The cars all way the same at the start of the race. It would be difficult to dictate to teams where they have to put the ballast, and trying to calculate the cars CG. Lighter drivers will have more ballast to play with allowing finer tuning of the chassis setup. This was one of the reasons why Kubica outdrove Heidfeld last year.machin wrote:It seems unfair that the smaller drivers get an advantage out of this (as they always have done), -wouldn't it be fairer if there was a minimum driver weight... if any driver is under that weight then ballast must be added to a designated area (say behind the seat, middle of the back sort of height)... this would make things a bit fairer.... (having said that I'm not advocating that F1 drivers should be overweight... of course they should be fit, but then being fit would still benefit the driver even if there were a minimum weight).
exactly, this is a non issue... F1 is alot more fair than say the IRL was a couple years ago when Danica Patrick had a 50LB advantage on the field becuz the minimum weight did not include the driver.xpensive wrote:As far as I understand, the car's minimum weight is already measured with the driver included, however, a lghter driver allows for ballast to be placed very low.
But, I don't think there's any rule yet against a bottom-heavy and air-headed driver?
Huh? Heidfeld is one of the smallest drivers on the grid, while I believe Kubica is one of the tallest. Nick is 167 cm and 61 kg according to his personal website, and I am pretty sure Robert is a fair bit longer as well as heavier.Shaddock wrote:Lighter drivers will have more ballast to play with allowing finer tuning of the chassis setup. This was one of the reasons why Kubica outdrove Heidfeld last year.
That was before the Kubica slimfast diet and Nick grew that heavy beard.Roland Ehnström wrote:Huh? Heidfeld is one of the smallest drivers on the grid, while I believe Kubica is one of the tallest. Nick is 167 cm and 61 kg according to his personal website, and I am pretty sure Robert is a fair bit longer as well as heavier.Shaddock wrote:Lighter drivers will have more ballast to play with allowing finer tuning of the chassis setup. This was one of the reasons why Kubica outdrove Heidfeld last year.
Edit: According to http://formula1.about.com/od/profiles/p/kubica.htm Kubica is 6' and 160 lbs, which equals 183 cm and 72.5 kg.
Weight isn't directly comparable to fitness. Take a Rugby player for example, they can weigh upwards of 14 stone (89kg) and they're very very fit people.wesley123 wrote:That realy aint healthy, im 190 cm 16 years old and i weight 65 kilos, heidfeld and kubica really arent healthy, im almost heavier then kubica and im really underweight.
Corrected your typo.roost89 wrote:
Weight isn't directly comparable to fitness. Take a Rugby player for example, they can weigh upwards of 14 stone (89kg) and they're very very fat people.
I wasn't comparing the drivers like for like. Kubica lost a lot of weight at the start of the year and this allowed his engineers to add and extra 5kg of ballast to the nose of the car. This worked his front tyres harder and generally improved the handling of the car. This along with the removal of engine braking last year was one of the reasons he out performed Nick.Roland Ehnström wrote:Huh? Heidfeld is one of the smallest drivers on the grid, while I believe Kubica is one of the tallest. Nick is 167 cm and 61 kg according to his personal website, and I am pretty sure Robert is a fair bit longer as well as heavier.Shaddock wrote:Lighter drivers will have more ballast to play with allowing finer tuning of the chassis setup. This was one of the reasons why Kubica outdrove Heidfeld last year.
Edit: According to http://formula1.about.com/od/profiles/p/kubica.htm Kubica is 6' and 160 lbs, which equals 183 cm and 72.5 kg.