planetf1.com

Lotus49 wrote:
.

Not 30bhp though, but 13bhp.

• Canadian GP long-run average lap times
  Driver Team Lap Time Tyres
  Lewis Hamilton Mercedes . 1:16.4 Ultrasofts
  Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:16.5 Ultrasofts
  Max Verstappen . Red Bull . 1:16.6 Hypersofts
  Kimi Raikkonen . Ferrari 1:16.7 Ultrasofts

Zoue wrote:Mercedes looking good on the long runs.

• Canadian GP long-run average lap times
  Driver Team Lap Time Tyres
  Lewis Hamilton Mercedes . 1:16.4 Ultrasofts
  Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:16.5 Ultrasofts
  Max Verstappen . Red Bull . 1:16.6 Hypersofts
  Kimi Raikkonen . Ferrari 1:16.7 Ultrasofts

Sorry about the crappy formatting, but this forum software is not the most, er, flexible

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton has owned this track since 2007 and Mercedes looked comfortably fastest today. I’d be amazed if he doesn’t win.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I hate driver coaching, telling Stroll how to drive the track.

I don't really mind it. If they aren't told when they're on track they get the info inbetween runs anyway.

You can put Stroll in a Mercedes, tell him to brake, turn in and get on the power at the same points Hamilton does, he still won't beat him. Knowing how to do something and actually being able to do it are two very different things.

pokerman wrote: I don't think that you can blame the drivers.

UnlikeUday wrote:Taken from Formula 1's official website:

Long-run pace deficit (seconds per lap)
1. Mercedes
2. Red Bull +0.6 s/lap
3. Ferrari +1 s/lap
4. Force India +1.4 s/lap
5. McLaren +1.5 s/lap
6. Renault +1.6 s/lap
7. Toro Rosso +1.7 s/lap
8. Haas +1.7 s/lap
9. Sauber +1.8 s/lap
10. Williams +2.3 s/lap

kleefton wrote:

pokerman wrote: I don't think that you can blame the drivers.

Vandoorne does absolutely nothing. Alonso, while he is driving the heck out of the car, is also a very expensive malcontent. At this point in his career, he should be in a top car and Mclaren doesn't have one and recently admitted they won't have one for a while. So Alonso at mclaren just doesn't make any sense anymore. Not for him, not for Mclaren. So imo, yes they should let both of them go.

AravJ wrote:Standout is Lewis and Alonso. Both on ultrasofts.
Lewis engine on seventh race wow, Merc still holds a massive engine advantage.
Alonso and even Stoffel always looked good in fp1 and fp2 so good signs coming from mclaren

Noni wrote:According to Daniel, he thinks Red Bull can only challenge Ferrari as Mercedes were running harder compound tyres. Mercedes were really quick on those tyres and believe they will have a strong race.

Lotus49 wrote:

AravJ wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:
You mean 10kw(13bhp) from the bigger exhaust manifold? Still no reason why McLaren wouldn't allow them to make a similar change if Honda told them what it would bring.

Doing that might have been tricky though admittedly as Honda called it an "unexpected" gain so if you can't tell your chassis maker what any change will bring how can that chassis maker decide if it's worth the compromise to the car?

Probably a good example of why the McHonda partnership failed actually,Honda are still in a learning phase, more trial and error really whereas McLaren and Alonso were, perhaps foolishly or unfairly, expecting much much more.

Also foolishly or unfairly expecting Honda could pull the midfield chassis to the front

Not really, Alonso said they lacked to the top guys more than once. Unfortunately he also said they had "one of the best" so predictably the "one" was dropped and that's all anyone chooses to remember which is neither McLaren or Alonso's problem really.

Plus we had 3 different chassis's during the McHonda era so which is it or are we expected to believe now that they are the only team to suffer no variance in performance chassis wise during this time?

I'm going to guess it's the latter to go along with the ridiculous picking and choosing of what Alonso quotes are supposed to sum up McLaren's view on their own chassis recently.

Zoue wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:

moby wrote:

dompclarke wrote:

pokerman wrote: It's actual very relevant, Honda were able to find an extra 30hp from the get go just by the extra room they were given by STR for the engine installation.

I've heard this said before, but seen nothing to back it up. Have Honda actually said this or is it just hearsay?
Also if true this is also Hondas fault, they could have told Mclaren they needed the space, can't blame only one party

I think I recall reading it was because STR allowed Honda room to fit a 'log' exhaust.
I just googled but can not find an article so maybe it was 'made up'

There was room left in the STR chassis where Renault took up more space in that area so Honda increased the size of the manifold and got an unexpected power bump from it.

Not 30bhp though, but 13bhp.

I think the unexpected part is a pretty salient point. McLaren can hardly be accused of holding them back there when even Honda weren't aware of the potential gains to be made

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

pokerman wrote:I hate driver coaching, telling Stroll how to drive the track.

I don't really mind it. If they aren't told when they're on track they get the info inbetween runs anyway.

You can put Stroll in a Mercedes, tell him to brake, turn in and get on the power at the same points Hamilton does, he still won't beat him. Knowing how to do something and actually being able to do it are two very different things.

Zoue wrote:Mercedes looking good on the long runs.

• Canadian GP long-run average lap times
  Driver Team Lap Time Tyres
  Lewis Hamilton Mercedes . 1:16.4 Ultrasofts
  Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:16.5 Ultrasofts
  Max Verstappen . Red Bull . 1:16.6 Hypersofts
  Kimi Raikkonen . Ferrari 1:16.7 Ultrasofts

Sorry about the crappy formatting, but this forum software is not the most, er, flexible

kleefton wrote:

pokerman wrote: I don't think that you can blame the drivers.

Vandoorne does absolutely nothing. Alonso, while he is driving the heck out of the car, is also a very expensive malcontent. At this point in his career, he should be in a top car and Mclaren doesn't have one and recently admitted they won't have one for a while. So Alonso at mclaren just doesn't make any sense anymore. Not for him, not for Mclaren. So imo, yes they should let both of them go.

UnlikeUday wrote:Taken from Formula 1's official website:

Long-run pace deficit (seconds per lap)
1. Mercedes
2. Red Bull +0.6 s/lap
3. Ferrari +1 s/lap
4. Force India +1.4 s/lap
5. McLaren +1.5 s/lap
6. Renault +1.6 s/lap
7. Toro Rosso +1.7 s/lap
8. Haas +1.7 s/lap
9. Sauber +1.8 s/lap
10. Williams +2.3 s/lap

Lotus49 wrote:

UnlikeUday wrote:Taken from Formula 1's official website:

Long-run pace deficit (seconds per lap)
1. Mercedes
2. Red Bull +0.6 s/lap
3. Ferrari +1 s/lap
4. Force India +1.4 s/lap
5. McLaren +1.5 s/lap
6. Renault +1.6 s/lap
7. Toro Rosso +1.7 s/lap
8. Haas +1.7 s/lap
9. Sauber +1.8 s/lap
10. Williams +2.3 s/lap

4th-9th separated by less than 1st-2nd. (You'd have to think Ferrari are sandbagging a bit though surely)

If that remains or similar is carried over then the midfield battle will be great, 7th-18th separated by less than half a second is mad, a good quali or one mistake can make such a big difference to your weekend.

UnlikeUday wrote:Grosjean hitting the Marmot:

pokerman wrote: McLaren clearly dictated that their car came first and Honda had to work around that, I've seen it being said that Honda are now finding it easier to work without certain restrictions being put on them.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:

moby wrote:

dompclarke wrote: Also if true this is also Hondas fault, they could have told Mclaren they needed the space, can't blame only one party

I think I recall reading it was because STR allowed Honda room to fit a 'log' exhaust.
I just googled but can not find an article so maybe it was 'made up'

There was room left in the STR chassis where Renault took up more space in that area so Honda increased the size of the manifold and got an unexpected power bump from it.

Not 30bhp though, but 13bhp.

I think the unexpected part is a pretty salient point. McLaren can hardly be accused of holding them back there when even Honda weren't aware of the potential gains to be made

McLaren clearly dictated that their car came first and Honda had to work around that, I've seen it being said that Honda are now finding it easier to work without certain restrictions being put on them.

lucifers wrote:kimi flying

F1_Ernie wrote:Horner said the delta between US and HS is 0.3, well that's pretty rubbish. Everyone starting on the US then, hopefully someone goes aggressive and starts on the HS.

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Horner said the delta between US and HS is 0.3, well that's pretty rubbish. Everyone starting on the US then, hopefully someone goes aggressive and starts on the HS.

according to Pirelli themselves it's over a second, which personally I think is a bit ambitious