F1 Most liked posts in thread: 2017 - F1

So, this is happening in 2018, it's official.

 

Whether they could build an engine competitive with the others really depends on the specifics of the next engine formula. AM know that and have said as much, but they may already consider branding to be the most likely way to go.

But if they're only going to re-brand I have to wonder which engine manufacturer would put up with that. Will their name go on the Renault engine cover or will it be just a title sponsor deal? Renault apparently accept RB re-branding their engines as Tag Heuer but that's not another automobile manufacturer's name. Will they, or any other, put up with an Aston Martin label on their engines? I need a reminder...how often has that happened in recent years? Maybe Cosworth is due for a comeback. I wouldn't be surprised if AM's recent participation in the future F1 engine formula discussion is more about looking into that sort of deal than is it about their making their own engines. Again, all depends on the engine formula...

 

"To celebrate 19 years of F1 in Malaysia, we gave fans the chance to relive one past race in full. The monsoon chaos of 2001 - now available to watch for 19 days - was the standout choice..."

(FYI - that 19 day You Tube free period starts today, 26 Sep)

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr0JEltbQUg"]2001 Malaysian Grand Prix: Full Race - YouTube[/ame]

 

Loose drain cover drama for Grosjean during FP2.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19HrKMDoEBk"]FP2 Highlights | 2017 Malaysian Grand Prix - YouTube[/ame]

 

That's very good.

It still only adds a few visuals to the generalization that it's important and that there really are negative the effects on following close and overtaking. You know the teams all have the ability to explain it even better and I think a lot of F1 fans need to see that sort of thing as visually as it can possibly be shown. Been wishing they'd do this ever since DRS was introduced... Trouble is, if a team shows how bad it really is they're providing direct justification for eliminating a lot of the aero designs they've become addicted to.

I think most arm chair critics still think there can be close racing if they simply delete the DRS (to make the racing more pure) because the real reason the racing isn't close without it is the drivers aren't as skillful or brave as they used to be. Though I wish DRS would go away, it isn't the evil it's portrayed to be by critics and that lack of skill/"guts" bit is pure BS.

I'm sort of in the anti-DRS camp, but not really...I want them to eliminate the conditions that make it all but necessary. Then they can either kill it off because it's a moveable areo device or allow it but let everyone use it as they see fit rather than dictating conditions, etc.

 

As someone else pointed out (can't remember who/where), hard to believe this could happen on a permanent circuit. Outcome could have been much worse.

 

Sorry about the (sort of) spoiler below:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.