planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:13 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

What caused Ferrari's lack of pace in Austin?
Engine changed to comply with technical directive 58%  58%  [ 21 ]
Circuit does not suit their car 19%  19%  [ 7 ]
Had to avoid kerbs and bumps 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Trialing high downforce setting 6%  6%  [ 2 ]
Sandbagging 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Leclerc ate too much of Binotto's birthday cake 8%  8%  [ 3 ]
Other 8%  8%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 36
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 2:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Posts: 4470
Location: LONDON...!
Asphalt_World wrote:
So, why were Mercedes claiming Ferrari had a 0.5 - 0.7 advantage on the start-finish straight alone on Saturday?

Red Bull said the same.

From the outside. They have had to reduce their downforce levels to give them the straight line speed. They are now slow through the corners again which disappeared post summer break. They are now back to how it was in the first half of the season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3311
Location: UK
Asphalt_World wrote:
So, why were Mercedes claiming Ferrari had a 0.5 - 0.7 advantage on the start-finish straight alone on Saturday?

Given that Hamilton achieved a similar overall lap time to the Ferraris, they must have lost that amount in the corners over the rest of the lap. That does not stack up with what we have seen since the summer break (Ferrari were fastest in Singapore, for instance) and suggests to me that Ferrari were running a low drag, low downforce setup. A cynical view may suggest they did it primarily to mask the loss of their power advantage to deflect attention, though more likely is that they've prioritised straight line speed for the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
j man wrote:
So Ferrari go from being utterly untouchable in qualifying to losing pole twice in a row since the FIA's "clarification". I must say, this is looking quite suspicious to me. Downforce / drag levels in car setup seem to be a slightly confounding factor in the straight line speed figures, but the loss of overall lap time is fairly clear to see.

Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3311
Location: UK
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
So Ferrari go from being utterly untouchable in qualifying to losing pole twice in a row since the FIA's "clarification". I must say, this is looking quite suspicious to me. Downforce / drag levels in car setup seem to be a slightly confounding factor in the straight line speed figures, but the loss of overall lap time is fairly clear to see.

Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
So Ferrari go from being utterly untouchable in qualifying to losing pole twice in a row since the FIA's "clarification". I must say, this is looking quite suspicious to me. Downforce / drag levels in car setup seem to be a slightly confounding factor in the straight line speed figures, but the loss of overall lap time is fairly clear to see.

Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

Since the summer break, that's when they found a load of extra performance, Mexico is always an anomaly because of the high altitude.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
j man wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
So Ferrari go from being utterly untouchable in qualifying to losing pole twice in a row since the FIA's "clarification". I must say, this is looking quite suspicious to me. Downforce / drag levels in car setup seem to be a slightly confounding factor in the straight line speed figures, but the loss of overall lap time is fairly clear to see.

Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.

Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
So Ferrari go from being utterly untouchable in qualifying to losing pole twice in a row since the FIA's "clarification". I must say, this is looking quite suspicious to me. Downforce / drag levels in car setup seem to be a slightly confounding factor in the straight line speed figures, but the loss of overall lap time is fairly clear to see.

Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.

Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet

The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
So Ferrari go from being utterly untouchable in qualifying to losing pole twice in a row since the FIA's "clarification". I must say, this is looking quite suspicious to me. Downforce / drag levels in car setup seem to be a slightly confounding factor in the straight line speed figures, but the loss of overall lap time is fairly clear to see.

Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.

Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet

The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

A bit of mental gymnastics with your numbers there, but anyway. I don't have the time now to dispute this properly. I'll leave it to that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am
Posts: 1399
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.

Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet

The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

A bit of mental gymnastics with your numbers there, but anyway. I don't have the time now to dispute this properly. I'll leave it to that


Where are the mental gymnastics in poker’s numbers?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Utterly "untouchable"? Come on, they have 9 poles, as many as Mercedes this year. And they only got the Mexico one as Max messed up under the yellows, otherwise he was almost 3 tenths up on them. Also Hamilton was right up there with them normally, it wasn't that Ferrari was securing the front row in every GP.

The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.

Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet

The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

A bit of mental gymnastics with your numbers there, but anyway. I don't have the time now to dispute this properly. I'll leave it to that

I'm producing factual numbers as opposed to vague reasoning of the last 2 races, maybe Ferrari were running more downforce in Austin which made them slow on the straight, look in Brazil they are still quick on the straight but ignoring the poor speed around the corners, after the TD Ferrari have lost lap time performance, let's see how things go in Abu Dhabi.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 7:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4370
Ferrari were 1-2 in quali at Bahrain with Charles about a third of a second ahead of the fastest Merc.
Charles would have won, fairly easily, without a last minute mechanical.

The following race the fastest Ferrari was third in quali, about a third of a second behind the Merc in pole. This is over a half-second swing from the previous race.
Ferrari's finished 13 and 31 seconds behind the winner.

Just pointing out how things can swing about in F1.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
j man wrote:
The real step change in performance came after the summer break, when Ferrari locked out pole position in all six races until the FIA directive was announced. Before that they tended to be faster on the straights but struggled with downforce in the turns so they only really excelled on the "power" circuits where downforce is less critical. Everyone expected them to win Spa and Monza, but dominating Singapore was what really raised suspicions that something had massively changed from earlier in the season. Now they may have found a miracle aero upgrade over the summer but that seems less likely given that their advantage seems to have suddenly evaporated and that they still have the same front wing concept that has been widely stated to lack overall downforce. More likely is that whatever they did that gave them that extra power allowed them to run a higher downforce setup, and now that that advantage has gone they are back to their early season form.

A fair point about the Mexican GP but the altitude does tend to blunt teams' power advantage somewhat.

Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet

The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

A bit of mental gymnastics with your numbers there, but anyway. I don't have the time now to dispute this properly. I'll leave it to that

I'm producing factual numbers as opposed to vague reasoning of the last 2 races, maybe Ferrari were running more downforce in Austin which made them slow on the straight, look in Brazil they are still quick on the straight but ignoring the poor speed around the corners, after the TD Ferrari have lost lap time performance, let's see how things go in Abu Dhabi.

Yeah, apologies, I forgot to include Spa that threw off the calcs as Lec was almost 0.75 of a sec ahead. Without Spa it was hardly 0.2 sec ahead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Asphalt_World wrote:
Ferrari were 1-2 in quali at Bahrain with Charles about a third of a second ahead of the fastest Merc.
Charles would have won, fairly easily, without a last minute mechanical.

The following race the fastest Ferrari was third in quali, about a third of a second behind the Merc in pole. This is over a half-second swing from the previous race.
Ferrari's finished 13 and 31 seconds behind the winner.

Just pointing out how things can swing about in F1.

In the first half of the season it was track specific if Ferrari were quicker or not specifically in qualifying, this tended to be tracks with long straights. After the break Ferrari were quicker everywhere, a third of a second clear of the next fastest car no matter what the track.

After the TD they are no longer quicker, no doubt they would be if on a track that suited the car like before the summer break.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Fair points, but I do remember them saying that they would sacrifice speed for some downforce in races. If they did that or not, I am not aware, but it is not that they ran into the sunset, I don't believe they locked out a front row at all and Hamilton was mostly up there with them. And the real problem is the tyres for Ferrari, not the downforce. That's where they hurt normally. Equally, the high altitude like Mexico and Sao Paulo may have hurt them in the engine department more than the others for all we know. And in Austin they were something like 0.012sec behind Bottas in quali, it's not that they dropped so far back. I am not going to jump into Max's "Ferrari is cheating" band wagon just yet

The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

A bit of mental gymnastics with your numbers there, but anyway. I don't have the time now to dispute this properly. I'll leave it to that

I'm producing factual numbers as opposed to vague reasoning of the last 2 races, maybe Ferrari were running more downforce in Austin which made them slow on the straight, look in Brazil they are still quick on the straight but ignoring the poor speed around the corners, after the TD Ferrari have lost lap time performance, let's see how things go in Abu Dhabi.

Yeah, apologies, I forgot to include Spa that threw off the calcs as Lec was almost 0.75 of a sec ahead. Without Spa it was hardly 0.2 sec ahead.

When do we start to exclude races for finding an average, even then not hardly 0.2s is actually 0.215s, so let's not be thinking that the number had to be rounded up to get to 0.2s.

The actual gaps were:-
0.763s
0.039s
0.191s
0.402s
0.229s

If you are going to remove the 0.763s then surely you also have to remove the 0.039s for fairer balance given an average of 0.274s that's hardly 0.2s?

Anyone that has dealt with such things that relate to F1 knows that such a gap is a car being dominant.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Ferrari were 1-2 in quali at Bahrain with Charles about a third of a second ahead of the fastest Merc.
Charles would have won, fairly easily, without a last minute mechanical.

The following race the fastest Ferrari was third in quali, about a third of a second behind the Merc in pole. This is over a half-second swing from the previous race.
Ferrari's finished 13 and 31 seconds behind the winner.

Just pointing out how things can swing about in F1.

In the first half of the season it was track specific if Ferrari were quicker or not specifically in qualifying, this tended to be tracks with long straights. After the break Ferrari were quicker everywhere, a third of a second clear of the next fastest car no matter what the track.

After the TD they are no longer quicker, no doubt they would be if on a track that suited the car like before the summer break.

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I think ideally they wanted this to be quietly sorted out but then Ferrari became quite aggressive with threats of libel over accusations of wrong doing, so it now looks like in response to that Red Bull are taking things to the next level?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I think ideally they wanted this to be quietly sorted out but then Ferrari became quite aggressive with threats of libel over accusations of wrong doing, so it now looks like in response to that Red Bull are taking things to the next level?

Ferrari threats of libel? I thought they said that they welcomed this as it would help clear their name, what threats are you referring to?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Ferrari were 1-2 in quali at Bahrain with Charles about a third of a second ahead of the fastest Merc.
Charles would have won, fairly easily, without a last minute mechanical.

The following race the fastest Ferrari was third in quali, about a third of a second behind the Merc in pole. This is over a half-second swing from the previous race.
Ferrari's finished 13 and 31 seconds behind the winner.

Just pointing out how things can swing about in F1.

In the first half of the season it was track specific if Ferrari were quicker or not specifically in qualifying, this tended to be tracks with long straights. After the break Ferrari were quicker everywhere, a third of a second clear of the next fastest car no matter what the track.

After the TD they are no longer quicker, no doubt they would be if on a track that suited the car like before the summer break.

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas

Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I think ideally they wanted this to be quietly sorted out but then Ferrari became quite aggressive with threats of libel over accusations of wrong doing, so it now looks like in response to that Red Bull are taking things to the next level?

Ferrari threats of libel? I thought they said that they welcomed this as it would help clear their name, what threats are you referring to?

It's in response to what Verstappen said, Binotto went to the Red Bull building and threatened Horner, sorry I thought this was common knowledge?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I think ideally they wanted this to be quietly sorted out but then Ferrari became quite aggressive with threats of libel over accusations of wrong doing, so it now looks like in response to that Red Bull are taking things to the next level?

Ferrari threats of libel? I thought they said that they welcomed this as it would help clear their name, what threats are you referring to?

It's in response to what Verstappen said, Binotto went to the Red Bull building and threatened Horner, sorry I thought this was common knowledge?

No, I'll admit that I missed that one. However RB said they are not pursuing this further anyway and threw the ball to Merc, so I'm not 100% sure it has to do with RB now


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The hard facts is the overall performance of the Ferrari that's not hidden away by downforce levels, before the summer break they were quick down the straights but slow around the corners, after the summer break they were still quick down the straights but now also quick around the corners. After the TD in Austin now they were not quick on the straights but quick in the corners, this explained away by running a lot of downforce so nothing to do with the TD. In Brazil I'm not quite sure what went off, initially I think they were quick on the straights so it was like look the TD has not affected us but the car was slow in the corners, at no point after the TD do we see the car quick both on the straights and quick in the corners at the same time.

After the summer break Ferrari took 5 straight pole positions at an average of being 0.325s quicker than the next fastest car, they were dominant, they also won 3 races, it would have been 4 they were running 1-2 in Sochi before Vettel's car failed and the subsequent SC cost Leclerc the lead of the race. In Mexico they only qualified second behind Verstappen but this is a track were the high altitude has always favoured Red Bull, they still out qualified Mercedes by 0.238s.

In Austin the TD is announced, Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race Leclerc can only finish 4th 52 seconds behind the Mercedes, reminiscent of some of the performances we saw before the summer break.

In Brazil again the Ferrari can only qualify second and in the race runs in 3rd place about 10 seconds behind the Red Bull and Mercedes before the race turned into a farce.

So after the summer break Ferrari were dominant in qualifying and winning races more often than not, after the TD they can't get a pole position and are far away from winning any races.

A bit of mental gymnastics with your numbers there, but anyway. I don't have the time now to dispute this properly. I'll leave it to that

I'm producing factual numbers as opposed to vague reasoning of the last 2 races, maybe Ferrari were running more downforce in Austin which made them slow on the straight, look in Brazil they are still quick on the straight but ignoring the poor speed around the corners, after the TD Ferrari have lost lap time performance, let's see how things go in Abu Dhabi.

Yeah, apologies, I forgot to include Spa that threw off the calcs as Lec was almost 0.75 of a sec ahead. Without Spa it was hardly 0.2 sec ahead.

When do we start to exclude races for finding an average, even then not hardly 0.2s is actually 0.215s, so let's not be thinking that the number had to be rounded up to get to 0.2s.

The actual gaps were:-
0.763s
0.039s
0.191s
0.402s
0.229s

If you are going to remove the 0.763s then surely you also have to remove the 0.039s for fairer balance given an average of 0.274s that's hardly 0.2s?

Anyone that has dealt with such things that relate to F1 knows that such a gap is a car being dominant.


Thanks for the lesson in F1. A 0.25 quali gap is not exactly dominance, Merc had bigger quali margins this year (Bottas was 0.86 ahead of Vettel in Spain for example), yet you wouldn't call them the dominant car of the season, would you? I'll leave it here as you are taking this the wrong way, understandably so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Ferrari were 1-2 in quali at Bahrain with Charles about a third of a second ahead of the fastest Merc.
Charles would have won, fairly easily, without a last minute mechanical.

The following race the fastest Ferrari was third in quali, about a third of a second behind the Merc in pole. This is over a half-second swing from the previous race.
Ferrari's finished 13 and 31 seconds behind the winner.

Just pointing out how things can swing about in F1.

In the first half of the season it was track specific if Ferrari were quicker or not specifically in qualifying, this tended to be tracks with long straights. After the break Ferrari were quicker everywhere, a third of a second clear of the next fastest car no matter what the track.

After the TD they are no longer quicker, no doubt they would be if on a track that suited the car like before the summer break.

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas

Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I think ideally they wanted this to be quietly sorted out but then Ferrari became quite aggressive with threats of libel over accusations of wrong doing, so it now looks like in response to that Red Bull are taking things to the next level?

Ferrari threats of libel? I thought they said that they welcomed this as it would help clear their name, what threats are you referring to?

It's in response to what Verstappen said, Binotto went to the Red Bull building and threatened Horner, sorry I thought this was common knowledge?

No, I'll admit that I missed that one. However RB said they are not pursuing this further anyway and threw the ball to Merc, so I'm not 100% sure it has to do with RB now

Oh I misread what you said, I thought you meant Red Bull had requested that the FIA take that course of action.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think ideally they wanted this to be quietly sorted out but then Ferrari became quite aggressive with threats of libel over accusations of wrong doing, so it now looks like in response to that Red Bull are taking things to the next level?

Ferrari threats of libel? I thought they said that they welcomed this as it would help clear their name, what threats are you referring to?

It's in response to what Verstappen said, Binotto went to the Red Bull building and threatened Horner, sorry I thought this was common knowledge?

No, I'll admit that I missed that one. However RB said they are not pursuing this further anyway and threw the ball to Merc, so I'm not 100% sure it has to do with RB now

Oh I misread what you said, I thought you meant Red Bull had requested that the FIA take that course of action.

No, RB didn't request this course of action, I wasn't clear perhaps


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
Thanks for the lesson in F1. A 0.25 quali gap is not exactly dominance, Merc had bigger quali margins this year (Bottas was 0.86 ahead of Vettel in Spain for example), yet you wouldn't call them the dominant car of the season, would you? I'll leave it here as you are taking this the wrong way, understandably so.

There's a difference between an average gap and an isolated gap, I'm using this to show the fall off in performance of the Ferrari car after the TD was introduced.

Also and yes if a car can be on average 0.25s quicker than the rest of the field over a season then that shows the car to be dominant.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Ferrari threats of libel? I thought they said that they welcomed this as it would help clear their name, what threats are you referring to?

It's in response to what Verstappen said, Binotto went to the Red Bull building and threatened Horner, sorry I thought this was common knowledge?

No, I'll admit that I missed that one. However RB said they are not pursuing this further anyway and threw the ball to Merc, so I'm not 100% sure it has to do with RB now

Oh I misread what you said, I thought you meant Red Bull had requested that the FIA take that course of action.

No, RB didn't request this course of action, I wasn't clear perhaps

I wonder then what's prompted the FIA to take things further?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Ferrari were 1-2 in quali at Bahrain with Charles about a third of a second ahead of the fastest Merc.
Charles would have won, fairly easily, without a last minute mechanical.

The following race the fastest Ferrari was third in quali, about a third of a second behind the Merc in pole. This is over a half-second swing from the previous race.
Ferrari's finished 13 and 31 seconds behind the winner.

Just pointing out how things can swing about in F1.

In the first half of the season it was track specific if Ferrari were quicker or not specifically in qualifying, this tended to be tracks with long straights. After the break Ferrari were quicker everywhere, a third of a second clear of the next fastest car no matter what the track.

After the TD they are no longer quicker, no doubt they would be if on a track that suited the car like before the summer break.

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas

Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.

Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3637
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I find it highly unlikely the FIA would go this far unless they had reasonable suspicion that the allegations were true. The confiscating of a customer engine is presumably to determine - if in the event the Ferrari engine is illegal - whether or not it was solely being done by the factory team. I'm that eventuality I think that the FIA would have little choice but to exclude Ferrari from the WCC (pull a McLaren 2007) but let the drivers keep their standings. Given its not a title, and Ferrari get turning up money anyway, it's unlikely they would protest - and Red Bull would get the second place windfall (and Williams would get 9th!)

However, one would assume that heads would role at Maranelo, Binotto at least, but probably also some technical/engine department names.

I also think Max only said what he said at USA because it had probably been said in an internal Red Bull meeting that they were pretty much certain Ferrari were cheating, and his subsequent outburst has forced everyone to call in the poker game.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am
Posts: 1399
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I find it highly unlikely the FIA would go this far unless they had reasonable suspicion that the allegations were true. The confiscating of a customer engine is presumably to determine - if in the event the Ferrari engine is illegal - whether or not it was solely being done by the factory team. I'm that eventuality I think that the FIA would have little choice but to exclude Ferrari from the WCC (pull a McLaren 2007) but let the drivers keep their standings. Given its not a title, and Ferrari get turning up money anyway, it's unlikely they would protest - and Red Bull would get the second place windfall (and Williams would get 9th!)

However, one would assume that heads would role at Maranelo, Binotto at least, but probably also some technical/engine department names.

I also think Max only said what he said at USA because it had probably been said in an internal Red Bull meeting that they were pretty much certain Ferrari were cheating, and his subsequent outburst has forced everyone to call in the poker game.


What would the reasoning behind a non-Ferrari car be though?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I find it highly unlikely the FIA would go this far unless they had reasonable suspicion that the allegations were true. The confiscating of a customer engine is presumably to determine - if in the event the Ferrari engine is illegal - whether or not it was solely being done by the factory team. I'm that eventuality I think that the FIA would have little choice but to exclude Ferrari from the WCC (pull a McLaren 2007) but let the drivers keep their standings. Given its not a title, and Ferrari get turning up money anyway, it's unlikely they would protest - and Red Bull would get the second place windfall (and Williams would get 9th!)

However, one would assume that heads would role at Maranelo, Binotto at least, but probably also some technical/engine department names.

I also think Max only said what he said at USA because it had probably been said in an internal Red Bull meeting that they were pretty much certain Ferrari were cheating, and his subsequent outburst has forced everyone to call in the poker game.


I'm not sure how much info/insight they have, but this could just play nicely into FIA's hands. They literally have nothing to lose really; they would investigate (once again) the Ferrari system, which would help appease everyone who's been suspicious of Ferrari's system and make the FIA look that they action on things and are not just Ferrari International Assistance.

If they are found guilty then again FIA is going to show that they act when they have to (and I wish they will). As you described above, Ferrari as a team could probably absorb this. If they are found not guilty, then it would silence the doubters. So the FIA can do this anyway, I don't see how they can lose from this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
JN23 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I find it highly unlikely the FIA would go this far unless they had reasonable suspicion that the allegations were true. The confiscating of a customer engine is presumably to determine - if in the event the Ferrari engine is illegal - whether or not it was solely being done by the factory team. I'm that eventuality I think that the FIA would have little choice but to exclude Ferrari from the WCC (pull a McLaren 2007) but let the drivers keep their standings. Given its not a title, and Ferrari get turning up money anyway, it's unlikely they would protest - and Red Bull would get the second place windfall (and Williams would get 9th!)

However, one would assume that heads would role at Maranelo, Binotto at least, but probably also some technical/engine department names.

I also think Max only said what he said at USA because it had probably been said in an internal Red Bull meeting that they were pretty much certain Ferrari were cheating, and his subsequent outburst has forced everyone to call in the poker game.


What would the reasoning behind a non-Ferrari car be though?

I would be guessing because the customer team are supposed to have the same spec engine, given that we're not seeing the same kind of engine performance advantages for the customer teams then it might be easier to see what Ferrari are doing by any differences they see in the respective engines?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am
Posts: 1399
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I find it highly unlikely the FIA would go this far unless they had reasonable suspicion that the allegations were true. The confiscating of a customer engine is presumably to determine - if in the event the Ferrari engine is illegal - whether or not it was solely being done by the factory team. I'm that eventuality I think that the FIA would have little choice but to exclude Ferrari from the WCC (pull a McLaren 2007) but let the drivers keep their standings. Given its not a title, and Ferrari get turning up money anyway, it's unlikely they would protest - and Red Bull would get the second place windfall (and Williams would get 9th!)

However, one would assume that heads would role at Maranelo, Binotto at least, but probably also some technical/engine department names.

I also think Max only said what he said at USA because it had probably been said in an internal Red Bull meeting that they were pretty much certain Ferrari were cheating, and his subsequent outburst has forced everyone to call in the poker game.


What would the reasoning behind a non-Ferrari car be though?

I would be guessing because the customer team are supposed to have the same spec engine, given that we're not seeing the same kind of engine performance advantages for the customer teams then it might be easier to see what Ferrari are doing by any differences they see in the respective engines?


I’m not talking about customer teams, the article Siao7 talks about says a non-Ferrari car is being looked at, I.e. someone who doesn’t use a Ferrari engine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
JN23 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
So AMUS now reports that the FIA has confiscated "fuel system parts" from Ferrari, a Ferrari customer and a non-Ferrari car, possibly for comparison. This is going to be interesting, it seems that Red Bull did force the FIA's hand into further looking into this.

Edit - PF1 link, I know it's not the most reliable one but it includes the AMUS link too.

I find it highly unlikely the FIA would go this far unless they had reasonable suspicion that the allegations were true. The confiscating of a customer engine is presumably to determine - if in the event the Ferrari engine is illegal - whether or not it was solely being done by the factory team. I'm that eventuality I think that the FIA would have little choice but to exclude Ferrari from the WCC (pull a McLaren 2007) but let the drivers keep their standings. Given its not a title, and Ferrari get turning up money anyway, it's unlikely they would protest - and Red Bull would get the second place windfall (and Williams would get 9th!)

However, one would assume that heads would role at Maranelo, Binotto at least, but probably also some technical/engine department names.

I also think Max only said what he said at USA because it had probably been said in an internal Red Bull meeting that they were pretty much certain Ferrari were cheating, and his subsequent outburst has forced everyone to call in the poker game.


What would the reasoning behind a non-Ferrari car be though?

I would be guessing because the customer team are supposed to have the same spec engine, given that we're not seeing the same kind of engine performance advantages for the customer teams then it might be easier to see what Ferrari are doing by any differences they see in the respective engines?


I’m not talking about customer teams, the article Siao7 talks about says a non-Ferrari car is being looked at, I.e. someone who doesn’t use a Ferrari engine.

Oh right I didn't pick up on that one, but same again I would be guessing it helps to see what's different in the engines and then investigate that difference further?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Another thought as to why Ferrari are being investigated further is a recent statement by Honda saying that they only want to continue in F1 if they are allowed to compete in a fair way.

There are some concerns whether Honda will continue past 2020 and likewise Red Bull said they won't if Honda pull out, this has even lead to Mercedes saying that they would supply Red Bull with engines if Honda pull out.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 3:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3871
I wonder what is the non-Ferrari car involved? Is it a Merc, Renault or Honda? And why is that not disclosed.

If I have to take a wild guess I’ll say it’s a Honda ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2019 9:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:21 am
Posts: 3955
Just to clarify, the FIA have confiscated THREE sets of parts. One Ferrari (team) set, one Ferrari (customer) set and one non-Ferrari set, the latter presumably as a control.

Tweet embedded here: https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

_________________
Forum rules: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14979

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 21, 2019 9:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7913
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
In the first half of the season it was track specific if Ferrari were quicker or not specifically in qualifying, this tended to be tracks with long straights. After the break Ferrari were quicker everywhere, a third of a second clear of the next fastest car no matter what the track.

After the TD they are no longer quicker, no doubt they would be if on a track that suited the car like before the summer break.

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas

Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.

Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.


You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33370
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas

Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.

Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.


You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation

Then he did very little with a brand new engine in Brazil, I'm actually surprised the issue is still being pursued in respect to what I see as a performance fall off after the TD was announced.

However there is a rumour of a secondary fuel sensor being used in Abu Dhabi, maybe there is a desire to ensure that any performance advantage with the fuel system can't be revisited especially for next season?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 1336
Location: Kansas
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
I'm sorry to be pedantic, but this is not correct. Italy was a gap of 0.039, Singapore 0.2, Japan was 0.229, Mexico 0.24 (if you discount that Max actually got the pole). Also, in USA Vettel was second, just 0.012 behind Bottas

Yeah that's worded wrong, that's averaged out over the 5 tracks, but you know when we say a driver is 2 tenths quicker than another driver it doesn't mean he's always 2 tenths quicker.

Mexico has always been an outlier for performance because of the high altitude whilst Austin was after the TD so I'm not sure were you are going with that?

I'm sorry, you called me out above that 0.2 is not 0.215, but now it is ok, 2 tenths are not really 2 tenths? Can you make up your mind?

USA I used to show that they fell back by 0.012, it's not that they lost a couple of seconds.

Well you pulled me up on semantics earlier, I wouldn't be calling 0.215s as being hardly 0.2s but I would say that about 0.195s.

Regarding Austin, no they didn't fall back by merely 0.012s when they were round about 3 tenths in front before, they fell back close to 3 tenths.


You realise that Leclerc was using an older spec 2 engine for Austin (while missing FP3), right? He could have been on pole otherwise, most likely actually since he has been besting Vettel in qualis lately. So I don't think how much time they lost in Austin is so clear cut.

Anyway, this is getting tiring, let's just wait and see what the FIA finds.

I'm a bit concerned as this is only reported by AMUS, I haven't been able to find any other info regarding the fuel parts investigation


24 hours later it's all over the 'net.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/fia-seize ... el-system/

https://www.grandprix247.com/2019/11/21 ... ularities/

https://f1i.com/news/362441-fia-reporte ... ystem.html

_________________
Mission WinLater


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: No registered users 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