Talk:Circuit de Monaco

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Formula One (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Motorsport (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.


I corrected the coordinates of the circuit. The coordinates given are for the start/finish line, taken from Google Earth.--Ciroa 16:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)--

Piquet quote[edit]

Hello. I believe the Nelson Piquet quote to be "Driving in Monaco is like riding a bike in your living room". At least, that's the way it's been referred to for ages here in Brazil. Does anyone have the source? Cheers. JimboB 14:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


Added links to BBC & official F1 site.--Cheetaih (talk) 23:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Gear for Ste. Devote[edit]

By no means is the Ste. Devote Corner taken in third or fourth gear in a formula one car. listen to the engines after having passed the corner, and you will hear at least five upshift manouvres on their ascent to the casino. Based on the fact that all modern have formula one cars have seven-speed-gearboxes, they pass the Ste. Devote corner either in first or second gear. Do not rely on the 'data' that is given to the press by some teams. they all contain some disinformation. (talk) 01:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

On-screen graphics from yesterday's GP suggest Ste. Devote is taken in second.Mr Larrington (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Lap Record[edit]

Now I've changed the record lap time back to what it was when M. Schumacher had done a 1:14 lap time. That's all fantastic and that but what I'm wondering is why is the record lap times that's performed in race conditions the only ones that count? Mark Webber did do a faster lap time but it isn't the record. If you can direct me to a discussion that bought about this decision then I would be much appreciated. If this is an unspoken rule, it seems a bit weird to me. Antimatter31 (talk) 08:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:F1#Lap_record_definition. DH85868993 (talk) 08:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I see now. Thanx. Antimatter31 (talk) 15:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


Can someone explain why the first sector on the course layout diagram doesn't begin precisely at the start/finish line? (talk) 19:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

There is no start/finish line at Monaco. The start line is much closer, a couple hundred metres closer, to Ste Devote than the finish line. This is in order to accomodate a full grid on such a short straight as the straight in front of the Monaco pits. But you are right in that the article should say this somewhere. --Falcadore (talk) 22:32, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hairpin name[edit]

This new scheme in it the hairpin name is correctly specified: Fairmont Hotel hairpin instead of Grand hotel hairpin — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Adverse Camber?[edit]

The article currently states:

The Rascasse takes the cars into a short, adversely-cambered straight that precedes the final corner, Virage Antony Noghes.

I'm unconvinced that this section is adversely cambered (i.e. higher at the edges of the track than in the centre - as defined at and Cant_(road/rail) and Camber_angle).

Could it be that the intention here was to convey that the (normal) camber is unfavourable to the drivers, since they tend to use the outside of the track at this point (due to shortness of the straight and the preceding and following bends both being right-hand)?

Does anyone have any conclusive evidence that this straight is actually adversely-cambered (as defined)? (talk) 13:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Having driven around the track there, itis inversely cambered (higher at the centre of the track than the edges). Inverse is objective, adverse is subjective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

That's also how I remember it, from walking the course, and also from TV coverage (2012-05-26) where the (straight) bridge cast a visibly "humped" shadow. In the absence of any support for it being adversely-cambered, I'm going to remove that claim. (talk) 12:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC)