planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Jun 18, 2018 4:11 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 739
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think the cars were not that far apart this weekend and it's more difficult to pick a clear cut winner than appears at first glance.

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


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


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

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

I dont really disagree with that (Ferrari being the better car for the weekend), but when it comes to consistency...

1. Whats so radically different about this, in comparison with SPA 2017 for example... Mercedes gets pole, Mercedes wins but YOU had Ferrari as the best car?
(If its the margins... why arent you making an allowance for the perception that if Hamilton had nailed his qualies he cound have gotten pole and (at least, he would have) run Vettel closer during the race too?)

2. In an attempt to dismiss the perception that Mercedes had the better car in Japan 2017, YOU came up with this comment...
F1_Ernie wrote:
which begs the question... how can you compare a sunday (practically) without Hamilton (due to his starting position and overheating issues)? Isnt Hamilton likewise supposed to have more pace than Bottas?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
Migen wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think the cars were not that far apart this weekend and it's more difficult to pick a clear cut winner than appears at first glance.

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


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


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

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

I dont really disagree with that (Ferrari being the better car for the weekend), but when it comes to consistency...

1. Whats so radically different about this, in comparison with SPA 2017 for example... Mercedes gets pole, Mercedes wins but YOU had Ferrari as the best car?
(If its the margins... why arent you making an allowance for the perception that if Hamilton had nailed his qualies he cound have gotten pole and (at least, he would have) run Vettel closer during the race too?)

2. In an attempt to dismiss the perception that Mercedes had the better car in Japan 2017, YOU came up with this comment...
F1_Ernie wrote:
which begs the question... how can you compare a sunday (practically) without Hamilton (due to his starting position and overheating issues)? Isnt Hamilton likewise supposed to have more pace than Bottas?


How can you compare one driver who doesn't start to one who does? So you think if Hamilton didnt have overheating issues he would have beaten Vettel?

In Japan, Vettel was 2nd and had engine problems on the grid, he wasn't involved in the race, Verstappen finished 1.4 seconds behind Hamilton, you don't think Vettel would have been close? Kimi has had a problem in races for over 3 years now, he is nowhere near on the same race pace as Vettel.

Bottas has proven on some days he can beat Hamilton over a weekend which has been proven in Canada, Bottas is closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel proven by the points. The gap between Vettel and Kimi is pretty big.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

Yes I'd say as a general rule of thumb if you have a car that gives you a qualifying advantage then that gives you a big advantage in the race as it's much easier to stay ahead than it is to overtake. The thing about Canada 2018 is that IMO the Ferrari and Mercedes were pretty evenly matched in qualifying and I find it hard to say one car was better on the strength of the qualifying result


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close


That is one of the reasons why IMO Ferrari had the better car, you always would take the car with a new engine unless it's a Williams. Mercedes had a 0.050s disadvantage in quali, might not sound a lot but it all makes a difference. Tbh i wouldnt be suprised to see Merc get pole in France if they sort out the new engine.

Did you read about Vettel having to play around with the switches in his car? Apparently something to do with satisfying the FIA.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 3:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
Does anyone know the gap between Hamilton and Bottas in 2018 quali not including Australia? It's got to be close surely?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2021
0.021s


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 4:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4687
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close

If, as is being said here and elsewhere, that the biggest part of the Ferrari PU update is efficiency then they’ll be able to run in high modes longer and/or more often than previously. Which in turn means that not only they’ll be seeing whatever power the update brings but also realize more of the previous available power that went untapped due to fuel saving.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 4:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
KingVoid wrote:
0.021s


Thanks, wow that is close. Its also 3-3 when both finished, will be interesting to see if Bottas can keep it up.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11119
RaggedMan wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close

If, as is being said here and elsewhere, that the biggest part of the Ferrari PU update is efficiency then they’ll be able to run in high modes longer and/or more often than previously. Which in turn means that not only they’ll be seeing whatever power the update brings but also realize more of the previous available power that went untapped due to fuel saving.


True - but at the same time, it wouldn't bring a lot of gains on Saturday.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11119
F1_Ernie wrote:
Like I said in quali Vettels needs him to take points of Hamilton.


Well, at least Bottas did just that for him :)

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 739
F1_Ernie wrote:
Migen wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

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


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

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

I dont really disagree with that (Ferrari being the better car for the weekend), but when it comes to consistency...

1. Whats so radically different about this, in comparison with SPA 2017 for example... Mercedes gets pole, Mercedes wins but YOU had Ferrari as the best car?
(If its the margins... why arent you making an allowance for the perception that if Hamilton had nailed his qualies he cound have gotten pole and (at least, he would have) run Vettel closer during the race too?)

2. In an attempt to dismiss the perception that Mercedes had the better car in Japan 2017, YOU came up with this comment...
F1_Ernie wrote:
which begs the question... how can you compare a sunday (practically) without Hamilton (due to his starting position and overheating issues)? Isnt Hamilton likewise supposed to have more pace than Bottas?


How can you compare one driver who doesn't start to one who does? So you think if Hamilton didnt have overheating issues he would have beaten Vettel?

In Japan, Vettel was 2nd and had engine problems on the grid, he wasn't involved in the race, Verstappen finished 1.4 seconds behind Hamilton, you don't think Vettel would have been close? Kimi has had a problem in races for over 3 years now, he is nowhere near on the same race pace as Vettel.

Bottas has proven on some days he can beat Hamilton over a weekend which has been proven in Canada, Bottas is closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel proven by the points. The gap between Vettel and Kimi is pretty big.

Its not about driver comparisons per se, its about who is the more accurate barometer of the car's maximal performance at Ferrari and Mercedes, and the majority of us would expect it to be Vettel for Ferrari (certainty, you agree with that) and Hamilton for Mercedes.
Kind of surprised that you`re trying to dismiss the later, especially at a time where we know for sure that Hamilton had issues with his car.

Logically I was thinking that, an out of position Hamilton impaled by overheating issues during the Canadian GP, would have been as good of a car performance barometer as Vettel (the non-starter) was at the Japanese GP for you... basically, making the car comparisons void in both occasion if you had kept the same standards ;)

Of course Bottas can outperform Hamilton when Hamilton doesnt get the qualies right and has engine issues during the race (I would FULLY expect Kimi to outperform Vettel too in similar instances), but whilst it might have, it doesnt necessarily mean that the generally weaker/slower driver on the team extracted all the potential performance of the car in both qualies and race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
Migen wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Migen wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:

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

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

I dont really disagree with that (Ferrari being the better car for the weekend), but when it comes to consistency...

1. Whats so radically different about this, in comparison with SPA 2017 for example... Mercedes gets pole, Mercedes wins but YOU had Ferrari as the best car?
(If its the margins... why arent you making an allowance for the perception that if Hamilton had nailed his qualies he cound have gotten pole and (at least, he would have) run Vettel closer during the race too?)

2. In an attempt to dismiss the perception that Mercedes had the better car in Japan 2017, YOU came up with this comment...
F1_Ernie wrote:
which begs the question... how can you compare a sunday (practically) without Hamilton (due to his starting position and overheating issues)? Isnt Hamilton likewise supposed to have more pace than Bottas?


How can you compare one driver who doesn't start to one who does? So you think if Hamilton didnt have overheating issues he would have beaten Vettel?

In Japan, Vettel was 2nd and had engine problems on the grid, he wasn't involved in the race, Verstappen finished 1.4 seconds behind Hamilton, you don't think Vettel would have been close? Kimi has had a problem in races for over 3 years now, he is nowhere near on the same race pace as Vettel.

Bottas has proven on some days he can beat Hamilton over a weekend which has been proven in Canada, Bottas is closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel proven by the points. The gap between Vettel and Kimi is pretty big.

Its not about driver comparisons per se, its about who is the more accurate barometer of the car's maximal performance at Ferrari and Mercedes, and the majority of us would expect it to be Vettel for Ferrari (certainty, you agree with that) and Hamilton for Mercedes.
Kind of surprised that you`re trying to dismiss the later, especially at a time where we know for sure that Hamilton had issues with his car.

Logically I was thinking that, an out of position Hamilton impaled by overheating issues during the Canadian GP, would have been as good of a car performance barometer as Vettel (the non-starter) was at the Japanese GP for you... basically, making the car comparisons void in both occasion if you had kept the same standards ;)

Of course Bottas can outperform Hamilton when Hamilton doesnt get the qualies right and has engine issues during the race (I would FULLY expect Kimi to outperform Vettel too in similar instances), but whilst it might have, it doesnt necessarily mean that the generally weaker/slower driver on the team extracted all the potential performance of the car in both qualies and race.


So everytime Bottas beats Hamilton it has to be due to quali or car issues, it's 3-3 when both have taken part in Q3 and 3-3 in races without the DNF which Bottas would have been ahead anyway. Bottas is driving on a different level above Kimi, Kimi has been a let down in F1 for a long time now and not been good enough for the seat for a number of years now.

Vettel had no chance to take part in Japan 2017 RACE so that's what I mean by you can't compare (i have said this before but last season there was comparisons between quali and race car). Why would you try and compare the second driver who is useless and qualified over a second behind Hamilton? Bottas is quick and puts more of a fight up against Hamilton than Kimi ever does to Vettel. Using the word obviously shows I am downplaying Kimi's ability quite abit.

In Canada Bottas qualified in front of Hamilton, he has held his own against Hamilton this season. How do we know Bottas isnt getting the max out of the car? Bottas is a lot closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel, so you think Hamilton could have won against a Ferrari which could fuel save while a Mercedes was pushing?

I feel quite privileged you remember me and my posting history, any more just pm me.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4687
mds wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close

If, as is being said here and elsewhere, that the biggest part of the Ferrari PU update is efficiency then they’ll be able to run in high modes longer and/or more often than previously. Which in turn means that not only they’ll be seeing whatever power the update brings but also realize more of the previous available power that went untapped due to fuel saving.


True - but at the same time, it wouldn't bring a lot of gains on Saturday.

Not a lot maybe, but if some of their Sunday deficiet, if there was one, was having to save fuel being more efficient now addresses that. And if it also came with some performance gain there’s a chance that it will match the gains the new Mercedes PU.

It’s all speculation but making the most power with the least amount of fuel has always been a part of performance so having improved fuel economy be the biggest feature of this upgrade isn’t as disappointing as it seemed like it was being made out to be.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 12:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 739
F1_Ernie wrote:
Migen wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Migen wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Come on now, you need to be consistent. Last year you would have said Mercedes was quicker, this year you would have said Mercedes was quicker, when it's Ferrari its equal.

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

I dont really disagree with that (Ferrari being the better car for the weekend), but when it comes to consistency...

1. Whats so radically different about this, in comparison with SPA 2017 for example... Mercedes gets pole, Mercedes wins but YOU had Ferrari as the best car?
(If its the margins... why arent you making an allowance for the perception that if Hamilton had nailed his qualies he cound have gotten pole and (at least, he would have) run Vettel closer during the race too?)

2. In an attempt to dismiss the perception that Mercedes had the better car in Japan 2017, YOU came up with this comment...
F1_Ernie wrote:
which begs the question... how can you compare a sunday (practically) without Hamilton (due to his starting position and overheating issues)? Isnt Hamilton likewise supposed to have more pace than Bottas?


How can you compare one driver who doesn't start to one who does? So you think if Hamilton didnt have overheating issues he would have beaten Vettel?

In Japan, Vettel was 2nd and had engine problems on the grid, he wasn't involved in the race, Verstappen finished 1.4 seconds behind Hamilton, you don't think Vettel would have been close? Kimi has had a problem in races for over 3 years now, he is nowhere near on the same race pace as Vettel.

Bottas has proven on some days he can beat Hamilton over a weekend which has been proven in Canada, Bottas is closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel proven by the points. The gap between Vettel and Kimi is pretty big.

Its not about driver comparisons per se, its about who is the more accurate barometer of the car's maximal performance at Ferrari and Mercedes, and the majority of us would expect it to be Vettel for Ferrari (certainty, you agree with that) and Hamilton for Mercedes.
Kind of surprised that you`re trying to dismiss the later, especially at a time where we know for sure that Hamilton had issues with his car.

Logically I was thinking that, an out of position Hamilton impaled by overheating issues during the Canadian GP, would have been as good of a car performance barometer as Vettel (the non-starter) was at the Japanese GP for you... basically, making the car comparisons void in both occasion if you had kept the same standards ;)

Of course Bottas can outperform Hamilton when Hamilton doesnt get the qualies right and has engine issues during the race (I would FULLY expect Kimi to outperform Vettel too in similar instances), but whilst it might have, it doesnt necessarily mean that the generally weaker/slower driver on the team extracted all the potential performance of the car in both qualies and race.


So everytime Bottas beats Hamilton it has to be due to quali or car issues, it's 3-3 when both have taken part in Q3 and 3-3 in races without the DNF which Bottas would have been ahead anyway. Bottas is driving on a different level above Kimi, Kimi has been a let down in F1 for a long time now and not been good enough for the seat for a number of years now.

Vettel had no chance to take part in Japan 2017 RACE so that's what I mean by you can't compare (i have said this before but last season there was comparisons between quali and race car). Why would you try and compare the second driver who is useless and qualified over a second behind Hamilton? Bottas is quick and puts more of a fight up against Hamilton than Kimi ever does to Vettel. Using the word obviously shows I am downplaying Kimi's ability quite abit.

In Canada Bottas qualified in front of Hamilton, he has held his own against Hamilton this season. How do we know Bottas isnt getting the max out of the car? Bottas is a lot closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel, so you think Hamilton could have won against a Ferrari which could fuel save while a Mercedes was pushing?

I feel quite privileged you remember me and my posting history, any more just pm me.

No, not every time. But in this particular case we all saw Hamilton struggling to get a decent lap in qualies and we also know that he had engine issues in the race.

Yes, Bottas seems to be driving better this season and yes he's closer to Hamilton than Kimi is to Vettel but again that doesnt mean he`s getting the max out of the car for sure... how much of that closer-ness is down to possible improvements from Bottas himself and how much of that is down to the possibility that Hamilton not been quite at his best (or the issues he had)?
My feeling is that its a bit of both.

No, I dont exactly remember your posting history, however I was sure that you had shown some inconsistencies in the past about similar subjects... and it didnt take me long to find 1 such example.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
RaggedMan wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close

If, as is being said here and elsewhere, that the biggest part of the Ferrari PU update is efficiency then they’ll be able to run in high modes longer and/or more often than previously. Which in turn means that not only they’ll be seeing whatever power the update brings but also realize more of the previous available power that went untapped due to fuel saving.
yeah, but as has been said this wouldn't make any difference at all on Saturday. On Sunday it just levels the field a bit more, where they used to be at a disadvantage as Mercedes was said to be able to run lighter as they didn't need as much fuel to run the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close


That is one of the reasons why IMO Ferrari had the better car, you always would take the car with a new engine unless it's a Williams. Mercedes had a 0.050s disadvantage in quali, might not sound a lot but it all makes a difference. Tbh i wouldnt be suprised to see Merc get pole in France if they sort out the new engine.

Did you read about Vettel having to play around with the switches in his car? Apparently something to do with satisfying the FIA.

If it was 0.050s then it wouldn't have made a difference to the qualifying result. Hamilton said that that Saturday had nothing to do with the engine, to be fair.

I didn't see anything about Vettel's switches - what did it say?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11119
Vettel said something about it, but as I understood it was just about managing the PU settings etc during the race. Didn't hear anywhere about it having to do with the FIA, probably the usual spreaders of FUD behind this.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11119
RaggedMan wrote:
mds wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close

If, as is being said here and elsewhere, that the biggest part of the Ferrari PU update is efficiency then they’ll be able to run in high modes longer and/or more often than previously. Which in turn means that not only they’ll be seeing whatever power the update brings but also realize more of the previous available power that went untapped due to fuel saving.


True - but at the same time, it wouldn't bring a lot of gains on Saturday.

Not a lot maybe, but if some of their Sunday deficiet, if there was one, was having to save fuel being more efficient now addresses that. And if it also came with some performance gain there’s a chance that it will match the gains the new Mercedes PU.

It’s all speculation but making the most power with the least amount of fuel has always been a part of performance so having improved fuel economy be the biggest feature of this upgrade isn’t as disappointing as it seemed like it was being made out to be.


Oh no it would definitely be a very useful upgrade, not disappointing at all.

It's just that it might hand the Saturday advantage back to Mercedes if their upgrade brings more power, and then with how difficult it has become to pass other cars, Ferrari might find themselves in a scenario that they had a few times last year, where they had arguably the better race car but couldn't exploit it due to track position out of qualifying.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
mds wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:
mds wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:
Zoue wrote:
One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close

If, as is being said here and elsewhere, that the biggest part of the Ferrari PU update is efficiency then they’ll be able to run in high modes longer and/or more often than previously. Which in turn means that not only they’ll be seeing whatever power the update brings but also realize more of the previous available power that went untapped due to fuel saving.


True - but at the same time, it wouldn't bring a lot of gains on Saturday.

Not a lot maybe, but if some of their Sunday deficiet, if there was one, was having to save fuel being more efficient now addresses that. And if it also came with some performance gain there’s a chance that it will match the gains the new Mercedes PU.

It’s all speculation but making the most power with the least amount of fuel has always been a part of performance so having improved fuel economy be the biggest feature of this upgrade isn’t as disappointing as it seemed like it was being made out to be.


Oh no it would definitely be a very useful upgrade, not disappointing at all.

It's just that it might hand the Saturday advantage back to Mercedes if their upgrade brings more power, and then with how difficult it has become to pass other cars, Ferrari might find themselves in a scenario that they had a few times last year, where they had arguably the better race car but couldn't exploit it due to track position out of qualifying.

yes I agree that a fuel economy upgrade would be significant, as it would allow them to exploit the car's potential more.

I think the cars are very evenly matched now. Whether they stay that way depends in part on what performance gains the Mercedes new PU brings


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
There's a difference between Spa 2017 and Canada 2018 aswell. Mercedes did have a quali advantage last year, there's no doubt about that. I called the Ferrari the better race car, it looked quicker and could stay close to the Mercedes all race. If I remember rightly Kingvoid and Zoue's opinion was that Mercedes was better in the race due to the quali advantage, if I am wrong I am sorry. A lot of the debates last season was regarding the best quali car and race car, this year it seems to be more about the weekend.

This year quali was close but in the race Ferrari had the advantage, more fuel efficient, better pace, new engine etc.

.

One area I'd agree with you is that Ferrari had the advantage of the new PU. If nothing else it gave a certain peace of mind and confidence to the driver. The reason I'm saying Ferrari have cause to be concerned is that even with the new engine they weren't significantly ahead, so when Mercedes bring theirs there's a good chance that they will pull ahead (everything else being equal, of course). I think if Hamilton had been on form on Saturday we'd probably be talking about how Mercedes have stayed ahead, the margins were that close


That is one of the reasons why IMO Ferrari had the better car, you always would take the car with a new engine unless it's a Williams. Mercedes had a 0.050s disadvantage in quali, might not sound a lot but it all makes a difference. Tbh i wouldnt be suprised to see Merc get pole in France if they sort out the new engine.

Did you read about Vettel having to play around with the switches in his car? Apparently something to do with satisfying the FIA.

If it was 0.050s then it wouldn't have made a difference to the qualifying result. Hamilton said that that Saturday had nothing to do with the engine, to be fair.

I didn't see anything about Vettel's switches - what did it say?


From Mark Hughes race report:

"As the tyres wore down, Vettel locked up into the chicane, but without really flat-spotting them. He was being asked to complete all sorts of systems switches at around this time. “At some stages I was saying, ‘Ok, when I am allowed to drive again?’ They were just managing something in the background. Otherwise car was beautiful today.”

So what was it that needed to be managed? “It wasn’t a problem with the car,” related a Ferrari spokesman, “just something we need to do to satisfy the FIA.” This is believed to be related to proving that no advantage is being taken of the twin battery layout being used to circumnavigate the FIA energy deployment sensors."

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
^^Thanks for that. Would explain why the FIA are looking for a more elegant monitoring solution for next year.

Interesting section on Kimi's race in the same piece:

With his tyres good for another dozen laps or so, and clear air ahead of him, he needed to make up around 0.33sec per lap on Verstappen before stopping if he was to leapfrog past all three of them. It was perfectly feasible; in the same car on the same age and compound of tyres as Räikkönen, Vettel made up an easy 0.5sec per lap on Verstappen – for several unpressured laps. Räikkönen would fail to pull out enough time to clear any of them by the time he pitted on lap 32. He’d go on to finish sixth from a situation where a podium had been more than possible.   

Two things strike me: first, that this doesn't appear to be taking into account the fact that Kimi didn't have the same PU upgrade Vettel did (although he did get a new turbo), which may point to a fairly decent benefit from that upgrade; and second, that Kimi's inability to pull out a gap indicates that he at least didn't have anything left in the car, which makes it more difficult to ascertain which was the better car that weekend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26063
Zoue wrote:
^^Thanks for that. Would explain why the FIA are looking for a more elegant monitoring solution for next year.

Interesting section on Kimi's race in the same piece:

With his tyres good for another dozen laps or so, and clear air ahead of him, he needed to make up around 0.33sec per lap on Verstappen before stopping if he was to leapfrog past all three of them. It was perfectly feasible; in the same car on the same age and compound of tyres as Räikkönen, Vettel made up an easy 0.5sec per lap on Verstappen – for several unpressured laps. Räikkönen would fail to pull out enough time to clear any of them by the time he pitted on lap 32. He’d go on to finish sixth from a situation where a podium had been more than possible.   

Two things strike me: first, that this doesn't appear to be taking into account the fact that Kimi didn't have the same PU upgrade Vettel did (although he did get a new turbo), which may point to a fairly decent benefit from that upgrade; and second, that Kimi's inability to pull out a gap indicates that he at least didn't have anything left in the car, which makes it more difficult to ascertain which was the better car that weekend.

Using the weaker driver as a barometer of car performance which wasn't done last year with Bottas and in the race just gone, of all the drivers in the front 6 cars, Kimi is the weakest driver, I'm not sure how many underwhelming performances Kimi has to produce for people to realise that?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 4th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 12:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
^^Thanks for that. Would explain why the FIA are looking for a more elegant monitoring solution for next year.

Interesting section on Kimi's race in the same piece:

With his tyres good for another dozen laps or so, and clear air ahead of him, he needed to make up around 0.33sec per lap on Verstappen before stopping if he was to leapfrog past all three of them. It was perfectly feasible; in the same car on the same age and compound of tyres as Räikkönen, Vettel made up an easy 0.5sec per lap on Verstappen – for several unpressured laps. Räikkönen would fail to pull out enough time to clear any of them by the time he pitted on lap 32. He’d go on to finish sixth from a situation where a podium had been more than possible.   

Two things strike me: first, that this doesn't appear to be taking into account the fact that Kimi didn't have the same PU upgrade Vettel did (although he did get a new turbo), which may point to a fairly decent benefit from that upgrade; and second, that Kimi's inability to pull out a gap indicates that he at least didn't have anything left in the car, which makes it more difficult to ascertain which was the better car that weekend.

Using the weaker driver as a barometer of car performance which wasn't done last year with Bottas and in the race just gone, of all the drivers in the front 6 cars, Kimi is the weakest driver, I'm not sure how many underwhelming performances Kimi has to produce for people to realise that?

I can only assume you didn't actually read my post at all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 149
I was also very surprised with the figure of 0.050 difference between new and 7th race. That seems very low.

The closest examples we have within Mercedes is Monza 2016, when Rosberg did the race on an old engine and was 0.4 behind Hamilton. Hamilton had a brand new, new spec engine. Rosberg old spec, old engine. But then Hamilton out qualified him by 0.5 in 2016 and 0.3 in 2014 so maybe it wasn't huge difference.

Bottas also used an old engine of slightly lower spec in Spain last year and was 0.220 off Hamilton which was about his average at that time last year.

We also saw Hamilton with a 1 race old engine vs Bottas with 5 race old engine in Abu Dhabi last year and Bottas took pole by 0.170. So maybe the 0.050 is pretty accurate after all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 1:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3185
Johnson wrote:
I was also very surprised with the figure of 0.050 difference between new and 7th race. That seems very low.

The closest examples we have within Mercedes is Monza 2016, when Rosberg did the race on an old engine and was 0.4 behind Hamilton. Hamilton had a brand new, new spec engine. Rosberg old spec, old engine. But then Hamilton out qualified him by 0.5 in 2016 and 0.3 in 2014 so maybe it wasn't huge difference.

Bottas also used an old engine of slightly lower spec in Spain last year and was 0.220 off Hamilton which was about his average at that time last year.

We also saw Hamilton with a 1 race old engine vs Bottas with 5 race old engine in Abu Dhabi last year and Bottas took pole by 0.170. So maybe the 0.050 is pretty accurate after all.



Yeah we are talking engines that are making around 1000 hp? The hp loss due to wear and tear isn’t going to be significant enough to make a huge difference on track. It’s not like it’s a top speed contest.

I read somewhere that 10hp is equal to 0.25 per lap at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve. That seems eccentric to me to be honest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26063
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
^^Thanks for that. Would explain why the FIA are looking for a more elegant monitoring solution for next year.

Interesting section on Kimi's race in the same piece:

With his tyres good for another dozen laps or so, and clear air ahead of him, he needed to make up around 0.33sec per lap on Verstappen before stopping if he was to leapfrog past all three of them. It was perfectly feasible; in the same car on the same age and compound of tyres as Räikkönen, Vettel made up an easy 0.5sec per lap on Verstappen – for several unpressured laps. Räikkönen would fail to pull out enough time to clear any of them by the time he pitted on lap 32. He’d go on to finish sixth from a situation where a podium had been more than possible.   

Two things strike me: first, that this doesn't appear to be taking into account the fact that Kimi didn't have the same PU upgrade Vettel did (although he did get a new turbo), which may point to a fairly decent benefit from that upgrade; and second, that Kimi's inability to pull out a gap indicates that he at least didn't have anything left in the car, which makes it more difficult to ascertain which was the better car that weekend.

Using the weaker driver as a barometer of car performance which wasn't done last year with Bottas and in the race just gone, of all the drivers in the front 6 cars, Kimi is the weakest driver, I'm not sure how many underwhelming performances Kimi has to produce for people to realise that?

I can only assume you didn't actually read my post at all

It still goes if you try and use Kimi as a barometer of the Ferrari's performance, his races can be somewhat indifferent.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 4th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
^^Thanks for that. Would explain why the FIA are looking for a more elegant monitoring solution for next year.

Interesting section on Kimi's race in the same piece:

With his tyres good for another dozen laps or so, and clear air ahead of him, he needed to make up around 0.33sec per lap on Verstappen before stopping if he was to leapfrog past all three of them. It was perfectly feasible; in the same car on the same age and compound of tyres as Räikkönen, Vettel made up an easy 0.5sec per lap on Verstappen – for several unpressured laps. Räikkönen would fail to pull out enough time to clear any of them by the time he pitted on lap 32. He’d go on to finish sixth from a situation where a podium had been more than possible.   

Two things strike me: first, that this doesn't appear to be taking into account the fact that Kimi didn't have the same PU upgrade Vettel did (although he did get a new turbo), which may point to a fairly decent benefit from that upgrade; and second, that Kimi's inability to pull out a gap indicates that he at least didn't have anything left in the car, which makes it more difficult to ascertain which was the better car that weekend.

Using the weaker driver as a barometer of car performance which wasn't done last year with Bottas and in the race just gone, of all the drivers in the front 6 cars, Kimi is the weakest driver, I'm not sure how many underwhelming performances Kimi has to produce for people to realise that?

I can only assume you didn't actually read my post at all

It still goes if you try and use Kimi as a barometer of the Ferrari's performance, his races can be somewhat indifferent.

still nothing to do with what I wrote


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22552
So Renault look to have captured a Mercedes engine design man:

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/renault-captures-mercedes-design-man-1046046/

Harman has worked with Mercedes for more than 17 years. He originally joined its engine division in 2001, as engineering team leader, before moving across to his powertrain integration role with the F1 team in 2011.

With Renault pushing on with investment and recruitment, Harman’s knowledge of how world champion Mercedes integrated its engine, transmission and chassis will be a further boost for the French manufacturer's long-term planning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

"Hi FTR Vettel. It's a tricky thing to answer, actually. As well as simply improving the efficiency of the engine, another way of saving fuel is to be fast enough to qualify on pole and then just control the pace of the race from the front. Certainly, the car was faster than Mercedes in the race and you saw Bottas use up so much fuel in his chase of Vettel that he had to back right off in the closing stages. But the fact that Montreal is a heavily fuel-demanding track layout and Vettel had things under control suggests that it's no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better."

"Hi Ryan. I think Mercedes' prospects for France are very good. It's the sort of high-speed-corner track that suits their aero efficiency very well. Also, the tyres are not the softest and they are the thin-gauge ones that Ferrari had a problem with in Barcelona but Mercedes did not. That doesn't necessarily mean it will be a walk in the park for them but looking at it from before the event, there's nothing they need fear about the Paul Ricard track."

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
"Thanks for the question Blade Thundrbolt; a name, I’m praying, which was actually given to you at birth by legendary parents. To the matter at hand, yes, I believe he has.

The Bottas we see this year learned much in his first season with a championship operation. Most importantly he has, I believe, learned how to tune both himself and his car to the diva-like qualities which has proven Mercedes’ Achilles heel over the past 18 months. While the temperature shifts - which affect the ability of the Mercedes to turn on its tyres - have left Hamilton flat footed and off his game on occasions, Bottas has been able to adapt. He has been the more consistent and the more at ease with his car this season."

He would and should have been leading the world championship after Baku. If it wasn’t for that puncture a few miles from the Azerbaijan flag, I’d wager it would be he and Vettel locked at the top of the standings as we speak. Certainly it is these two who stand out for me as the most solid performers out of the top three teams in the season to date.

Having seemingly got on top of his baffling yo-yoing race pace last season, it is his reluctance to go for that move for the lead in Bahrain that is now seen as an example of what many argue is his only major weak point. Questions have and continue to persist as to his hunger and his ability to land the knockout punch.

But I think that is to misunderstand Bottas’s approach. Sure, he could have gone for the move. But he could also have got it wrong and ended up with nothing. His hunger burns deep, but he’s a larger-picture guy. Of course he wants to win every race he starts. But a row of second places will suit him and his desires far more than a win here, a fifth there and a few DNFs sprinkled into the mix.

He’s fast, he’s consistent, he’s calm and mature - and he’s my dark horse for the 2018 drivers’ world championship.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1692
Zoue wrote:
So Renault look to have captured a Mercedes engine design man:

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/renault-captures-mercedes-design-man-1046046/

Harman has worked with Mercedes for more than 17 years. He originally joined its engine division in 2001, as engineering team leader, before moving across to his powertrain integration role with the F1 team in 2011.

With Renault pushing on with investment and recruitment, Harman’s knowledge of how world champion Mercedes integrated its engine, transmission and chassis will be a further boost for the French manufacturer's long-term planning.


Slowly going with Merc strategy of hiring everyone in the paddock.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3185
F1_Ernie wrote:
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/features/2018/6/f1-inbox---your-questions-on-ferraris-engine--bottas-and-red-bul.html

"Hi FTR Vettel. It's a tricky thing to answer, actually. As well as simply improving the efficiency of the engine, another way of saving fuel is to be fast enough to qualify on pole and then just control the pace of the race from the front. Certainly, the car was faster than Mercedes in the race and you saw Bottas use up so much fuel in his chase of Vettel that he had to back right off in the closing stages. But the fact that Montreal is a heavily fuel-demanding track layout and Vettel had things under control suggests that it's no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better."

"Hi Ryan. I think Mercedes' prospects for France are very good. It's the sort of high-speed-corner track that suits their aero efficiency very well. Also, the tyres are not the softest and they are the thin-gauge ones that Ferrari had a problem with in Barcelona but Mercedes did not. That doesn't necessarily mean it will be a walk in the park for them but looking at it from before the event, there's nothing they need fear about the Paul Ricard track."


Regarding the tires, the US is not a thinner gauge tire is it? That's the qualifying tire and Ferrari should not have a problem on it. I would not be surprised if a Ferrari is on pole there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2617
kleefton wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/features/2018/6/f1-inbox---your-questions-on-ferraris-engine--bottas-and-red-bul.html

"Hi FTR Vettel. It's a tricky thing to answer, actually. As well as simply improving the efficiency of the engine, another way of saving fuel is to be fast enough to qualify on pole and then just control the pace of the race from the front. Certainly, the car was faster than Mercedes in the race and you saw Bottas use up so much fuel in his chase of Vettel that he had to back right off in the closing stages. But the fact that Montreal is a heavily fuel-demanding track layout and Vettel had things under control suggests that it's no worse than Mercedes - and maybe even slightly better."

"Hi Ryan. I think Mercedes' prospects for France are very good. It's the sort of high-speed-corner track that suits their aero efficiency very well. Also, the tyres are not the softest and they are the thin-gauge ones that Ferrari had a problem with in Barcelona but Mercedes did not. That doesn't necessarily mean it will be a walk in the park for them but looking at it from before the event, there's nothing they need fear about the Paul Ricard track."


Regarding the tires, the US is not a thinner gauge tire is it? That's the qualifying tire and Ferrari should not have a problem on it. I would not be surprised if a Ferrari is on pole there.


I wouldn't know but I'm sure someone does. Here's the French grand prix tyre choices.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13670 ... h-gp-tyres

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3185
Nevermind, think I found the answer. All the compounds brought to this race will be thinner gauge. So that US tire is different from the US we've seen at previous rounds. Another hard to predict race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1195
F1_Ernie wrote:
"Thanks for the question Blade Thundrbolt; a name, I’m praying, which was actually given to you at birth by legendary parents. To the matter at hand, yes, I believe he has.

The Bottas we see this year learned much in his first season with a championship operation. Most importantly he has, I believe, learned how to tune both himself and his car to the diva-like qualities which has proven Mercedes’ Achilles heel over the past 18 months. While the temperature shifts - which affect the ability of the Mercedes to turn on its tyres - have left Hamilton flat footed and off his game on occasions, Bottas has been able to adapt. He has been the more consistent and the more at ease with his car this season."

He would and should have been leading the world championship after Baku. If it wasn’t for that puncture a few miles from the Azerbaijan flag, I’d wager it would be he and Vettel locked at the top of the standings as we speak. Certainly it is these two who stand out for me as the most solid performers out of the top three teams in the season to date.

Having seemingly got on top of his baffling yo-yoing race pace last season, it is his reluctance to go for that move for the lead in Bahrain that is now seen as an example of what many argue is his only major weak point. Questions have and continue to persist as to his hunger and his ability to land the knockout punch.

But I think that is to misunderstand Bottas’s approach. Sure, he could have gone for the move. But he could also have got it wrong and ended up with nothing. His hunger burns deep, but he’s a larger-picture guy. Of course he wants to win every race he starts. But a row of second places will suit him and his desires far more than a win here, a fifth there and a few DNFs sprinkled into the mix.

He’s fast, he’s consistent, he’s calm and mature - and he’s my dark horse for the 2018 drivers’ world championship.


So you are now arguing that Hamilton is not adaptable as much as Bottas is or what?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2018 9:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9157
Rockie wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
"Thanks for the question Blade Thundrbolt; a name, I’m praying, which was actually given to you at birth by legendary parents. To the matter at hand, yes, I believe he has.

The Bottas we see this year learned much in his first season with a championship operation. Most importantly he has, I believe, learned how to tune both himself and his car to the diva-like qualities which has proven Mercedes’ Achilles heel over the past 18 months. While the temperature shifts - which affect the ability of the Mercedes to turn on its tyres - have left Hamilton flat footed and off his game on occasions, Bottas has been able to adapt. He has been the more consistent and the more at ease with his car this season."

He would and should have been leading the world championship after Baku. If it wasn’t for that puncture a few miles from the Azerbaijan flag, I’d wager it would be he and Vettel locked at the top of the standings as we speak. Certainly it is these two who stand out for me as the most solid performers out of the top three teams in the season to date.

Having seemingly got on top of his baffling yo-yoing race pace last season, it is his reluctance to go for that move for the lead in Bahrain that is now seen as an example of what many argue is his only major weak point. Questions have and continue to persist as to his hunger and his ability to land the knockout punch.

But I think that is to misunderstand Bottas’s approach. Sure, he could have gone for the move. But he could also have got it wrong and ended up with nothing. His hunger burns deep, but he’s a larger-picture guy. Of course he wants to win every race he starts. But a row of second places will suit him and his desires far more than a win here, a fifth there and a few DNFs sprinkled into the mix.

He’s fast, he’s consistent, he’s calm and mature - and he’s my dark horse for the 2018 drivers’ world championship.


So you are now arguing that Hamilton is not adaptable as much as Bottas is or what?

F1_Ernie isn´t arguing anything, Will Buxton is.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/feat ... d-bul.html

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2021
Let’s be honest here, if races like Bahrain or China 2018 had happened in 2017 but the situations were reversed (Mercedes as Ferrari and Ferrari as Mercedes), there is no doubt that the usual suspects would argue the cars were equal, if not Ferrari supremacy. There were people arguing that Ferrari was the car to have in Belgium 2017, a very similar situation.

In Baku, once Mercedes got the tyres heated up, they were easily as fast as Ferrari. Hamilton was consistently eating into Vettel’s lead before he locked up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:41 am
Posts: 180
KingVoid wrote:
Let’s be honest here, if races like Bahrain or China 2018 had happened in 2017 but the situations were reversed (Mercedes as Ferrari and Ferrari as Mercedes), there is no doubt that the usual suspects would argue the cars were equal, if not Ferrari supremacy. There were people arguing that Ferrari was the car to have in Belgium 2017, a very similar situation.

In Baku, once Mercedes got the tyres heated up, they were easily as fast as Ferrari. Hamilton was consistently eating into Vettel’s lead before he locked up.


Or Vettel was simply managing the gap up front?

Just putting this out there. A different perspective on Baku

"Vettel was driving to a gap, could've pulled out more, Hamilton in a slower car was trying like crazy to close the gap. If you'd put them in the opposite situations that's probably what would've occured too. I don't see him (Hamilton) 'playing it safe' as you say. I see him having transcended the car at Albert Park (where's he's always fantastic), where Ferrari didn't quite unlock the full potential of their car (a combination that made the Merc look faster than it was). But since then Ferrari has been the fastest and Hamilton is just doing what he can withit." Mark Hughes.


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: wolfticket 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