planetf1.com

lamo wrote: By coasting I also meant, Kimi had plenty of life in his tyres to push for in laps but never got to use them as he was told pit now half a lap before he was. No qualifying style max engine mode in laps like Vettel did.

This is a good point. It would have been fair to tell Kimi a few laps before the pit stop that it is go time. Especially if they weren't planning on pitting Vettel on the very next lap, but instead make him go long and push to the max. Even if the tires were starting to lose grip, Kimi could have turned up the engine to the max and set much faster laps prior to pitting.

mikeyg123 wrote:I think Ferrari in races by a small margin.

The gaps are small enough that they can be overcome by good strategy and good driving. I think quite often we havecseen the slower car win.

I agree. For me, Ferrari edges it.

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

Zoue wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

Yes, Kimi on multiple occasions has complained about rears falling off this season. Can't recall Vettel doing that. If it turns out Vettel wins this season due to his better understanding of tires, that's indeed a huge shame for all the lazy donkeys that couldn't be arsed to test the tires when Pirelli invited them all.

SmoothRide wrote:

lamo wrote: By coasting I also meant, Kimi had plenty of life in his tyres to push for in laps but never got to use them as he was told pit now half a lap before he was. No qualifying style max engine mode in laps like Vettel did.

This is a good point. It would have been fair to tell Kimi a few laps before the pit stop that it is go time. Especially if they weren't planning on pitting Vettel on the very next lap, but instead make him go long and push to the max. Even if the tires were starting to lose grip, Kimi could have turned up the engine to the max and set much faster laps prior to pitting.

It's very, very common knowledge that the radio broadcasts are delayed on TV, many times by several laps or minutes. So we can't assume Raikkonen was told about coming into the minutes while he was near Rascasse, that's ridiculous.

Zoue wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

https://gptoday.com/details/view/606046 ... o_Ferrari/

While Wolff made snide remarks of Pirelli helping Ferrari, Provera from Pirelli has hinted Mercedes might want to look at their drivers:

“It was a very serious piece of work on the part of Vettel and Ferrari.
“Vettel was always ready with humility, to test when others were ‘not available’ and the results are the fruit of a lot of passionate work from a team that is totally focused on winning.”

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

SmoothRide wrote:

lamo wrote: By coasting I also meant, Kimi had plenty of life in his tyres to push for in laps but never got to use them as he was told pit now half a lap before he was. No qualifying style max engine mode in laps like Vettel did.

This is a good point. It would have been fair to tell Kimi a few laps before the pit stop that it is go time. Especially if they weren't planning on pitting Vettel on the very next lap, but instead make him go long and push to the max. Even if the tires were starting to lose grip, Kimi could have turned up the engine to the max and set much faster laps prior to pitting.

It's very, very common knowledge that the radio broadcasts are delayed on TV, many times by several laps or minutes. So we can't assume Raikkonen was told about coming into the minutes while he was near Rascasse, that's ridiculous.

the message to Kimi was "box this lap, Kimi." So it wouldn't have been laps or minutes earlier

Zoue wrote:

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

SmoothRide wrote:

lamo wrote: By coasting I also meant, Kimi had plenty of life in his tyres to push for in laps but never got to use them as he was told pit now half a lap before he was. No qualifying style max engine mode in laps like Vettel did.

This is a good point. It would have been fair to tell Kimi a few laps before the pit stop that it is go time. Especially if they weren't planning on pitting Vettel on the very next lap, but instead make him go long and push to the max. Even if the tires were starting to lose grip, Kimi could have turned up the engine to the max and set much faster laps prior to pitting.

It's very, very common knowledge that the radio broadcasts are delayed on TV, many times by several laps or minutes. So we can't assume Raikkonen was told about coming into the minutes while he was near Rascasse, that's ridiculous.

the message to Kimi was "box this lap, Kimi." So it wouldn't have been laps or minutes earlier

Yes, I agree. It could, however, be at the start of that lap, not Rascasse. To pass it off as FACT that he was called in so late, to hint at a Ferrari conspiracy so he doesn't set a fast in-lap, is not correct.

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

Zoue wrote:

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

SmoothRide wrote:

lamo wrote: By coasting I also meant, Kimi had plenty of life in his tyres to push for in laps but never got to use them as he was told pit now half a lap before he was. No qualifying style max engine mode in laps like Vettel did.

This is a good point. It would have been fair to tell Kimi a few laps before the pit stop that it is go time. Especially if they weren't planning on pitting Vettel on the very next lap, but instead make him go long and push to the max. Even if the tires were starting to lose grip, Kimi could have turned up the engine to the max and set much faster laps prior to pitting.

It's very, very common knowledge that the radio broadcasts are delayed on TV, many times by several laps or minutes. So we can't assume Raikkonen was told about coming into the minutes while he was near Rascasse, that's ridiculous.

the message to Kimi was "box this lap, Kimi." So it wouldn't have been laps or minutes earlier

Yes, I agree. It could, however, be at the start of that lap, not Rascasse. To pass it off as FACT that he was called in so late, to hint at a Ferrari conspiracy so he doesn't set a fast in-lap, is not correct.

There is no "conspiracy" here. It's just that Ferrari focused much more on Vettel winning the race than anything else. From a team standpoint, it makes sense. If a Ferrari driver wins WDC this year, it is going to be Vettel. He has to compete against a very fast Merc car and two competent drivers who can win a race whenever an opportunity presents itself. So it's not going to be easy. I guess my point is that Kimi lost this race primarily because he is a clear #2 and very little, if any, thought was given within the team how to maximize his strategy.

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

Zoue wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

https://gptoday.com/details/view/606046 ... o_Ferrari/

While Wolff made snide remarks of Pirelli helping Ferrari, Provera from Pirelli has hinted Mercedes might want to look at their drivers:

“It was a very serious piece of work on the part of Vettel and Ferrari.
“Vettel was always ready with humility, to test when others were ‘not available’ and the results are the fruit of a lot of passionate work from a team that is totally focused on winning.”

I'd think Vettel's 100% more knowledge of the tyres than other drivers perhaps benefited the car build by 0.01% or less relative to other teams. The engineers build the car based on physics not feel

Herb Tarlik wrote:There really should be an equal choice in this poll. The cars are so closely matched now that the input of the driver seems to be more important.

My thoughts exactly. Love it I must say.

Ferrari edging it for me now I've seen them in pretty much all conditions. I think Baku might be the only place I'd change that as the top end grunt advantage of Mercedes still looked evident in China so should be there.

The Mercedes has the potential to be quicker in the right circumstances but it looks like it's as easy as nailing jelly to the wall to get it there. Bottas dealt with it better in Monaco qualifying but was all at sea in the race with no changes overnight, and that's not normal.

They seem to have a lot more issues tyre wise whereas the Ferrari looks easy in any and all circumstances. I think the banning of the HPC suspension has hurt Mercedes and Red Bull far more than they wanted to let on when it comes to working the tyres. Pirelli constantly lowering the tyre temps is taking it even further in Ferrari's direction as well.

If Mercedes can get the tyres working as well as Ferrari than I think it's ultimately slightly faster but it's got a far too narrow set up range right now to be considered the best car. It literally changed overnight at Monaco for Bottas and Lewis, with it being halfway through the race on Sunday for Lewis when he said it came back.

Too strange when you add in some of the quotes from Wolf about the uneven tyre temperatures across both cars. The Ferrari has looked great straight out of the box with very little struggles.

But the Mercedes could easily be the quickest in Canada if they get the tyres working so it's really close either way.

Zoue wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

That may be down to how Kimi likes to setup his car.

The 2 Ferrari cars are very different. They dont even use same launch control. Kimi and his side of garage have completely different setup than what Vettel does. Obviously all key aero and chassis upgrades will be on both cars, but everything else including minor suspension settings, ride height settings, balance of the car, launch control are down to demands of individual driver. Sadly, we dont get as much information from Ferrari garage as we get from some other teams including Mercedes. I dont know if its language barrier or Ferrari are really being that secretive with anyone including pitlane press. Wish we knew more.

funkymonkey wrote:

Zoue wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

That may be down to how Kimi likes to setup his car.

The 2 Ferrari cars are very different. They dont even use same launch control. Kimi and his side of garage have completely different setup than what Vettel does. Obviously all key aero and chassis upgrades will be on both cars, but everything else including minor suspension settings, ride height settings, balance of the car, launch control are down to demands of individual driver. Sadly, we dont get as much information from Ferrari garage as we get from some other teams including Mercedes. I dont know if its language barrier or Ferrari are really being that secretive with anyone including pitlane press. Wish we knew more.

I'm sure I read somewhere they had very similar setup requirements, but it doesn't really make a difference - it's still only one driver who's getting great tyre life, so how do we know it's a fundamental car characteristic? How do we know, for example, that the Merc drivers' setups aren't compromising their own tyre longevity?

Monaco looked like the first race where one or the other had a clear advantage. Obviously pushes Ferrari a bit further ahead in terms of a season average. I definitely think it's been slightly the better car to be in over the course of the season. Still talking small margins though.

funkymonkey wrote:That may be down to how Kimi likes to setup his car.

The 2 Ferrari cars are very different. They dont even use same launch control. Kimi and his side of garage have completely different setup than what Vettel does. Obviously all key aero and chassis upgrades will be on both cars, but everything else including minor suspension settings, ride height settings, balance of the car, launch control are down to demands of individual driver. Sadly, we dont get as much information from Ferrari garage as we get from some other teams including Mercedes. I dont know if its language barrier or Ferrari are really being that secretive with anyone including pitlane press. Wish we knew more.

Kimi presumably still likes to set up his car the same way he always has, and his tyre management capabilities have not been consistent over the Pirelli era. Neither have Vettel's, but much closer - the only year where Vettel has looked really poor at tyre management was 2014, whereas Kimi hasn't been able to keep the tyres alive to his Lotus-era standard ever since joining Ferrari. There are a few possibilities to explain this:

a) Kimi went off the cliff some time between 2013 and 2014.
b) All of Kimi's Ferrari cars have been poor at keeping their tyres alive, but Vettel and Alonso were so good they disguised it.
c) Kimi never was all that great at tyre management at Lotus, it's just that Grosjean wasn't any better.
d) The Ferrari needs a different driving technique than the Lotus to keep its tyres alive, and Kimi can't adapt.
e) Kimi is so darned inconsistent it's impossible to tell with him.

Honestly, it could be any of them except for a.

I have always heard that Vettel and Kimi want a similar car in terms of handling, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can do the same things with it. Personally, I'm of the opinion that Kimi has never been good at tyre management and the 2012-2013 Lotus was simply a great car. Kimi was at his best in the era when tyres could take a beating and fuel dictated pit strategy; now that he's up against the driver who arguably mastered the Pirelli era the best, he's not capable of keeping up over a race distance. That's reflected in the way that he's closer in qualifying than the races: you don't need to preserve your tyres in qualifying.

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

Zoue wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Zoue wrote:It's clear the Ferrari was the quicker car in Monaco, but whether that was helped by the nature of the circuit (SWB vs LWB) will become clearer after Canada.

But consider this. It's been taken pretty much as gospel that the Ferrari is much kinder to its tyres than the Mercedes and that is one of its biggest advantages. But Vettel pulled off his same "unleash the beast" trick on older tyres against Kimi that he had previously done against the Mercs. If that had been Bottas, or Hamilton, that Vettel had done it to I'm sure we'd again be reading about how he was able to do this because Ferrari was better than the Merc, etc. But he did it to his team mate. So isn't it possible that it's Vettel who's better on his tyres, rather than it being down to the car itself?

If you read James Allen's blog, Vettel is the only driver that visited Pirelli and probably also tested the tires. All the other drivers made excuses. So one would assume he has a better knowledge of the tires, which he obviously transfered to Ferrari, which in turn means Ferrari know the tires better. And Vettel marginally better than Raikkonen (since KR never tested them or talked to Pirelli engineers).

I should venture that Vettel is somewhat more than marginally better than Kimi on the tyres. There has been more than one occasion this year where we've heard Kimi complaining about tyre life, but I don't recall that ever being an issue for Seb. Quite the contrary, in fact. He seems to make them last forever, even when harassing cars in front of him. My point was the reference point for Ferrari being kind to its tyres is pretty much entirely due to what Seb does with them, as Kimi is no better than the Mercedes guys. So it's at least a possibility that it's driver, not car, related.

Good call about the Pirelli visit(s) by Seb. I do recall reading that, so may be something to that

https://gptoday.com/details/view/606046 ... o_Ferrari/

While Wolff made snide remarks of Pirelli helping Ferrari, Provera from Pirelli has hinted Mercedes might want to look at their drivers:

“It was a very serious piece of work on the part of Vettel and Ferrari.
“Vettel was always ready with humility, to test when others were ‘not available’ and the results are the fruit of a lot of passionate work from a team that is totally focused on winning.”

Bottas commented that he learned a lot from the Pirelli testing, and he has shown that he has ability to find a better compromise in controlling the tyre temperatures - at least for a qualifying lap. Mercedes need the information they are getting from Bottas' work with controlling the tyre temperatures if they are to find a way of controlling them during every race.

After Monaco I realised the Ferrari is the better car.
Its more versatile for all kinds of tracks, definitely.

nixxxon wrote:After Monaco I realised the Ferrari is the better car.
Its more versatile for all kinds of tracks, definitely.

I tend to agree now

I think the difference between the cars is only how they use the tyres. The Ferrari looks like the tyres were made for it ( History repeating lol )
were as on the merc they are really difficult to get in the working range.

At Monaco Lewis struggled like mad on the tyres on his car were as after his pit stop he said the difference was night and day between the two. At this point he was really flying.

On gross terms, the Mercedes engine still has a little more grunt than any other engine. But the Ferrari chassis is superior to the Mercedes chassis. IMO the Ferrari is 0.1% better. So with relatively equal machinery it now comes down to how teams function and how well the drivers do.

And since some people have injected Vettel and Hamilton into the conversation, here goes ...

Vettel is dedicated. His visit to Pirelli is one example. He has done his homework, he has done his training, he is completely prepared for a title challenge. Hamilton has not earned any confidence. IMO he is the most talented and quickest driver of his generation. But after he looked very knackered after Barcelona, I doubt if any further training or doing homework will come close to catching up with Vettel.

One is enjoying his celebrity status, the other has a sharp focus on just one thing, is avoiding the party scene and is able to deal with adversity.

Blinky McSquinty wrote:On gross terms, the Mercedes engine still has a little more grunt than any other engine. But the Ferrari chassis is superior to the Mercedes chassis. IMO the Ferrari is 0.1% better. So with relatively equal machinery it now comes down to how teams function and how well the drivers do.

And since some people have injected Vettel and Hamilton into the conversation, here goes ...

Vettel is dedicated. His visit to Pirelli is one example. He has done his homework, he has done his training, he is completely prepared for a title challenge. Hamilton has not earned any confidence. IMO he is the most talented and quickest driver of his generation. But after he looked very knackered after Barcelona, I doubt if any further training or doing homework will come close to catching up with Vettel.

One is enjoying his celebrity status, the other has a sharp focus on just one thing, is avoiding the party scene and is able to deal with adversity.

Vettel has two kids.

I sincerely hope he isn't just focusing on one thing.

Saw this elsewhere and it sums up some of Mercedes issues...

-The engineers can not explain why Hamilton was so poor in qualifying, but they were able to explain why Bottas nailed his lap

-Race day was then the other way around: Again, they dont know why

-Long wheel base is unrelated, as also proven by FI competiveness, however it wasnt helpful in Monaco, as the car looked scruffy through Loewes or Rascasse.

-Tyre issues is unresolved even if it looked good in Spain

-Hamiltons quickest time in Monaco (fuel corrected) was in FP1, normally the track conditions alone are improving by 1.9 s. The long runs on thursday were quicker than on sunday too.

-Bottas had tyre deg in free air (and was 0.6 s slower than Hamilton on SS) while Hamilton had no tyre deg in traffic. Again: They dont know why.

-That Mercedes struggles with slow corners is denied by Wolff, as Bottas was also in Bahrain and Barcelona way off the pace.

-New tyres have the implication that it's harder to keep the tyres in the right temp on tracks with slow corners or smooth asphalt, because unlike previous seasons the drivers can attack on these tyres.

-Weight distribution is unlikely to be the issue

-The issue could be the lower rake (and hence the whole concept): They have less floor clearance on the rear, which means that they have a lower spring deflection and hence they can't use the tyres as good, which hurts more on a street circuit.

-Last year this wasn't a issue because they didn't had to push the tyres. And on some tracks the trick suspension helped as well

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... isch%29%29

Jeder Fahrer geht seinen eigenen Weg in der Vorbereitung. Der eine will perfekt sein und ist ein akribischer Arbeiter, der andere verlässt sich auf seinen Instinkt und seine Routine. Sebastian war immer schon ein Tüftler. Vielleicht hat er früher begriffen, wie er den Reifen am schnellsten ins richtige Arbeitsfenster bringen kann. Wir müssen da aufholen und uns an der eigenen Nase nehmen.

http://www.speedweek.com/formel1/news/1 ... mfall.html

Wolff: Every driver have their own way of preparing. One wants to be perfect and works on the details, while the other relies on his instincts and routines. Vettel has always been a hard worker so maybe he has been faster to understand how to properly get the tyres to the optimum window. Now we have to catch up.
(my translation)


Now who has said this before?
Oh yeah, that was me

Covalent wrote:I think Mercedes is probably the better car but the Ferrari boys are better at setting up their car to get the tyres working in the optimum window.

Covalent wrote:

Jeder Fahrer geht seinen eigenen Weg in der Vorbereitung. Der eine will perfekt sein und ist ein akribischer Arbeiter, der andere verlässt sich auf seinen Instinkt und seine Routine. Sebastian war immer schon ein Tüftler. Vielleicht hat er früher begriffen, wie er den Reifen am schnellsten ins richtige Arbeitsfenster bringen kann. Wir müssen da aufholen und uns an der eigenen Nase nehmen.

http://www.speedweek.com/formel1/news/1 ... mfall.html

Wolff: Every driver have their own way of preparing. One wants to be perfect and works on the details, while the other relies on his instincts and routines. Vettel has always been a hard worker so maybe he has been faster to understand how to properly get the tyres to the optimum window. Now we have to catch up.
(my translation)


Now who has said this before?
Oh yeah, that was me

Covalent wrote:I think Mercedes is probably the better car but the Ferrari boys are better at setting up their car to get the tyres working in the optimum window.

The way I read that is that Wolff is attributing the difference to the drivers, not the car?

Zoue wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Jeder Fahrer geht seinen eigenen Weg in der Vorbereitung. Der eine will perfekt sein und ist ein akribischer Arbeiter, der andere verlässt sich auf seinen Instinkt und seine Routine. Sebastian war immer schon ein Tüftler. Vielleicht hat er früher begriffen, wie er den Reifen am schnellsten ins richtige Arbeitsfenster bringen kann. Wir müssen da aufholen und uns an der eigenen Nase nehmen.

http://www.speedweek.com/formel1/news/1 ... mfall.html

Wolff: Every driver have their own way of preparing. One wants to be perfect and works on the details, while the other relies on his instincts and routines. Vettel has always been a hard worker so maybe he has been faster to understand how to properly get the tyres to the optimum window. Now we have to catch up.
(my translation)


Now who has said this before?
Oh yeah, that was me

Covalent wrote:I think Mercedes is probably the better car but the Ferrari boys are better at setting up their car to get the tyres working in the optimum window.

The way I read that is that Wolff is attributing the difference to the drivers, not the car?

Yes indeed, although I'd still put the Merc slightly ahead if working optimally. But he does confirm what I thought about the Ferrari drivers (or at least Vettel) doing a better job of setting up the car.

The Ferrari is slightly faster, but more importantly it has been good at every track so far and seem to be kinder on the tyres.

The Ferrari does certainly seem more consistent. Both Mercedes drivers have had large swings with performance even during races, whilst the Ferrari drivers are consistently performing at the level we are accustomed from them.

I think in races Ferrari have had the edge in Australia, Russia, Spain and Monaco. Monaco being the biggest gap between the teams thus far.

Vettel himself has won 3 and could have taken another 2 with better luck.

Covalent wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Jeder Fahrer geht seinen eigenen Weg in der Vorbereitung. Der eine will perfekt sein und ist ein akribischer Arbeiter, der andere verlässt sich auf seinen Instinkt und seine Routine. Sebastian war immer schon ein Tüftler. Vielleicht hat er früher begriffen, wie er den Reifen am schnellsten ins richtige Arbeitsfenster bringen kann. Wir müssen da aufholen und uns an der eigenen Nase nehmen.

http://www.speedweek.com/formel1/news/1 ... mfall.html

Wolff: Every driver have their own way of preparing. One wants to be perfect and works on the details, while the other relies on his instincts and routines. Vettel has always been a hard worker so maybe he has been faster to understand how to properly get the tyres to the optimum window. Now we have to catch up.
(my translation)


Now who has said this before?
Oh yeah, that was me

Covalent wrote:I think Mercedes is probably the better car but the Ferrari boys are better at setting up their car to get the tyres working in the optimum window.

The way I read that is that Wolff is attributing the difference to the drivers, not the car?

Yes indeed, although I'd still put the Merc slightly ahead if working optimally. But he does confirm what I thought about the Ferrari drivers (or at least Vettel) doing a better job of setting up the car.

One thing is that the Ferrari drivers might have an easier job when it comes to setting up the car. It seems to have a broad working window, will always be there or thereabouts. Whereas the Mercedes seems to have a much narrower working window and the setup has to be nailed - and even then it can be unpredictable.

There might be a pattern in Bottas doing well in Monaco qualifying and Hamilton not, and then Hamilton actually being pretty fast during the race and Bottas less so. Maybe in Monaco the car just was unsuited to the conditions/track/... and it wasn't possible to set it up to be fast in qualifying AND fast during the race? And on some other tracks just marginal to find the overlap between ideal setups for qualifying and race?

mikeyg123 wrote:The Ferrari does certainly seem more consistent. Both Mercedes drivers have had large swings with performance even during races, whilst the Ferrari drivers are consistently performing at the level we are accustomed from them.

I think in races Ferrari have had the edge in Australia, Russia, Spain and Monaco. Monaco being the biggest gap between the teams thus far.

Vettel himself has won 3 and could have taken another 2 with better luck.

Especially Bottas, in the first 6 races he has had at least one bad stint in 5 of them. Only Russia were both stints at the same level. Russia was also a track with zero degradation which could explain why. He can not work both types of tyre in a race. He can't be that bad of a driver to suffer that badly.

Hamilton has had 2 full weekends out of 6 were he was way off but he seems fine when changing compounds during the race and doesn't have the Bottas weakness.

lamo wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The Ferrari does certainly seem more consistent. Both Mercedes drivers have had large swings with performance even during races, whilst the Ferrari drivers are consistently performing at the level we are accustomed from them.

I think in races Ferrari have had the edge in Australia, Russia, Spain and Monaco. Monaco being the biggest gap between the teams thus far.

Vettel himself has won 3 and could have taken another 2 with better luck.

Especially Bottas, in the first 6 races he has had at least one bad stint in 5 of them. Only Russia were both stints at the same level. Russia was also a track with zero degradation which could explain why. He can not work both types of tyre in a race. He can't be that bad of a driver to suffer that badly.

Hamilton has had 2 full weekends out of 6 were he was way off but he seems fine when changing compounds during the race and doesn't have the Bottas weakness.

Yes, It was Bottas that led me down that chain of thought as it is very strange to see a drivers performance fluctuate so much over the course of the race. Remember Bottas had a reputation for consistency.

mikeyg123 wrote:

lamo wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The Ferrari does certainly seem more consistent. Both Mercedes drivers have had large swings with performance even during races, whilst the Ferrari drivers are consistently performing at the level we are accustomed from them.

I think in races Ferrari have had the edge in Australia, Russia, Spain and Monaco. Monaco being the biggest gap between the teams thus far.

Vettel himself has won 3 and could have taken another 2 with better luck.

Especially Bottas, in the first 6 races he has had at least one bad stint in 5 of them. Only Russia were both stints at the same level. Russia was also a track with zero degradation which could explain why. He can not work both types of tyre in a race. He can't be that bad of a driver to suffer that badly.

Hamilton has had 2 full weekends out of 6 were he was way off but he seems fine when changing compounds during the race and doesn't have the Bottas weakness.

Yes, It was Bottas that led me down that chain of thought as it is very strange to see a drivers performance fluctuate so much over the course of the race. Remember Bottas had a reputation for consistency.

This is the first time I'm hearing of this consistency, he was touted just the same way Hulk was and still is being touted!

...aaaand the pendulum swings back again

Zoue wrote:...aaaand the pendulum swings back again

Or it's Hamilton making the difference at his best track

TBF Merc are generally slightly better in quali (Or Hamilton and Bottas are better qualifiers than we think) but it's in races where Ferrari do the business (Or Vettel is an even race driver than we think).

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote:...aaaand the pendulum swings back again

Or it's Hamilton making the difference at his best track

TBF Merc are generally slightly better in quali (Or Hamilton and Bottas are better qualifiers than we think) but it's in races where Ferrari do the business (Or Vettel is an even race driver than we think).

I've no doubt Hamilton is making some difference as he's undoubtedly a top driver. I don't think he's making quite that much difference, though.

I read (on JA, I think) that Bottas in particular had some very strong race runs. I suspect it will be quite close this weekend and writing Mercedes off after the Monaco anomaly was a little premature

Zoue wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote:...aaaand the pendulum swings back again

Or it's Hamilton making the difference at his best track

TBF Merc are generally slightly better in quali (Or Hamilton and Bottas are better qualifiers than we think) but it's in races where Ferrari do the business (Or Vettel is an even race driver than we think).

I've no doubt Hamilton is making some difference as he's undoubtedly a top driver. I don't think he's making quite that much difference, though.

I read (on JA, I think) that Bottas in particular had some very strong race runs. I suspect it will be quite close this weekend and writing Mercedes off after the Monaco anomaly was a little premature

Yeah I'm really only joshing with that

I don't think anyone "wrote Merc off" after Monaco.

Hamilton put in the fastest lap of the race on old Supersofts compared to Vettel on the new ultrasofts in which he had to go all-out to catch the Force Indias. Mercedes definitely had the car to beat in Canada; however, I think that Vettel could have split them had Max not taken off part of his front wing.

I'd say Mercedes has the edge on power, Ferrari has the edge on cornering.
Canada is a power track, therefore Merc was faster.

Merc and Ferrari was running different races.