Page 51 of 57 FirstFirst ... 26373839404142434445464748495051525354555657 LastLast
Results 1,501 to 1,530 of 1705

Thread: Barcelona Testing 2018

  1. #1501
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,959
    Quote Originally Posted by bondilad View Post
    Kimi changed for hypersofts to end his race sim. So he was quicker.
    He was on mediums at the end of the stint.

  2. #1502
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    4,437
    Quote Originally Posted by nani_s23 View Post
    When is Aus GP???


    FP1 in 13 days 7 hours

  3. #1503
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,959
    Quote Originally Posted by jgonzalesm6 View Post
    FP1 in 13 days 7 hours
    13D is a lot....after this testing

  4. #1504
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    4,437
    Quote Originally Posted by nani_s23 View Post
    13D is a lot....after this testing
    yup.....

  5. #1505
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    4,437

  6. #1506
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Christchurch,UK
    Posts
    3,157
    I'm pleased the testing is over, now we can concentrate on what might happen in the real world of racing. It's all very well getting excited on one day only to have the next day causing all sorts of negativity, so roll on Melbourne and we'll hope and pray that we have gone in the right direction.

  7. #1507
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    4,437
    Quote Originally Posted by wisepie View Post
    I'm pleased the testing is over, now we can concentrate on what might happen in the real world of racing. It's all very well getting excited on one day only to have the next day causing all sorts of negativity, so roll on Melbourne and we'll hope and pray that we have gone in the right direction.
    +5 +7

  8. #1508
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    4,437

  9. #1509
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,959
    Good job by Ferrari. Let’s hope they bring their best in Melbourne with all the data they have collected.
    Also There is something with rear end of Ferrari, that’s keeping me confident.

  10. #1510
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    slovenia
    Posts
    80
    Kimi said that Ferrari can go faster if they want to

  11. #1511
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Slovenia, Maribor
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by alfaromeo View Post
    Kimi said that Ferrari can go faster if they want to
    Hello (kolega). Where did he said that? Thank you.
    That is always a good sign if true.

  12. #1512
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Lithuania
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Vettel165 View Post
    Hello (kolega). Where did he said that? Thank you.
    That is always a good sign if true.
    https://www.racefans.net/2018/03/09/...go-faster-can/

    Vettel fastest lap onboard(awful camera although)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iIYNet0vws

  13. #1513
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Greensboro, NC, USA
    Posts
    76
    From: https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/te...stano-1013145/

    Ma č anche giusto dire che la Mercedes ha preferito non simulare il classico GP partendo con il pieno, ma pare che abbia scelto di limitare il carico di carburante, preferendo fare degli stint con un carico pių costante per scoprire il punto di crisi della stessa gomma Medium che č stata usata in due tranche di gara.
    Translation:
    But it is also fair to say that Mercedes has preferred not to simulate the classic GP starting with the full, but it seems that has chosen to limit the fuel load, preferring to make stints with a more constant load to discover the point of crisis of the same tire Medium that was used in two tender tranches.

  14. #1514
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    943
    ESPN is saying that Bottas could have done a 1:16.2 on the ultras using delta times.

    http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...impresses-most
    ~FORZA FERRARI~

  15. #1515
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,605
    Quote Originally Posted by ferrari1.8t View Post
    ESPN is saying that Bottas could have done a 1:16.2 on the ultras using delta times.

    http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...impresses-most
    Possibly could, BUT until he does that lap time it is all hypothetical

  16. #1516
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    147
    Kimi happy with the car " very good feeling"

    -"Not happy how the conditions have been and how little kilometers I have been able to do, but the final day was a good day and good that it was, as I havenīt done much driving because of the weather and now on second week when I was ill. Good day now and Iīm happy how the car works."
    -"Iīm not interested about the comparison to others (when speaked about racesim), but I was able to drive it and see/feel how the car works in race. It was quite ok and we tried few different things. We didnīt try to go as fast as we could, it wasnīt the main purpose."
    -"Car feels quite good, didnīt drive much, so itīs difficult to say, but today it felt good.There are always things you can improve, like always when we are driving. It will never be perfect. I have a good feeling."

  17. #1517
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Machu Pichu
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by ClaudiuCojo View Post
    Kimi happy with the car " very good feeling"

    -"Not happy how the conditions have been and how little kilometers I have been able to do, but the final day was a good day and good that it was, as I havenīt done much driving because of the weather and now on second week when I was ill. Good day now and Iīm happy how the car works."
    -"Iīm not interested about the comparison to others (when speaked about racesim), but I was able to drive it and see/feel how the car works in race. It was quite ok and we tried few different things. We didnīt try to go as fast as we could, it wasnīt the main purpose."
    -"Car feels quite good, didnīt drive much, so itīs difficult to say, but today it felt good.There are always things you can improve, like always when we are driving. It will never be perfect. I have a good feeling."
    This sounds gooooddd


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Go Ferrari, beat them all!

  18. #1518
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    slovenia
    Posts
    80
    If is kimi happy with the car, that is good sign

  19. #1519
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    France
    Posts
    165
    Honestly i don't get all this pessimism concerning our car.
    After seeing Vettel yesterday i'm sure we will be in the mix.
    This car is effortless and very balanced.
    I'm ready to bet a pole in Australia!

  20. #1520
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Madagascar
    Posts
    14
    A closer look at the preseason F1 tests
    by Mark Hughes on 9th March 2018

    The conclusions we can draw from the two preseason Formula 1 tests



    So at the end of eight days of Formula 1 preseason testing, what do we know? Definitively, nothing. But the data is telling us something.

    Unsurprisingly – just as was also evident last week – the identity of the top three teams hasn’t changed from 2017. Given that there was a 1.5sec gap between them to the best-of-the-rest last year, this isn’t too surprising. Consensus among pretty much all of the teams is that the gap after the top three teams is around 1sec, with the second group headed by Renault, Haas and – at the 59th minute of the 11th hour thanks to a late effort by Fernando Alonso – the unreliable McLaren.

    But how do Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull compare with each other? Although the fastest time of the test (and the fastest ever around the track) was Sebastian Vettel’s 1min17.1sec on the Thursday of week two, this was a qualifying simulation on low fuel and the fastest (hyper-soft) tyres, a combination that we did not see from either Mercedes or Red Bull.

    Mercedes seemed much the fastest car on the medium tyre but averaged around 0.3sec slower than Ferrari on the ultra – and didn’t use the hyper at all. All teams were suffering rear tyre blistering as the times came down – but Mercedes particularly so.

    The full 60-plus lap race simulations of Valtteri Bottas, Vettel and Max Verstappen on Thursday, allow us to refine what we do know. Taking some ‘order of magnitude correct’ numbers regarding fuel consumption (around 1.5kg per lap) and lap time penalty for weight (around 0.35sec for every 10kg) we can comfortably infer some weight-corrected lap times from those long-runs because we can be pretty certain of their fuel loads, given that they had to have enough to complete the full 60-plus laps.

    All three drivers did two-stop race sims on the day, with Bottas and Verstappen using new medium tyres for all three stints. Vettel used supersofts for his first stint, mediums for the remaining two.

    Looking first at Bottas, his first stint was of 28 laps. On the second lap he went around in 1min23.0sec with a calculated 97.3kg of fuel aboard (the amount required to complete the remaining 65 laps). Weight-correcting that (9.73 x 0.35sec for 10kg = 3.4sec) implies a 1min19.6sec on low fuel. By the end of that first stint, on lap 28, with around 59kg of fuel on board, he set a 1min22.0sec. The difference in fuel load between those laps (on lap two and 28) would be around 39kg (worth around 1.37sec). Subtract that 1.37sec from his lap 2 time and allowing for the fuel weight only he should, by lap 28, be able to lap in around 1min21.6sec. But he’s only done a 1min22.0sec. The difference is the implied tyre degradation – i.e. the tyres are 0.4sec slower after 28 laps. This works out at around 0.06sec of tyre deg per lap.

    So we are now armed with the two factors – fuel weight and tyre deg – necessary to give a conversion of what lap time any driver could do on low fuel, implied from the race runs. Towards the end of Bottas’ second stint, he does his best lap, taking into account fuel and tyres. His 1min20.5sec with around 44kg on board (1.5sec worth) translates as a 1min19.0sec, fuel-corrected. But the tyres were 13 laps-old (0.8sec-worth of deg). So implying that Bottas on low fuel and fresh medium tyres could do a 1min18.2sec.

    If we do the very same calculations for the runs of Vettel and Verstappen, we get an implied lap time of 1min18.3sec for the Ferrari (a 1min19.9sec on his very last lap, with medium tyres that were 24 laps old) and a 1min19.4sec for the Red Bull.

    Low-fuel times on new, medium tyres

    Team Time
    Mercedes 1min18.3sec
    Ferrari 1min18.4sec
    Red Bull 1min19.4sec
    There are, however, a couple of anomalies hidden in the detail of those numbers.



    Anomaly 1: Closer inspection of Vettel’s run reveals a strange picture. Comparing the start of stint lap times with those at the end and accounting for the fuel reduction, there is virtually zero tyre deg apparent on the Ferrari with the medium compound. This defies all logic. It implies that Vettel was not pushing but simply driving to a delta lap time. The pattern of his laps would seem to confirm this. So, why would he do that in a race simulation? The obvious reason that suggests itself is that the Ferrari was struggling to make the full 105kg allocation of fuel last. With the much faster lap times now possible from the faster cars and faster resurfaced track, the cars are on full throttle significantly longer than before. They might well also be more draggy, courtesy of the halo (although Mercedes maintains they managed to integrate it in such a way that the car doesn’t notice the difference). Is Ferrari’s race pace currently limited by its fuel consumption? If we remove the tyre deg correction from the Ferrari, its implied low-fuel best is only a 1min19.6sec. There’s no way it’s that far off the pace. Vettel’s best lap indicates a potential Mercedes-matching pace but his race stint averaged 0.5sec per lap slower. Again, this would tally with eking out the fuel.

    Anomaly 2: The Red Bull did show some tyre degradation – although less than the Merc – and Verstappen’s best lap came with his lap 46 effort of 1min20.7sec with 32kg of fuel aboard (around 1.1sec worth), giving a fuel-corrected lap of 1min19.6sec on tyres that were just three laps old (around 0.2sec worth), giving a deg-corrected 1min19.4sec, a long way (1.1sec) from the Mercedes calculated best lap. However, Verstappen’s average for the race distance was only around 0.5sec per lap slower – and it could simply be that he judged the required pace for his tyres differently and his hard laps were simply not as hard as those of Bottas.

    All these comparisons were on the medium tyres, the hardest of the five available compounds at the test. Pirelli’s final day estimate of the difference in ultimate lap time between them around Barcelona was as follows:

    Tyre Difference to hypersoft
    Medium +2.55sec
    Soft +1.75sec
    Supersoft +1.35sec
    Ultrasoft +0.75sec
    However, historically, the Mercedes is always much stronger relative to the opposition on the hardest tyre – or conversely, the opposition finds more time from the softest tyres than the Merc. It’s clear there is a very big spread from car to car in how they respond to the different compounds. Other paddock estimates put the gap between the medium and hyper at just 1.6sec. It may well be that the Red Bull finds the full 2.5s Pirelli estimates but the Mercedes and Ferrari significantly less. In which case, the Red Bull would suddenly be right there, much of its apparent deficit of between 0.5-1.1sec on the medium evaporating away on the softest tyre.

    So we have a big three of Mercedes/Ferrari/Red Bull, each with question marks around them. Is the Merc too hard on its rear tyres? Does the Ferrari have a fuel consumption issue? Is the Red Bull outright fast enough?

    Alonso’s time actually put McLaren best of the rest, though probably when the track was at its absolute fastest, fully rubbered in on the final day. There’s little apparent difference between its pace – as glimpsed between the breakdowns – and that of Renault and Haas (with its impressive ‘white SF70H’) and it may well be that McLaren’s Melbourne upgrade is the biggest of anyone’s, given that its late-notice engine supplier change ensured a quite basic ‘launch spec’ car. The Honda has been impressively reliable in the Toro Rosso which looks to have the edge over the currently ill-balanced Williams and the very basic – with plenty of bolt-on performance promised for Melbourne – Force India. Sauber appears still to be bringing up the rear with a grip shortfall from its highly distinctive C37.

    All will be revealed at Melbourne, but we have some definite clues now.

  21. #1521
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Machu Pichu
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by KonPatTsh View Post
    A closer look at the preseason F1 tests
    by Mark Hughes on 9th March 2018

    The conclusions we can draw from the two preseason Formula 1 tests



    So at the end of eight days of Formula 1 preseason testing, what do we know? Definitively, nothing. But the data is telling us something.

    Unsurprisingly – just as was also evident last week – the identity of the top three teams hasn’t changed from 2017. Given that there was a 1.5sec gap between them to the best-of-the-rest last year, this isn’t too surprising. Consensus among pretty much all of the teams is that the gap after the top three teams is around 1sec, with the second group headed by Renault, Haas and – at the 59th minute of the 11th hour thanks to a late effort by Fernando Alonso – the unreliable McLaren.

    But how do Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull compare with each other? Although the fastest time of the test (and the fastest ever around the track) was Sebastian Vettel’s 1min17.1sec on the Thursday of week two, this was a qualifying simulation on low fuel and the fastest (hyper-soft) tyres, a combination that we did not see from either Mercedes or Red Bull.

    Mercedes seemed much the fastest car on the medium tyre but averaged around 0.3sec slower than Ferrari on the ultra – and didn’t use the hyper at all. All teams were suffering rear tyre blistering as the times came down – but Mercedes particularly so.

    The full 60-plus lap race simulations of Valtteri Bottas, Vettel and Max Verstappen on Thursday, allow us to refine what we do know. Taking some ‘order of magnitude correct’ numbers regarding fuel consumption (around 1.5kg per lap) and lap time penalty for weight (around 0.35sec for every 10kg) we can comfortably infer some weight-corrected lap times from those long-runs because we can be pretty certain of their fuel loads, given that they had to have enough to complete the full 60-plus laps.

    All three drivers did two-stop race sims on the day, with Bottas and Verstappen using new medium tyres for all three stints. Vettel used supersofts for his first stint, mediums for the remaining two.

    Looking first at Bottas, his first stint was of 28 laps. On the second lap he went around in 1min23.0sec with a calculated 97.3kg of fuel aboard (the amount required to complete the remaining 65 laps). Weight-correcting that (9.73 x 0.35sec for 10kg = 3.4sec) implies a 1min19.6sec on low fuel. By the end of that first stint, on lap 28, with around 59kg of fuel on board, he set a 1min22.0sec. The difference in fuel load between those laps (on lap two and 28) would be around 39kg (worth around 1.37sec). Subtract that 1.37sec from his lap 2 time and allowing for the fuel weight only he should, by lap 28, be able to lap in around 1min21.6sec. But he’s only done a 1min22.0sec. The difference is the implied tyre degradation – i.e. the tyres are 0.4sec slower after 28 laps. This works out at around 0.06sec of tyre deg per lap.

    So we are now armed with the two factors – fuel weight and tyre deg – necessary to give a conversion of what lap time any driver could do on low fuel, implied from the race runs. Towards the end of Bottas’ second stint, he does his best lap, taking into account fuel and tyres. His 1min20.5sec with around 44kg on board (1.5sec worth) translates as a 1min19.0sec, fuel-corrected. But the tyres were 13 laps-old (0.8sec-worth of deg). So implying that Bottas on low fuel and fresh medium tyres could do a 1min18.2sec.

    If we do the very same calculations for the runs of Vettel and Verstappen, we get an implied lap time of 1min18.3sec for the Ferrari (a 1min19.9sec on his very last lap, with medium tyres that were 24 laps old) and a 1min19.4sec for the Red Bull.

    Low-fuel times on new, medium tyres

    TeamTime
    Mercedes1min18.3sec
    Ferrari1min18.4sec
    Red Bull1min19.4sec
    There are, however, a couple of anomalies hidden in the detail of those numbers.



    Anomaly 1: Closer inspection of Vettel’s run reveals a strange picture. Comparing the start of stint lap times with those at the end and accounting for the fuel reduction, there is virtually zero tyre deg apparent on the Ferrari with the medium compound. This defies all logic. It implies that Vettel was not pushing but simply driving to a delta lap time. The pattern of his laps would seem to confirm this. So, why would he do that in a race simulation? The obvious reason that suggests itself is that the Ferrari was struggling to make the full 105kg allocation of fuel last. With the much faster lap times now possible from the faster cars and faster resurfaced track, the cars are on full throttle significantly longer than before. They might well also be more draggy, courtesy of the halo (although Mercedes maintains they managed to integrate it in such a way that the car doesn’t notice the difference). Is Ferrari’s race pace currently limited by its fuel consumption? If we remove the tyre deg correction from the Ferrari, its implied low-fuel best is only a 1min19.6sec. There’s no way it’s that far off the pace. Vettel’s best lap indicates a potential Mercedes-matching pace but his race stint averaged 0.5sec per lap slower. Again, this would tally with eking out the fuel.

    Anomaly 2: The Red Bull did show some tyre degradation – although less than the Merc – and Verstappen’s best lap came with his lap 46 effort of 1min20.7sec with 32kg of fuel aboard (around 1.1sec worth), giving a fuel-corrected lap of 1min19.6sec on tyres that were just three laps old (around 0.2sec worth), giving a deg-corrected 1min19.4sec, a long way (1.1sec) from the Mercedes calculated best lap. However, Verstappen’s average for the race distance was only around 0.5sec per lap slower – and it could simply be that he judged the required pace for his tyres differently and his hard laps were simply not as hard as those of Bottas.

    All these comparisons were on the medium tyres, the hardest of the five available compounds at the test. Pirelli’s final day estimate of the difference in ultimate lap time between them around Barcelona was as follows:

    TyreDifference to hypersoft
    Medium+2.55sec
    Soft+1.75sec
    Supersoft+1.35sec
    Ultrasoft+0.75sec
    However, historically, the Mercedes is always much stronger relative to the opposition on the hardest tyre – or conversely, the opposition finds more time from the softest tyres than the Merc. It’s clear there is a very big spread from car to car in how they respond to the different compounds. Other paddock estimates put the gap between the medium and hyper at just 1.6sec. It may well be that the Red Bull finds the full 2.5s Pirelli estimates but the Mercedes and Ferrari significantly less. In which case, the Red Bull would suddenly be right there, much of its apparent deficit of between 0.5-1.1sec on the medium evaporating away on the softest tyre.

    So we have a big three of Mercedes/Ferrari/Red Bull, each with question marks around them. Is the Merc too hard on its rear tyres? Does the Ferrari have a fuel consumption issue? Is the Red Bull outright fast enough?

    Alonso’s time actually put McLaren best of the rest, though probably when the track was at its absolute fastest, fully rubbered in on the final day. There’s little apparent difference between its pace – as glimpsed between the breakdowns – and that of Renault and Haas (with its impressive ‘white SF70H’) and it may well be that McLaren’s Melbourne upgrade is the biggest of anyone’s, given that its late-notice engine supplier change ensured a quite basic ‘launch spec’ car. The Honda has been impressively reliable in the Toro Rosso which looks to have the edge over the currently ill-balanced Williams and the very basic – with plenty of bolt-on performance promised for Melbourne – Force India. Sauber appears still to be bringing up the rear with a grip shortfall from its highly distinctive C37.

    All will be revealed at Melbourne, but we have some definite clues now.
    Good and interesting article, first one leaving Ferrari in the fight


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Go Ferrari, beat them all!

  22. #1522
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,605
    Reading the above pretty much tallies with what I said yday, the Ferrari seemed to be driving to a delta. Noehere above woukd it suggest the RB is the 2nd fastest car.

  23. #1523
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    salco
    Posts
    1,819
    and this 'fuel consumption problem' is baloney right?

  24. #1524
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Machu Pichu
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrarichamp View Post
    and this 'fuel consumption problem' is baloney right?
    Is the obvious answer of the delta, the other explanation is we are sandbagging like crazy and have a super car


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Go Ferrari, beat them all!

  25. #1525
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    salco
    Posts
    1,819
    so we turn up in Melbourne with the engine turned down? that would be a disaster.

  26. #1526
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    10,183
    Quote Originally Posted by wisepie View Post
    I'm pleased the testing is over, now we can concentrate on what might happen in the real world of racing. It's all very well getting excited on one day only to have the next day causing all sorts of negativity, so roll on Melbourne and we'll hope and pray that we have gone in the right direction.
    Well said

  27. #1527
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    4,437
    Pirelli tyre differences in laptime.

    hypersoft - 0.75s - ultrasoft - 0.6s - supersoft - 0.4s - soft - 0.8s - medium.


    #F1 Testing in #Barcelona, 2 weeks cumulative: All the best times (tyre compound as background colour), gaps, number of total laps:
    - 22 drivers have shown up, #Vettel fastest and with most laps.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DX34-sHXcAMcutp.jpg


    F1 Testing in #Barcelona, total kilometreage by engine manufacturers : 1. Mercedes 11,963.35km, 2. Ferrari 11,218.55km, 3. Renault 10,133.935km, 4. Honda 3826.41km

    Per car: 1. Mercedes 3987.8km, 2. Honda 3826.4km, 3. Ferrari 3739.5km, 4. Renault 3378km.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DX30StvWkAIrkqu.jpg

    #F1 Total distance by teams during 2 weeks of testing in Barcelona :
    1. Mercedes 4841.2km, 2. Ferrari 4324.5km... 10. McLaren 2788.3km

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DX3yWpsX0AEtCnt.jpg

  28. #1528
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Babes&Whisky
    Posts
    1,876
    Hamilton seems to be very impressed with the Mercedes, already thanking everyone for the great car, faster and easier to drive than last year's car, acts like they have this one in the bag. He has never shown this kind of behaviour in previous seasons. In some they where sandbaggind and not admitting it, leaving everyone in the dust in Australia, in others he was just quietly confident, and hoping to be ahead of the competition
    Last edited by IulianFerrari; 9th March 2018 at 22:41.

  29. #1529
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    1,095
    how does mark hughes know vettel did a qualy lap with LOW FUEL????
    CUT ME. CUT YOU. BOTH OUR BLOOD IS FERRARI RED!

  30. #1530
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Diamond Head
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrarichamp View Post
    and this 'fuel consumption problem' is baloney right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Aberracus View Post
    Is the obvious answer of the delta, the other explanation is we are sandbagging like crazy and have a super car
    Please let option b be true

    If you follow the Mark Hughes article, he puts the Ferrari only one tenth behind the Mercedes on their best tyre, the medium. And that comparison is with the Ferrari possibly having to lift to conserve fuel. That's great news if true IMO. We can run full power for qualifying and, it looks like we are fastest in that mode. Second, at the start of the race Seb can run a few laps, clear out and then control the race from front, conserving as and when he needs. The Mercs and Bulls will have to deal with tire deg.
    Also, even if we did have to conserve fuel here, we won't have to at every circuit. And there is always scope for the team and Shell to improve our fuel consumption.
    I'm really excited about Australia.

    Oops, I forgot, belay all the above.
    Doom, gloom, blah blah, more doom more gloom, blah blah, heads must roll, blah blah blah

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •