August 22, 2008
My first impression of the track being like Melbourne needs to be corrected, too. If you took the DNA from both Monaco and Montreal, then did some weird gene-splicing experiments (since all other problems in the world have been taken care of), you'd end up with Valencia. Twisty, curvy, but with some high-speed sections followed rapidly by brutally slow hairpins, and some promising passing areas to boot. There's some potential here, folks.
Bridgestone brought the soft and supersoft compounds to the party, and it doesn't look like there's going to be any out-of-the-ordinary wear issues (unless you're Nico Rosberg, who at one point flat-spotted his tires so badly after a spin that you could SEE the flat spots as the car was moving at 160mph). It turns out, however, that the tire manufacturer is somewhat concerned about the bridge, of all things. It turns out that it's not your usual span, but a swinging bridge that splits in half to clear the way to the harbor, and there's a gap of about a half-inch between the two pieces. That's fine for your everyday street tire, but for a race tire going at 130-140mph? There may (or may not) be a lot of blowouts come raceday.
I'm getting excited about this race. Sure, some of it is because we haven't had a race in three weeks, but I think this circuit promises big things. Since it's new, I'm going to treat it as if it's a wet race: all bets are off, and nobody knows what's going to happen. If it actually rains, though, not only are all bets off, but the casino is closed.
Quals Saturday, be here or be somewhere else.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at August 22, 2008 09:22 PM (+rSRq)
Short of asphalting the crack shut (and some major construction work on the bridge after the race), no, not really.
To clear up a point that I blew completely in the post: the drivers are more concerned about the gap than Bridgestone, though the tire company has publicly said that they're sure the tires will be fine... which pretty much means that they're worried about it.
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 22, 2008 09:33 PM (UdB9M)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at August 23, 2008 10:45 AM (+rSRq)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at August 23, 2008 10:46 AM (+rSRq)
As far as slowing down for 10 goes, though, there's something that you, Steven, can't know since you've never watched a race: the way these cars can shed appalling amounts of speed. Using carbon/carbon brakes, instead of steel like NASCAR or IndyCar (?), they may just as well throw a battleship anchor out the back. From 120mph to zero in under three seconds in about 200 feet. From 60mph to zero in 55 feet. All of that at up to 5.5g.
Dry numbers don't really do it justice.
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 23, 2008 12:21 PM (AW3EJ)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at August 23, 2008 02:00 PM (+rSRq)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at August 23, 2008 02:02 PM (+rSRq)
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 23, 2008 03:11 PM (AW3EJ)
47 queries taking 0.1478 seconds, 235 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.