2012 Hungarian GP - Hungaroring

[dxpetrov]

Another review to support my theory about RB pace.
http://www.planet-f1.com/race-features/ ... om-Hungary?

[beelsebob]

Another review to support my theory about RB pace.
http://www.planet-f1.com/race-features/ ... om-Hungary?

That in no way supports your idea that the red bull is the fastest car there, only that it was faster than it showed. No one disputes that Vettel was held up (he was), only the assertion that he was able to be the fastest car on the circuit all other things being equal (he wasn't).

[dxpetrov]

Another review to support my theory about RB pace.
http://www.planet-f1.com/race-features/ ... om-Hungary?

That in no way supports your idea that the red bull is the fastest car there, only that it was faster than it showed. No one disputes that Vettel was held up (he was), only the assertion that he was able to be the fastest car on the circuit all other things being equal (he wasn't).

I think we are not reading things in same way. Or it could be that ''fanboyism'' stirs our perspective.
Just one excerpt from the text I put link into:
It could be that their wings have been clipped by the controversies which raging around them through July, or it could be that the pace is still there and has simply been muddied by dirty air.

In short, put Vettel out front again and he could disappear into the distance.

[beelsebob]

Another review to support my theory about RB pace.
http://www.planet-f1.com/race-features/ ... om-Hungary?

That in no way supports your idea that the red bull is the fastest car there, only that it was faster than it showed. No one disputes that Vettel was held up (he was), only the assertion that he was able to be the fastest car on the circuit all other things being equal (he wasn't).

I think we are not reading things in same way. Or it could be that ''fanboyism'' stirs our perspective.
Just one excerpt from the text I put link into:
It could be that their wings have been clipped by the controversies which raging around them through July, or it could be that the pace is still there and has simply been muddied by dirty air.

In short, put Vettel out front again and he could disappear into the distance.

"It could be" is not the same thing as "it's certain that". Vettel was massively dominant in Valencia because every single aspect of the track suits the Red Bull car, it did in 2011 too – red bull were 2 seconds clear of everyone in Valencia last year. They were less dominant everywhere else. The stats support the fact that Vettel was quicker than his pace over the race in hungary showed – he was held up a lot; but they also show that he was in far from the fastest car.

[Mort]

I was a bit worried that I'd registered at exactly the wrong time with a 5 week break before the next race.
But this discussion may make it a tad more bearable.

Interesting that it's gone from a statement of opined fact to a "theory" that RedBull were the fastest over the weekend, but anyway RedBull themselves are only stating that their pace "Wasn't too bad" and besides everyone is entitled to their opinion. All I would say is that IMHO using Mr. Benson's opinion to provide substance to your argument is a tad like using sand for foundations!

Looking at all factors across the weekend I'd have said the relative performance of the cars was:-

1. Lotus
2. McLaren
3. RedBull (close between the top 3, and I can see arguments for differing orders)
4. Ferrari
5. Williams
6. Mercedes (worryingly)
7. Force India
8. Sauber
9. Torro Rosso
10. Caterham
11. Marussia
12. HRT

So redBull 3rd at best having said that conditons played a big part this weekend, hence the relative increase in performance of Lotus. And the decrease in performance of Sauber and Ferrari. Remains to be seen where they all stand after Spa (I expect big changes to the above list)

[Nando]

I was a bit worried that I'd registered at exactly the wrong time with a 5 week break before the next race.
But this discussion may make it a tad more bearable.

Oh you have no idea... this forum will turn into a cake-throwing contest when there´s no F1 around to discuss

[SpliT]

Tyres for next three races:
Belgium: Hard(silver) and Medium(white)
Italy: Hard(silver) and Medium(white)
Singapore: Soft(yellow) and Supersoft(red)

[beelsebob]

I was a bit worried that I'd registered at exactly the wrong time with a 5 week break before the next race.
But this discussion may make it a tad more bearable.

Interesting that it's gone from a statement of opined fact to a "theory" that RedBull were the fastest over the weekend, but anyway RedBull themselves are only stating that their pace "Wasn't too bad" and besides everyone is entitled to their opinion. All I would say is that IMHO using Mr. Benson's opinion to provide substance to your argument is a tad like using sand for foundations!

Looking at all factors across the weekend I'd have said the relative performance of the cars was:-

1. Lotus
2. McLaren
3. RedBull (close between the top 3, and I can see arguments for differing orders)
4. Ferrari
5. Williams
6. Mercedes (worryingly)
7. Force India
8. Sauber
9. Torro Rosso
10. Caterham
11. Marussia
12. HRT

So redBull 3rd at best having said that conditons played a big part this weekend, hence the relative increase in performance of Lotus. And the decrease in performance of Sauber and Ferrari. Remains to be seen where they all stand after Spa (I expect big changes to the above list)

I'd tend to agree with that assessment of the pace. The only exception is that I'm not sure of the order of the top two – I suspect McLaren were running deliberately conservatively because they weren't confident of exactly how kind their new car was on the tyres.

[NathanOlder]

Yeah I'd agree. there was no way Lewis pushed 100% for more than a few laps. maybe at the start and around the pit stops. in the last 3rd of the race he was only running flat out in the last sector so Kimi coyldnt get on the back of him on the straight. you could see when Lewis was clear down the straight he was braking real early for turn 1. when kimi was closer down the straight Lewis was braking early. We didnt see how fast the Mclaren was in the race. how much faster it could have been is unknown. IMHO.

[Nando]

The biggest telling is that he was doing personal best sectors with 5 laps to go.
You really don´t do that if you think the tires can go within a lap or two.

It looked like he only made sure he hooked it up through the last two corners, everything else was irrelevant due to the wake he was leaving behind.

[beelsebob]

The biggest telling is that he was doing personal best sectors with 5 laps to go.
You really don´t do that if you think the tires can go within a lap or two.

It looked like he only made sure he hooked it up through the last two corners, everything else was irrelevant due to the wake he was leaving behind.

Yes and no – if he was taking the entire stint fairly carefully (entirely plausable given that no one else had made hards last 30 laps), then it would be entirely reasonable to expect the stint to take the normal form of improving times as the fuel burns off. What would have been telling is if his times started to go off towards the end of the stint (indicating that he really couldn't have gone any faster), or if he'd put in a couple of mega laps at the end (indicating that he was confident the tyre life was there and could just stretch his legs for the win)... Just casually chugging down to a best lap towards the end tells us no more than there were tyres left at the end, and nothing about how much faster he could have potentially gone.

Given that he was about 0.2 faster than raikonnen in the last sector, I would guess that he could have gone about 0.4 to 0.8 seconds a lap faster if he really pushed – 0.2 seconds per sector faster than raikonnen.

[Nando]

Yea he actually set his fastest lap of the race on 24 laps old Hard tires.

And that fastest time was half a second quicker the Grosjean´s fastest time.
Raikkonen a tenth away from Hamilton´s best time.

This must mean that he was indeed pacing himself. It should not be possible to do your best laptime so late in a stint if you really had to go all out during the stint.
Less fuel should be negated by the tires reaching their end you would think.

[myurr]

Yeah I'd agree. there was no way Lewis pushed 100% for more than a few laps. maybe at the start and around the pit stops. in the last 3rd of the race he was only running flat out in the last sector so Kimi coyldnt get on the back of him on the straight. you could see when Lewis was clear down the straight he was braking real early for turn 1. when kimi was closer down the straight Lewis was braking early. We didnt see how fast the Mclaren was in the race. how much faster it could have been is unknown. IMHO.

The speed differential down the straight was telling as well. Kimi was usually only a couple of kmph faster at any given point despite having DRS, suggesting that Hamilton was getting on the power a lot earlier out of the last corner (as he had been doing all weekend).

[myurr]

Very interesting gap chart from James Allen's site:


You can see very clearly that after Hamilton's final stop that he maintained just enough pace to cover all the other drivers, then slowed for a few laps whilst Raikkonen caught him and in turn saved some tyre life there, before then picking the pace up again once Raikkonen was right behind him.

[Ral]

Yeah, but Raikkonen's fastest lap was on tyres over 20 laps old indicating he too could have gone faster in his last stint. Although Adam Cooper did a review of the race in the subscriber's section of Autosport.com and he says Raikkonen's mediums weren't new but rather a scrubbed set.

Which still doesn't give a definitive answer as to which of the two was fastest per se, just means they were both not going as fast as they could, for different reasons.