Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026. A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after 2014.
The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak power
from the ICU.
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about
compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after 2014.
The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak power
from the ICU.
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about
compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after 2014.
The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak power
from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own decisions
of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a compression ratio of 25,
well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about
compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after
2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak
power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read what
I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing
each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the best
or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and
every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the minutest
detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns
out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a
compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a totally
forgone conclusion ?!
On 2/9/26 12:52 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about
compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after
2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak
power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read
what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing
each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the best >>> or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and
every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the minutest
detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns
out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a
compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a totally
forgone conclusion ?!
Why?
On 10/02/2026 1:39 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/9/26 12:52 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about >>>>>> compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after
2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the
peak power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read
what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing
each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the
best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and >>>> every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio race. >>>> Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the
minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns >>>> out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a
compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a totally
forgone conclusion ?!
Why?
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across the field.
On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across the
field.
Potential you say, right!
For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the
others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.
I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages and disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then others
and visa versa.
F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.
As we speak some road cars are in certain arearCOs way more advanced then F1.
Edmund <nomail@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across the >>> field.
Potential you say, right!
For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different
manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the
others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.
I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages and
disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then others
and visa versa.
F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by
technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.
As we speak some road cars are in certain arearCOs way more advanced then F1.
This comes up every few years and it's simple: what kind of F1 do you
want?
F1 has always been about both the drivers and the constructors. Drivers
(to a large extent) have an upper limit. In any generation - certainly recently - the difference between the best and the worst is relatively
small (particularly the best few) and it's things like consistency and
mental preparedness that often distinguishes the good from the great.
That's all pretty tight margins.
The other part has been the cars where I'd made two arguments.
1. An unregulated, non-formula competition would allow unconstrained development which could move much faster than development of drivers.
Not only would I argue that weakening the regulations would move it more towards being a constructors' competition, I would go so far as to say
it would rendered the WDC irrelevent. And that's fine if what you want
is a pure technology competition. Some would like that (you seem to)
others would hate it.
2. Any move in that direction would decisively shift (even further) the advantage to the bigger, better-funded teams. Again, you could argue
"what's the problem with that" but that (just as with the other
regulations) has been fought against with things like cost caps and
penalties on excessive engine and gearbox changes.
We could go around this argument for the millionth time, but the outcome
is always the same: Removal of restrictions (or the formula itself) completely changes the competition and is likely to (even more) lead to processions.
And the fans have been clear (over the decades I've watched) they don't
like the same car and/or driver* constantly winning. They want (but
rarely get) close competition. What you're arguing is completely out of
step with that.
* Every dominant driver - from Schumacher through Prost, Senna,
Schumacher, Vettel, Hamilton and most recently Verstappen - split the
fans, particularly when there are contiguous runs. If the car is
significantly better than the field (which in your scenario it
could/would be), you could well get a dominant driver...but as they
only need to beat their teammate you could have an inferior driver
(compared to the other teams' drivers) winning year after year. As was
alleged with most of the drivers above...but is rarely "just" the car.
On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:
On 10/02/2026 1:39 am, Edmund wrote:Potential you say, right!
On 2/9/26 12:52 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com
wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about >>>>>>> compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined >>>>>>> measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after >>>>>> 2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the
peak power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read >>>>> what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing >>>>> each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the
best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and >>>>> every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio
race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the
minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what
turns out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a
compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a totally
forgone conclusion ?!
Why?
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across
the field.
For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the
others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.
I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages and disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then others
and visa versa.
F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.
As we speak some road cars are in certain arearCOs way more advanced then F1.
Regulations.Simply put: cost control.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about
compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after 2014.
The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak power
from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read what I said about it before and then give your opinion.No, actually. The innovation that is better and better aerodynamics...
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own decisions
of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a compression ratio of 25,
well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
On 10/02/2026 9:45 pm, Edmund wrote:
On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:
On 10/02/2026 1:39 am, Edmund wrote:Potential you say, right!
On 2/9/26 12:52 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com >>>>>>>> wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about >>>>>>>> compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined >>>>>>>> measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after >>>>>>> 2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the >>>>>>> peak power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read >>>>>> what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start
racing each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one >>>>>> is the best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and >>>>>> every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio >>>>>> race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the
minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what
turns out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a >>>>>> compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they >>>>>> mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a
totally forgone conclusion ?!
Why?
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across
the field.
For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different
manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the
others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.
I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages
and disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then
others and visa versa.
F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by
technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.
As we speak some road cars are in certain arearCOs way more advanced
then F1.
They are designed by engineers within the bounds of a specified FORMULA, like Formula One, Formula Ford, etc, etc.
What you are suggesting is a totally open non-formula series, with huge disparities possible/probable.
On 10/02/2026 9:45 pm, Edmund wrote:
On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:
On 10/02/2026 1:39 am, Edmund wrote:Potential you say, right!
On 2/9/26 12:52 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com >>>>>>>> wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about >>>>>>>> compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined >>>>>>>> measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after >>>>>>> 2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the >>>>>>> peak power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read >>>>>> what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start
racing each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one >>>>>> is the best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and >>>>>> every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio >>>>>> race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the
minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what
turns out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a >>>>>> compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they >>>>>> mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a
totally forgone conclusion ?!
Why?
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across
the field.
For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different
manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the
others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.
I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages
and disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then
others and visa versa.
F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by
technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.
As we speak some road cars are in certain arearCOs way more advanced
then F1.
They are designed by engineers within the bounds of a specified FORMULA, like Formula One, Formula Ford, etc, etc.
What you are suggesting is a totally open non-formula series, with huge disparities possible/probable.
On 2026-02-10 15:06, Geoff wrote:
On 10/02/2026 9:45 pm, Edmund wrote:
On 2/9/26 10:37 PM, Geoff wrote:
On 10/02/2026 1:39 am, Edmund wrote:Potential you say, right!
On 2/9/26 12:52 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 9/02/2026 1:06 am, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>> wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about >>>>>>>>> compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined >>>>>>>>> measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after >>>>>>>> 2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the >>>>>>>> peak power from the ICU.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read >>>>>>> what I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start
racing each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one >>>>>>> is the best or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each >>>>>>> and every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault >>>>>>> clio race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the
minutest detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what >>>>>>> turns out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a >>>>>>> compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations,
they mostly took away the excitement.
Surely that would make more of a 'procession' and outcomes a
totally forgone conclusion ?!
Why?
Because of the potential extreme disparity of car performance across
the field.
For starters, its kind of the whole idea of racing between different
manufacturers to show that their design is better/faster then the
others. Nothing wrong if the best will win.
I can imagine that different designs have both different advantages
and disadvantages, could be that one suits certain tracks better then
others and visa versa.
F1 should be the top of technical innovations and and be designed by
technicians instead of a bunch of elderly bureaucrats.
As we speak some road cars are in certain arearCOs way more advanced
then F1.
They are designed by engineers within the bounds of a specified
FORMULA, like Formula One, Formula Ford, etc, etc.
What you are suggesting is a totally open non-formula series, with
huge disparities possible/probable.
And HUGE costs.
On 2026-02-08 04:06, Edmund wrote:
On 2/7/26 7:33 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
On 2/7/2026 12:15 PM, scole wrote:Yeah and what is better for racing then reducing the power!
In article <10lieqp$24rpc$1@dont-email.me>, nomail@hotmail.com wrote:
Regulations.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
Regulations are regulations - it's formula racing. They care about
compression ratio because they've decided to use it as a defined
measurable as part of the racing formula.
It's not new for 2026.-a A maximum of 18:1 was set sometime after
2014. The reduction to 16:1 this year is intended to reduce the peak
power from the ICU.
The maximum power has almost ZERO impact on how good the racing actually
is.
What makes for good racing is:
Parity between the car and driver combinations, and...
...the ability to run close behind the car in front.
Listen, I donrCOt want to repeat myself over and over again so read whatNo, actually. The innovation that is better and better aerodynamics...
I said about it before and then give your opinion.
Ask yourselves, what is the point of car/engine brands start racing
each other in the first place? IsnrCOt it to show which one is the best
or fastest, yes or no?
The elderly billionaire rule makers decided to rCLrule outrCY each and
every innovation or clever design and turn it into a renault clio race.
Everything they can think of must be exactly the same to the minutest
detail.
I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own
decisions of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns
out to be the best. If a team can make an engine run with a
compression ratio of 25, well done!
The regulations have not only have stopped major innovations, they
mostly took away the excitement.
...which, with all the best will in the world, will always, ALWAYS
result in the air behind a car giving poorer downforce to a car trying
to overtake...
...has taken away almost all of the excitement.
The last set of regulations were an attempt to limit that effect, and it worked for a while.
As for "making their own decisions" on engine design, that area is very
well understood, and so quickly, all the engines will be pretty similar.
As an example, when the F1 rules allowed for up to-a 3.5l displacement naturally aspirated engines, there were V8s, V10s and V12s (and only
Ferrari was running V12s and they won just one race that year)
And if you let the teams run a 25:1 compression ratio, then they'll be chasing extremely exotic (and potentially highly toxic) fuels to make it possible.
The days of a completely unlimited "formula" are over. The costs would skyrocket.
On 2026-01-30 06:22, Edmund wrote:
Regulations.Simply put: cost control.
What do you guys think of the regulations.
Specifically, why would they care about compression ratio?
and no one is for removal of ( all) restrictions, I am merely
advocating to give the designers the change to do their job.
No it is not, not even close.
What you are suggesting is a totally open non-formula series, with
huge disparities possible/probable.
On 11/02/2026 9:39 pm, Edmund wrote:
No it is not, not even close.
What you are suggesting is a totally open non-formula series, with
huge disparities possible/probable.
"I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own decisions
of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns out to be the best."
That sound like pretty much 'open' to me ....
On 11/02/2026 9:39 pm, Edmund wrote:
No it is not, not even close.
What you are suggesting is a totally open non-formula series, with
huge disparities possible/probable.
"I call for a lot more freedom for the teams to make their own decisions
of their design,-a 4 cylinders 1 or 16, lets see what turns out to be the best."
That sound like pretty much 'open' to me ....
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 02:11:27 |
| Calls: | 812 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| Messages: | 210,165 |