A near-miss at Silverstone

The accident at Silverstone that stopped the race on the first lap could have been a great deal more serious than it ended up being, as it is clear from footage that has been posted on Youtube, that I am not allowed to show here because of the restrictions that the Formula One group has in relation to broadcasting images of the race. However, still images from this sequence show just how lucky Max Chilton was when his Marussia was hit by wreckage from Kimi Raikkonen’s Ferrari, notably one of the two tyres which were torn loose from the Ferrari’s wheels. What was left of the wheels remained with the car thanks to the wheel tethers. If the tyre had hit Chilton’s head it could have had very serious consequences.

Chilton“That was a scary moment when I was hit by the flying tyre,” Chilton said. “I was very lucky in one respect but massively unlucky given the damage to my car. It was like an explosion. Everything shot across to the left-hand side of the track and I saw something fly across and I ducked and luckily it hit the nose and went to the left and broke my front wheel duct.”

72 thoughts on “A near-miss at Silverstone

      1. His driving error did not cause the accident, his decision to re-enter the track at full speed did. I think in this situation, as a driver, you should have to wait until it is safe to rejoin the track, else receive a stop-go. There has been a number of this type of incidents in recent years and there are not strict enough rules for abusing track limits like this.

        1. Rubbish comment. It’s a race and sometimes accidents happen. There doesn’t always need to be a punishment for someone. Over regulation is killing the sport where every little tap gets someone a grid penalty for the next face. Whatever happened to the phrase racing incident.

        2. Philip, I agree completely. Re-entering balls out is unacceptable and Kimi should be handed a stiff penalty; a fine and position penalty to send a firm message to all the drivers. From the photo, the real folks in danger, worse than Chilton are the people behind that completely inadequate fencing. I’ll have to watch the incident again, but I doubt that fence could stop a loose wheel. It’s a given that teethers will never stop all wheels from coming loose in all accidents; the physics just don’t add up. I’ve said it before and will say it again and again here; F1 needs to lose their superiority complex and look at other racing series safety approaches; especially Indycar as the closest relative. That catch fencing would never be allowed at an Indycar track. F1’s safety car responses are way too slow; and the list goes on and on. F1 has been merely lucky since May 1st, 1994, but it can’t last; someone will pay for their poor safety practices with severe injury or worse. Hope not, of course, but hard to see how it’s not going to happen eventually.
          My 2 pence,

        3. Well, if the track hadn’t had a cleverly place ditch-ette on the edge of the track, everything would have been fine.

          You’d think they would’ve spent some of the hour they spent repairing the armco to smooth out the thing that caused the whole mess…

  1. So close to the near miss Alonso had last year. However, I would assume the consequences would not be very scary considering Massa took a spring to his helmet and still survived. In the case of Surtees, it was a whole wheel (and its extra weight) that caused the fatality.

    1. The spring that hit Massa weighed less than 1kg and did a tremendous amount of damage. A tyre weighs considerably more than that. It is folly to assume that the outcome of an accident “would not be not very scary” on the basis that the person survives it.

  2. I feel this incident was caused mainly by kimi but also by the track designers, if there were gravel instead of tarmac on the runoff, kimi would be out of the race and everyone else would be safe, with tarmac, kimi makes the mistake and floors the throttle on the tarmac to try to minimize his losses, making the eventual accident all the more dangerous.

    1. You could argue that that part of the circuit should be as smooth as possible. In fact, the whole immediate perimeter of either side of the tarmac should be completely flat. Take last year when Justin Wilson broke his back when he went off a few feet from the track surface and his car bounced hard enough to cause this injury.

    2. He chose to go ‘balls out’ across the grass to enter the track instead of the tarmac a couple of metres before, so it has hardly anything to do with track designers because there is a safe way to enter the track wiithout going across the grass.

      1. Blaming the track designers is like blaming the architect of a building in need of some paint touch ups. This is a track maintenance/safety issue. There should not be within a meter or so of the track edge a ridge that launches a car. What if Kimi had lost control of his car before reaching this launch pad? As this accident was happening, what if it was Massa, Koby, or Chilton who had been pushed over this ridge? When a driver who’s car is in perfect condition ends up in the grass just a couple of feet from the track and is violently launched in the air, you consider this to be the fault of the driver?

  3. Luck is need and Max was lucky…
    I still remember mechanics at Formula Renault how they were giving pit board while driver is doing 180km/h and open the line to get into Eau Rouge…

    Still shock of how at Indianapolis 500 pit board are given at bunker pit wall while your car is doing at least 225mph even if you are the slowest!,…. some times “3 wide!…”

    No body remember Monza 2000, when debris or a wheel from Jordan+Arrows crash hit a marshal? is was 15 year ago, I think there have been time to have a think.

    During the years I am work in motorsport twice I have forgot my credential and have been push out of the pit wall, sadly never have been push out of the wall by no wearing a helmet and anti intrusion overall.

    Congratulation to ACO, by make a rule for it and for the people in the pit lane.

    Please have a look how the track marshal stand there, watching with the latest high tech head protection, a radio head set…

    I take the time to watch F1 races after my 500 miles race last sunday, and still remember how Martin Brundle, Damon Hill, Johnny Herbert, Damon Hill etc, say in TV, “thanks to the track marshal for the great job the do, standing in the rain and perform their not remunerate duties”

    C’mon, is pretty cheap expose your live for zero.

    Pretty simple, at least you wear a helmet with internal head set if you work at wall rail. I guess the cost of 100 helmets and head sets is less of some of the expenses of organisation for a GP. And you what?, you can use them for 5 or 7 years.

    Why team members are not allow at start of race? If they are not allow at start of race in a future when after every safety car there is a standing start I guess people will need to get out of their “commando stand”.

    If I will be that standing marshal I tell you I get at periscope height at least for lap 1.

    1. Roberto,

      I’m usually critical of F1 safety in comparison to Indycar, but you’ve pointed out a glaring exception in Indycar safety “Still shock of how at Indianapolis 500 pit board are given at bunker pit wall while your car is doing at least 225mph even if you are the slowest!,…. some times “3 wide!…” Excellent point and it needs to change here at IMS; ridiculous in this day and age this still occurs.


      1. Or beyond the 500 itself – look at how dangerous that start in the Indianapolis GP was in May.

        As for Kimi… in my opinion, the method of his rejoining the track was madness. Not even a rookie error, just crass stupidity.

        1. I’ve been to more than 50 Indianapolis 500’s and the start of the race with 33 cars screaming into turn one is madness magnified. The start still raises the hair on the back of my neck.

          1. Leigh – head slap here. You were referring to front straight accident. Yes, nasty business.

        2. I race, while obviously
          on a different planet from these guys (SCCA and VARA) and there is a often a moment desperation to not fall behind which causes a momentary lapse in judgment and triggers moves like this. It happens to the best of drivers sometimes. I wouldn’t call it “crass stupidity,” but a moment where competitiveness overrides caution and logic. If these guys didn’t have it in spades, they wouldn’t be in F1. And, remember, this happened at speeds that don’t always allow for careful consideration. He also probably had no idea that gully was there.

      2. Roberto: The drama… sigh. I have a greater chance of injury (or death) driving to the race track – fact. There is risk in everything we do in life. Dating can be riskier then marshaling at the track… (my single mates inform me!). In 28 years I’ve had one close call. More marshals suffer lower leg injuries from holes in the ground then from race cars.

        You can never stand beside a race track risk free – we’re aware of that – it’s part of the ‘deal’ that we accept. I can’t comment on IMS and Indy Car concerning the lack of fences on pit lane but I can tell you they were there during the Indy F1 era – so it’s a cultural thing with IMS I suspect.

        I know marshal groups that use helmets and other then small low velocity objects such as stones – a helmet cannot protect you from a direct hit such as a 35lb tire traveling at x mph. The key is working with a partner such as in face to face flagging, having an exit plan from the post and using the fences and walls where you can to protect yourself. NOT using a smartphone (as in the photo Joe linked) is not acceptable and lands you in retraining as a first offense in my club. Leave the texting, facebooking and photo’s to the fans! We take what is a volunteer job as serious as if our lives depended on it. Oh wait?

        Yes, if I did a personal mental assessment of marshals I’d most likely find that most are risk takers – but not to the level of these extreme sports participants who jump off cliffs with fabric wings or climb around in deep underground tunnels. I find most of my mates are of the calculated risk types – not the ‘I hope it works’ or the ‘here, hold my beer and watch this’ kind. We weed those kind out pretty fast. You may be surprised to know that more race fans are killed world wide then race marshals, (a sad fact). I’m all for (more) public protection – they didn’t buy into the event for such an thing (injury) to occur – we enter the track with eyes wide open and those eyes always look UP track…


    2. Thank you, Roberto, for your thoughts, and for working to make all these things I love happen, and be safe.

      This is the story from Monza in 2000: http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns02811.html

      It is sad that I think the reason there is no formal respect paid to those hurt in their work for the race, is due to worry over legal risk. I’d like some public token to pay respect in general. In a positive way. Like a statue, not of the deceased, but of just a marshal, ushering fans in to the circuit, something that would just make people think a bit. Maybe think “why is that statue there?” children might ask especially, because they might be confused and assume it is a famous driver. That would be a great way to introduce a young lad to his first race meeting. Put on it just a simple dedication to the risks taken by all the marshals. Somewhere, maybe online, list all those pulled from wreckage and saved by brave marshals. I don’t have kids, sadly, but if I did, I would not want them going to races or even viewing, without understanding something of the very real risk involved. I don’t think my view is uncommon, far from it, so you don’t need a depressing symbolic gesture, just a talking point and a mark of respect.

      1. It’s the small hours and the end of coffee’s ability to awaken me, from a long day, but suddenly I do somehow recall, Murray Walker’s voice, in somber, reflective tones, commemorating a marshal’s passing. I recall nothing else, save it may have been first a mention of a driver, then a Marshall, suffering or passing. But Murray has that ability of speech and humanity if delivery to say what I think later commentators cannot quite express nor do newer commentators have the gravitas and, possibly, political capital, to mention sad events beyond those absolutely in the public full awareness, the obvious ones. F1 I think has a responsibility to avoid any smugness about safety or history of casualties, drivers or not, whilst the roads claim so many still. But there are commentators I feel don’t have the vocal range – I do not mean to aver in any way any diminution of their personal or emotional capacity or empathy – just don’t have the vocal range in enunciation to make such tributes quite “right”, to carry the gravitas into the real world of the present and into levity form lament.

  4. Has ther been any talk of the track itself being a factor?

    It looked like the cause of the accident was Kimi being pitched in the air when he tried to re-enter the track. There appears to be a big curb/bump at the track edge that launched him and caused him to lose control. Sure seems like that section of track (and any others like it at other tracks) needs to be looked at and fixed.

    Very glad nobody was seriously hurt.

    1. I thought it was a little ditch, but you could be right, it might have been a bump… either way, it was as bad as the access road in Austria… and maybe worse as you couldn’t readily see the damn thing…

      The folks blaming Kimi are missing the point… the only mistake he made was to assume that he didn’t need to climb out of the car to inspect that particular place on the track to see if it was inexplicably flawed…

      1. he only mistake he made was to assume that he didn’t need to climb out of the car to inspect that particular place on the track to see if it was inexplicably flawed…

        I really can’t agree with that. He was at full throttle on the wet grass, it was a stupid and dangerous thing to do.

        If it was Maldonado who’d done it people would be demanding race bans, but because everyone likes Kimi they’re blaming the track.

        1. He was driving from tarmac to tarmac and chose the place where there was about 5 feet of grass to cross between the 2 tarmac surfaces… he correctly chose this path because it involved the least grass of the available options… and the border between the grass and the track had an abrupt edge that produced enough impact to generate a cloud of dirt, break the suspension, and put him in the air.

          Driving over a couple feet of grass doesn’t do any of that. Only a fault with the preparation and maintenance of track does that.

          As for the claim that this factual observation is somehow based on Kimi love, I’m actually aggravated with him (again), as he seems bored (again), much as he was the year he spent tooling around in 7th place with his arm out the window while leaving the racing to his then-teammate Massa.

          This is not about Kimi, it’s about a fault with the track that broke the car.

          1. p.s. On the other hand, you’re right that I might be happy to blame Maldonado 😉

            p.p.s. But that’s because he’s proven himself to be an ass on track. In contrast, Kimi has shown himself to be both responsible and fair while at speed. (Plus, Kimi doesn’t whine.)

            1. During the armco hour there was lots of time with little to do but watch replays of the event umpteen times… which the NBCSN crew did. I make every effort to forget anything Leigh Diffey says; Matchett and Hobbs concluded that the ditch event (and it was a ditch, one camera angle clearly shows it) broke the right rear suspension (signalled in time by the dirt cloud).

              Both seemed sure that the broken right rear is why the car was so violently squirrelly upon its return to the track prior to the initial head-on contact with the fence. It also explains the abrupt pivot to the right directly into the fence head-on, as the left rear wheel was pushing the car on while the right rear was no longer functioning.

              I’ve just now reviewed their coverage via DVR: Matchett tentatively wondered if it was a broken suspension when first reviewing the camera view looking back on the event. Then, when reviewing the view looking forward from behind the event, both he and Hobbs exclaimed at pretty much the same moment that the ditch broke the car. Multiple further reviews in slo-mo resulted in them speaking of the broken right rear as if it was an obvious fact.


                1. Well, you could be right.

                  I couldn’t see damage… but I have learned to trust Matchett’s eyeballs. It’s normal for a car to go zipping across the screen lickety split and have Matchett comment that some tire or wing or upright is failing. How he can see these things in real-time is beyond me. Then, his studio people will bring up a slo-mo of the same thing, Matchett will draw a circle around it with his telestrator pen… and I *still* can’t see what he’s talking about. Then, 3 or 4 laps later the part he’s talking about will fail. The man simply has superhuman eyes for noticing car things.

                  Regardless of eyes, the subsequent behavior of the car seems more in keeping with their explanation than the alternate one. But, obviously, I really have no way to know…

        2. I’m blaming the track because that is what appears to be the cause of Kimi losing control. My view of the accident is not influenced by which driver was involved.

          1. Kimi chose to drive across the grass to enter the track instead of using the tarmac a couple of metres before. In stead of following the safe route he chose to follow the fastest route so he wouldn’t lose too many places.

            Imho if someone leaves the track and enters again, and causes an accident, he is at fault. A track should be entered safely.

            1. Watch it again. There was no tarmac path a couple of meters before. The only way in or out of that runoff area (viz. the track) was over something else. He picked the shortest non-tarmac path available to him.

  5. Im amazed at the strength and integrity of these cars, the money invested in safety since Senna bore fruit at Silverstone.
    I assume for the drivers getting into these cars, it must be a leap of faith, in the machine as well as the men responsible for designing it.
    I for one am happy at the stress on safety in Formula One, because at the end of the day all this technology will trickle down to road cars.

  6. Would think the mass at that speed would cause far more damage to the head/neck than a spring? (Massa)

    1. In motor racing as in life, accidents happen. Sometimes people get hurt or can die. It can never be 100% safe, never has been, never will be. Max was lucky, Kimi was too. It was an accident, no point making any more than that out of it.

      1. I disagree. There’s always value in investigating serious or very nearly serious incidents such as this one. The driver, the circuit and the cars all posses attributes that contributed to the creation of a near-fatal accident so it is right that the existence of those factors be questioned calmly and proposals to combat them made for consideration. No drama, just common sense.

        1. Agree entirely, Tom. Any industry should be aware of risks and take steps to reduce them – doesn’t have to mean over-zealous policing of the driving regulations, as some people are complaining – through studying what took place and why.

          If the conclusions are that a repeat situation cannot be avoided without severely damaging other aspects of the sport (clearly F1 would be safer speed-limited to 30mph or with drivers instantly being black-flagged for running off the track) then the dangers may have to be accepted.

          Work out what happened and why, then try to analyse the R in ALARP.

      2. Damian,

        Agree about the never 100%, but totally disagree that nothing more to it. Kimi has a responsibility to others to understand his surroundings, particularly when going off-track and coming back on. No way he is blameless and he should definitely be punished severely to send a strong message that what he did is unacceptable. He HAS to slow down and rejoin only when it’s clear and safe and be aware of the route. It’s not a track surface. He’s the one that went off-track and has the responsibility. Big fine and more to him.

        1. As others have said, he was doing what racing drivers do, and at the start of a race in the early few laps,the best chances are there for each driver to make up places, adrenaline takes over and there is always the chance of accidents. People are too remote from danger these days and there is always a cry in any accident situation that someone has to take the blame and some dubious punishment. It should be realised that life is fragile, and can be ended at anytime by the simplest of happenings and that this cannot be totally contained. As Lauda said, it is getting to the point that racing is too restricted and governed and that is not sensible or reasonable. No different to asking a soldier to comply with a restrictive list of rules of engagement when his opponent has none to comply with. All the stupid radio moans between Alonso & Vettel made a mockery of F1 at the GP, and were staged because of how the rules are. No wonder people are turning off the sport. It’s time to get some reality and sense of proportionality back.

          1. People are too remote from danger these days and there is always a cry in any accident situation that someone has to take the blame and some dubious punishment.

            Driving at full throttle on wet grass and bouncing back into the field is idiotic, and he needs to be reminded that it is idiotic. Grass is not the race track, it will naturally have divots in it, wet grass especially so. I remember Grosjean being vilified after he broke his car doing the same thing.

            I think people are letting their like of Kimi blind them. If Maldonado had done the same thing, the knives would be out.

            1. Not so Troll, because usually Madonaldo actually drives into other cars, which Kimi has no record of doing. Kimi had an accident, it happens, it’s motor racing it is never entirely safe, can’t be and won’t be unless it is turned into a computer graphic game, which Bernie might do if he thought he’d make more money that way without real circuits,cars and drivers!

          2. Once upon a time drivers had to be able to think as well as drive. There will always be a bit of a bump between grass and tarmac. Re-entering the circuit flat-chat as Kimi did was a dumb move, and seriously hints that Kimi’s brain is operating a couple of watts short of optimal. Sometimes you have to know when discretion is the better part of valour, and by lying low for a short while you will live to fight again.

            Just because racing has become safer doesn’t mean the drivers are excused responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Rather than complain that the race wasn’t being held on a Tilkedrome car park, devoid of all features, Kimi should just have held his hand up and said “yup, sorry, my bad”. What next? Kimi runs into a wall at Monaco and everyone pins the blame on the armco being too close to the track? You race on the track in front of you. If your tactics and decisions don’t suit that track, the fault is yours not the track’s.

  7. A timely reminder that despite the huge advances in safety, the possibility of an accident with VERY serious consequences is always present. And always will be. Kimi was doing what any other driver would – to get back on the circuit as quickly as possible. It’s their instinct. I have wondered recently though, especially with all this talk of stewards issuing warnings for ‘track limits’ whether a return to gravel traps in places would be better? I believe they were phased out in places to keep more cars in the race if they had an ‘off’, and that tarmac is more successful at slowing down cars, as they don’t launch and ‘skitter’ across the gravel unabated, but gravel would have certainly slowed kimi down enough to avoid his accident on Sunday.

    1. True. A gravel trap on an approach to a concrete bridge must be better than tarmac. Saying that – why the hell do they still have a bridge!?

      Unclear what these Indy 500 comments relate to. As far as i know they don’t show pit boards in indycar. However in the Indy Grand Prix this year they did do a standing start without the catch fencing used by F1. Mayor of Indy and a Marshall were hit by debris. Also the wall between pit lane and track is barely taller than it was in 1973 when Jackie Stewart criticised it (see his comment and full race on youtube)

      1. ‘why the hell do they still have a bridge!?’ – So they can get to the centre of the circuit and the garages! Where would Suzuka be without a bridge….. Maybe a tunnel instead, but Pedro Lamy landed in one of those during a Silverstone test in ’94. Nothing is perfect.

  8. Having been star-struck by this sport since the late seventies – and even using it to launch a career in broadcasting PR – I’m finding it harder and harder to explain and sometimes justify my passion, not only to myself but others.

    There are hundreds of books, thousands of press articles and seminars that articulate how businesses like F1 can an and often do fail and why some come back from the brink and thrive.

    F1 displays all the classic symptoms, a myopic management style an aging staff, unwilling to let go, not understanding the world is changing, playing safe and wanting to cling to 100% of X when they could have 100% of XXXXX,.

    F1 is governed by fear, greed and a ‘dictatorship’ mindset that believes that if “I can’t have it then no one can”.

    How the mighty fall by Jim Collins could have been written for F1 and its tribulations.

  9. A lot of back and forth here. But I remember the back of the ticket from my first race (long long ago) – “Motor Racing is Dangerous”. If you participate there are risks; that you accept.

  10. Plus it should be remembered that in virtually all other Racing Series and in most of our own cars we have lower profile tyres to provide :-
    1. Superior grip
    2. Superior Handling (let the suspension do the suspension)
    3. Superior control of the tread.
    4. Added Security for tyre to rim with a larger rim.

    And what old buffoon retains 15″ rims because he preferred them and it wants them on his Series ……… and Pirelli only TESTS ……at Silvestone this week an 18″ rim. …..Honestly, F1 is laughable at times.

    Lets face it Mr Ecclestone has had his time – for safety’s sake – we need to move on – Lets face it F1 could be prosecuted in a Court of Law for NOT instigating known safety measures therefore 15″ rims should be banned on safety grounds.

  11. “it is clear from footage that has been posted on Youtube, that I am not allowed to show here because of the restrictions that the Formula One group has in relation to broadcasting images of the race”

    I sense subtle criticism here. You’re not even allowed to post pictures (video or still) taken by the on-track audience even when they share it freely? I can understand the screengrab thing, but this?

    1. I don’t believe there are any restrictions on photographs, or still pictures from video, but I think the people who take the video are actually behaving illegally as the terms of conditions of their tickets do not allow them to film the action. Thus I would be pulled up if I was to post the video on the blog, although I have a perfect right to point fans to it, if that is what I wish to do. I am sure that if this is wrong Karen will come along and tell us.

  12. Provided this comment gets through Joe’s moderation firewall, I would just like to ask him what he thinks of the condition of the silverstone track?

    I mean a large bit of hollow hidden underneath a hastilly spread sheet of grassy lawn at/near the exit to a run-off area …. just by the white kerbing

    Should Raikkonen, Ferrari, and the FIA individually and severally sue the owners of the circuit for damages caused by their negligence?

    Thanks in advance

    1. I don’t think it is bad. If you want better tracks you have to give the circuits the chance to generate revenues. F1 does not.

  13. Joe – I understand that there are currently experiments with some form of cockpit protection being constructed somewhere on the cars frame. That’s either some kind of protective clear “bubble” completely covering the driver, or some form of construction somewhere on the front of the car leading up to the cockpit. Do you know where they are with that, and when is the possibility of it being introduced via regulations?

    The last I heard they’d ruled out the former and were going to go with the latter but haven’t heard anything since. Last SUnday was a timely reminder of the dangers of being hit by a tyre that has become free of the car. Also not forgetting that quite recently, a driver in one of the lower formulas was killed after being hit directly by a tyre that had come free.

  14. The embarrassment from the race was the equipment and manpower that it took to repair the Armco fencing, with as Coultard mentioned a “spanner”.
    Only in England does it take 12 guys to supervise the two guys doing the repair work for an hour….Ridiculous.

    1. Jeff, Armco is not a simple, solid barrier. They are actually pretty refined structures designed to absorb and deflect crash energy, and keep the crashing car within a defined zone. They do this by deformation, in a controlled sense, and by spreading the load of an accident along a much longer length of the barrier than is actually in contact with the car. Hence, after an accident you need to inspect not just the barrier at the point of impact, but also some distance on either side. Additionally, the stanchions that hold the barrier up need to be inspected and seen to be as secure and well located as possible. We saw at Le Mans last year (and a few times at Zandvoort in the 1970s) what happens when an Armco barrier isn’t properly supported. Even after you have swapped out the damaged portion of barrier and made sure that the stanchions are sound, the bolts that hold it all together will have to be torqued up to the proper specs and then everything will need to be checked to make sure that it is as good as new.

      Frankly, Coulthard’s comments just show him to be fairly ignorant. If I were you, I would be more embarrassed had the English repair crew been happy to do a quick, bodged-together lash-up rather than putting everything back together properly. As for Niki Lauda’s comments, for a compatriot of Jochen Rindt and as someone who actually participated at the same events that killed Helmuth Koinigg, Peter Revson and Mark Donohue you would have thought that he would know the value of a properly installed and secure Armco barrier. I suppose age catches up with us all eventually.

  15. Oh dear, all the comments about Kimi’s “madness” etc, etc. He’s an exciting guy to watch, and a RACER. He made a mistake, went wide, kept his foot in – as he has done many many times in the past (remember at Spa when he drove through engine smoke on the exit of Eau Rouge). This time it didn’t work so an accident occurred. OMG an accident on a racetrack…

    Let’s not spend hours analysing it – this is motor racing.

    1. I agree with Nick…aha! Seriously, F1 is sterile enough these days, and Kimi will likely only be in it for another 28 races or so, so I’d think race fans should shut up, belt up and enjoy the ride, because he is probably the most serious racer out there. Nothing interests him at all except getting in the car and dragging the utmost out of it. We could do with a grid full of guys like him, no BS and all action! I really hope he goes back to WRC after F1 as he had the speed, but lacked the experience, to win there, but all he needed was a season or two extra competing and he would have been a winner. Kimi & Robert Kubica would be great PR for Rallying.

  16. Old buffoon here! For me the wheel tire proportion currently fitted by NASCAR race cars ,possibly has been the same dimensions since the late sixties? Looks great! Ditto for F One cars circa DFV kit car ascendant years! The penchant for Rice Rocket Bean Can exhaust sporting instant MOT fail Zero suspension travel unable to drive at night due flickering headlight issue,paired with the DUB wheel “fashion” accessory by pimp wannabe Escalade curb crawler types! It is all about taste , or lack of it! NASCAR desires to identify with the Sedans they want to sell , so Engineering fabs up a rim/tire combination that at 200 MPH for as long as they have managed to sell TV Add time .meanwhile every twerp in a BMW drives around pretending to be Senna 80 MPH past infants schools and wheel repair shops have multified by 1000 % …..The other Jeff.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s