ummm.. Generally speaking it's called having a discussion. That means people might post things that concurr with what you said, or even not concurr with it.
If you want to interpret that as a general attack on your beliefs, opinions, sense of self worth be my guest, (it'll be no skin off my nose), but it certainly wasn't intended that way. My posts weren't even in direct response to yours Boy are you in for a shock when you start working.
Well obviously a bad intercooler is going to be worse than nothing at all. If it's basically not able to do any cooling worth talking about and is unduely restrictive to the flow then sure replacing it with one that has good flow and actually does some cooling should result in power improvement. But it's going to depend a lot on the actual car, and I would have thought most modern cars don't have nearly such crap intercoolers in them.
To be honest. The most I would bother doing tuning wise to a standard turbo engine is get it chipped by a reputable company. Assuming it's the kind of engine that responds well to being chipped. Like the VAG engine do.
+1 that. Those changes aren't going to make any difference. Might help the car maintain power and prevent heat soak but otherwise no real power gained from them. Methinks someones been blinded by sales hype.
Turbo lag is pretty much a thing of the past on modern cars. It's more a sense of blunting of throttle sharpness these days. But even then only really at low revs when the Turbo isn't really spinning up properly.
In the most part gone are the days when you floor it and nothing happens for a second or two. As long as you're in the right gear for your speed, (which you should be anyway), then a modern turbo engine is more like a slightly elastic surge when you plant your foot. They just require a slightly different driving technique IME.
But if sharp throttle response is your "thang" then fair enough.
Ok point taken. I was overstating the significance somewhat. But the point still stands that experience at lower levels is not directly transferable to a series that makes higher skills etc demands of it's drivers. Obviously a lot of race craft is gained in lower series, and thank god it is, can you imagine people using Matt Neal overtaking tactics in F1 (oh certain drivers do
).Apart from the fact that none of that will happen in reality.
It may look like an advantage for the capped teams but in practice it almost certainly won't be. They have to stay within the budget.. NO MATTER WHAT.. that limits what they will be able to achieve even when given a free reign technically.
Team budget caps - good for F1 ?
Would seem maybe it could be....
There could possibly be three new teams on the grid if the proposed capping of team budgets goes ahead in F1.
Independent teams looking to join F1
More teams would mean more drivers and hopefully more "interesting" races. Not that I think this season has got off to a bad start by any means.
Thoughts??
There could possibly be three new teams on the grid if the proposed capping of team budgets goes ahead in F1.
Independent teams looking to join F1
More teams would mean more drivers and hopefully more "interesting" races. Not that I think this season has got off to a bad start by any means.
Thoughts??
When you consider that the "veterans" of F1 have clocked up over 200 races I don't think anyone could ever objectively call a mere 38 race starts "experienced". Under 50 races is still clearly "novice" status as far as F1 is concerned. To be considered "Experienced" a driver would need to have completed at least 100 races (half way to veteran status) IMO.
Points are irrelevant. You can't judge a drivers experience on the basis of how many points they've scored.
Also, as anyone who is actually in a position to be knowlegable in such things will tell you, (ie those with experience of both), F1 is in a different league completely to any other motorsport series and so no, experience in other series isn't relevant to F1. Much the same as any MotoGP and any other motorcycle racing series on the planet. There is just no preparation that can be made in other series to climbing aboard and racing a MotoGP machine.
I'll say simply this.
Go ahead, take you're wonderfull business idea and vision and see how far you get BY YOURSELF.
Without the help of experienced Sales, Marketing, Engineering, Administrative, Legal, Project Management people to help you, that "Great" business acumen of yours is worth squat.
Business is a COLLABORATION. It needs BOTH the people to give it direction and strategy AND the people to turn those things in to an ACTUAL money making enterprise.
The arrogance of the belief that it's solely the CEO's, Directors et al that deserve the credit for building the business and creating the wealth and driving forward the economy astounds me it truely does.
I'm not talking about putting in place any punative measures to make companies employ older more experienced staff. However, I do think they should legislate against companies creating a young company "culture" artificially because of bias and biggotry against older people on the assumption they're slow or entrenched in their ways and unable to learn.
I'm talking about the government helping older unemployed people to get back in to work with retraining packages. If it's good enough for the young why not all?? Seriously, 25 isn't even that old!! what about the poor 26 year old??
Yes, we've all seen what business does when it's allowed to do what it likes completely unregulated. We're reaping the rewards of it right now. People need to learn the new reality, laissez fair capitalism doesn't work. It just mandates greed and wealth creation for a minority. Growth isn't everything, we need to get out of this cycle of profit and growth generation being the sole ambition of business. There is such a thing as too much growth being bad for the economy.
That's the problem, too much short term thinking. Too much lining their own pockets and not thinking about the long term consequences even for their own businesses let alone the economy overall.
If the banks had been far more heaviliy and actively regulated we would not be in the sh*t we're in today. That's just a fact.
Rubbish. The people that are being paid over £150k by and large are CEOs, Chaimen etc of large corporations. They have in no way created jobs for the people in general. The employees of those corporations create the wealth for the business through their hard work. They're the ones that put the companies in the position of growth to be able to employ more people.
The vast majority of company directors etc, (the people you're really alluding to), who start up new businesses and create new jobs that way, don't pay themselves anywhere near £150k. They simply can't afford it.
What I'm about to say it probably not going to go down very well here, (considering the average age on this forum), but..
I think they've already done more than enough to help young people in to work etc. I think it's about time they started doing something for older people that find themselves in the position of being out of work with dependants to support and lots of bills. Especially now with more and more people ending up unemployed. To be blunt if you're under 25 and you loose your job chances are you're renting and could easily go back to live with your parents if you really had too. Also, young people haven't really entrenched themselves in a career and it would be far easier for them to find a job in another sector, especially with employers being youth fixated like they are.
For the likes of 30/40 year olds moving career is much harder and it's people with 10-20 years in the same sector that really need the retraining money. History has proven this, look at the coal, steel, tin, etc etc industries that went to the wall. It's the older workers that have ended up on the long term unemployment list, not the younger ones who could managed to find work in other industries.
So, where's the support for the older worker that finds themself out of a job??? Where's their retraining budget?. It's just plain wrong to assume that because you're older you have savings and money in the bank in order to retrain. Plus time factors are far more critical when you're older. The bank waits around for no man before repossessing the home that you spent 20 years building up.
It's about time this government stopped giving all it's handouts to the younger generation, who are more flexible and able to take another path. It's about time they started doing something for the people that have worked their asses off half their lives to build up this economy in the first place. Time to give something back !!
/rant
I think they've already done more than enough to help young people in to work etc. I think it's about time they started doing something for older people that find themselves in the position of being out of work with dependants to support and lots of bills. Especially now with more and more people ending up unemployed. To be blunt if you're under 25 and you loose your job chances are you're renting and could easily go back to live with your parents if you really had too. Also, young people haven't really entrenched themselves in a career and it would be far easier for them to find a job in another sector, especially with employers being youth fixated like they are.
For the likes of 30/40 year olds moving career is much harder and it's people with 10-20 years in the same sector that really need the retraining money. History has proven this, look at the coal, steel, tin, etc etc industries that went to the wall. It's the older workers that have ended up on the long term unemployment list, not the younger ones who could managed to find work in other industries.
So, where's the support for the older worker that finds themself out of a job??? Where's their retraining budget?. It's just plain wrong to assume that because you're older you have savings and money in the bank in order to retrain. Plus time factors are far more critical when you're older. The bank waits around for no man before repossessing the home that you spent 20 years building up.
It's about time this government stopped giving all it's handouts to the younger generation, who are more flexible and able to take another path. It's about time they started doing something for the people that have worked their asses off half their lives to build up this economy in the first place. Time to give something back !!
/rant
Hmmmm.. Actually quite difficult..
Dream as in with no practical considerations? or Dream as in the car I would like to own in the real world? If I could only choose one.
Ignoring practicalities it would actually be something along the lines of the Porsche Cayman. Two seater 2-door coupe, Mid or Front engined. Adaptive AWD. Relatively light but not super light, (around 1200kg), so as not to be over sensitive to wind. Normally Aspirated 3.5 ltr engine producing around 300-350 Bhp and 350-370Nm of torque. 0-60 in 5 sec 0-100 in 10 sec topping out at anything over 140 I don't really care as long as it can get there rapidly.
The realistic option would be 5 seater, 4 door coupe looking a lot like the Alfa Romeo Brera, but with much the same other performance parameters as the 2-seater above, only definitely front engined, and not more than 1300kg in weight and physically a bit smaller than the Brera.
Dream as in with no practical considerations? or Dream as in the car I would like to own in the real world? If I could only choose one.
Ignoring practicalities it would actually be something along the lines of the Porsche Cayman. Two seater 2-door coupe, Mid or Front engined. Adaptive AWD. Relatively light but not super light, (around 1200kg), so as not to be over sensitive to wind. Normally Aspirated 3.5 ltr engine producing around 300-350 Bhp and 350-370Nm of torque. 0-60 in 5 sec 0-100 in 10 sec topping out at anything over 140 I don't really care as long as it can get there rapidly.
The realistic option would be 5 seater, 4 door coupe looking a lot like the Alfa Romeo Brera, but with much the same other performance parameters as the 2-seater above, only definitely front engined, and not more than 1300kg in weight and physically a bit smaller than the Brera.
It'll be pistols at dawn.. mark my words !
I agree about Glock, but not about Trulli. Trulli has been around since the stone ages, (he's competed in 205 GPs), if he hasn't developed the potential by now I don't think he ever will.
Points are all well and good, but they don't tell the whole story and if you are going to use them, then at least make it a meaningful comparison and work out the points per race entered. Then you can actually compare the drivers on a like for like basis.
If you work that out it comes out like this:
Points Races Average
Hamilton 211 38 5.55
Alonso 555 126 4.40
Raikkonen 531 143 3.71
Kubica 120 43 2.79
Massa 298 109 2.73
Kovalainen 87 38 2.29
Barrichello 545 274 1.99
Vettel 51 29 1.76
Button 253 158 1.60
Glock 37 25 1.48
Heidfeld 204 155 1.32
Fisichella 267 217 1.23
Truli 222.5 205 1.09
Buemi 3 3 1.00
Piquet (Jnr) 19 21 0.90
Webber 109.5 126 0.87
Rosberg 44.5 56 0.79
Nakajima 9 22 0.41
Bourdais 5 21 0.24
Sutil 1 38 0.03
Schumacher 1369 250 5.48
Prost 798.5 202 3.95
Senna 614 162 3.79
Lauda 420.5 177 2.38
Piquet 485 207 2.34
Remember it has become easier to score points since the likes of Shumacher and Prost retired, so a fair comparison can't be made between the current drivers with less than 90-100 races under their belt and the past masters.
Makes me laugh that when people are confronted with a person offering a differing opinion on something they personally like, they always assume it's because the other person knows nothing about the subject.
Maybe people should just accept that others are informed by different frames of reference and have different ideas about what is and isn't good and just don't agree with them.
Edited to add - same goes for the opinion that when someone doesn't like a form of music it's because they are narrow minded or a snob or some such other tripe.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
Did you start them manually or have you set them to "Automatic" ??
I've had a problem with updates not working in the past and it wouldn't work until the services , (particularly the actual "windows updates" service), were set to "automatic" and running rather than just in a running state. No idea why.
Found THIS on the MS website.
More updates related errors HERE
Last edited by gezmoor, .
I really don't care. To be honest the whole idea of nominating a particular individual smells too much of cliques and elitism to me.
Maybe not, but a sense of self preservation most certainly. LFS has none of it. Essentially trying to compare LFS with real driving let alone real racing is like trying to compare playing a FPS with real war, pointless. A reasonable representation of general car behaviour it may be but on an objective realism scale it would be lucky to score above 3/10.
Nope not my logic, empirical fact. Quite a big difference really.
PMSL .. saying that like you even know me
Actually that's where you're wrong.
My priorities are straight. But my priorities really aren't any concern of yours now are they? according to your own "logic" that is.
I couldn't give a monkeys what people do with their lives, as long as you say it doesn't affect me. That doesn't stop facts being facts though.
Dream on. Being a giant killer on the road means nothing when it comes to real racing. The road version relies completely on high tech electronics and masses of power to beat far more expensive cars. IF all of that is stripped out for racing it will be left with a lot of work to do to be competitive against the likes of Porche who have had decades of superiority at Le Mans.
His point is that RWD cars are more fun and satisfying to drive and that cars with low levels of grip and crap suspensions are even more fun because they are more "lively" and don't have to be driven fast to have "fun" in and also that cars without power steering have better feedback.
To which I say, fine that's his opinion. Mine is different, I get my buzz from making progress, not larking about with a car that is easy to slide and ultimately has poor performance, imagining I'm taking a really fast car to the limit on a race track.
I want a car that's going to get me from point A to point B quickly well within the limitations of the car, the road conditions and the law. I learned a long time ago how dangerous it is to take a vehicle to the limit, (or anywhere near), on a public road. Older cars have a lower safe performance envelope and are more likely to crash at any given speed. That's just a fact. No matter how much you "fun" you think they are to drive.
I get more satisfaction from the actual speed of the drive not how the car feels in my hands. But then I'm an ex motorcyclist and I'm used to real pace and cars just feel slow to me.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG