planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:02 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think the cars were not that far apart this weekend and it's more difficult to pick a clear cut winner than appears at first glance.

Vettel beat Bottas by less than a tenth in qualifying, so it's impossible to say what was car and what was driver. And in the race Bottas wasn't miles away. Hamilton was lacklustre at the beginning but managed to put pressure on Ricciardo at the end, so had pace: he just wasn't able to use it for much of the race. And Kimi was dropped by all of them (although I think his strategy was messed up once again). I think Mercedes have cause to be happy that their car performed as well as it did against others with upgraded PUs and should be looking forward to their own upgrades which might even propel them ahead.


Ferrari was the better car for the weekend.
hmm, I'm having a little trouble following your reasoning. Perhaps some detail might help?


Come on now, you need to be consistent. Last year you would have said Mercedes was quicker, this year you would have said Mercedes was quicker, when it's Ferrari its equal.

Ferrari get pole, Ferrari win, makes it the better car for the weekend.

There's certainly a case to be made for Ferrari being the quicker car. But circumstances count for a lot. The margin between pole and second was tiny, less than a tenth. You don't think it's possible that could be down to driver difference? Would have been a different story with two or three tenths, but 0.93s is very close. And track position was king, so that made the race

All I'm saying is it's not a slam-dunk. I also think the fact that Mercedes were so close with such an old PU should have Ferrari worried


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
F1_Ernie wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Ferrari was the better car for the weekend.

Or Hamilton didn't extract the maximum from the Mercedes?

There's two or three ways to read it, and only one of them really means that the Ferrari was better.

1) Ferrari genuinely was better, and Bottas had a very strong weekend to be so close to them.
2) Bottas being within a tenth means that an on-form Hamilton would have qualified on pole and likely won.
3) Ferrari wasn't great, but both Vettel and Bottas put in great drives to overshadow their teammates.

I'm inclined to think it was a weak performance from Hamilton, and the cars were equal. Bottas qualifying a tenth behind Vettel and finishing roughly that amount per lap behind in the end is indicative of the basic pace gap between Vettel and Bottas (if not less than); in a dominant Ferrari, Vettel would have been farther ahead. Hamilton just had a poor weekend, as evidenced by his repeated mistakes in qualifying.


But last year in the exact same scenarios it would have been called the Mercedes was faster :lol:

But last year wasn't exactly the same. Margin for pole was 0.330s. much higher than this year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 827
With a Verstappen lap, Merc would have had pole and probably won.
With a 7 race old engine Merc is right behind.
Vettel didn't dominate nearly like Merc in Spain.

This was not a race to judge the rest off the season from, IMO it's still advantage Merc, but their #1 driver didn't deliver.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7220
Ferrari were clearly the best in the race but I think Mercedes were fastest in qualifying. This is one of Hamilton's strongest tracks so I find it hard to believe he couldn't have beaten Bottas by at least a tenth if he was on form. Add to that Vettel had a brand new, upgraded, engine vs the old Mercedes ones and I think Ferrari have cause to be concerned about that qualifying.

An on form Hamilton would have probably won that race after starting on pole. Says something about how close it was that he ended up 5th.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9240
Exediron wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Ferrari was the better car for the weekend.

Or Hamilton didn't extract the maximum from the Mercedes?

There's two or three ways to read it, and only one of them really means that the Ferrari was better.

1) Ferrari genuinely was better, and Bottas had a very strong weekend to be so close to them.
2) Bottas being within a tenth means that an on-form Hamilton would have qualified on pole and likely won.
3) Ferrari wasn't great, but both Vettel and Bottas put in great drives to overshadow their teammates.

I'm inclined to think it was a weak performance from Hamilton, and the cars were equal. Bottas qualifying a tenth behind Vettel and finishing roughly that amount per lap behind in the end is indicative of the basic pace gap between Vettel and Bottas (if not less than); in a dominant Ferrari, Vettel would have been farther ahead. Hamilton just had a poor weekend, as evidenced by his repeated mistakes in qualifying.

Yeah this sums it up pretty well. Ferrari and Mercedes were equal in quali, and all three top teams were roughly equal in the race. It had all the ingredients for a great race, alas...

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Ferrari have some reason to be optimistic. After some mishaps in China and Baku, and then being dominated in Spain, things looked like Mercedes were gaining an easy upper hand. But Canada, even when Mercedes didn't bring their upgrades, shows Ferrari are still there.

Question is what Mercedes will have to do to get their new spec PU as reliable as they want it - possibly turning back the upgrades in power a bit and maybe it won't bring a huge deal of performance? We will have to see. But there was a time when even an old Mercedes PU would have dominated at Canada. And the silver lining of course for Ferrari is that they probably never counted to win in Canada so that's a good bit of the "bad luck" points recovered.

Not sure what to expect from France but then it'll be interesting to see if they can stop Mercedes' perfect winning record (since 2014) in the Austria-Great Britain duo of races. If they can do that, then the title fight should extend to the end of the season.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1505
What the upgrade brought for Ferrari was something they have lacked all season and that is fuel efficiency hence they were the only team out of the front runners not fuel saving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Have to think of one thing though that I didn't detail enough in my previous post:
- Mercedes they weren't feeling confident yet concerning the reliability of their new PU spec
- Hamilton's Canada unit seems to really be end of life

From the second point follows that in France they will have no choice other than give him a new PU.
But what if they are still not satisfied with it? Will they risk it and give him a new spec, or will they play it safe and give him an old spec PU? And in the latter case, they'll have a choice between letting him race 5-7 races with it or picking up a penalty later in the year.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 1:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2774
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/bott ... h-1045621/

"Everyone had to save fuel but I think Ferrari had pace in hand so they could start fuel-saving in the first stint," said Bottas.

"At that time we were trying to push and get closer to them and worry about it later.

"We used quite a bit of fuel in the first stint so I had to save quite a lot in the second stint."

Bottas said even by using more fuel in the opening stint he couldn't keep up with Vettel, who told him he was managing his pace from the beginning.

"We tried really hard to push Ferrari in the first stint but we just couldn't match the pace," said Bottas.

"Speaking to Sebastian after the race they were kind of managing it – he said he was saving fuel all through the race consistently.

"We were giving it all we had for the first stint to try to keep up with them, to be there when the pitstops were going to happen.

"We didn't have enough pace for that. They had a small margin they could use to save fuel and control the race."

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26904
KingVoid wrote:
Ferrari > Mercedes > Red Bull

Yep

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:20 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26904
F1_Ernie wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Ferrari was the better car for the weekend.

Or Hamilton didn't extract the maximum from the Mercedes?

There's two or three ways to read it, and only one of them really means that the Ferrari was better.

1) Ferrari genuinely was better, and Bottas had a very strong weekend to be so close to them.
2) Bottas being within a tenth means that an on-form Hamilton would have qualified on pole and likely won.
3) Ferrari wasn't great, but both Vettel and Bottas put in great drives to overshadow their teammates.

I'm inclined to think it was a weak performance from Hamilton, and the cars were equal. Bottas qualifying a tenth behind Vettel and finishing roughly that amount per lap behind in the end is indicative of the basic pace gap between Vettel and Bottas (if not less than); in a dominant Ferrari, Vettel would have been farther ahead. Hamilton just had a poor weekend, as evidenced by his repeated mistakes in qualifying.


But last year in the exact same scenarios it would have been called the Mercedes was faster :lol:

Indeed generally speaking for some there seems to be a need for one car to be down graded judging by the moving goal posts and I wouldn't be referring to the posts I quoted as such.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:04 pm
Posts: 390
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.

For all you know, Bottas could be just as fast as Vettel. Hamilton does seem to be having an off year so far but I don't think that accounts for the difference we've seen. I would also say that Bottas's performance has been pretty strong this year overall. There is no reason to make the assumption that the outcomes are not representative.

The only reason that Bottas was ahead of Vettel in China was Vettel's slow in-lap and slow stop. Vettel was easily faster than him there. I think Ferrari have generally been a bit quicker. In Bahrain, China, Baku and Canada they were able to pull a gap and control it. In Monaco they were also marginally quicker though they struggled in Barcelona with the tires. I think they are just the fastest right now. There doesn't seem to be some mitigating factor. We'll see how things stack up in the long run this year. Mercedes have a substantial engine upgrade for the next round and they might take the initiative there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:55 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3311
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.


:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
sandman1347 wrote:
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.

For all you know, Bottas could be just as fast as Vettel. Hamilton does seem to be having an off year so far but I don't think that accounts for the difference we've seen. I would also say that Bottas's performance has been pretty strong this year overall. There is no reason to make the assumption that the outcomes are not representative.

The only reason that Bottas was ahead of Vettel in China was Vettel's slow in-lap and slow stop. Vettel was easily faster than him there. I think Ferrari have generally been a bit quicker. In Bahrain, China, Baku and Canada they were able to pull a gap and control it. In Monaco they were also marginally quicker though they struggled in Barcelona with the tires. I think they are just the fastest right now. There doesn't seem to be some mitigating factor. We'll see how things stack up in the long run this year. Mercedes have a substantial engine upgrade for the next round and they might take the initiative there.


I don't really think it's fair to declare the thread pointless due to biased people, then call Bahrain "controlling a gap" when just one more lap could have given us a different winner. That was not controlled, it was fighting for dear life to keep out of DRS as long as possible and then just hanging on and trying to defend as well as possible.

Bahrain was a tie given only tenths separated them on the line (and Bottas bottled an overtaking opportunity), and I consider an on form Hamilton better than Bottas so it's not even a stretch to think that an on form Hamilton could have at least won it (heck, Bottas could have won that had he been a bit more decisive in his overtaking attempt) or maybe even put some daylight between him and Vettel.

Agree that overall Ferrari have been better, but you at least have to factor in Hamilton's on and off form and his capabilities vs those of Bottas.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2177
Ferrari was not able to “pull a gap to Mercedes and control it” in Bahrain. Bottas’ pace actually forced Ferrari to pit early. He was catching Vettel and in undercut territory.

Then after they pitted, Bottas did a 33.7 on mediums with 36 laps of fuel onboard. That remained the fastest lap until the end of the race.

Vettel’s drive in Bahrain is the best drive of the season IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 379
That is if you overlook that Bahrain was only close because Vettel, who was on a 2 stopper had to do a one stop because a pit man was laying down injured during his 2nd stop window and Ferrari likely didn't want to use those wheel guns again anyway given how many times they had already failed that year.

Ferrari likely would have 1-2 Bahrain if Kimi made it out the pits. Bottas would not have been able to cover it - the undercut was too strong. So Kimi had already beaten Bottas by that point.

The 2 stopper was the best way to complete. The absolute worse way to complete it was what Vettel did. 1 stop, pitted on lap 19/57 and putting on softs.

The Mercedes did appear to be easier on the tyres, or at least Bottas was easier on the tyres than Vettel but without track position it was kind of meaningless and with it being 1 Mercedes vs 2 Ferrari's, Ferrari had a tactical advantage.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Johnson wrote:
Ferrari likely would have 1-2 Bahrain if Kimi made it out the pits. Bottas would not have been able to cover it - the undercut was too strong. So Kimi had already beaten Bottas by that point..


Why would Bottas have covered Kimi? Bottas was onestopping regardless of Vettel's strategy. In fact Bottas deliberately held back at the beginning of the stint because they expected Vettel to stop again. They only realized Vettel would onestop it later in the stint, at which point be began to really close the gap. But he came too late - just.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 379
Then Bottas would have lost to Kimi. Because Kimi would be 26 seconds behind with 22 laps to go on tyres 2-3 seconds per lap quicker. Kimi had just fitted new SS. 2 compounds softer and 14 laps fresher than Bottas on a track with huge degradation. The two stop was much quicker.

When Kimi pitted he was only 1.7 behind Bottas, so Bottas was unable to cover. Basically if Kimi had made it out the pits there was no way Bottas could beat him.

The undercut was so strong that Vettel had to pit the next lap after Kimi to be able to finish ahead of him. Kimi was 5.5 behind Vettel when he pitted.

Just as an example of the power of the undercut and tyre degredation in Bahrain, Kimi was 5.6 seconds behind Bottas in stint 1. Kimi pitted 1 lap before him and the gap went down to 1.7 seconds.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Johnson wrote:
Then Bottas would have lost to Kimi. Because Kimi would be 26 seconds behind with 22 laps to go on tyres 2-3 seconds per lap quicker. Kimi had just fitted new SS. 2 compounds softer and 14 laps fresher than Bottas on a track with huge degradation. The two stop was much quicker..


Honest question: can you back up all of these numbers here? And not with theoretical data but from race data?

Secondly, you're assuming Kimi, despite "huge deg", would maintain a scorching rhythm throughout the SS stint? Seems contradictory.

Thirdly, Bottas drove a pretty flat stint, indicating no huge deg on his side.

Putting all of it together it's questionable Kimi had Bottas beat despite you making it seem like foregone conclusion.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2177
Johnson wrote:
That is if you overlook that Bahrain was only close because Vettel, who was on a 2 stopper had to do a one stop because a pit man was laying down injured during his 2nd stop window and Ferrari likely didn't want to use those wheel guns again anyway given how many times they had already failed that year.

Bottas was gaining hand over fist on Vettel on the last lap of Vettel's first stint. Mercedes was clearly easier on the tyres, and their race pace forced Vettel into an early pit stop. Bahrain was going to be close regardless of strategy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 379
mds wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Then Bottas would have lost to Kimi. Because Kimi would be 26 seconds behind with 22 laps to go on tyres 2-3 seconds per lap quicker. Kimi had just fitted new SS. 2 compounds softer and 14 laps fresher than Bottas on a track with huge degradation. The two stop was much quicker..


Honest question: can you back up all of these numbers here? And not with theoretical data but from race data?

Secondly, you're assuming Kimi, despite "huge deg", would maintain a scorching rhythm throughout the SS stint? Seems contradictory.

Thirdly, Bottas drove a pretty flat stint, indicating no huge deg on his side.

Putting all of it together it's questionable Kimi had Bottas beat despite you making it seem like foregone conclusion.


Its not contradictory at all, because for every lap of that stint his tyres would always be 14 laps fresher and 2 compounds softer than the car he was chasing. That doesn't go away. Both Ferrari and Mercedes said after the race the 2 stop was much quicker and it clearly would have been.

You can also look at Kimi's stint 1 to see he would have easily managed it. The SS (that had done qualifying) he did the whole stint 35.7-36.3. The first 15 laps all more like 35.7-36.0. Whilst on full tanks.

Then have a look at Kimi's 2nd stint, mid 34's straight away and consisently until Bottas holds him up. Now take 15 laps worth of fuel out and put on a compound softer and he is in the high 32's and low 33's.

Its no problem to do 22 laps with low fuel on the SS (they did 18/19 + qualifying on full tanks), he would have caught Bottas within about 12-13 of those laps anyway and then no need to run a fast pace.

Just look at the in and out laps, new tyres were a huge advantage. Bottas himself was in the low 36's and the fastest man on track who hadn't pitted, he pitted, put on new mediums and did a 33.7 the first lap then settled into mid 34's even though the new tyres were two compounds harder.

Same with Vettel, he was 2.0 ahead of Bottas, but pitted 2 laps earlier - gap went up to 7.7 seconds. Those are the kinds of advantages new tyres had against old. Kimi's would have been the most extreme as it was 2 compounds in his favour too.


Last edited by Johnson on Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:16 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 379
KingVoid wrote:
Johnson wrote:
That is if you overlook that Bahrain was only close because Vettel, who was on a 2 stopper had to do a one stop because a pit man was laying down injured during his 2nd stop window and Ferrari likely didn't want to use those wheel guns again anyway given how many times they had already failed that year.

Bottas was gaining hand over fist on Vettel on the last lap of Vettel's first stint. Mercedes was clearly easier on the tyres, and their race pace forced Vettel into an early pit stop. Bahrain was going to be close regardless of strategy.


Similar to many races like last year, track position is king. Bottas never got into under cut territory, actually he did but then Vettel pitted that very lap and the gap ballooned. 2 lap undercut gained him nearly 6 seconds. Mercedes didn't really have any cards to play except a medium and 1 stop but it was a low yield move and one that would have likely seen Bottas finish 3rd behind both Ferrari's since Kimi was 2 stopping.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 4:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2177
Bottas was 2.282s behind Vettel on the lap before Vettel pitted. That is clearly undercut territory. The undercut was worth about 3 seconds around Bahrain, as it was around China.

If Vettel has the race pace to pull away further from Bottas he would have done so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Johnson wrote:
Its not contradictory at all, because for every lap of that stint his tyres would always be 14 laps fresher and 2 compounds softer than the car he was chasing. That doesn't go away.


No that doesn't go away, but softer compounds tend to gradually lose their advantage over a stint compared to harder tyres because they tend to go off quicker.

So Kimi would have been over 25s behind with 20 laps to go, initially being about 1.5s faster than Bottas could have managed over a whole stint. Even if Raikkonen would have been able of keeping that 1.5s difference over an entire stint then he wouldn't have caught Bottas until lap 51. But I don't even believe he would have been able to do that. Looking at his first stint, Kimi did 14 racing laps with the first set and during that limited period degradation clearly showed in that his times gradually dropped off. And even if he had caught Bottas a few laps from the end, he still had to pass, then on degraded supersofts.

Nope, still can't see this being a foregone conclusion.

Looking at your arguments, I think what you do not factor in is the strength of the Mercedes on harder compounds. Usually we see them being quite a bit stronger as the compounds get harder.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 643
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.
Lewis is over driving on occasion to make up the deficit.
Pretty clear that Ferrari is the faster car at the moment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
Laz_T800 wrote:
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.
Lewis is over driving on occasion to make up the deficit.
Pretty clear that Ferrari is the faster car at the moment.

Lewis left plenty of time on the table. Ordinarily you'd see him beating Bottas and this is a track he excels at. And if we are going to go on driver quotes, Lewis himself said "I really feel like we had the pace to lock out the front row." It doesn't appear clear to him that Ferrari is the faster car.

There's a case to be made for Ferrari, but I don't think it's at all clear. And it's close enough that whatever performance upgrade Mercedes' new engine may bring should have Ferrari worried


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Laz_T800 wrote:
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.

Seb is a very self-critical guy and even if he leaves 0.05s on the table he'll say it wasn't perfect and he's left time on the table. He's done it often and people use it against him, just because he does. Others don't and people remain quiet.

Looking at Sebs lap it was pretty damn good if you ask me.

Not saying the Ferrari isn't faster at this point, but going by those words to say the Ferrari was definitely the fastest in qualifying last weekend maybe is not entirely correct.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2774
Zoue wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.
Lewis is over driving on occasion to make up the deficit.
Pretty clear that Ferrari is the faster car at the moment.

Lewis left plenty of time on the table. Ordinarily you'd see him beating Bottas and this is a track he excels at. And if we are going to go on driver quotes, Lewis himself said "I really feel like we had the pace to lock out the front row." It doesn't appear clear to him that Ferrari is the faster car.

There's a case to be made for Ferrari, but I don't think it's at all clear. And it's close enough that whatever performance upgrade Mercedes' new engine may bring should have Ferrari worried


There's Hamilton quotes saying Ferrari was the better car, Ferrari have been the better car so far, Ferrari has the better all round car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Gumption wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This thread is almost pointless because most of the vocal people in here are completely biased. This year Ferrari have the slight edge. It's plain to see. That doesn't mean their edge will endure throughout the season but, as of now, they are ahead. I don't know how you can watch the race weekends unfold and come to a different conclusion. With the exception of the strange Barcelona race with one-off tires, Ferrari have been quicker than Mercedes everywhere since the second round. The margin is not big. It's small but it's there.

The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.
Lewis is over driving on occasion to make up the deficit.
Pretty clear that Ferrari is the faster car at the moment.

Lewis left plenty of time on the table. Ordinarily you'd see him beating Bottas and this is a track he excels at. And if we are going to go on driver quotes, Lewis himself said "I really feel like we had the pace to lock out the front row." It doesn't appear clear to him that Ferrari is the faster car.

There's a case to be made for Ferrari, but I don't think it's at all clear. And it's close enough that whatever performance upgrade Mercedes' new engine may bring should have Ferrari worried


There's Hamilton quotes saying Ferrari was the better car, Ferrari have been the better car so far, Ferrari has the better all round car.

Sure there are. Which just goes to show that driver quotes aren't necessarily the bible we should be going to for things like this, since they can contradict themselves. That was my point in bringing it up.

A qualifying gap of less than a tenth isn't something you can use to demonstrate superiority, particularly when the number one driver and qualifying specialist is absent. I think there is a case to say that Ferrari were stronger in the race in Canada, but OTOH that was only with one driver and the "main" driver for Mercedes, who is normally a specialist at this circuit, was having a bad day, so I don't agree it's a clear cut thing. I also think the engine life disparity had something to do with it and as soon as they get fresh ones installed - even without taking potential upgrades into account - they'll be even stronger. As far as the cars themselves go I see them as fairly neck and neck at the moment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2774
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Gumption wrote:
The problem is that Hamilton has been underperforming in no man's land off-and-on again. Bottas has nearly pipped Vettel to pole a couple times (even on a track Hamilton is supposed to dominate), was right behind Vettel in Bahrain and ahead of him in China before the SC so the comparison has mainly been Vettel/Ferrari to Bottas/Mercedes. Bottas is not a top tier driver hence the thought that someone, apparently other than Hamilton, can extract more out of the Mercedes.


Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.
Lewis is over driving on occasion to make up the deficit.
Pretty clear that Ferrari is the faster car at the moment.

Lewis left plenty of time on the table. Ordinarily you'd see him beating Bottas and this is a track he excels at. And if we are going to go on driver quotes, Lewis himself said "I really feel like we had the pace to lock out the front row." It doesn't appear clear to him that Ferrari is the faster car.

There's a case to be made for Ferrari, but I don't think it's at all clear. And it's close enough that whatever performance upgrade Mercedes' new engine may bring should have Ferrari worried


There's Hamilton quotes saying Ferrari was the better car, Ferrari have been the better car so far, Ferrari has the better all round car.

Sure there are. Which just goes to show that driver quotes aren't necessarily the bible we should be going to for things like this, since they can contradict themselves. That was my point in bringing it up.

A qualifying gap of less than a tenth isn't something you can use to demonstrate superiority, particularly when the number one driver and qualifying specialist is absent. I think there is a case to say that Ferrari were stronger in the race in Canada, but OTOH that was only with one driver and the "main" driver for Mercedes, who is normally a specialist at this circuit, was having a bad day, so I don't agree it's a clear cut thing. I also think the engine life disparity had something to do with it and as soon as they get fresh ones installed - even without taking potential upgrades into account - they'll be even stronger. As far as the cars themselves go I see them as fairly neck and neck at the moment.


Apparently the difference between the old engine to new is 0.050 seconds with all party modes available, the new engine going by rumours is a tenth so that is enough to give Mercedes the advantage. I wonder what the mechanical problem was on Hamilton's car which gave him cooling issues.

Of course Seb could be playing with Bottas when he said he was fuel saving all through the race while Bottas was going flat out in the first stint, if that's true then that's something for Mercedes to worry about. Bottas was running on fumes even with a safety car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Seb said he left time on the table during Canada Qualifying.
Bottas nailed his lap.
Lewis is over driving on occasion to make up the deficit.
Pretty clear that Ferrari is the faster car at the moment.

Lewis left plenty of time on the table. Ordinarily you'd see him beating Bottas and this is a track he excels at. And if we are going to go on driver quotes, Lewis himself said "I really feel like we had the pace to lock out the front row." It doesn't appear clear to him that Ferrari is the faster car.

There's a case to be made for Ferrari, but I don't think it's at all clear. And it's close enough that whatever performance upgrade Mercedes' new engine may bring should have Ferrari worried


There's Hamilton quotes saying Ferrari was the better car, Ferrari have been the better car so far, Ferrari has the better all round car.

Sure there are. Which just goes to show that driver quotes aren't necessarily the bible we should be going to for things like this, since they can contradict themselves. That was my point in bringing it up.

A qualifying gap of less than a tenth isn't something you can use to demonstrate superiority, particularly when the number one driver and qualifying specialist is absent. I think there is a case to say that Ferrari were stronger in the race in Canada, but OTOH that was only with one driver and the "main" driver for Mercedes, who is normally a specialist at this circuit, was having a bad day, so I don't agree it's a clear cut thing. I also think the engine life disparity had something to do with it and as soon as they get fresh ones installed - even without taking potential upgrades into account - they'll be even stronger. As far as the cars themselves go I see them as fairly neck and neck at the moment.


Apparently the difference between the old engine to new is 0.050 seconds with all party modes available, the new engine going by rumours is a tenth so that is enough to give Mercedes the advantage. I wonder what the mechanical problem was on Hamilton's car which gave him cooling issues.

Of course Seb could be playing with Bottas when he said he was fuel saving all through the race while Bottas was going flat out in the first stint, if that's true then that's something for Mercedes to worry about. Bottas was running on fumes even with a safety car.

yeah, but it's more than raw stats, though. They will treat an old engine very differently to a brand new one and they will be more reluctant to push it:

"I was conflicted at the end because I wanted to push to get that next position but if the engine goes in the last couple of laps..

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-thought-engine-was-going-to-blow-1045614/

it doesn't mean the car itself is worse, but they won't necessarily use its full potential

By all accounts one of the main benefits of the Ferrari upgrade was related to fuel efficiency, where they have trailed Mercedes so far this year


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 379
mds wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Its not contradictory at all, because for every lap of that stint his tyres would always be 14 laps fresher and 2 compounds softer than the car he was chasing. That doesn't go away.


No that doesn't go away, but softer compounds tend to gradually lose their advantage over a stint compared to harder tyres because they tend to go off quicker.

So Kimi would have been over 25s behind with 20 laps to go, initially being about 1.5s faster than Bottas could have managed over a whole stint. Even if Raikkonen would have been able of keeping that 1.5s difference over an entire stint then he wouldn't have caught Bottas until lap 51. But I don't even believe he would have been able to do that. Looking at his first stint, Kimi did 14 racing laps with the first set and during that limited period degradation clearly showed in that his times gradually dropped off. And even if he had caught Bottas a few laps from the end, he still had to pass, then on degraded supersofts.

Nope, still can't see this being a foregone conclusion.

Looking at your arguments, I think what you do not factor in is the strength of the Mercedes on harder compounds. Usually we see them being quite a bit stronger as the compounds get harder.


I just showed the SS didn't go off when in a much harder scenario, the first stint. Bottas was the one who was taking the tyres over recommended limit. Not Kimi.

You think 2 compounds softer and 14 laps fresher would yield just 1.5 seconds per lap advantage?

Kimi would have been in the high 32's and low 33's. Bottas was in the mid 34 to mid 35's.

The Mercedes pace on the medium was also not strong, they too had massive degradation. So, Vettel was planned to do exactly what Kimi did and pit the very next lap at which point he would have only been about 2 seconds ahead of Kimi himself. Do you not think Vettel would win the race from there?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2774
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Lewis left plenty of time on the table. Ordinarily you'd see him beating Bottas and this is a track he excels at. And if we are going to go on driver quotes, Lewis himself said "I really feel like we had the pace to lock out the front row." It doesn't appear clear to him that Ferrari is the faster car.

There's a case to be made for Ferrari, but I don't think it's at all clear. And it's close enough that whatever performance upgrade Mercedes' new engine may bring should have Ferrari worried


There's Hamilton quotes saying Ferrari was the better car, Ferrari have been the better car so far, Ferrari has the better all round car.

Sure there are. Which just goes to show that driver quotes aren't necessarily the bible we should be going to for things like this, since they can contradict themselves. That was my point in bringing it up.

A qualifying gap of less than a tenth isn't something you can use to demonstrate superiority, particularly when the number one driver and qualifying specialist is absent. I think there is a case to say that Ferrari were stronger in the race in Canada, but OTOH that was only with one driver and the "main" driver for Mercedes, who is normally a specialist at this circuit, was having a bad day, so I don't agree it's a clear cut thing. I also think the engine life disparity had something to do with it and as soon as they get fresh ones installed - even without taking potential upgrades into account - they'll be even stronger. As far as the cars themselves go I see them as fairly neck and neck at the moment.


Apparently the difference between the old engine to new is 0.050 seconds with all party modes available, the new engine going by rumours is a tenth so that is enough to give Mercedes the advantage. I wonder what the mechanical problem was on Hamilton's car which gave him cooling issues.

Of course Seb could be playing with Bottas when he said he was fuel saving all through the race while Bottas was going flat out in the first stint, if that's true then that's something for Mercedes to worry about. Bottas was running on fumes even with a safety car.

yeah, but it's more than raw stats, though. They will treat an old engine very differently to a brand new one and they will be more reluctant to push it:

"I was conflicted at the end because I wanted to push to get that next position but if the engine goes in the last couple of laps..

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-thought-engine-was-going-to-blow-1045614/

it doesn't mean the car itself is worse, but they won't necessarily use its full potential

By all accounts one of the main benefits of the Ferrari upgrade was related to fuel efficiency, where they have trailed Mercedes so far this year


The article is talking about the overheating of the engine and Hamilton being worried it would last all race, he was doing a pr exercise and trying to take the positives out of a poor weekend. The overheating was not due to an old engine but due to a mechanical problem.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 379
KingVoid wrote:
Bottas was 2.282s behind Vettel on the lap before Vettel pitted. That is clearly undercut territory. The undercut was worth about 3 seconds around Bahrain, as it was around China.

If Vettel has the race pace to pull away further from Bottas he would have done so.


That is exactly what I said, Bottas had just gone into undercut territory so Ferrari pitted. It was 2.8 the lap before that. Mercedes were out to pit Bottas at that very time and told him to do the opposite to Vettel.

I am not sure what the bolded part is in reference too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's Hamilton quotes saying Ferrari was the better car, Ferrari have been the better car so far, Ferrari has the better all round car.

Sure there are. Which just goes to show that driver quotes aren't necessarily the bible we should be going to for things like this, since they can contradict themselves. That was my point in bringing it up.

A qualifying gap of less than a tenth isn't something you can use to demonstrate superiority, particularly when the number one driver and qualifying specialist is absent. I think there is a case to say that Ferrari were stronger in the race in Canada, but OTOH that was only with one driver and the "main" driver for Mercedes, who is normally a specialist at this circuit, was having a bad day, so I don't agree it's a clear cut thing. I also think the engine life disparity had something to do with it and as soon as they get fresh ones installed - even without taking potential upgrades into account - they'll be even stronger. As far as the cars themselves go I see them as fairly neck and neck at the moment.


Apparently the difference between the old engine to new is 0.050 seconds with all party modes available, the new engine going by rumours is a tenth so that is enough to give Mercedes the advantage. I wonder what the mechanical problem was on Hamilton's car which gave him cooling issues.

Of course Seb could be playing with Bottas when he said he was fuel saving all through the race while Bottas was going flat out in the first stint, if that's true then that's something for Mercedes to worry about. Bottas was running on fumes even with a safety car.

yeah, but it's more than raw stats, though. They will treat an old engine very differently to a brand new one and they will be more reluctant to push it:

"I was conflicted at the end because I wanted to push to get that next position but if the engine goes in the last couple of laps..

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-thought-engine-was-going-to-blow-1045614/

it doesn't mean the car itself is worse, but they won't necessarily use its full potential

By all accounts one of the main benefits of the Ferrari upgrade was related to fuel efficiency, where they have trailed Mercedes so far this year


The article is talking about the overheating of the engine and Hamilton being worried it would last all race, he was doing a pr exercise and trying to take the positives out of a poor weekend. The overheating was not due to an old engine but due to a mechanical problem.

That wasn't the only comment he made on engines, though.

"But it will mean our performance is not probably the greatest. It's the seventh race on the engine, and the goal is to make the engines stay the same the whole way through, so naturally it's degraded, you lose horsepower over races.

"If we're at 7000kms or whatever it is, it definitely would have lost performance. So at a power circuit it will probably be magnified."


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-mercedes-difficult-canada-weekend-ferrari-advantage-1045008/?s=1

I don't think Hamilton would be so worried, or calling the performance "not the greatest," if he felt that he may be losing 0.050s per lap. Having said that, in the same article Vettel states that a new engine won't make that much difference (although I suspect he was trying to play it down), so it's hard to know who to believe. My gut says a driver would choose a new engine every race if they could and the difference between a 7 race old engine and a fresh one is much more than Wolff stated.

Question: if Hamilton was on form do we think he would have beaten Bottas to pole? Particularly in Canada? If the answer's yes, then that means he probably would have beaten Vettel, too. So why is it a dead cert that the Ferrari was the better car?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
Johnson wrote:
I just showed the SS didn't go off when in a much harder scenario, the first stint. Bottas was the one who was taking the tyres over recommended limit. Not Kimi.


The SS did go off, both Bottas' as well as Kimi's first stint showed gradually worse times. Less for Bottas, more for Kimi (which is more relevant given that Kimi is the one we're trying to project a SS stint for) who lost about 1.4s in lap time over 14 racing laps.

Quote:
You think 2 compounds softer and 14 laps fresher would yield just 1.5 seconds per lap advantage?

Kimi would have been in the high 32's and low 33's. Bottas was in the mid 34 to mid 35's.


Bottas was holding back for much of the stint because they were expecting Vettel to stop once more. Once they understood Vettel would run to a onestopper he set mid 34's for a good number of laps, have to factor in some traffic for a few slower laps and near the end he was limited by Vettel's pace (and dirty air).

So yes looking at Kimi around the 1:33 mark, but worsening as all SS stints did, against Bottas who (going by the last stint) could run a pretty flat stint around 1:34.5.

Quote:
The Mercedes pace on the medium was also not strong, they too had massive degradation.


Not really, the Bottas' medium stint had a mid 1:34 in lap 2 and still a mid 1:34 a few laps from the end, after which he was impacted by Vettel's pace.

Quote:
So, Vettel was planned to do exactly what Kimi did and pit the very next lap at which point he would have only been about 2 seconds ahead of Kimi himself. Do you not think Vettel would win the race from there?


I thought we were talking about how Kimi had Bottas beat. But Vettel-Bottas: Mercedes obviously were going for a onestopper so they thought that was their best shot at getting the race back to them.

Pitting Vettel would have meant he would have had to pass 2 Mercedes cars on track. He would have encountered Hamilton not long after pitting, so while losing some time he would have taken him pretty fast. But then Bottas, with the supersofts degrading faster than the mediums on the Mercedes, especially during a maximum attack stint? I'm not feeling it.

And Mercedes didn't either. Read this: http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... at-ferrari
Quote:
"I think we had won the race already after coming out on the medium behind Sebastian with a gap that we were able to close down, knowing that they would either need to stop once again or they would run out tyre if we were to push them," the Mercedes boss told reporters, when asked if they could have done something different.

"This was the moment where I would say 90 per cent probability was on us winning and we lost that."

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2774
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Sure there are. Which just goes to show that driver quotes aren't necessarily the bible we should be going to for things like this, since they can contradict themselves. That was my point in bringing it up.

A qualifying gap of less than a tenth isn't something you can use to demonstrate superiority, particularly when the number one driver and qualifying specialist is absent. I think there is a case to say that Ferrari were stronger in the race in Canada, but OTOH that was only with one driver and the "main" driver for Mercedes, who is normally a specialist at this circuit, was having a bad day, so I don't agree it's a clear cut thing. I also think the engine life disparity had something to do with it and as soon as they get fresh ones installed - even without taking potential upgrades into account - they'll be even stronger. As far as the cars themselves go I see them as fairly neck and neck at the moment.


Apparently the difference between the old engine to new is 0.050 seconds with all party modes available, the new engine going by rumours is a tenth so that is enough to give Mercedes the advantage. I wonder what the mechanical problem was on Hamilton's car which gave him cooling issues.

Of course Seb could be playing with Bottas when he said he was fuel saving all through the race while Bottas was going flat out in the first stint, if that's true then that's something for Mercedes to worry about. Bottas was running on fumes even with a safety car.

yeah, but it's more than raw stats, though. They will treat an old engine very differently to a brand new one and they will be more reluctant to push it:

"I was conflicted at the end because I wanted to push to get that next position but if the engine goes in the last couple of laps..

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-thought-engine-was-going-to-blow-1045614/

it doesn't mean the car itself is worse, but they won't necessarily use its full potential

By all accounts one of the main benefits of the Ferrari upgrade was related to fuel efficiency, where they have trailed Mercedes so far this year


The article is talking about the overheating of the engine and Hamilton being worried it would last all race, he was doing a pr exercise and trying to take the positives out of a poor weekend. The overheating was not due to an old engine but due to a mechanical problem.

That wasn't the only comment he made on engines, though.

"But it will mean our performance is not probably the greatest. It's the seventh race on the engine, and the goal is to make the engines stay the same the whole way through, so naturally it's degraded, you lose horsepower over races.

"If we're at 7000kms or whatever it is, it definitely would have lost performance. So at a power circuit it will probably be magnified."


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-mercedes-difficult-canada-weekend-ferrari-advantage-1045008/?s=1

I don't think Hamilton would be so worried, or calling the performance "not the greatest," if he felt that he may be losing 0.050s per lap. Having said that, in the same article Vettel states that a new engine won't make that much difference (although I suspect he was trying to play it down), so it's hard to know who to believe. My gut says a driver would choose a new engine every race if they could and the difference between a 7 race old engine and a fresh one is much more than Wolff stated.

Question: if Hamilton was on form do we think he would have beaten Bottas to pole? Particularly in Canada? If the answer's yes, then that means he probably would have beaten Vettel, too. So why is it a dead cert that the Ferrari was the better car?


I fully agree with you regarding the engines, it's just that article was talking more about the cooling issues than the difference in engines. I think I read Lauda say both Ferrari and Red bull are better at fuel saving than the Mercedes now.

If we go by trends from last season then Hamilton would beat Bottas which would put him fighting Vettel for pole. Vettel best time in S3 was a 28.570, Bottas 28.689 and Hamilton 28.869. Even if he matched Bottas he wouldn't have beaten Vettel and they have the same engine but Hamilton had a bird in the brakes :lol: It would have been close.

I'm not changing the subject but looking at the times Kimi really missed an opportunity to beat Hamilton and maybe higher in quali. His 2nd sector was 2nd best and 3rd sector was still the 3rd best of quali which does show how good the car was through them sectors and he never did a second run, he fluffed it again. Like I said in quali Vettels needs him to take points of Hamilton.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23213
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Apparently the difference between the old engine to new is 0.050 seconds with all party modes available, the new engine going by rumours is a tenth so that is enough to give Mercedes the advantage. I wonder what the mechanical problem was on Hamilton's car which gave him cooling issues.

Of course Seb could be playing with Bottas when he said he was fuel saving all through the race while Bottas was going flat out in the first stint, if that's true then that's something for Mercedes to worry about. Bottas was running on fumes even with a safety car.

yeah, but it's more than raw stats, though. They will treat an old engine very differently to a brand new one and they will be more reluctant to push it:

"I was conflicted at the end because I wanted to push to get that next position but if the engine goes in the last couple of laps..

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-thought-engine-was-going-to-blow-1045614/

it doesn't mean the car itself is worse, but they won't necessarily use its full potential

By all accounts one of the main benefits of the Ferrari upgrade was related to fuel efficiency, where they have trailed Mercedes so far this year


The article is talking about the overheating of the engine and Hamilton being worried it would last all race, he was doing a pr exercise and trying to take the positives out of a poor weekend. The overheating was not due to an old engine but due to a mechanical problem.

That wasn't the only comment he made on engines, though.

"But it will mean our performance is not probably the greatest. It's the seventh race on the engine, and the goal is to make the engines stay the same the whole way through, so naturally it's degraded, you lose horsepower over races.

"If we're at 7000kms or whatever it is, it definitely would have lost performance. So at a power circuit it will probably be magnified."


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-mercedes-difficult-canada-weekend-ferrari-advantage-1045008/?s=1

I don't think Hamilton would be so worried, or calling the performance "not the greatest," if he felt that he may be losing 0.050s per lap. Having said that, in the same article Vettel states that a new engine won't make that much difference (although I suspect he was trying to play it down), so it's hard to know who to believe. My gut says a driver would choose a new engine every race if they could and the difference between a 7 race old engine and a fresh one is much more than Wolff stated.

Question: if Hamilton was on form do we think he would have beaten Bottas to pole? Particularly in Canada? If the answer's yes, then that means he probably would have beaten Vettel, too. So why is it a dead cert that the Ferrari was the better car?


I fully agree with you regarding the engines, it's just that article was talking more about the cooling issues than the difference in engines. I think I read Lauda say both Ferrari and Red bull are better at fuel saving than the Mercedes now.

If we go by trends from last season then Hamilton would beat Bottas which would put him fighting Vettel for pole. Vettel best time in S3 was a 28.570, Bottas 28.689 and Hamilton 28.869. Even if he matched Bottas he wouldn't have beaten Vettel and they have the same engine but Hamilton had a bird in the brakes :lol: It would have been close.

I'm not changing the subject but looking at the times Kimi really missed an opportunity to beat Hamilton and maybe higher in quali. His 2nd sector was 2nd best and 3rd sector was still the 3rd best of quali which does show how good the car was through them sectors and he never did a second run, he fluffed it again. Like I said in quali Vettels needs him to take points of Hamilton.
Hamilton only had to beat Bottas by a tenth and he would have been on pole. It's not completely far-fetched. Of course, maybe Bottas just drove a superb lap. All I'm saying is it was too close to rule out driver ability.

Fully agree on Kimi. he really let the team down with his final qualifying. Not saying he would definitely have locked out the front row, as the front two were so close, he should absolutely have snatched 3rd and kept Hamilton behind him. Very poor showing


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: dompclarke, kleefton, Lotus49, MB-BOB, pokerman 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