When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Anyone have a link to a detailed description of what happened with the Mercedes's tire pressure? I can't find anything that actually gives a timeline.
When did the FIA find out of the under inflation? At the starting grid, during the race, after the tires were changed??? This lack of transparency makes it hard to know if there is a conspiracy.
More F-C, and what is really interesting is that a GP2 driver caught the same way as MBZ got penalized all the way to the back of the grid at Monza. I can't remember which driver I saw criticizing the lack of the stewards' uniformity in application of the Pirelli/FIA directive regarding tire pressures but I saw it yesterday.
More:
stewards will not take any further action against Lewis Hamilton for running low tyre pressures at the start of the Grand Prix. The Italian GP stewards have decided against punishment for Lewis Hamilton from the Monza race after the Mercedes driver took victory by 25 seconds.
Hamilton, along with teammate Nico Rosberg, was investigated for starting the race with tyre temperatures below those set out in a technical directive. There was a threat of disqualification or a time penalty, but the stewards have decided against any further penalty.
Stewards' statement:
"Having heard from the Technical Delegate, the Team Representatives and the Pirelli Team Tyre engineer, the Stewards have determined that the pressure in the tyres concerned were at the minimum start pressure recommended by Pirelli when they were fitted to the car. In making this determination regarding the pressures, the Stewards noted that the tyre warming blankets had been disconnected from their power source, as is normal procedure, and the tyres were significantly below the maximum permitted tyre blanket temperature at the time of the FIA’s measurement on the grid, and at significantly different temperatures from other cars measured on the grid. Further, the Stewards are satisfied that the team followed the currently specified procedure, supervised by the Tyre Manufacturer, for the safe operation of the tyres. Therefore the Stewards decide to take no further action. Nevertheless, the Stewards recommend that the Tyre Manufacturer and the FIA hold further meetings to provide clear guidance to the teams on measurement protocols".
Quote
Never mind a penalty, Pat Symonds reckons Lewis Hamilton should be disqualified from the Italian GP for breaking a "safety regulation."
The Brit is having to face the stewards in the wake of his Italian Grand Prix after it was revealed his rear-left tyre was 0.3 PSI below the minimum pressure at the start of the grand prix.
Pirelli had changed the tyre measures ahead of the Italian weekend in response to Sebastian Vettel's Spa blow-out.
However, both Mercedes cars failed to adhere to the new measurement as Nico Rosberg's rear-left was 1.1 PSI blow the specified minimum.
Symonds, Williams' chief technical officer, believes it is a infringement worthy of disqualification.
"What I'm hearing is that a team broke a safety regulation and I can't see anything other than full disqualification."
He added: "It's out of my hands but I don't think it's a tough decision if the measurements are verified."
Rob Smedley, Williams head of performance, backed his colleague's assessment.
"It's a safety issue - as far as I know, it's a disqualification," he said.
On the tire scandal if we can call it that, I didn't even know that tire pressures were checked by FIA. It used to be between the tire manufacturers and the teams. It's also a great race strategy, Williams used to be very analytical on tire pressure and setting it considering the race conditions.
As for MBZ and RBR, I never seriously thought MBZ would supply RBR. Too close for competition. The McLaren/MBZ dealwas a long term arrangement that went back 2 decades that got renewed every so often.
Speaking of McLaren, I sorta agree there's alot of rumors going on BUT there have also been plenty of official public statements from Eric Bouler and Yasuhisa Arai pointing fingers at the other's products and their faults. Really surprises me since it seems so un-McLaren and un-Honda like thing to do. Does not solve the problems and presents awkward relationship problems. RBR use of it with Renault is not surprising since that sorta goes along their mode of operation.
my understanding was Jo Siffert the FIA Tech inspector, knew before the race as pressures were taken on the grid.
See, that's very vague. If the FIA knew about this at the beginning of the race, why wasn't anything done? If they measured the tires when they still had warmers on, when did they remeasure them? On the grid?
Why did Mercedes start to panic at the end of the race?
This is really strange.
What about during the race? If the tire pressure is such a safety issue, then why didn't Pirelli and the FIA force Mecedes to call the cars in during the race to change tires?
Why did Mercedes start to panic at the end of the race?
I don't know the answers to the rest of your questions F-C but MBZ was anticipating a time penalty from the FIA and so told Lew to push to offset the expected penalty to retain P1. It never came to be of course and they never had to panic Hamilton either.
They didn't tell Ham the specifics of why they wanted him to push hard because he is known to go off the rails sometimes when he hears stuff like that. He has a bit of a short fuse LOL.
(Legend2TL: I agree with Webber too... however keep in mind he is still pissed with Vettel's politicking)
By: Adam Cooper, F1 reporter
2015-09-07
The final laps of the Italian Grand Prix left everybody - including race winner Lewis Hamilton - very confused. Adam Cooper brings you the full story behind the tyre pressure saga.
The Italian Grand Prix turned on its head at 3.04pm, although at that stage neither race winner Lewis Hamilton, his Mercedes team nor the millions of people watching at home had any idea what was about to happen.
Up until that point, the Monza race had been pretty routine for the reigning world champion and his pit wall. Having made a good start, and eased away from Sebastian Vettel in the first stint, he made an untroubled pitstop and was cruising to a dominant victory.
He even had time to ask the pit wall if there was anything he could do to help save the engine – the upgraded unit remember – for future races.
Then everything changed as we saw pictures of a worried Toto Wolff at the centre of a debate in the garage. There were also some unusual radio messages from Hamilton's engineer.
"Strat Mode 3. We need to pull a gap, don't ask questions, just execute," was one.
Then later: "We need some good lap times, we'll explain at the end."
Hamilton responded: "What do I need to do? I can't go much quicker."
"What you are doing is great, Lewis," was the reply.
Mystery motive
The obvious conclusion was that Mercedes had spotted a technical problem or perhaps a tyre issue that might require him to make an urgent late pitstop, hence the need to create the gap.
Clearly as confused as the rest of us by what had unfolded, and having to up his pace, after the chequered flag, he said: "those last few laps were not cool."
It was only in those minutes after the race that driver, the media and public learned of the tyre pressure issue, and it became clear what Mercedes was worried about.
The team had received notification from the FIA, in a document timestamped at 3.04pm, of an investigation into a tyre pressure anomaly on the grid.
It had prompted fears that there could be a time penalty at the end of the race, possibly of the order of 25s – the post-race equivalent of a stop and go.
Incredibly, Lewis actually crossed the line 25.042s ahead of Vettel, more by luck than judgement, one suspects...
Initially the team had no real answers as to what had happened.
"All I know is we set our pressures fully supervised by the Pirelli engineer, he was perfectly happy with them as they were set," said Paddy Lowe immediately after the flag.
"So other than that I don't understand it and we'll go and investigate. I think with what I'd call an abundance of caution, because we haven't done anything wrong, we thought let's make a gap."
Background concern
The tyre pressure saga had kicked off earlier in the weekend when Pirelli told the teams that, as a result of the Spa dramas, it wanted to impose higher minimum pressure limits.
After further discussions, figures of 21psi front and 19.5psi rear – representing an increase of 1psi over more normal baselines – were agreed on for Friday.
Tyre pressure is significant because it's such a key parameter of car performance, and teams don't like to be forced to go higher than they would like.
As one senior race engineer explained: "For a given track temperature for a given car and given brake temperature and rim heating, there is a pressure where it's optimum for grip, wear and everything else.
"Here, because everything was high, everyone was looking to come down. It helps your pace, wear and everything. If you do a long run 0.5psi represents a difference in wear and performance."
Things moved up a notch on Saturday morning when Pirelli wrote to the teams in effect warning that they had to respect the tyre pressures minimums.
In the letter, first revealed by Motorsport.com, Pirelli's top engineer Mario Isola told the teams: "Our prescriptions about minimum starting pressures are based on the assumption that running pressures are higher than starting ones. These are the historical values we've seen, and we therefore need you to respect this in order to operate the tyres safely.
"If we find, during any session, that your stabilised pressures are equal to or lower than the starting pressures, we will give higher starting pressures limit to your team, as agreed with FIA."
Dodging the guidelines
This was a response to Pirelli and the FIA's frustration that teams were apparently trying various clever methods to get around the pressure requirement.
In other words, they were passing the test when the tyres went on the cars, but then running below the limit, in some cases with the rears at 18.5psi. Given that this was a question of safety, the FIA was clearly concerned, as were Pirelli.
"We need to be sure that our tyres are operated in the range of camber and pressure we want," Isola told Motorsport.com on Saturday. "We need to be sure that the running pressure is in-line with the starting pressure.
"We are checking and we are enforcing the usual data that are the starting pressure, the maximum camber and the temperature in the blankets. We just reminded everybody that this is for us very important. We need to be sure that all this data is respected. And we work with the FIA about that.
"I fully understand that the teams need to find performance, that is clear. On the other side we have to be sure that the tyres are working in the right way. It's always a balance between the two. It's clear that nobody's happy when you control something."
And as ever, the teams look for any advantage, and sometimes Pirelli has to rein them in.
Isola added: "It's not an easy job! For me it is not correct to say that people are cheating. They are trying to find the room in the regulations to do something that is allowed because it is not forbidden.
"If we realise that this new idea has a negative impact on the tyre, we need to react, and to police it. They've found some grey areas where they can work at the limit, that's all.
"It's more operatonal than set-up, but it's a combination of both, because also the set-up had an influence on how the tyre works."
Saturday's final practice session and qualifying passed without incident, but it was interesting to note that there were penalties in GP2 as a result of tyre pressure anomalies.
Given the general climate, it was logical to assume that that the F1 teams went into Sunday fully aware that the FIA was keeping a close eye on things, and thus it was imperative to comply with the limits.
Surprise checks
The usual practice is for the pressures of the tyres used to start the race to be recorded by the team's individual Pirelli engineers in the last few minutes before the start, and this information is relayed to the FIA.
Different tyres are used for the reconnaissance laps through the pitlane and to get to the grid, so the actual race tyres are waiting on trollies on the grid in heated blankets.
Exactly when they are checked appears to be something of a grey area, and apparently the FIA found out that different Pirelli engineers and teams adopt slightly different procedures and timings.
However, in essence, the numbers are taken when the tyres are still in fully heated blankets. The Pirelli engineer with each team, sets (or oversees) the pressure setting just before the blankets are disconnected from the power supply, ie when they are at their hottest. This is normally 110°C.
The tyres are then put on the car and the blankets loosened in order to lower the car onto the ground to tighten the wheels, so all the time they're cooling down and losing pressure.
On this occasion the FIA decided to impose its own extra surprise checks at a late stage, between 3-5 minutes before the start, having agreed such a strategy with Pirelli on Sunday morning.
The top four cars on the grid – the Ferraris and Mercedes – were duly singled out, and in each case just the left rear was checked by FIA technical delegate Jo Bauer.
It was at this stage that the anomalies were discovered. Hamilton's tyre was 0.3psi below the limit, and Rosberg's 1.1psi below the limit. The two Ferraris were found to be above the limit.
This information was then processed by Bauer and passed to the FIA Stewards. As they were to discover, the key is that when Bauer's measurements were taken, the tyre blankets had already been disconnected from their power source as part of the usual procedure the Mercedes crew go through on the grid.
Mercedes duly pointed out that even in that short time the drop in temperature was sufficient to prompt the drop in pressure that the FIA recorded.
The Stewards accepted this argument, and agreed that the earlier Pirelli supervised measurement, in other words the normal procedure of measuring while still in the heated blankets, showed that the tyres were above the legal minimum when "they went on the car."
FIA frustration
In what appears to be a case of miscommunication, the FIA had not been informed that Pirelli usually accepts the earlier measurement – with the tyres fully heated in their still connected blankets – as its definitive official "starting pressure."
When Bauer did his extra checks, it was at a stage when Pirelli had already accepted the Mercedes tyres as "legal", while knowing that, with the blankets disconnected, the temperature and pressure could only drop.
So in effect it would seem that Bauer was wasting his time by measuring pressures in the last few minutes before the start, with the blankets disconnected.
Given that the FIA is trying to police the situation at the request of Pirelli – and has to take all the parameters that Pirelli sets at face value – it would seem that perhaps the tyre maker didn't quite get its story straight.
Indeed, Pirelli confirmed to the Stewards that Mercedes had complied with its own requirements, vis a vis its blankets plugged-in measurements.
Once this became apparent the Stewards decided that, while there was an anomaly in the pressures recorded by the FIA, there was also a grey area in the procedures and timing of the measurements.
The Stewards also accepted that once the cars started moving, the tyres heated up again, and the pressures went up. Indeed, data from the cars showed that throughout the race the Mercedes tyres stayed well above the minimum requirement, and the FIA was satisfied by that.
The punishment potential
Taking a win away from Hamilton would have been a Draconian punishment given that this was not a clear cut case.
That was especially true as the race data indicated that no advantage was gained, since he was running above the minimum during the race. After all, given this is a safety matter, what really counts is the stabilised pressure when the cars are running.
Consider too the ramifications of an exclusion for Hamilton, representing a 25-point bonus for Nico Rosberg, who could not lose any points as he didn't score in Monza, but whose tyre pressure anomaly was in fact more extreme than Hamilton's...
The counter argument is that teams should have been prepared for such a spot check and put sufficient pressure in the tyres to allow for that window after the blankets were disconnected.
It could be argued they should ensure that they stayed above the limit somewhat may, at least to the point where the FIA could make a physical check before the cars actually drove off.
Legal or not legal?
It would be safe to assume that Ferrari did leave such a margin, and thus the Italian team is not happy that Mercedes sailed so close to the wind. Others were not impressed either.
"You are either legal or you aren't legal," said one F1 engineer. "Especially at a circuit like this where the speeds are so high, you've got to have a margin. This is Monza, anywhere where you want to be safe, it's here. You try to be a bit sensible about it."
The key part of the Stewards decision was the final paragraph, in which they "recommend that the tyre manufacturer and the FIA hold further meetings to provide clear guidance to the teams on measurement protocols."
In other words, if Pirelli wants the FIA to properly police pressures on its behalf, it has to come up with a definitive procedure that everyone accepts and understands, which is not the case at the moment.
While sorting out such procedures should be straightforwards, F1 dodged a bullet at Monza without them in place.
Had the Stewards accepted that Hamilton had been in breach - whether innocent or not - the implications would have been massive.
F1 would have had F1's first race-winning disqualification since Spa 1994, and Hamilton losing 25 points? World championships have been won and lost on much, much less.
===================
What I fail to understand is how come it took the FIA 1:04 minutes to issue a letter of concern to MBZ? In other words, it was at 3:04 when notified and an hour plus in to the race and AFTER MBZ had changed Hamilton's tires. I knew those tire warmers were hot but 110 C?
EDIT: or approximately what water boils at sea level (212 F) Makes you wonder how those mechanics are able to squat holding the tire blankets over the tire until the last second during qualifying.
Last edited by Chief F1 Fan; 09-09-2015 at 07:20 AM.
^Good article. Blame can go all around. Thought Prodromou would have had a more immediate impact, but I guess I forgot he joined after McLaren had already designed the layout.
^ I'm wondering if the axial compressor on the turbo was a major technology problem for Honda. No one else was using that approach, AFAIK radial turbines and compressors are used on the other current F1 engines.
Honda is using IHI (Japanese company) for their turbos, Ferrari Honeywell (Garrett). MBZ is designing and producing their own turbo which is impressive.
Last weekend I happened to find a couple interesting technical F1 websites, and there was a great article on the proposed FIA aerodynamic rules and requirements for 2017. What surprised me was the radial changes to increase downforce. IIRC, the stepped bottom will be closer to the plank. The diffuser will be changed as well. And the sidepods are also reshaped, for greater downforce. But the front wing with their ~6-12 elements will be retained, which is a problem in passing with drafting causing all sorts of flow problems and understeer. At least the wider rear tires makes some sense to give more mechanical grip.
The goal was to make the 2017 cars ~6-7 seconds a lap faster than 2015, I was like WTF FIA made the current rules to make the cars that much slower in 2014 from the cars in the early 2010's. So I'm like very baffled as to the FIA rule makers, and can see why people like Gordon Murray can only shake their heads.
Some thoughts on the very talented Brambam/McLaren F1 designer and also designer of the McLaren F1 road car.
Thereafter, the units were turned down in the interests of reliability – and the engine in the back of Nico Rosberg's car had to be removed and replaced by an old standard-spec unit after suffering a leak in Saturday morning practice. But in P1 on Friday their end-of-straight speeds, combined with information gained by other teams via GPS-tracking suggested the new motor could have been as much as 40bhp more powerful than that which was already dominating the season.
Merc making power gains with new fuel and cylinder shape. Pretty interesting stuff.
Another good excerpt,...
This resistance to detonation is believed to be the biggest single advantage enjoyed by Mercedes over the rival Ferrari and, particularly, Renault, which is believed to be poor in this regard. This advantage compounds in the hybrid era, for the more power that is produced, the more heat that is created for the ersH to recover, giving greater electrical power too.
The necessity for the engine and fuel to be developed together in this formula was underlined last year when McLaren ran Mercedes engines as customers but was contracted to run Mobil fuel. Despite identical engines to the works cars, the McLarens were often as much as 40 horsepower down.
Headline: Renault to stop supplying engines to other F1 teams
Renault will stop supplying engines to Formula 1 teams after its contractual obligations end.
Carlos Ghosn, Renault's chairman and chief executive officer, also hinted the company's relationship with Red Bull is likely to end this year.
Ghosn said: "We have already alerted the F1 authorities and told them: 'Don't count on us as a provider of an engine - it's over.'"
Renault is in the process of trying to negotiate a takeover of the Lotus team.
But Ghosn said there was still a possibility the company could walk away from F1.
"Our future is the subject of detailed analysis and renegotiating," he said. "We will either exit or run our own team. We don't have a clear decision yet."
Renault has an engine supply contract with Red Bull until 2016.
Rossi to race in 5 of the last 7 races for Manor. He would be doing all but two conflict with GP2 and that contract trumps his new F1 contract with Manor. American in F1! I wonder if this is a possible way to get him experience to maybe be one of the Haas drivers next year. To be honest though I would really like to see Magnussen at Haas if he isn't at McLaren.
Last edited by CCColtsicehockey; 09-16-2015 at 03:24 PM.
Well, supposedly McLaren let Magnussen's contract expire so that's a done deal. I liked the way he raced last year and he definitely deserves a ride. Rossi isn't good enough to get that Haas ride-yet. The last American, Scott Speed, in F1 was a disaster even though he came up through the Red Bull Racing Young Driver Program. Michael Andretti was the 2nd last American driver and well, we all know how that turned out. Haas needs an established driver like Gutierrez.
Rossi to race in 5 of the last 7 races for Manor. He would be doing all but two conflict with GP2 and that contract trumps his new F1 contract with Manor. American in F1! I wonder if this is a possible way to get him experience to maybe be one of the Haas drivers next year. To be honest though I would really like to see Magnussen at Haas if he isn't at McLaren.
Got a feeling Renault is exiting the sport for awhile, couldn't agree more with Ghosn statement below.
"Unfortunately when we were winning championships the Renault name was never mentioned. It was the team that was winning," he said.
"So we started to feel the return on this investment was very weak.
Originally Posted by CCColtsicehockey
Rossi to race in 5 of the last 7 races for Manor. He would be doing all but two conflict with GP2 and that contract trumps his new F1 contract with Manor. American in F1! I wonder if this is a possible way to get him experience to maybe be one of the Haas drivers next year. To be honest though I would really like to see Magnussen at Haas if he isn't at McLaren.
Bad timing for Magnussen as he just broke his hand bicycling.
Grosjean to Haas makes perfect sense-he has finally settled down aggressive-wise and just bagged an impressive 3rd @ Spa. He had a good career on the way to F1 and may finally be mature enough to drive a car and get consistent results, something Haas will desperately be seeking.
Grosjean to Haas makes perfect sense-he has finally settled down aggressive-wise and just bagged an impressive 3rd @ Spa. He had a good career on the way to F1 and may finally be mature enough to drive a car and get consistent results, something Haas will desperately be seeking.
You think a factory Renault will be worse off than a completely new team? Even if the Haas is a thinly disguised Ferrari, I'd still think that a properly funded Lotus->Renault will be a better option.
The only way Grosjean would decide on Haas is if the uncertainty at Renault making a decision is so great that he can't take a chance to wait.
what would really give me pause if I was Grojo is the fact that even with MBZ engines this year, it can't keep up to RBR. Next year's "Lotus" will be a very limited evolution of this year's car. Lotus didn't have money to pay its mechanics yet alone do CFD work on a new chassis. Yes, I do think the new Haas will be better than an old Lotus.
Alain Prost. By Maurice Hamilton. 320 pages. Blink. $55.
In this biography of Alain Prost as told through the words of many of the people who worked with the French driver during his racing career — from go-karting and car-racing school through the lower formulas and finally 13 years in Formula One — there is one word early on that seems out of place.
Maurice Hamilton, who narrates the story between the voices of the interviewees — who include Prost himself — has woven a highly readable, gripping account of the Frenchman’s racing career. But on the first page of the first chapter, Hamilton writes that Prost, now 60, was “arguably” one of the best racing drivers in history.....
Ayrton Senna and Vettel, and is eclipsed only by Schumacher, who has 91.
Other statistics, too, prove that he is unarguably one of the greatest drivers the series ever had.
In the rest of the 320-page book, which is filled with fabulous photos, the facts are reinforced by the testimony of Prost’s friends and colleagues. They paint a picture of a man who rose to the top from a humble background in rural France, the son of a furniture maker. He had an incredible natural talent for making cars go faster than just about anyone else could, with an apparent effortlessness that was part of what kept him from being popular with fans.
“I was astonished when Prost tested with us” after he had already won three world titles, says Frank Dernie, an engineer at the Ligier team. “Knowing his reputation, I wasn’t really surprised by the quality of the feedback he gave us; I was ready for that. But what did surprise me was how quick he was. However great a driver he had been all those years, for some reason I never really thought of him as ultimately quick, in the ‘Senna’ sense of the word.”
It was more for his quiet, shy personality and his less-than-exuberant driving style that Prost got bad press. His other problem was his rivalry with Senna, who was in many ways Prost’s exact opposite. Senna appeared to be an exuberant driver, and his charisma grabbed the attention wherever he went.
But Prost pushed for the McLaren Honda team to hire Senna as his teammate starting in 1988, even if Senna had always insisted on molding his teams to work exclusively around him.
“I told Honda that they needed to have the best driver for the future — so it had to be Ayrton,” Prost says in the book. “They wanted to have Nelson
(Piquet) — and Nelson was a good friend, he was always close to me. I did not know Ayrton very well at the time. But I said: ‘Why Nelson? If you want to make a strong team, take the best, take the youngest, the one for the future. Take Ayrton.”’
Once at the team, Senna’s more flamboyant character and driving style wrapped the team and much of the public around his finger, leaving Prost to look like a bad guy. That impression was reinforced two decades later by a 2010 documentary film, “Senna,” directed by Asif Kapadia, in which Prost was cast as the evil foe to the late, great Brazilian legend. The last chapter of Hamilton’s book, part of an ongoing series about great McLaren drivers, suggests that the film got that part of the story wrong.
“I didn’t think they did a good job at all,” Stefan Johansson, a driver who raced as a teammate to Prost at McLaren before Senna arrived, told Hamilton, referring to the film. “I’d worked with both Senna and Prost and, at best, it was six of one and half a dozen of the other. As far as I was concerned, Alain had not come out of this very well. It was not a true reflection of the guy I knew and for whom I have so much respect. They didn’t do Prost any favors whatsoever.”
This book does a good job of correcting that, offering a portrait of the man and the racer, in the words of those who knew him best.
Good read, gotta go buy the book now. I was always a Prost fan. I couldn't believe it one time while walking behind the gold grandstands in Montreal there he was, right next to me! I said hello and we walked and chatted for a little bit. He was pretty shy just as this review states. I bet he really wishes he never asked for Senna to be his team mate now, especially after the '89 Japanese GP.
POS DRIVER NATIONALITY ENTRANT TIME
1. Nico Rosberg Germany Mercedes GP 1:47.995
2. Lewis Hamilton Britain Mercedes GP 1:48.314
3. Daniel Ricciardo Autralian Red Bull-Renault 1:48.331
4. Sebastian Vettel Germany Ferrari 1:48.494
5. Kimi Raikkonen Finland Ferrari 1:48.785
6. Valtteri Bottas Finland Williams-Mercedes 1:49.380
7. Max Verstappen Netherlands Toro Rosso-Renault 1:49.466
8. Nico Hulkenberg Germany Force India-Mercedes 1:49.854
9. Carlos Sainz Spain Toro Rosso-Renault 1:50.019
10. Pastor Maldonado Venezuela Lotus-Mercedes 1:50.068
11. Fernando Alonso Spain McLaren-Honda 1:50.123
12. Sergio Perez Mexico Force India-Mercedes 1:50.125
13. Felipe Nasr Brazil Sauber-Ferrari 1:50.158
14. Romain Grosjean France Lotus-Mercedes 1:50.341
15. Jenson Button Britain McLaren-Honda 1:50.455
16. Marcus Ericsson Sweden Sauber-Ferrari 1:50.883
17. Felipe Massa Brazil Williams-Mercedes 1:51.035
18. Daniil Kvyat Russia Red Bull-Renault 1:51.188
19. Will Stevens Britain Marussia-Ferrari 1:53.903
20. Alexander Rossi United States Marussia-Ferrari 1:53.918
POS DRIVER NATIONALITY ENTRANT TIME
1. Daniil Kvyat Russia Red Bull-Renault 1:46.142
2. Kimi Raikkonen Finland Ferrari 1:46.181
3. Daniel Ricciardo Autralian Red Bull-Renault 1:46.256
4. Lewis Hamilton Britain Mercedes GP 1:46.479
5. Sebastian Vettel Germany Ferrari 1:46.487
6. Sergio Perez Mexico Force India-Mercedes 1:46.659
7. Nico Rosberg Germany Mercedes GP 1:46.781
8. Fernando Alonso Spain McLaren-Honda 1:46.959
9. Nico Hulkenberg Germany Force India-Mercedes 1:47.294
10. Max Verstappen Netherlands Toro Rosso-Renault 1:47.427
11. Felipe Massa Brazil Williams-Mercedes 1:47.684
12. Felipe Nasr Brazil Sauber-Ferrari 1:47.755
13. Marcus Ericsson Sweden Sauber-Ferrari 1:47.795
14. Jenson Button Britain McLaren-Honda 1:47.888
15. Carlos Sainz Spain Toro Rosso-Renault 1:48.012
16. Romain Grosjean France Lotus-Mercedes 1:48.096
17. Valtteri Bottas Finland Williams-Mercedes 1:48.118
18. Pastor Maldonado Venezuela Lotus-Mercedes 1:50.094
19. Alexander Rossi United States Marussia-Ferrari 1:56.739
20. Will Stevens Britain Marussia-Ferrari 1:59.932
Good read, gotta go buy the book now. I was always a Prost fan. I couldn't believe it one time while walking behind the gold grandstands in Montreal there he was, right next to me! I said hello and we walked and chatted for a little bit. He was pretty shy just as this review states. I bet he really wishes he never asked for Senna to be his team mate now, especially after the '89 Japanese GP.
Also on my read list and my fav F1 driver. Never met him (only F1 driver I met in person was Mario) but saw him many times in the F1 garages under Cobo Hall in Detroit. Always looking over data with Lauda, Bernard, Dennis,...and later Senna, Murray.
Yeah, in the end he probably regretted encouraging Dennis to hire Senna. Portugal GP 1988 was the first of alot more drama to come between the two.
Agree totally with Johansson, that the movie "Senna" is a very unfair to Prost. Senna played more politics than Prost, within the team and press. If I was Prost I would never speak to John Bisignano again, some of the topics he presents in the movie are simply untrue or distorted.
All I remember from "Senna" is that Prost was asked by Ayrton's family to be a pallbearer. Later I heard both Prost and Stewart were moved from positions 1 & 2 to 5 & 6 as pallbearers by Senna's family. I thought the two antagonists pretty much buried the hatchet before Senna's death?
All I remember from "Senna" is that Prost was asked by Ayrton's family to be a pallbearer. Later I heard both Prost and Stewart were moved from positions 1 & 2 to 5 & 6 as pallbearers by Senna's family. I thought the two antagonists pretty much buried the hatchet before Senna's death?
There were several scenes where the movie implies that Prost played favors from Balestre and FIA over the collisions and penalties to Senna. Not covered in the movie was Honda providing different engine mappings for Senna and Prost which annoyed Prost since Senna sometimes had higher trap speeds.
And yes, they made up at the end of 1993 season and spoke several times up to Imola 1994. IIRC Prost was also on the Senna Foundation board too.
A colleague/friend met Rossi in California couple years ago after a support race. Said he was a really nice guy and low-key, he's top goal was getting a F1 ride. Hoping he makes it, it's been since 78 that a American won a F1 race.
09-08-2015, 07:50 AM
American in F1! I wonder if this is a possible way to get him experience to maybe be one of the Haas drivers next year. To be honest though I would really like to see Magnussen at Haas if he isn't at McLaren.
Haas needs an established driver like Gutierrez. 
(its a night race).
