planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:12 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 8:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 2000
Merc and Red Bull seem to be in agreement that Ferrari have the best engine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
Quotes?

I don’t take Toto Wolff very seriously btw. He spent most of 2015 talking about what a huge threat Ferrari was going to be each weekend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 2000
http://grandprix.com/news/ferrari-have- ... ilton.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
KingVoid wrote:
Quotes?

I don’t take Toto Wolff very seriously btw. He spent most of 2015 talking about what a huge threat Ferrari was going to be each weekend.

Essentially, all available evidence corroborates this position. Ferrari's performance relative to Mercedes in the area of straight line speed as well as the obvious boost in performance for customer teams such as Haas and Sauber (and the noticeable relative decline of teams like Force India and Williams) makes this abundantly clear.

What leads you to believe that this isn't an accurate assessment?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
I can agree that Ferrari have caught Mercedes in the engine department, I’m just not convinced that they have surpassed them.

For example, I’m pretty sure that Ferrari still have to save more fuel than Mercedes each race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
KingVoid wrote:
I can agree that Ferrari have caught Mercedes in the engine department, I’m just not convinced that they have surpassed them.

For example, I’m pretty sure that Ferrari still have to save more fuel than Mercedes each race.

What do you base that on? The fact that they are achieving more power is evidenced by the things I mentioned above. The notion that they are losing out in terms of efficiency doesn't seem to have any real underlying evidence to support it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 11:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4653
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
If Ferrari have Leclerc and Vettel in 2019, that could result in them getting a higher Constructors Championship total, which would increase the risk of Mercedes not winning that title.

Staying with Bottas might be enough for Mercedes (if they can provide clearly the best car in 2019), but with Hamilton not seeming to be at his best this year, it seems to me that they might need to strengthen the driver line-up for 2019. If Mercedes value the drivers Championship more, then sticking with what they have would suit that IMO.


If Bottas can keep this form and the form he had before Monaco last year then I think they'll be more than fine, Leclerc as good as he is will still lose points through inexperience, he's getting a pass for doing so in the last 3 races because he's in a Sauber but if he's doing that in Ferrari he'll get more criticism.

If Bottas repeats the post Monaco form last year and Leclerc smashes it then yeah they'll be in bother but I don't know how they can get rid of Bottas if they give him the two year deal, especially if it's a condition of Lewis's new deal that Bottas gets a two year deal as well, so they'll have to stick it out with him whatever Ferrari do.

He doesn't look like slipping back to last years form though, he's been largely very good this year so I don't think it's a problem.

I'm scratching my head at the bolded part. How would it be a condition of Hamilton's contract that Bottas get a contract? Am I missing something here?


Paddock rumour that Lewis asked that Bottas be given a deal for the same duration of his extension as part of his new deal with Mercedes.

http://www.nextgen-auto.com/Mercedes-to ... 28344.html

Ted mentions it here... http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/11 ... p-round-up

_________________
"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 Jul 05, 2018 11:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4739
Of course Sauber is much better this year. They have a current PU instead of the previous years model.

Haas is going to be better just with another season under their belt to develop their car more. Of course the PU improved but they probably also look a bit better than last year but they’re also flattered a bit by FI going backward.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
If Ferrari have Leclerc and Vettel in 2019, that could result in them getting a higher Constructors Championship total, which would increase the risk of Mercedes not winning that title.

Staying with Bottas might be enough for Mercedes (if they can provide clearly the best car in 2019), but with Hamilton not seeming to be at his best this year, it seems to me that they might need to strengthen the driver line-up for 2019. If Mercedes value the drivers Championship more, then sticking with what they have would suit that IMO.


If Bottas can keep this form and the form he had before Monaco last year then I think they'll be more than fine, Leclerc as good as he is will still lose points through inexperience, he's getting a pass for doing so in the last 3 races because he's in a Sauber but if he's doing that in Ferrari he'll get more criticism.

If Bottas repeats the post Monaco form last year and Leclerc smashes it then yeah they'll be in bother but I don't know how they can get rid of Bottas if they give him the two year deal, especially if it's a condition of Lewis's new deal that Bottas gets a two year deal as well, so they'll have to stick it out with him whatever Ferrari do.

He doesn't look like slipping back to last years form though, he's been largely very good this year so I don't think it's a problem.

I'm scratching my head at the bolded part. How would it be a condition of Hamilton's contract that Bottas get a contract? Am I missing something here?


Paddock rumour that Lewis asked that Bottas be given a deal for the same duration of his extension as part of his new deal with Mercedes.

http://www.nextgen-auto.com/Mercedes-to ... 28344.html

Ted mentions it here... http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/11 ... p-round-up

Oh, a rumor...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
I can agree that Ferrari have caught Mercedes in the engine department, I’m just not convinced that they have surpassed them.

For example, I’m pretty sure that Ferrari still have to save more fuel than Mercedes each race.

What do you base that on? The fact that they are achieving more power is evidenced by the things I mentioned above. The notion that they are losing out in terms of efficiency doesn't seem to have any real underlying evidence to support it.

Ferrari were lifting and coasting a lot in Bahrain. Mercedes’ superior fuel consumption is something that’s been wildly reported by AMUS etc...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
I can agree that Ferrari have caught Mercedes in the engine department, I’m just not convinced that they have surpassed them.

For example, I’m pretty sure that Ferrari still have to save more fuel than Mercedes each race.

What do you base that on? The fact that they are achieving more power is evidenced by the things I mentioned above. The notion that they are losing out in terms of efficiency doesn't seem to have any real underlying evidence to support it.

Ferrari were lifting and coasting a lot in Bahrain. Mercedes’ superior fuel consumption is something that’s been wildly reported by AMUS etc...
Speculation is different from reporting. A single race of perhaps running lighter than they should have doesn't suggest that they are losing out in fuel efficiency. Again, where is the evidence of that? We can look at trap speeds and performance of customer teams to corroborate the performance difference between the units. Where is the evidence that Ferrari have some efficiency disadvantage?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
Adrian Newey: "Mercedes is superior in all disciplines. Engine power, fuel consumption, drivability, MGU-H recuperation. You can not make up for that with a better car."

Tobi Grüner: GPS data shows Ferrari had to save significantly more fuel than Mercedes during Barcelona race simulations, which explains part of the pace gap.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... utos-2018/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
sandman1347 wrote:
Speculation is different from reporting.

The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 2:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
KingVoid wrote:
Adrian Newey: "Mercedes is superior in all disciplines. Engine power, fuel consumption, drivability, MGU-H recuperation. You can not make up for that with a better car."

Tobi Grüner: GPS data shows Ferrari had to save significantly more fuel than Mercedes during Barcelona race simulations, which explains part of the pace gap.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... utos-2018/

This article is from before the season even started. Those comments were made without any information about how the cars perform when actually competing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 2:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Speculation is different from reporting.

The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 6:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 822
An analysis based on only top speed : ) All the signs are there that when the tyres suits the Merc they have a sound gap to all the rest.
No wonder Merc are pushing for a tyre change..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 7:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Speculation is different from reporting.

The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Speculation is different from reporting.

The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Add tyres, gear ratios, rake, weight, etc. All help the top speed, it is not an accurate measure, never was.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Speculation is different from reporting.

The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Speculation is different from reporting.

The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4653
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
If Ferrari have Leclerc and Vettel in 2019, that could result in them getting a higher Constructors Championship total, which would increase the risk of Mercedes not winning that title.

Staying with Bottas might be enough for Mercedes (if they can provide clearly the best car in 2019), but with Hamilton not seeming to be at his best this year, it seems to me that they might need to strengthen the driver line-up for 2019. If Mercedes value the drivers Championship more, then sticking with what they have would suit that IMO.


If Bottas can keep this form and the form he had before Monaco last year then I think they'll be more than fine, Leclerc as good as he is will still lose points through inexperience, he's getting a pass for doing so in the last 3 races because he's in a Sauber but if he's doing that in Ferrari he'll get more criticism.

If Bottas repeats the post Monaco form last year and Leclerc smashes it then yeah they'll be in bother but I don't know how they can get rid of Bottas if they give him the two year deal, especially if it's a condition of Lewis's new deal that Bottas gets a two year deal as well, so they'll have to stick it out with him whatever Ferrari do.

He doesn't look like slipping back to last years form though, he's been largely very good this year so I don't think it's a problem.

I'm scratching my head at the bolded part. How would it be a condition of Hamilton's contract that Bottas get a contract? Am I missing something here?


Paddock rumour that Lewis asked that Bottas be given a deal for the same duration of his extension as part of his new deal with Mercedes.

http://www.nextgen-auto.com/Mercedes-to ... 28344.html

Ted mentions it here... http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/11 ... p-round-up

Oh, a rumor...


That's all we tend to have when it comes to contract talks.

_________________
"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: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6130
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
The claims about Ferrari having a better engine are also based on nothing but speculation and assumptions.

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.


I'm sorry I'm barging in, I'm just intrigued by this. I agree with Zoue in this, I think the overall idea I get is that Ferrari have closed the gap in the engine and they are marginally the overall better car (possibly). It is such a close call though that I wouldn't give either competitor the advantage. We've also seen them two being beaten by the RB this year, having an engine clearly inferior, so there's that.

I too think that anything Horner or a direct competitor says must be taken with a pinch of salt. But before the engine upgrades Lewis was saying that the engine modes look equal:

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/head ... -ours.html


Leo Turrini (journo very close to Ferrari, so again pinch of salt) claimed that Mercedes were already hitting 1000bhp before, while Ferrari is close in 2018 now:

https://www.thisisf1.com/2018/04/20/mer ... ul-engine/


Nothing to indicate that either is really better, just that Ferrari has caught up. As for the upgraded engines, I can't find anything as to how they stack up really. But I do not think they are far apart. It is possible that the advantage that Merc had last year and has now disappeared makes it look like Ferrari has the strongest engine. I am not sure how we can gauge which engine is performing better, without knowing figures really.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1141
Location: Far side of Koozebane
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
If Ferrari have Leclerc and Vettel in 2019, that could result in them getting a higher Constructors Championship total, which would increase the risk of Mercedes not winning that title.

Staying with Bottas might be enough for Mercedes (if they can provide clearly the best car in 2019), but with Hamilton not seeming to be at his best this year, it seems to me that they might need to strengthen the driver line-up for 2019. If Mercedes value the drivers Championship more, then sticking with what they have would suit that IMO.


If Bottas can keep this form and the form he had before Monaco last year then I think they'll be more than fine, Leclerc as good as he is will still lose points through inexperience, he's getting a pass for doing so in the last 3 races because he's in a Sauber but if he's doing that in Ferrari he'll get more criticism.

If Bottas repeats the post Monaco form last year and Leclerc smashes it then yeah they'll be in bother but I don't know how they can get rid of Bottas if they give him the two year deal, especially if it's a condition of Lewis's new deal that Bottas gets a two year deal as well, so they'll have to stick it out with him whatever Ferrari do.

He doesn't look like slipping back to last years form though, he's been largely very good this year so I don't think it's a problem.

I'm scratching my head at the bolded part. How would it be a condition of Hamilton's contract that Bottas get a contract? Am I missing something here?


Paddock rumour that Lewis asked that Bottas be given a deal for the same duration of his extension as part of his new deal with Mercedes.

http://www.nextgen-auto.com/Mercedes-to ... 28344.html

Ted mentions it here... http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/11 ... p-round-up


The veto clause when you don't have a veto clause.

_________________
Question: If a compulsive liar tells you they're a compulsive liar, are they really a compulsive liar?

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.

Kind of laughable when you claim I should stick to the facts but ignore the sources that I provide (which contain plenty of facts) and provide no sources of your own. I've even include the anecdotal evidence of people saying that the engine is the strongest (you always seem to prefer that).

So to be clear; of course top speed alone doesn't give away engine performance. That much is obvious and I have made the same point myself earlier in this very topic thread. I don't need you to point that out for me and I think you already know that. How much downforce you run will impact your top speeds as will the engine mode you're running and several other factors. The thing is that those factors would lead to offsets in other areas which would be evident through analysis. Read the articles Zoue. They go to the level of isolating the effects of Q3 engine modes. The reason I bring up your "motive" is because that's the only thing driving your commentary here. You are not driven by data at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 2:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.

Kind of laughable when you claim I should stick to the facts but ignore the sources that I provide (which contain plenty of facts) and provide no sources of your own. I've even include the anecdotal evidence of people saying that the engine is the strongest (you always seem to prefer that).

So to be clear; of course top speed alone doesn't give away engine performance. That much is obvious and I have made the same point myself earlier in this very topic thread. I don't need you to point that out for me and I think you already know that. How much downforce you run will impact your top speeds as will the engine mode you're running and several other factors. The thing is that those factors would lead to offsets in other areas which would be evident through analysis. Read the articles Zoue. They go to the level of isolating the effects of Q3 engine modes. The reason I bring up your "motive" is because that's the only thing driving your commentary here. You are not driven by data at all.

You wrote, and I quote,

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.

So clearly you were drawing parallels between top speed and engine performance, which is the main point I was contesting.

As to the articles, I've already shown that one should be discounted because it is out of date and we are discussing the state of the engines now. Doesn't matter how many you provide like that, since they aren't relevant. Two others share the same source and should therefore be counted as one. And in that one, we have Red Bull saying Ferrari have a "superb" engine, but nothing actually comparing them with Mercedes. And the other quote comes from a Mercedes driver. No self interest there, then. I don't really consider that empirical, especially when the Mercedes drivers have wiped the floor with the Ferrari ones these past two qualifying sessions, ever since their upgrade was introduced. And the final one says it's "no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better." Hardly definitive, is it?

My motive is irrelevant to the question, especially when I could raise the same question with you. You've not shown any actual data, just quotes which rely on hearsay and speculation. Nothing so far provides any real proof and the evidence of the last qualifying sessions would suggest otherwise anyway. But even that's not definitive, since it's clear that advantages in qualifying aren't always mirrored in the races.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
Mark Hughes (not someone I take particularly seriously but people on here do) said that Ferrari ran out of ERS deployment on the long straight in Baku while Mercedes did not. That's why Hamilton was constantly gaining 4 tenths on Vettel in the final sector of every lap.

Ferrari did not have this problem in qualifying but did have this problem in the race.

There's a lot of sources that claim roughly the same thing. Mercedes have a more efficient engine than Ferrari.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2733
KingVoid wrote:
Mark Hughes (not someone I take particularly seriously but people on here do) said that Ferrari ran out of ERS deployment on the long straight in Baku while Mercedes did not. That's why Hamilton was constantly gaining 4 tenths on Vettel in the final sector of every lap.

Ferrari did not have this problem in qualifying but did have this problem in the race.

There's a lot of sources that claim roughly the same thing. Mercedes have a more efficient engine than Ferrari.


I thought it was in quali Mercedes had a deployment advantage on the straight.

_________________
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: Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
KingVoid wrote:
Mark Hughes (not someone I take particularly seriously but people on here do) said that Ferrari ran out of ERS deployment on the long straight in Baku while Mercedes did not. That's why Hamilton was constantly gaining 4 tenths on Vettel in the final sector of every lap.

Ferrari did not have this problem in qualifying but did have this problem in the race.

There's a lot of sources that claim roughly the same thing. Mercedes have a more efficient engine than Ferrari.

to be fair though the latest Ferrari upgrade is said to have addressed Ferrari's efficiency issues. By all accounts they have made significant gains there now


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ferrari undoubtedly have a very good engine, but top speeds are not an accurate way of measuring. That has as much to do with setup as it does horsepower. And "best" encompasses a lot more than that, anyway. Acceleration, flexibility etc all play a part. In any event, if you look at the speed traps in qualifying in Austria Vettel headed Hamilton by 1kph, followed by Ocon, Bottas and then Raikkonen, while in France the order was Perez, Kimi, Sirotkin, Leclerc and then Vettel and Bottas on equal top speed. How you work out that means Ferrari must have the better engine is anybody's guess.

Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.

Kind of laughable when you claim I should stick to the facts but ignore the sources that I provide (which contain plenty of facts) and provide no sources of your own. I've even include the anecdotal evidence of people saying that the engine is the strongest (you always seem to prefer that).

So to be clear; of course top speed alone doesn't give away engine performance. That much is obvious and I have made the same point myself earlier in this very topic thread. I don't need you to point that out for me and I think you already know that. How much downforce you run will impact your top speeds as will the engine mode you're running and several other factors. The thing is that those factors would lead to offsets in other areas which would be evident through analysis. Read the articles Zoue. They go to the level of isolating the effects of Q3 engine modes. The reason I bring up your "motive" is because that's the only thing driving your commentary here. You are not driven by data at all.

You wrote, and I quote,

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.

So clearly you were drawing parallels between top speed and engine performance, which is the main point I was contesting.

As to the articles, I've already shown that one should be discounted because it is out of date and we are discussing the state of the engines now. Doesn't matter how many you provide like that, since they aren't relevant. Two others share the same source and should therefore be counted as one. And in that one, we have Red Bull saying Ferrari have a "superb" engine, but nothing actually comparing them with Mercedes. And the other quote comes from a Mercedes driver. No self interest there, then. I don't really consider that empirical, especially when the Mercedes drivers have wiped the floor with the Ferrari ones these past two qualifying sessions, ever since their upgrade was introduced. And the final one says it's "no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better." Hardly definitive, is it?

My motive is irrelevant to the question, especially when I could raise the same question with you. You've not shown any actual data, just quotes which rely on hearsay and speculation. Nothing so far provides any real proof and the evidence of the last qualifying sessions would suggest otherwise anyway. But even that's not definitive, since it's clear that advantages in qualifying aren't always mirrored in the races.

I've shown plenty of actual data but you've lazily ignored it. Even just look at the qualifying session today. Look at where the cars have relative advantage to one another. It's pretty clear that Mercedes have the slight edge in aero while Ferrari have the slight edge in power. That is how they compare and they are quite closely matched at this point in the season.

It's interesting how, once again, you choose to suggest that Hamilton's comment is based in "self-interest" simply because it undermines your point while never hesitating to use his quotes if you feel they help your points. Anyway, I'm prepared to leave it at that in the interest of not wasting any more of my time but if you press the issue, I will gather the precise relevant data to put the point to bed conclusively.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
You need a cigarette paper to separate the Mercs and Ferraris here. They look astonishingly close in qualifying at least. Nothing between them. Red Bull aren't happy in Silverstone, that's for sure


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1717
Davidson delivering appropriate passion in the Ham-Vet lap comparison. Seems Ham gained through corners and Seb gained through straights.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Zoue wrote:
You need a cigarette paper to separate the Mercs and Ferraris here. They look astonishingly close in qualifying at least. Nothing between them. Red Bull aren't happy in Silverstone, that's for sure

It's interesting because Silverstone tests both power and aero through high-speed corners. Low-speed traction-focused corners are perhaps the one area that Silverstone doesn't really push the limits on (and that's where Red Bull are strongest).

Anyway, as a long-time F1 fan, I think this is the most extreme level of performance that has ever been displayed on a racing track. The amount of Gs being pulled out here is hard to believe. Very futuristic stuff today.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Making a generic comment about setup and cherry-picking some data isn't really an analysis is it Zoue? When you look at any real analysis of the engine performance this season or listen to any feedback on the topic from the people actually in F1, there is pretty much a consensus at this point. I'll post some links below but it's only people in the forum such as yourself and Kingvoid who want to constantly paint Mercedes as having an advantage that claim otherwise.
https://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/f ... n-20180704
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/ ... ull-battle
https://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari- ... ilton.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.

Kind of laughable when you claim I should stick to the facts but ignore the sources that I provide (which contain plenty of facts) and provide no sources of your own. I've even include the anecdotal evidence of people saying that the engine is the strongest (you always seem to prefer that).

So to be clear; of course top speed alone doesn't give away engine performance. That much is obvious and I have made the same point myself earlier in this very topic thread. I don't need you to point that out for me and I think you already know that. How much downforce you run will impact your top speeds as will the engine mode you're running and several other factors. The thing is that those factors would lead to offsets in other areas which would be evident through analysis. Read the articles Zoue. They go to the level of isolating the effects of Q3 engine modes. The reason I bring up your "motive" is because that's the only thing driving your commentary here. You are not driven by data at all.

You wrote, and I quote,

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.

So clearly you were drawing parallels between top speed and engine performance, which is the main point I was contesting.

As to the articles, I've already shown that one should be discounted because it is out of date and we are discussing the state of the engines now. Doesn't matter how many you provide like that, since they aren't relevant. Two others share the same source and should therefore be counted as one. And in that one, we have Red Bull saying Ferrari have a "superb" engine, but nothing actually comparing them with Mercedes. And the other quote comes from a Mercedes driver. No self interest there, then. I don't really consider that empirical, especially when the Mercedes drivers have wiped the floor with the Ferrari ones these past two qualifying sessions, ever since their upgrade was introduced. And the final one says it's "no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better." Hardly definitive, is it?

My motive is irrelevant to the question, especially when I could raise the same question with you. You've not shown any actual data, just quotes which rely on hearsay and speculation. Nothing so far provides any real proof and the evidence of the last qualifying sessions would suggest otherwise anyway. But even that's not definitive, since it's clear that advantages in qualifying aren't always mirrored in the races.

I've shown plenty of actual data but you've lazily ignored it. Even just look at the qualifying session today. Look at where the cars have relative advantage to one another. It's pretty clear that Mercedes have the slight edge in aero while Ferrari have the slight edge in power. That is how they compare and they are quite closely matched at this point in the season.

It's interesting how, once again, you choose to suggest that Hamilton's comment is based in "self-interest" simply because it undermines your point while never hesitating to use his quotes if you feel they help your points. Anyway, I'm prepared to leave it at that in the interest of not wasting any more of my time but if you press the issue, I will gather the precise relevant data to put the point to bed conclusively.

Well you can leave it at that if you want but I'm not going to let some keyboard warrior call me lazy without calling him out. I've tried to keep this dispassionate but you appear intent on trying to cause an argument. Why you can't debate like an adult is anybody's guess. You appear unable to debate without throwing accusations or slurs around like confetti.

You haven't provided any data in this exchange. If you say you have, then frankly you're lying. You tried to draw parallels between top speeds and engine power, which in itself is extremely lazy "analysis," and that's the point I've contested. That's it. I think the cars are too close at the moment to be certain where their advantages lie, since a lot depends on setup anyway and it's hard separate the package out. But I don't have a problem with someone thinking that Ferrari's engine is better, just the dodgy reasoning behind it. Top speed is no evidence of anything


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Another important point is that they are using the thinner tires here. In the past, this has meant an advantage for Mercedes but that advantage seems to be gone here. It's possible that Ferrari will be quite a bit ahead in the coming races but as of today, they are neck and neck.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think you may be a bit confused. I'm not the one making generic claims such as top speed demonstrating superior engine performance. I'm simply pointing out that there are several factors which influence that and you cannot deduce the engine's relative strengths from top speed alone. And it's hardly cherry picking when we are talking about whether the engine is the best now and subsequently highlighting data from the most recent races.

Instead of trying to second guess my motives, stick to the facts of the matter. All I'm saying is that if you want to make a claim of which engine is better you need to do more than look at top speeds. And regarding cherry picking, two of those articles are using the same source, while one is from the middle of May and both Ferrari and Mercedes have brought significant upgrades since then, making it largely irrelevant. Finally, the last article doesn't actually state which engine is better, so it's unclear just what kind of evidence it is.

FWIW, I think it's possible that Ferrari moved ahead with their most recent upgrade, but Mercedes may well have re-passed them again with their latest one. Certainly Lauda was claiming that the 2.1 spec was "two tenths faster" before the French Grand Prix, where Lewis coincidentally ended up nearly 4 tenths clear of Vettel in qualifying, while in the last GP Bottas qualified more than 3 tenths ahead. I don't know whether that makes the engine better, as opposed to the whole package, but for me it's difficult to conclude that the Ferrari is superior at this point.

Kind of laughable when you claim I should stick to the facts but ignore the sources that I provide (which contain plenty of facts) and provide no sources of your own. I've even include the anecdotal evidence of people saying that the engine is the strongest (you always seem to prefer that).

So to be clear; of course top speed alone doesn't give away engine performance. That much is obvious and I have made the same point myself earlier in this very topic thread. I don't need you to point that out for me and I think you already know that. How much downforce you run will impact your top speeds as will the engine mode you're running and several other factors. The thing is that those factors would lead to offsets in other areas which would be evident through analysis. Read the articles Zoue. They go to the level of isolating the effects of Q3 engine modes. The reason I bring up your "motive" is because that's the only thing driving your commentary here. You are not driven by data at all.

You wrote, and I quote,

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.

So clearly you were drawing parallels between top speed and engine performance, which is the main point I was contesting.

As to the articles, I've already shown that one should be discounted because it is out of date and we are discussing the state of the engines now. Doesn't matter how many you provide like that, since they aren't relevant. Two others share the same source and should therefore be counted as one. And in that one, we have Red Bull saying Ferrari have a "superb" engine, but nothing actually comparing them with Mercedes. And the other quote comes from a Mercedes driver. No self interest there, then. I don't really consider that empirical, especially when the Mercedes drivers have wiped the floor with the Ferrari ones these past two qualifying sessions, ever since their upgrade was introduced. And the final one says it's "no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better." Hardly definitive, is it?

My motive is irrelevant to the question, especially when I could raise the same question with you. You've not shown any actual data, just quotes which rely on hearsay and speculation. Nothing so far provides any real proof and the evidence of the last qualifying sessions would suggest otherwise anyway. But even that's not definitive, since it's clear that advantages in qualifying aren't always mirrored in the races.

I've shown plenty of actual data but you've lazily ignored it. Even just look at the qualifying session today. Look at where the cars have relative advantage to one another. It's pretty clear that Mercedes have the slight edge in aero while Ferrari have the slight edge in power. That is how they compare and they are quite closely matched at this point in the season.

It's interesting how, once again, you choose to suggest that Hamilton's comment is based in "self-interest" simply because it undermines your point while never hesitating to use his quotes if you feel they help your points. Anyway, I'm prepared to leave it at that in the interest of not wasting any more of my time but if you press the issue, I will gather the precise relevant data to put the point to bed conclusively.

Well you can leave it at that if you want but I'm not going to let some keyboard warrior call me lazy without calling him out. I've tried to keep this dispassionate but you appear intent on trying to cause an argument. Why you can't debate like an adult is anybody's guess. You appear unable to debate without throwing accusations or slurs around like confetti.

You haven't provided any data in this exchange. If you say you have, then frankly you're lying. You tried to draw parallels between top speeds and engine power, which in itself is extremely lazy "analysis," and that's the point I've contested. That's it. I think the cars are too close at the moment to be certain where their advantages lie, since a lot depends on setup anyway and it's hard separate the package out. But I don't have a problem with someone thinking that Ferrari's engine is better, just the dodgy reasoning behind it. Top speed is no evidence of anything

Keyboard warrior? Have it your way. I'll be back with the information required within the next day or so but in the meantime, I'll leave you with this one question: what information have you provided? What data do you have to support your claims? When I post my response with all of the relevant data as well as the analysis of said-data, if you do not provide similar data to support your claims, be prepared to be called out on it. You provide nothing but hot air and want others to have air-tight data sheets. As I mentioned before, annoying as it might be, I will take the time to put a conclusive end to this discussion (feels like de ja vu).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23042
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Kind of laughable when you claim I should stick to the facts but ignore the sources that I provide (which contain plenty of facts) and provide no sources of your own. I've even include the anecdotal evidence of people saying that the engine is the strongest (you always seem to prefer that).

So to be clear; of course top speed alone doesn't give away engine performance. That much is obvious and I have made the same point myself earlier in this very topic thread. I don't need you to point that out for me and I think you already know that. How much downforce you run will impact your top speeds as will the engine mode you're running and several other factors. The thing is that those factors would lead to offsets in other areas which would be evident through analysis. Read the articles Zoue. They go to the level of isolating the effects of Q3 engine modes. The reason I bring up your "motive" is because that's the only thing driving your commentary here. You are not driven by data at all.

You wrote, and I quote,

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.

So clearly you were drawing parallels between top speed and engine performance, which is the main point I was contesting.

As to the articles, I've already shown that one should be discounted because it is out of date and we are discussing the state of the engines now. Doesn't matter how many you provide like that, since they aren't relevant. Two others share the same source and should therefore be counted as one. And in that one, we have Red Bull saying Ferrari have a "superb" engine, but nothing actually comparing them with Mercedes. And the other quote comes from a Mercedes driver. No self interest there, then. I don't really consider that empirical, especially when the Mercedes drivers have wiped the floor with the Ferrari ones these past two qualifying sessions, ever since their upgrade was introduced. And the final one says it's "no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better." Hardly definitive, is it?

My motive is irrelevant to the question, especially when I could raise the same question with you. You've not shown any actual data, just quotes which rely on hearsay and speculation. Nothing so far provides any real proof and the evidence of the last qualifying sessions would suggest otherwise anyway. But even that's not definitive, since it's clear that advantages in qualifying aren't always mirrored in the races.

I've shown plenty of actual data but you've lazily ignored it. Even just look at the qualifying session today. Look at where the cars have relative advantage to one another. It's pretty clear that Mercedes have the slight edge in aero while Ferrari have the slight edge in power. That is how they compare and they are quite closely matched at this point in the season.

It's interesting how, once again, you choose to suggest that Hamilton's comment is based in "self-interest" simply because it undermines your point while never hesitating to use his quotes if you feel they help your points. Anyway, I'm prepared to leave it at that in the interest of not wasting any more of my time but if you press the issue, I will gather the precise relevant data to put the point to bed conclusively.

Well you can leave it at that if you want but I'm not going to let some keyboard warrior call me lazy without calling him out. I've tried to keep this dispassionate but you appear intent on trying to cause an argument. Why you can't debate like an adult is anybody's guess. You appear unable to debate without throwing accusations or slurs around like confetti.

You haven't provided any data in this exchange. If you say you have, then frankly you're lying. You tried to draw parallels between top speeds and engine power, which in itself is extremely lazy "analysis," and that's the point I've contested. That's it. I think the cars are too close at the moment to be certain where their advantages lie, since a lot depends on setup anyway and it's hard separate the package out. But I don't have a problem with someone thinking that Ferrari's engine is better, just the dodgy reasoning behind it. Top speed is no evidence of anything

Keyboard warrior? Have it your way. I'll be back with the information required within the next day or so but in the meantime, I'll leave you with this one question: what information have you provided? What data do you have to support your claims? When I post my response with all of the relevant data as well as the analysis of said-data, if you do not provide similar data to support your claims, be prepared to be called out on it. You provide nothing but hot air and want others to have air-tight data sheets. As I mentioned before, annoying as it might be, I will take the time to put a conclusive end to this discussion (feels like de ja vu).
You've got this back to front. I've not asked you for anything. I'm not demanding you provide data, but you're claiming to have already provided it when you haven't, then called me lazy for ignoring data that doesn't actually exist!

I don't need you to provide data. Just don't claim you have when you haven't. Just like you're now claiming that I'm demanding air-tight data sheets when I've not made a single request for anything. You're having a conversation in your mind that I'm not part of but you're projecting that discussion onto me in here. Please stop it.

To avoid confusion, I don't need data to disagree with the notion that top speeds are proof of a better engine. I don't need you to spend time on working out data to answer a non-existent demand of mine. If you want to do it, knock yourself out. But don't do it in response to a demand I haven't made. Look back through our exchange and you'll see that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 2:51 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3256
Invade wrote:
Davidson delivering appropriate passion in the Ham-Vet lap comparison. Seems Ham gained through corners and Seb gained through straights.


It's been the same since Australia, Merc is better in high speed corners but Ferrari is better in the straights and low speed traction zones. It is no wonder why many think they have a stronger engine. Silverstone is a weird track in a sense that a lot of those high speed corners are taken flat out so they are essentially straights. No wonder Ferrari was so close here, and could have easily gotten pole.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4898
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
You wrote, and I quote,

No it's based on actual data. Ferrari have had higher top speeds then Mercedes pretty much everywhere. Haas and Sauber also have superior top end speed to Mercedes customer teams more often than not. They have also leapfrogged those teams in terms of performance this season despite trailing behind them last season. So no, it's no speculation and assumption at all. It's called analysis.

So clearly you were drawing parallels between top speed and engine performance, which is the main point I was contesting.

As to the articles, I've already shown that one should be discounted because it is out of date and we are discussing the state of the engines now. Doesn't matter how many you provide like that, since they aren't relevant. Two others share the same source and should therefore be counted as one. And in that one, we have Red Bull saying Ferrari have a "superb" engine, but nothing actually comparing them with Mercedes. And the other quote comes from a Mercedes driver. No self interest there, then. I don't really consider that empirical, especially when the Mercedes drivers have wiped the floor with the Ferrari ones these past two qualifying sessions, ever since their upgrade was introduced. And the final one says it's "no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better." Hardly definitive, is it?

My motive is irrelevant to the question, especially when I could raise the same question with you. You've not shown any actual data, just quotes which rely on hearsay and speculation. Nothing so far provides any real proof and the evidence of the last qualifying sessions would suggest otherwise anyway. But even that's not definitive, since it's clear that advantages in qualifying aren't always mirrored in the races.

I've shown plenty of actual data but you've lazily ignored it. Even just look at the qualifying session today. Look at where the cars have relative advantage to one another. It's pretty clear that Mercedes have the slight edge in aero while Ferrari have the slight edge in power. That is how they compare and they are quite closely matched at this point in the season.

It's interesting how, once again, you choose to suggest that Hamilton's comment is based in "self-interest" simply because it undermines your point while never hesitating to use his quotes if you feel they help your points. Anyway, I'm prepared to leave it at that in the interest of not wasting any more of my time but if you press the issue, I will gather the precise relevant data to put the point to bed conclusively.

Well you can leave it at that if you want but I'm not going to let some keyboard warrior call me lazy without calling him out. I've tried to keep this dispassionate but you appear intent on trying to cause an argument. Why you can't debate like an adult is anybody's guess. You appear unable to debate without throwing accusations or slurs around like confetti.

You haven't provided any data in this exchange. If you say you have, then frankly you're lying. You tried to draw parallels between top speeds and engine power, which in itself is extremely lazy "analysis," and that's the point I've contested. That's it. I think the cars are too close at the moment to be certain where their advantages lie, since a lot depends on setup anyway and it's hard separate the package out. But I don't have a problem with someone thinking that Ferrari's engine is better, just the dodgy reasoning behind it. Top speed is no evidence of anything

Keyboard warrior? Have it your way. I'll be back with the information required within the next day or so but in the meantime, I'll leave you with this one question: what information have you provided? What data do you have to support your claims? When I post my response with all of the relevant data as well as the analysis of said-data, if you do not provide similar data to support your claims, be prepared to be called out on it. You provide nothing but hot air and want others to have air-tight data sheets. As I mentioned before, annoying as it might be, I will take the time to put a conclusive end to this discussion (feels like de ja vu).
You've got this back to front. I've not asked you for anything. I'm not demanding you provide data, but you're claiming to have already provided it when you haven't, then called me lazy for ignoring data that doesn't actually exist!

I don't need you to provide data. Just don't claim you have when you haven't. Just like you're now claiming that I'm demanding air-tight data sheets when I've not made a single request for anything. You're having a conversation in your mind that I'm not part of but you're projecting that discussion onto me in here. Please stop it.

To avoid confusion, I don't need data to disagree with the notion that top speeds are proof of a better engine. I don't need you to spend time on working out data to answer a non-existent demand of mine. If you want to do it, knock yourself out. But don't do it in response to a demand I haven't made. Look back through our exchange and you'll see that.

First of all, there are data in the sources provided. The fact that you choose to discount it, doesn't mean that it isn't there. Secondly, top speed alone doesn't necessarily isolate engine performance but it certainly is one of the key factors in analyzing it. Making the point (about setup) that I have made myself and repeating it to the point of redundancy doesn't strengthen your argument.

In the interest of potentially saving myself some time, let me ask you this: do you agree that the evidence suggests that the Ferrari engine is the most powerful right now? Of course this cannot be 100% proven (unless we get a video of them on the dyno). Scientists will tell you that nothing can ever be proven right. Hypotheses can only be supported by evidence or proven wrong. But considering how the Mercedes and Ferrari cars stack up to one another as well as the way that the customer teams compare to one another; would you agree that, with the evidence we have right now, the Ferrari seems to have the slight edge in power? If you do agree then we really don't need to carry this on any further.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 3:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7141
A very promising session for Ferrari. This was the most dominant Mercedes track last year and they've come within a tenth of locking out the front row.

Add to that Kimi lost a lot in the second sector indicating a good lap would have him on pole and that Vettel had a neck injury which almost made him miss qualifying, on one of the highest G demanding circuits on the calendar, a track which has never been a strong track for him anyway.

Ferrari were probably the best car today all things considered and while track temps probably helped they would have still been dominated last year with these temps IMO. Very encouraging for them going forward.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 5:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2121
In Canada, I believed that Mercedes was just as good as Ferrari and it was Seb who made the difference while Lewis had an off weekend.

Today in Silverstone, I reckon Ferrari may have had the faster car in qualifying (by maybe a tenth). Hamilton just put together an amazing lap while Seb and Kimi made some small mistakes.


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: Google Adsense [Bot], kleefton, Toby. 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