planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Dec 16, 2018 2:36 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 974
M44 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Clarky wrote:
What was all this smoking from the Ferrari's when starting?

Seems to happen to all Ferrari engines and is most likely due to the rule changes around oil burning. There's also a little smoke when they're out on track and apparently their fuel consumption is pretty bad so it looks like they've screwed up the engine.

Yeah I'm guessing there is a relationship between not being able to burn that oil anymore and reports of poor fuel consumption, maybe Ferrari are more affected by the restrictions on oil burning than Mercedes?


They are chucking out a considerable amount of oil from the breather pipes as well. Ted Kravitz reported that Vettel was quite grumpy when questioned about there long-run pace on Thursday.


Wasnt this the oil burn issue enforced last year already (sometime after the winter break)?. I remember merc brought out there last engine just before the rule could take effect while ferrari still did not use the 4th PU that needed to comply.
And should they not be catching the oil rather than releasing it to atmosphere


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7776
KingVoid wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/closer-look-preseason-f1-tests

Mark Hughes hypothesises that the Ferrari does indeed have fuel consumption issues, and that it would tally with their long stint pace with what appeared to be 0 tyre degradation over the stint. He's not the first journo to wheel out the 'White SF70H' line when discussing the Haas either. If the Haas is suddenly as quick as it's times were suggesting (and tbh, I doubt it will be) then I expect a few irate team principals having words about just how close the collaboration has been with Ferrari this year.

I have to ask: why does Hughes automatically assume that the reason to why Vettel drove at a delta pace in testing was because he has to save fuel? What if they are just sandbagging?

On his 17.1 lap (the fastest time in testing), Vettel lifted over the line.

It could also be a combination of both. Ferrari need to save more fuel but they are also sandbagging a bit.

Good points.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:41 pm
Posts: 381
AravJ wrote:
M44 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Clarky wrote:
What was all this smoking from the Ferrari's when starting?

Seems to happen to all Ferrari engines and is most likely due to the rule changes around oil burning. There's also a little smoke when they're out on track and apparently their fuel consumption is pretty bad so it looks like they've screwed up the engine.

Yeah I'm guessing there is a relationship between not being able to burn that oil anymore and reports of poor fuel consumption, maybe Ferrari are more affected by the restrictions on oil burning than Mercedes?


They are chucking out a considerable amount of oil from the breather pipes as well. Ted Kravitz reported that Vettel was quite grumpy when questioned about there long-run pace on Thursday.


Wasnt this the oil burn issue enforced last year already (sometime after the winter break)?. I remember merc brought out there last engine just before the rule could take effect while ferrari still did not use the 4th PU that needed to comply.
And should they not be catching the oil rather than releasing it to atmosphere


The new regulation for this year stipulates the breather pipe needs to exit the rear of the car by the monkey-seat area. There is speculation that this was being used by most teams in years past to recirculate the oil that is now exiting the breather pipes back into the combustion process.

It just seems that maybe Mercedes and to an extent Renault (as they were late to the oil burning), have got it figured more than Ferrari.

As to them chucking out oil residue onto track, its very much a problem I would imagine. Imagine following a Ferrari down a straight and getting your visor covered in residue :uhoh:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28712
AravJ wrote:
M44 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Clarky wrote:
What was all this smoking from the Ferrari's when starting?

Seems to happen to all Ferrari engines and is most likely due to the rule changes around oil burning. There's also a little smoke when they're out on track and apparently their fuel consumption is pretty bad so it looks like they've screwed up the engine.

Yeah I'm guessing there is a relationship between not being able to burn that oil anymore and reports of poor fuel consumption, maybe Ferrari are more affected by the restrictions on oil burning than Mercedes?


They are chucking out a considerable amount of oil from the breather pipes as well. Ted Kravitz reported that Vettel was quite grumpy when questioned about there long-run pace on Thursday.


Wasnt this the oil burn issue enforced last year already (sometime after the winter break)?. I remember merc brought out there last engine just before the rule could take effect while ferrari still did not use the 4th PU that needed to comply.
And should they not be catching the oil rather than releasing it to atmosphere

No I believe this is a new rule that's been brought out that prevents the breather pipe from the engine to be routed into the airbox were the waste gases that build up in the engine are then burnt within the engine, this I believe is normal practice in road car engines and is done in part to stop these harmful gases to be vented into the atmosphere.

However I guess that this system has been used as a way of carrying the oil into the combustion system of the engines so to prevent this the FIA has decreed that the breather pipes have to be vented into the atmosphere which I'm guessing is not exactly healthy though?

In regards to Ferrari I would be guessing that they found some of their performance gains through this system and maybe the rule change came after the new engine was designed, so now we see the engine spewing out oil and rumours of the engine struggling with fuel efficiency.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 9:48 pm
Posts: 379
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28712
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?

It certainly looks like it might be a chink in their armour something that perhaps they might have to manage in the races?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


Given that they have among the most agressive tyre selection for Melbourne, I think they're feeling confident enough:

Image

Source: http://www.f1network.net/main/s107/st196636.htm

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 703
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28712
Laz_T800 wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.

When were the tyres chosen, before or after winter testing?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 703
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.

When were the tyres chosen, before or after winter testing?


Can't say for sure but i'd imagine after they'd been allowed to test. The compounds are different so it would be bizarre to expect them to choose having never run them on the cars.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5620
I'm shocked Hamilton only chose to bring a single set of softs. That has been his tire of choice these last 4 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:04 am
Posts: 306
sandman1347 wrote:
I'm shocked Hamilton only chose to bring a single set of softs. That has been his tire of choice these last 4 years.


I would imagine it was b/c he was cought out by vettel last year and doesnt want a repeat of that. :blush:

_________________
- Mod Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 9:48 pm
Posts: 379
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.

When were the tyres chosen, before or after winter testing?


Tires for non-European races are chosen 14 weeks before the race, so way before testing. They didn't have a clue at that time.

Edit: Well, they did the Abu Dhabi tire test obviously, don't know how final the compounds were there though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28712
Llotyhy wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.

When were the tyres chosen, before or after winter testing?


Tires for non-European races are chosen 14 weeks before the race, so way before testing. They didn't have a clue at that time.

Edit: Well, they did the Abu Dhabi tire test obviously, don't know how final the compounds were there though.

So they are a bit in the dark?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 9:48 pm
Posts: 379
pokerman wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
What are you guys making of the reports that the Mercedes is insanely tough on the tires, even the harder compounds?


The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.

When were the tyres chosen, before or after winter testing?


Tires for non-European races are chosen 14 weeks before the race, so way before testing. They didn't have a clue at that time.

Edit: Well, they did the Abu Dhabi tire test obviously, don't know how final the compounds were there though.

So they are a bit in the dark?


If I understand the info correctly, yes. What's also weird is that Mercedes didn't even test the softer tires and already had problems with the mediums. Maybe it's all a storm in a tea cup or even a red herring, but I found it interesting nonetheless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2956
Location: UK
sandman1347 wrote:
I'm shocked Hamilton only chose to bring a single set of softs. That has been his tire of choice these last 4 years.

Remember the tyre compounds have all gone a step softer this year. Last year's 'soft' is now the 'medium'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28712
Llotyhy wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Llotyhy wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
The only thing I've seen mentioned was that they had some blistering on the softer tyre runs. The medium runs were really consistent with long stints and very little time drop off?
They've gone pretty aggressively towards the Ultra-soft for Melbourne which doesn't suggest they themselves believe they have a problem.

When were the tyres chosen, before or after winter testing?


Tires for non-European races are chosen 14 weeks before the race, so way before testing. They didn't have a clue at that time.

Edit: Well, they did the Abu Dhabi tire test obviously, don't know how final the compounds were there though.

So they are a bit in the dark?


If I understand the info correctly, yes. What's also weird is that Mercedes didn't even test the softer tires and already had problems with the mediums. Maybe it's all a storm in a tea cup or even a red herring, but I found it interesting nonetheless.

I heard them having problems with the softs but not the mediums, it's the medium tyre running that basically has seen everyone saying that Mercedes are the favourites.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28712
j man wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I'm shocked Hamilton only chose to bring a single set of softs. That has been his tire of choice these last 4 years.

Remember the tyre compounds have all gone a step softer this year. Last year's 'soft' is now the 'medium'.

That actually makes even less sense for Hamilton his race tyres are 2 steps softer than the softs of last year.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:41 pm
Posts: 381
Where is this talk of Mercedes being harder on the softer compounds from? On the last development diary with Sky - they reported that it was kind to its tyres and far easier to set up to get the tyres working.

They also had minimal deg on there long runs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5017
M44 wrote:
Where is this talk of Mercedes being harder on the softer compounds from? On the last development diary with Sky - they reported that it was kind to its tyres and far easier to set up to get the tyres working.

They also had minimal deg on there long runs.


Some Bottas quotes I believe and some pics of his SS looking a bit of a mess. They did look great on the mediums though yeah.

_________________
"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 Mar 13, 2018 11:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5017
"The biggest challenge we faced today was to get the tyres working properly on this new track surface,” Hamilton agreed. “The medium tyre was difficult to get working; the soft tyre is better for warm-up, but suffered with degradation. We are learning all the time.

“It's been a good day. We've got through everything we needed and put good mileage on the car - it's been productive.”




Can't find the Bottas ones from later in the week, they were maybe to his home press I'm not sure but those are Lewis's from here...

https://www.crash.net/f1/news/891002/1/ ... s-mercedes

_________________
"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 Mar 13, 2018 11:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:41 pm
Posts: 381
Lotus49 wrote:
"The biggest challenge we faced today was to get the tyres working properly on this new track surface,” Hamilton agreed. “The medium tyre was difficult to get working; the soft tyre is better for warm-up, but suffered with degradation. We are learning all the time.

“It's been a good day. We've got through everything we needed and put good mileage on the car - it's been productive.”




Can't find the Bottas ones from later in the week, they were maybe to his home press I'm not sure but those are Lewis's from here...

https://www.crash.net/f1/news/891002/1/ ... s-mercedes


Thankyou :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6960
Location: Mumbai, India
Vettel feels rival teams are using blistering as a way to influence Pirelli to get tyres to races that might suit them:
https://www.racefans.net/2018/03/13/tyre-blisters-shows-f1-teams-are-trying-to-influence-pirelli-vettel/

Image
Source - http://www.imgur.com

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:34 pm
Posts: 35
Location: USA
I think there are far too many tyre compounds. It's gotten ridiculous.

There should be:
Wet
Intermediate
Hard
Soft

_________________
"IF is a very long word in Formula One; in fact, IF is F1 spelled backwards." - Murray Walker


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7543
Super Aguri Fun Time wrote:
I think there are far too many tyre compounds. It's gotten ridiculous.

There should be:
Wet
Intermediate
Hard
Soft

I'd add medium so that there are 3 compounds per race but I agree if they're going to only bring 3 compounds to each weekend why not just change the compound itself but keep the names hard-medium-soft for the sake of simplicity.

We're going to have hypersoft, ultrasoft and supersoft as the 3 compounds for a race this year, does that not strike anyone else as being a bit silly and tacky? Not to mention completely nonsensical, with S-M-H even someone with no previous knowledge of the sport can tell the difference between the tyres just from the name and therefore which will be faster. How is anyone supposed to know what order SS-HS-US are without already knowing it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Super Aguri Fun Time wrote:
I think there are far too many tyre compounds. It's gotten ridiculous.

There should be:
Wet
Intermediate
Hard
Soft

I'd add medium so that there are 3 compounds per race but I agree if they're going to only bring 3 compounds to each weekend why not just change the compound itself but keep the names hard-medium-soft for the sake of simplicity.


This is exactly what I mentioned in the PF1 Whatsapp chat group. They can make as many compounds as they want in function of the track (or restrict it to the ones they have now, to get the teams familiar with them), choose 3 compunds that make sense for the track they're going to and label them hard, medium soft.

For the casual viewer, this makes sense.
For the viewer that wants to know more, they can always give more information about which compounds are brought exactly.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 845
Location: India
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ben3Yg9M72w

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM9-GK3MeLI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 602
mds wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Super Aguri Fun Time wrote:
I think there are far too many tyre compounds. It's gotten ridiculous.

There should be:
Wet
Intermediate
Hard
Soft

I'd add medium so that there are 3 compounds per race but I agree if they're going to only bring 3 compounds to each weekend why not just change the compound itself but keep the names hard-medium-soft for the sake of simplicity.


This is exactly what I mentioned in the PF1 Whatsapp chat group. They can make as many compounds as they want in function of the track (or restrict it to the ones they have now, to get the teams familiar with them), choose 3 compunds that make sense for the track they're going to and label them hard, medium soft.

For the casual viewer, this makes sense.
For the viewer that wants to know more, they can always give more information about which compounds are brought exactly.

I disagree. Think it is great that they have more flexibility to bring appropriate tyres to each race track. Circuits like Russia were a joke and need much softer tyres than many other races. Does it really matter what they call them? The casual viewer won't be too fussed, and those who are interested will still only see 3 compounds on any given weekend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14274
WHoff78 wrote:
mds wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Super Aguri Fun Time wrote:
I think there are far too many tyre compounds. It's gotten ridiculous.

There should be:
Wet
Intermediate
Hard
Soft

I'd add medium so that there are 3 compounds per race but I agree if they're going to only bring 3 compounds to each weekend why not just change the compound itself but keep the names hard-medium-soft for the sake of simplicity.


This is exactly what I mentioned in the PF1 Whatsapp chat group. They can make as many compounds as they want in function of the track (or restrict it to the ones they have now, to get the teams familiar with them), choose 3 compunds that make sense for the track they're going to and label them hard, medium soft.

For the casual viewer, this makes sense.
For the viewer that wants to know more, they can always give more information about which compounds are brought exactly.

I disagree. Think it is great that they have more flexibility to bring appropriate tyres to each race track. Circuits like Russia were a joke and need much softer tyres than many other races. Does it really matter what they call them? The casual viewer won't be too fussed, and those who are interested will still only see 3 compounds on any given weekend.


That's not what Mds is saying. You still have all the compounds you have now, or even many more if you like, but whichever three you take to any race weekend are always called the soft, medium and hard. So the "hard" taken to Monaco will be a lot softer than the "hard" taken to Silverstone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
mikeyg123 wrote:
WHoff78 wrote:
mds wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Super Aguri Fun Time wrote:
I think there are far too many tyre compounds. It's gotten ridiculous.

There should be:
Wet
Intermediate
Hard
Soft

I'd add medium so that there are 3 compounds per race but I agree if they're going to only bring 3 compounds to each weekend why not just change the compound itself but keep the names hard-medium-soft for the sake of simplicity.


This is exactly what I mentioned in the PF1 Whatsapp chat group. They can make as many compounds as they want in function of the track (or restrict it to the ones they have now, to get the teams familiar with them), choose 3 compunds that make sense for the track they're going to and label them hard, medium soft.

For the casual viewer, this makes sense.
For the viewer that wants to know more, they can always give more information about which compounds are brought exactly.

I disagree. Think it is great that they have more flexibility to bring appropriate tyres to each race track. Circuits like Russia were a joke and need much softer tyres than many other races. Does it really matter what they call them? The casual viewer won't be too fussed, and those who are interested will still only see 3 compounds on any given weekend.


That's not what Mds is saying. You still have all the compounds you have now, or even many more if you like, but whichever three you take to any race weekend are always called the soft, medium and hard. So the "hard" taken to Monaco will be a lot softer than the "hard" taken to Silverstone.


Yes, exactly this.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5620
All the doom and gloom about a Mercedes walkover might be a bit premature. Apparently the tire-compound correction assumptions are a bit off the mark. The idea that there are bigger gaps in performance between the tires is not panning out. Toto Wolf said the following:

"What we have seen is that the steps in performance and in grip between the tyre compounds was relatively small," he said.

"Between medium and soft, soft and supersoft, supersoft and ultrasoft you could see tiny steps, between a tenth or two, sometimes no step at all.

"With some teams, like Williams, there was no step at all."

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13484 ... re-in-test


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7543
sandman1347 wrote:
All the doom and gloom about a Mercedes walkover might be a bit premature. Apparently the tire-compound correction assumptions are a bit off the mark. The idea that there are bigger gaps in performance between the tires is not panning out. Toto Wolf said the following:

"What we have seen is that the steps in performance and in grip between the tyre compounds was relatively small," he said.

"Between medium and soft, soft and supersoft, supersoft and ultrasoft you could see tiny steps, between a tenth or two, sometimes no step at all.

"With some teams, like Williams, there was no step at all."

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13484 ... re-in-test

I hope so and I did hear Ted give smaller tyre deltas to the ones we got at the end of the test.

I'm just preparing myself for the worst and that way I can't be disappointed, I think all of us doom and gloom bunch are :]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 10:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6218
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
All the doom and gloom about a Mercedes walkover might be a bit premature. Apparently the tire-compound correction assumptions are a bit off the mark. The idea that there are bigger gaps in performance between the tires is not panning out. Toto Wolf said the following:

"What we have seen is that the steps in performance and in grip between the tyre compounds was relatively small," he said.

"Between medium and soft, soft and supersoft, supersoft and ultrasoft you could see tiny steps, between a tenth or two, sometimes no step at all.

Okay, so assuming that's true - and estimating the gap as a consistent 2/10 between each compound before Hypersoft, plus double for the Hyper - here is what we'd get:

MED 0.0 | SOFT -0.2 | SS -0.4 | US -0.6 | HS - 1.0

1. Ferrari - 1:17.182 (Hypersoft) = 1:17.182 (Corrected)
2. Red Bull - 1:18.327 (Supersoft) = 1:17.727 (Corrected)
3. Haas - 1:18.360 (Supersoft) = 1:17.760 (Corrected)
4. McLaren - 1:17.784 (Hypersoft) = 1:17.784 (Corrected)
5. Mercedes - 1:18.825 (Medium) = 1:17.825 (Corrected)
6. Toro Rosso - 1:18.363 (Hypersoft) = 1:18.363 (Corrected)
7. Williams - 1:19.189 (Soft) = 1:18.389 (Corrected)
8. Force India - 1:18.967 (Hypersoft) = 1:18.967 (Corrected)
9. Renault - 1:20.042 (Medium) = 1:19.042 (Corrected)
10. Sauber - 1:19.118 (Hypersoft) = 1:19.118 (Corrected)

Those numbers are just about as dubious as the original corrections, predicting Mercedes as 5th fastest and Ferrari 6 tenths clear of the field.

The other possibility is that no-one pushed flat out except for Haas and maybe Ferrari.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 10:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2062
Ferrari dominating would be even worse than Mercedes dominating - since we would not even get a fight between teammates ....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 12:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7543
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Ferrari dominating would be even worse than Mercedes dominating - since we would not even get a fight between teammates ....

I think Ferrari dominating would be the second worst thing that could happen this year.

Either way we aren't getting a fight between teammates based in what we've seen of Bottas/Kimi so far but at least with Ferrari it would be a change in who is dominating, a miniscule improvement sure, but still one IMO. Also I can't quite separate myself from the romantic element in Ferrari winning a title after not doing so for a decade and coming so close on so many occasions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 602
mds wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
WHoff78 wrote:
mds wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
I'd add medium so that there are 3 compounds per race but I agree if they're going to only bring 3 compounds to each weekend why not just change the compound itself but keep the names hard-medium-soft for the sake of simplicity.


This is exactly what I mentioned in the PF1 Whatsapp chat group. They can make as many compounds as they want in function of the track (or restrict it to the ones they have now, to get the teams familiar with them), choose 3 compunds that make sense for the track they're going to and label them hard, medium soft.

For the casual viewer, this makes sense.
For the viewer that wants to know more, they can always give more information about which compounds are brought exactly.

I disagree. Think it is great that they have more flexibility to bring appropriate tyres to each race track. Circuits like Russia were a joke and need much softer tyres than many other races. Does it really matter what they call them? The casual viewer won't be too fussed, and those who are interested will still only see 3 compounds on any given weekend.


That's not what Mds is saying. You still have all the compounds you have now, or even many more if you like, but whichever three you take to any race weekend are always called the soft, medium and hard. So the "hard" taken to Monaco will be a lot softer than the "hard" taken to Silverstone.


Yes, exactly this.

Appreciate that, but as I went on to say, would still prefer to see right away exactly what compounds teams are on, and really don't see it causing any concern or confusion for the casual viewer, or why others would want it dumbed down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:27 pm
Posts: 169
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
All the doom and gloom about a Mercedes walkover might be a bit premature. Apparently the tire-compound correction assumptions are a bit off the mark. The idea that there are bigger gaps in performance between the tires is not panning out. Toto Wolf said the following:

"What we have seen is that the steps in performance and in grip between the tyre compounds was relatively small," he said.

"Between medium and soft, soft and supersoft, supersoft and ultrasoft you could see tiny steps, between a tenth or two, sometimes no step at all.

Okay, so assuming that's true - and estimating the gap as a consistent 2/10 between each compound before Hypersoft, plus double for the Hyper - here is what we'd get:

MED 0.0 | SOFT -0.2 | SS -0.4 | US -0.6 | HS - 1.0

1. Ferrari - 1:17.182 (Hypersoft) = 1:17.182 (Corrected)
2. Red Bull - 1:18.327 (Supersoft) = 1:17.727 (Corrected)
3. Haas - 1:18.360 (Supersoft) = 1:17.760 (Corrected)
4. McLaren - 1:17.784 (Hypersoft) = 1:17.784 (Corrected)
5. Mercedes - 1:18.825 (Medium) = 1:17.825 (Corrected)
6. Toro Rosso - 1:18.363 (Hypersoft) = 1:18.363 (Corrected)
7. Williams - 1:19.189 (Soft) = 1:18.389 (Corrected)
8. Force India - 1:18.967 (Hypersoft) = 1:18.967 (Corrected)
9. Renault - 1:20.042 (Medium) = 1:19.042 (Corrected)
10. Sauber - 1:19.118 (Hypersoft) = 1:19.118 (Corrected)

Those numbers are just about as dubious as the original corrections, predicting Mercedes as 5th fastest and Ferrari 6 tenths clear of the field.

The other possibility is that no-one pushed flat out except for Haas and maybe Ferrari.

This doesn’t explain the disparity in long run pace though, which is what spawned all the doom and gloom articles not the low fuel runs. Almost everyone has ignored those.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6218
Location: Michigan, USA
bonecrasher wrote:
This doesn’t explain the disparity in long run pace though, which is what spawned all the doom and gloom articles not the low fuel runs. Almost everyone has ignored those.

Fair enough, but why are we assuming they were flat-out on the long runs either? They could easily have been holding something in reserve, and it seems pretty likely that some teams did. The race sims that teams do in FP2 aren't perfect predictors for their race pace the very same weekend, so I don't think there's any reason to take it as gospel in pre-season testing.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:21 am
Posts: 3530
Exediron wrote:
Okay, so assuming that's true - and estimating the gap as a consistent 2/10 between each compound before Hypersoft, plus double for the Hyper - here is what we'd get:

MED 0.0 | SOFT -0.2 | SS -0.4 | US -0.6 | HS - 1.0

1. Ferrari - 1:17.182 (Hypersoft) = 1:17.182 (Corrected)
2. Red Bull - 1:18.327 (Supersoft) = 1:17.727 (Corrected)
3. Haas - 1:18.360 (Supersoft) = 1:17.760 (Corrected)
4. McLaren - 1:17.784 (Hypersoft) = 1:17.784 (Corrected)
5. Mercedes - 1:18.825 (Medium) = 1:17.825 (Corrected)
6. Toro Rosso - 1:18.363 (Hypersoft) = 1:18.363 (Corrected)
7. Williams - 1:19.189 (Soft) = 1:18.389 (Corrected)
8. Force India - 1:18.967 (Hypersoft) = 1:18.967 (Corrected)
9. Renault - 1:20.042 (Medium) = 1:19.042 (Corrected)
10. Sauber - 1:19.118 (Hypersoft) = 1:19.118 (Corrected)

Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Top times by team - Tyre corrected
Image

I figured an average of these two 'corrections' might give a more accurate picture [assuming neither Pirelli nor Mercedes called the time difference right - Pirelli to exaggerate the versatility of their tyre development, Mercedes possibly as mind games for the opposition given how they performed on harder tyres] but mainly just out of mild interest.

This is the result I came up with:

1 - Mercedes - 1:17.025
2 - Ferrari - 1:17.182
3 - Red Bull - 1:17.327
4 - Haas - 1:17.360
5 - McLaren - 1:17.784
6 - Williams - 1:17.889
7 - Renault - 1:18.242
8 - Toro Rosso - 1:18.363
9 - Force India - 1:18.967
10 - Sauber - 1:19.118

Haas and Force India seem out of place but it's not like huge performance swings have never happened before.

_________________
AlienTurnedHuman wrote:
Eurytus probably thought he was God. At least until he was banned. Which means if he was God, it makes me very scared of PF1-Mod.

Please report forum problems to us, via PM/Feedback Thread. Screenshots will also help.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6218
Location: Michigan, USA
An interesting quote from Bottas, on the subject of the Hypersoft tyre (full article on Autosport):

Quote:
Pirelli's hypersoft appeared in Abu Dhabi in the post-season test last November, and Bottas said that offered sufficient opportunity to try the new-for-2018 compound.

He agreed with Wolff that the life of the tyres made it an irrelevant one to test on in Spain, claiming "they would only last one lap" on a high-energy circuit such as Barcelona.

So if Bottas (who presumably is privy to Mercedes' tyre data) says that the Hypersoft will only last one lap, either a) Mercedes has terrible soft tyre management, or b) the Hypersoft runners were definitely not pushing, since many of those times were set on runs with multiple flying laps of similar speed.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


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: JN23 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