Alonso had fastest pit stop in Canada

24 comments on “Alonso had fastest pit stop in Canada”

1. 

   Ryan Wood
   16th June 2010, 18:52

   Pretty quick! I think Red Bull recorded the quickest actual stop, just tyres in Canada, around three seconds, or just under. Very impressive.
   1. 

      Macca (@macca)
      17th June 2010, 4:32

      Your right Ryan, Webber’s last stop was a 3.0 second stop, the fastest this year according Brundle
2. 

   US_Peter (@us_peter)
   16th June 2010, 18:56

   It would be interesting to know what the actual stopped time was. Vettel’s was 3.3 according to the onscreen info during the race. Wonder if Alonso’s was mainly faster due to better braking/accelerating, or if the actual stop was quicker as well…
   1. 

      BasCB
      17th June 2010, 7:20

      I think i remember, that Alonso had a 3.2 stop there, but it also shows the experience of the drivers.

      Schumi shows he is good at it, being respectably quicker than Rosberg. Still Mercedes seem to be at the top of quick stops. They did some in earlier races as well.
      1. 

         Mike
         17th June 2010, 8:25

         It’s one thing Merc seems to have got really right, I can’t remember Bahrain, But from Aus, they have been the quickest, or close to, barring issues.
3. 

   Ino
   16th June 2010, 18:59

   I didn’t catch Red Bull’s pitstop times, if they were under 3 seconds, is that the first one this year? I saw Nico Rosberg had a 3.3 sec one, pretty quick!
4. 

   chump
   16th June 2010, 19:04

   I think Webber’s second stop showed up as 3.0s on the world feed.
   1. 

      Ryan Wood
      16th June 2010, 19:17

      Yeh, I think it was Webber’s, remember Leggard saying it was the quickest so far.
      1. 

         epi
         16th June 2010, 20:13

         I remember Legard spouting a lot of nonsense most weekends. He’s hardly a good source of info over the weekend
         1. 

            Ryan Wood
            16th June 2010, 23:08

            Yeah, you’re not wrong there, however I’m just using him as a memorable reference. I remember him saying it, which jogged my memory of seeing the time.
            1. 

               Adrian
               17th June 2010, 8:44

               Pretty sure it was Brundle who said it, so it has some credibility!!
   2. 

      Scribe (@scribe)
      16th June 2010, 19:36

      Yeah thats what I saw.
5. 

   Guy
   16th June 2010, 20:41

   As these times are inferred and based on a typical pit lane time loss of 14.1 seconds (accurate, I assume, to one decimal place), quoting them to thousandths of a second seems to be overdoing it a bit.

   Surely allowing for margin of error we’d have to say Nico Hülkenberg’s 7.799 is the same as Jenson Button’s 7.8s.

   Also, is the 14.1s loss the extra time spent driving through the pits? To calculate the actual pit stop time from the total time in the pit lane, don’t we need also to deduct the time the car would have spent on the track between the pit lane entrance and exit if it hadn’t stopped?
   1. 

      BasCB
      17th June 2010, 7:25

      As mentioned in the article, Keith had the total pit times (from entry point to exit) from the FIA – those are the first times shown on TV, before showing the time spent standing still – and these times are with an accuracy of 0.001, so the times are accurate.
   2. 

      Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
      17th June 2010, 9:31

      I don’t think the 14.1 matters if you’re talking about decimal accuracy – add it back on to all the times and you still get the same 0.001s different between Button and Hülkenberg.

      I don’t know what you mean by ‘actual’ pit stop time in your second question. If you’re talking about stationary time then the only way to get that is to time the pit stops, because of the variation between how quickly a car brakes to and accelerates away from their pit box.
      1. 

         Tango
         17th June 2010, 15:35

         Well really, this 0.001 s sensitivity can be right only if it is triggered from a point at the entrance of the pitlane and stopped at another point at the end of the pit lane. As it is then machine triggered. And to this extent, the “driver reaction time” factor will be overwelmingly important over the speed of actual pit stop.

         Any timing of actual pit stop per say has to be taken back to 0.1 s or even to the second as it is human deicision that triggers and stops the timing (even accounting the time it takes to lift the car and let it back down).

         So 0,001 timings are only accurate as far as time spent in the pitlane goes. Any timing of actual pit stop will certainly be flawed (or at least not refined).

         Sensitivity of measure is always important. Per example, giving a temperature with 0,01 degrees definition (as some home thermometres do) is senseless : it is impossible to have such measurement (and it will be very variable).
      2. 

         nik (@nik)
         17th June 2010, 17:25

         Total pitstop time is a lot more important to stationary time since it shows the slow down, hitting marks and getting out of the box again. A lot of people complained about ‘total time’ when it was introduced, but it is far more accurate in showing how much time was lost than what stationary time is. Stationary time is only good to measure the performance of pit crews, rather than the driver.
6. 

   sato113
   16th June 2010, 21:01

   i think mercedes are the fastest in general. looks like lotus are pretty slow.
7. 

   bwells
   16th June 2010, 21:39

   That was amazing watching them come out of the pit lane side by side… I almost dropped my beer!!… I was in Grandstand 11 so I had a great view of the pass… :) It was a thrilling moment of an amazing race… too bad the traffic cost Fernando the win… :)
8. 

   BasCB
   17th June 2010, 7:22

   Interesting, Virgin seems to have got their pit stops covered pretty well. Both drivers are quite a lot in front of both Lotus and HRT.
   Experience also seems to show, with Glock having more experience (in total and in the race, with 5 stops).
9. 

   PJA
   17th June 2010, 9:24

   Is there any reason why the FIA does not release the stationary time of the cars at the pit stop, such as they do not always have that information for every stop so they don’t want to release an incomplete list?
   1. 

      Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
      17th June 2010, 9:26

      I don’t know, but I guess the only way they could do it would be to have a group of people timing every pit stop. There would need to be at least 12 people (one at each team) which is quite a lot of manpower, which is expensive.
      1. 

         PJA
         17th June 2010, 9:47

         I don’t know if I am getting confused with the system used to determine if someone jumped the start, but years ago, possibly in the 1990s, I remember a commentator saying that they actually put sensors in the ground which could measure when a car was stationary through a sensor in the car.

         The only race at the time where this didn’t happen was at Monaco as they weren’t allowed to drill holes in the ground to place the sensors.
10. 

    Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
    17th June 2010, 9:27

    This was the first time Ferrari had been quickest at pit stops this year. I’ll have data up for all the teams in all the races later today.

Comments are closed.