F1 2010: Testing sessions thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyL

6.7 seconds off the pace (in the wet, with a novice driver) with 20-odd laps under their belt. A very respectable start. Especially since they've had the least amount of time to get ready. Much more impressive than certain other teams who announced they were entering F1 a year ago and still haven't even shown a picture of a completed car.

---

indeed, much stronger start then Virgin who I thought where far from disgracing themselfs either.

So far, the two new teams are doing alright.

Now, the sooner USF1 does the right thing and announce that they are done the sooner we can see what Steffan GP is capable of.

Also, Campos also need to get their act together, at least they have a car thanks to Dallara and I hope that if Campos folds the FIA allow Dallara to take their place and at least have the opportunity to put together a budget to run their car themselfs, would be such a waste to develop a car and actually finnish it but it never see a race track..

Something that needs to be seriously brought into question though is why the hell where USF1 and Campos awarded a birth in F1 over clearly far more serious bids from the likes of Steffan and Prodrive? The FIA, once again, proven to be complete idiots

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macksrallye

St.D... when did I put an amount/percentage to the luck involved... never. My understanding of what you are saying is that you should expect a standard race & therefore the top teams should win (very basic I know). However it is because the top teams are so adaptable & prepared for the the unexpected (racing incidents as you call them) that they are at the top.

Chance/Luck always have a part to play but don't count on it helping you, you must be as prepared as possible from every angle to be successful. I know this as I am a competitor in Aus.

---

Its because the top teams ARE the top teams, based on their performance that a high expectation is valid. These are concrete factors not assumptions.

It is this same reason that they are the most adaptable to all situations.

My argument is valid and we stand at opposite ends - its like reason versus faith, philosophically they oppose each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I am evil Homer

Solid base but they need to get closer. That said it does look nice in those colours with the yellow wheels!

---

Got to love those yellow wheels!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sonic

I too was miffed when I saw that the God awful Fauzy had been given the first major test for Lotus at Jerez but the more I thought about it the smarter it seemed. The team is chasing sponsors so having a home grown driver behind the wheel could generate some positive headlines, but more to the point let Fauzy find out that the front wing falls off (or whatever) and then give the T127 to a proper driver on Thursday for some serious running.

I only hope they keep one eye on the weather and avoid giving Lousy Fauzy the only dry running.

---

imagine fauzy has a super license and participates in testing, while USF1 have not signed a second pay driver yet and windsor said it was difficult to find US drivers capable of a super license.

btw Lotus is showing Virgin how its done. Get out there and do some laps.
Still don't understand their hesitance to actually run more than a few laps on the track.

I repeat my disappointment at Virgin's testing program to date. Not hating on them but just pointing out their lack of opportunity to take advantage of much needed on track testing. By their admission they were being very cautious. Not wanting to do laps in the rain, etc etc etc, Which i don;t understand since these cars and drivers will have to run in the rain and in Glock's case has driven in the rain. So he should be well acclimated to these conditions and surely would take care of the car. oh well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

The Ferrari F60 was a problematic car in 2009 - other than in the hands of Kimi at Spa and the advantage of KERS, it could not have been anywhere near the front. The Force India was at its best.

The dimnished field was after people such as Hamilton - also not in the best of Mclaren's - and Button were out of the race on the first laps.

And just general underperformance by the top drivers for the race. This is a coincidence of circumstances that also saw Heidfeld on the podium.

So unless you expect this sort of thing to occur in 2010 the probability of a Sauber podium is extremely low. Possible yes, but it is probabilities that rule.

FI did not win a podium at Monza.

---

Kimi's best results in 2009
3rd - Monaco - qualified 2nd
2nd in Hungary - qualified 7th
3rd in Europe - qualified 6th
1st in belgium - qualified 6th
3rd in italy - qualified 3rd
4th in Japan -qualified 5th

massa best performances in 2009
4th in Monaco - qualified 5
3rd in Europe - qualified 6th
6st in turkey - qualified 7th
11rd in Britain - qualified 4rd
8th in Germany -qualified 3th

seems to me kimi got a good grip of the car eventualy. with some storng performances. Rhe Ferrari seems to have come to its own right around Monaco and if Massa had stayed healthy might have gotten more than 1 victory in 2009. so they were not just good in Spa or because of Kers ( which did not work in a few races for them)

I'll bet you that Sauber gets at least 2 podiums in 2010. The car is much better than you think it is. It is not a new novice car. It is the evolution from last year's BMW and pretty much has had about 10 months of development work behind it. Slight modifications were made to fit the Ferrari engine, but overall, this is pretty much a BMW chasis and design.

If BMW were still on the grid, would you say that you think their chances of a podium would be low? Because this is essentially the BMW.

Anyway. lets watch the races rather than writing off teams before the start of the season. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

That is why Spa 2009 was such an anomally - the unusual coincidence of factors laid the groundwork. If the top teams were all functioning properly - as I expect in 2010 and you do not - a podium in Belguin would not have occurred for FI or even for Sauber even though they were backed by one of the world's best and biggest auto manufacturers.

---

I still fail to see where Spa was an anomaly. Force India were quick ALL weekend, They took pole. The car was better dialed in than the macs and Brawns that weekend. A bang up job by the team. And no excuses can be made for Brawn or Macs. Force India came into that weekend well prepared and did do those efforts justice. If you consider drivers being human and not performing at their peak on a given weekend while conversely labeling those that did drive well and performed admirably an anomaly then, I'm sorry, but you don't seem to have watched many F1 races with a keen eye. For that is the norm in F1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyL

6.7 seconds off the pace (in the wet, with a novice driver) with 20-odd laps under their belt. A very respectable start. Especially since they've had the least amount of time to get ready. Much more impressive than certain other teams who announced they were entering F1 a year ago and still haven't even shown a picture of a completed car.

---

here here!
:up:

so massa goes out on a late morning glory run of 5 laps with fumes in his tank and promptly stops on track. What was the point in that?

I'm starting to worry about the Merc. So many testing days and they never impressed. Hopefully they are just being "serious" and not going for "glory runs" and not just slow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

I still fail to see where Spa was an anomaly. Force India were quick ALL weekend, They took pole. The car was better dialed in than the macs and Brawns that weekend. A bang up job by the team. And no excuses can be made for Brawn or Macs. Force India came into that weekend well prepared and did do those efforts justice. If you consider drivers being human and not performing at their peak on a given weekend while conversely labeling those that did drive well and performed admirably an anomaly then, I'm sorry, but you don't seem to have watched many F1 races with a keen eye. For that is the norm in F1.

---

And what about Monza? FI were on the money with their low DF package.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

I repeat my disappointment at Virgin's testing program to date. Not hating on them but just pointing out their lack of opportunity to take advantage of much needed on track testing. By their admission they were being very cautious. Not wanting to do laps in the rain, etc etc etc, Which i don;t understand since these cars and drivers will have to run in the rain and in Glock's case has driven in the rain. So he should be well acclimated to these conditions and surely would take care of the car. oh well.

---

You learn nothing useful about the car in the wet apart from tyres or pracitice/improving technique. Testing is about driving consistantly. You don't do that in the wet because you're constantly adapting to the conditions, altering your driving lines, braking, turn in, etc etc