planetf1.com

j man wrote:Roughly even in the race I think. Hard to tell with Hamilton as he was following Vettel for most of the race, but Bottas didn't seem to have any great pace.

Ruh roh.

A great Hamilton performance or a very mediocre Bottas performance?

Invade wrote:

j man wrote:Roughly even in the race I think. Hard to tell with Hamilton as he was following Vettel for most of the race, but Bottas didn't seem to have any great pace.

Ruh roh.

A great Hamilton performance or a very mediocre Bottas performance?

And therein lies the problem that is the root of this debate for the past few years. Is it Hamilton's or Bottas' performance that is representative of Mercedes' pace? Often it's a matter of which suits one's agenda best.

Everybody is saying Bottas was slow, was he? To me, it just looked like he was stuck in traffic, as soon as he got clean air he was setting fastest laps.

j man wrote:

Invade wrote:

j man wrote:Roughly even in the race I think. Hard to tell with Hamilton as he was following Vettel for most of the race, but Bottas didn't seem to have any great pace.

Ruh roh.

A great Hamilton performance or a very mediocre Bottas performance?

And therein lies the problem that is the root of this debate for the past few years. Is it Hamilton's or Bottas' performance that is representative of Mercedes' pace? Often it's a matter of which suits one's agenda best.

Depends what you compare it to. If you're comparing the Merc with a Ferrari driven by Vettel or a RBR driven by Verstappen then look at Hamilton. If you're comparing it to the Alfa driven by Kimi or RP driven by Perez then look at Bottas.

Mercedes had the best race pace by a very good margin. Hamilton messed up the hairpin 4 or 5 times and was on Vettel's gearbox the following sector, easily able to follow him through the corners without losing any performance from dirty air.

KingVoid wrote:Mercedes had the best race pace by a very good margin. Hamilton messed up the hairpin 4 or 5 times and was on Vettel's gearbox the following sector, easily able to follow him through the corners without losing any performance from dirty air.

I noticed the commentators mention that a few times but it was mainly because the DRS detection zone is before the hairpin and the DRS on the straight was worth 0.4-0.5

So Lewis would mess up, drop back to 1.5 seconds and then be back to 1.0 again right away but just due to DRS.

But yes the Mercedes did have a pace advantage on the hard tyre. Track position was everything today though.

Johnson wrote:Everybody is saying Bottas was slow, was he? To me, it just looked like he was stuck in traffic, as soon as he got clean air he was setting fastest laps.

He clearly had some pace. It was his messy qualifying and timid racecraft that cost him any chance of getting close to that front three.

KingVoid wrote:Mercedes had the best race pace by a very good margin. Hamilton messed up the hairpin 4 or 5 times and was on Vettel's gearbox the following sector, easily able to follow him through the corners without losing any performance from dirty air.

Well that's not true, he was certainly losing performance by following Vettel closely, but the fact he managed to stay so close just underlines the pace advantage Hamilton had over Vettel once on the hard compound.

Another way to look at it: based on watching the leading two drivers in the race, whose car would you rather be in?
Edited for grammar

Ferrari have to be pretty worried that this was one of the most suited tracks to them on paper and theres a genuine debate about who was quicker.

How many more tracks do we expect Ferrari to challenge? Austria, Italy jump out but overall I think we are in for a long year.

Ferrari have been roughly quicker on 1 sector while Mercedes on the remaining 2 sectors. Funnily enough Ferrari also have roughly 1/3 of the combined points between them and Mercedes.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:Ferrari have to be pretty worried that this was one of the most suited tracks to them on paper and theres a genuine debate about who was quicker.

How many more tracks do we expect Ferrari to challenge? Austria, Italy jump out but overall I think we are in for a long year.

Pretty worried about what?

They didnt close shop versus Redbull, they will keep plodding along, the fans should be more worried at this rate.

Covalent wrote:Ferrari have been roughly quicker on 1 sector while Mercedes on the remaining 2 sectors. Funnily enough Ferrari also have roughly 1/3 of the combined points between them and Mercedes.

Sectors and irrelevant. In qualifying Hamilton was 0.050 up on Vettel in sc1 and sc2 but 0.300 down in sc3. He was 0.200 slower a lap.

At a Spa last year, Ferrari was slower than Mercedes for most of the lap but gained 0.4 in the chicane.

tootsie323 wrote:Another way to look at it: based on watching the leading two drivers in the race, whose car would you rather be in?
Edited for grammar

Track position was key here. In the last 5 seasons, how many drivers have lost a race having lead after the final pit stop? Without SC influence. One I believe, Austria 2016 when Hamilton overtook Rosbergand that was partly due to a Rosberg error and them running different tyres. Oh and USA 2015 when Rosberg made an error, went off track and Hamilton got him.

Vettel got pole. Held the lead at the start and after the pit stops. Once he held after the stops the race was 90% his. Only reliability or an error could lose him the race. Hamilton was nowhere near to being able to overtake. The delta to overtake was 1.0-1.2 seconds, Hamilton at best had 0.5 on Vettel.

The closet Hamilton ever got was 0.5 behind at the end of the pit straight which is miles off.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:Ferrari have to be pretty worried that this was one of the most suited tracks to them on paper and theres a genuine debate about who was quicker.

How many more tracks do we expect Ferrari to challenge? Austria, Italy jump out but overall I think we are in for a long year.

Mercedes was easily the faster car here. Vettel did amazing job in qualifying. I would say Ferrari had a very positive weekend overall. I do not think they are going to win many races this year unless Mercedes drivers have car problem or both drivers have bad weekend.

I forgot to do my update after Monaco were I think Mercedes were quickest followed by Red Bull then Ferrari:-

1. Mercedes 118
2. Ferrari 91
3. Red Bull 84

For Canada I make it close to equal between Mercedes and Ferrari with Red Bull in third:-

1. Mercedes 143
2. Ferrari 116
3. Red Bull 99

pokerman wrote:I forgot to do my update after Monaco were I think Mercedes were quickest followed by Red Bull then Ferrari:-

1. Mercedes 118
2. Ferrari 91
3. Red Bull 84

For Canada I make it close to equal between Mercedes and Ferrari with Red Bull in third:-

1. Mercedes 143
2. Ferrari 116
3. Red Bull 99

How was Ferrari quicker than Redbull at Monaco?

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I forgot to do my update after Monaco were I think Mercedes were quickest followed by Red Bull then Ferrari:-

1. Mercedes 118
2. Ferrari 91
3. Red Bull 84

For Canada I make it close to equal between Mercedes and Ferrari with Red Bull in third:-

1. Mercedes 143
2. Ferrari 116
3. Red Bull 99

How was Ferrari quicker than Redbull at Monaco?

Read again.

Bottas' pace was fine, as soon as he got clean air he was matching Hamilton's pace although Hamilton might have used up more of his tyres by that point by running a much quicker pace in the first 20 laps.

But from lap 20-28 Bottas is quicker than Hamilton every lap, only by a tiny amount - less than a tenth - most laps between 20-25 before Hamiltons tyres go.

The second stint is harder to analyse because Lewis is being held up by Vettel. But when Hamilton does his 8 lap charge to close the 4.5 seconds to Vettel he is in the mid 15's. 10 laps later, when Bottas himself has clean air is in the low 15's, although with a lighter car and older tyres.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... 20Hamilton

All in all, hard to tell there relative race pace due to being held up at various times. But Bottas' certainly wasn't slow this weekend but caught in traffic. A similar thing happened to Hamilton in China when he got criticised for being slow when in reality he was just stuck behind Verstappen for the first half of the race and once he got clean air was on the leaders pace.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I forgot to do my update after Monaco were I think Mercedes were quickest followed by Red Bull then Ferrari:-

1. Mercedes 118
2. Ferrari 91
3. Red Bull 84

For Canada I make it close to equal between Mercedes and Ferrari with Red Bull in third:-

1. Mercedes 143
2. Ferrari 116
3. Red Bull 99

How was Ferrari quicker than Redbull at Monaco?

Read again.

Lojik wrote:

KingVoid wrote:Mercedes had the best race pace by a very good margin. Hamilton messed up the hairpin 4 or 5 times and was on Vettel's gearbox the following sector, easily able to follow him through the corners without losing any performance from dirty air.

Well that's not true, he was certainly losing performance by following Vettel closely, but the fact he managed to stay so close just underlines the pace advantage Hamilton had over Vettel once on the hard compound.

It also had to do with fuel consumption. Ferrari generally has a problem against the Merc in the race in that they seem to consume more fuel. I recall reading that in Baku, although Hamilton was pushing Bottas for the whole race, he had something like 7 liters of fuel left at the end while Vettel's tank was pretty much dry by the end. In Canada Vettel also mentioned that he had to do some fuel saving in the second stint, which explains why Hamilton was closer to him than in the first stint.
So even on the power circuits it is going to be hard for Ferrari to beat Merc.

kleefton wrote:

Lojik wrote:

KingVoid wrote:Mercedes had the best race pace by a very good margin. Hamilton messed up the hairpin 4 or 5 times and was on Vettel's gearbox the following sector, easily able to follow him through the corners without losing any performance from dirty air.

Well that's not true, he was certainly losing performance by following Vettel closely, but the fact he managed to stay so close just underlines the pace advantage Hamilton had over Vettel once on the hard compound.

It also had to do with fuel consumption. Ferrari generally has a problem against the Merc in the race in that they seem to consume more fuel. I recall reading that in Baku, although Hamilton was pushing Bottas for the whole race, he had something like 7 liters of fuel left at the end while Vettel's tank was pretty much dry by the end. In Canada Vettel also mentioned that he had to do some fuel saving in the second stint, which explains why Hamilton was closer to him than in the first stint.
So even on the power circuits it is going to be hard for Ferrari to beat Merc.

BIB: Is that what the radio message to Vettel about the numbers on his dashboard being correct was then?

The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

I think Vettel was tyre/fuel saving, he allowed Hamilton to close him done it seems, knowing catching is one thing but passing another.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... 20Hamilton

During the 8 lap phase where Hamilton closes Vettel down, Vettel is consistently doing 15.9's whilst Hamilton on average is doing 15.5's but once Hamilton catches Vettel, Vettel starts to do 15.1-15.2 even setting a 15.0.

Mercedes was definitely quicker but I don't think it was as high as the 0.5 Hamilton reeled him in at, Ferrari seemed to be managing something during that phase, likely fuel.

Siao7 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

Which also goes along with both Ferrari and Red Bull trying to get the tyres changed to last year's tyres but unlike 2013 there are no grounds to say that the tyres are unsafe. Red Bull campaigned to get the tyres changed in 2013 which happened on safety grounds and lo and behold Vettel won the last 9 races of the season.

I would be guessing that the best they can hope for is getting the tyres changed for next season?

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

Which also goes along with both Ferrari and Red Bull trying to get the tyres changed to last year's tyres but unlike 2013 there are no grounds to say that the tyres are unsafe. Red Bull campaigned to get the tyres changed in 2013 which happened on safety grounds and lo and behold Vettel won the last 9 races of the season.

I would be guessing that the best they can hope for is getting the tyres changed for next season?

My expectation is for super-thick tire compounds next year. While this year seems to be a slam dunk for Mercedes, it has arguably provided the FIA with the silver bullet it has been looking for to shake things up. It's all about the tires. Probably should have been obvious from last year where we saw Mercedes suddenly surge ahead during those three races where they ran the thinner tread tires.

I think all the whinging and complaining about Mercedes dominance will crystallize in the form of tires designed to stop them next year. Somewhat similar to how Ferrari were finally stopped in 2005 by the ban on tire changes during the race.

I dont think the tyres need changing, Marko said in his statement that merc essentially focused more on mechanical grip and more downforce while the rest went with less downforce and struggle with the tyres. They all had the same data and tests on the tyres yet chose their own approach which back fired in laments terms.

In a true car racing type series the order of importance for me is engine > mechanical grip > aero. If you look at other car series were aero is more static and similar between the teams you seem to get much better racing. If you change the order to be aero as a deciding factor all we get is the same with most likely RBR at the front and again no one being able to overtake because the aero is way to delicate to follow a car closely.

If anything I would like them to further restrict the aero and have more focus on mechanical grip etc. They are only just at the beginning of curbing the aero dependencies and the other teams should be working towards this as well.

What we have in Mercedes is a team operating a level above of the nearest competitors, if it weren't for Merc the race for the titles would be a lot closer between RBR and Ferrari. But we can't punish merc for simply being better than the others with the same rules. If anything Ferrari and RBR should be hounded to get it together - they've had more than enough time by now but they choose not to abandon their design philosophies in pursuit of victory but instead cry foul all over the place bringing the sport into disrepute in my book.

This is in very broad terms obviously but its the way I see the sport. I would prefer if it kept progressing this line of development in the future and not go to an overly aero dependant philosophy.

sandman1347 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

Which also goes along with both Ferrari and Red Bull trying to get the tyres changed to last year's tyres but unlike 2013 there are no grounds to say that the tyres are unsafe. Red Bull campaigned to get the tyres changed in 2013 which happened on safety grounds and lo and behold Vettel won the last 9 races of the season.

I would be guessing that the best they can hope for is getting the tyres changed for next season?

My expectation is for super-thick tire compounds next year. While this year seems to be a slam dunk for Mercedes, it has arguably provided the FIA with the silver bullet it has been looking for to shake things up. It's all about the tires. Probably should have been obvious from last year where we saw Mercedes suddenly surge ahead during those three races where they ran the thinner tread tires.

I think all the whinging and complaining about Mercedes dominance will crystallize in the form of tires designed to stop them next year. Somewhat similar to how Ferrari were finally stopped in 2005 by the ban on tire changes during the race.

Possibly but the reasons the tyres got changed was because of bad blistering and it wasn't just Mercedes that had problems, I think more teams than not?

I think it goes way beyond tires to be honest. The Merc is just the better car, period. Canada was a good track for Ferrari, all the experts predicted they'd have a chance there. Merc somehow this year has leapfrogged Redbull as the best chassis. That is why they are so tough to beat. When the season resumes in France does anyone think Ferrari will be as close as they were in Canada? On most conventional circuit layouts, the Merc is going to dominate. I believe Ferari will have a chance in Austria, Monza, and maybe Spa, but every where else they are going to get their pickle handed to them by Merc. You can book it.

Despite Mercedes success this season they still believe that the Ferrari is the faster car. Hamilton has said recently that Ferrari have a mode that Mercedes don't have. Is this that their aero package gives them that advantage or is the Ferrari power unit better then?
As a rider to that if it is better then why aren't Ferrari doing anything with it?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hami ... s/4474230/

Option or Prime wrote:Despite Mercedes success this season they still believe that the Ferrari is the faster car. Hamilton has said recently that Ferrari have a mode that Mercedes don't have. Is this that their aero package gives them that advantage or is the Ferrari power unit better then?
As a rider to that if it is better then why aren't Ferrari doing anything with it?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hami ... s/4474230/

Better engine but slower car?

Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

Covalent wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

'Poach'? Thought Allison was basically given no choice but to leave.

shoot999 wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

'Poach'? Thought Allison was basically given no choice but to leave.

Yeah wasn't he sacked by Marchionne, his wife had just died and he was viewed as spending too much time in England because of his need to be with his children?

pokerman wrote:

shoot999 wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

'Poach'? Thought Allison was basically given no choice but to leave.

Yeah wasn't he sacked by Marchionne, his wife had just died and he was viewed as spending too much time in England because of his need to be with his children?

Ah in that case I got that wrong, well would still be nice to see how it would have turned out had he stayed.

Covalent wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

Ferrari will currently be behind Redbull, it seems folks have forgotten the disastrous car he built for them in '16.

Until Binotto was moved over to the chassis side from the engine department in '17 and allowed Simone Resta more leverage to work on the car.

James Allison rides on the coat tail of others nothing has changed in the design of Mercedes, you have Aldo Costa working his magic there, to now associate that success to him or go as far as comparing him to Newey is worthy of a serious laugh.

pokerman wrote:

shoot999 wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

'Poach'? Thought Allison was basically given no choice but to leave.

Yeah wasn't he sacked by Marchionne, his wife had just died and he was viewed as spending too much time in England because of his need to be with his children?

Wasn't sacked because of his wife dying, he was given the time off.

He was sacked because he was allowed to work his way and deliver results by a certain time, when he didn't he was let go same way the engine guy was before Binotto was given full reign.

pokerman wrote:

shoot999 wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Option or Prime wrote:Quite possibly, I just wonder if James Allison's involvement is significant, everyone understandably raves about Adrian Newey's cars but JA was super strong for Ferrari in the 2000's.

Would be interesting to know how the Ferrari-Mercedes battle would have turned out had Mercedes not been able to poach Allison from Ferrari.

'Poach'? Thought Allison was basically given no choice but to leave.

Yeah wasn't he sacked by Marchionne, his wife had just died and he was viewed as spending too much time in England because of his need to be with his children?

Yea, sacked by Marchionne. He didnt like the management structure Allison had in place and wanted Allison to copy the Proctor and Gamble model. Also Allison didn't want to spend as much time on the road, nor in Italy; Marchionne wanted him more hands on. In addition JA had the majority of the team concentrating on the 2017 model; Marchionne wanted wins in 2016.
Allison went on bereavement leave and eventually 'left by mutual agreement' (sacked).

And as we all now know it subsequently all worked out perfectly for Ferrari