planetf1.com

It is currently Mon May 21, 2018 7:03 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1181
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.

In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.


He qualified behind Bottas, he finished behind Bottas, you seem to keep forgetting this. Without his penalty who knows what would have happened

Indeed. And several drivers who started on the dirty side of the gird (includind Kimi) struggled to get going well. Hamilton will have been on the same side but his penalty changed this. I'm not at all sure he'd have beaten Bottas. Bottas didn't look at all weak over the weekend there and is usually very good at defending.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4241
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

_________________
"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 Apr 20, 2018 9:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

That is very interesting, thank you Lotus49. I find it a very suspicious claim, that last bit I mean. The bit claiming that a team can design a component to fail, not totally, a little bit, not much, enough to give the exact performance you wanted but not fail entirely... That is just too difficult to achieve and any slight mistake would cost them dearly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1614
Lamo... if you're still somewhere out there lurking, I hope you'll come back.


Over the course of the season I simply don't see Renault power dealing with the reliability of Mercedes and Ferrari power. Red Bull may end up often looking like the raciest car but even if it's the case it won't be enough to snatch the titles away from the other two, who also have proven perennial WDC contenders on their teams.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 290
Siao7 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

That is very interesting, thank you Lotus49. I find it a very suspicious claim, that last bit I mean. The bit claiming that a team can design a component to fail, not totally, a little bit, not much, enough to give the exact performance you wanted but not fail entirely... That is just too difficult to achieve and any slight mistake would cost them dearly.

To me that doesn't read as the seal failing, but the tolerances been such that oil can seep past the desired amount.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
dompclarke wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

That is very interesting, thank you Lotus49. I find it a very suspicious claim, that last bit I mean. The bit claiming that a team can design a component to fail, not totally, a little bit, not much, enough to give the exact performance you wanted but not fail entirely... That is just too difficult to achieve and any slight mistake would cost them dearly.

To me that doesn't read as the seal failing, but the tolerances been such that oil can seep past the desired amount.

Yeah, you could be right, but a seal is a seal, shouldn't let anything go through, right? If it does, it has failed, I don't think they have tolerances in seals. That's from my personal experience with seals, but I may be wrong of course


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

BIB: isn't that effectively cheating? Beyond simply pushing the boundaries of the rules, I mean? And if it's known, why aren't the transgressors being punished, whoever they may be?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4241
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

BIB: isn't that effectively cheating? Beyond simply pushing the boundaries of the rules, I mean? And if it's known, why aren't the transgressors being punished, whoever they may be?


It wouldn't be visible just on inspection and there's no way to monitor it during the race or qualy would be my guesses so it can just be denied and the usage explained away as normal losses as oil is burned to some degree in every engine.

_________________
"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 Apr 20, 2018 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 792
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4241
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..


And Ferrari?

_________________
"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 Apr 20, 2018 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

well, to be fair we don't know if it was just Merc or if Ferrari are doing it too. The article indicates that Merc are being cautious and Ferrari more aggressive, so maybe they are both culprits here.

I seem to recall Ferrari last year had to stop their oil burning because they were found out, but Merc at the time weren't and they surged ahead as a result. Would be frankly disturbing if last year's title-winning car was cheating.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4241
They've definitely both been doing it as far as I'm concerned. They both go through far more oil than Renault and Honda and I don't think it's a coincidence. It's consistently been both that the FIA have had suspicion about since Spain 2015. I first read about it in January 2015 when the ex Mercedes combustion chief started at Ferrari and it was being talked about on the Ferrari forum that Merc were doing something with the oil.

Australia usage was supposedly..

Mercedes 0.58/100km
Ferrari 0.58/100km
Renault 0.1-0.2/100km
Honda 0.1-0.2/100km

(Limit 0.6/100km)

Again, too much coincidence for me when you take into account performance differences between the manufacturers.

_________________
"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 Apr 20, 2018 11:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
I think they're close enough to have the drivers make the difference which is what most of us want anyway right?

Like last year?

Well yes or are you seeing both Mercedes drivers in the top2 of the championship followed by 2 Ferrari drivers in last year's results?

I don't fully understand but I will just take the yes. :)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.

I think I mentioned this as well in another thread, did Mercedes not want to give Hamilton an unfair advantage on Bottas, likewise Ferrari didn't really want to give Kimi the opportunity of beating Vettel?

What's quite telling is that both Vettel and Bottas were not happy that they weren't able to be given the opportunity to change their tyres under the SC, now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on?
I doubt either would have been thinking of their team mates when they said that, tbh. They were fighting for the lead and lost the opportunity to convert it. That's all that would have been on their minds

They would be aware of exactly what took place, who pitted and who didn't.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
Lotus49 wrote:
They've definitely both been doing it as far as I'm concerned. They both go through far more oil than Renault and Honda and I don't think it's a coincidence. It's consistently been both that the FIA have had suspicion about since Spain 2015. I first read about it in January 2015 when the ex Mercedes combustion chief started at Ferrari and it was being talked about on the Ferrari forum that Merc were doing something with the oil.

Australia usage was supposedly..

Mercedes 0.58/100km
Ferrari 0.58/100km
Renault 0.1-0.2/100km
Honda 0.1-0.2/100km

(Limit 0.6/100km)

Again, too much coincidence for me when you take into account performance differences between the manufacturers.

yeah I should have put "likely" instead of "maybe" in my previous post.

Still disturbs me that the FIA have had their suspicions but haven't been able to assuage them completely in nearly three years. To my mind if a manufacturer goes to such lengths to circumvent the rules that's a lot more serious than bending them slightly. Considering the impact this supposedly has, I'm a little surprised the FIA haven't been more aggressive in countering it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.

In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.


He qualified behind Bottas, he finished behind Bottas, you seem to keep forgetting this. Without his penalty who knows what would have happened

Well you can't say it's a fair fight when one driver starts with an disadvantage not of his own making.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 792
Zoue wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

well, to be fair we don't know if it was just Merc or if Ferrari are doing it too. The article indicates that Merc are being cautious and Ferrari more aggressive, so maybe they are both culprits here.

I seem to recall Ferrari last year had to stop their oil burning because they were found out, but Merc at the time weren't and they surged ahead as a result. Would be frankly disturbing if last year's title-winning car was cheating.


It was called out already last year that Ferrari didn't have as clever solution as Merc, and when they had theirs removed it was season over.

Since Ferrari haven't made a huge fuss over it they might be using it also, but perhaps have more control off it than Merc or is not in such a bad position (read diesel engines) as Merc?


Last edited by AnRs on Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.

I think I mentioned this as well in another thread, did Mercedes not want to give Hamilton an unfair advantage on Bottas, likewise Ferrari didn't really want to give Kimi the opportunity of beating Vettel?

What's quite telling is that both Vettel and Bottas were not happy that they weren't able to be given the opportunity to change their tyres under the SC, now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on?
I doubt either would have been thinking of their team mates when they said that, tbh. They were fighting for the lead and lost the opportunity to convert it. That's all that would have been on their minds

They would be aware of exactly what took place, who pitted and who didn't.

I should have made clear I was referring to the line "now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on." What happened with their team mates is largely irrelevant and they would likely have been angry about their teams not being as aggressive with the tyres as Red Bull were, leaving them exposed. Their team mates wouldn't have been a factor


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

BIB: isn't that effectively cheating? Beyond simply pushing the boundaries of the rules, I mean? And if it's known, why aren't the transgressors being punished, whoever they may be?

Well it's been mentioned that Ferrari have been doing it just in case you are wondering?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

I read that Ferrari are doing it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 792
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

I read that Ferrari are doing it.


And who do you beleived started it and won titles with it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

well, to be fair we don't know if it was just Merc or if Ferrari are doing it too. The article indicates that Merc are being cautious and Ferrari more aggressive, so maybe they are both culprits here.

I seem to recall Ferrari last year had to stop their oil burning because they were found out, but Merc at the time weren't and they surged ahead as a result. Would be frankly disturbing if last year's title-winning car was cheating.

Whilst Ferrari running an extra oil tank to burn oil in the engine was not cheating at all. :)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Seems Mercedes switched to an older oil spec after Australia because they were too close to going over the new reduced 0.6ltr/100km limit for usage in the race. Ferrari are still risking it and that's why they now have more power than Mercedes but are still a bit behind on efficiency in the race. Mercedes have now used two specs of oil this year so are only allowed one more. Also reveals how the oil burn trick was done.

Quote:
Since the GP Bahrain Ferrari leads the power ranking even. Already there was to recognize that the red cars have made up on the straights compared to Mercedes floor. The same picture was repeated in China . Vettel was just ahead of three out of four speed measurements. Ferrari and Mercedes separated at top speed 1.5 km / h.

That's not because the Ferrari V6 Turbo had once again gained in performance. Mercedes had decided before the second Grand Prix of the year to restore a level of oil. The former best in class is now using an oil specification from 2016 again. This results in slight performance losses.

The reason for the voluntary disarmament is due to a rule change. Mercedes wants to be on the safe side with oil consumption. Since this season, only 0.6 liters per 100 kilometers may be consumed. This is to prevent oil from being introduced into the combustion process for increased performance.

Meanwhile, it is also known how the oil tricksters have practiced in the past. A seal in the compressor of the turbocharger was deliberately "leaking" designed so that a pre-calculated amount of oil could enter the combustion chamber.


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... tor-power/

BIB: isn't that effectively cheating? Beyond simply pushing the boundaries of the rules, I mean? And if it's known, why aren't the transgressors being punished, whoever they may be?

Well it's been mentioned that Ferrari have been doing it just in case you are wondering?
Only Ferrari? Has that been mentioned anywhere?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.

I think I mentioned this as well in another thread, did Mercedes not want to give Hamilton an unfair advantage on Bottas, likewise Ferrari didn't really want to give Kimi the opportunity of beating Vettel?

What's quite telling is that both Vettel and Bottas were not happy that they weren't able to be given the opportunity to change their tyres under the SC, now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on?
I doubt either would have been thinking of their team mates when they said that, tbh. They were fighting for the lead and lost the opportunity to convert it. That's all that would have been on their minds

They would be aware of exactly what took place, who pitted and who didn't.

I should have made clear I was referring to the line "now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on." What happened with their team mates is largely irrelevant and they would likely have been angry about their teams not being as aggressive with the tyres as Red Bull were, leaving them exposed. Their team mates wouldn't have been a factor

Their ire seemed to be with the stewards not allowing them to change their tyres and I just ponder given that their teammates did not change their tyres why they think it would have been different with themselves?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

well, to be fair we don't know if it was just Merc or if Ferrari are doing it too. The article indicates that Merc are being cautious and Ferrari more aggressive, so maybe they are both culprits here.

I seem to recall Ferrari last year had to stop their oil burning because they were found out, but Merc at the time weren't and they surged ahead as a result. Would be frankly disturbing if last year's title-winning car was cheating.

Whilst Ferrari running an extra oil tank to burn oil in the engine was not cheating at all. :)

What is your point here? I stated above that maybe both are culprits and last year Ferrari stopped because they were found out. So why mention it again?

My point is not with the ones who were caught, but with the possibility that others were not caught and were therefore cheating.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think I mentioned this as well in another thread, did Mercedes not want to give Hamilton an unfair advantage on Bottas, likewise Ferrari didn't really want to give Kimi the opportunity of beating Vettel?

What's quite telling is that both Vettel and Bottas were not happy that they weren't able to be given the opportunity to change their tyres under the SC, now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on?
I doubt either would have been thinking of their team mates when they said that, tbh. They were fighting for the lead and lost the opportunity to convert it. That's all that would have been on their minds

They would be aware of exactly what took place, who pitted and who didn't.

I should have made clear I was referring to the line "now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on." What happened with their team mates is largely irrelevant and they would likely have been angry about their teams not being as aggressive with the tyres as Red Bull were, leaving them exposed. Their team mates wouldn't have been a factor

Their ire seemed to be with the stewards not allowing them to change their tyres and I just ponder given that their teammates did not change their tyres why they think it would have been different with themselves?

I'm not sure I understand. How did the stewards not allow them to change their tyres?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:

Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.

In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.


He qualified behind Bottas, he finished behind Bottas, you seem to keep forgetting this. Without his penalty who knows what would have happened

Well you can't say it's a fair fight when one driver starts with an disadvantage not of his own making.

This is F1, fairness is something that is not a given. And again, he had qualified behind Bottas BEFORE the penalty


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4241
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
They've definitely both been doing it as far as I'm concerned. They both go through far more oil than Renault and Honda and I don't think it's a coincidence. It's consistently been both that the FIA have had suspicion about since Spain 2015. I first read about it in January 2015 when the ex Mercedes cöombustion chief started at Ferrari and it was being talked about on the Ferrari forum that Merc were doing something with the oil.

Australia usage was supposedly..

Mercedes 0.58/100km
Ferrari 0.58/100km
Renault 0.1-0.2/100km
Honda 0.1-0.2/100km

(Limit 0.6/100km)

Again, too much coincidence for me when you take into account performance differences between the manufacturers.

yeah I should have put "likely" instead of "maybe" in my previous post.

Still disturbs me that the FIA have had their suspicions but haven't been able to assuage them completely in nearly three years. To my mind if a manufacturer goes to such lengths to circumvent the rules that's a lot more serious than bending them slightly. Considering the impact this supposedly has, I'm a little surprised the FIA haven't been more aggressive in countering it


To be honest I think it took a while for the FIA to work out exactly what was going on. If I remember rightly their first investigation was checking whether the oil was being changed somehow while it was running so they wanted to test a sample from before and after as they thought something was being added but they found nothing.

Then it was speculated they found nothing because the oil itself carried the anti-knock properties already in it's and then they also had to work out how it was being delivered and with no one fessing up I think that took too long for them to work out.

It seems they're getting there but tbh I'd hoped the ban on the active valve would put an end to it full stop but obviously not with this new suspected method.

_________________
"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 Apr 20, 2018 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4241
Siao7 wrote:
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


All I suspect. Mercedes customers seem to have fallen back quite a bit and as much as Williams driver line up isn't helping they just don't seem to have that competitive edge having a Mercedes engine used to bring. Meanwhile Haas skyrocket up the grid.

More coincidences maybe, but not for me.

_________________
"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 Apr 20, 2018 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

I read that Ferrari are doing it.


And who do you beleived started it and won titles with it?

Why didn't Ferrari protest knowing that Mercedes were doing it, maybe because they were also doing it themselves?

Engines burning oil I believe is a natural process as such, even the Honda and Renault engines burn oil so it's not illegal as such.

I thought the diesel engine tricks relate to VAG and not Mercedes?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
Lotus49 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


All I suspect. Mercedes customers seem to have fallen back quite a bit and as much as Williams driver line up isn't helping they just don't seem to have that competitive edge having a Mercedes engine used to bring. Meanwhile Haas skyrocket up the grid.

More coincidences maybe, but not for me.


Ok, thanks. I see what you mean, but if they were indeed cheating I find it difficult to believe that they would instruct/show the customer teams how to also cheat. How would that work?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

well, to be fair we don't know if it was just Merc or if Ferrari are doing it too. The article indicates that Merc are being cautious and Ferrari more aggressive, so maybe they are both culprits here.

I seem to recall Ferrari last year had to stop their oil burning because they were found out, but Merc at the time weren't and they surged ahead as a result. Would be frankly disturbing if last year's title-winning car was cheating.

Whilst Ferrari running an extra oil tank to burn oil in the engine was not cheating at all. :)

What is your point here? I stated above that maybe both are culprits and last year Ferrari stopped because they were found out. So why mention it again?

My point is not with the ones who were caught, but with the possibility that others were not caught and were therefore cheating.

You actually don't know who was doing what and are just assuming that it was just Mercedes doing all this supposed cheating.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
Lotus49 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


All I suspect. Mercedes customers seem to have fallen back quite a bit and as much as Williams driver line up isn't helping they just don't seem to have that competitive edge having a Mercedes engine used to bring. Meanwhile Haas skyrocket up the grid.

More coincidences maybe, but not for me.

Raises a couple of questions for me. Firstly, if Ferrari are doing it now then the FIA needs to get cleverer in how they identify these things so that they can stop them. Maybe demand that each manufacturer provides a new engine every time an upgrade happens, so that the FIA can take it apart to look for transgressions. Not sure if that would work in regard to companies' IP, but clearly what they are doing now isn't enough and they need to stamp it out. Secondly, if it turns out that a large part of Merc's advantage over the last couple of years has been the illegal use of oil, then I hope they find a book the size of Australia to throw at them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.

In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.


He qualified behind Bottas, he finished behind Bottas, you seem to keep forgetting this. Without his penalty who knows what would have happened

Well you can't say it's a fair fight when one driver starts with an disadvantage not of his own making.

This is F1, fairness is something that is not a given. And again, he had qualified behind Bottas BEFORE the penalty

...and if he had qualified in front what difference would that have made?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


All I suspect. Mercedes customers seem to have fallen back quite a bit and as much as Williams driver line up isn't helping they just don't seem to have that competitive edge having a Mercedes engine used to bring. Meanwhile Haas skyrocket up the grid.

More coincidences maybe, but not for me.

Raises a couple of questions for me. Firstly, if Ferrari are doing it now then the FIA needs to get cleverer in how they identify these things so that they can stop them. Maybe demand that each manufacturer provides a new engine every time an upgrade happens, so that the FIA can take it apart to look for transgressions. Not sure if that would work in regard to companies' IP, but clearly what they are doing now isn't enough and they need to stamp it out. Secondly, if it turns out that a large part of Merc's advantage over the last couple of years has been the illegal use of oil, then I hope they find a book the size of Australia to throw at them.

But not Ferrari?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
AnRs wrote:
So is this why Merc was so fast in preseason and first race and suddenly lost 6-7th? A seeping seal?
No wonder why they themselves have no explanation to the sudden slump in form...
Probably had to come out sooner or later, it's not like Merc are unknown to other (diesel)engine tricks..

well, to be fair we don't know if it was just Merc or if Ferrari are doing it too. The article indicates that Merc are being cautious and Ferrari more aggressive, so maybe they are both culprits here.

I seem to recall Ferrari last year had to stop their oil burning because they were found out, but Merc at the time weren't and they surged ahead as a result. Would be frankly disturbing if last year's title-winning car was cheating.

Whilst Ferrari running an extra oil tank to burn oil in the engine was not cheating at all. :)

What is your point here? I stated above that maybe both are culprits and last year Ferrari stopped because they were found out. So why mention it again?

My point is not with the ones who were caught, but with the possibility that others were not caught and were therefore cheating.

You actually don't know who was doing what and are just assuming that it was just Mercedes doing all this supposed cheating.

oh for...

Look, you've tried to point the finger of blame at Ferrari in no less than three consecutive posts above. And I've mentioned Ferrari myself in several posts and said it should be stopped if it turns out they are doing it this year. Why is it unthinkable that Mercedes may have been doing the same in previous years, especially given the size of advantage they had?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.


He qualified behind Bottas, he finished behind Bottas, you seem to keep forgetting this. Without his penalty who knows what would have happened

Well you can't say it's a fair fight when one driver starts with an disadvantage not of his own making.

This is F1, fairness is something that is not a given. And again, he had qualified behind Bottas BEFORE the penalty

...and if he had qualified in front what difference would that have made?


You tell me. Apparently qualifying and finishing behind your teammate does not mean you did worse than him in your book...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


All I suspect. Mercedes customers seem to have fallen back quite a bit and as much as Williams driver line up isn't helping they just don't seem to have that competitive edge having a Mercedes engine used to bring. Meanwhile Haas skyrocket up the grid.

More coincidences maybe, but not for me.

Raises a couple of questions for me. Firstly, if Ferrari are doing it now then the FIA needs to get cleverer in how they identify these things so that they can stop them. Maybe demand that each manufacturer provides a new engine every time an upgrade happens, so that the FIA can take it apart to look for transgressions. Not sure if that would work in regard to companies' IP, but clearly what they are doing now isn't enough and they need to stamp it out. Secondly, if it turns out that a large part of Merc's advantage over the last couple of years has been the illegal use of oil, then I hope they find a book the size of Australia to throw at them.

But not Ferrari?

Seriously, poker, you have a blind side a mile wide when it comes to Mercedes. I've mentioned Ferrari and said they need to be stopped if they are doing it. Why is your automatic response to anyone including Mercedes in the conversation to automatically try to deflect to Ferrari? Are they somehow sacrosanct? If so, why?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 602
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Is that ALL Ferrari and Mercedes engined teams or just the main teams? Does anyone know?


All I suspect. Mercedes customers seem to have fallen back quite a bit and as much as Williams driver line up isn't helping they just don't seem to have that competitive edge having a Mercedes engine used to bring. Meanwhile Haas skyrocket up the grid.

More coincidences maybe, but not for me.

Raises a couple of questions for me. Firstly, if Ferrari are doing it now then the FIA needs to get cleverer in how they identify these things so that they can stop them. Maybe demand that each manufacturer provides a new engine every time an upgrade happens, so that the FIA can take it apart to look for transgressions. Not sure if that would work in regard to companies' IP, but clearly what they are doing now isn't enough and they need to stamp it out. Secondly, if it turns out that a large part of Merc's advantage over the last couple of years has been the illegal use of oil, then I hope they find a book the size of Australia to throw at them.

But not Ferrari?


Nah, Ferrari need stopping and maybe a stern telling off. Maybe they should have to do some lines or something.
Mercedes need to have the book thrown at them and be stripped of all titles and banned from the sport.


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], owenmahamilton, paul_gmb 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