Formula 1

9098 readers

76 users here now

Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series

Rules

Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
No gambling, crypto or NFTs
Spoilers are allowed
Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but don’t want to become formuladank.

Up next

F1 Calendar

2024 Calendar

Location	Date
🇶🇦 Qatar	29 Nov-01 Dec
🇦🇪 Abu Dhabi	06-08 Dec

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Both Haas cars under investigation for potentially illegal rear wing elements (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I wish they gave numbers... like were they 85.1mm, or 90?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Well it doesn't matter. Breaking the technical specifications results in a DQ irrespective of the severity or cause.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Unless it was a parts failure that happened on track, I believe, and you had a like for like that wasn't. It would be interesting to know by how much it was over, but almost certainly a DQ if that's true

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Unless it was a parts failure that happened on track, I believe, and you had a like for like that wasn't

A parts failure without a cause can still result in a DQ. Remember Hamilton got DQ'ed from qualifying in Brazil 2021 even though merc claimed that his car became out of spec only after failure during qualifying.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yup! That's what I was thinking of. I'm almost certainly wrong but I was under the impression that they couldn't prove it because they didn't have a like for like DRS actuator mount, but that could've been the potential way out of the DQ if they had

Like I said, probably wrong and misremembering

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

they couldn't prove it because they didn't have a like for like DRS actuator mount, but that could've been the potential way out of the DQ if they had.

I thought they were punished because they couldn't prove that it was damaged in session and not before so the FIA had to assume that the drs actuator mount was beyond the specification specified by the regulations for the whole session.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

That has literally no bearing on my desire to know the actual numbers