planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:44 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic

who is faster? Merc or Ferrari?
Poll ended at Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:35 am
Ferrari 37%  37%  [ 44 ]
Mercedes 63%  63%  [ 74 ]
Total votes : 118
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
mds wrote:
lamo wrote:
mds wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think the BIB is the point.


Just looked at it somewhat closer. Counting the obvious events or lesser performances of both drivers:
- Russia: LH+13 SV-3
- Monaco: LH+6
- Baku: SV+13
- Singapore: SV+25 LH-7 (assuming Seb would have won)
- Brazil: LH+13 SV-7

Mexico not figuring because I see it as neutral at best.

Grand total if both drivers would have made no errors or would have had no bad weekends: SV+28, LH+32.
So you could make a very good case for both drivers having left a very comparable amount of points on the table even including Singapore as error instead of racing incident.


I would call that quite SV biased.

Mexico was his fault (he understeered his car directly into Hamilton causing a puncture) and he came out of it +10 over Hamilton. If he doesn't puncture Hamiltons tyre. Lewis finishes at least 2nd (18) and Vettel 5th. That is an 18 point swing and it becomes SV +30 LH +48

Sometimes errors can gain you a large amount of points, Spa 2014 gained Rosberg +18 points when if he hadn't have hit Lewis he would have left -7. 25 point swing by causing a collision.


I don't see how it's biased. Most of it is pretty straightforward.
For Hamilton, I give him Bottas' finishing position in Russia and Monaco, but not better. Assuming a Hamilton that doesn't underperform should definitely be able to accomplish what Bottas does, that is not a stretch. And I give him the win in Brazil, because frankly I can't see him do anything other than pole and win if he doesn't crash.
Same for Seb, I give him the win in Baku and Singapore.


I'm not saying Mexico wasn't Seb's fault. I'm saying that his mistake wasn't detrimental for his championship bid. With collision: gained 10 points. Without collision: would have probably gained 7 or 10 points. His mistake gave a positive effect on the standings, or neutral at worst.


I agree with everything but Mexico.

Vettel had already taken himself out before he hit Hamilton. At that point Hamilton would be 1st/2nd and Vettel 3rd-5th.

Vettel had a net gain from his collisions in Mexico.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21002
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
You predicted they would collide in Mexico and were correct because they did. But you have a 50% chance of being right there, so I don't think you can use that as evidence of any science behind your calculations.

I don't believe you can use past contact as evidence of future conduct, since every race (and corner) is different. There are too many variables, from car positions relative to each other, other players in the mix, distance to 1st corner, angle of corner etc. I don't agree that two drivers making contact in e.g. Canada increases the probability that they will do so again in e.g. Brazil.


This is not how statistics work.

The available outcomes are;
1) collision
2) no collision

There is not a 50% chance of each outcome (being right)

The available outcomes of winning the lottery are;
1) win jackpot
2) don't win jackpot

There is not a 50% chance of each outcome

Furthermore, I did not predict the collision in Mexico. I attributed a probability to an outcome. I stated there was a 30-40% chance of a colliision in Mexico. So I was saying it was more likely they wouldn't collide.

If a weatherman says there is a 10% chance it will rain and it does rain. He did not predict rain, he was actually saying there was a 90% chance it wouldn't rain and it did. He got it completely wrong.

The second part of your comment I agree with, you can not predict. That is why you use probability ranges. A prediction would be "they will crash", a probability range is completely different. We know for certain that percentage lies somewhere between 1 and 99%. Then you can start to examine the factors to attribute a probability.

This is how all probability works and whilst you can always say "you never know what would happen in each individual case" that doesn't render probability meaningless. Probabilities are used to decide nearly all major government and individual decisions.

I'm not writing a mathematical thesis, though. Point is saying two drivers may come together at the start isn't down to any clairvoyancy, especially when you know that both of them are reasonably desperate for a win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 701
Location: UK
Zoue wrote:
I'm not writing a mathematical thesis, though. Point is saying two drivers may come together at the start isn't down to any clairvoyancy, especially when you know that both of them are reasonably desperate for a win.


Really depends on the two drivers though as to whether they collide, LH with Alonso or Button then a collision is unlikely. LH with Vettel outside of the first 3 laps also unlikely, but ask the same question on lap 1 then there is a higher chance of a retirement.

Personally I think some drivers are more prone to collide than others but whether they are doing it on purpose is MUCH less clear. Some drivers simply put their car in situations where the chances of contact are higher. Are they better or worse drivers for doing that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 7:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
F1_Ernie wrote:
mds wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Bottas got a better start, seen it so many times now.


Maybe once more then. Vettel gets away just as fast, Merc power then kicks in.

Quote:
I just don't understand how people just presume one driver would win because the other did, sometimes they can be beaten fair and square.


Uh, yes, of course they can. Isn't that the whole point? The car won so Hamilton left a bunch of points on the table.


Better start and slipstream done more than power. Had this discussion a while back. Doesn't mean Hamilton would do the same start.

The car won because of turn 1 not because it was the fastest car. If Hamilton doesn't make turn 1 winning he doesn't win.
If Bottas or Kimi made a certain amount of races 1st the chances are they would win the majority of them races if it's a normal 1 stopper. Nothing to do with having the faster car.

Also Bottas can be better at certain tracks, same happened with Rosberg.

Anyway all I was saying there was no guarantee.


I love how anybody that claims Mercedes power for the start in Russia always neglects to mention Bottas sitting in the slipstream for 6-7 seconds and once he pulls out of his his speed advantage is minimal.

Furthermore, when has Mercedes power off the line been a thing? Any other races that has been a factor? I haven't seen it. The cars have been pretty equal off the line and the slipstream affect is ridiculous this year with this draggy huge tyre'd monsters.

Bottas did the exact same thing to Hamilton from P3 in Spain, slightly better start, huge slipstream and would have powered by if he had room and it was a long long run to t1 like Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS2BUVrDNTI

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
Bottas had 4 kph on Vettel at Sochi which helped him overtake at the start. That is a fact.

If you want to see what happens when two cars have equal top speed at Sochi? In both 2014 and 2015, one Mercedes driver was in the slipstream of the other at the start. Neither Nico or Lewis drove completely past each other. They only got alongside.

The idea that a driver can drive completely past another driver (like Bottas was completely ahead of Vettel before the braking zone at Sochi) purely thanks to slipstream is complete nonsense and a fantasy. You need a top speed advantage to do that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
KingVoid wrote:
Bottas had 4 kph on Vettel at Sochi which helped him overtake at the start. That is a fact.

If you want to see what happens when two cars have equal top speed at Sochi? In both 2014 and 2015, one Mercedes driver was in the slipstream of the other at the start. Neither Nico or Lewis drove completely past each other. They only got alongside.

The idea that a driver can drive completely past another driver (like Bottas was completely ahead of Vettel before the braking zone at Sochi) purely thanks to slipstream is complete nonsense and a fantasy. You need a top speed advantage to do that.

Yes, Bottas had a 3.2 kpmh speed advantage on that part of the track. I didn't say he didn't have a speed advantage, I disputed it was entirely down to engine power. Firstly 3.2 kmph is minimal and can be explained by setup, the Ferrari's were quicker all race and weekend in S3, the twisty high down force section.

Bottas simply got a slightly better start, a good slipstream and used his tiny straight line speed advantage and the huge run to T1 to get by. As you said yourself, the pole sitter usually comes under some attack into T1 in Russia and with these draggier cars it was going to happen even more this year.

Vettel drove straight by Hamilton in Spain, he just got a slightly better start (2nd phase) the same as he did to Bottas in Brazil. Again in the 2nd phase of the start.

If you watch the Bottas onboard in Russia, the overtake is set up when the car is going about 130-160 kmph, the 2nd phase of the start is when he reels in Vettel - so top speed doesn't even really have that much to do with it - although it helps once he pulls out the slipstream to keep his momentum.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
Bottas had a top speed advantage of 3.8 kph over Vettel; or about 1.2%. Over a stretch of 500 meters, that kind of speed advantage will pull you about 5 meters ahead. In other words, an entire car length.

Here, Bottas is fully alongside Vettel and they are beyond the pitlane exit:

Image

At this point, your start is pretty much irrelevant (unless there is a big difference, which there was not in the case of Vettel and Bottas).

Now exactly 3.0 seconds later, Bottas is already fully ahead of Vettel and cuts off the inside line.

Image

They have covered less than 250 meters compared to the previous picture but Bottas gained about 6 meters on Vettel. How can anyone with a straight face deny that this is not thanks to engine power?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2900
KingVoid wrote:
Bottas had a top speed advantage of 3.8 kph over Vettel; or about 1.2%. Over a stretch of 500 meters, that kind of speed advantage will pull you about 5 meters ahead. In other words, an entire car length.

Here, Bottas is fully alongside Vettel and they are beyond the pitlane exit:

Image

At this point, your start is pretty much irrelevant (unless there is a big difference, which there was not in the case of Vettel and Bottas).

Now exactly 3.0 seconds later, Bottas is already fully ahead of Vettel and cuts off the inside line.

Image

They have covered less than 250 meters compared to the previous picture but Bottas gained about 6 meters on Vettel. How can anyone with a straight face deny that this is not thanks to engine power?


3.8kph is virtually nothing. If you get hit by a car going 3.8kph you won't break anything.
Yes, Mercedes has slightly more top end power than Ferrari, but that pass in Sochi was mainly due to the slipstream.
Ferrari has beaten Merc off the line quite often this year too, actually more often than not, to be honest. That to me, says their power unit may be better than the Merc off the line, superior in midrange power maybe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4553
Location: Michigan, USA
kleefton wrote:
Ferrari has beaten Merc off the line quite often this year too, actually more often than not, to be honest. That to me, says their power unit may be better than the Merc off the line, superior in midrange power maybe.

It says to me that their clutch system is better, which we've known for a while.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

And yet Vettel had 3.8kph higher top end speed at Barcelona...

What you seem not to realize is that top speed isn't primarily a product of the engine. It's mostly a product of the setup of the car. Want more top end speed? Run less downforce. Simple.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
It's a product of both. There's a reason to why Red Bull feel disadvantaged by their less powerful engine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1702
KingVoid wrote:
It's a product of both. There's a reason to why Red Bull feel disadvantaged by their less powerful engine.


Of course it is, the point people are making is you have no idea how much of both in any single instance. How many times did we see Manor top the speed charts? How often did we see Williams higher then the works Mercedes team, despite the Merc having additional modes available?

It could be down to power. Or it could be that Merc went with a package which had less drag. Every team is in a constant drag vs downforce trade-off, and they bring slightly different ideas to each weekend.

Additionally, I think I've seen some charts from the first half of the season which showed Ferrari appeared to have a slightly better engine going through much of the speed range and its only when it gets to the very top end that Merc's advantage kicks in. I'm still not sure what this is based on (how can they accurately remove the potential impact due to the overall car package), but this would support your Merc's top-end speed advantage. What I would say though is that your calculation of x% advantage would need to account for the engine performance as it reaches that top speed too. We could see, for example, the Ferrari gain 5 metres as it reaches top speed before the Merc takes the exact same 5 metres back once they both peak.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 718
Ennis wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
It's a product of both. There's a reason to why Red Bull feel disadvantaged by their less powerful engine.


Of course it is, the point people are making is you have no idea how much of both in any single instance. How many times did we see Manor top the speed charts? How often did we see Williams higher then the works Mercedes team, despite the Merc having additional modes available?

It could be down to power. Or it could be that Merc went with a package which had less drag. Every team is in a constant drag vs downforce trade-off, and they bring slightly different ideas to each weekend.

Additionally, I think I've seen some charts from the first half of the season which showed Ferrari appeared to have a slightly better engine going through much of the speed range and its only when it gets to the very top end that Merc's advantage kicks in. I'm still not sure what this is based on (how can they accurately remove the potential impact due to the overall car package), but this would support your Merc's top-end speed advantage. What I would say though is that your calculation of x% advantage would need to account for the engine performance as it reaches that top speed too. We could see, for example, the Ferrari gain 5 metres as it reaches top speed before the Merc takes the exact same 5 metres back once they both peak.


But this is old news, FIA banned Ferrari oil burning solution, but never could ban Mercedes oil burning, after that engine wise it was game over 2017.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
KingVoid wrote:
Bottas had 4 kph on Vettel at Sochi which helped him overtake at the start. That is a fact.

If you want to see what happens when two cars have equal top speed at Sochi? In both 2014 and 2015, one Mercedes driver was in the slipstream of the other at the start. Neither Nico or Lewis drove completely past each other. They only got alongside.

The idea that a driver can drive completely past another driver (like Bottas was completely ahead of Vettel before the braking zone at Sochi) purely thanks to slipstream is complete nonsense and a fantasy. You need a top speed advantage to do that.

The Mercedes is designed to be faster in a straight line than the Ferrari, the Ferrari design gives it more down force but also more drag that's the pay back you get with the high rake design.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
King> You are yet to address if it was setup? Vettel had 3-4 Kmph on the Mercedes in Spain. I guess you would attribute that one to setup?

Also if a car is 3.8 kmph faster at the top end does not mean it is that amount faster through the lower ranges, in fact that is not the case at all. It will only have that advantage at the very end. Bottas gets Vettel during the accleration phase, well before top end.

Also if a car is capable of 300 kmph in normal conditions and 310 in the slipstream. The moment they pull out of the slipstream, they car still holds 310 momentarily and due to momentum it will gradually fall but in the Bottas/Vettel scenario (length of straight) the car behind will still have 5-6 kmph advantage carried from the slipstream by the end of the straight - the car doesn't stop dead when it pulls out the slipstream.

Ferrari and Red Bull run a lot more rake, this is a design feature that reduces top speed but raises downforce.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1702
pokerman wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.


I actually enjoy your posts my good man, but your way of replying to threads gives me a headache. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5377
Ennis wrote:
pokerman wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.


I actually enjoy your posts my good man, but your way of replying to threads gives me a headache. :D


I totally agree! Plus the answer with questions thing. That's my favourite!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2900
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Ferrari has beaten Merc off the line quite often this year too, actually more often than not, to be honest. That to me, says their power unit may be better than the Merc off the line, superior in midrange power maybe.

It says to me that their clutch system is better, which we've known for a while.

Which we have been speculating for a while you mean.
And thats all im doing too; speculating.
Moreover the clutch system doesnt explain why ferrari is so much better out of slow corners. A difference in the powerband might explain that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21002
kleefton wrote:
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Ferrari has beaten Merc off the line quite often this year too, actually more often than not, to be honest. That to me, says their power unit may be better than the Merc off the line, superior in midrange power maybe.

It says to me that their clutch system is better, which we've known for a while.

Which we have been speculating for a while you mean.
And thats all im doing too; speculating.
Moreover the clutch system doesnt explain why ferrari is so much better out of slow corners. A difference in the powerband might explain that.

traction? I'm no engineer so at the risk of being shot down in flames big time but isn't that also a product of chassis/suspension?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
Aside from the driver, good starts are a product of (in no particular order) ;

- clutch
- engine power
- engine drive-ability
- weight distribution
- centre of gravity
- steering wheel lever design
- dirty side/ clean side of grid
- suspension set up
- ERS battery boost
- downforce (for the second phase of the start, not so important 0-100kmph)

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Siao7 wrote:
Ennis wrote:
pokerman wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.


I actually enjoy your posts my good man, but your way of replying to threads gives me a headache. :D


I totally agree! Plus the answer with questions thing. That's my favourite!

I fail to see what was wrong with my post. :)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
pokerman wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.

Mercedes have almost always been better than Ferrari in a straight line this year. This is an inherit disadvantage Vettel has had to deal with, regardless of whether its because of setup or PU.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3617
Its both. Mercedes have a bit more power and inherently a bit less drag courtesy of the LWB.

Set up can add a bit more but Ferrari would have to take more off to compete in straight line speed which can affect tyre performance (Monza) or electrical recovery (Baku) if they don't get it right. Before Baku they had a blown axle to reduce drag on straights and an extra oil tank to compensate but they were taken away from them.

Its just better for them now to put up with Spa like levels and put up with the lack of top end speed. If Mercedes switch concept to the SWB then they'll have the same balancing act to do and they'll match up a bit more in the top end.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 1743
KingVoid wrote:
pokerman wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.

Mercedes have almost always been better than Ferrari in a straight line this year. This is an inherit disadvantage Vettel has had to deal with, regardless of whether its because of setup or PU.


Vettel can't choose his setup?!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
KingVoid wrote:
pokerman wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Hamilton had 4.0 kph on Vettel at Spa. Do you remember what happened when Vettel pulled out of the slipstream?

3.8 kph is clearly makes a significant difference in F1, to deny this is idiotic.

It maybe idiotic not to realise that the Mercedes was set up to be fast on the straight at Spa, also Hamilton was able to override the electrical store to extend it's usage against Vettel something that you have been told before but wait a few weeks and then start peddling all this again.

Mercedes have almost always been better than Ferrari in a straight line this year. This is an inherit disadvantage Vettel has had to deal with, regardless of whether its because of setup or PU.

Well that's not something that I have taken notice of I tend to leave things like that to other people, however it's a fact that high rake leads to more down force but less top speed, that's something that you seem to like to gloss over, Ferrari should have all the advantages but no disadvantages, that's how it comes across, it's the reason for instance why the Ferrari can follow cars much better than the Mercedes, it has better down force.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Lotus49 wrote:
Its both. Mercedes have a bit more power and inherently a bit less drag courtesy of the LWB.

Set up can add a bit more but Ferrari would have to take more off to compete in straight line speed which can affect tyre performance (Monza) or electrical recovery (Baku) if they don't get it right. Before Baku they had a blown axle to reduce drag on straights and an extra oil tank to compensate but they were taken away from them.

Its just better for them now to put up with Spa like levels and put up with the lack of top end speed. If Mercedes switch concept to the SWB then they'll have the same balancing act to do and they'll match up a bit more in the top end.

Still after you've said all that it's a fact that Mercedes went with a low down force set up at Spa so that like for like comparison is pointless.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1702
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


You can't have it both ways though. If it is a disadvantage for his top speed, its his advantage through corners, following cars, and I assume to overall lap time (otherwise Ferrari would go with a lower downforce setup). It's like saying that the Merc was at an inherent disadvantage to the Manor, because the Manor always topped the speed charts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 1743
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21002
davidheath461 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?

setup?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
Zoue wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?

setup?


Indeed. Setup.

Not directed at you Zoue, but...

If Ferrari is quicker on straights - Setup
If Mercedes is quicker on straights - Engine power

That seems to be the theme for some in here.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1725
davidheath461 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?

Because top speed is not consistent, since setups aren't consistent from weekend to weekend?

Vettel has generally had less top speed than Hamilton this season, but it hasn't been consistent from circuit to circuit. How is that so hard to understand?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21002
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?

setup?


Indeed. Setup.

Not directed at you Zoue, but...

If Ferrari is quicker on straights - Setup
If Mercedes is quicker on straights - Engine power

That seems to be the theme for some in here.

Understood. But if the general trend shows e.g. Mercedes faster on the straights and an outlier shows Ferrari, then doesn't that suggest that there's something specific to that circuit?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
We will never know for sure the influence of setup, engine power and design philosophy.

One thing we do know for certain is that the high rake philosophy is higher drag and therefore all other things equal will give a lower top speed. Ferrari is high rake compared to Mercedes and personally the top speed advantage is quite negligible for me. 3-4 kmph is nothing. In days gone by, when we spoke about top speed advantage and engine power it was in the 8-12 kmph range.

Once you factor in the Ferrari's strength, down force, traction etc. It would not surprise me if the Ferrari on an average straight - especially one that has a slower corner before it - is achieving a slightly higher or at least equalling the speed of the Mercedes for the majority of the straight. It is only once we approach V-max (drag squares with speed, so once you get near the top end, air is like syrup and lower downforce really plays a part) the Mercedes takes over.


Edit - found a video that shows this...

Right at the start, Vettel is doing 270. Hamilton 261 (+9)

As we cross the start finish line (+3). Note finish line is just over halfway down the straight. So Vettel has carried more speed for over half the straight.

By the end of the straight it is equal.

The same happens on the exit of turn 2, Hamilton behind the whole time just matches Vettel by the end of the straight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fp5N3ICc1k

Interesting though, Mercedes has the advantage on high speed corners on this and when Hamilton exits the high speed corners onto straights he has a +3/4 kmph advantage all from better exits. When he exits his speed is more like +7/8 kmph as he goes onto the main back straight.

This is what is going on nearly every weekend, but normally it would be Ferrari only 3-4 kmph for the first third or half of the straight and by the end it would be 3-4 kmph behind.

This is why just posted top speed figures is miss leading and is telling a very small part of the story (the speed at the very end of straights) and ignores the 85-90% of the straight that went before. Top speed readers are always placed at the ends of straights.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3617
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Its both. Mercedes have a bit more power and inherently a bit less drag courtesy of the LWB.

Set up can add a bit more but Ferrari would have to take more off to compete in straight line speed which can affect tyre performance (Monza) or electrical recovery (Baku) if they don't get it right. Before Baku they had a blown axle to reduce drag on straights and an extra oil tank to compensate but they were taken away from them.

Its just better for them now to put up with Spa like levels and put up with the lack of top end speed. If Mercedes switch concept to the SWB then they'll have the same balancing act to do and they'll match up a bit more in the top end.

Still after you've said all that it's a fact that Mercedes went with a low down force set up at Spa so that like for like comparison is pointless.


All like for like comparisons are pointless, they are two different concepts.

Ferrari's low d/f config will still be draggier than Mercedes low d/f config because of the nature of their cars design (LWB-Low rake Vs SWB-Higher Rake) so they can either strip even more off than Mercedes do to compensate and risk losing tyre performance over the whole lap which is pointless or simply put up with it being behind in top end performance.

If Mercedes get the perfect low d/f package, right on the brink of losing tyre performance, then there's literally nothing Ferrari can do to match top end speed without losing tyre performance. (Legally anyway, they had two things to combat it but they lost them in Baku).

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3617
davidheath461 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?


Flexi floor, Blown axle cutting drag and extra oil tank to burn more.

When they had those they could run the same levels of wing as Mercedes and not lose top end grunt through their inherently draggier car. They could even run more and match them, I think it was Oz where they ran so much more cooling than Mercedes but still matched them in top end grunt but not 100% sure.

Baku directives nipped all that in the bud.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2900
lamo wrote:
We will never know for sure the influence of setup, engine power and design philosophy.

One thing we do know for certain is that the high rake philosophy is higher drag and therefore all other things equal will give a lower top speed. Ferrari is high rake compared to Mercedes and personally the top speed advantage is quite negligible for me. 3-4 kmph is nothing. In days gone by, when we spoke about top speed advantage and engine power it was in the 8-12 kmph range.

Once you factor in the Ferrari's strength, down force, traction etc. It would not surprise me if the Ferrari on an average straight - especially one that has a slower corner before it - is achieving a slightly higher or at least equalling the speed of the Mercedes for the majority of the straight. It is only once we approach V-max (drag squares with speed, so once you get near the top end, air is like syrup and lower downforce really plays a part) the Mercedes takes over.


Edit - found a video that shows this...

Right at the start, Vettel is doing 270. Hamilton 261 (+9)

As we cross the start finish line (+3). Note finish line is just over halfway down the straight. So Vettel has carried more speed for over half the straight.

By the end of the straight it is equal.

The same happens on the exit of turn 2, Hamilton behind the whole time just matches Vettel by the end of the straight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fp5N3ICc1k

Interesting though, Mercedes has the advantage on high speed corners on this and when Hamilton exits the high speed corners onto straights he has a +3/4 kmph advantage all from better exits. When he exits his speed is more like +7/8 kmph as he goes onto the main back straight.

This is what is going on nearly every weekend, but normally it would be Ferrari only 3-4 kmph for the first third or half of the straight and by the end it would be 3-4 kmph behind.

This is why just posted top speed figures is miss leading and is telling a very small part of the story (the speed at the very end of straights) and ignores the 85-90% of the straight that went before. Top speed readers are always placed at the ends of straights.


Yes, this is something that has been consistent all year. There was another video analysis comparing Merc vs Ferrari in Hungary and it basically showed what you just said; Ferrari is stronger at lower speeds but Merc comes back at the higher speeds.

Abu Dhabi should be very interesting, as I don' tthink the straights are long enough for Merc to show its straight line advantage, and the last sector is where Ferrari should definitely be better. I know everyone is expecting Hamilton to smash it with his newer engine, but I think Ferrari will get another pole. Redbull should be very strong there too, Lewis will be really strong in the race though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 1743
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Vettel can't choose his setup?!

Ferrari is inherently a draggy car, and the high downforce package is simply better than the low downforce package.


Then why did Vettel have a higher top speed at Barcelona compared to Hamilton?

Because top speed is not consistent, since setups aren't consistent from weekend to weekend?

Vettel has generally had less top speed than Hamilton this season, but it hasn't been consistent from circuit to circuit. How is that so hard to understand?


It's not difficult to understand, but it contradicts the idea that Ferrari is an inherently draggy car. Clearly they can take drag off the car to the point that they have a higher top speed at Mercedes (as was demonstrated in Barcelona).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: F1 MERCENARY, slide and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group