Discussion
FourWheelDrift said:
Times combined
14. Antonio Giovinazzi - Sauber - 1m 22.401s (110 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
17. Stoffel Vandoorne - McLaren - 1m 22.576s (101 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
18. Fernando Alonso - McLaren - 1m 22.598s (100 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 3
Sauber reserve driver with a year old engine, faster than both McLaren drivers on the same tyres. Hmmmm.....14. Antonio Giovinazzi - Sauber - 1m 22.401s (110 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
17. Stoffel Vandoorne - McLaren - 1m 22.576s (101 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
18. Fernando Alonso - McLaren - 1m 22.598s (100 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 3
Edited by FourWheelDrift on Thursday 2nd March 21:01
amokwa said:
FourWheelDrift said:
Times combined
14. Antonio Giovinazzi - Sauber - 1m 22.401s (110 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
17. Stoffel Vandoorne - McLaren - 1m 22.576s (101 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
18. Fernando Alonso - McLaren - 1m 22.598s (100 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 3
Sauber reserve driver with a year old engine, faster than both McLaren drivers on the same tyres. Hmmmm.....14. Antonio Giovinazzi - Sauber - 1m 22.401s (110 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
17. Stoffel Vandoorne - McLaren - 1m 22.576s (101 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
18. Fernando Alonso - McLaren - 1m 22.598s (100 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 3
Edited by FourWheelDrift on Thursday 2nd March 21:01
deadslow said:
amokwa said:
FourWheelDrift said:
Times combined
14. Antonio Giovinazzi - Sauber - 1m 22.401s (110 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
17. Stoffel Vandoorne - McLaren - 1m 22.576s (101 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
18. Fernando Alonso - McLaren - 1m 22.598s (100 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 3
Sauber reserve driver with a year old engine, faster than both McLaren drivers on the same tyres. Hmmmm.....14. Antonio Giovinazzi - Sauber - 1m 22.401s (110 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
17. Stoffel Vandoorne - McLaren - 1m 22.576s (101 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 4
18. Fernando Alonso - McLaren - 1m 22.598s (100 laps) - Ultra soft tyres - Day 3
Edited by FourWheelDrift on Thursday 2nd March 21:01
I just read a couple of articles which suggest that the engine which they have run this week is producing less power than the 2016 PU and that Honda aren't sure if the new engine they are bringing next week will address the root cause of Tuesday's premature PU failure.
I admire the optimists and I am not a detractor of McLaren but I find it hard to be optimistic about their season. Renault and Torro Rosso are both much improved from last season and will relish demoting them to a position even lower than last season.
Mclaren were darting in and out of the pits with aero rakes on....it's testing, the fastest lap times have about as much relevance to car performance at the minute as what colour underwear Lewis was wearing. Unless you believe a Sauber on last years engine is going to run just 8 tenths slower than Hamiltons Merc in qualifying come Melbourne?
That the Torro Rosso's are the slowest cars on the grid?
That the Torro Rosso's are the slowest cars on the grid?
Edited by PhillipM on Friday 3rd March 14:16
PhillipM said:
Unless you believe ... that the Torro Rosso's are the slowest cars on the grid?
I wondered about that having watched Scarbs' YouTube video on the Toro Rosso. He was very complimentary about some of the design features of the body/chassis - not that will necessarily translate to pace on the track, of course!Edited by PhillipM on Friday 3rd March 14:16
PhillipM said:
Mclaren were darting in and out of the pits with aero rakes on....it's testing, the fastest lap times have about as much relevance to car performance at the minute as what colour underwear Lewis was wearing. Unless you believe a Sauber on last years engine is going to run just 8 tenths slower than Hamiltons Merc in qualifying come Melbourne?
That the Torro Rosso's are the slowest cars on the grid?
You don't have to even look at laptimes to see McLaren are in dire straits- They used PU parts equating to around 5 complete units to complete about three race distances (at an unspectacular pace) In season they will have 4 power units to complete 20 race weekends. That the Torro Rosso's are the slowest cars on the grid?
HustleRussell said:
They used PU parts equating to around 5 complete units
Where's that coming from?They only swapped one PU in and modified the oil tank baffles.
If they'd destroyed enough parts for 5 complete power units then Alonso would have been doing Fred Flintstone impersonations on the Friday.
Merc and Renault had that many failures too...
Edited by PhillipM on Friday 3rd March 14:53
That's what the BBC are inferring rather than actually what Honda said - the engine with the oil tank issue for example was swapped back in and used once the tank design was sorted, the second engine (the one that actually had a failure) was the one that was shipped straight out for analysis.
Oi_Oi_Savaloy said:
BoRED S2upid said:
Oi_Oi_Savaloy said:
I think it'll be the same as it's always been - fuel being the key factor Yogi imo.
It was fuel and tyres last year which was rubbish. Less braking time to recover energy and more drag to overcome means the race will be dominated by eking-out the 100kg fuel allowance.
Even Ross Brawn has commented that, apart from the ugly appendages, the cars still look remarkably similar even to his trained eye.
I have a feeling that an awful lot of money has just been spent to ensure another year of Mercedes dominance. Which in all fairness to Toto & Co, is exactly what they said.
rdjohn said:
Less braking time to recover energy and more drag to overcome means the race will be dominated by eking-out the 100kg fuel allowance.
The decrease in time on the brakes means there will be an increase in the rate of recovery - AFAICS there are no regulatory limits on the rate of recovery, just the amount of energy that can be recovered per lap.The cars are heavier, so they may actually be able to recover even more energy from braking, assuming they are travelling at the same speed when the brakes are applied. They will in most cases be travelling faster at a given braking point due to increased corner exit speeds - it's only at the end of the straights where they'll be slower, but again, they're heavier, so more kinetic energy available for recovery.
There is also a 5kg increase in the fuel allowance this year.
Given the above, there should be a reduced need to save fuel, though it will continue as it always has as fuel is just another thing to be managed in order to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible.
HardtopManual said:
The decrease in time on the brakes means there will be an increase in the rate of recovery - AFAICS there are no regulatory limits on the rate of recovery, just the amount of energy that can be recovered per lap.
The cars are heavier, so they may actually be able to recover even more energy from braking, assuming they are travelling at the same speed when the brakes are applied. They will in most cases be travelling faster at a given braking point due to increased corner exit speeds - it's only at the end of the straights where they'll be slower, but again, they're heavier, so more kinetic energy available for recovery.
There is also a 5kg increase in the fuel allowance this year.
Given the above, there should be a reduced need to save fuel, though it will continue as it always has as fuel is just another thing to be managed in order to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible.
The engines were already efficient enough to not need the full fuel load at the start of a race last year.The cars are heavier, so they may actually be able to recover even more energy from braking, assuming they are travelling at the same speed when the brakes are applied. They will in most cases be travelling faster at a given braking point due to increased corner exit speeds - it's only at the end of the straights where they'll be slower, but again, they're heavier, so more kinetic energy available for recovery.
There is also a 5kg increase in the fuel allowance this year.
Given the above, there should be a reduced need to save fuel, though it will continue as it always has as fuel is just another thing to be managed in order to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible.
The new formula means they are on the throttle approx. 10% more than last year, so will burn more fuel during a race, with the gains made in efficiency, even with a 10% increase in throttle application they will be able to under fuel the car at race start in most events.
jsf said:
The engines were already efficient enough to not need the full fuel load at the start of a race last year.
The new formula means they are on the throttle approx. 10% more than last year, so will burn more fuel during a race, with the gains made in efficiency, even with a 10% increase in throttle application they will be able to under fuel the car at race start in most events.
At Monaco, yes. At Spa, Monza and Canada, certainly not.The new formula means they are on the throttle approx. 10% more than last year, so will burn more fuel during a race, with the gains made in efficiency, even with a 10% increase in throttle application they will be able to under fuel the car at race start in most events.
If teams were not struggling with the 100kg limit, they would have agreed with the Merc-engined teams that there was no need to increase to 105kg for 2017.
The reality is that the PUs only run maximum power during Q3. They have a high power engine mode for the first two laps of the race (remember ROS de-rating at Barcelona last year?) and then they run in economy mode for most of the race. Perhaps either turning the wick up to hold off a competitor, or down to concerve engine life.
Only a few seasons ago, teams were burning fuel during off-throttle periods just to energise their diffuser.
This "pottering" is what upsets drivers like Alonso and Hamilton, who remember the good old days. They started in Karts and went all the way through to GP2 maximising the power they had available to them at every opportunity.
The engine designers and the control software developers have done a great job. But we have yet to see any tangible development applied to everyday road cars. The Toyota Prius set a pretty high benchmark for hybrid road cars. There are now many more plug-in hybrids and none recovering energy from their turbo etc. In reality EV is the future of city-driving and Tesla has done far more in that field to stimulate manufacturers, than F1 will ever achieve.
HardtopManual said:
The decrease in time on the brakes means there will be an increase in the rate of recovery - AFAICS there are no regulatory limits on the rate of recovery, just the amount of energy that can be recovered per lap.
The cars are heavier, so they may actually be able to recover even more energy from braking, assuming they are travelling at the same speed when the brakes are applied. They will in most cases be travelling faster at a given braking point due to increased corner exit speeds - it's only at the end of the straights where they'll be slower, but again, they're heavier, so more kinetic energy available for recovery.
There is also a 5kg increase in the fuel allowance this year.
Given the above, there should be a reduced need to save fuel, though it will continue as it always has as fuel is just another thing to be managed in order to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible.
I am not sure just how reliable this source is but...The cars are heavier, so they may actually be able to recover even more energy from braking, assuming they are travelling at the same speed when the brakes are applied. They will in most cases be travelling faster at a given braking point due to increased corner exit speeds - it's only at the end of the straights where they'll be slower, but again, they're heavier, so more kinetic energy available for recovery.
There is also a 5kg increase in the fuel allowance this year.
Given the above, there should be a reduced need to save fuel, though it will continue as it always has as fuel is just another thing to be managed in order to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible.
http://en.f1i.com/news/261796-teams-fear-fuel-cons...
.... seems to suggest that teams could be struggling with the fue limit.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff