planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Jul 17, 2018 11:20 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 9:48 pm
Posts: 303
To be fair, they never thought they would be close, that's McLaren-style ridiculousness. Renault's goal was to be the fourth team this season and expand their factory, team and expertise. It looks like they could pull this off. For 2019 they want to crack the top 3.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1704
Is this going to be a two-horse race? RBR promise a lot in long runs and aren't far away in qualifying but I'm pretty sure Ferrari and Mercedes have clearly superior engines and frankly I trust their driver lineups more (Vettel and Ham more likely to win you a championship than either Verstappen or Ricciardo).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 2000
Invade wrote:
Is this going to be a two-horse race? RBR promise a lot in long runs and aren't far away in qualifying but I'm pretty sure Ferrari and Mercedes have clearly superior engines and frankly I trust their driver lineups more (Vettel and Ham more likely to win you a championship than either Verstappen or Ricciardo).


I don't think we've seen the true RBR race pace. They haven't had a clean weekend yet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 2000
mikeyg123 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
I completely forgot about just how big the gap was at Singapore. Fair enough.


I still expect Mercedes to be the car to beat in China. Ferrari are only 0.4s faster than Ricciardo here, which is about the same margin they had in Australia. I think that Merc are just struggling here and it’s track specific.


China and Bahrain are basically the same track. It will depend on the temperature.


:?:

China is front limited. Bahrain is rear limited. Definitely not the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2116
Today was a difficult race to understand.

It felt like Mercedes had better race pace than Ferrari by the way Bottas gained on Vettel at the end of the first stint. That could have been fuel saving, or Vettel’s tyres just went off.

We still haven’t really seen Red Bull’s potential yet. Verstappen temporary overtook Hamilton so that’s at least something.

I would give Ferrari a 10, Mercedes 9 and Red Bull 8 for qualifying. I’d give Mercedes and Ferrari both a 9.5 for race pace with a non-score for Red Bull.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:38 pm 
It’s a shame but Red Bull will not compete with these two, they will win some races but the car is way too unreliable. They could literally be out the championship in 2-3 races time even though they may actually have the best race car. Verstappen is also way too wild to challenge for a WDC yet.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 7:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9215
lamo wrote:
It’s a shame but Red Bull will not compete with these two, they will win some races but the car is way too unreliable. They could literally be out the championship in 2-3 races time even though they may actually have the best race car. Verstappen is also way too wild to challenge for a WDC yet.

I'd say it's still too early days, they still have enough races to go to turns things around.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 210
Location: Kansas
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
It’s a shame but Red Bull will not compete with these two, they will win some races but the car is way too unreliable. They could literally be out the championship in 2-3 races time even though they may actually have the best race car. Verstappen is also way too wild to challenge for a WDC yet.

I'd say it's still too early days, they still have enough races to go to turns things around.


With the exception of Danny Ricky, the entire RBR group need to be dissuaded from reloading once they have shot themselves in the foot!!!

So far I am relatively happy with the Red/Silver battle this year, even if I don't particularly like the outcomes. The cars are much more evenly matched now than most of the Lewis haters would have you believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
KingVoid wrote:
Today was a difficult race to understand.

It felt like Mercedes had better race pace than Ferrari by the way Bottas gained on Vettel at the end of the first stint. That could have been fuel saving, or Vettel’s tyres just went off.

We still haven’t really seen Red Bull’s potential yet. Verstappen temporary overtook Hamilton so that’s at least something.

I would give Ferrari a 10, Mercedes 9 and Red Bull 8 for qualifying. I’d give Mercedes and Ferrari both a 9.5 for race pace with a non-score for Red Bull.

The only thing that looked to be in Mercedes favor at Bahrain was that Bottas seemed to get better life out of the SS tires than either of the Ferraris. This was unexpected as Merc have been bellyaching about the tires more than anyone else. Before Vettel came back to him though, he did build a lead so to suggest that the Merc had better pace is dubious. On the Softs, Vettel was able to get 40 laps done and still maintain enough pace to avoid being passed on track. I don't think there's much of a way to compare race pace at the moment. They employed different strategies and used different compounds at different times.

What seems evident is that the cars are far more similar to one another this year. Last year, the Mercs had the clear advantage on power tracks while the Ferraris were clearly better at the tighter, twistier circuits. It seems that best practices are starting to settle in here in year two of these regs and the cars no longer have that sort of specialization relative to each other. In fact, if anything, the first two races suggest the roles might be reversed (although not to the magnitude of the differences last year). China should be a good benchmark for both teams/cars. That circuit has a bit of everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 7:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 583
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Today was a difficult race to understand.

It felt like Mercedes had better race pace than Ferrari by the way Bottas gained on Vettel at the end of the first stint. That could have been fuel saving, or Vettel’s tyres just went off.

We still haven’t really seen Red Bull’s potential yet. Verstappen temporary overtook Hamilton so that’s at least something.

I would give Ferrari a 10, Mercedes 9 and Red Bull 8 for qualifying. I’d give Mercedes and Ferrari both a 9.5 for race pace with a non-score for Red Bull.

The only thing that looked to be in Mercedes favor at Bahrain was that Bottas seemed to get better life out of the SS tires than either of the Ferraris. This was unexpected as Merc have been bellyaching about the tires more than anyone else. Before Vettel came back to him though, he did build a lead so to suggest that the Merc had better pace is dubious. On the Softs, Vettel was able to get 40 laps done and still maintain enough pace to avoid being passed on track. I don't think there's much of a way to compare race pace at the moment. They employed different strategies and used different compounds at different times.

What seems evident is that the cars are far more similar to one another this year. Last year, the Mercs had the clear advantage on power tracks while the Ferraris were clearly better at the tighter, twistier circuits. It seems that best practices are starting to settle in here in year two of these regs and the cars no longer have that sort of specialization relative to each other. In fact, if anything, the first two races suggest the roles might be reversed (although not to the magnitude of the differences last year). China should be a good benchmark for both teams/cars. That circuit has a bit of everything.

Agree with a lot of this, particularly the differentials on power and high downforce tracks, all though definitely tough to call so far. For me, strangely, the Mercedes seems to have a marginally bigger advantage at the start of 2018 than they did in 2017 prior to the Spain upgrades (although with Spain and Monaco suiting the Ferrari that wasn’t clear until Canada). All credit to Ferrari though for taking advantage in the last two races though. I also think Red Bull will be a bigger factor this year, even if reliability and consistency means they are not in the race for titles themselves.

Could perhaps be that Ferrari have made a good step in terms of power input, but need to get a handle on fuel efficiency.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4401
Thinking on necessity to run more components than allowed, why do F1 teams do not make a deal that each team will change the engine and other components every 3 or 4 race, so all of them get the same penalty? Are they not able to make such thoughtful deals? It will be fair, and it will wipe out the ridiculousness of the rule.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 1878
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Thinking on necessity to run more components than allowed, why do F1 teams do not make a deal that each team will change the engine and other components every 3 or 4 race, so all of them get the same penalty? Are they not able to make such thoughtful deals? It will be fair, and it will wipe out the ridiculousness of the rule.


Because they do not trust each other, not at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 822
Perhaps true pace will show in China, still too early to judge, Merc have dropped the ball twice with not going for it, Red Bull have been unable to mount a challenge so far and Vettel have grasped the opportunities.

But so far I have to agree with all before season experts that it looks like Mercs year again as soon as they get their act together like 2017.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:57 pm 
In Australia qualifying;

Mercedes were 1.1 seconds quicker than 2017
Ferrari were 0.6 seconds quicker than 2017

In Bahrain qualifying ;
Mercedes were 0.6 seconds quicker than 2017
Ferrari were 1.3 seconds quicker than 2017

We still need to see some more to get a big picture but its swinging all over compared to last year. It is very strange in that the cars have possibly switched traits. Mercedes now might have better tyre life and management and Ferrari may now have more power and qualifying speed.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
Mercedes still have an issue with being overly conservative. I think it has cost them two wins (certainly one win). There is wisdom in "winning as slowly as possible" but it is also unwise to get too comfortable when someone else is in the lead and you are trying to win the race. They allowed Vettel space and time that they shouldn't have. Putting both Hamilton and Bottas on the same strategy was just weak and wishy-washy. Vettel didn't face pressure until the dying couple of laps due to that decision and it's the reason Vettel was able to make the one-stopper work out.

Hamilton, despite pitting more than half way through the race and putting on the Medium compound, wasn't really pushing that hard for a big part of his last stint. I just don't get it. They already lost out in Australia due to not pushing hard enough after pitting and they just let it happen again. This is an area where they have been exposed numerous times now over the last few years. They are not one of the better strategic thinking teams at all.

By contrast, Vettel pitted for softs and pushed right up to Hamilton and passed him. That way it's not up to circumstances outside of his control. By getting back into the lead ASAP, the situation is now INSIDE of his control. I think Mercedes need their mentality to evolve.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:20 pm 
Bottas was on a 2 stopper I think, they switched him to 1. He was right in range to undercut Vettel and take the lead of the race and go on a 2 stopper. That is why Ferrari pitted Vettel and thus Bottas switched to a 1. The tactic was right.

From where Hamilton was (14 seconds off the lead once he got into P4 and clean air) a 1 stopper was the only option really. Hamilton was in no mans land, he didn't really have anything to push for. He was 25 seconds off the lead when he came out after his stop and 19 behind Kimi. Mercedes did not expect Vettel's tyres to be THAT bad at the end otherwise Hamilton may have been able to do something, but that would have been 20 Hammer time laps on the off chance that Vettel fell off the cliff completely which was unlikely to the extent they actually did.

They also had to balance Hamiltons tyre usage with the possibility of him figting Vettel on SS at the end and probably hoped to use Hamilton to slow Vettel on his SS push to get Bottas.

The only mistake they made was Bottas backing off and dropping 3.5 seconds to Vettel in a 10 lap phase allowing the gap up to nearly 9 seconds, that was not necessary at all. They were slow to see Vettel was 1 stopping which to me was obvious about 5 laps before they realised.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
lamo-They never put any pressure on Vettel until the last 2-3 laps. They just hung back and waited for him to make his moves. They are too passive and reactive. By pushing, you put pressure on your opponent and force them to make decisions before they really want to.

You say it was correct to put Bottas on the Medium tire but I have to disagree. Perhaps it created a marginally better chance of Bottas winning that particular race but it reduced the chance of Mercedes winning that race and, perhaps more importantly, it all but eliminated the chance of Hamilton (the guy who is likely to be able to win the WDC) winning it. Vettel only decided to one-stop because of the complete lack of pressure from Mercedes. Then, as you pointed out, Mercedes realized very late in the day that Vettel wasn't stopping and had both drivers flying in the closing laps. They needed to be flying earlier. There was no reason for Bottas to be passive at all and really Hamilton had no reason to be passive either. Even if Vettel stopped again, it would have benefited Hamilton to have gained as much time as possible prior to that. They are overthinking things. Sometimes it's better to play checkers than chess.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 822
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:58 pm 
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo-They never put any pressure on Vettel until the last 2-3 laps. They just hung back and waited for him to make his moves. They are too passive and reactive. By pushing, you put pressure on your opponent and force them to make decisions before they really want to.

You say it was correct to put Bottas on the Medium tire but I have to disagree. Perhaps it created a marginally better chance of Bottas winning that particular race but it reduced the chance of Mercedes winning that race and, perhaps more importantly, it all but eliminated the chance of Hamilton (the guy who is likely to be able to win the WDC) winning it. Vettel only decided to one-stop because of the complete lack of pressure from Mercedes. Then, as you pointed out, Mercedes realized very late in the day that Vettel wasn't stopping and had both drivers flying in the closing laps. They needed to be flying earlier. There was no reason for Bottas to be passive at all and really Hamilton had no reason to be passive either. Even if Vettel stopped again, it would have benefited Hamilton to have gained as much time as possible prior to that. They are overthinking things. Sometimes it's better to play checkers than chess.


I don't agree.

The decision to put Bottas on the medium was a good one, a race winning one if they kept the pace up in the second stint and didn't give Vettel breathing space. You are right, that did mean Hamilton then had no chance to win but judging by how easily Vettel breezed by him when on new tyres early in the race, he was never going to be able to fight Vettel on fresh tyres. Hamilton had no chance to win, he was 15 seconds off the lead once he got clean air. Only a SC could bring him back in.

What else should they have done with Bottas at the first stop, Vettel got in before them (no chance to undercut)? Maybe they could have done a very aggressive 2 stopper to snatch the lead. That is it.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2116
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.

That’s not really a rumour though is it? That’s more like Ricciardo making a joke.

Ferrari had slightly better straight line speed than Mercedes in both Australia and Bahrain. The main reason why Merc were second best in qualy in Bahrain was because Ferrari was a lot better through the corners than they were at Australia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo-They never put any pressure on Vettel until the last 2-3 laps. They just hung back and waited for him to make his moves. They are too passive and reactive. By pushing, you put pressure on your opponent and force them to make decisions before they really want to.

You say it was correct to put Bottas on the Medium tire but I have to disagree. Perhaps it created a marginally better chance of Bottas winning that particular race but it reduced the chance of Mercedes winning that race and, perhaps more importantly, it all but eliminated the chance of Hamilton (the guy who is likely to be able to win the WDC) winning it. Vettel only decided to one-stop because of the complete lack of pressure from Mercedes. Then, as you pointed out, Mercedes realized very late in the day that Vettel wasn't stopping and had both drivers flying in the closing laps. They needed to be flying earlier. There was no reason for Bottas to be passive at all and really Hamilton had no reason to be passive either. Even if Vettel stopped again, it would have benefited Hamilton to have gained as much time as possible prior to that. They are overthinking things. Sometimes it's better to play checkers than chess.


I don't agree.

The decision to put Bottas on the medium was a good one, a race winning one if they kept the pace up in the second stint and didn't give Vettel breathing space. You are right, that did mean Hamilton then had no chance to win but judging by how easily Vettel breezed by him when on new tyres early in the race, he was never going to be able to fight Vettel on fresh tyres. Hamilton had no chance to win, he was 15 seconds off the lead once he got clean air. Only a SC could bring him back in.

What else should they have done with Bottas at the first stop, Vettel got in before them (no chance to undercut)? Maybe they could have done a very aggressive 2 stopper to snatch the lead. That is it.

Their chance at winning was Vettel having to stop a second time and Hamilton winning on a one-stop. That was their one and only chance really because Bottas was not up to the task of passing Vettel on track. The pass Vettel made on Hamilton earlier was when Lewis was on tires that were 30 laps old and Vettel was on brand new tires. That scenario was never a threat to repeat itself. Hamilton's tires still had plenty of pace in them at the end of the race.

Had Bottas pushed hard on soft tires from the beginning of his second stint, he could have forced Vettel's hand. A second stop would have meant Vettel would come out several seconds behind Hamilton and without enough time to catch him. Instead they hung back and allowed Vettel to race as comfortably as possible for as long as possible. Really, his times only deteriorated in the last few laps and he had such a buffer to Bottas that it took most of those laps for Bottas to get into striking range; giving him just 2 laps to really have a go.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:34 pm 
They had no chance of Hamilton winning with a 1 stop when he essentially began the race 15 seconds behind the leaders... from about lap 7 onwards once he got into 4th it was impossible for him to win from that far back without a SC.

Hamilton could have maybe won the race on a 1 stopper if he had minimised his time loss to the leaders in the opening stint and stayed within 3-4 seconds of Vettel at the first round of stops but he lost too much time coming through. Even then the tyre delta was still very high.

Hamilton on a medium tyre that was about 15 laps old vs Vettel on a new SS would not be too much different to Hamilton on a 25 lap old soft vs Vettel on a new soft. Vettel would be 2 steps softer, although the age would be less - I think that would more or less equal out and Vettel be at least 2 seconds per lap quicker like he was when he breezed by Hamilton. I still see Hamilton having no chance here.

Bottas winning via a 1 stop represented a much better chance of a race win than Hamilton winning on a 1 stop with both Bottas/Vettel 2 stopping.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
lamo wrote:
They had no chance of Hamilton winning with a 1 stop when he essentially began the race 15 seconds behind the leaders... from about lap 7 onwards once he got into 4th it was impossible for him to win from that far back without a SC.

Hamilton could have maybe won the race on a 1 stopper if he had minimised his time loss to the leaders in the opening stint and stayed within 3-4 seconds of Vettel at the first round of stops but he lost too much time coming through. Even then the tyre delta was still very high.

Hamilton on a medium tyre that was about 15 laps old vs Vettel on a new SS would not be too much different to Hamilton on a 25 lap old soft vs Vettel on a new soft. Vettel would be 2 steps softer, although the age would be less - I think that would more or less equal out and Vettel be at least 2 seconds per lap quicker like he was when he breezed by Hamilton. I still see Hamilton having no chance here.

Bottas winning via a 1 stop represented a much better chance of a race win than Hamilton winning on a 1 stop with both Bottas/Vettel 2 stopping.

I don't think you're really thinking this through. When Hamilton stopped he and Vettel were essentially separated by a single pit delta and he was on newer, fresher tires than Vettel. Instead of driving to a delta, had he pushed right away, he could have easily gained 0.5-1.0 seconds per lap for the next 20 laps or so. The pressure on Vettel from Bottas would also have been a huge factor; potentially causing more rapid wear and deg. If Vettel had to pit on lap 50 or so, he would not have had an easy time catching up to Hamilton and Hamilton's tires would have been in good shape anyway. The Mediums could easily have done 40 laps and he only needed about 30. More importantly, the pressure would have been on Vettel to catch him and pass him.

Trying to play the long game to win with Bottas was a dubious strategy. In the grand scheme of things, a Bottas win amounts to little more than damage limitation. Unless, of course, you believe Bottas is a likely WDC contender (I don't). They should have used Bottas to pressure Vettel IMO; not to try to outlast him on harder tires.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:18 pm 
Vettel was never going to pit around lap 50 unless he got a puncture. It was around 17-20 laps to go or nothing.

Saying the mediums "could easily do 40 laps" is true, but at what speed? The mediums still had significant degradation. Hamiltons fastest lap of the race was 33.9, 6 seconds slower than Vettels pole lap. If a Ferrari or Mercedes put SS's on for the last 10 laps, they would have been in the 30's. After all they were in the mid 35's with 100kg of fuel and managing them at the start of the race. Not having to manage them and light fuel they would be very quick.

You still haven't explained how Hamilton can win this race. He had no way to win this race against Vettel once he was 15 seconds behind on lap 10/57. He simply did not have enough of a pace advantage to overcome that. Whatever Vettel did, he would beat Hamilton. What Vettel did was actually the slowest possible way he could have completed that race and had to limp home on shot tyres and still beat him. By my calculations, if Vettel pitted for SS 5 laps from the end he would have finished the race quicker than he actually did.

If Bottas pitted for SS on lap 51/57, very unorthodox, he may have won. That would have been doing just low 31's. Vettel did a 27.9 in qualifying, so that's being quite conservative, especially with how rubber-ed the track is on race day.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
Your calculations fail to take into account the task of actually overtaking. Also I think you greatly overestimate the times possible with SS tires at the end. You could run that fast for maybe 2-3 laps but then you'd be in big trouble. To do those times without the qualy engine modes and without the warm-up/cool-down cycle is asking for trouble. You can't lean on the tires that much in the race and get away with it.

The point is that Hamilton could have gained track position and, even with your scenario, he'd be in roughly a similar situation as he was against Rosberg in 2014. Actually the situation would have been better as there was no safety car to erase his lead this time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:14 pm 
sandman1347 wrote:
Your calculations fail to take into account the task of actually overtaking. Also I think you greatly overestimate the times possible with SS tires at the end. You could run that fast for maybe 2-3 laps but then you'd be in big trouble. To do those times without the qualy engine modes and without the warm-up/cool-down cycle is asking for trouble. You can't lean on the tires that much in the race and get away with it.

The point is that Hamilton could have gained track position and, even with your scenario, he'd be in roughly a similar situation as he was against Rosberg in 2014. Actually the situation would have been better as there was no safety car to erase his lead this time.


Those times? That isn't even fast, its 3 seconds slower than qualifying on the same tyre. I was being conservative. Overtaking is simple when you have 3 second per lap advantage. But anyway it was just an example to show how slow pace was at the end and how much tyre degradation there was.

It would not have been like 2014 at all, the final stint in that was a soft tyre vs a medium tyre - both new. Nico had about 0.4-0.5 advantage being on 1 compound softer.

Vettel would have had 2 compounds softer and 15 laps younger = 2.0-2.5 second advantage. It would have been much more like what he was earlier in the race when Vettel had a 23 lap younger tyres but the same compounds which again was approx 2.0-2.5 seconds.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 822
KingVoid wrote:
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.

That’s not really a rumour though is it? That’s more like Ricciardo making a joke.

Ferrari had slightly better straight line speed than Mercedes in both Australia and Bahrain. The main reason why Merc were second best in qualy in Bahrain was because Ferrari was a lot better through the corners than they were at Australia.


Ricciardo answered a question about the rumour, he wasn't the source, but even so a drop in 8 th in 14 days and all the talk about partymode, perhaps mainly from Merc and the new engine regs probably fuels the rumour


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:59 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5400
Location: Michigan, USA
AnRs wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.

That’s not really a rumour though is it? That’s more like Ricciardo making a joke.

Ferrari had slightly better straight line speed than Mercedes in both Australia and Bahrain. The main reason why Merc were second best in qualy in Bahrain was because Ferrari was a lot better through the corners than they were at Australia.

Ricciardo answered a question about the rumour, he wasn't the source, but even so a drop in 8 th in 14 days and all the talk about partymode, perhaps mainly from Merc and the new engine regs probably fuels the rumour

It happens every single year. Melbourne is a very favorable Merc track, so every year they look super quick there and every year people are surprised when they're not as quick at the next track. You'd think people would have got used to it, but no...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 822
Exediron wrote:
AnRs wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.

That’s not really a rumour though is it? That’s more like Ricciardo making a joke.

Ferrari had slightly better straight line speed than Mercedes in both Australia and Bahrain. The main reason why Merc were second best in qualy in Bahrain was because Ferrari was a lot better through the corners than they were at Australia.

Ricciardo answered a question about the rumour, he wasn't the source, but even so a drop in 8 th in 14 days and all the talk about partymode, perhaps mainly from Merc and the new engine regs probably fuels the rumour

It happens every single year. Melbourne is a very favorable Merc track, so every year they look super quick there and every year people are surprised when they're not as quick at the next track. You'd think people would have got used to it, but no...


But it's not like they've been slow even after Aus since 2014? At the end off 2017 they had like 5th also on everybody?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 12:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.


So in the year we're deciding what engine to use next, the competitive order with this one looks quite tight at the top.

Interesting...

:twisted:

_________________
"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: Wed Apr 11, 2018 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
AnRs wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.

That’s not really a rumour though is it? That’s more like Ricciardo making a joke.

Ferrari had slightly better straight line speed than Mercedes in both Australia and Bahrain. The main reason why Merc were second best in qualy in Bahrain was because Ferrari was a lot better through the corners than they were at Australia.


Ricciardo answered a question about the rumour, he wasn't the source, but even so a drop in 8 th in 14 days and all the talk about partymode, perhaps mainly from Merc and the new engine regs probably fuels the rumour

The idea that Mercedes would just concede the pole position to their main rivals for no reason other than to avoid the press is totally absurd. If they had an ace up their sleeve on Saturday, they would use it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 12:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9215
Lotus49 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.


So in the year we're deciding what engine to use next, the competitive order with this one looks quite tight at the top.

Interesting...

:twisted:

I smell a conspiracy theory :twisted:

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 822
Avoid press wasn't the rumour about, more next gen engines, no restriction inside current rules, let's see what happens in China, this could get interesting. +5th in Abu Dhabi, +7th in Aus, -1 in Bahrain followed by..

If they where confident they had the advantage and a 1 stoppper and a better package, voila we have a conspiracy : )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 624
sandman1347 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
AnRs wrote:
There is also a rumour that Merc didn't use "party mode" in qualy in Bahrain, due to the negative attention they got in Aus.

“It seems that this weekend they’re not up to their usual standard,” Ricciardo added. “Maybe they’ve decided not to use the usual qualifying mode to divert attention from this topic,” Ricciardo smiled.

That’s not really a rumour though is it? That’s more like Ricciardo making a joke.

Ferrari had slightly better straight line speed than Mercedes in both Australia and Bahrain. The main reason why Merc were second best in qualy in Bahrain was because Ferrari was a lot better through the corners than they were at Australia.


Ricciardo answered a question about the rumour, he wasn't the source, but even so a drop in 8 th in 14 days and all the talk about partymode, perhaps mainly from Merc and the new engine regs probably fuels the rumour

The idea that Mercedes would just concede the pole position to their main rivals for no reason other than to avoid the press is totally absurd. If they had an ace up their sleeve on Saturday, they would use it.


Exactly. Toto looked furious that they weren't able to challenge.
Mercedes were poor on SS tyres in comparison to everyone else. They were running full on, every mode possible.
The obvious answer is usually the right one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
Didn't really know where to put this but it talks about the power differences between Mercedes and Ferrari and how it may have swung back to Ferrari and now it's more even on a Saturday because they are risking more than Mercedes with the oil burn.

Shamelessly lifted from xtremclock on AS..

From #AMuS (Google Translate): https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... d-haerter/



"Fuel consumption has risen significantly in all this year. Because the drive units deliver the same amount of power despite the longer running times . And the cars have up to five percent more downforce. As a rule, this also means more air resistance. The top speeds have dropped compared to last year. This means more time on the straights, more time under full load and thus a higher consumption.

The engine technicians have calculated that on the critical routes would need 109 instead of 105 kilograms to get through carefree.

So far it is not clear who is affected. Renault seems to hit hardest. The Renault drivers had in Melbourne even after seven laps under safety-car conditions to take the foot off the gas. In Bahrain even Honda made a better figure. Ferrari operated in Bahrain more lift and coast than Mercedes. However, an engineer from the silver camp warns: "We drove there most of the time in the slipstream. This helps."

Mercedes has another problem, you can hear under the hand. The cars with Mercedes engines are not as fast on the straights as they should be. This has supposedly to do with the oil specification. We hear that Petronas dug up a 2016 oil grade to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Until the beginning of the season, the oil consumption of Mercedes and Ferrari was only 0.01 liters below the permitted limit of 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers.

After the oil correction, Mercedes should be on the safe side when it comes to oil consumption. But that also costs power . Ferrari is obviously still full risk just below the pain threshold. And it benefits relative to the competition. No wonder that Mercedes engine chief Andy Cowell says: "In qualifying Ferrari and we are on par." So far, this was the domain of the Mercedes engine.

The oil theme could boil up soon. The opponents of Ferrari are trying to find out why the Ferrari engine in the factory car smokes so much when starting. And even when driving smokes more than the other Ferrari teams. Should not all engines of a manufacturer be the same this year ?

Some suspect some trick behind that will allow Ferrari to add oil to the combustion process. Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A gasket in the compressor of the turbocharger was carefully constructed "leaking" so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber."

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4733
Reminiscent of the Toyota WRC turbo cheat.
https://jalopnik.com/how-the-best-racing-cheat-of-all-time-worked-1792828060

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4869
So I think it's safe to say that Ferrari have the upper hand right now. They have more power; plain and simple. They are quicker on the straights and through the corners.

The question is; can Mercedes win the development race this year. For the first time in a long time, they're gonna need to.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23034
Ferrari certainly looked quicker here in qualifying. Nearly half a second is unlikely to be just the drivers. I could be wrong but I think it was a lot closer on the harder compounds, so we'll see what happens in the race


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2116
0.530 sec is quite the gap in qualifying. Last year, only around Singapore (0.635 sec) did Ferrari have that kind of advantage over Mercedes.

But Mercedes have successfully lobied for harder tyres around Silverstone, Barcelona and Paul Ricard so performance might yet swing in their favour.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 2000
2 front row lockouts - one in a hot rear limited track and one in a cold rear limited track. It definitely looks like Ferrari is more consistent and faster across different conditions and different track types, at least in qualifying. 39 year old Kimi has been the on the front row in every race so far!

Strange how Vettel has been saying Mercedes is faster in the lead up to both the last 2 weekends yet the opposite seems to be true.


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: Alienturnedhuman, Bing [Bot], Exediron 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