Yet another Honda grenade left Tabooma sidelined in Canada... again bringing up the question of whether or not a driver can be responsible for the life of the engine with all of today's electronic controls.
Interestingly, all year long the BAR team and Honda have said that it was just luck of the draw, and there was no reason to blame Sato for his seemingly horrible luck, but after Canada there was this quote from Jenson:
"There has been a difference in our driving style which could have caused some of the problems, I know he was trying to change that but I'm not sure if he managed that in the race here."
( link:
http://www.planet-f1.com/news/story_16045.shtml )
I think that anyone who has raced any motorized vehicle knows that there are many things you can do to hurt your equipment, whether it's tires, suspension, brakes, transmission, engine... and I don't think you can ever completely eliminate that with electronic controls. On the engine front, at 19,000rpm, there is enough inertia in the rotating assembly to easily have spikes above the rev limiter, especially in the midst of lurid spins like Taku had in qualifying and the race.
Anyway, it's been discussed before, but where to people weigh in on the driver input vs. engine reliability issue?
14 Jun 2004, 13:10 (Ref:1003563)
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode