planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:01 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Altair wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
Is:
Gasly that good OR
Toro Rosso that good OR
Honda that good?
could be a fluke.

I will need a few more races before I fall for the hype.

Haas looked like world beaters in Australia, couldn't get one of their drivers out of Q1 this time.


Not a fluke, just suits them down to the ground. Opposite of McLaren which seems to have the aero efficiency of a London Bus, at least around here.

Straight line speed that they blamed entirely on the Honda engine last year.


At what point though wasn't it? They didn't have full ers deployment until Monza for example so for x amount of seconds a lap they lost all ers support.

That's not a chassis issue. Trimming it out and getting 4-5kph extra wouldn't have changed much and if they'd have lost more in the corners than they gained on the straight it would be a net loss so why do it?

Well I will bow to your greater technical knowledge on such things but as an overview it doesn't look to clever for McLaren, they seem to be falling between two stools.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:11 pm
Posts: 52
kleefton wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
JN23 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
The Honda engine is clearly performing well. That cannot be denied at this point.


Or Toro Rosso have the best chassis :lol:


Or Gasly is better than Alonso!


You guys are hilarious.



Gassly is not bad, he did win the F2 2016 title i think..
It's early days and only the race result tomorrow will determine what is really going on..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

Yep I saw some experts say it was an incredible lap from Hamilton whilst many it seemed were fixated on the party mode.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
lamo wrote:
This grid start after a SC is complete none sense. What a terrible rule. This will guarantee to make 2-3 race wins per season pure luck as well as multiple positions not for the win completely randomised.

A driver can, top every practice session, every Q session, lead every lap and dominate the entire weekend and then have a SC drop in the last 10 laps and get out dragged into turn 1. At some tracks its actually an advantage to start in P2, like Russia. Especially with these huge and wide draggy cars from 2017 on wards.


Yea, isn't that cool? You have to do well every second of the race, no one is entitled to jack squat. This is racing, no one is entitled.


Or just be bang average apart from one good start after a safety car a few laps from home.


Yes. Everyone knows the rules and possible scenarios that may arise in a race. Just because you did fantastic for 99% of a race, you are still not entitled to anything. This is racing, hard competition, not a charity or feel-good club.

Racing is a glorious but cruel sport. Get used to it.

So racing should be a lottery were a driver that's leading the race by 10 seconds gets forced into a restarted race and gets crashed out at the first corner and that's perfectly fair?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mort Canard wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Mort Canard wrote:
Please someone teach Rachel Brookes to speak so Americans can understand her. Don’t have any particular problem with understanding Crofty or Lazenby.

What is it about the way she talks which makes it difficult?

Women have higher voices that make it harder for us OFs to understand them. Her rapid delivery doesn't help either. I don't think her accent is any thicker than the other announcers but for me she is harder to understand.

Rachel Brookes accent would be very much on the posh sound compared to many of us.

Speak for one's self, peasant.

Image
http://mobi.perezhilton.com/2017-03-02- ... -reporters

I'd probably get away with that now but not when I was growing up. 8O

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23034
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's not obvious at all. Lewis looked comfortably to have pace in hand in Australia, whereas here in Bahrain he doesn't. So you can either take the view that he performed superhuman feats in Australia, but for some reason couldn't replicate that here, or you can take the view that in Australia the Merc was the better car, while it doesn't look like that in Bahrain. Either way there's no conclusive evidence that he put in a ferocious lap (although in all fairness he could well have done) and I for one am unconvinced that someone could better their own time by 6 tenths unless a) something material changed in the car, or b) they weren't really trying up to that point and the car had plenty of pace in hand.

Vettel improved by nearly half a second on his Q2 time in Bahrain and, while I think he did pretty well, I don't think he performed any miracles here today, either. Her did well to pip an apparently on-form Kimi to pole but I'm not blowing it out of proportion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
PRFAN wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
Is:
Gasly that good OR
Toro Rosso that good OR
Honda that good?


Maybe all 3!!

Will keep an eye on the kid, he performed well today!

TR has a history of delivering competitive chassis

Maybe Honda has turned the corner!

McLaren a bit exposed today!

It's probably not a chassis thing. It's clear that straight line speed is their strength. They have been extremely fast through the traps in both races and they have been much more competitive at this power circuit than they were at Melbourne. The Honda engine seems pretty good. Hard to believe I know and it's likely that the qualifying performance of the engine is superior to the sustainable race performance but so far so good.

I'm calling a RBR works deal for the near future.


They're only one of 4 teams with a full chassis dyno which means testing 24/7. It's absolutely a chassis thing, it's a slippy one alright. Peak power was getting ok for Honda after Monza and Alo was usually in Q3 but it's efficiency and reliability was where they still lack.

Obviously Honda are still improving no argument there but that STR is slick in a straight line, it's been evident since winter testing and this track suits it.

Nah having really low drag is a big factor but you need power too. I know it hurts man but you have to admit that the Honda unit has performed well both in terms of power and reliability so far. I'm not saying it's the best but give them some credit man.


It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
sandman1347 wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Where's that Hamilton lap come from?

It seems he's just quicker on the softs here. Really the supersofts seem to just be the far worse tire for Mercedes.

I actually think he would have done better in Q3 on the softs but it's possible he either had no fresh ones left or they might be needed for the race?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7109
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's too early to state either of those things with any real certainty. Even back in the 2014-2016 days there were weekends where Mercedes were completely outpaced by Ferrari or Red Bull or both.

It will take a few more races for the competative order to establish itself, not least because the top 3 teams have fundamentally very different concepts meaning there are likely to be circuit dependant swings like last year.

Don't fall into the trap of doing exactly what you're saying others did post-Australia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Altair wrote:
could be a fluke.

I will need a few more races before I fall for the hype.

Haas looked like world beaters in Australia, couldn't get one of their drivers out of Q1 this time.


Not a fluke, just suits them down to the ground. Opposite of McLaren which seems to have the aero efficiency of a London Bus, at least around here.

Straight line speed that they blamed entirely on the Honda engine last year.


At what point though wasn't it? They didn't have full ers deployment until Monza for example so for x amount of seconds a lap they lost all ers support.

That's not a chassis issue. Trimming it out and getting 4-5kph extra wouldn't have changed much and if they'd have lost more in the corners than they gained on the straight it would be a net loss so why do it?

Well I will bow to your greater technical knowledge on such things but as an overview it doesn't look to clever for McLaren, they seem to be falling between two stools.


I'm only up to speed on the Honda stuff because I followed it closely, most of it goes way over my head but cheers. McLaren were awful today and have been all weekend. Only race pace looked ok in FP2 but one lap pace has been shocking all weekend.

May point to a tyre issue and getting it in the sweet spot but we'll see if they struggle again next week to know more.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 740
Location: India
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

Yep I saw some experts say it was an incredible lap from Hamilton whilst many it seemed were fixated on the party mode.


I missed the first race and FP sessions. But here Mercedes is not looking smooth at all and Bottas did well to come so close I think. Hamilton is not comfortable or Mercedes is not comfortable here inspite of using full engine power. So in race Ferrari should be safe and RBR too I think will be faster than Mercedes. Obviously Max will not be able to catch top5. Hamilton will have to be at his best to get podium. I do not think it will happen. Ricciardo and 2 Ferrari should get podiums

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM9-GK3MeLI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

Yep I saw some experts say it was an incredible lap from Hamilton whilst many it seemed were fixated on the party mode.


I missed the first race and FP sessions. But here Mercedes is not looking smooth at all and Bottas did well to come so close I think. Hamilton is not comfortable or Mercedes is not comfortable here inspite of using full engine power. So in race Ferrari should be safe and RBR too I think will be faster than Mercedes. Obviously Max will not be able to catch top5. Hamilton will have to be at his best to get podium. I do not think it will happen. Ricciardo and 2 Ferrari should get podiums


Yeah, imo Max would have come right behind the Ferraris in qualifying. Ricc hasn't been getting the most out of the car in qualy it seems. They will still be fierce tomorrow, as you say. I think they'll be faster than Merc. Anyone watched FP3 and you can clearly see how unsettled the Merc is this weekend. Redbull might even be faster than Ferrari in race trim. We'll find out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Lotus49 wrote:
It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.


Agree they have to improve the reliability, but do you think they are ahead of Renault in peak power as we speak?

Because it's looking very likely now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.


Agree they have to improve the reliability, but do you think they are ahead of Renault in peak power as we speak?

Because it's looking very likely now.


No but I think it's the area they are closest to them in.

Why is it likely let alone very likely?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4870
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
PRFAN wrote:

Maybe all 3!!

Will keep an eye on the kid, he performed well today!

TR has a history of delivering competitive chassis

Maybe Honda has turned the corner!

McLaren a bit exposed today!

It's probably not a chassis thing. It's clear that straight line speed is their strength. They have been extremely fast through the traps in both races and they have been much more competitive at this power circuit than they were at Melbourne. The Honda engine seems pretty good. Hard to believe I know and it's likely that the qualifying performance of the engine is superior to the sustainable race performance but so far so good.

I'm calling a RBR works deal for the near future.


They're only one of 4 teams with a full chassis dyno which means testing 24/7. It's absolutely a chassis thing, it's a slippy one alright. Peak power was getting ok for Honda after Monza and Alo was usually in Q3 but it's efficiency and reliability was where they still lack.

Obviously Honda are still improving no argument there but that STR is slick in a straight line, it's been evident since winter testing and this track suits it.

Nah having really low drag is a big factor but you need power too. I know it hurts man but you have to admit that the Honda unit has performed well both in terms of power and reliability so far. I'm not saying it's the best but give them some credit man.


It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.

You're talking about last season while I'm talking about this season. In terms of power I find it hard to believe Honda haven't moved up into third on the board behind Ferrari and Merc. Yes, my mistake on the reliability and that might still very well be their Achilles heel but they have taken a step forward. Certainly this has gone exponentially better than their time with McLaren.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.


Agree they have to improve the reliability, but do you think they are ahead of Renault in peak power as we speak?

Because it's looking very likely now.


No but I think it's the area they are closest to them in.

Why is it likely let alone very likely?


Because they seem to be consistently faster in a straight line? I understand that this may be due to TR having a slippery car, but it seems to me the Honda is faster in a straight line than all Renault powered cars.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
It's probably not a chassis thing. It's clear that straight line speed is their strength. They have been extremely fast through the traps in both races and they have been much more competitive at this power circuit than they were at Melbourne. The Honda engine seems pretty good. Hard to believe I know and it's likely that the qualifying performance of the engine is superior to the sustainable race performance but so far so good.

I'm calling a RBR works deal for the near future.


They're only one of 4 teams with a full chassis dyno which means testing 24/7. It's absolutely a chassis thing, it's a slippy one alright. Peak power was getting ok for Honda after Monza and Alo was usually in Q3 but it's efficiency and reliability was where they still lack.

Obviously Honda are still improving no argument there but that STR is slick in a straight line, it's been evident since winter testing and this track suits it.

Nah having really low drag is a big factor but you need power too. I know it hurts man but you have to admit that the Honda unit has performed well both in terms of power and reliability so far. I'm not saying it's the best but give them some credit man.


It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.

You're talking about last season while I'm talking about this season. In terms of power I find it hard to believe Honda haven't moved up into third on the board behind Ferrari and Merc. Yes, my mistake on the reliability and that might still very well be their Achilles heel but they have taken a step forward. Certainly this has gone exponentially better than their time with McLaren.


I'm talking about this year, those Gasly failures and the race pace of Hartley in Oz for efficiency comparison. What you're doing is equating one qualifying session they did really well in today and assuming they are now ahead of Renault in all departments. Seriously?

We haven't even seen their best driver in full race pace yet over a full race and you want me to just assume it's fixed? Sorry but no, I'll happily give them the credit for both efficiency and reliability once we've actually witnessed it at the very least once. Preferably more.

Agree it's going better than at McLaren but that's not really surprising. This is year 4 for Honda now and they know what they're doing and have only being doing what the others have been doing with lean burn and 'h' recuperation and deployment since Monza 2017 so it's impossible for them to be worse than the clueless years before that.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4870
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

They're only one of 4 teams with a full chassis dyno which means testing 24/7. It's absolutely a chassis thing, it's a slippy one alright. Peak power was getting ok for Honda after Monza and Alo was usually in Q3 but it's efficiency and reliability was where they still lack.

Obviously Honda are still improving no argument there but that STR is slick in a straight line, it's been evident since winter testing and this track suits it.

Nah having really low drag is a big factor but you need power too. I know it hurts man but you have to admit that the Honda unit has performed well both in terms of power and reliability so far. I'm not saying it's the best but give them some credit man.


It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.

You're talking about last season while I'm talking about this season. In terms of power I find it hard to believe Honda haven't moved up into third on the board behind Ferrari and Merc. Yes, my mistake on the reliability and that might still very well be their Achilles heel but they have taken a step forward. Certainly this has gone exponentially better than their time with McLaren.


I'm talking about this year, those Gasly failures and the race pace of Hartley in Oz for efficiency comparison. What you're doing is equating one qualifying session they did really well in today and assuming they are now ahead of Renault in all departments. Seriously?

We haven't even seen their best driver in full race pace yet over a full race and you want me to just assume it's fixed? Sorry but no, I'll happily give them the credit for both efficiency and reliability once we've actually witnessed it at the very least once. Preferably more.

Agree it's going better than at McLaren but that's not really surprising. This is year 4 for Honda now and they know what they're doing and have only being doing what the others have been doing with lean burn and 'h' recuperation and deployment since Monza 2017 so it's impossible for them to be worse than the clueless years before that.

It's not one session, it's the whole season (and pre-season) they've been faster in a straight line than all of the Renault powered cars. I think you're too invested in this to be honest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's not obvious at all. Lewis looked comfortably to have pace in hand in Australia, whereas here in Bahrain he doesn't. So you can either take the view that he performed superhuman feats in Australia, but for some reason couldn't replicate that here, or you can take the view that in Australia the Merc was the better car, while it doesn't look like that in Bahrain. Either way there's no conclusive evidence that he put in a ferocious lap (although in all fairness he could well have done) and I for one am unconvinced that someone could better their own time by 6 tenths unless a) something material changed in the car, or b) they weren't really trying up to that point and the car had plenty of pace in hand.

Vettel improved by nearly half a second on his Q2 time in Bahrain and, while I think he did pretty well, I don't think he performed any miracles here today, either. Her did well to pip an apparently on-form Kimi to pole but I'm not blowing it out of proportion.

The reference would be a F1 expert, ex F1 driver, not a random forumer.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.


Agree they have to improve the reliability, but do you think they are ahead of Renault in peak power as we speak?

Because it's looking very likely now.


No but I think it's the area they are closest to them in.

Why is it likely let alone very likely?


Because they seem to be consistently faster in a straight line? I understand that this may be due to TR having a slippery car, but it seems to me the Honda is faster in a straight line than all Renault powered cars.


Except Red Bull i believe. Dan was quicker in the traps which doesn't measure top speed.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/results/2 ... 015/?st=Q3

Top speed is the most affected by drag and STR may well have been quicker, I haven't seen that trap but they were further away in 'chassis' sectors in Oz which is a higher d/f track and we come here and they're suddenly on par with Haas on a track that favours lower d/f and straightline speed. If it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck etc.

STR upgrades brought the performance today by the way.. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/toro ... 92015&em=1

Just in case anyone was still in doubt the effectiveness of being able to test 24/7 while everyone else bar the top 3 can't. Insane gains from just a floor.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

Yep I saw some experts say it was an incredible lap from Hamilton whilst many it seemed were fixated on the party mode.


I missed the first race and FP sessions. But here Mercedes is not looking smooth at all and Bottas did well to come so close I think. Hamilton is not comfortable or Mercedes is not comfortable here inspite of using full engine power. So in race Ferrari should be safe and RBR too I think will be faster than Mercedes. Obviously Max will not be able to catch top5. Hamilton will have to be at his best to get podium. I do not think it will happen. Ricciardo and 2 Ferrari should get podiums

Hamilton's alternate tyre strategy may yet come into play?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
r but you need power too. I know it hurts man but you have to admit that the Honda unit has performed well both in terms of power and reliability so far. I'm not saying it's the best but give them some credit man.


It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.

You're talking about last season while I'm talking about this season. In terms of power I find it hard to believe Honda haven't moved up into third on the board behind Ferrari and Merc. Yes, my mistake on the reliability and that might still very well be their Achilles heel but they have taken a step forward. Certainly this has gone exponentially better than their time with McLaren.


I'm talking about this year, those Gasly failures and the race pace of Hartley in Oz for efficiency comparison. What you're doing is equating one qualifying session they did really well in today and assuming they are now ahead of Renault in all departments. Seriously?

We haven't even seen their best driver in full race pace yet over a full race and you want me to just assume it's fixed? Sorry but no, I'll happily give them the credit for both efficiency and reliability once we've actually witnessed it at the very least once. Preferably more.

Agree it's going better than at McLaren but that's not really surprising. This is year 4 for Honda now and they know what they're doing and have only being doing what the others have been doing with lean burn and 'h' recuperation and deployment since Monza 2017 so it's impossible for them to be worse than the clueless years before that.

It's not one session, it's the whole season (and pre-season) they've been faster in a straight line than all of the Renault powered cars. I think you're too invested in this to be honest.


The whole season and winter testing is exactly what I'm basing it on rather than one quali session and the ridiculous obsession with the speed trap. I just don't think speed traps are engine dyno numbers, it's got nothing to do with honesty. We've seen race stints in winter testing further away than one lap pace for STR and we saw the same in Oz with Hartley. We've seen them further away in the chassis sectors in Spain and Oz (Haven't seen here yet) than they were in the power sectors suggesting a lack of d/f. We had tyre complaints in Oz again that suggested lack of d/f. What am I supposed to do with info but infer they are running slicker than a baby seal.

What have you seen regarding race efficiency to place them above Renault and even worse place them above Renault in PU terms entirely? And winter testing suggested Mercedes dominance of 2015 levels. Is that what you've seen so far?

Perhaps it's not my honesty that's the issue and some people's desire to stick the boot in to a certain team/driver is what's behind this way over the top reaction to a single quali session that the team itself put down to their own upgrade rather than anything Honda related.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:41 pm 
Ferrari gain generally 0.3 on Mercedes from qualifying to race day, we saw that in Australia too and all last year. Mercedes are toast tomorrow. However, Ricciardo and Red Bull generally gain the same amount on Ferrari so he could feature - so long as he doesn’t get held up by Bottas in stint 1. That could ruin his race.

I feel Red Bull have the pace to win this, its just the traffic that might hurt them.


Last edited by lamo on Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:43 pm 
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

Yep I saw some experts say it was an incredible lap from Hamilton whilst many it seemed were fixated on the party mode.


I missed the first race and FP sessions. But here Mercedes is not looking smooth at all and Bottas did well to come so close I think. Hamilton is not comfortable or Mercedes is not comfortable here inspite of using full engine power. So in race Ferrari should be safe and RBR too I think will be faster than Mercedes. Obviously Max will not be able to catch top5. Hamilton will have to be at his best to get podium. I do not think it will happen. Ricciardo and 2 Ferrari should get podiums

Hamilton's alternate tyre strategy may yet come into play?


It could help him beat Bottas and get 4th maybe, unless a SC aids him or he manages to 2 stop and everybody else 3 stops I can’t see him featuring. Mercedes doesn’t have the race pace.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4870
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's not obvious at all. Lewis looked comfortably to have pace in hand in Australia, whereas here in Bahrain he doesn't. So you can either take the view that he performed superhuman feats in Australia, but for some reason couldn't replicate that here, or you can take the view that in Australia the Merc was the better car, while it doesn't look like that in Bahrain. Either way there's no conclusive evidence that he put in a ferocious lap (although in all fairness he could well have done) and I for one am unconvinced that someone could better their own time by 6 tenths unless a) something material changed in the car, or b) they weren't really trying up to that point and the car had plenty of pace in hand.

Vettel improved by nearly half a second on his Q2 time in Bahrain and, while I think he did pretty well, I don't think he performed any miracles here today, either. Her did well to pip an apparently on-form Kimi to pole but I'm not blowing it out of proportion.

The reason his time was much better in his final run in Q3 in Melbourne was because he actually had to abort his lap on his first run because of Bottas' crash. His tires for that first run had an extra lap on them and were not optimal. He found the limit there in that last run and had a much better run than the other front runners. By your own logic, the fact that Raikkonen outqualified Vettel should be a hint that perhaps Seb was less than comfortable in Australia. Another hint would be the fact that Seb specifically said he wasn't comfortable.

You talk about proportion while completely ignoring...proportion. Vettel beating Kimi by a tenth in Bahrain is different than Hamilton beating the field by a mile in Australia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4870
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.

You're talking about last season while I'm talking about this season. In terms of power I find it hard to believe Honda haven't moved up into third on the board behind Ferrari and Merc. Yes, my mistake on the reliability and that might still very well be their Achilles heel but they have taken a step forward. Certainly this has gone exponentially better than their time with McLaren.


I'm talking about this year, those Gasly failures and the race pace of Hartley in Oz for efficiency comparison. What you're doing is equating one qualifying session they did really well in today and assuming they are now ahead of Renault in all departments. Seriously?

We haven't even seen their best driver in full race pace yet over a full race and you want me to just assume it's fixed? Sorry but no, I'll happily give them the credit for both efficiency and reliability once we've actually witnessed it at the very least once. Preferably more.

Agree it's going better than at McLaren but that's not really surprising. This is year 4 for Honda now and they know what they're doing and have only being doing what the others have been doing with lean burn and 'h' recuperation and deployment since Monza 2017 so it's impossible for them to be worse than the clueless years before that.

It's not one session, it's the whole season (and pre-season) they've been faster in a straight line than all of the Renault powered cars. I think you're too invested in this to be honest.


The whole season and winter testing is exactly what I'm basing it on rather than one quali session and the ridiculous obsession with the speed trap. I just don't think speed traps are engine dyno numbers, it's got nothing to do with honesty. We've seen race stints in winter testing further away than one lap pace for STR and we saw the same in Oz with Hartley. We've seen them further away in the chassis sectors in Spain and Oz (Haven't seen here yet) than they were in the power sectors suggesting a lack of d/f. We had tyre complaints in Oz again that suggested lack of d/f. What am I supposed to do with info but infer they are running slicker than a baby seal.

What have you seen regarding race efficiency to place them above Renault and even worse place them above Renault in PU terms entirely? And winter testing suggested Mercedes dominance of 2015 levels. Is that what you've seen so far?

Perhaps it's not my honesty that's the issue and some people's desire to stick the boot in to a certain team/driver is what's behind this way over the top reaction to a single quali session that the team itself put down to their own upgrade rather than anything Honda related.

The "to be honest" was not meant that you weren't being honest. It was a common figure of speech. I also specifically said that they were probably better in qualifying than the race. You are way too reved up about this. I'd rather drop it to be honest. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23034
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's not obvious at all. Lewis looked comfortably to have pace in hand in Australia, whereas here in Bahrain he doesn't. So you can either take the view that he performed superhuman feats in Australia, but for some reason couldn't replicate that here, or you can take the view that in Australia the Merc was the better car, while it doesn't look like that in Bahrain. Either way there's no conclusive evidence that he put in a ferocious lap (although in all fairness he could well have done) and I for one am unconvinced that someone could better their own time by 6 tenths unless a) something material changed in the car, or b) they weren't really trying up to that point and the car had plenty of pace in hand.

Vettel improved by nearly half a second on his Q2 time in Bahrain and, while I think he did pretty well, I don't think he performed any miracles here today, either. Her did well to pip an apparently on-form Kimi to pole but I'm not blowing it out of proportion.

The reference would be a F1 expert, ex F1 driver, not a random forumer.

Because they are never biased. And always right


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23034
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's not obvious at all. Lewis looked comfortably to have pace in hand in Australia, whereas here in Bahrain he doesn't. So you can either take the view that he performed superhuman feats in Australia, but for some reason couldn't replicate that here, or you can take the view that in Australia the Merc was the better car, while it doesn't look like that in Bahrain. Either way there's no conclusive evidence that he put in a ferocious lap (although in all fairness he could well have done) and I for one am unconvinced that someone could better their own time by 6 tenths unless a) something material changed in the car, or b) they weren't really trying up to that point and the car had plenty of pace in hand.

Vettel improved by nearly half a second on his Q2 time in Bahrain and, while I think he did pretty well, I don't think he performed any miracles here today, either. Her did well to pip an apparently on-form Kimi to pole but I'm not blowing it out of proportion.

The reason his time was much better in his final run in Q3 in Melbourne was because he actually had to abort his lap on his first run because of Bottas' crash. His tires for that first run had an extra lap on them and were not optimal. He found the limit there in that last run and had a much better run than the other front runners. By your own logic, the fact that Raikkonen outqualified Vettel should be a hint that perhaps Seb was less than comfortable in Australia. Another hint would be the fact that Seb specifically said he wasn't comfortable.

You talk about proportion while completely ignoring...proportion. Vettel beating Kimi by a tenth in Bahrain is different than Hamilton beating the field by a mile in Australia.

How good is beating the field by a mile in a car that is comfortably the class of the field?

I agree that Seb was not comfortable in the car in Melbourne. I've never said otherwise? I don't quite get how relevant that is. Just like Hamilton doesn't look that comfortable in his car so far this weekend. Just shows that the cars aren't that easy to set up


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23034
lamo wrote:
Ferrari gain generally 0.3 on Mercedes from qualifying to race day, we saw that in Australia too and all last year. Mercedes are toast tomorrow. However, Ricciardo and Red Bull generally gain the same amount on Ferrari so he could feature - so long as he doesn’t get held up by Bottas in stint 1. That could ruin his race.

I feel Red Bull have the pace to win this, its just the traffic that might hurt them.

Apparently the Mercs are chewing their tyres again, which certainly won't help them tomorrow


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
You're talking about last season while I'm talking about this season. In terms of power I find it hard to believe Honda haven't moved up into third on the board behind Ferrari and Merc. Yes, my mistake on the reliability and that might still very well be their Achilles heel but they have taken a step forward. Certainly this has gone exponentially better than their time with McLaren.


I'm talking about this year, those Gasly failures and the race pace of Hartley in Oz for efficiency comparison. What you're doing is equating one qualifying session they did really well in today and assuming they are now ahead of Renault in all departments. Seriously?

We haven't even seen their best driver in full race pace yet over a full race and you want me to just assume it's fixed? Sorry but no, I'll happily give them the credit for both efficiency and reliability once we've actually witnessed it at the very least once. Preferably more.

Agree it's going better than at McLaren but that's not really surprising. This is year 4 for Honda now and they know what they're doing and have only being doing what the others have been doing with lean burn and 'h' recuperation and deployment since Monza 2017 so it's impossible for them to be worse than the clueless years before that.

It's not one session, it's the whole season (and pre-season) they've been faster in a straight line than all of the Renault powered cars. I think you're too invested in this to be honest.


The whole season and winter testing is exactly what I'm basing it on rather than one quali session and the ridiculous obsession with the speed trap. I just don't think speed traps are engine dyno numbers, it's got nothing to do with honesty. We've seen race stints in winter testing further away than one lap pace for STR and we saw the same in Oz with Hartley. We've seen them further away in the chassis sectors in Spain and Oz (Haven't seen here yet) than they were in the power sectors suggesting a lack of d/f. We had tyre complaints in Oz again that suggested lack of d/f. What am I supposed to do with info but infer they are running slicker than a baby seal.

What have you seen regarding race efficiency to place them above Renault and even worse place them above Renault in PU terms entirely? And winter testing suggested Mercedes dominance of 2015 levels. Is that what you've seen so far?

Perhaps it's not my honesty that's the issue and some people's desire to stick the boot in to a certain team/driver is what's behind this way over the top reaction to a single quali session that the team itself put down to their own upgrade rather than anything Honda related.

The "to be honest" was not meant that you weren't being honest. It was a common figure of speech. I also specifically said that they were probably better in qualifying than the race. You are way too reved up about this. I'd rather drop it to be honest. ;)


Ok I see what you meant there now, my bad. Happy to drop it, and I'm not reved, I just want to actually see the race pace for a while before going overboard and putting them ahead of Renault based on not much evidence at all. I don't think that's a bad thing really.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 950
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
It doesn't hurt, it's still the worst PU swapped out for a better one. McLaren's own embarrassing failing on the chassis side around here doesn't change that.

How have they performed well reliability wise? One failed mgu-h that destroyed Gasly's ICE and Turbo on the first weekend of the year so he's on his second already and they switched out Hartley's mgu h as a precaution. That's not good.

Power wise it's peak power, full ers support and ICE power in qualifying, hasn't been far away from Renault since Monza. Efficiency and how close they can get to their peak power in sustain mode we'll see tomorrow although I think if they can be reliable they'll hang on to at least beat McLaren, maybe not Haas (K-Mag) and the Renault's though.

The credit is due in where they made strides, peak power and I've been giving them it since last year. I just didn't start as soon as they got out of a partnership with McLaren. When they make the same strides in reliability and efficiency in the race I'll do the same.


Agree they have to improve the reliability, but do you think they are ahead of Renault in peak power as we speak?

Because it's looking very likely now.


No but I think it's the area they are closest to them in.

Why is it likely let alone very likely?


Because they seem to be consistently faster in a straight line? I understand that this may be due to TR having a slippery car, but it seems to me the Honda is faster in a straight line than all Renault powered cars.


Except Red Bull i believe. Dan was quicker in the traps which doesn't measure top speed.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/results/2 ... 015/?st=Q3

Top speed is the most affected by drag and STR may well have been quicker, I haven't seen that trap but they were further away in 'chassis' sectors in Oz which is a higher d/f track and we come here and they're suddenly on par with Haas on a track that favours lower d/f and straightline speed. If it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck etc.

STR upgrades brought the performance today by the way.. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/toro ... 92015&em=1

Just in case anyone was still in doubt the effectiveness of being able to test 24/7 while everyone else bar the top 3 can't. Insane gains from just a floor.

Seriously, he also says the biggest difference from Oz is setup. They are rookie drivers and never raced in Oz before plus practice 3 was wet.
Gasly's was slightly quicker than Dan on the speed trap
What is clear is Mclaren was beaten by STR by two rookie drivers in a intentionally bloated car to give honda room to develop. McLaren are still the slowest on the straights as they were last year. McLaren are almost equally good as STR on sector traps which points to STR being about equal to McLaren in corners. McLaren chasis was poor last year and it's poor this year.. Honda still need to
prove reliability and efficiency but at least together with STR they are best of the rest in qualy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
AravJ wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:

Agree they have to improve the reliability, but do you think they are ahead of Renault in peak power as we speak?

Because it's looking very likely now.


No but I think it's the area they are closest to them in.

Why is it likely let alone very likely?


Because they seem to be consistently faster in a straight line? I understand that this may be due to TR having a slippery car, but it seems to me the Honda is faster in a straight line than all Renault powered cars.


Except Red Bull i believe. Dan was quicker in the traps which doesn't measure top speed.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/results/2 ... 015/?st=Q3

Top speed is the most affected by drag and STR may well have been quicker, I haven't seen that trap but they were further away in 'chassis' sectors in Oz which is a higher d/f track and we come here and they're suddenly on par with Haas on a track that favours lower d/f and straightline speed. If it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck etc.

STR upgrades brought the performance today by the way.. https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/toro ... 92015&em=1

Just in case anyone was still in doubt the effectiveness of being able to test 24/7 while everyone else bar the top 3 can't. Insane gains from just a floor.

Seriously, he also says the biggest difference from Oz is setup. They are rookie drivers and never raced in Oz before plus practice 3 was wet.
What is clear is Mclaren was beaten by STR by two rookie drivers in a intentionally bloated car to give honda room to develop. McLaren are still the slowest on the straights as they were last year. McLaren are almost equally good as STR on sector traps which points to STR being about equal to McLaren in corners. McLaren chasis was poor last year and it's poor this year.. Honda still need to
prove reliability and efficiency but at least together with STR they are best of the rest in qualy.


True about set up from Oz and them being rooks but why can't McLaren's woes today be set up related? All of a sudden it means this and even a different car from last year was poor? That's a hell of a stretch no?

Considering the swing in other teams performances from Oz to here as well it points to nothing more than McLaren sucked in qualifying in Bahrain 2018. It could be a one-off like Suzuka in 2016 for all we know at this point.

True though about Macca's performance on the straights, they obviously have more drag than the other Renault powered teams which has hurt them here especially. Other possibility is they lied about the overheating turbo and are still too scared to run full pelt of course but you'd think they'd own up to that after today.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7998
I like Hartley. But I think he is a long game racer not s f1 pilot. If he has not made the adjustment in 2 more GP, it is probably time to change him. He will either have a moment where he adjusts this week, or he will always be an endurance racer. I hope he does a flash change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23034
moby wrote:
I like Hartley. But I think he is a long game racer not s f1 pilot. If he has not made the adjustment in 2 more GP, it is probably time to change him. He will either have a moment where he adjusts this week, or he will always be an endurance racer. I hope he does a flash change.

He was only a few tenths behind Ghasly. Sainz was further away from Hulk, to be fair


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7998
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
I like Hartley. But I think he is a long game racer not s f1 pilot. If he has not made the adjustment in 2 more GP, it is probably time to change him. He will either have a moment where he adjusts this week, or he will always be an endurance racer. I hope he does a flash change.

He was only a few tenths behind Ghasly. Sainz was further away from Hulk, to be fair


Yeh, its not a clock thing, its a gut thing.

No, I really can not justify it. :-P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4638
moby wrote:
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
I like Hartley. But I think he is a long game racer not s f1 pilot. If he has not made the adjustment in 2 more GP, it is probably time to change him. He will either have a moment where he adjusts this week, or he will always be an endurance racer. I hope he does a flash change.

He was only a few tenths behind Ghasly. Sainz was further away from Hulk, to be fair


Yeh, its not a clock thing, its a gut thing.

No, I really can not justify it. :-P


He wasn't helped by being the guinea pig on Friday and running the old package for comparison against Gasly with the new one. Perception is reality and now Gasly has a great quali it just solidify's what people saw on Friday and now the weekend so far that he's on another level so it's a tough one for Hartley.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
This just shows what an over reaction there was to Australian qualifying, unfair party mode etc.

At this point it's obvious Hamilton put in a ferocious lap in qualifying there while Vettel wasn't particularly comfortable all weekend. Nothing new in this forum. Even last year we had several posters acting like the Mercedes was still at 2014 levels of dominance. People are slow to take in new information.

It's not obvious at all. Lewis looked comfortably to have pace in hand in Australia, whereas here in Bahrain he doesn't. So you can either take the view that he performed superhuman feats in Australia, but for some reason couldn't replicate that here, or you can take the view that in Australia the Merc was the better car, while it doesn't look like that in Bahrain. Either way there's no conclusive evidence that he put in a ferocious lap (although in all fairness he could well have done) and I for one am unconvinced that someone could better their own time by 6 tenths unless a) something material changed in the car, or b) they weren't really trying up to that point and the car had plenty of pace in hand.

Vettel improved by nearly half a second on his Q2 time in Bahrain and, while I think he did pretty well, I don't think he performed any miracles here today, either. Her did well to pip an apparently on-form Kimi to pole but I'm not blowing it out of proportion.

The reference would be a F1 expert, ex F1 driver, not a random forumer.

Because they are never biased. And always right

Oh that must be it, British and biased.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26410
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Ferrari gain generally 0.3 on Mercedes from qualifying to race day, we saw that in Australia too and all last year. Mercedes are toast tomorrow. However, Ricciardo and Red Bull generally gain the same amount on Ferrari so he could feature - so long as he doesn’t get held up by Bottas in stint 1. That could ruin his race.

I feel Red Bull have the pace to win this, its just the traffic that might hurt them.

Apparently the Mercs are chewing their tyres again, which certainly won't help them tomorrow

Well Hamilton's going to be running on one step harder tyres.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 6th

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9215
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Ferrari gain generally 0.3 on Mercedes from qualifying to race day, we saw that in Australia too and all last year. Mercedes are toast tomorrow. However, Ricciardo and Red Bull generally gain the same amount on Ferrari so he could feature - so long as he doesn’t get held up by Bottas in stint 1. That could ruin his race.

I feel Red Bull have the pace to win this, its just the traffic that might hurt them.

Apparently the Mercs are chewing their tyres again, which certainly won't help them tomorrow

Well Hamilton's going to be running on one step harder tyres.

He´ll run soft/medium while everyone else supersoft/soft?

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7998
Lotus49 wrote:
moby wrote:
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
I like Hartley. But I think he is a long game racer not s f1 pilot. If he has not made the adjustment in 2 more GP, it is probably time to change him. He will either have a moment where he adjusts this week, or he will always be an endurance racer. I hope he does a flash change.

He was only a few tenths behind Ghasly. Sainz was further away from Hulk, to be fair


Yeh, its not a clock thing, its a gut thing.

No, I really can not justify it. :-P


He wasn't helped by being the guinea pig on Friday and running the old package for comparison against Gasly with the new one. Perception is reality and now Gasly has a great quali it just solidify's what people saw on Friday and now the weekend so far that he's on another level so it's a tough one for Hartley.


Indeed. But as I say, I like Hartley, Red Bull however did not.
He did well once he went to endurance racing, but they do not have 'produce it now' session and performance over time gets the bonus.
This is where I see Hartley being weak. If you can not pull one out of the hat, you always start down the pile. You could be better than the driver infront of you, but he is still infront of you until you pass him.
3 tenths in the session can mean 5 or more places he has to make up during the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], RaggedMan 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