"nobody" (nobody13)
08/25/2013 at 08:04 • Filed to: None
0
3|
"nobody" (nobody13)
08/25/2013 at 08:04 • Filed to: None | 0
| 3 |
get in !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! !
Destructive Tester
> nobody
08/25/2013 at 08:53 |
|
I had this thought when Marussia advancedboth cars to Q2. It made me wonder, why is it exactly that the lower tier teams always seem to do better in adverse conditions? I'm fully aware of the car-equalizing effect of a wet track, but shouldn't the "better" drivers on the higher tier teams still prevail? I'm wondering if its because the drivers of the inferior cars are just used to their cars feeling like they're being driven on wooden wheels on a butter-slicked track and end-up with a better feel for their car in less-than-optimum track conditions. Opinions?
|
nobody
> Destructive Tester
08/25/2013 at 08:57 |
|
The lower tiers can gamble more in adverse conditions. Yesterday the two Marussias and GVdG both went out on inters while everyone else was on slicks. Fortunately for them, conditions were right for inters and not for slicks.
|
Destructive Tester
> nobody
08/25/2013 at 09:03 |
|
That's true. I didn't consider the fact that the potential downside to any gamble they make being starting on the back row as opposed to, the second to last row...