planetf1.com

Seems like Sebastian and Ferrari get the advantage on Mercedes more often than the Mercedes pull out a great start on Team Red. I am curious if this is somehow related to the car or if Sebastian is possibly better at maximizing traction without wheel spin. Seems like this had been going on for a number of years. I remember a lot of races where the pole was taken by Lewis but Seb got by on the start and Lewis had to repass him during the race or with pit strategy. It's easy to see that once he gets an advantage Sebastian usually consolidates it with a chop across his competitors front wing depriving it of downforce and intimidating other drivers.

I have not noticed that Vettel actually reacts quicker but he does seem to accelerate faster than most.

So: 1. Is Seb/Ferrari better than Lewis/Mercedes at the start? 2. Does Ferrari have a better clutch or traction on the start? 3. Is Vettel just better at maximizing traction and controlling wheel spin than most anyone else on average?

Well iirc it's actually been pretty back and forth the past few years with a few standout starts from both. The thing is if you start first and Sprint away into the lead did you really get a good start?

That out of the way there were some rumors about that pedal of sebs Ferrari being tied to the clutch earlier this season, could be where he is finding time if that is some sort of start mode clutch vs race mode clutch switch or something... That's a total stab in the dark though I really have no idea.

The start procedures are apparently very complex, so it could be that Ferrari have a better process or they might have better engine management.

I think the traction from the start would (from the car) mostly come down to heat in the tyres and drivability of the engine to minimise wheel spin. Maybe they optimise tyre heat on the warm-up lap better?

Some drivers are just better than others at starts. If I recall correctly, Ricciardo was particularly bad at starts when he first got to Red Bull. He was qualifying ahead of Seb, but had to pass him during the races due to poor starts.

emb1496 wrote:Well iirc it's actually been pretty back and forth the past few years with a few standout starts from both. The thing is if you start first and Sprint away into the lead did you really get a good start?

That out of the way there were some rumors about that pedal of sebs Ferrari being tied to the clutch earlier this season, could be where he is finding time if that is some sort of start mode clutch vs race mode clutch switch or something... That's a total stab in the dark though I really have no idea.

Are you talking about Seb's extra paddle on the steering wheel or is Seb supposed to have a pedal for different clutch functioons?

France and Austria the Ferrari’s were on the softer compound and today Lewis got a bad start.

Mort Canard wrote:Seems like Sebastian and Ferrari get the advantage on Mercedes more often than the Mercedes pull out a great start on Team Red. I am curious if this is somehow related to the car or if Sebastian is possibly better at maximizing traction without wheel spin. Seems like this had been going on for a number of years. I remember a lot of races where the pole was taken by Lewis but Seb got by on the start and Lewis had to repass him during the race or with pit strategy. It's easy to see that once he gets an advantage Sebastian usually consolidates it with a chop across his competitors front wing depriving it of downforce and intimidating other drivers.

I have not noticed that Vettel actually reacts quicker but he does seem to accelerate faster than most.

So: 1. Is Seb/Ferrari better than Lewis/Mercedes at the start? 2. Does Ferrari have a better clutch or traction on the start? 3. Is Vettel just better at maximizing traction and controlling wheel spin than most anyone else on average?

He does react quicker and remember when he was adamant at Bottas jumping the start at Russia last year.

Rockie wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:Seems like Sebastian and Ferrari get the advantage on Mercedes more often than the Mercedes pull out a great start on Team Red. I am curious if this is somehow related to the car or if Sebastian is possibly better at maximizing traction without wheel spin. Seems like this had been going on for a number of years. I remember a lot of races where the pole was taken by Lewis but Seb got by on the start and Lewis had to repass him during the race or with pit strategy. It's easy to see that once he gets an advantage Sebastian usually consolidates it with a chop across his competitors front wing depriving it of downforce and intimidating other drivers.

I have not noticed that Vettel actually reacts quicker but he does seem to accelerate faster than most.

So: 1. Is Seb/Ferrari better than Lewis/Mercedes at the start? 2. Does Ferrari have a better clutch or traction on the start? 3. Is Vettel just better at maximizing traction and controlling wheel spin than most anyone else on average?

He does react quicker and remember when he was adamant at Bottas jumping the start at Russia last year.

It was Austria, but otherwise true. Vettel has a long record of making good starts, not just at Ferrari.

Additionally, however, Ferrari has a long record of making a fast-starting car, so I think it's just a perfect combination. Mercedes, on the other hand, has been infamous in recent years for clutch problems at the start.

Rockie wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:Seems like Sebastian and Ferrari get the advantage on Mercedes more often than the Mercedes pull out a great start on Team Red. I am curious if this is somehow related to the car or if Sebastian is possibly better at maximizing traction without wheel spin. Seems like this had been going on for a number of years. I remember a lot of races where the pole was taken by Lewis but Seb got by on the start and Lewis had to repass him during the race or with pit strategy. It's easy to see that once he gets an advantage Sebastian usually consolidates it with a chop across his competitors front wing depriving it of downforce and intimidating other drivers.

I have not noticed that Vettel actually reacts quicker but he does seem to accelerate faster than most.

So: 1. Is Seb/Ferrari better than Lewis/Mercedes at the start? 2. Does Ferrari have a better clutch or traction on the start? 3. Is Vettel just better at maximizing traction and controlling wheel spin than most anyone else on average?

He does react quicker and remember when he was adamant at Bottas jumping the start at Russia last year.

My road car is 'Low end' and has a gadget that can read road signs (speed). I'm sure it is not beyond the people they have there to make a device that 'sees' the light go out, but it is not legal to have any sort of launch control. Unless they know better, maybe its in the wording?

Bottas did jump but they gave it to him because it was within a limit that I forget what they called it.
But it was faster than humans can react - He just got lucky.
Maybe some of the oil the mercs burn gets on the clutch plates??
Lewis gets a lot of poor starts. Always seems to bog down off the line.
Merc might just be low on low end grunt?

It is the car. We have seen Raikkonen also get blistering starts.

A car design for the next season begins well in advance, and the designers have to make certain decisions very early in that design process. We have seen the strengths and weaknesses of the Mercedes car, many of them carry from year to year. The Merc sucks following other cars, it is one of the poorest coming off the line, and it's cooling system for brakes, oil, and radiator is borderline critical. But that same car is an absolute killer once it gets underway and in clear air.

The point is that any car is a series of compromises, you can't have your cake and eat it too. The strengths of the Merc out-weigh the disadvantages, and overall it is expected that the Merc will the title. I expect them too, the basic design parameters deliver a championship car. It may look embarrassing at a few tracks, not win at others, but it will win enough races and points to deliver a championship.

The reason for the sub-par starts in the Merc are (IMO) down tot he clutch design. Build a tiny clutch that has the absolute minimum of mass, it will be the quickest shifting car. But a small clutch can also suck big time for pulling away from the line. We will never know, whatever deficiencies the Merc starting has will remain a closely guarded secret.

Whatever is going on, Ferrari have a better starting system, it consistently beats the crap out of the Merc at the line.

Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

mds wrote:Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

Fully agree. People's perceptions tend to get clouded by recent events and often fail to take circumstance into account. Bottas went from 4th to 2nd last race and passed Kimi in the process, but for some reason no-one's attributing that to the car

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

Fully agree. People's perceptions tend to get clouded by recent events and often fail to take circumstance into account. Bottas went from 4th to 2nd last race and passed Kimi in the process, but for some reason no-one's attributing that to the car

Kimi got a better start than the Mercs but was boxed in due to Hamilton's poor start.

Rockie wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

Fully agree. People's perceptions tend to get clouded by recent events and often fail to take circumstance into account. Bottas went from 4th to 2nd last race and passed Kimi in the process, but for some reason no-one's attributing that to the car

Kimi got a better start than the Mercs but was boxed in due to Hamilton's poor start.

If Kimi would have made a better start than Bottas (or even an equal one) he would have just been able to pass Hamilton on the right side, like he was planning to do. But he had to retrace his steps because Bottas had already drawn alongside at that point. Bottas had a better start than Kimi.

It has been clear for a very long time now that Mercedes certainly may have the worst launch system among the top teams, and for whatever reason, they are not great at the restarts after a Safety car period.
Granted, the clutch is now miles better than the one used by Hamilton and Rosberg where an aborted start with a subsequent increase of the temperature of the clutch was enough for them to lose multiple places at the restart.

Who can forget the starts from Alonso and Massa who constantly were gaining places left and right? Ferrari knows how to make launch systems.

I remember the ridiculously good start by Rosberg in Spain in 2016 where he apparently used a "wrong" setting at the start only to be a sitting duck 2 curves ahead. FIA monitoring Ferrari batteries does tell me that there is something "fishy"(but legal) that these guys are doing. May be bypassing some system/sensor hence using "free" energy? who knows. Just talking.

mds wrote:

Rockie wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

Fully agree. People's perceptions tend to get clouded by recent events and often fail to take circumstance into account. Bottas went from 4th to 2nd last race and passed Kimi in the process, but for some reason no-one's attributing that to the car

Kimi got a better start than the Mercs but was boxed in due to Hamilton's poor start.

If Kimi would have made a better start than Bottas (or even an equal one) he would have just been able to pass Hamilton on the right side, like he was planning to do. But he had to retrace his steps because Bottas had already drawn alongside at that point. Bottas had a better start than Kimi.

Ok so Bottas got a better start than Vettel in France as well by that logic.

Rockie wrote:

mds wrote:

Rockie wrote:

Zoue wrote:

mds wrote:Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

Fully agree. People's perceptions tend to get clouded by recent events and often fail to take circumstance into account. Bottas went from 4th to 2nd last race and passed Kimi in the process, but for some reason no-one's attributing that to the car

Kimi got a better start than the Mercs but was boxed in due to Hamilton's poor start.

If Kimi would have made a better start than Bottas (or even an equal one) he would have just been able to pass Hamilton on the right side, like he was planning to do. But he had to retrace his steps because Bottas had already drawn alongside at that point. Bottas had a better start than Kimi.

Ok so Bottas got a better start than Vettel in France as well by that logic.

What do you mean, "by that logic"? Bottas started behind Kimi, gained on him and pulled alongside before Kimi had to slow due to having his path blocked, so Bottas had a better start. It's not exactly some exotic logic I've applied here.

The question is rather what kind of mental gymnastics you're applying to say Kimi had a better start than Bottas.

As for France: No, Vettel came from behind Bottas and pulled alongside before being boxed in, so Vettel had the better start.
See?
Vettel came from behind, pulled alongside.
Bottas came from behind, pulled alongside.

Not hard, no?

Could it simply be tyre warm up is not so good on the Merc?

I don't think there is any underlying issue, Lewis just made a bad start last time out.

Perhaps a mix of car and driver. Ferrari have been the second best team for the last 4 years, plus some. Both team and driver have every reason to put everything into the start to try and put themselves into a position to win some races. Mercedes get caught out from time to time, but have no need to focus on the start to the same extent. That could well change if it begins to cost them regularly.

article here says Lewis simply got too much wheelspin at the start, that's why he lost places. Nothing to do with Ferrari having an advantage

The simple answer is that we got some wheelspin,” he explained when speaking about what had gone wrong for Hamilton. “There was a bit less grip on the grid than we were expecting. 

“We had done practice starts there and at Silverstone they do actually allow you do a start from the grid.

“But for some reason on Sunday we didn't quite have what we expected and as soon as you get the wheelspin you lose traction and that lost him places quickly.”

https://www.crash.net/f1/news/900911/1/ ... -f1-starts

Incidentally, the same article also states that Hamilton suffered minimal damage in the incident and his complaints of floor damage likely stemmed from the difficulties he encountered following other cars

Up until Austria, the pole sitter had never lost the lead on lap 1 this season. I think that starts in general haven’t been as exciting this year.

Even 'poor start' is more than one thing. A poor start in itsself is failing to roll quickly when the lights change. The Merc's do not seem to have this problem, they are moving as soon as the others.
The next 'phase' is getting from moving to moving quickly enough to pile on more power without ripping the wheels from the tarmac. This is where Merc seem to be inferior.

Its not a start problem per se it is an acceleration from low speed problem.
Either they can not feed the most power in without overdoing it, or something is not 'sticking' to the road. Suspension problem or some application of the tyre problem.

Assuming it is only the drivers foot that controls the amount of power applied, this is the problem.

If it is not only the drivers foot that controls it, then this is the problem

mds wrote:Isn't too much made of this? Last race obviously Hamilton messed up but Bottas did fine, the two races previous Vettel and Raikkonen respectively had softer tyres which means more grip so a better start.

Preceding these 3 races, haven't we seen the Mercs just keeping position for a long string of races?


Edit: I just looked into it. From Australia to Canada:
Ferrari: net total of 3 positions lost on the grid: 1 time lost 2 places, 2 times lost 1 place, 1 time gained 1 place
Mercedes: net total of 0 positions lost/gained on the grid: 2 times lost 1 place, 2 times gained 1 place

I did not count the lost positions for Kimi in Baku since that was an incident, however given he tangled with Perez who started two places back maybe he didn't get the best start?

Gaining positions is a bad indicator of how good a start actually was. Sometimes getting a good start actually makes you lose positions because you get blocked in and have to brake - like Vettel in France for example.

I believe, every time a Ferrari has started on pole, it has maintained the lead 4/4.
Mercedes maintain the lead from pole is 3/5.

I don't have any other numbers, just heeding caution on the numbers you produced. But instances like China, Bottas only overtook Raikkonen due to him getting squeezed by Vettel - so its not really about how each car launched, its other factors coming into play.

To me, it hasn't been noticeable that either were better at the starts. Maybe Ferrari did find something the last couple of races though? They have had rockets starts in the last 3 races but 2 of them they had softer tyres so its hard to tell.

These cars are also so long, large and draggy that I think if two cars make an equal start - if the run is long enough to turn 1 then the car in P2 or even P3 actually has an advantage over pole man.

Silverstone was the first time this season Mercedes took pole position but was not leading by turn 1.

Ferrari have had great starts for pretty much this decade. Alonso used to have great starts. Vettel and Kimi started third and fourth in Hungary 2015, and Australia 2016 are indications of great starts. Vettel in Canada 2016 was another.

Johnson wrote: Gaining positions is a bad indicator of how good a start actually was. Sometimes getting a good start actually makes you lose positions because you get blocked in and have to brake - like Vettel in France for example.

True, but I hadn't taken the last 3 races into account and I think France was pretty much a one-off in that regard.

My intent wasn't really to prove that Ferrari are worse starters, just going against this notion that the Mercedes is a considerably worse starter. I don't think it's based on actual facts if you take everything into account and it's only just now an issue because Lewis botched his and the memories of 2016 returned somewhat.

I think if I'd do the exercise for 2017 as well it would show that since the start of 2017 Mercedes have largely been no worse, no better than Ferrari at the start.

Thebusinessmuppet wrote:Ferrari have had great starts for pretty much this decade. Alonso used to have great starts. Vettel and Kimi started third and fourth in Hungary 2015, and Australia 2016 are indications of great starts. Vettel in Canada 2016 was another.

Alonso's had great starts wherever he's been, Renault and McHonda especially, and is still doing it he's just not getting the rub of the green in T1 this year so keeps getting boxed in or contact avoiding trouble, Perez in Silverstone, France fiasco,Sainz avoiding RoGro in Spain, Baku,Singapore last year etc..

He's having no luck since getting borked by the FI's in Malaysia last year, it's quite a mad run of bad luck at the start.

Lotus49 wrote:

Thebusinessmuppet wrote:Ferrari have had great starts for pretty much this decade. Alonso used to have great starts. Vettel and Kimi started third and fourth in Hungary 2015, and Australia 2016 are indications of great starts. Vettel in Canada 2016 was another.

Alonso's had great starts wherever he's been, Renault and McHonda especially, and is still doing it he's just not getting the rub of the green in T1 this year so keeps getting boxed in or contact avoiding trouble, Perez in Silverstone, France fiasco,Sainz avoiding RoGro in Spain, Baku,Singapore last year etc..

He's having no luck since getting borked by the FI's in Malaysia last year, it's quite a mad run of bad luck at the start.

My comment was with regards to Alonso's time at Ferrari. Spain 2011, I think he came form fourth, and I think Spain 2013 was another, not sure if he gained the lead after passing Kimi on the outside.

Regarding Alonso, since he has started in the back half of the grid, it is easier for him to make great starts, due to mayhem at the start, and sometime you hgt boxed in or get blocked during starts. Stroll I think this year has gained a lot of positions at the start due to him starting at the back consistently at the back.

Thebusinessmuppet wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:

Thebusinessmuppet wrote:Ferrari have had great starts for pretty much this decade. Alonso used to have great starts. Vettel and Kimi started third and fourth in Hungary 2015, and Australia 2016 are indications of great starts. Vettel in Canada 2016 was another.

Alonso's had great starts wherever he's been, Renault and McHonda especially, and is still doing it he's just not getting the rub of the green in T1 this year so keeps getting boxed in or contact avoiding trouble, Perez in Silverstone, France fiasco,Sainz avoiding RoGro in Spain, Baku,Singapore last year etc..

He's having no luck since getting borked by the FI's in Malaysia last year, it's quite a mad run of bad luck at the start.

My comment was with regards to Alonso's time at Ferrari. Spain 2011, I think he came form fourth, and I think Spain 2013 was another, not sure if he gained the lead after passing Kimi on the outside.

Regarding Alonso, since he has started in the back half of the grid, it is easier for him to make great starts, due to mayhem at the start, and sometime you hgt boxed in or get blocked during starts. Stroll I think this year has gained a lot of positions at the start due to him starting at the back consistently at the back.

He had some great starts at Ferrari yeah but he had just as many in Renault as well tbf so I don't think it's a Ferrari only thing.

There's more potential to make up places just on the basis there's more cars in front of you sure but you still have to get the great start or you'll get swamped from behind or make no places up on the cars in front unless something happens so he still needs to make the great starts off the line to make up the places and especially in 2016 we saw starts even better than his Ferrari ones.

What? They have an advantage everywhere, it's an insanely dominant car.

Warheart01 wrote:What? They have an advantage everywhere, it's an insanely dominant car.

...

You're joking, right?

Exediron wrote:

Warheart01 wrote:What? They have an advantage everywhere, it's an insanely dominant car.

...

You're joking, right?

I doubt he is....

I dont think they do as both Merc and Ferrari have had lightning starts this year.

What I did notice at Silverstone is Sebastian let Lewis settle at the start a short while before pulling up in P2. In races were the merc has to wait an extended amount of time in p1 for other cars to take position they do seem to suffer from a bad get off.

This could be due to driver or car

Pullrod wrote: [...]
I remember the ridiculously good start by Rosberg in Spain in 2016 where he apparently used a "wrong" setting at the start only to be a sitting duck 2 curves ahead. FIA monitoring Ferrari batteries does tell me that there is something "fishy"(but legal) that these guys are doing. May be bypassing some system/sensor hence using "free" energy? who knows. Just talking.

It looks like I was right after all

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/
"The competition's GPS data shows it clearly: Ferrari's advantage on the straight has disappeared for two races."

Pullrod wrote:

Pullrod wrote: [...]
I remember the ridiculously good start by Rosberg in Spain in 2016 where he apparently used a "wrong" setting at the start only to be a sitting duck 2 curves ahead. FIA monitoring Ferrari batteries does tell me that there is something "fishy"(but legal) that these guys are doing. May be bypassing some system/sensor hence using "free" energy? who knows. Just talking.

It looks like I was right after all

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/
"The competition's GPS data shows it clearly: Ferrari's advantage on the straight has disappeared for two races."

That article is dated 21st July, since then Mercedes seem to have levelled the playing field, its an interesting article. So have Mercedes upgraded their software and have Renault also found a corresponding power increase? If that is the case both Mercedes and Ferrari are equal on power and the 50 points are unassailable barring DNF's.

Option or Prime wrote:

Pullrod wrote:

Pullrod wrote: [...]
I remember the ridiculously good start by Rosberg in Spain in 2016 where he apparently used a "wrong" setting at the start only to be a sitting duck 2 curves ahead. FIA monitoring Ferrari batteries does tell me that there is something "fishy"(but legal) that these guys are doing. May be bypassing some system/sensor hence using "free" energy? who knows. Just talking.

It looks like I was right after all

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/
"The competition's GPS data shows it clearly: Ferrari's advantage on the straight has disappeared for two races."

That article is dated 21st July, since then Mercedes seem to have levelled the playing field, its an interesting article. So have Mercedes upgraded their software and have Renault also found a corresponding power increase? If that is the case both Mercedes and Ferrari are equal on power and the 50 points are unassailable barring DNF's.

Says 2nd October to me

Option or Prime wrote:

Pullrod wrote:

Pullrod wrote: [...]
I remember the ridiculously good start by Rosberg in Spain in 2016 where he apparently used a "wrong" setting at the start only to be a sitting duck 2 curves ahead. FIA monitoring Ferrari batteries does tell me that there is something "fishy"(but legal) that these guys are doing. May be bypassing some system/sensor hence using "free" energy? who knows. Just talking.

It looks like I was right after all

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/
"The competition's GPS data shows it clearly: Ferrari's advantage on the straight has disappeared for two races."

That article is dated 21st July, since then Mercedes seem to have levelled the playing field, its an interesting article. So have Mercedes upgraded their software and have Renault also found a corresponding power increase? If that is the case both Mercedes and Ferrari are equal on power and the 50 points are unassailable barring DNF's.

are you sure you've not got your wires crossed? I don't speak German but I'm sure the article references Russia and Singapore?

Option or Prime wrote:

Pullrod wrote:

Pullrod wrote: [...]
I remember the ridiculously good start by Rosberg in Spain in 2016 where he apparently used a "wrong" setting at the start only to be a sitting duck 2 curves ahead. FIA monitoring Ferrari batteries does tell me that there is something "fishy"(but legal) that these guys are doing. May be bypassing some system/sensor hence using "free" energy? who knows. Just talking.

It looks like I was right after all

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... r-vorteil/
"The competition's GPS data shows it clearly: Ferrari's advantage on the straight has disappeared for two races."

That article is dated 21st July, since then Mercedes seem to have levelled the playing field, its an interesting article. So have Mercedes upgraded their software and have Renault also found a corresponding power increase? If that is the case both Mercedes and Ferrari are equal on power and the 50 points are unassailable barring DNF's.

The article is from 2 days ago...

Yes, true. Sorry did the translation thing and read a completely different article! I'm having problems finding it.

OK, this is what I was responding to:

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

Given the date its still interesting!