2019 Pre-Season Testing Thread (Updated with Test 2 Lineup)

[Black_Flag_11]

The reality is that in appearances Ferrari look best. What especially strikes me are two particular laps: Leclerc 17.2 on C2 and Vettel 16.7 on C3. By comparison, Hamilton managed a 16.6 on the C4.

Ferrari are very quick. Mercedes are probably behind but not by too much.

Indeed just going off those times puts Ferrari 3 to 4 tenths quicker.

It doesn’t, though. Because we can extrapolate all we want but the fact remains that on identical tyres Vettel and Hamilton posted near-identical times. Which puts them pretty close to each other and I think it’s fair to say both were trying, at least on the fastest tyre. It’s doubtful either had the engines cranked up to party mode but that’s likely to be the only variable left.

Fastest laps don't mean that much anyway, with Vettel doing a 1-16.7 on the C3's then the 1-16.2 lap on C5's is clearly not ultimate pace so Hamilton matching that doesn't mean anything which is basically the point I was making.

More important are the race sims were Ferrari look to be 0.5s quicker, this is were the experts try to determine which are the faster cars.

my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

The top 3 have held back a lot with their fastest laps, a point really brought home by that table posted in another thread showing the difference between best 2019 testing time and 2018 qualifying time for each team.

Every team improved on their 2018 time (by 0.8 - 1.5 seconds) apart from the top three, who set almost exactly the same time. Either the midfield have massively outdeveloped Ferrari & Mercedes or they're holding back by at least 0.5 - 1.0 seconds so it's way too early to call it either way at this point IMO.

[pokerman]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

[pokerman]

The reality is that in appearances Ferrari look best. What especially strikes me are two particular laps: Leclerc 17.2 on C2 and Vettel 16.7 on C3. By comparison, Hamilton managed a 16.6 on the C4.

Ferrari are very quick. Mercedes are probably behind but not by too much.

Indeed just going off those times puts Ferrari 3 to 4 tenths quicker.

It doesn’t, though. Because we can extrapolate all we want but the fact remains that on identical tyres Vettel and Hamilton posted near-identical times. Which puts them pretty close to each other and I think it’s fair to say both were trying, at least on the fastest tyre. It’s doubtful either had the engines cranked up to party mode but that’s likely to be the only variable left.

Fastest laps don't mean that much anyway, with Vettel doing a 1-16.7 on the C3's then the 1-16.2 lap on C5's is clearly not ultimate pace so Hamilton matching that doesn't mean anything which is basically the point I was making.

More important are the race sims were Ferrari look to be 0.5s quicker, this is were the experts try to determine which are the faster cars.

my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

That's kind of a wing and a prayer saying that different tyres suit the cars better with no evidential back up, a 1-16-7 on the C3 tyre has got to be seen as better than a 1-16.6 on a C4 tyre.

I would venture that Ferrari are at least 3 tenths quicker up to 5 tenths quicker.

[Zoue]

Indeed just going off those times puts Ferrari 3 to 4 tenths quicker.

It doesn’t, though. Because we can extrapolate all we want but the fact remains that on identical tyres Vettel and Hamilton posted near-identical times. Which puts them pretty close to each other and I think it’s fair to say both were trying, at least on the fastest tyre. It’s doubtful either had the engines cranked up to party mode but that’s likely to be the only variable left.

Fastest laps don't mean that much anyway, with Vettel doing a 1-16.7 on the C3's then the 1-16.2 lap on C5's is clearly not ultimate pace so Hamilton matching that doesn't mean anything which is basically the point I was making.

More important are the race sims were Ferrari look to be 0.5s quicker, this is were the experts try to determine which are the faster cars.

my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

That's kind of a wing and a prayer saying that different tyres suit the cars better with no evidential back up, a 1-16-7 on the C3 tyre has got to be seen as better than a 1-16.6 on a C4 tyre.

I would venture that Ferrari are at least 3 tenths quicker up to 5 tenths quicker.

Is it? Are you really saying that there's no evidence from the past that different cars suit the softer/harder compounds better? I'd disagree with that, quite strongly.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the Ferrari looks quicker. I am disagreeing that you can make any proclamations on how big the deficit is based on testing where we don't know the details of the programs the teams were running. And the final days' laps raise questions as to how far behind Mercedes actually are.

[Zoue]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

[kleefton]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

The qualifying was close, but it was definitely advantage Ferrari, hence why they locked the front row.

In the race Vettel had to do 37 laps on the soft tire The medium tire was always going to be faster for Bottas who was going about the same distance, and for hamilton who only had to do about 29 laps on that tire due to the fact it is a more durable tire. Vettel's original strategy, also Pirelli's recommended strategy, was to two stop anyway, with supersoft followed by 2 stints on the softs, but it got switched to a one stopper once it was clear Mercedes wasn't going to pit again, and because Kimi retired and did not provide them with any safety net.

The cars were close that weekend, as they were all year really, but you have to give the slight advantage to Ferrari since they locked the front row and ultimately Vettel did win the race with a sub-optimal strategy.

[lucifers]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

I agree, australia is one of hamiltons strongest tracks for qualifying so if hamilton is no where near the ferraris on saturday then mercedes are in big trouble.

[JN23]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

I agree, australia is one of hamiltons strongest tracks for qualifying so if hamilton is no where near the ferraris on saturday then mercedes are in big trouble.

Slightly off topic but it's weird how despite being on pole in six of the last seven years, Hamilton has only managed to win once in that time here. Just the way it goes I guess

[F1_Ernie]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

I agree, australia is one of hamiltons strongest tracks for qualifying so if hamilton is no where near the ferraris on saturday then mercedes are in big trouble.

Slightly off topic but it's weird how despite being on pole in six of the last seven years, Hamilton has only managed to win once in that time here. Just the way it goes I guess

Mercedes have done there very best to lose the last 2 years, there was that year with the engine problem which I think was 2014, Hamilton had a bad start one year in 2016. Hasnt really been a good track for him on Sundays.

[kleefton]

After reading this, I think I have just about jumped on the Ferrari band wagon.

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/261 ... d-mercedes

[BeOnEdge]

After reading this, I think I have just about jumped on the Ferrari band wagon.

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/261 ... d-mercedes

I think I'll join you.

[pokerman]

It doesn’t, though. Because we can extrapolate all we want but the fact remains that on identical tyres Vettel and Hamilton posted near-identical times. Which puts them pretty close to each other and I think it’s fair to say both were trying, at least on the fastest tyre. It’s doubtful either had the engines cranked up to party mode but that’s likely to be the only variable left.

Fastest laps don't mean that much anyway, with Vettel doing a 1-16.7 on the C3's then the 1-16.2 lap on C5's is clearly not ultimate pace so Hamilton matching that doesn't mean anything which is basically the point I was making.

More important are the race sims were Ferrari look to be 0.5s quicker, this is were the experts try to determine which are the faster cars.

my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

That's kind of a wing and a prayer saying that different tyres suit the cars better with no evidential back up, a 1-16-7 on the C3 tyre has got to be seen as better than a 1-16.6 on a C4 tyre.

I would venture that Ferrari are at least 3 tenths quicker up to 5 tenths quicker.

Is it? Are you really saying that there's no evidence from the past that different cars suit the softer/harder compounds better? I'd disagree with that, quite strongly.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the Ferrari looks quicker. I am disagreeing that you can make any proclamations on how big the deficit is based on testing where we don't know the details of the programs the teams were running. And the final days' laps raise questions as to how far behind Mercedes actually are.

What's for sure is that you can basically ignore the lap times done on the C5 tyres, 3 tenths seems to be the minimum estimation of the gap.

[pokerman]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

This is Exediron's theory not mine and I believe it's been explained why the Mercs were quicker because of the strategy and not the cars.

In the past you have nominally said that if a car starts on pole and wins then it gets the accolade of being faster, I'm thinking of Spa 2017.

[Zoue]

After reading this, I think I have just about jumped on the Ferrari band wagon.

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/261 ... d-mercedes

yeah quite an interesting read

[Zoue]

But I agree that Australia is not a normal venue. Whatever happens over there will not necessarily determine the true pecking order. China and Bahrain are better tracks for that.

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

This is Exediron's theory not mine and I believe it's been explained why the Mercs were quicker because of the strategy and not the cars.

In the past you have nominally said that if a car starts on pole and wins then it gets the accolade of being faster, I'm thinking of Spa 2017.

My point was the top four were so very close and I'm wondering what the gap has to be in order for the cars to be proclaimed equal? Do they all have to set identical times?

[pokerman]

Historically, Bahrain is a wonderful track for predicting the champion. Until Vettel broke that pattern the last two years, the winner of the Bahrain GP (normal layout) had a nearly 100% record of winning the championship, the only exceptions being the two years Massa won it.

But arguably, that still makes it dead accurate for predicting the car that should win the title. The 2007 and 2008 Ferraris were the class of the field, and the 2017 and 2018 Ferraris were certainly championship capable - in particular, the 2018 car.

Regarding Australia, it has become known as a Mercedes stronghold in recent years. If Mercedes is beaten on pure pace in Melbourne, that will be a sign that they are definitely in trouble.

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

This is Exediron's theory not mine and I believe it's been explained why the Mercs were quicker because of the strategy and not the cars.

In the past you have nominally said that if a car starts on pole and wins then it gets the accolade of being faster, I'm thinking of Spa 2017.

My point was the top four were so very close and I'm wondering what the gap has to be in order for the cars to be proclaimed equal? Do they all have to set identical times?

Spa 2017 Hamilton out qualified Vettel by 2 tenths but that year it kind of was bequeathed that one car had to be declared as being better at any given round.

Arguably, vettel was only so close behind because Hamilton engaged the wrong engine mode. If he hadn't then it's just as probable that Vettel wouldn't have been so close in the first place. And the extra grunt of the Mercedes in the prime overtaking spot on the circuit showed when Vettel couldn't do anything even with the tow.

The most you can say is that the cars looked pretty evenly matched on Sunday. But the Merc is clearly faster on Saturday, which means it's not exactly an equal fight. The Merc has a built in advantage which puts them in the prime slot at the race start.

Last year which car had this special boost in qualifying and the extra straight line speed?

[Zoue]

Interesting stats regarding Bahrain and I guess it backs up what tends to be said about Ferrari starting the 2017 and 2018 seasons with the stronger car, in particular in 2018.

Regarding Australia I feel it's not just a simple case of it being a Mercedes track but also a Hamilton track so if he can't get close in Australia then Ferrari are starting the season with a big advantage.

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

This is Exediron's theory not mine and I believe it's been explained why the Mercs were quicker because of the strategy and not the cars.

In the past you have nominally said that if a car starts on pole and wins then it gets the accolade of being faster, I'm thinking of Spa 2017.

My point was the top four were so very close and I'm wondering what the gap has to be in order for the cars to be proclaimed equal? Do they all have to set identical times?

Spa 2017 Hamilton out qualified Vettel by 2 tenths but that year it kind of was bequeathed that one car had to be declared as being better at any given round.

Arguably, vettel was only so close behind because Hamilton engaged the wrong engine mode. If he hadn't then it's just as probable that Vettel wouldn't have been so close in the first place. And the extra grunt of the Mercedes in the prime overtaking spot on the circuit showed when Vettel couldn't do anything even with the tow.

The most you can say is that the cars looked pretty evenly matched on Sunday. But the Merc is clearly faster on Saturday, which means it's not exactly an equal fight. The Merc has a built in advantage which puts them in the prime slot at the race start.

Last year which car had this special boost in qualifying and the extra straight line speed?

Doesn't really answer my question, though. How close do they have to be for you to consider them equal?

In 2017 everybody was talking about Mercedes' "party mode," not least Hamilton himself. They did have an advantage then. I would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even personally

[Filip]

You guys realize Mercedes could be the faster car then Ferrari ? and really those times are irrelevant. Never listen to Hamilton, he always claims Ferrari is faster, he does it deliberately, 2nd part of 2018 season, Merc was far faster car, it is pure fact, but we still heard tons of such crap.

Testing times for us means nothing, only pros in paddock can pull something out of it.
We will see around may how it looks.

I got a feeling 2019 will be very similar to 2018, with RedBulls unknown potential, Williams being lapped 10 times, and unfortunately Danny Ric sad face all season.

[pokerman]

In Bahrain Vettel got pole by a tenth from Kimi, who was half a tenth ahead of Bottas, with Hamilton a tenth behind him. The race finished with Bottas less than a second behind Vettel and his fastest lap on the Medium tyre was half a second quicker than Vettel's on the Soft (in consecutive laps). Indeed after the stops when he got clear air Hamilton was closing Vettel down by around half a second a lap, despite being on the harder tyre. You and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a faster car, clearly.

This is Exediron's theory not mine and I believe it's been explained why the Mercs were quicker because of the strategy and not the cars.

In the past you have nominally said that if a car starts on pole and wins then it gets the accolade of being faster, I'm thinking of Spa 2017.

My point was the top four were so very close and I'm wondering what the gap has to be in order for the cars to be proclaimed equal? Do they all have to set identical times?

Spa 2017 Hamilton out qualified Vettel by 2 tenths but that year it kind of was bequeathed that one car had to be declared as being better at any given round.

Arguably, vettel was only so close behind because Hamilton engaged the wrong engine mode. If he hadn't then it's just as probable that Vettel wouldn't have been so close in the first place. And the extra grunt of the Mercedes in the prime overtaking spot on the circuit showed when Vettel couldn't do anything even with the tow.

The most you can say is that the cars looked pretty evenly matched on Sunday. But the Merc is clearly faster on Saturday, which means it's not exactly an equal fight. The Merc has a built in advantage which puts them in the prime slot at the race start.

Last year which car had this special boost in qualifying and the extra straight line speed?

Doesn't really answer my question, though. How close do they have to be for you to consider them equal?

In 2017 everybody was talking about Mercedes' "party mode," not least Hamilton himself. They did have an advantage then. I would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even personally

What about Ferrari's boost mode that strangely gets a pass for 2018, have you watched any of the split screen qualifying onboards were Vettel's car is seen to out accelerate Hamilton's car down any given straight?

You would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even but not Spa 2017 when Vettel stalked Hamilton for the entire race.

If you reply to this maybe go to the appropriate thread as we are off topic?

[pokerman]

You guys realize Mercedes could be the faster car then Ferrari ? and really those times are irrelevant. Never listen to Hamilton, he always claims Ferrari is faster, he does it deliberately, 2nd part of 2018 season, Merc was far faster car, it is pure fact, but we still heard tons of such crap.

Testing times for us means nothing, only pros in paddock can pull something out of it.
We will see around may how it looks.

I got a feeling 2019 will be very similar to 2018, with RedBulls unknown potential, Williams being lapped 10 times, and unfortunately Danny Ric sad face all season.

Second part of the season which started off with Ferrari being quicker at Spa, were quicker at Hungary but then it rained, was quicker at Germany but then it rained, were quicker at Italy but Vettel went for a spin.

[Zoue]

This is Exediron's theory not mine and I believe it's been explained why the Mercs were quicker because of the strategy and not the cars.

In the past you have nominally said that if a car starts on pole and wins then it gets the accolade of being faster, I'm thinking of Spa 2017.

My point was the top four were so very close and I'm wondering what the gap has to be in order for the cars to be proclaimed equal? Do they all have to set identical times?

Spa 2017 Hamilton out qualified Vettel by 2 tenths but that year it kind of was bequeathed that one car had to be declared as being better at any given round.

Arguably, vettel was only so close behind because Hamilton engaged the wrong engine mode. If he hadn't then it's just as probable that Vettel wouldn't have been so close in the first place. And the extra grunt of the Mercedes in the prime overtaking spot on the circuit showed when Vettel couldn't do anything even with the tow.

The most you can say is that the cars looked pretty evenly matched on Sunday. But the Merc is clearly faster on Saturday, which means it's not exactly an equal fight. The Merc has a built in advantage which puts them in the prime slot at the race start.

Last year which car had this special boost in qualifying and the extra straight line speed?

Doesn't really answer my question, though. How close do they have to be for you to consider them equal?

In 2017 everybody was talking about Mercedes' "party mode," not least Hamilton himself. They did have an advantage then. I would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even personally

What about Ferrari's boost mode that strangely gets a pass for 2018, have you watched any of the split screen qualifying onboards were Vettel's car is seen to out accelerate Hamilton's car down any given straight?

You would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even but not Spa 2017 when Vettel stalked Hamilton for the entire race.

If you reply to this maybe go to the appropriate thread as we are off topic?

Be happy to, if you'd just answer the question?

[pokerman]

My point was the top four were so very close and I'm wondering what the gap has to be in order for the cars to be proclaimed equal? Do they all have to set identical times?

Spa 2017 Hamilton out qualified Vettel by 2 tenths but that year it kind of was bequeathed that one car had to be declared as being better at any given round.

Arguably, vettel was only so close behind because Hamilton engaged the wrong engine mode. If he hadn't then it's just as probable that Vettel wouldn't have been so close in the first place. And the extra grunt of the Mercedes in the prime overtaking spot on the circuit showed when Vettel couldn't do anything even with the tow.

The most you can say is that the cars looked pretty evenly matched on Sunday. But the Merc is clearly faster on Saturday, which means it's not exactly an equal fight. The Merc has a built in advantage which puts them in the prime slot at the race start.

Last year which car had this special boost in qualifying and the extra straight line speed?

Doesn't really answer my question, though. How close do they have to be for you to consider them equal?

In 2017 everybody was talking about Mercedes' "party mode," not least Hamilton himself. They did have an advantage then. I would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even personally

What about Ferrari's boost mode that strangely gets a pass for 2018, have you watched any of the split screen qualifying onboards were Vettel's car is seen to out accelerate Hamilton's car down any given straight?

You would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even but not Spa 2017 when Vettel stalked Hamilton for the entire race.

If you reply to this maybe go to the appropriate thread as we are off topic?

Be happy to, if you'd just answer the question?

Did I not already answer the fact that it was you yourself that determined in 2017 that cars had to be identical to determine a too close to call verdict in any given race, now answer why Ferrari's PU performance advantage last year got a free pass?

[dizlexik]

You guys realize Mercedes could be the faster car then Ferrari ? and really those times are irrelevant. Never listen to Hamilton, he always claims Ferrari is faster, he does it deliberately, 2nd part of 2018 season, Merc was far faster car, it is pure fact, but we still heard tons of such crap.

Testing times for us means nothing, only pros in paddock can pull something out of it.
We will see around may how it looks.

I got a feeling 2019 will be very similar to 2018, with RedBulls unknown potential, Williams being lapped 10 times, and unfortunately Danny Ric sad face all season.

There is nothing that suggest Mercedes is the fastest either and it's not just Hamilton saying that Ferrari is the fastest.

[Zoue]

Doesn't really answer my question, though. How close do they have to be for you to consider them equal?

In 2017 everybody was talking about Mercedes' "party mode," not least Hamilton himself. They did have an advantage then. I would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even personally

What about Ferrari's boost mode that strangely gets a pass for 2018, have you watched any of the split screen qualifying onboards were Vettel's car is seen to out accelerate Hamilton's car down any given straight?

You would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even but not Spa 2017 when Vettel stalked Hamilton for the entire race.

If you reply to this maybe go to the appropriate thread as we are off topic?

Be happy to, if you'd just answer the question?

Did I not already answer the fact that it was you yourself that determined in 2017 that cars had to be identical to determine a too close to call verdict in any given race, now answer why Ferrari's PU performance advantage last year got a free pass?

I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

[pokerman]

Doesn't really answer my question, though. How close do they have to be for you to consider them equal?

In 2017 everybody was talking about Mercedes' "party mode," not least Hamilton himself. They did have an advantage then. I would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even personally

What about Ferrari's boost mode that strangely gets a pass for 2018, have you watched any of the split screen qualifying onboards were Vettel's car is seen to out accelerate Hamilton's car down any given straight?

You would call Bahrain 2018 fairly even but not Spa 2017 when Vettel stalked Hamilton for the entire race.

If you reply to this maybe go to the appropriate thread as we are off topic?

Be happy to, if you'd just answer the question?

Did I not already answer the fact that it was you yourself that determined in 2017 that cars had to be identical to determine a too close to call verdict in any given race, now answer why Ferrari's PU performance advantage last year got a free pass?

I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

You ask me what the criteria is when it's you yourself that sets the citerias that then seem to change with the wind.

Look you don't really want to answer why your criteria yet again changes when you overlook the superior PU of Ferrari in 2018 after this was your key point to determine that Mercedes were better in 2017.

Another thing that changes is the qualifying criteria, 2 tenths is close in Bahrain 2018 but 2 tenths in Spa 2017 indicates that the Mercedes was the better car.

I'm taking this over to the 2018 team comparison thread were you can answer there.

[Lotus49]

I don't understand if Zoue has indeed changed his opinion why there would still be disagreement then? Surely unless you've both flipped sides you'd now see things the same way, which clearly wasn't the case in the vs. thread so have you switched too or what am I missing?

Genuine question as I've seen this a lot in that thread last year but don't understand how if you're of opposite views one year and argue, but then the next year you accuse one of switching views but you still end up arguing haven't you both switched sides? Genuinely confused about that last year but didn't want to derail the thread but this one's already derailed and I'm bored waiting for the new season so thought I'll ask now and not derail the next one lol..

[Invade]

VET vs HAM in 2 parts.

 

An Instagram Post from the 21st century

https://www.instagram.com/p/BurN4cMAU5N/

[Invade]

Surprised there are no comments on the above.

Here's another piece...




From the Autosport Youtube channel.

[pokerman]

I don't understand if Zoue has indeed changed his opinion why there would still be disagreement then? Surely unless you've both flipped sides you'd now see things the same way, which clearly wasn't the case in the vs. thread so have you switched too or what am I missing?

Genuine question as I've seen this a lot in that thread last year but don't understand how if you're of opposite views one year and argue, but then the next year you accuse one of switching views but you still end up arguing haven't you both switched sides? Genuinely confused about that last year but didn't want to derail the thread but this one's already derailed and I'm bored waiting for the new season so thought I'll ask now and not derail the next one lol..

My argument is that opinion/criteria gets changed depending on the outcome you may want to see, I can pm you if you want as others are getting somewhat bored with the discussion?

[Rockie]

VET vs HAM in 2 parts.

 

An Instagram Post from the 21st century

https://www.instagram.com/p/BurN4cMAU5N/

Going by this video what one can deduct here is it looks like Vettel is on a normal lap and Hamilton is on a qualifying lap, as Vettel is not even trying to make most of the apex through the lap.

[sandman1347]

VET vs HAM in 2 parts.

 

An Instagram Post from the 21st century

https://www.instagram.com/p/BurN4cMAU5N/

Going by this video what one can deduct here is it looks like Vettel is on a normal lap and Hamilton is on a qualifying lap, as Vettel is not even trying to make most of the apex through the lap.

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

[Siao7]

VET vs HAM in 2 parts.

 

An Instagram Post from the 21st century

https://www.instagram.com/p/BurN4cMAU5N/

Going by this video what one can deduct here is it looks like Vettel is on a normal lap and Hamilton is on a qualifying lap, as Vettel is not even trying to make most of the apex through the lap.

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

Quicker by a 0.003 of a sec, it's not that he was half a second ahead.

And Hamilton did have a wobble and had to correct, so he could have gone faster. Not sure if Vettel was on a normal lap either, he was throwing the car deeper than Hamilton on the curbs, it did not look like he was cruising.

[UnlikeUday]

VET vs HAM in 2 parts.

 

An Instagram Post from the 21st century

https://www.instagram.com/p/BurN4cMAU5N/

Going by this video what one can deduct here is it looks like Vettel is on a normal lap and Hamilton is on a qualifying lap, as Vettel is not even trying to make most of the apex through the lap.

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

If Ferrari are strongest, could we see the grid in Melbourne as:
Vettel
Hamilton
Leclerc
Bottas???????

[sandman1347]

VET vs HAM in 2 parts.

 

An Instagram Post from the 21st century

https://www.instagram.com/p/BurN4cMAU5N/

Going by this video what one can deduct here is it looks like Vettel is on a normal lap and Hamilton is on a qualifying lap, as Vettel is not even trying to make most of the apex through the lap.

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

If Ferrari are strongest, could we see the grid in Melbourne as:
Vettel
Hamilton
Leclerc
Bottas???????

Lots of assumptions there. That would be a solid prediction if the gap between the cars is small and if Leclerc is not on par with Vettel.

[Blake]

The gap between the cars does appear to be small.

[Exediron]

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

Reminiscent of the Red Bull years, perhaps?

Vettel missing apexes is not proof that he wasn't pushing.

[Black_Flag_11]

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

Reminiscent of the Red Bull years, perhaps?

Vettel missing apexes is not proof that he wasn't pushing.

I doubt either were pushing to the limit, Ferrari look quicker but the main evidence is in the long runs. The fastest laps are both holding so much in reserve that drawing conclusions is impossible. Just comes down to who was holding back more.

[sandman1347]

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

Reminiscent of the Red Bull years, perhaps?

Vettel missing apexes is not proof that he wasn't pushing.

I don't think either of them is treating it like Saturday on a race weekend. Mostly I'm referring to the time that's in the car. The Ferrari looked more planted and churned out a really fast time on a lap that wasn't anywhere near inch-perfect. I think both cars were within their limits. Most likely the Q3 times in Barcelona will break into the 1:14s. Just kind of calling it like I see it at the moment. Melbourne could throw us a surprise.

[Invade]

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

Reminiscent of the Red Bull years, perhaps?

Vettel missing apexes is not proof that he wasn't pushing.

I don't think either of them is treating it like Saturday on a race weekend. Mostly I'm referring to the time that's in the car. The Ferrari looked more planted and churned out a really fast time on a lap that wasn't anywhere near inch-perfect. I think both cars were within their limits. Most likely the Q3 times in Barcelona will break into the 1:14s. Just kind of calling it like I see it at the moment. Melbourne could throw us a surprise.

Low 16s but on something similar to the 2018 hypersoft. So I wouldn't quite expect 14s in Barcelona.

[Exediron]

Yeah Vettel missed a couple of apexes in the third sector and yet still did a quicker lap. Ferrari will be strongest IMO.

Reminiscent of the Red Bull years, perhaps?

Vettel missing apexes is not proof that he wasn't pushing.

I don't think either of them is treating it like Saturday on a race weekend. Mostly I'm referring to the time that's in the car. The Ferrari looked more planted and churned out a really fast time on a lap that wasn't anywhere near inch-perfect. I think both cars were within their limits. Most likely the Q3 times in Barcelona will break into the 1:14s. Just kind of calling it like I see it at the moment. Melbourne could throw us a surprise.

Low 16s but on something similar to the 2018 hypersoft. So I wouldn't quite expect 14s in Barcelona.

I think we just might see those 14s. Year-on-year development is usually given as about 1.5 seconds, and with all the teams saying they didn't lose any net downforce at all we may be very close to that figure. That would suggest a time around 14.5, depending on what tyre is available for Barcelona quali.