Grand Prix Rejects

A fiver* says they swoop for Max Verstappen instead and Rrrrrrmmmmnnn Grrrrjjjjnnnn is not a happy bunny.









* Zimbabwean dollars.

dinizintheoven wrote:A fiver* says they swoop for Max Verstappen instead and Rrrrrrmmmmnnn Grrrrjjjjnnnn is not a happy bunny.









* Zimbabwean dollars.

That'll please the driver of the number 27 car no end if they do that.

They have really impressed me on both weekends. At this rate, they might even beat Williams, especially if Gutiérrez is a bit luckier in the next few races.

Our good old friend doesn't seem to agree, though... I found this among the energy invention ads and seizure-inducing GIFs:

Don Pentecost (January 6) wrote:What a joke. Haas F1 is anything but American. If he can't put together a REAL American team, he shouldn't be in it...

http://www.grandprix247.com/2016/04/04/ ... aas-in-f1/


The natives are getting restless.....

Wallio wrote:http://www.grandprix247.com/2016/04/04/not-everyone-happy-with-early-success-for-haas-in-f1/


The natives are getting restless.....

Do we really think that the Haas is basically a Ferrari? I honestly don't know, it would take someone smarter than I to explain that to me. I do know it's a Dallara chassis, so that would seem to indicate that it isn't "basically a Ferrari".

As for Williams' bitching, the only reason that Haas beat them is because they bathplugged up. In reality Williams should be ahead of Haas and probably will be by the end of the season.

I still fully expect Haas to come back to earth soon and probably usually fight for the last few points-paying positions while often finishing out of the points. Also, I doubt they can afford to develop the car too much over the course of the season, so that's going to hinder them as time goes on. Though they might be formidable at the low-downforce tracks.

All that said, GO HAAS!

So, I know Haas have had plenty of help from Ferrari, but their success so far does make me wonder how HRT would have done if they had the money to actually pay Dallara. Probably better.

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:As for Williams' bitching, the only reason that Haas beat them is because they bathplugged up. In reality Williams should be ahead of Haas and probably will be by the end of the season.

Gutierrez being a muppet should almost ensure that, although I expect Williams will continue to try and level the playing field with timid strategy calls throughout the season...

More_Blue_Flags wrote:

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:As for Williams' bitching, the only reason that Haas beat them is because they bathplugged up. In reality Williams should be ahead of Haas and probably will be by the end of the season.

Gutierrez being a muppet should almost ensure that, although I expect Williams will continue to try and level the playing field with timid strategy calls throughout the season...

Yep, being crashed into and having technical failures certainly is grounds for muppetry.

AustralianStig wrote:

More_Blue_Flags wrote:

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:As for Williams' bitching, the only reason that Haas beat them is because they bathplugged up. In reality Williams should be ahead of Haas and probably will be by the end of the season.

Gutierrez being a muppet should almost ensure that, although I expect Williams will continue to try and level the playing field with timid strategy calls throughout the season...

Yep, being crashed into and having technical failures certainly is grounds for muppetry.

I would have thought that most of his career at Sauber would have sufficed as evidence for the 'muppet' statement. I am confident that, regardless of his bad luck in the last two outings, he will be nowhere near Grosjean this year and won't be doing the Hass justice.

More_Blue_Flags wrote:I would have thought that most of his career at Sauber would have sufficed as evidence for the 'muppet' statement. I am confident that, regardless of his bad luck in the last two outings, he will be nowhere near Grosjean this year and won't be doing the Hass justice.

He won't get near Grosjean this year, or at least he shouldn't, but I have hope he can begin to improve. Rags to Riches is what Gp Rejects is all about, well, Muppet to Megastar, maybe.

I've got an avatar bet that says Gutierrez will beat Grosjean this year, so I'm 99.3% sure he's gonna do it!

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:

Wallio wrote:http://www.grandprix247.com/2016/04/04/not-everyone-happy-with-early-success-for-haas-in-f1/


The natives are getting restless.....

Do we really think that the Haas is basically a Ferrari? I honestly don't know, it would take someone smarter than I to explain that to me. I do know it's a Dallara chassis, so that would seem to indicate that it isn't "basically a Ferrari".

As for Williams' bitching, the only reason that Haas beat them is because they bathplugged up. In reality Williams should be ahead of Haas and probably will be by the end of the season.

I still fully expect Haas to come back to earth soon and probably usually fight for the last few points-paying positions while often finishing out of the points. Also, I doubt they can afford to develop the car too much over the course of the season, so that's going to hinder them as time goes on. Though they might be formidable at the low-downforce tracks.

All that said, GO HAAS!

It's a bit more complicated. Dallara to my understanding has only done the tub. And while a bad tub will bring down your whole package (see the Jaguar R2 and R3 and the Renault R31 after the front exhausts were scrapped) a good one in of itself won't make you a winner, although it certainly helps.

Ferrari have done the bulk of the work on the car. Some pieces directly (engine, gearbox, suspension) other indirectly (wings, nose, engine cover). The way I've read it, Dallara would design a piece, then send it to Ferrari for CFD and windtunnel testing, where Ferrari staff would "suggest" improvements. So who really designed the pieces? Other teams actually complained to the FIA because Ferrari indirectly was able to get double the windtunnel hours, thanks to Dallara.

If I had to guess I'd say the car is 85% Ferrari, 10% Dallara, 3% Haas (seats steering wheel, etc.) and 2% other (Pirelli, Brembo, etc.). Disappointing, but you can't argue with the results. And if it keeps an American team on the grid, I can live with it.

Wallio wrote:
It's a bit more complicated. Dallara to my understanding has only done the tub. And while a bad tub will bring down your whole package (see the Jaguar R2 and R3 and the Renault R31 after the front exhausts were scrapped) a good one in of itself won't make you a winner, although it certainly helps.

Ferrari have done the bulk of the work on the car. Some pieces directly (engine, gearbox, suspension) other indirectly (wings, nose, engine cover). The way I've read it, Dallara would design a piece, then send it to Ferrari for CFD and windtunnel testing, where Ferrari staff would "suggest" improvements. So who really designed the pieces? Other teams actually complained to the FIA because Ferrari indirectly was able to get double the windtunnel hours, thanks to Dallara.

If I had to guess I'd say the car is 85% Ferrari, 10% Dallara, 3% Haas (seats steering wheel, etc.) and 2% other (Pirelli, Brembo, etc.). Disappointing, but you can't argue with the results. And if it keeps an American team on the grid, I can live with it.

No, that's not entirely true. Haas have been using Dallara for composite work, but they've done the bulk of the design work themselves and then sent their mould and tool designs over with some engineers to get the car built.

Ataxia wrote:

Wallio wrote:
It's a bit more complicated. Dallara to my understanding has only done the tub. And while a bad tub will bring down your whole package (see the Jaguar R2 and R3 and the Renault R31 after the front exhausts were scrapped) a good one in of itself won't make you a winner, although it certainly helps.

Ferrari have done the bulk of the work on the car. Some pieces directly (engine, gearbox, suspension) other indirectly (wings, nose, engine cover). The way I've read it, Dallara would design a piece, then send it to Ferrari for CFD and windtunnel testing, where Ferrari staff would "suggest" improvements. So who really designed the pieces? Other teams actually complained to the FIA because Ferrari indirectly was able to get double the windtunnel hours, thanks to Dallara.

If I had to guess I'd say the car is 85% Ferrari, 10% Dallara, 3% Haas (seats steering wheel, etc.) and 2% other (Pirelli, Brembo, etc.). Disappointing, but you can't argue with the results. And if it keeps an American team on the grid, I can live with it.

No, that's not entirely true. Haas have been using Dallara for composite work, but they've done the bulk of the design work themselves and then sent their mould and tool designs over with some engineers to get the car built.

I'm a bit fuzzy on the specfics. I know the team has three bases, and that there were (are?) Haas people on site in Fiorano. That maybe an engine thing though. Stenier had said on NBC repeatedly though that the car would be "as close to a customer car as allowed".

Again, not saying its good or bad, but I can certainly see where teams would moan about it.

Wallio wrote:

Ataxia wrote:

Wallio wrote:
It's a bit more complicated. Dallara to my understanding has only done the tub. And while a bad tub will bring down your whole package (see the Jaguar R2 and R3 and the Renault R31 after the front exhausts were scrapped) a good one in of itself won't make you a winner, although it certainly helps.

Ferrari have done the bulk of the work on the car. Some pieces directly (engine, gearbox, suspension) other indirectly (wings, nose, engine cover). The way I've read it, Dallara would design a piece, then send it to Ferrari for CFD and windtunnel testing, where Ferrari staff would "suggest" improvements. So who really designed the pieces? Other teams actually complained to the FIA because Ferrari indirectly was able to get double the windtunnel hours, thanks to Dallara.

If I had to guess I'd say the car is 85% Ferrari, 10% Dallara, 3% Haas (seats steering wheel, etc.) and 2% other (Pirelli, Brembo, etc.). Disappointing, but you can't argue with the results. And if it keeps an American team on the grid, I can live with it.

No, that's not entirely true. Haas have been using Dallara for composite work, but they've done the bulk of the design work themselves and then sent their mould and tool designs over with some engineers to get the car built.

I'm a bit fuzzy on the specfics. I know the team has three bases, and that there were (are?) Haas people on site in Fiorano. That maybe an engine thing though. Stenier had said on NBC repeatedly though that the car would be "as close to a customer car as allowed".

Again, not saying its good or bad, but I can certainly see where teams would moan about it.

With regards to sub components, there are some components that are definitely procured from Ferrari - the suspension components (and that is all components - i.e. not just the suspension arms, but also elements such as the shock absorbers) and brake ducts, for example, are supplied directly by Ferrari.

James Allen produced a list of items which the team has to own the intellectul property rights to in order to qualify as a manufacturer, and those are as follows:
• Monocoque
• Survival cell
• Front-impact structures
• Roll-over structures
• Bodywork – except airboxes, exhausts, and prescribed bodywork geometries
• Wings
• Floor
• Diffuser
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2016/01/m ... m-haas-f1/

Now, that doesn't exclude the option of asking third parties to produce components such as the chassis, which is why Haas subcontracted that out to Dallara. As Wallio alludes to, though, the windtunnel testing itself took place in Ferrari's facilities (according to Haas, that is, as he confirmed that they were using Ferrari's tunnel to undertake 60% scale model testing).

As it happens, it does seem as if some of the other teams have found the relationship between Haas and Ferrari somewhat troubling too. We know that, in the middle of last year, Mercedes asked the FIA to conduct a formal investigation into the windtunnel testing Ferrari was conducting on Haas's behalf over allegations that Ferrari was potentially using those tests to acquire information for their own car, thereby circumventing the restrictions on windtunnel hours (given that Haas, as a new entrant, wasn't limited in terms of windtunnel testing time in the same way that the existing teams are).

mario wrote:With regards to sub components, there are some components that are definitely procured from Ferrari - the suspension components (and that is all components - i.e. not just the suspension arms, but also elements such as the shock absorbers) and brake ducts, for example, are supplied directly by Ferrari.

James Allen produced a list of items which the team has to own the intellectul property rights to in order to qualify as a manufacturer, and those are as follows:
• Monocoque
• Survival cell
• Front-impact structures
• Roll-over structures
• Bodywork – except airboxes, exhausts, and prescribed bodywork geometries
• Wings
• Floor
• Diffuser
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2016/01/m ... m-haas-f1/

Now, that doesn't exclude the option of asking third parties to produce components such as the chassis, which is why Haas subcontracted that out to Dallara. As Wallio alludes to, though, the windtunnel testing itself took place in Ferrari's facilities (according to Haas, that is, as he confirmed that they were using Ferrari's tunnel to undertake 60% scale model testing).

As it happens, it does seem as if some of the other teams have found the relationship between Haas and Ferrari somewhat troubling too. We know that, in the middle of last year, Mercedes asked the FIA to conduct a formal investigation into the windtunnel testing Ferrari was conducting on Haas's behalf over allegations that Ferrari was potentially using those tests to acquire information for their own car, thereby circumventing the restrictions on windtunnel hours (given that Haas, as a new entrant, wasn't limited in terms of windtunnel testing time in the same way that the existing teams are).

Which would especially raise eyebrows since Gene Haas owns a majority stake in the Windshear tunnel in NC. Which is pretty state-of-the-art and has been used by F1 teams before. Its not like Haas was using Ferrari's facilities because they don't have one. SOMETHING was going on there.

Wallio wrote:Which would especially raise eyebrows since Gene Haas owns a majority stake in the Windshear tunnel in NC. Which is pretty state-of-the-art and has been used by F1 teams before. Its not like Haas was using Ferrari's facilities because they don't have one. SOMETHING was going on there.

Windshear's a full-scale tunnel, and hence isn't FIA approved for Formula 1 usage at this time. Haas would have to spend money converting it, but in doing so would lose any customers who use it for the full-scale capabilities.

You'd ask "why not just chuck a 60% scale model in the tunnel?", but you then have to spend quite a lot of money on calibration and sensors that work at a different scale; it would be a lot of effort to do that when you can simply borrow someone else's kit.

Ataxia wrote:

Wallio wrote:Which would especially raise eyebrows since Gene Haas owns a majority stake in the Windshear tunnel in NC. Which is pretty state-of-the-art and has been used by F1 teams before. Its not like Haas was using Ferrari's facilities because they don't have one. SOMETHING was going on there.

Windshear's a full-scale tunnel, and hence isn't FIA approved for Formula 1 usage at this time. Haas would have to spend money converting it, but in doing so would lose any customers who use it for the full-scale capabilities.

You'd ask "why not just chuck a 60% scale model in the tunnel?", but you then have to spend quite a lot of money on calibration and sensors that work at a different scale; it would be a lot of effort to do that when you can simply borrow someone else's kit.

Or, as Peter Windsor accurately discussed in this month's column in F1 Racing, why in the hell won't the FIA change the regulations to allow Windshear to be used and save everyone a considerable amount of money?

AndreaModa wrote:

Ataxia wrote:

Wallio wrote:Which would especially raise eyebrows since Gene Haas owns a majority stake in the Windshear tunnel in NC. Which is pretty state-of-the-art and has been used by F1 teams before. Its not like Haas was using Ferrari's facilities because they don't have one. SOMETHING was going on there.

Windshear's a full-scale tunnel, and hence isn't FIA approved for Formula 1 usage at this time. Haas would have to spend money converting it, but in doing so would lose any customers who use it for the full-scale capabilities.

You'd ask "why not just chuck a 60% scale model in the tunnel?", but you then have to spend quite a lot of money on calibration and sensors that work at a different scale; it would be a lot of effort to do that when you can simply borrow someone else's kit.

Or, as Peter Windsor accurately discussed in this month's column in F1 Racing, why in the hell won't the FIA change the regulations to allow Windshear to be used and save everyone a considerable amount of money?

Although I haven't read that article, the caveats of allowing Windshear to be used would be that you'd have teams pouring money into their own full-scale tunnels and models, and this would prompt a giant arms race. When you're building wind tunnel models, you'd be testing all sorts of new parts in order to check the correlation between aerodynamic data generated in a real-world test against those generated in CFD. In addition to the increased costs I've mentioned already in converting the wind tunnel, creating larger prototype parts would ramp up the cost of materials significantly.

It's just not really beneficial to anyone to increase the scale size in wind tunnel testing, especially as CFD turbulence models continue to converge towards real-life figures; in the relatively near future, I'd imagine there'd be another few dabbles with purely-CFD development of aerodynamic packages. On the face of it, there didn't appear to be anything drastically wrong with the idea behind Virgin Racing's approach, but the package didn't look aggressive enough at all. CFD doesn't do your design-work, engineers do.

CoopsII wrote:

More_Blue_Flags wrote:I would have thought that most of his career at Sauber would have sufficed as evidence for the 'muppet' statement. I am confident that, regardless of his bad luck in the last two outings, he will be nowhere near Grosjean this year and won't be doing the Hass justice.

He won't get near Grosjean this year, or at least he shouldn't, but I have hope he can begin to improve. Rags to Riches is what Gp Rejects is all about, well, Muppet to Megastar, maybe.

Let's not forget Grosjean was pretty toilet to begin with, but then he had a break from F1, came back and was much stronger.

watka wrote:

CoopsII wrote:

More_Blue_Flags wrote:I would have thought that most of his career at Sauber would have sufficed as evidence for the 'muppet' statement. I am confident that, regardless of his bad luck in the last two outings, he will be nowhere near Grosjean this year and won't be doing the Hass justice.

He won't get near Grosjean this year, or at least he shouldn't, but I have hope he can begin to improve. Rags to Riches is what Gp Rejects is all about, well, Muppet to Megastar, maybe.

Let's not forget Grosjean was pretty toilet to begin with, but then he had a break from F1, came back and was much stronger.

Yes, but don't forget that during Grosjean's time off he was winning the GP2 title (though I can't remember where GUT ever finished in GP2). Of course none of this means that GUT won't improve. I really hope he does, Haas needs the points he can produce. Statistically he should even beat Grosjean sometimes, though probably not a lot.

Grosjean finished in 3rd place in his 2012 season in GP2, behind Luiz Razia and Davide Valsecchi.

Miguel98 wrote:Grosjean finished in 3rd place in his 2012 season in GP2, behind Luiz Razia and Davide Valsecchi.

I think it is safe to assume that you meant Gutierrez instead of Grosjean . And he would have been a contender too for the Championship in the year after had he not come into F1 at the end of 2012. He also won GP3 in his rookie year ahead of Wickens and Rossi among others. I am unsure if he was a muppet to begin with although it is well established that he came in because of money. It did not help either that he came in what was probably the weakest fields in GP2 history, 2012 and 2013 with Valsecchi and Leimer the champions respectively, failing the cut into F1.

Ataxia wrote:Although I haven't read that article, the caveats of allowing Windshear to be used would be that you'd have teams pouring money into their own full-scale tunnels and models, and this would prompt a giant arms race. When you're building wind tunnel models, you'd be testing all sorts of new parts in order to check the correlation between aerodynamic data generated in a real-world test against those generated in CFD. In addition to the increased costs I've mentioned already in converting the wind tunnel, creating larger prototype parts would ramp up the cost of materials significantly.

It's just not really beneficial to anyone to increase the scale size in wind tunnel testing, especially as CFD turbulence models continue to converge towards real-life figures; in the relatively near future, I'd imagine there'd be another few dabbles with purely-CFD development of aerodynamic packages. On the face of it, there didn't appear to be anything drastically wrong with the idea behind Virgin Racing's approach, but the package didn't look aggressive enough at all. CFD doesn't do your design-work, engineers do.

The FIA has taken a rather inconsistent line over the use of full scale windtunnel testing - the ban was lifted in 2010 when the FIA permitted teams to trade their allowance of constant speed straight line tests for full scale windtunnel tests. Back in 2012, Lotus did actually take up that option and did actually choose to undertake their tests using the Windshear tunnel - but instead of using a model, Lotus just took their actual car over and placed that in the windtunnel instead.

However, since then the FIA has revoked that option and has now gone back to having a hard cap on the model size that can be used (60%).

mario wrote:

Ataxia wrote:Although I haven't read that article, the caveats of allowing Windshear to be used would be that you'd have teams pouring money into their own full-scale tunnels and models, and this would prompt a giant arms race. When you're building wind tunnel models, you'd be testing all sorts of new parts in order to check the correlation between aerodynamic data generated in a real-world test against those generated in CFD. In addition to the increased costs I've mentioned already in converting the wind tunnel, creating larger prototype parts would ramp up the cost of materials significantly.

It's just not really beneficial to anyone to increase the scale size in wind tunnel testing, especially as CFD turbulence models continue to converge towards real-life figures; in the relatively near future, I'd imagine there'd be another few dabbles with purely-CFD development of aerodynamic packages. On the face of it, there didn't appear to be anything drastically wrong with the idea behind Virgin Racing's approach, but the package didn't look aggressive enough at all. CFD doesn't do your design-work, engineers do.

The FIA has taken a rather inconsistent line over the use of full scale windtunnel testing - the ban was lifted in 2010 when the FIA permitted teams to trade their allowance of constant speed straight line tests for full scale windtunnel tests. Back in 2012, Lotus did actually take up that option and did actually choose to undertake their tests using the Windshear tunnel - but instead of using a model, Lotus just took their actual car over and placed that in the windtunnel instead.

However, since then the FIA has revoked that option and has now gone back to having a hard cap on the model size that can be used (60%).

Yeah, sorry my initial statement was poorly worded - Windsor was basically saying the FIA's regulations limiting wind tunnel usage have prompted the teams to spend vast sums of money getting round the problem by building smaller windtunnels or recalibrating existing ones and also using CFD. If those restrictions weren't in place, Haas would have their own windtunnel ready to go. As it is, from an F1 perspective, it sits there unused which is nuts!

So Grosjean finished 8th in Russia. I sort of think that is about the maximum level of the car overall (i.e. fighting for the last few points-paying positions). I'm not expecting a lot of 5ths and 6ths from here on out because I expect there to be more growing pains coming up.

I would like to think that in Grosjean's hands the car could consistently challenge for the big points and Guttierez could also consistently score points as well, but I just doubt the car is that good at this point.

I am curious what people think about the loopholes that were closed by the FIA that allowed so much wind tunnel testing going into this season. How much will that hurt the development of next year's car and hurt Haas' chances going forward?

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:I am curious what people think about the loopholes that were closed by the FIA that allowed so much wind tunnel testing going into this season. How much will that hurt the development of next year's car and hurt Haas' chances going forward?

Yes, I think this will be interesting next year. Obviously they have a base to work from with this year's car but they're on their own now and that will have an impact on their performance I think.

That said, Grosjean has been outperforming the car so far I think so if he can keep that up into next year, it might not matter!

http://www.motorsport.com/nascar/news/stewart-haas-working-to-make-grosjean-s-nascar-debut-happen-734861/

Hopefully the link works. Anyhow it says Haas are trying to get Grosjean a drive in Nascar (Perhaps a one-off on a road course). Now, I'm a fan of Romain, but this seems to me to have disaster written all over it. I'm worried that it may hamper his chances of getting a Ferrari drive next year or the year after. Plus, there isn't exactly much of a track record of F1 drivers going to Nascar. Just look at how JPM struggled.

Anyway, anyone have some thoughts?

Yes, it's a "disaster written all over it" if you expect any F1 driver to waltz into any category of motor racing and instantly blitz it because everybody else is so inferior.

Personally though, I think it's an awesome thing every time that an active top level motor racing driver from any series leaves their comfort zone and tries something new. My expectations would be to see him struggle a bit with the car initially, but eventually settle safely amongst the mid-pack, finish something like P15 - P25 and everybody would only benefit; the NASCAR fans would see the American team's F1 driver in action on "their" soil, some F1 fans would watch a NASCAR race they would not otherwise watch, and Romain would have some fun.

I don't see any way an one-off on a road course would hamper his Ferrari chances, unless he got hurt - but then that's a risk one sometimes has to take to enjoy life.

How would doing a race in NASCAR completely separate from the rest of his career have anything to do with his chances of going to Ferrari? His performance in his first ever NASCAR race has nothing to do with how skilled he is at F1. It just seems like a thing he's doing (if he does) because it'd be a race and he's a racing driver.

Well, what about the Red Bull driver that got thrashed in a kart race by Massa's son? Didn't he lose his seat at the team because of that?

Oh wait, that was the other Red Bull driver...

Simtek wrote:Well, what about the Red Bull driver that got thrashed in a kart race by Massa's son? Didn't he lose his seat at the team because of that?

Oh wait, that was the other Red Bull driver...

So Kvyat <<< Ricciardo <<< Felipe Massa's son

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:How would doing a race in NASCAR completely separate from the rest of his career have anything to do with his chances of going to Ferrari? His performance in his first ever NASCAR race has nothing to do with how skilled he is at F1. It just seems like a thing he's doing (if he does) because it'd be a race and he's a racing driver.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be cool to see Grosjean in a Nascar race. But it might affect his chances if he's really terrible at it and it might also make Ferrari question his commitment to F1. Unfortunately it's likely past the days when F1 drivers can truly be all-rounders notwithstanding Hulkenberg's race in le Mans last year which I think was really a one-off.

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:How would doing a race in NASCAR completely separate from the rest of his career have anything to do with his chances of going to Ferrari? His performance in his first ever NASCAR race has nothing to do with how skilled he is at F1. It just seems like a thing he's doing (if he does) because it'd be a race and he's a racing driver.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be cool to see Grosjean in a Nascar race. But it might affect his chances if he's really terrible at it and it might also make Ferrari question his commitment to F1. Unfortunately it's likely past the days when F1 drivers can truly be all-rounders notwithstanding Hulkenberg's race in le Mans last year which I think was really a one-off.

Such an assertion looks like a massive overstretch to me. As much as you could argue the point above, you could equally argue Grosjean being unwilling to entertain such a venture - even just in theory - specifically in partnership with the team he races for, would amount to subordination and lead Ferrari to question his work ethic and commitment. Is he a lazy, stubborn driver who won't do anything above the absolute minimum required of his contract?

If he had just been asking permission to go off on some jaunt with a random team in a random series, it would be different. But this is about his team utilising one of their key assets (lead driver who is now a well established name in the sport) and deploying them in a key market for some extra PR spin.

The comments coming from the Haas camp make it sound like it is a very much team-driven endeavour, rather than being pushed from Grosjean's side. Turning down this opportunity on purpose, when his employer is asking him to partake, rather than vice-versa, would risk casting him in a far more negative light than going off to the States for a handful of days in the year. In a way, it boils down to being no more than a team PR day, which drivers are contracted to participate in anyway. This one just happens to be way more fun and interesting for the participating driver than normal.

Biscione wrote:

Row Man Gross-Gene wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:How would doing a race in NASCAR completely separate from the rest of his career have anything to do with his chances of going to Ferrari? His performance in his first ever NASCAR race has nothing to do with how skilled he is at F1. It just seems like a thing he's doing (if he does) because it'd be a race and he's a racing driver.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be cool to see Grosjean in a Nascar race. But it might affect his chances if he's really terrible at it and it might also make Ferrari question his commitment to F1. Unfortunately it's likely past the days when F1 drivers can truly be all-rounders notwithstanding Hulkenberg's race in le Mans last year which I think was really a one-off.

Such an assertion looks like a massive overstretch to me. As much as you could argue the point above, you could equally argue Grosjean being unwilling to entertain such a venture - even just in theory - specifically in partnership with the team he races for, would amount to subordination and lead Ferrari to question his work ethic and commitment. Is he a lazy, stubborn driver who won't do anything above the absolute minimum required of his contract?

If he had just been asking permission to go off on some jaunt with a random team in a random series, it would be different. But this is about his team utilising one of their key assets (lead driver who is now a well established name in the sport) and deploying them in a key market for some extra PR spin.

The comments coming from the Haas camp make it sound like it is a very much team-driven endeavour, rather than being pushed from Grosjean's side. Turning down this opportunity on purpose, when his employer is asking him to partake, rather than vice-versa, would risk casting him in a far more negative light than going off to the States for a handful of days in the year. In a way, it boils down to being no more than a team PR day, which drivers are contracted to participate in anyway. This one just happens to be way more fun and interesting for the participating driver than normal.

You make some good points. I guess I would change my mind a bit and agree that it's overall a good thing (but still with some risk). I guess now all we have to do is wait and see if they can actually make it happen. If it does, I'll probably try and watch it, which I wouldn't normally do.

The story being told over here is that old Gene, ecstatic that RoGro is batting .750 right now, basically said to him, "what can I do for you?" and Grosjean said he wanted to try NASCAR. Gene then made his team figure it out and they are running with it. Ferrari have nothing to do with it, and Hell they keep Kimi around and he was DESTROYED in Trucks.

It wouldn't be all that hard to do, NASCAR has a rule allowing a 5th, part time entry, for drivers classified as "rookies" (as Grosjean would be) to test on the fly. Watkins Glen is during the stupidly long F1 summer break, and in a Hendrick...err I mean Haas car he would easily qualify and IMO do pretty well. They just have to find a way for him to test prior.

Wallio wrote:The story being told over here is that old Gene, ecstatic that RoGro is batting .750 right now, basically said to him, "what can I do for you?" and Grosjean said he wanted to try NASCAR. Gene then made his team figure it out and they are running with it. Ferrari have nothing to do with it, and Hell they keep Kimi around and he was DESTROYED in Trucks.

It wouldn't be all that hard to do, NASCAR has a rule allowing a 5th, part time entry, for drivers classified as "rookies" (as Grosjean would be) to test on the fly. Watkins Glen is during the stupidly long F1 summer break, and in a Hendrick...err I mean Haas car he would easily qualify and IMO do pretty well. They just have to find a way for him to test prior.

Reading through the articles, I would have thought that Haas would have seen an excellent opportunity for a cross disciplinary promotional event.

From Haas's point of view, it will most probably generate additional public interest in his NASCAR team for that race, which could lead to increased sponsorship and perhaps open up avenues for cross promotion (perhaps some of his sponsors within NASCAR might become interested in providing additional sponsorship for his F1 team). Equally, it potentially raises awareness of his F1 team in the US and might help the sport increase its profile there - in fact, given that Bernie has dreamt for years about cracking the US market, I wouldn't be surprised if he is privately encouraging Haas to do this given that it would potentially expose F1 to a much larger audience in the US.

mario wrote:In fact, given that Bernie has dreamt for years about cracking the US market, I wouldn't be surprised if he is privately encouraging Haas to do this given that it would potentially expose F1 to a much larger audience in the US.

Non-championship exhibition F1 race at Watkins Glen - you heard it here first.

http://www.motorsport.com/nascar-cup/ne ... ut-735460/

I'm sure he'd want to spend the F1 holidays with his wife and kids, thus not wanting to race Watkins Glen. That makes sense to him. Question is when would he be able to actually test the car before debuting at Sonoma if he does get to attempt to qualify & race there.

I know so little of Nascar, I'm curious if they still use a standard manual transmission or a sequential gearbox like F1? Also what other differences are there?