Button and Brundle

-qwerty- Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Muks_C Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > there's a difference between being arrogant
> and
> > smarmy. i want to punch the smug tw*ts face
> every
> > time he speaks, with his wannabe american
> accent.
> >
> > and he was good in '04 cos they were cheating
> FFS!
> > we can only guess at how long they were
> pulling
> > the underweight-car trick, but Imola '05 was
> > certanly not the first time.
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------

> Sorry, where's your proof? How can you be sure it
> "certainly not the first time"?

well there were rumours that the FIA suspected something last season and in the first 2 races, but couldn't act on it until BAR actaully scored some points.

and a system whereby you make an underweight car then add fuel to bring it up to the minimum weight and then lie and tell the inspectors that it is actually free of fuel doesn't just happen once out of the blue, it is a planned strategy, all the way from the design of the fuel tank to the way its implemented in the race weekend. the BAR management didn't even deny it, Nick Fry labelled it as a 'different interpretation of the rules'.

so do you really think it happened only once (Imola '05) and they were simply very unlucky to be caught? come on! my guess is that it had been going at least for the 2nd half of 2004, if not earlier.

---

RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael

Your guess. I haven't made an acersion either way because none of us are in a position to know. But as you say, if it does have ot be part of a design process from the start I find it unlikely it was introduced halfway through 2004 - if its been there a while its 2005 only in all likelihood.

-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

nemesis -

doesnt always work out like that, look at his bar this year, seems quick over 1 lap but slow in races

some cars use their tyres more thus fast over 1 lap as they heat the tyres quickyl, but over race distance tyres burn out

@ qwerty, they were cheating using the fuel tank, so maybe the legal and illegal fuel tanks can be put in and taken out as desired, from race to race if they want, so maybe its not such a fundamental item that can only be brought in from the start of a season, but something that could be brought in half way through a season?

but my point was more to do with it being a conscious decision to do that, i.e they had to design and build the dodgy fuel tanks, so it couldn't have just happened by accident in 1 race.

maybe their great 2004 form can be partly attributed to it?

---

RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael

I'll be honest. Im not really thinking about this year. As more often than not, hes fallen back in races. Which backs up what your saying.

But take last year. Germany. From the back of the Grid to 2nd. So when hes in the mood he can do the business. But its because its so infrequently that I doubt he has the talent neccessary.

Few people would doubt Kimi in the BAR would do the job properly. And so would Michael and so even would Fernando. So on the basis of that. Jenson is very much a 2nd class driver.

If you put JB in a Ferrari he would do a Barrichello. i.e. Make himself look much better than he is. But thats the easy way. Put a Good driver in a 2nd or even 3rd rate car (Im thinking MS in 96) and they'll pull something amazing out of the bag more often than not.

IYSWIM

BAR cheated in 2004, it's a fact and FIA know it. An ex-BAR engineer who works now at Renault told the story. The problem is that the FIA dont wanna change the whole 2004 season results, that would be a mess.They should have banned BAR for more than 2 races.

bull theres no way they could do that for an enitre season

why not?

they used at Imola and as the car was designed at the beggining of the season, do you think they change it SPECIALLY for THAT race? NO, they had already used the tank in 2005 before Imola, and proved in tests before races...and NOBODY knew and said anything at all.If the engineer wouldnt have told it, we wouldnt know it yet. And neither FIA.

Oh, I acknowledge that it didnt happen by accident. My point was generally more to do with needing solid EVIDENCE and proof before accusing them. People do this all the time, and you can't just od it, because in the real world, that sort of thing can get oyu into a lot of trouble!



-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

requenov Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BAR cheated in 2004, it's a fact and FIA know it.
> An ex-BAR engineer who works now at Renault told
> the story. The problem is that the FIA dont wanna
> change the whole 2004 season results, that would
> be a mess.They should have banned BAR for more
> than 2 races.

source?

a fact fact... yea whatever mate.. *rolls*

please shut me up by proving this. otherwise u will look like a nob... and id rather you prove it than just saying

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

its f1, no evidence is needed
bar got 2nd in 2004 - almost enough to say they were cheating :|
but on the ilovejenson bright side maybe button not winning is because they didn't want to be scrutinised too closely

____
Tony

so Chet, because we don't have solid evidence to show you, do you really believe that Imola '05 was the very first time they ever cheated with the dodgy fuel tank and lied to the inspectors when asked if the car was completely empty of fuel?

even without facts/evidence, it leads anyone who doesn't permanently wear Button-tinted-spectacles to think this must have been going on for quite some time, certainly for every race of 2005 before they were caught, and possibly as far as the 2nd half of 2004, if not the whole season.

---

RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael

its an accepted fact within f1 circles that BAR were running that style fuel tank all throughout 2004.

---

even Button himself saying they cheated throughout 2004 wouldn't be enough to convince Chetty...

---

RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael

Having fuel in the collector tank wouldn't necessarily mean that BAR ran underweight at any point.

The only reason that they were banned was because they couldn't prove their innocence in a way accepeted by the regulations.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2005 04:20PM by tripleM.

thats true, but the fact that fuel is needed in the tank to bring it up to the minimum weight, while the other teams' cars were meeting the minimum weight without fuel (as required) would mean there must be some advantage somewhere i.e. being able to run underweight at some point in the race, otherwise it would be totally pointless to do it.

---

RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael

well at the time it was reported other teams done the same thing as BAR some even saying ferrari and toyota had to change their tanks and that also cost ferrari pace i.e bahrain and imola they were on the pace then they were not.

There was another team as well but can not remember who now will check later i think it was saiber but not sure.

bar's argument was that this section of the fule tank was always full, because the engine needed super high density of fuel to start, without the tank there the engine wouldnt run at all, so it was always full.

As I said earlier though, since we can't just proclaim they definately cheated, neither can we say straight out that BAR's reason was true, or that it WAS always full.

-----------------

She says brief things, her love’s a pony
My love’s subliminal

so i take every1 is basing BARs success last year on the basis that they possibly cheated?
tbh no more should be said about this because we know fuk all

no1 here has any clue what so ever. we dont even know a % of what really happend.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

bar's argument was that this section of the fule tank was always full, because the engine needed super high density of fuel to start, without the tank there the engine wouldnt run at all, so it was always full.

Full all the time or not, thats still illegal. The car without the fuel didnt meet the minimum weight. Whilst it doesnt prove they cheated in every race, it is a fact they ran the car under weight at Imola. You've also got to think that if they did run the tank in 2004, then it was there for a reason. They cant exactly say that they used it legally in 2004 and not in 2005 can they? Its not like they have a problem cheating.

i.e. being able to run underweight at some point in the race

Actually if you think about it, whilst it only runs underweight for a very small point in time, the gain over the entire distance is huge because its running lighter than required for the entire race except the final stint where they have to put in enough to make sure the car tips the scales at the minimum.

Its a bit like flexable aerodynamics. When the cars in the inspection, it *appears* to be legal, but when its on track, its not.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2005 07:50PM by DaveEllis.