I'll get onto it for Silverstone.Formula None wrote:2 palms : 0.5 Scots mileandrew wrote:Scale?
I'll get onto it for Silverstone.Formula None wrote:2 palms : 0.5 Scots mileandrew wrote:Scale?
Exaggerating way to much here. It´s not like we are on 256K lines anymore.andrew wrote:The offered alternatives take up far too much space IMHO and would make the opening post too long, but I guess some folk are never happy unless they have something to complain about?
I'm not talking about 256K lines or anything like that. It is the space on the page I am meaning, the length of the post.HampusA wrote:Exaggerating way to much here. It´s not like we are on 256K lines anymore.andrew wrote:The offered alternatives take up far too much space IMHO and would make the opening post too long, but I guess some folk are never happy unless they have something to complain about?
It´s just some friendly criticism on how we think it could look better. No need to get all defensive
I'm certainly not preaching but thanks for the IT lesson.Diesel wrote:In the middle of your mouse there is this wheel, if you roll it the page moves up and down. If you haven't got that then on your keyboard there are these two buttons 'Page Up' and 'Page Down'. These also allow you to move up and down a web page. Failing that at the bottom middle of your keyboard there is this big bar type key, slam down on that and you'll find the page will also rapidly scroll down.
We know how to scroll on web pages, so please stop preaching how your saving vertical space, we don't need it.
Ok i can understand that, but on the other hand, after page 2 i would assume nobody is on the first page anymore. I know i´m not, i watched that once and now it´s always the last pageandrew wrote:I'm not talking about 256K lines or anything like that. It is the space on the page I am meaning, the length of the post.
As for it being friendly, it all depends who it comes from I guess. There are ways to ask for something without looking like a moaner making a fuss over nothing.
Whole page is relevant only if it shows something worth while. Why say 1000 words when 500 will do? I like the race threads I have opened to have some sort of standardisation, nothing wrong with that. Plus it depends what is available at the time. The FIA site is sometimes slow to produce the circuit info so I gave up on them a while ago and found a reasonable alternative.Diesel wrote:Whole page is relative, not everyone runs the same screen resolution as you.
I'll see what I can find. Might see if I can find some good pics of the pit complex with its funky roof (do you know who the architect was - it's bound to be on their website). Will that fulfill the artistic requirements along with the scaled pen sketch I'm doing for Forumla None? I'm gonna be busy, I'm terrible at freehand sketches so the sketch of the track will take a while.HampusA wrote:Could you please next time get a nicer track layout? it´s Silverstone and they have built a new complex so we could celebrate it like that in a way
1) No real high downforce stuff (well, more than canada or monaco, but yeh)Shrieker wrote:I see no reason why Vettel won't be winning here. Yet he's not included in the top 3 predictions on this thread so far.
Wishful thinking ?
beelsebob wrote:1) No real high downforce stuff (well, more than canada or monaco, but yeh)Shrieker wrote:I see no reason why Vettel won't be winning here. Yet he's not included in the top 3 predictions on this thread so far.
Wishful thinking ?
2) It's where McLaren's next major upgrade package arrives.
3) Ferrari have been incredibly strong in mechanical grip circuits lately.
Simply lacking down force is not enough to win on a low downforce circuit. My Skoda Fabia lacked downforce relative to the ferrari, but it's not gonna beat it round Monza.CyleB wrote:beelsebob wrote:1) No real high downforce stuff (well, more than canada or monaco, but yeh)Shrieker wrote:I see no reason why Vettel won't be winning here. Yet he's not included in the top 3 predictions on this thread so far.
Wishful thinking ?
2) It's where McLaren's next major upgrade package arrives.
3) Ferrari have been incredibly strong in mechanical grip circuits lately.
i think it more so that they have been strong in the low down force circuits..... because they are lacking down force
Because it makes as much sense as yours – the point is that you don't beat people by being worse in some department. Yes, the Ferrari has less DF than the McL or RBR, but the McL and RBR can strip it off when they need to. To win, you need to have an advantage. The advantage Ferrari appear to have is some pretty awesome rear suspension design and hence mechanical grip.CyleB wrote:what i am saying is that they started with less down force so there for on low down force circuits they are still going to have less down force then a car with much more starting down force .... and why in the world would you even use that comparisonSimply lacking down force is not enough to win on a low downforce circuit. My Skoda Fabia lacked downforce relative to the ferrari, but it's not gonna beat it round Monza.