2023 United States Grand Prix - COTA, Oct 20 - 22

[AMG.Tzan]

Oh Hamilton close to Perez in the points? The FIA: Hold my beer!

Thankfully Lewis didn’t win last night cause I would be breaking walls now! This is unbelievable!

I don’t know what the FIA is trying to accomplish with these things these two past years! Whenever someone gets close to Red Bull they find something to stop them!

Red Bull’s floor was clearly way more worn out too compared to others whenever we saw the car from bottom pictures yet they never DSQed them…

Meanwhile this track is full of bumps everywhere almost at the point of it being destroyed! What did they expect after 2 back to back races??

[101FlyingDutchman]

Perfectly reasonable to DQ. Would have expected it for any other car on the grid too if this was the case. Lower ride height gives increased floor performance. You play with fire, sometimes you get burned.
Tough luck. But it’s good to see at least that Merc has found performance nonetheless. Can only be a good thing moving forward to next years car.

[AMG.Tzan]

Perfectly reasonable to DQ. Would have expected it for any other car on the grid too if this was the case. Lower ride height gives increased floor performance. You play with fire, sometimes you get burned.
Tough luck. But it’s good to see at least that Merc has found performance nonetheless. Can only be a good thing moving forward to next years car.

Increased budget gives you more development potential too!

Red Bull played with fire but they didn’t get burned! How come??

“randomly” selecting 4 cars! But oh this “random” happens to be Hamilton and Leclerc because one got pole and the other close to beating Verstapen! Quite “random”

2 races on a so bumpy track like Austin what did they expect really? If you’re gonna check planks after this weekend then check everyone…

[DChemTech]

The online betting sites must be pulling their hair. This will change a lot of betting results

I'm not the betting type, but I'm sure those are only paid out once the actual (and not provisional) race classification is published?

I applaude anything that frustrates those parasites, so if it affects betting sites its a great side effect of this whole charade.

[search]

“randomly” selecting 4 cars! But oh this “random” happens to be Hamilton and Leclerc because one got pole and the other close to beating Verstapen! Quite “random”

"random" is this case doesn't mean that they are doing a draw to pick out the cars. They are checking them randomly, so the teams don't know in advance.

[mzivtins]

So really, where we though McLaren were not doing great at this track, they were. With the Ferrari and Mercedes running so low, the gains made the McLaren look a little slower out of the triple behind red bull.

Good to see normal service resumed from a McLaren perspective, but where would Piastri have been relative on pure, fair pace? Given GR's pace you would think the McLarens had a P2-3 in them.

Ah well

[bluechris]

Do we want the FIA to be thorough or selective?
Selectively thorough & thoroughly selective are two entirely different things.

Thorough offcourse. With all the money they gain from F1 at least they can cover the basics which at least is the consistency in car checking. If the top teams did that, i cannot imagine what is huppening lower in the grid.
Either way what they did yesterday is wrong. When they saw that almost all the cars they checked were problematic they could had ask then and only then all the cars to be checked.

My point is that you cannot give a gift place to a car/driver after, without checking it, simple isnt it?

[Chuckjr]

Ferrari race pace is a tragedy.

Merc race strategy is deplorable.

Merc BONED Lewis. Race strategy sodomy. Lewis should hire a proctologist.

Pace of Merc and Macca has to be questioned since they were running too close to the ground to finish a race. Can’t trust race pace yet on Merc. Had they been running a few stops higher they likely would not have had the pace they had today. Good job from Merc tho for clearly improving the drivability of the car. Looking forward to seeing how it works in Mexico running a height more in keeping with RB.

Max is a sly, sly driver. Shrewd. Calculated. Schumacheresque. Reminded me today of the days when Schumacher would lose some gears and still take the win. He’s a better driver than I realized. Much respect.

[DChemTech]

“randomly” selecting 4 cars! But oh this “random” happens to be Hamilton and Leclerc because one got pole and the other close to beating Verstapen! Quite “random”

"random" is this case doesn't mean that they are doing a draw to pick out the cars. They are checking them randomly, so the teams don't know in advance.

It is also not fully random but porpoising index is involved AFAIK. Which means they are more likely to check cars for which a lot of bottom contact is expected. Still, considering the outcome they should, in this case, also check the rest.

[mzivtins]

Pace of Merc and Macca has to be questioned

Good job from Merc tho for clearly improving the drivability of the car.

*Ferrari

You will have a strong aero advantage running the car that low, so the performance gain was undoubtedly overshadowed by the gain from the ride height.

From a test perspective, the data is unreliable, so back to square 1 for the next race for merc

[chrisc90]

I guess you could use Russell’s data and times. Whether he was also in breach of running low we will never ever know or find out.

Onto the next one.

[Mogster]

“randomly” selecting 4 cars! But oh this “random” happens to be Hamilton and Leclerc because one got pole and the other close to beating Verstapen! Quite “random”

"random" is this case doesn't mean that they are doing a draw to pick out the cars. They are checking them randomly, so the teams don't know in advance.

It is also not fully random but porpoising index is involved AFAIK. Which means they are more likely to check cars for which a lot of bottom contact is expected. Still, considering the outcome they should, in this case, also check the rest.

I suspect the stewards didn’t want to invite an Indianapolis 2005 type scenario with 50% of the field being excluded. This does send a message though, if you’re visibly bouncing and audibly hitting the track then you’re inviting a check. You could hear Hamilton’s car grounding from the onboards.

There’s also a question about not giving the teams time to do long runs and check wear rate.

[Cs98]

"random" is this case doesn't mean that they are doing a draw to pick out the cars. They are checking them randomly, so the teams don't know in advance.

It is also not fully random but porpoising index is involved AFAIK. Which means they are more likely to check cars for which a lot of bottom contact is expected. Still, considering the outcome they should, in this case, also check the rest.

There’s also a question about not giving the teams time to do long runs and check wear rate.

Hasn't been an issue up until this point which tells me competitors can estimate this kind of stuff perfectly well, they just have to opt slightly on the side of caution. This will serve as a reminder that extra pace isn't worth it when the car can't be classified.

[SharkY]

Hasn't been an issue up until this point which tells me competitors can estimate this kind of stuff perfectly well, they just have to opt slightly on the side of caution. This will serve as a reminder that extra pace isn't worth it when the car can't be classified.

Sure, but sprints haven't been held at such a bumpy track before. And I don't believe that Merc and Ferrari, who are desperately fighting for points would try to cheat willingly. And given that they weren't DSQ from COTA or any other track before, I assume the testing gave them too little data. And my bet is that this could apply to half of the grid.

I hate it, when FIA says that there was a breach, but not the extent of the breach (and they're not even consistent about it - pit lane speeding always has a speed indicated). It would be nice to know, what the difference was between legal and illegal cars.

Also, I’m not sure FIA understands the random testing method. When you manufacture something, randomly test 4 pieces from the batch and find 1 faulty, you don’t just throw away the faulty one, claiming the rest of untested batch is okay. You test the whole batch!
I’m quite curious what they’d do if they had to DSQ half the grid.

[chrisc90]

What was the pace like of Russell compared to others then?