planetf1.com

I do seem to recall that at the time the new tyres were announced - long before the Grand Prix took place - there were already claims that it was pressure from Mercedes that pushed Pirelli into making the new tyres. Not that I see anything sinister in that, as I'll bet all teams try it on at some stage. But I don't find it that shocking or hard to believe.

But it's a big step from that to conspiracy. I don't see what Pirelli would have to gain by "favouring" any one team over another. Likely just frustration from Vettel for the fact that he struggled so much with them

Zoue wrote:I do seem to recall that at the time the new tyres were announced - long before the Grand Prix took place - there were already claims that it was pressure from Mercedes that pushed Pirelli into making the new tyres. Not that I see anything sinister in that, as I'll bet all teams try it on at some stage. But I don't find it that shocking or hard to believe.

But it's a big step from that to conspiracy. I don't see what Pirelli would have to gain by "favouring" any one team over another. Likely just frustration from Vettel for the fact that he struggled so much with them

AMuS started it with an article that solely mentioned Mercedes. Then they backtracked and mentioned unnamed other teams.

Ferrari being one of those teams came up this weekend I think but I'm not sure.

It was mentioned here to http://www.planetf1.com/news/pirelli-ag ... e-demands/

AnRs wrote:It was mentioned here to http://www.planetf1.com/news/pirelli-ag ... e-demands/

What's interesting is that according to that McLaren went on record back then that they suffered no effects but have since been named in that same story that mentioned Ferrari as one of the teams struggling.

There's lots that don't add up about this whole thing which just feeds into it I suppose.

AnRs wrote:It was mentioned here to http://www.planetf1.com/news/pirelli-ag ... e-demands/

"According to Auto Motor und Sport, the Silver Arrows opened a discussion with the manufacturer in pre-season testing after experiencing drastic blistering with their tyres."

kleefton wrote:According to Marc Priestly, former Mclaren f1 mechanic, this whole tyre conspiracy is much a do about nothing. And Ferrari was one of the teams that complained about the blistering, and therefore were also responsible for the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 8W_vizIGf4

Skip to the 15 minute mark if you want to listen to what he had to say about the tires. There are also numerous reputable sources discarding this idea that Pirelli helped Mercedes.

His British so it's nonsense

F1_Ernie wrote:

kleefton wrote:According to Marc Priestly, former Mclaren f1 mechanic, this whole tyre conspiracy is much a do about nothing. And Ferrari was one of the teams that complained about the blistering, and therefore were also responsible for the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 8W_vizIGf4

Skip to the 15 minute mark if you want to listen to what he had to say about the tires. There are also numerous reputable sources discarding this idea that Pirelli helped Mercedes.

His British so it's nonsense

Na but he's contradicting someone else at McLaren earlier, if that's because he's british or not who knows : )

F1_Ernie wrote:

kleefton wrote:According to Marc Priestly, former Mclaren f1 mechanic, this whole tyre conspiracy is much a do about nothing. And Ferrari was one of the teams that complained about the blistering, and therefore were also responsible for the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 8W_vizIGf4

Skip to the 15 minute mark if you want to listen to what he had to say about the tires. There are also numerous reputable sources discarding this idea that Pirelli helped Mercedes.

His British so it's nonsense

I like MP but is he not just parroting Mark Hughes's article? Where was all this McLaren and Ferrari blistering talk before Mark wrote about it?

I genuinely don't recall any mention of McLaren having issues at all or Ferrari being one of the teams to complain from the time or even right up until that article.

Granted It's not like I've gone looking for it to be fair but it seems to have popped up from nowhere in response to the conspiracy nuts.

Lotus49 wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:

kleefton wrote:According to Marc Priestly, former Mclaren f1 mechanic, this whole tyre conspiracy is much a do about nothing. And Ferrari was one of the teams that complained about the blistering, and therefore were also responsible for the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 8W_vizIGf4

Skip to the 15 minute mark if you want to listen to what he had to say about the tires. There are also numerous reputable sources discarding this idea that Pirelli helped Mercedes.

His British so it's nonsense

I like MP but is he not just parroting Mark Hughes's article? Where was all this McLaren and Ferrari blistering talk before Mark wrote about it?

I genuinely don't recall any mention of McLaren having issues at all or Ferrari being one of the teams to complain from the time or even right up until that article.

Granted It's not like I've gone looking for it to be fair but it seems to have popped up from nowhere in response to the conspiracy nuts.

This is most likely why, would Ferrari fans moan and talk about conspiracy theories if they won, I very much doubt it. If they are both right then it seems an easy way to counter the conspiracy rubbish to me.

The biggest problem is that no one has any proof either way, it's just small quotes from people here and there and people use them quotes to back up their opinion. Been a complete mess really.

Getting back to the main topic; the shift in form we saw at the last race presents an interesting possibility. If the season is going to contain shifts in the balance of power like it has so far, the important thing will be making sure to win when you have the advantage. Thus far, Vettel and Ferrari have won in Bahrain with the advantage but have finished 8th and 4th in China and Baku. That strike rate is troubling. Hamilton and Mercedes by contrast finished 2nd in Australia and first in Spain.

So I think the story of the season has been how wrong things have gone for Ferrari strategically. In terms of driving, Vettel has been pretty solid. The restart at the end of the race in Baku was really his only substantial misstep so far. That said, two races that looked like easy wins turned into a 4th and an 8th. That's a 34 point loss, almost entirely through strategy and unpredictability. Okay, they definitely cashed in on the safety car in Australia so that makes up for some of it but they have not played their cards right this year strategically.

After running old and new spec tyres at Barcelona, Vettel has come out and said it was the correct call to move to the new spec tyres for the Spanish GP.

"Normally you don't get the chance to revisit these kind of decisions that are made," he said.

"But we did now with the day that we had today, and I think the result is that, if we had the normal tyres on Sunday, we'd probably even be worse off.

"So I think it was the correct call, and it was our fault not to have the same tyre wear or life as other people."

I have to admit on being wrong here. I didn't buy what Benson or Wolff said, but if Vettel says it then I believe it.

KingVoid wrote:I have to admit on being wrong here. I didn't buy what Benson or Wolff said, but if Vettel says it then I believe it.

I take back what I said about sour grapes.

Johnson wrote:After running old and new spec tyres at Barcelona, Vettel has come out and said it was the correct call to move to the new spec tyres for the Spanish GP.

"Normally you don't get the chance to revisit these kind of decisions that are made," he said.

"But we did now with the day that we had today, and I think the result is that, if we had the normal tyres on Sunday, we'd probably even be worse off.

"So I think it was the correct call, and it was our fault not to have the same tyre wear or life as other people."

Oops! I wouldn't be surprised if some still say that Vettel doesn't know what he's talking about.

KingVoid wrote:I have to admit on being wrong here. I didn't buy what Benson or Wolff said, but if Vettel says it then I believe it.

sandman1347 wrote:Getting back to the main topic; the shift in form we saw at the last race presents an interesting possibility. If the season is going to contain shifts in the balance of power like it has so far, the important thing will be making sure to win when you have the advantage. Thus far, Vettel and Ferrari have won in Bahrain with the advantage but have finished 8th and 4th in China and Baku. That strike rate is troubling. Hamilton and Mercedes by contrast finished 2nd in Australia and first in Spain.

So I think the story of the season has been how wrong things have gone for Ferrari strategically. In terms of driving, Vettel has been pretty solid. The restart at the end of the race in Baku was really his only substantial misstep so far. That said, two races that looked like easy wins turned into a 4th and an 8th. That's a 34 point loss, almost entirely through strategy and unpredictability. Okay, they definitely cashed in on the safety car in Australia so that makes up for some of it but they have not played their cards right this year strategically.

Bottas got ahead of Vettel in China after pits. He would have won that race had there not been SC. Though Vettel would have finished ahead of Hamilton I think.

Interesting comment in Brundle's post-race anlysis:

Somebody I respect a lot in the paddock caught my attention post-race. He said 'there's no point in trying to analyse any race or upgrade, it's simply about who is generating the right tyre temperatures at any given point'. That rather spoiled my day.

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

Zoue wrote:Interesting comment in Brundle's post-race anlysis:

Somebody I respect a lot in the paddock caught my attention post-race. He said 'there's no point in trying to analyse any race or upgrade, it's simply about who is generating the right tyre temperatures at any given point'. That rather spoiled my day.

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

If true I expect the teams to bring upgrades related to controlling the tyre temperatures. In terms of development resources, that'll probably bring more bang for the buck than anything else.

kleefton wrote:According to Marc Priestly, former Mclaren f1 mechanic, this whole tyre conspiracy is much a do about nothing. And Ferrari was one of the teams that complained about the blistering, and therefore were also responsible for the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 8W_vizIGf4

Skip to the 15 minute mark if you want to listen to what he had to say about the tires. There are also numerous reputable sources discarding this idea that Pirelli helped Mercedes.

Another interesting blog from Marc Priestly. Touches on why Merc lost some performance in the first few races. Also discusses the latest allegations against Ferrari.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5OxyB11XAc

KingVoid wrote:I have to admit on being wrong here. I didn't buy what Benson or Wolff said, but if Vettel says it then I believe it.

What I find a bit annoying is that unless Ferrari admit anything then everything said is all lies and how often do Ferrari admit anything?

Mercedes-Benz wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:Getting back to the main topic; the shift in form we saw at the last race presents an interesting possibility. If the season is going to contain shifts in the balance of power like it has so far, the important thing will be making sure to win when you have the advantage. Thus far, Vettel and Ferrari have won in Bahrain with the advantage but have finished 8th and 4th in China and Baku. That strike rate is troubling. Hamilton and Mercedes by contrast finished 2nd in Australia and first in Spain.

So I think the story of the season has been how wrong things have gone for Ferrari strategically. In terms of driving, Vettel has been pretty solid. The restart at the end of the race in Baku was really his only substantial misstep so far. That said, two races that looked like easy wins turned into a 4th and an 8th. That's a 34 point loss, almost entirely through strategy and unpredictability. Okay, they definitely cashed in on the safety car in Australia so that makes up for some of it but they have not played their cards right this year strategically.

Bottas got ahead of Vettel in China after pits. He would have won that race had there not been SC. Though Vettel would have finished ahead of Hamilton I think.

Bottas only got the lead because Ferrari made a miscalculation with their required pitstop delta. That was a race Vettel was in control of until the stops. Certainly he was able to gap Bottas with ease during the first stint while simultaneously hounding him once he lost track position. Overtaking was just out of reach as the pace difference wasn't big enough but Vettel was the fastest there.

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:I have to admit on being wrong here. I didn't buy what Benson or Wolff said, but if Vettel says it then I believe it.

What I find a bit annoying is that unless Ferrari admit anything then everything said is all lies and how often do Ferrari admit anything?

I shouldn't read too much into it. The teams are always trying to score political points off each other and taking anything at face value is often difficult. But when someone confesses to messing up, it's much more believable because what ulterior motive could they have? I don't think it's a Ferrari thing any more than it's a Mercedes thing

sandman1347 wrote:Getting back to the main topic; the shift in form we saw at the last race presents an interesting possibility. If the season is going to contain shifts in the balance of power like it has so far, the important thing will be making sure to win when you have the advantage. Thus far, Vettel and Ferrari have won in Bahrain with the advantage but have finished 8th and 4th in China and Baku. That strike rate is troubling. Hamilton and Mercedes by contrast finished 2nd in Australia and first in Spain.

So I think the story of the season has been how wrong things have gone for Ferrari strategically. In terms of driving, Vettel has been pretty solid. The restart at the end of the race in Baku was really his only substantial misstep so far. That said, two races that looked like easy wins turned into a 4th and an 8th. That's a 34 point loss, almost entirely through strategy and unpredictability. Okay, they definitely cashed in on the safety car in Australia so that makes up for some of it but they have not played their cards right this year strategically.

Vettel cutting across Kimi at the start of the Chinese GP wasn't the wisest decision, like Kimi said if he doesn't back out then they crash, this allowed Bottas through to 2nd. Not sure why you would fight a teammate so hard who won't fight you in turn 1 anyway. Kimi should have been on the front row in Baku which could have changed things, but a SC changed the race there.

Like you say you need to maximise your points at the circuits you have the advantage specially in qualifying, Ferrari pit crew also did slow stops at China and Spain then there's also Kimi at Bahrain, so they haven't been at their best. When you have the advantage you need both cars 1st and 2nd after the first few corners.

SR1 wrote:

kleefton wrote:According to Marc Priestly, former Mclaren f1 mechanic, this whole tyre conspiracy is much a do about nothing. And Ferrari was one of the teams that complained about the blistering, and therefore were also responsible for the change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 8W_vizIGf4

Skip to the 15 minute mark if you want to listen to what he had to say about the tires. There are also numerous reputable sources discarding this idea that Pirelli helped Mercedes.

Another interesting blog from Marc Priestly. Touches on why Merc lost some performance in the first few races. Also discusses the latest allegations against Ferrari.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5OxyB11XAc

Did this questioning of Toto about Merc being asked to remove something from their ICE make it into any other publications as it's the first I'm hearing about it?

Johnson wrote:

motorfinger wrote:in Silverstone, Abu Dhabi, and Monza so three times in 2015.

Didn't Vettel have PU issue in Abu Dhabi and qualify P16?

No PU issue, just failed to get out of Q1 on softs.

Monaco is a one-off, so can Australia and Austria be too, but it's hard not to see how good the Merc was around Austria and how bad the Ferrari was.
I don't beleive there's been so big achievement difference between the driversso far, a bit of bad luck and some off races for a season is normal.

But, if this continues it's not even a question but a Merc walkover again, like many said after testing, that will probably continue until 2021 at least.
Their PU is to good for anyone to take on, even if it's a rumour their slump in form came from they where having to remove something from their PU after Aus,
otherwise they would have been just as dominant the rest off the races.

Ferrari seems to lack both the little luck they need and the reliability they need to be able to go up against the mighty Mercs.
Red Bull lacks the qualifying and probably PU also to stand a chance over a season.

So it seems Red Bull is going to have to wait a little longer before Renault give them a PU closer to the Mercedes and Ferrari ones...

http://www.f1i.com/news/304315-renault- ... cerns.html

Wonder if this will impact the decision on taking a risk with Honda?

Zoue wrote:So it seems Red Bull is going to have to wait a little longer before Renault give them a PU closer to the Mercedes and Ferrari ones...

http://www.f1i.com/news/304315-renault- ... cerns.html

Wonder if this will impact the decision on taking a risk with Honda?

I think the ICE upgrade is still coming so could make some inroads but yeah it's disappointing they can't get on top of that new MGU-K. Well over a year in development.

Red Bull may have to make that call without ever running the new part of the ERS. Could get interesting if Red Bull announce they switch to Honda and Renault bring this great new ers that puts them on par with the other two.

Unlikely but it would be funny to see what Marko says.

Lotus49 wrote:

Zoue wrote:So it seems Red Bull is going to have to wait a little longer before Renault give them a PU closer to the Mercedes and Ferrari ones...

http://www.f1i.com/news/304315-renault- ... cerns.html

Wonder if this will impact the decision on taking a risk with Honda?

I think the ICE upgrade is still coming so could make some inroads but yeah it's disappointing they can't get on top of that new MGU-K. Well over a year in development.

Red Bull may have to make that call without ever running the new part of the ERS. Could get interesting if Red Bull announce they switch to Honda and Renault bring this great new ers that puts them on par with the other two.

Unlikely but it would be funny to see what Marko says.

If that happens the mod team may go on strike for a week...

I do think you're right though; as broken as the Red Bull/Renault relationship is, this will either bring them together in some over-dramatised about-face or it'll be the final nail in the coffin of that contract. I can't see a third alternative.

P-F1 Mod wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:

Zoue wrote:So it seems Red Bull is going to have to wait a little longer before Renault give them a PU closer to the Mercedes and Ferrari ones...

http://www.f1i.com/news/304315-renault- ... cerns.html

Wonder if this will impact the decision on taking a risk with Honda?

I think the ICE upgrade is still coming so could make some inroads but yeah it's disappointing they can't get on top of that new MGU-K. Well over a year in development.

Red Bull may have to make that call without ever running the new part of the ERS. Could get interesting if Red Bull announce they switch to Honda and Renault bring this great new ers that puts them on par with the other two.

Unlikely but it would be funny to see what Marko says.

If that happens the mod team may go on strike for a week...

I do think you're right though; as broken as the Red Bull/Renault relationship is, this will either bring them together in some over-dramatised about-face or it'll be the final nail in the coffin of that contract. I can't see a third alternative.

Dieter takes his ball and goes home after selling the team to Bernie who brings it back as Brabham.

P-F1 Mod wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:

Zoue wrote:So it seems Red Bull is going to have to wait a little longer before Renault give them a PU closer to the Mercedes and Ferrari ones...

http://www.f1i.com/news/304315-renault- ... cerns.html

Wonder if this will impact the decision on taking a risk with Honda?

I think the ICE upgrade is still coming so could make some inroads but yeah it's disappointing they can't get on top of that new MGU-K. Well over a year in development.

Red Bull may have to make that call without ever running the new part of the ERS. Could get interesting if Red Bull announce they switch to Honda and Renault bring this great new ers that puts them on par with the other two.

Unlikely but it would be funny to see what Marko says.

If that happens the mod team may go on strike for a week...

I do think you're right though; as broken as the Red Bull/Renault relationship is, this will either bring them together in some over-dramatised about-face or it'll be the final nail in the coffin of that contract. I can't see a third alternative.

I think this summer could be a classic for the good Dr. Marko. Someone's getting both barrels, Renault,McLaren or Alonso, he's had a wee pop at all of them this year and I think he's just warming up.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... s-renault/

Nun sind 5 Rennen ins Land gegangen. Die 4 Autokonzerne kennen das Kräfteverhältnis. Ferrari hat in der Qualifikation ein leichtes Leistungsplus. Mercedes ist im Rennen eine Spur besser. Renault muss noch rund 30 PS aufholen, Honda zwischen 40 und 50 PS.

Translation:

Now 5 races have gone into the country. The four car companies know the balance of power. Ferrari has a slight performance advantage in qualifying. Mercedes is a bit better in the race. Renault still has to catch up around 30 hp, Honda between 40 and 50 hp.

sandman1347 wrote:

Mercedes-Benz wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:Getting back to the main topic; the shift in form we saw at the last race presents an interesting possibility. If the season is going to contain shifts in the balance of power like it has so far, the important thing will be making sure to win when you have the advantage. Thus far, Vettel and Ferrari have won in Bahrain with the advantage but have finished 8th and 4th in China and Baku. That strike rate is troubling. Hamilton and Mercedes by contrast finished 2nd in Australia and first in Spain.

So I think the story of the season has been how wrong things have gone for Ferrari strategically. In terms of driving, Vettel has been pretty solid. The restart at the end of the race in Baku was really his only substantial misstep so far. That said, two races that looked like easy wins turned into a 4th and an 8th. That's a 34 point loss, almost entirely through strategy and unpredictability. Okay, they definitely cashed in on the safety car in Australia so that makes up for some of it but they have not played their cards right this year strategically.

Bottas got ahead of Vettel in China after pits. He would have won that race had there not been SC. Though Vettel would have finished ahead of Hamilton I think.

Bottas only got the lead because Ferrari made a miscalculation with their required pitstop delta. That was a race Vettel was in control of until the stops. Certainly he was able to gap Bottas with ease during the first stint while simultaneously hounding him once he lost track position. Overtaking was just out of reach as the pace difference wasn't big enough but Vettel was the fastest there.

Vettel also made several mistakes on his lap before coming in to box. This was while Bottas had just set a middle sector that was nearly a second faster than Vettel had previously. Sky analysed these mistakes, while also comparing the pit entry of Vettel and Bottas. They showed that Vettel slowed down to the pit limiter much earlier than he needed to. While Bottas left it until the last moment possible. This combined with Vettel's mistakes on his lap before he pitted and them both entering the pits as well as the pit stops was what got Bottas ahead. Sky were not even totally certain that Vettel will have got Bottas even if their pit stops were the same time. Vettel unfortunately did look have the slower pitstop but it was 2.8 seconds. That isn't exactly slow, but Vettel also cost himself more time by making 2 other small mistakes. Bottas didn't do this so I don't think it was just down to Ferrari that got lost Vettel a place.

KingVoid wrote:https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... s-renault/

Nun sind 5 Rennen ins Land gegangen. Die 4 Autokonzerne kennen das Kräfteverhältnis. Ferrari hat in der Qualifikation ein leichtes Leistungsplus. Mercedes ist im Rennen eine Spur besser. Renault muss noch rund 30 PS aufholen, Honda zwischen 40 und 50 PS.

Translation:

Now 5 races have gone into the country. The four car companies know the balance of power. Ferrari has a slight performance advantage in qualifying. Mercedes is a bit better in the race. Renault still has to catch up around 30 hp, Honda between 40 and 50 hp.

Yep that seems about right to me the characteristics of the Mercedes and Ferrari have swapped places from last year apart from the ability to follow cars in dirty air perhaps?

so pecking order for Monaco?

What we know so far is that Ferrari is better at the power circuits and better at getting heat into the tyres. Conversely, Mercedes seem better on twisty parts and have slightly better tyre life.

Lot's of people have Red Bull as the favourites but i think qualifying (and therefore the race weekend) will come down to who can switch on the hypersofts in qualifying, and i think Ferrari will be the best at that.

Yeah I think we might get a bit of a Singapore repeat with Fer>RB>Merc but we'll see. Weather apparently could be thunderstorms for Saturday which could be key, you'd fancy Seb,Max and Lewis to duke it out in that case with my money on Lewis.

For some reason, Renault being only 30 horsepower down surprises me. Red Bull have been about 7 tenths slower than pole on average this season. I don’t know how much 30 horsepower is worth, but I doubt it’s more than 7 tenths. Perhaps Red Bull’s chassis is not all that?

The truth will be revealed in Monaco.

KingVoid wrote:For some reason, Renault being only 30 horsepower down surprises me. Red Bull have been about 7 tenths slower than pole on average this season. I don’t know how much 30 horsepower is worth, but I doubt it’s more than 7 tenths. Perhaps Red Bull’s chassis is not all that?

The truth will be revealed in Monaco.

It's the knock on effect on the car as well that brings the lap time. Faster you go the more d/f you produce and the more the car works as it was made to.

I think 15-20bhp is around 2-3ths iirc from the oil burn talk as that's what's basically missing for Renault, so 30bhp might be 4ths or so with a couple more coming from the added benefits to the car.

I think they're in the ballpark at least chassis wise but I don't think they are miles ahead as sometimes portrayed. Believe it or not they'll still be a couple of tenths down because of the engine even in Monaco so based on your average maybe Ferrari will be the team to beat.

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... s-renault/

Nun sind 5 Rennen ins Land gegangen. Die 4 Autokonzerne kennen das Kräfteverhältnis. Ferrari hat in der Qualifikation ein leichtes Leistungsplus. Mercedes ist im Rennen eine Spur besser. Renault muss noch rund 30 PS aufholen, Honda zwischen 40 und 50 PS.

Translation:

Now 5 races have gone into the country. The four car companies know the balance of power. Ferrari has a slight performance advantage in qualifying. Mercedes is a bit better in the race. Renault still has to catch up around 30 hp, Honda between 40 and 50 hp.

Yep that seems about right to me the characteristics of the Mercedes and Ferrari have swapped places from last year apart from the ability to follow cars in dirty air perhaps?

Max mentioned a week or two ago that it was much easier to follow the Mercedes than it was the Ferrari, so may be it's not that the Mercedes finds it hard to follow other cars, but is just at a disadvantage when behind the Ferrari specifically?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... s-renault/

Nun sind 5 Rennen ins Land gegangen. Die 4 Autokonzerne kennen das Kräfteverhältnis. Ferrari hat in der Qualifikation ein leichtes Leistungsplus. Mercedes ist im Rennen eine Spur besser. Renault muss noch rund 30 PS aufholen, Honda zwischen 40 und 50 PS.

Translation:

Now 5 races have gone into the country. The four car companies know the balance of power. Ferrari has a slight performance advantage in qualifying. Mercedes is a bit better in the race. Renault still has to catch up around 30 hp, Honda between 40 and 50 hp.

Yep that seems about right to me the characteristics of the Mercedes and Ferrari have swapped places from last year apart from the ability to follow cars in dirty air perhaps?

Max mentioned a week or two ago that it was much easier to follow the Mercedes than it was the Ferrari, so may be it's not that the Mercedes finds it hard to follow other cars, but is just at a disadvantage when behind the Ferrari specifically?

That would be an interesting design philosophy; make the car fast in quali and very difficult to follow in the race.