planetf1.com

It seems that this year Ferrari is seriously and genuninely quick, the car appears to be very stable, very neutral and balanced, and apparently it should be a serious Merc treat for both titles. The Merc has not showed that stable in corners so far, whilst they still may have the best engine, they have had some problems in the chasis side.

Are you looking for a Ham/Vet battle, or a battle of the two finns, or a 4 way WDC battle?

I would like to see a battle of the two finns although I think Ham/Vet should definitely be there aswell.

4 way WDC would be good, although I think it would be a mistake to write Red Bull off just yet.

I still think Mercedes will be leading the way come Australia. I think they have something in reserve

Zoue wrote:4 way WDC would be good, although I think it would be a mistake to write Red Bull off just yet.

I still think Mercedes will be leading the way come Australia. I think they have something in reserve

Once the Renault engine issues get over, am expecting Red Bull to be there with them immediately.

If Mercedes still leads by a big margin, then this whole regulation change took place for nothing.

But some suggest, the new regulations should favour Ferrari more.

UnlikeUday wrote: If Mercedes still leads by a big margin, then this whole regulation change took place for nothing.

How/why?

There were two driving factors for the changes:
1. To make F1 great again - no, they wanted to make the cars "beasts" again, as fast as they were over ten years ago, and, visibly impressive as well. This steered the bulk of the regulation changes.
2. Give PU manufacturers more freedom to develop, and as such give them a better chance to catch up. This is why the token system was scrapped.

If Mercedes still leads by a big margin, then they have once again done a better job, but that doesn't mean the changes above are invalidated.

Zoue wrote:4 way WDC would be good, although I think it would be a mistake to write Red Bull off just yet.

I still think Mercedes will be leading the way come Australia. I think they have something in reserve

I agree and think Merc and RB were holding back a bit. Also I'd bet Merc develop the car better over the season.
But fingers crossed a four way battle is possible if Kimi can nail qualifying. Whilst I'd like to see RB be a serious contender if that happens they may take points from Ferrari and lessen the battle to the Mercs. The sport badly needs a close battle between teams. Hopefully one team at least can take on Mercedes.

Personally I'd prefer a 3-way WDC battle, but I'd settle with a 4-way one too

mds wrote:

UnlikeUday wrote: If Mercedes still leads by a big margin, then this whole regulation change took place for nothing.

How/why?

There were two driving factors for the changes:
1. To make F1 great again - no, they wanted to make the cars "beasts" again, as fast as they were over ten years ago, and, visibly impressive as well. This steered the bulk of the regulation changes.
2. Give PU manufacturers more freedom to develop, and as such give them a better chance to catch up. This is why the token system was scrapped.

If Mercedes still leads by a big margin, then they have once again done a better job, but that doesn't mean the changes above are invalidated.

Agree for the most part, although I'd say Mercedes had a head start, to be fair. Even if Ferrari are behind them, if they are close then I'd say they'd have done a better job

I keep reading about Merc... and Red Bull holding back/sandbagging. Are all of you sure that Ferrari has shown everything that they have?

Or are we still basing our perceptions on the past 3 years?

Blake wrote:I keep reading about Merc... and Red Bull holding back/sandbagging. Are all of you sure that Ferrari has shown everything that they have?

Or are we still basing our perceptions on the past 3 years?

The last three years plays a big part for me. I'm not convinced the new regs are the complete reset people claim, although of course there are a lot of changes. But there are also reports that Mercedes have not turned up the wick yet and have a good 6 tenths in hand (Sky Sports) and I'm inclined to believe that. I don't see the pecking order has changed that much that I'd say this year is a complete fresh start for all the teams

Blake wrote:I keep reading about Merc... and Red Bull holding back/sandbagging. Are all of you sure that Ferrari has shown everything that they have?

Or are we still basing our perceptions on the past 3 years?

This. Watching Raikkonen's 1.18:6 lap in Barcelona, he missed two apexes either due to braking a bit later than normal or due to a good amount of fuel on board. The lap was not perfect; far from it. However, what was pleasing to see in the lap that the car was very steady and Kimi was not correcting it on every turn.

Looking forward for this fight this year, hoping Kimi can give all other 5 drivers (Mercedes' and Red Bull' and Vettel) a run for their money too.

I understand, Zoue... but I have to wonder how Merc does race simulations but doesn't use their power... what do they gain if they don't push the car to race speeds? Just a thought.

I read about the .6 seconds, but it just doesn't make sense to me. Why would they hold back so much? What would they gain by it? If there is a good reason for them to hold back and for Red Bull to do so, then why can we not wonder if Ferrari have done the same?

I don't know if Ferrari will be a match for the Merc or not, but I certainly hope so, and will get a bit of a chuckle if it turns out that the preseason testing reflects reality. Cant blame a tifosi for hoping!

Blake wrote:I keep reading about Merc... and Red Bull holding back/sandbagging. Are all of you sure that Ferrari has shown everything that they have?

Or are we still basing our perceptions on the past 3 years?

A rude awakening might becoming soon, it's unbelievable that without knowing all the parameters people willl tell you Merc turned down their engine by 6 tenths meaning Ferrari was on max engine mode how they have come to that conclusion baffles me.

Vettel was on for a low 1.18's but backed off, but that does not future in the sandbagging theories.

Also people forget Merc was rubbish in the high downforce era, so they may have the best engine, but got the aero wrong that's a possibility.

Blake wrote:I understand, Zoue... but I have to wonder how Merc does race simulations but doesn't use their power... what do they gain if they don't push the car to race speeds? Just a thought.

I read about the .6 seconds, but it just doesn't make sense to me. Why would they hold back so much? What would they gain by it? If there is a good reason for them to hold back and for Red Bull to do so, then why can we not wonder if Ferrari have done the same?

I don't know if Ferrari will be a match for the Merc or not, but I certainly hope so, and will get a bit of a chuckle if it turns out that the preseason testing reflects reality. Cant blame a tifosi for hoping!

This must be that once in a blue moon where we agree . Even if Ferrari were going full bore and Mercedes were holding back 6 tenths of performance, Kimi's best time was 7 tenths faster than the nearest Merc! Simple math should tell us what that means. The reality is that Vettel was on a quicker lap and aborted it and Kimi has said that he could go faster if he wanted to. So while I do think it's likely that Mercedes had quite a bit in reserve, I think the same is likely for Ferrari. Perhaps they held back less but the time gap is massive.

I think it's going to be close at the very least and my inclination is to believe that Ferrari are on top at the moment.

sandman1347 wrote:

Blake wrote:I understand, Zoue... but I have to wonder how Merc does race simulations but doesn't use their power... what do they gain if they don't push the car to race speeds? Just a thought.

I read about the .6 seconds, but it just doesn't make sense to me. Why would they hold back so much? What would they gain by it? If there is a good reason for them to hold back and for Red Bull to do so, then why can we not wonder if Ferrari have done the same?

I don't know if Ferrari will be a match for the Merc or not, but I certainly hope so, and will get a bit of a chuckle if it turns out that the preseason testing reflects reality. Cant blame a tifosi for hoping!

This must be that once in a blue moon where we agree . Even if Ferrari were going full bore and Mercedes were holding back 6 tenths of performance, Kimi's best time was 7 tenths faster than the nearest Merc! Simple math should tell us what that means. The reality is that Vettel was on a quicker lap and aborted it and Kimi has said that he could go faster if he wanted to. So while I do think it's likely that Mercedes had quite a bit in reserve, I think the same is likely for Ferrari. Perhaps they held back less but the time gap is massive.

I think it's going to be close at the very least and my inclination is to believe that Ferrari are on top at the moment.

Also looking at the degradation if Merc weren't using max power, they are in more trouble than people realise then!

Blake wrote:I understand, Zoue... but I have to wonder how Merc does race simulations but doesn't use their power... what do they gain if they don't push the car to race speeds? Just a thought.

I read about the .6 seconds, but it just doesn't make sense to me. Why would they hold back so much? What would they gain by it? If there is a good reason for them to hold back and for Red Bull to do so, then why can we not wonder if Ferrari have done the same?

I don't know if Ferrari will be a match for the Merc or not, but I certainly hope so, and will get a bit of a chuckle if it turns out that the preseason testing reflects reality. Cant blame a tifosi for hoping!

I get what you're saying and I'm not in any way pretending to have any inside knowledge. But Merc traditionally hold back and I see no reason to doubt they's have done so again. Ferrari, meanwhile, have a tendency to showboat in testing.

Williams were pretty close to them and I find it hard to believe that Merc wouldn't be much further ahead. I'd be ecstatic if I'm proven wrong and, let's face it, it's not as though we have long to wait to find out. But I'd be surprised if Merc weren't ahead

Zoue wrote:Merc traditionally hold back

One year ago it was evident from testing that Mercedes were still the ones to beat. While they sandbagged with their single lap pace, race pace was telling enough. It is not the same this year.

Williams were pretty close to them and I find it hard to believe that Merc wouldn't be much further ahead.

Same remark: Williams were only close in single lap pace, not race pace.

There isn't any evidence to suggest Mercedes are even that close to Ferrari, is there? I don't really get where people are coming from.

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:Merc traditionally hold back

One year ago it was evident from testing that Mercedes were still the ones to beat. While they sandbagged with their single lap pace, race pace was telling enough. It is not the same this year.

Not according to this report:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... in-testing

The race simulations of the Ferrari-Mercedes quartet were carried out at different times and across different days. We also recorded them running slightly different lap distances - 66 for Hamilton, 65 for Rosberg, 69 for Vettel and 65 for Raikkonen. The Finn was also running a significantly different race configuration by finishing on the hards.

But on average, these were their lap-time averages

Lewis Hamilton - 1:28.98
Nico Rosberg - 1:29.22
Kimi Raikkonen - 1:29.32
Sebastian Vettel - 1:29.47

Things are a lot closer, it's true. But overall Mercedes still look like the team to beat

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:Merc traditionally hold back

One year ago it was evident from testing that Mercedes were still the ones to beat. While they sandbagged with their single lap pace, race pace was telling enough. It is not the same this year.

Not according to this report:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... in-testing

The race simulations of the Ferrari-Mercedes quartet were carried out at different times and across different days. We also recorded them running slightly different lap distances - 66 for Hamilton, 65 for Rosberg, 69 for Vettel and 65 for Raikkonen. The Finn was also running a significantly different race configuration by finishing on the hards.

But on average, these were their lap-time averages

Lewis Hamilton - 1:28.98
Nico Rosberg - 1:29.22
Kimi Raikkonen - 1:29.32
Sebastian Vettel - 1:29.47

Things are a lot closer, it's true. But overall Mercedes still look like the team to beat

So Merc seemed faster last year... Isn't that what I was saying? I'm kind of lost here as to what your point is?

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:Merc traditionally hold back

One year ago it was evident from testing that Mercedes were still the ones to beat. While they sandbagged with their single lap pace, race pace was telling enough. It is not the same this year.

Not according to this report:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... in-testing

The race simulations of the Ferrari-Mercedes quartet were carried out at different times and across different days. We also recorded them running slightly different lap distances - 66 for Hamilton, 65 for Rosberg, 69 for Vettel and 65 for Raikkonen. The Finn was also running a significantly different race configuration by finishing on the hards.

But on average, these were their lap-time averages

Lewis Hamilton - 1:28.98
Nico Rosberg - 1:29.22
Kimi Raikkonen - 1:29.32
Sebastian Vettel - 1:29.47

Things are a lot closer, it's true. But overall Mercedes still look like the team to beat

So Merc seemed faster last year... Isn't that what I was saying? I'm kind of lost here as to what your point is?

My point is that I'm clearly not paying attention. Didn't see the date on that

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:
One year ago it was evident from testing that Mercedes were still the ones to beat. While they sandbagged with their single lap pace, race pace was telling enough. It is not the same this year.

Not according to this report:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... in-testing

The race simulations of the Ferrari-Mercedes quartet were carried out at different times and across different days. We also recorded them running slightly different lap distances - 66 for Hamilton, 65 for Rosberg, 69 for Vettel and 65 for Raikkonen. The Finn was also running a significantly different race configuration by finishing on the hards.

But on average, these were their lap-time averages

Lewis Hamilton - 1:28.98
Nico Rosberg - 1:29.22
Kimi Raikkonen - 1:29.32
Sebastian Vettel - 1:29.47

Things are a lot closer, it's true. But overall Mercedes still look like the team to beat

So Merc seemed faster last year... Isn't that what I was saying? I'm kind of lost here as to what your point is?

My point is that I'm clearly not paying attention. Didn't see the date on that

Oh OK

Here is a long run analysis from JA: https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/ ... k-out-for/

But even so, the numbers here say that Ferrari is ahead by a good 3/10ths on long run pace after the second test. So in all likelihood they are very close on pace in reality, even if Mercedes is sandbagging on the upper end of the scale.

So, getting the right quote finally:

https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/03/ ... k-out-for/

Puts Ferrari just ahead of Mercedes, but with the belief that Mercedes haven't yet gone all out. I'm sticking with my forecast that Merc will be ahead, but will be more than happy to be proven wrong

edit: just saw mds put the same quote on. Not my day today!

I think we can safely say that no-one has gone flat out yet. Reasons being;

1. All the cars will change between now and Melbourne,
2. Limited number of engines mean they are all turned down and teams don't want to stress and blow them during testing,
3. No-one wants to show their hand.

Anecdotally, Ferrari appear to run a more racy testing program. Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Everything we've seen in testing is just indicative of where everyone is. Even Melbourne is a bit of an odd track (it's usually a rather pleasant park) and all the teams still have to see how their cars perform on the new tyres when they do turn up the engines. I'm not sure I'll believe there is an established pecking order until China.

Just my opinion of watching F1 for 30 years though - I'd love to see a 4 (or 6) way battle.

Blackcat75 wrote:I think we can safely say that no-one has gone flat out yet. Reasons being;

1. All the cars will change between now and Melbourne,
2. Limited number of engines mean they are all turned down and teams don't want to stress and blow them during testing,
3. No-one wants to show their hand.

Anecdotally, Ferrari appear to run a more racy testing program. Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Everything we've seen in testing is just indicative of where everyone is. Even Melbourne is a bit of an odd track (it's usually a rather pleasant park) and all the teams still have to see how their cars perform on the new tyres when they do turn up the engines. I'm not sure I'll believe there is an established pecking order until China.

Just my opinion of watching F1 for 30 years though - I'd love to see a 4 (or 6) way battle.

Just a comment on your 2nd point: PUs used for testing are not taken from the annual allocation. They could use a new one every session and it wouldn't make a difference. It makes more sense for them to stress the engines, to see where their weak points are, than to try to conserve them and be surprised come race day

Zoue wrote:

Blackcat75 wrote:I think we can safely say that no-one has gone flat out yet. Reasons being;

1. All the cars will change between now and Melbourne,
2. Limited number of engines mean they are all turned down and teams don't want to stress and blow them during testing,
3. No-one wants to show their hand.

Anecdotally, Ferrari appear to run a more racy testing program. Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Everything we've seen in testing is just indicative of where everyone is. Even Melbourne is a bit of an odd track (it's usually a rather pleasant park) and all the teams still have to see how their cars perform on the new tyres when they do turn up the engines. I'm not sure I'll believe there is an established pecking order until China.

Just my opinion of watching F1 for 30 years though - I'd love to see a 4 (or 6) way battle.

Just a comment on your 2nd point: PUs used for testing are not taken from the annual allocation. They could use a new one every session and it wouldn't make a difference. It makes more sense for them to stress the engines, to see where their weak points are, than to try to conserve them and be surprised come race day

Good catch!
McLaren/Honda were spot on with their testing program then.

Is Ferrari still the team with the biggest financial capability when it comes to development or are Mercedes now ahead on this?

No comment until after Oz

Blackcat75 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Blackcat75 wrote:I think we can safely say that no-one has gone flat out yet. Reasons being;

1. All the cars will change between now and Melbourne,
2. Limited number of engines mean they are all turned down and teams don't want to stress and blow them during testing,
3. No-one wants to show their hand.

Anecdotally, Ferrari appear to run a more racy testing program. Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Everything we've seen in testing is just indicative of where everyone is. Even Melbourne is a bit of an odd track (it's usually a rather pleasant park) and all the teams still have to see how their cars perform on the new tyres when they do turn up the engines. I'm not sure I'll believe there is an established pecking order until China.

Just my opinion of watching F1 for 30 years though - I'd love to see a 4 (or 6) way battle.

Just a comment on your 2nd point: PUs used for testing are not taken from the annual allocation. They could use a new one every session and it wouldn't make a difference. It makes more sense for them to stress the engines, to see where their weak points are, than to try to conserve them and be surprised come race day

Good catch!
McLaren/Honda were spot on with their testing program then.

They're clearly going to have the most robust engine of them all come Oz!

"We had two goals for the Barcelona tests," Marchionne said.

"Firstly, to be competitive with Red Bull Racing. And secondly, to have a reliable car. For me, Mercedes is still ahead."

http://en.f1i.com/news/261879-mercedes- ... ionne.html
Bluff?

UnlikeUday wrote:Is Ferrari still the team with the biggest financial capability when it comes to development or are Mercedes now ahead on this?

Im pretty sure redbull and merc are the biggest spenders.

Ferrari has failed to keep up with those two teams in the development race during the past few years.

I think to start the year they will be comfortably ahead but merc and redbull will catch and pass them eventually.

Very possible that 4-6 guys have a real chance at the title this year.

Whenever theres a rule change any car that comes out looking fast always ends up that way!

'07 Ferrari till Mclaren found their car dossier ala Alonso saying he brings 6/10th to the team.

'09 Redbull was looking good till BrawnGP turned up, due to DD, had that been outlawed Redbull would have been fastest.

'14 Mercedes and people argued otherwise saying once Renault sorts itself Redbull with its aero prowess will be back on song.

'17 Ferrari???? History beckons!

Blackcat75 wrote:Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Again, that just holds true for single lap pace. The long run pace between both teams was not far off the real pace difference of the season's start.

Merc need to be more than just holding back a bit to be ahead of Ferrari I think. One thing I'm wondering about is their qualifying pace. We know that Merc turn it up for Q3 so I can envision a scenario where they outqualify Ferrari but only have at best equal race pace to begin the year, and therefore could hold off Ferrari who would be hounding them for the whole race or races.. the early races in the season that is.

Mercedes have a much less blank canvas than Red Bull, so I think Red Bull will make the biggest gains through being able to apply their fundamental understanding of the regulations onto a less distorted canvas. Mercedes could run into some trouble in that area this season, though they have James Allison, who oversaw the exploitation (I assume) of the sidepods which Ferrari have untapped. That will be good for 2018.

If Mercedes are strongest this year it will be by virtue of clinging onto old philosophies and warping them to work today, whereas Ferrari have an approach that takes more direct advantage of the current regs and Red Bull have an open outlook which can lead to an eventual application which is filled with clarity. Mercedes look more all in and also more convoluted. I do expect a highly competitive year with Red Bull coming on strong by the end and being in prime position in 2018 over Merc and Ferrari.

Yes yes I know I'm making stupidly and stupendously bold predictions about the very distant future. Allow me some fun.

mds wrote:

Blackcat75 wrote:Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Again, that just holds true for single lap pace. The long run pace between both teams was not far off the real pace difference of the season's start.

Yea, I'm not saying you are wrong (I don't record of all the lap times as I used to), but how many times have we said 'what happened to the Ferrari challenge?'.

Example 1.
The Guardian's piece after 2015 testing (couldn't find Autosport's):
"Ferrari have made a big step forward
Some say the prancing horse could be the dark horse of the 2015 F1 championship. OK, they appeared to be showboating as they dominated the timesheets in Spain – they and the Ferrari-powered Sauber were first and second in terms of pace on all four days. But it is worth noting that Nico Rosberg described Ferrari’s pace as an “eye-opener”. Much more important is that both drivers, Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen, seemed happy with the car, and did plenty of laps too."
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/ ... we-learned

End of year result: Mercedes 16 race wins, Ferrari 3 Race wins.

Example 2.
Autosport's Headline after 2016 testing:
"Mercedes knows Ferrari is close after 2016 F1 testing
Mercedes believes it will be closely-matched with Ferrari at the start of the Formula 1 season but does not know if it will be ahead, Nico Rosberg says..."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/123116

End of year result: Mercedes 19 race wins, Ferrari 0 Race wins

Example 3.
Autosport's Headline after 2017 testing:
"After Mercedes topped the opening Formula 1 pre-season test at Barcelona, all eyes were on Ferrari and Red Bull in week two in the hope of signs that F1's silver hegemony could be ended in 2017.

Ferrari duly upped the ante, and there are legitimate hopes of a three-horse race this season - although all is not quite as it seems on the timing screens."
http://www.autosport.com/premium/featur ... al-f1-test

A pattern of expectation emerges...

I'd prefer racing over dominance, and I hope I'm wrong and the hype this year is justified and Ferrari does match Mercedes, and it's all me turning into a grumpy old cynic!

I'll be that guy then...

Why is everyone automatically assuming Mercedes will be closer or better than Ferrari? If you look at both the short and the long runs Ferrari is clearly on top at the moment. Ferrari really didn't try to set monster times either. Vettel was lifting and intentionally screwing up sectors on the penultimate day and was still comfortably faster than other teams on softer tyres.

Why wouldn't Ferrari be further ahead than we've seen? Why is it possible for Mercedes to suddenly close and not for Ferrari being just dominant.

Sure, the season is long and development can make a big difference in the course of the year, but I honestly don't see anything else than red cars on the front of the grid in Melbourne... and no, I don't think it will be close.

Llotyhy wrote:I'll be that guy then...

Why is everyone automatically assuming Mercedes will be closer or better than Ferrari? If you look at both the short and the long runs Ferrari is clearly on top at the moment. Ferrari really didn't try to set monster times either. Vettel was lifting and intentionally screwing up sectors on the penultimate day and was still comfortably faster than other teams on softer tyres.

Why wouldn't Ferrari be further ahead than we've seen? Why is it possible for Mercedes to suddenly close and not for Ferrari being just dominant.

Sure, the season is long and development can make a big difference in the course of the year, but I honestly don't see anything else than red cars on the front of the grid in Melbourne... and no, I don't think it will be close.

Because no-one has tried to go particularly quick yet. It's like watching athletes jogging round a running track, some are testing out their shoes, some are stretching, some practising their starts, some cruising at 90%, some testing their heartbeat. But no-one has gone 100% full pelt yet.

The best way to predict a winner is form, and Mercedes have form. But who knows? Things change.

Llotyhy wrote:I'll be that guy then...

Why is everyone automatically assuming Mercedes will be closer or better than Ferrari? If you look at both the short and the long runs Ferrari is clearly on top at the moment. Ferrari really didn't try to set monster times either. Vettel was lifting and intentionally screwing up sectors on the penultimate day and was still comfortably faster than other teams on softer tyres.

Why wouldn't Ferrari be further ahead than we've seen? Why is it possible for Mercedes to suddenly close and not for Ferrari being just dominant.

Sure, the season is long and development can make a big difference in the course of the year, but I honestly don't see anything else than red cars on the front of the grid in Melbourne... and no, I don't think it will be close.

I can't speak for others but my expectations about Mercedes is based not just on recent history but by what I read the other day about the aero package they brought and Ferrari didn't.

It makes sense the Ferrari in comparison looked more planted and did better on their long runs because it was fundamentally the same car for the entire 8 days. The difference in set up compared to the Mercedes would be huge, the Ferrari would have been set up perfectly after all that running while Mercedes were said to be struggling with both set up and with the new aero package.

But they were still close to Ferrari in long runs which frankly is quite scary considering.

But I really hope it's just the recent past clouding/dampening my expectations but not long now to find out either way.

Blackcat75 wrote:

mds wrote:

Blackcat75 wrote:Between winter testing and the first race last year, we saw Mercedes make a larger jump in performance than Ferrari (IIRC).

Again, that just holds true for single lap pace. The long run pace between both teams was not far off the real pace difference of the season's start.

Yea, I'm not saying you are wrong (I don't record of all the lap times as I used to), but how many times have we said 'what happened to the Ferrari challenge?'.

I'm very well aware that this is testing, I'm not even trying to argument that Ferrari WILL be ahead. That would be foolish
I am just saying that what we've seen in testing this year is very different to what we saw in 2014, 2015, 2016 - that we can't say it's the same old as we've always seen from Ferrari.

Example 1.
The Guardian's piece after 2015 testing (couldn't find Autosport's):

Example 2.
Autosport's Headline after 2016 testing:

Example 3.
Autosport's Headline after 2017 testing:

The thing is, the examples of year 1 and 2 are different as they only focus on single lap pace. Mercedes duly used that to hide a bit, but looking at long run pace it was always evident also in 2015 and 2016 that Merc were ahead.
This same pattern does not hold true for 2017 testing.

Because no-one has tried to go particularly quick yet. It's like watching athletes jogging round a running track, some are testing out their shoes, some are stretching, some practising their starts, some cruising at 90%, some testing their heartbeat. But no-one has gone 100% full pelt yet.

Maybe not, but then I'm wondering what sense there is in going testing and at least during race sims not turning the wick up like you would do in actual races. How are you going to test reliability? How are you going to know if there are issues if you aren't anywhere close to potential? Isn't testing when you want to find and solve those issues instead of encountering them during actual races and then having to solve them during the season, with virtually no testing available and thus with fixes possibly taking much longer?

Unless they are so confident that their new power unit will be reliable - but that's a huge leap of faith.

It does look good for them so far. It does look like they have built a genuinely good car this time, question is how much were Mercedes sandbaging during the test? If any at all.
Perhaps Alonso whould have stayed with Ferrari..!

People keep taking away the wrong conclusions from last season's testing as well; Ferrari started last season quite close to Mercedes and should have won in Melbourne. They failed to develop and were overhauled by Red Bull ovwr the course of 2016, but they started off close to Mercedes.