I'm pretty sure he was joking!Quote:
Originally Posted by BleAivano
Printable View
I'm pretty sure he was joking!Quote:
Originally Posted by BleAivano
yes i fed up when somebody asks,and while you answer him he says that my answer is ironic.Are you doing the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM
About the Fords vs Citroens difference due to braking fade is very clear if you watch splits and drivers comments.
At first stage without brake problems they lost more while was bigger and with plenty of junctions.
Except that you think that if Fords had braking problems at a 23 km stage the difference would be 4 and 2,8 seconds from Loeb without problems?
Ok let's just go back to my irony meter remark -I didn't say your post was ironic, the sense of my reply was that you didn't 'detect' that I was being ironic. i.e you were being literal in response to a rhetorical statement. As Back - N -Black correctly thought, I WAS JOKING!!! Now that I have deconstructed the gag I hope we can avoid any more 'flaming' (see what I did there? ;) )Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
http://www.imgdumper.nl/uploads6/503...44-Quattro.jpg
"Quick fuel-stop. Feel like little guy in such a powerfull group B car! Once in a lifetime experience, so damm nice. Stig Blomqvist will drive his original car tomorrow, together with the owner of the car. Just wanted to share this one with you! :-)"
From Kevin Abbring's Facebook page. That is one fine looking piece of machine.
What are you trying to say all the time? That the grass was greener back then? Yes, it was, we all know...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother John
Was oil flammable in 1970'? Yes, it was even in 1920...
Was brake liquid flammable in 1970'? Yes, it was even in 1920...
Was exhaust hot? Yes, it was even in 1920...
Was debris of tyre/rim able to damage brake liquid pipes? Yes, it was even in 1920...
etc. etc.
Shall we ride horses? But you can fall down and hurt Yourself You know...
Ok ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintexmemory
Thanks "8gear". A very nice looking rally car.
Man, that thing never gets old, I love it.Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
Thanks Mirek...nicely put =)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
I have no doubt about that, is obvious. I only can't understand in wich part of that logic enters the moment when Loeb start looking at the splits.Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
Ohhh yes it is! A lovely beast. IMO is the most incredible rallycar since forever.Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
But talking about fires… this was not a good car to have a crash...
Simon Jean Joseph-Philip Mills gravel crew for Petter Solberg
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.n...04655715_n.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
Actually there is a difference irony -> ειρωνεια in modern greek is synonymous to sarcasm in English (thus Dims reaction).
A rhetorical Q is a question which answer is self evident to the audience.
The guy made a joke, Dim needs to lighten up and I need to say hi to all you guys as another bloody greek!
Did someone get hurt with S1 E2? I know for some fatal crashes with Lancia & Peugeout, but don't know for S1 E2.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM
After SS2 Matthieu Arzéno 14th overall and 3rd in S2000 not bad start of WRC event for him :cool:
Tire punctureQuote:
Originally Posted by Rautiainen
That itself doesn't say anything about the safety of the car.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
Yes, according to the team the debris of rear tyre probably cut brake pipe and the car burnt from ignited brake liquid.Quote:
Originally Posted by AP-Racing
You have to feel for Prokop, that's bad luck. Some people get a puncture and they just lose a few minutes...Quote:
Originally Posted by AP-Racing
I know, but we see modern cars can burst too. I hope these accidents happen almost never though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Lappi 10th fastest on ss3 !!!
the road dried out ??? still amazing !!!!!
Fu%&! :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by r199
εσυ τωρα τι θελεις? ρολλαριστα 2ες ανοιγεις? :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by stoukerman
Welcome Stelios!!
no way,must be an error.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
38th in wrc.com, it is some mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
EDIT: but I see the times there are equal from 11th on
Loeb is possible to look at Petters splits after 6 minutes due to 6 minutes later start for Petter.Thats why you see him to make more difference after 4th split.4th split is about 7-8 minutes inside stage.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM
11th fastest ;) but then again, all of the drivers who did not do the stage got this time...Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
That i know, never was a fatal crash with the S1. But the S1 was not very used, there were a few cars running, many less than Ford, Lancia and Peugeot. Even Audi only made 5 or 6 rallyes with this car, because they retired before the half of the 1986 season.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
That's some mistake. He must have notional time as all others.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
yeah rally.cz has him as 10th... probably a mistake.
Second loop starting in a few minutes! :)
2nd loop started...
Yes, one 6 missed in system column caused this. Too many notional times so mistake happened. Corrected yet, sorry to all.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
some nice news from ewrc.cz!!
Status injured fan is better
Yesterday marked shakedown unpleasant event when cartwheel Nicolas Fuchs crashing against the rail and four of them hit. While one of them was seriously injured, and while even talking about an injury that threatened him in life.
The three injured were released from hospital yesterday and the latest news and speaks about improving the health status of the fourth. Attending physicians in the hospital trierské are satisfied with the condition of the patient and assesses its development positively.
Split times of WRC.COM don't work yet for SS4 ??? :s
Isn't the schedule late at the afternoom because of SS3 problems?
No, it is on time.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM