Formula 1 Rolex Magyar Nagydíj 2021

  • Thread starter Jimlaad43
  • 555 comments
  • 22,670 views
6,082
United States
Washington State
OutlawQuadrant
I've always thought whining is a prerequisite to be a race car driver of any discipline.

Really interested to see the outcome of the Aston Martin appeal. Based on what I've read, it is possible that the car could actually have more than 1 liter of fuel inside but Aston could still get no points anyways.
 
10,320
Australia
Australia
I_IGrayfoxI_I
I've always thought whining is a prerequisite to be a race car driver of any discipline.

Really interested to see the outcome of the Aston Martin appeal. Based on what I've read, it is possible that the car could actually have more than 1 liter of fuel inside but Aston could still get no points anyways.
Then that shows that the FIA disqualified Vettel for no reason and they don't want to reinstate his 2nd to save face

As this show either the FIA's testing methods are flawed or the sensors are flawed.

The FIA knows how much fuel went in, they can see how much went into the engine.
X-Y=Z

It also sets a precedent where the testing officials can remove less than 1liter at anytime even if the tank has more the minimum 1l required for testing.
 
9,393
Australia
Western Sydney
mustafur
The Reserve tanks have 1.7L in them and this is why Aston are appealing, saying they can get their full sample via that.

Personally I don't really understand this 1L sample rule at all, they have the technology to get a proper sample from 1ml let alone a litre.
 
Last edited:
10,320
Australia
Australia
I_IGrayfoxI_I
The Reserve tanks have 1.7L in them and this is why Aston are appealing, saying they can get their full sample via that.

Personally I don't really understand this 1L sample rule at all, they have the technology to get a proper sample from 1ml let alone a litre.
True, with modern testing they can use a few millileters.
When doing a urine sample you just pee into a small sample jar, you they dont need all your urine.

If the teams want they may want the rule amended to say 50mL.
I am sure all teams will be more than willing as it means they can run 1L less fuel and teams will chase those 700grams easily.
Also means they're less likely to be disqualified for any issues.
 
9,393
Australia
Western Sydney
mustafur
True, with modern testing they can use a few millileters.
When doing a urine sample you just pee into a small sample jar, you they dont need all your urine.

If the teams want they may want the rule amended to say 50mL.
I am sure all teams will be more than willing as it means they can run 1L less fuel and teams will chase those 700grams easily.
Also means they're less likely to be disqualified for any issues.
or just use the reserve tanks and then teams are free to run out of fuel.
 

Jimlaad43

GeoGuessr God
Premium
10,046
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
The Reserve tanks have 1.7L in them and this is why Aston are appealing, saying they can get their full sample via that.

Personally I don't really understand this 1L sample rule at all, they have the technology to get a proper sample from 1ml let alone a litre.
Give the teams a chance to run the tanks to 1ml and it'll get crazy with cars stopping on the last and slowdown laps when they get it wrong. The 1L thing means there is reserve for them to drive it home and only stop if they think they're in trouble, rather than because they actually are. As the FIA said, they take into account the inlap for their calculations, so if 1.7L came out but say, the inlap that wasn't completed would have used 0.8L extra, then you can see why it fails.

Formula E has a maximum power usage rather than running the batteries flat for the same reason. You don't actually want the teams to run out of juice across the line regularly and be unable to get back to the pits.

With 1L, there is plenty of space for impurities to be diluted enough so that any fouling or a couple of loose "illegal bits" can be measured without massively distorting it. One fleck of something that's 1ppm in a litre is likely to be many more ppm in a ml, which could fail it. With a litre, it gives the fuel a chance to mix and allow outliers and specific areas of concern to massively distort a reading. The illegal bit of fuel may have disappeared by the time you're down to 1ml of the other, less dense fuel which floated on top.

Rules are rules and 1L is not a difficult thing to produce or store in a car.
 
9,393
Australia
Western Sydney
mustafur
Give the teams a chance to run the tanks to 1ml and it'll get crazy with cars stopping on the last and slowdown laps when they get it wrong. The 1L thing means there is reserve for them to drive it home and only stop if they think they're in trouble, rather than because they actually are. As the FIA said, they take into account the inlap for their calculations, so if 1.7L came out but say, the inlap that wasn't completed would have used 0.8L extra, then you can see why it fails.

Formula E has a maximum power usage rather than running the batteries flat for the same reason. You don't actually want the teams to run out of juice across the line regularly and be unable to get back to the pits.

With 1L, there is plenty of space for impurities to be diluted enough so that any fouling or a couple of loose "illegal bits" can be measured without massively distorting it. One fleck of something that's 1ppm in a litre is likely to be many more ppm in a ml, which could fail it. With a litre, it gives the fuel a chance to mix and allow outliers and specific areas of concern to massively distort a reading. The illegal bit of fuel may have disappeared by the time you're down to 1ml of the other, less dense fuel which floated on top.

Rules are rules and 1L is not a difficult thing to produce or store in a car.
They still have the reserve tanks though, and that comes from the same fuel so that would be the ideal solution.
 

TheCracker

Nothing to see here...
Premium
21,924
South Korea
North Korea
GTP_TheCracker
Give the teams a chance to run the tanks to 1ml and it'll get crazy with cars stopping on the last and slowdown laps when they get it wrong. The 1L thing means there is reserve for them to drive it home and only stop if they think they're in trouble, rather than because they actually are. As the FIA said, they take into account the inlap for their calculations, so if 1.7L came out but say, the inlap that wasn't completed would have used 0.8L extra, then you can see why it fails.

Formula E has a maximum power usage rather than running the batteries flat for the same reason. You don't actually want the teams to run out of juice across the line regularly and be unable to get back to the pits.

With 1L, there is plenty of space for impurities to be diluted enough so that any fouling or a couple of loose "illegal bits" can be measured without massively distorting it. One fleck of something that's 1ppm in a litre is likely to be many more ppm in a ml, which could fail it. With a litre, it gives the fuel a chance to mix and allow outliers and specific areas of concern to massively distort a reading. The illegal bit of fuel may have disappeared by the time you're down to 1ml of the other, less dense fuel which floated on top.

Rules are rules and 1L is not a difficult thing to produce or store in a car.
The sample also gets divided into at least three separate samples. One for the FIA to check at the track, one for an independent lab to check and one for the team to keep as a reference. So that 1ltr soon becomes just a coke cans worth of fuel available to check. A urine or saliva sample can be a tiny amount, as you are usually just checking for the presence of one thing. The fuel sample is probably looking at the overall composition of the fuel in which case many different tests are probably carried out on it, requiring a greater volume.
 
10,320
Australia
Australia
I_IGrayfoxI_I
Give the teams a chance to run the tanks to 1ml and it'll get crazy with cars stopping on the last and slowdown laps when they get it wrong. The 1L thing means there is reserve for them to drive it home and only stop if they think they're in trouble, rather than because they actually are. As the FIA said, they take into account the inlap for their calculations, so if 1.7L came out but say, the inlap that wasn't completed would have used 0.8L extra, then you can see why it fails.

Formula E has a maximum power usage rather than running the batteries flat for the same reason. You don't actually want the teams to run out of juice across the line regularly and be unable to get back to the pits.

With 1L, there is plenty of space for impurities to be diluted enough so that any fouling or a couple of loose "illegal bits" can be measured without massively distorting it. One fleck of something that's 1ppm in a litre is likely to be many more ppm in a ml, which could fail it. With a litre, it gives the fuel a chance to mix and allow outliers and specific areas of concern to massively distort a reading. The illegal bit of fuel may have disappeared by the time you're down to 1ml of the other, less dense fuel which floated on top.

Rules are rules and 1L is not a difficult thing to produce or store in a car.
The FIA could control fuel.
Instead of having Mobil 1, Petronas, Shell, Caltex supplying fuel.

Just like how perelli are the ONLY tire supplier, there can be a single fuel supplier.
After all the FIA wants to make F1 relevent to road cars.
Having a more standard fuel be used would mean the teams have to extract the most performance from a more normal 98 octane rated fuel
Or F1 could do what a similar thing to Indy use an Alcohol based fuel
E100 for F1 wouldn't be all that bad, but E100 does require more fuel to be used than straight petrol.
 
9,393
Australia
Western Sydney
mustafur
The FIA could control fuel.
Instead of having Mobil 1, Petronas, Shell, Caltex supplying fuel.

Just like how perelli are the ONLY tire supplier, there can be a single fuel supplier.
After all the FIA wants to make F1 relevent to road cars.
Having a more standard fuel be used would mean the teams have to extract the most performance from a more normal 98 octane rated fuel
Or F1 could do what a similar thing to Indy use an Alcohol based fuel
E100 for F1 wouldn't be all that bad, but E100 does require more fuel to be used than straight petrol.
I am fully against that, I'm even against the single tyre supplier. The fuels currently used in F1 are Bespoke to the engines especially on the factory teams, to suddenly change rules like that you could definitely advantage an engine over another as they where designed from the start to run with particular fuel, aside from my views to have more open rules on more things, you would need to have new engine regs to implement that and be fair.
 
Last edited:

Jimlaad43

GeoGuessr God
Premium
10,046
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Alcohol based fuels is the last thing we want. I'd like my flames to be visible if I have to fight a fuel fire thank you very much. Methanol in cars can go away. Diluting the fuel with water is a terrible "solution" to dealing with a fire as that's not possible with a simple, carryable fire extinguisher.
 

McLaren

Premium
41,184
United States
Texas
Partyboy78
He complains about his tires when they're not worn but blistered because he overheated them.
We all know if you push too hard on these tires they overheat and blister, when lewis does that Push hard and tries to make up 2 seconds per lap he overheats the tires.
This causes blisters, this reduces the grip until they're worn down, this is why we see him set fastest lap after fastest lap after he made this my tires are worn comments.
Interesting. So it's b/c he doesn't know how to properly maintain his tires.

And here I read it's really just a mind game (b/c Lewis is constantly praised for his tire management). I'm sure these games are also exclusive to Lewis as well.
He knows that the safety car is not a race car and cant go a million miles per hour so why does he bitch that it needs to go "faster", if the safety car floored it on the straights it will have to slam on the brakes 100m+ before the braking point to slow down enough.
Not to mention this will cause a concertina effect on the cars down the grid as well.
This isn't Lewis only. Other drivers have complained at times, LeClerc comes to mind.

But, don't let what @Northstar said stop you from making these statements.
I'd imagine if broadcasters paid as much attention to the other drivers' radios as they do Lewis' we would find they spend just as much time whining when something isn't perfect (except Kimi of course, I don't think he's received that expansion pack yet).
 
Last edited:
10,320
Australia
Australia
I_IGrayfoxI_I
The fuels currently used in F1 are Bespoke to the engines especially on the factory teams
My point exactly

The FIA wants to stick to Hybrids as it relevant to road cars, how is bespoke fuel relevant?
Using FIA fuel means they have more control over it.

To suddenly change rules like that you could definitely advantage an engine over another as they where designed from the start to run with particular fuel
This is pretty much no different to how Mercedes nailed hybrid engines from day 1.
They were either very very very lucky with their design or they were working on this idea for some time to maybe use in their road cars or maybe another racing series.

You would need to have new engine regs to implement that and be fair.
It can be done with the next engine regulation change.
All manufactures know how their engines run on 98 octane as they do have road going cars, using E100 is also green.

Only issue with E100 is they WILL need to refuel, but this is a better way to "Slow" down" pit stops than the current idea.
 
Last edited:
9,393
Australia
Western Sydney
mustafur
My point exactly

The FIA wants to stick to Hybrids as it relevant to road cars, how is bespoke fuel relevant?
Using FIA fuel means they have more control over it.
It would be relevant to the fuel companies, as it's still fuel they can sell to the public unlike E100.
This is pretty much no different to how Mercedes nailed hybrid engines from day 1.
They were either very very very lucky with their design or they were working on this idea for some time to maybe use in their road cars or maybe another racing series.
it's not the same because the engines where not made before the regulations were planned.
It can be done with the next engine regulation change.
All manufactures know how their engines run on 98 octane as they do have road going cars, using E100 is also green.

Only issue with E100 is they WILL need to refuel, but this is a better way to "Slow" down" pit stops than the current idea.
Ethanol isn't Green, outside of the fact it's basically a exotic fuel at E100 level unlike the 91 they use now, there is other concerns that a fuel that takes away from food supply and is incredibly inefficient to make is even a good idea to begin with(not to say the regular type is good, but you know).
 
Last edited:
148
Germany
1 h from Nürburg
toastet
even with a standard fuel the situation wouldn't change. they would still need to get the fuel sample since there would be a chance of adding additives etc. while fueling the car. you would still have to check it after the race. one little step would be to take the sample on the grid since it is not allowed to refuel on the grid. but that wouldn't change the amount of fuel in the car if you take the sample before or after the race.

As to the cars with Floor damage, because the current spec cars have their floors sticking soo far out from the body basically any side contact is going to wreck havoc on the floor and take away massive chunks of downforce as the floor is where most of the downforce is, Max had Basically no right side floor left next to the side pod with Ricciardos about half gone, I'm geniunely surprised Max was able to go faster then even a Haas in that condition given the amount of lost downforce and for it all to be on one side of the car and at a track that is maximum downforce.

New 2022 Regs should help in this regard, the floors will not stick out of the body work anywhere near as much so the cars should be much more robust with side contact and so long as there is no retirement level damage there shouldn't be much downforce loss.
not sure about this since even with the smaller floor the greater amount of downforce will come from it in 2022 spec. even more than this era. so smaller damage could still have a bigger impact or at least the same like big damage today.
 

Famine

GTP Editor, GTPEDIA Author
Administrator
72,941
United Kingdom
Rule 12
GTP_Famine
I've always thought whining is a prerequisite to be a race car driver of any discipline.
I've always thought that in the cut-throat world of top-level motorsport, where all two-way communication is monitored and subject to open broadcast, any team worth anything would have developed a system of code words to disguise their true intention and status from others to maintain an advantage.

Though the bitching about other drivers is probably slightly more overt - to either get themselves out of trouble for bad moves, or get other people into trouble to move them out of the way through penalties.
 

MagpieRacer

Aaand across the line..
Premium
12,752
England
Wymondham, Norfolk
MagpieRacer
Interesting read for those who want to know more about F1 fuel.

And the future on fuel and sustainable fuels being handed out to the engine suppliers to stringent F1 specs for them to test with a push to the suppliers developing their own fuels ahead of the new powertrain architecture (exp. 2025). In other words, as close to a 'spec fuel'as you'll ever get in F1.
 
Last edited:
376
United Kingdom
London
Dreadmed
I like Kimi as much as the next guy, but you have to admit he's a bit abusive towards his engineer and his team at times.
Yeah, I imagine it's built up over the last couple of years... he referred to it (in a manner of speaking) once he was informed of the time penalty; "Anytime we have a chance (of scoring points) some 🤬 happens."
 

Jimlaad43

GeoGuessr God
Premium
10,046
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
This whole fuel debate brings up another annoying thing about F1 fans.

Why is a perfectly reasonable rule fine until your favourite driver breaks said rule? And then it becomes the worst thing ever, is completely flawed and the worst thing ever, despite the fact it has been enforced in the past and everyone had complied to it in all the times they weren't affected by the rule.

At least when everyone complains about a new rule there isn't any evidence for or against it, or complains about something subjective or inconsistently applied there's reason for debate. But an old, obvious rule? No, it's fine until someone we like loses because they broke it.

/rant
 
20,498
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
This whole fuel debate brings up another annoying thing about F1 fans.

Why is a perfectly reasonable rule fine until your favourite driver breaks said rule? And then it becomes the worst thing ever, is completely flawed and the worst thing ever, despite the fact it has been enforced in the past and everyone had complied to it in all the times they weren't affected by the rule.

At least when everyone complains about a new rule there isn't any evidence for or against it, or complains about something subjective or inconsistently applied there's reason for debate. But an old, obvious rule? No, it's fine until someone we like loses because they broke it.

/rant
Reminds me of someone here incensed that HAM got to repair his car in the British GP red flag, should be banned they said, but didn't seem to have similar issues to Max doing it in Hungary. Funny that.

Fans be fans I guess.
 
476
Sweden
Stockholm
This whole fuel debate brings up another annoying thing about F1 fans.

Why is a perfectly reasonable rule fine until your favourite driver breaks said rule? And then it becomes the worst thing ever, is completely flawed and the worst thing ever, despite the fact it has been enforced in the past and everyone had complied to it in all the times they weren't affected by the rule.

At least when everyone complains about a new rule there isn't any evidence for or against it, or complains about something subjective or inconsistently applied there's reason for debate. But an old, obvious rule? No, it's fine until someone we like loses because they broke it.

/rant
While I agree with your point, this rule doesn't come up a whole lot. In fact prior to this instance with Vettel there were only three fuel related disqualifications over the last 10 years and only one of those were strictly to do with using too much fuel over the race distance, and that was KMAG in 2018 US GP. In that same race Ocon got DSQ for exceeding the maximum fuel flow rate. And in the 2014 Australian GP Ricciardo was DSQ for exceeding the maximum fuel flow rate.

So it's not like fans have had a lot of opportunity to get upset about this one particular rule, and in this case with Vettel it does seem like the rule is rather obtuse. They can't extract enough fuel for the test, which fair enough is against the rules, but according to the FIA approved sensors there's more than enough fuel left for them to get 1 liter out so according to the FIA approved method the team was correct in thinking they had enough fuel left to satisfy the rule.

If you can't trust the sensors in a case like this it gets really difficult for the teams to abide by the rules.

So sometimes people get upset when a seldom used rule gets highlighted like this and want the rule to be changed/amended for the future, regardless of which driver it impacted.
 

Terronium-12

The Man Comes Around
Moderator
27,062
United States
Brooklyn, NY
KR_Viper
I Renown I
This whole fuel debate brings up another annoying thing about F1 fans.

Why is a perfectly reasonable rule fine until your favourite driver breaks said rule? And then it becomes the worst thing ever, is completely flawed and the worst thing ever, despite the fact it has been enforced in the past and everyone had complied to it in all the times they weren't affected by the rule.

At least when everyone complains about a new rule there isn't any evidence for or against it, or complains about something subjective or inconsistently applied there's reason for debate. But an old, obvious rule? No, it's fine until someone we like loses because they broke it.

/rant
Any rule, no matter how fair and just, that can decide the results of a race after the race is already concluded doesn't sit well with me. Regardless of who it is. Does it erase the action or excitement felt during the race? No, of course not but a DSQ after it sure as hell leaves a sour taste in your mouth. Worst of all, it isn't even something Vettel did wrong or really has any control over. AM screwed up, not him! Even if it happened to Mazepin I'd think it was a little 🤬 because he managed to do whatever to get into points and then an arbitrary rule strips him of said result after the fact? That's a big negative in my book.

Disclaimer, Mazepin can kick a bag of rocks but the point remains the same, even if it were him.. :lol:
 

McLaren

Premium
41,184
United States
Texas
Partyboy78
Any rule, no matter how fair and just, that can decide the results of a race after the race is already concluded doesn't sit well with me. Regardless of who it is. Does it erase the action or excitement felt during the race? No, of course not but a DSQ after it sure as hell leaves a sour taste in your mouth. Worst of all, it isn't even something Vettel did wrong or really has any control over. AM screwed up, not him! Even if it happened to Mazepin I'd think it was a little 🤬 because he managed to do whatever to get into points and then an arbitrary rule strips him of said result after the fact? That's a big negative in my book.

Disclaimer, Mazepin can kick a bag of rocks but the point remains the same, even if it were him.. :lol:
To my understanding, the rule is to combat any attempt at cheating by adding something to the fuel. If Vettel's car was found to have "illegal" additives or whatever (even if he is completely unaware), I mean, does the rule not become just?
 

Terronium-12

The Man Comes Around
Moderator
27,062
United States
Brooklyn, NY
KR_Viper
I Renown I
To my understanding, the rule is to combat any attempt at cheating by adding something to the fuel. If Vettel's car was found to have "illegal" additives or whatever (even if he is completely unaware), I mean, does the rule not become just?
Oh, it's absolutely just if that were the case and there'd be no argument of any kind, much like there really isn't much of one now. My issue is that it affected his result through no fault of his own. is he still provisionally on the podium while AM continues to appeal the decision, or has that come to an end already?
 
100
United States
Rochester NY
Reminds me of someone here incensed that HAM got to repair his car in the British GP red flag, should be banned they said, but didn't seem to have similar issues to Max doing it in Hungary. Funny that.

Fans be fans I guess.
yeah that was so weird ;^y
 

CLowndes888

I want to be monkey
Premium
10,435
Australia
Melbourne
fubbletrouble888
The FIA could control fuel.
Instead of having Mobil 1, Petronas, Shell, Caltex supplying fuel.

Just like how perelli are the ONLY tire supplier, there can be a single fuel supplier.
After all the FIA wants to make F1 relevent to road cars.
Having a more standard fuel be used would mean the teams have to extract the most performance from a more normal 98 octane rated fuel
Or F1 could do what a similar thing to Indy use an Alcohol based fuel
E100 for F1 wouldn't be all that bad, but E100 does require more fuel to be used than straight petrol.
This baffles me. Most categories these days use one type of fuel from one supplier. I can't believe F1 hasn't bothered with a control fuel yet. Surely that's on the agenda for the future.
 
1,905
United Kingdom
Isle of Wight, UK
He complains about his tires when they're not worn but blistered because he overheated them.
We all know if you push too hard on these tires they overheat and blister, when lewis does that Push hard and tries to make up 2 seconds per lap he overheats the tires.
This causes blisters, this reduces the grip until they're worn down, this is why we see him set fastest lap after fastest lap after he made this my tires are worn comments.

He knows that the safety car is not a race car and cant go a million miles per hour so why does he bitch that it needs to go "faster", if the safety car floored it on the straights it will have to slam on the brakes 100m+ before the braking point to slow down enough.
Not to mention this will cause a concertina effect on the cars down the grid as well.

It might be because he is being a little spoiled with this like DAS from last year which helped increase tire temp during safety car periods or formation laps or its replacement "Brake Magic" thing.

But he did something dangerous which is fact, several former F1 drivers mentioned it was not a good idea to try and make a pass at that corner in that fashion, now lewis is complaining about a similar thing where someone on the inside closes the gap.

I mentioned 3 that I could quickly think of.

Pretty sure he complained about another driver "Exceeding Track Limits", yet he was doing the same thing on a few corners too.
Not to jump down your throat, but a couple of notes -

Brake Magic didn't replace DAS, as far as I'm aware every car on the grid would use the same sort of procedure to control brake temps under the safety car - it was just highly bizarre to see it left on, if anything it hints how much management these modern drivers do and it's amazing we don't see this sort of error every race tbh.

Regarding complaining about the tyre, I think it's generally accepted at this point there's a good deal of gamesmanship there, the cars are close this year and races can be won in the pits - even with the more dominant MBs races could be lost in the pits. I feel LH complains like clockwork and always in the same way because it helps to stop RB and rivals getting a read on how much performance LH has left in the tyre. When racing for the lead everyone wants to be the car that determines the strategy and not one that has to react.

I also think Lewis complains to cope - it's a quite British thing, exaggerating the difficulty of a task while you deal with it, a sort of cathartic semi-rage that fuels motivation. I totally get why people don't like it but I think if you turned the radios on as much as we do now in a lot of classic races, you'd hear your heroes doing the same thing.

As for "did something dangerous that was a bad idea", well, racing is dangerous, and if you judged it purely by say, the impact on your wallet and potential risk to life and limb, is an extremely bad idea. It's all about how you frame these things.
 
3,057
Norway
Norway
I mean, fan is a shortened version of fanatic.

Definition of fanatic

(Entry 1 of 2)
1 disapproving : a person exhibiting excessive enthusiasm and intense uncritical devotion toward some controversial matter (as in religion or politics)
 

Liquid

Fission Mailed
Premium
24,657
Slovakia
Bratvegas
GTP_Liquid
Every driver does moan but on a genuine note, does any other driver fake complain about their tyres as regularly as Lewis Hamilton? Hamilton's done it for years, very successfully, and nobody else seemingly does it.

I know you need to have inherently good tyre management skills for the ploy to work in the first place but I'm surprised that nobody else has at least tried it as often.