2015 Malaysian Grand Prix - Sepang

[dans79]

you need to recognize that the person you are talking to is a fanboy of mercedes... he will keep making excuses till the end of time.
1.Vettel was .7 seconds behind hamilton in DRS range on lap 3 with DRS about to be activated..
2.Mercedes got a freebie for a first pit stop behind the safety car on their first stop.....
3.no matter what mercedes did with or without a safety car Vettel was going to be ahead after mercedes first pit stop with the pass either on track( see point #1) or in the pits.
IMHO that was game set match vettel with the lead and one less stop to make with nore than enough pace to stay ahead
i could care less how hot it was... it was the exact same temp for ALL the teams.
i could care less what strategic error mercedes made... you dont get to use a perceived error they made as an excuse as to why they got beaten
then some want to look at lap times of different teams at different times in the race with different fuel loads albeit on the same tire really???
on the same tire at the start of the race with as close a fuel load as there could be hamilton could not shake vettel.

Blah blah blah, we all no you hate Mercedes

[giantfan10]

you need to recognize that the person you are talking to is a fanboy of mercedes... he will keep making excuses till the end of time.
1.Vettel was .7 seconds behind hamilton in DRS range on lap 3 with DRS about to be activated..
2.Mercedes got a freebie for a first pit stop behind the safety car on their first stop.....
3.no matter what mercedes did with or without a safety car Vettel was going to be ahead after mercedes first pit stop with the pass either on track( see point #1) or in the pits.
IMHO that was game set match vettel with the lead and one less stop to make with nore than enough pace to stay ahead
i could care less how hot it was... it was the exact same temp for ALL the teams.
i could care less what strategic error mercedes made... you dont get to use a perceived error they made as an excuse as to why they got beaten
then some want to look at lap times of different teams at different times in the race with different fuel loads albeit on the same tire really???
on the same tire at the start of the race with as close a fuel load as there could be hamilton could not shake vettel.

Blah blah blah, we all no you hate Mercedes

hate mercedes ? not in the least.... i remember going down the autobahn heading to Amsterdam from Mainz-Finthen flugplatz doing 339kph for most of the way....loved it... and the 300e i was driving.
Mercedes deserved their 2014 championship.. they won it fair and square and i have no issue with that..
my issue is not with mercedes at all its with some of the the fanboys that throw common sense out of the window.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Slower quicky, doesn't mean slower by a second or so and sitting ducks to be overtaken.
Of course every car has to go through back markers, but look at the times they have to go through and analyze how it adds to the woes of tyre life.

He lost 1.6 seconds in 12 laps on lesser fuel than what would be at the start. That is every reason to believe his degradation would have been worse if he stayed out in the SC period.

On your second point, so Vettel would have gotten the same disadvantage as well like Hamilton while passing back markers I suppose?

The point is not that Mercedes weren't fast in Malaysia. They were, but couldn't sustain it. While Ferrari were a lil slower but were consistently in the same range, thus helping them win the race.

you need to recognize that the person you are talking to is a fanboy of mercedes... he will keep making excuses till the end of time.
1.Vettel was .7 seconds behind hamilton in DRS range on lap 3 with DRS about to be activated..
2.Mercedes got a freebie for a first pit stop behind the safety car on their first stop.....
3.no matter what mercedes did with or without a safety car Vettel was going to be ahead after mercedes first pit stop with the pass either on track( see point #1) or in the pits.
IMHO that was game set match vettel with the lead and one less stop to make with nore than enough pace to stay ahead
i could care less how hot it was... it was the exact same temp for ALL the teams.
i could care less what strategic error mercedes made... you dont get to use a perceived error they made as an excuse as to why they got beaten
then some want to look at lap times of different teams at different times in the race with different fuel loads albeit on the same tire really???
on the same tire at the start of the race with as close a fuel load as there could be hamilton could not shake vettel.

Oh please, cut your crap. I am a fan of whoever who is winning, as I respect the hard work that they would put into, to be where they are. Be it Ferrari in 2000s, Red Bull in 2010+ or Merc now. In fact, I was one of those who were shouting that Ferrari has a highly improved PU, based on how Sauber was performing in Winter testing.
You have simply posted some hypothetical points here, which you cannot prove at all. I have given numbers from the race and was trying to tell that, there is no miracle in sight to believe that Ferrari is going to race wheel to wheel with Merc this year. The tyre degradation crap that is going on, there is nothing to really it back up, to say the tyre degradation is going to eat up Merc this year, without understanding race situation, is simply living on a pot shot. If you cannot understand and want to live in some kind of hallucination, so be it.
Just saw your user name, is this an irony that you keep a name like "GIANTFAN" and referring to someone's post as fanboyism?

[Chene_Mostert]

GPR-A
I do not see the points above being any more hypothetical than your "numbers" that fail to compare like for like.
Reality is Ferrari had the pace to put Merc under pressure and they had the pace to finish ahead of Merc in the race.
None of your hypothetical excuses can change the actual outcome. They needed to be faster than Ferrari to finish ahead which they did not do.
Guess you will have to start supporting Ferrari as they WILL challenge for wins this season. Evidence of this was clear as from the first day of pre season testing. Go check the "numbers"

[komninosm]

GPR-A
I do not see the points above being any more hypothetical than your "numbers" that fail to compare like for like.
Reality is Ferrari had the pace to put Merc under pressure and they had the pace to finish ahead of Merc in the race.
None of your hypothetical excuses can change the actual outcome. They needed to be faster than Ferrari to finish ahead which they did not do.
Guess you will have to start supporting Ferrari as they WILL challenge for wins this season. Evidence of this was clear as from the first day of pre season testing. Go check the "numbers"

Strawman.
He's not saying Ferrari didn't put Merc under pressure.
He's saying Merc made several strategic mistakes (in Practice, Qualifying and the Race) and that allowed Ferrari to beat it because they had closed the perfomance gap and the conditions of the race. But Merc still was the fastest car, if only by a little and this makes Ferrari/Vettel win all the more glorious.

[iotar__]

Strawman.
He's not saying Ferrari didn't put Merc under pressure.
He's saying Merc made several strategic mistakes (in Practice, Qualifying and the Race) and that allowed Ferrari to beat it because they had closed the perfomance gap and the conditions of the race. But Merc still was the fastest car, if only by a little and this makes Ferrari/Vettel win all the more glorious.

"Strategic mistakes" and their impact are exaggerated or made up. Ferrari could do two stops that put them at track position advantage compared to Mercedes' three in the event of safety car. No strategy decisions can change that. Same for qualifying and medium tyres overblown drama, one set of mediums is not changing much.

What else? Don't tell me it's medium-hards sequence or pitting under SC. What practice mistake? Partly missed FP1 as a semi-excuse for less than stellar driver's pace/tyre management? I agree though that they did make mistake of not giving Rosberg info and right strategy but it wouldn't have changed the result. Without SC Merc is probably winning it on account of having two cars, pole position and forcing Ferrari out of their "own race mode" but only slightly. No point in dissecting it.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

GPR-A
I do not see the points above being any more hypothetical than your "numbers" that fail to compare like for like.
Reality is Ferrari had the pace to put Merc under pressure and they had the pace to finish ahead of Merc in the race.
None of your hypothetical excuses can change the actual outcome. They needed to be faster than Ferrari to finish ahead which they did not do.
Guess you will have to start supporting Ferrari as they WILL challenge for wins this season. Evidence of this was clear as from the first day of pre season testing. Go check the "numbers"

Oh, but then why did they failed to challenge in Melbourne? OR Were we watching some other season?
I would support anyone who does a good job and deserves to be at the front on merit. But I wouldn't depend upon fortune tellers to do that.

[Andres125sx]

What some people ignore is no car has an infinite operating temperature window

If a car is strong on hot temperatures, it will struggle with cold temperatures

Ferrari was strong with a track temperarture of up to 62ºC (142ºF), Mercedes struggled with that temperature as they put too much temperature on their tires and suffer too much degradation, thermal degradation

With more common temperatures it will be the opposite, Ferrari will struggle putting temperature on their tires, while Mercedes will make the most of them even if track temperature is cold. We saw it even on Malaysia, on Q3 with rain, Hamilton made the pole even when he did his lap with a lot more water on the track compared to Vettel´s lap.

If we see a half of the seasson with this temperatures, Ferrari will be a title contender, but obviously we will only see some more race, if they´re lucky enough

[Chene_Mostert]

What some people ignore is no car has an infinite operating temperature window

If a car is strong on hot temperatures, it will struggle with cold temperatures

Ferrari was strong with a track temperarture of up to 62ºC (142ºF), Mercedes struggled with that temperature as they put too much temperature on their tires and suffer too much degradation, thermal degradation

With more common temperatures it will be the opposite, Ferrari will struggle putting temperature on their tires, while Mercedes will make the most of them even if track temperature is cold. We saw it even on Malaysia, on Q3 with rain, Hamilton made the pole even when he did his lap with a lot more water on the track compared to Vettel´s lap.

If we see a half of the seasson with this temperatures, Ferrari will be a title contender, but obviously we will only see some more race, if they´re lucky enough

The idea that Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 struggled in the "higher" temperatures is just some made up excuse by serious Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 supporters.
Is there any official info to support this?
Media speculation is not considered official.
For all we know they had tyre trouble because they were not in a position to "save fuel, Save tyres, lift and coast, maintain the gap."
The illusion of this "super chassis" with best aero, best tyre wear, best team strategies was established Last year with totally out of proportion PU performance. Not the case this season, as the season progresses we will see more shortcomings.

[Just_a_fan]

Not the case this season, as the season progresses we will see more shortcomings.

You may be right, but on the basis of two races where one was very hot and one wasn't, the evidence we have so far suggests that the Mercedes is temperature sensitive in tyre use.

It's great that you're a Ferrari fan, but please try to stay away from fanboyism in the race threads.

[SectorOne]

The idea that Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 struggled in the "higher" temperatures is just some made up excuse by serious Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 supporters. Is there any official info to support this? Media speculation is not considered official.

Does the driver winning the Malaysian Grand Prix count?

"They probably struggled a bit with the heat, more than expected," explained Vettel.

Why Ferrari were so close? My viewpoints,

1, Mercedes W06 is a much more sensitive car then the W05.
Scarbs mentioned they were fiddling alot with setup after the engine problem in FP1.

2, The Mercedes suffered more degradation then the Ferrari. Not to be confused with tire wear.
3, The track temps in Malaysia was abnormal with 62 degrees. Something not seen in all of 2014 for example.
4, The Ferrari simply handles the heat better and is one way to explain how you cut down a 35 sec race advantage in two weeks time without really changing anything on the car.
5, Mercedes half*ssed attempt to do a three stopper which in reality was a two stopper with the addition of 4 laps.


In China we will know for sure where Ferrari is.

[giantfan10]

The idea that Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 struggled in the "higher" temperatures is just some made up excuse by serious Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 supporters. Is there any official info to support this? Media speculation is not considered official.

Does the driver winning the Malaysian Grand Prix count?

"They probably struggled a bit with the heat, more than expected," explained Vettel.

Why Ferrari were so close? My viewpoints,

1, Mercedes W06 is a much more sensitive car then the W05.
Scarbs mentioned they were fiddling alot with setup after the engine problem in FP1.

2, The Mercedes suffered more degradation then the Ferrari. Not to be confused with tire wear.
3, The track temps in Malaysia was abnormal with 62 degrees. Something not seen in all of 2014 for example.
4, The Ferrari simply handles the heat better and is one way to explain how you cut down a 35 sec race advantage in two weeks time without really changing anything on the car.
5, Mercedes half*ssed attempt to do a three stopper which in reality was a two stopper with the addition of 4 laps.


In China we will know for sure where Ferrari is.

Ferrari didnt cut down a 35 second race advantage because there was no true 35 second advantage...in your brain the amount of seconds car 1 finishes ahead of car 2 is the advantage....that cannot be further from the truth....

[Chene_Mostert]

Strawman.
He's not saying Ferrari didn't put Merc under pressure.
He's saying Merc made several strategic mistakes (in Practice, Qualifying and the Race) and that allowed Ferrari to beat it because they had closed the perfomance gap and the conditions of the race. But Merc still was the fastest car, if only by a little and this makes Ferrari/Vettel win all the more glorious.

"Strategic mistakes" and their impact are exaggerated or made up. Ferrari could do two stops that put them at track position advantage compared to Mercedes' three in the event of safety car. No strategy decisions can change that. Same for qualifying and medium tyres overblown drama, one set of mediums is not changing much.

What else? Don't tell me it's medium-hards sequence or pitting under SC. What practice mistake? Partly missed FP1 as a semi-excuse for less than stellar driver's pace/tyre management? I agree though that they did make mistake of not giving Rosberg info and right strategy but it wouldn't have changed the result. Without SC Merc is probably winning it on account of having two cars, pole position and forcing Ferrari out of their "own race mode" but only slightly. No point in dissecting it.

Totally agree with you on the Rosberg strategy, seems to me the Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 team's "strategy" is to allow Rosberg to finish behind Lewis, irrespective of who is in front of Lewis, as long as they maintain the illusion of "we allow our drivers to fight"

[Andres125sx]

What some people ignore is no car has an infinite operating temperature window

If a car is strong on hot temperatures, it will struggle with cold temperatures

Ferrari was strong with a track temperarture of up to 62ºC (142ºF), Mercedes struggled with that temperature as they put too much temperature on their tires and suffer too much degradation, thermal degradation

With more common temperatures it will be the opposite, Ferrari will struggle putting temperature on their tires, while Mercedes will make the most of them even if track temperature is cold. We saw it even on Malaysia, on Q3 with rain, Hamilton made the pole even when he did his lap with a lot more water on the track compared to Vettel´s lap.

If we see a half of the seasson with this temperatures, Ferrari will be a title contender, but obviously we will only see some more race, if they´re lucky enough

The idea that Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 struggled in the "higher" temperatures is just some made up excuse by serious Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 supporters.
Is there any official info to support this?

I´m far from a Mercedes supporter, but facts talk by theirselves

The official info is Melbourne and Sepang races

There´re also many analysis for both races, and this is common conclusion, not just mine

[Chene_Mostert]

What some people ignore is no car has an infinite operating temperature window

If a car is strong on hot temperatures, it will struggle with cold temperatures

Ferrari was strong with a track temperarture of up to 62ºC (142ºF), Mercedes struggled with that temperature as they put too much temperature on their tires and suffer too much degradation, thermal degradation

With more common temperatures it will be the opposite, Ferrari will struggle putting temperature on their tires, while Mercedes will make the most of them even if track temperature is cold. We saw it even on Malaysia, on Q3 with rain, Hamilton made the pole even when he did his lap with a lot more water on the track compared to Vettel´s lap.

If we see a half of the seasson with this temperatures, Ferrari will be a title contender, but obviously we will only see some more race, if they´re lucky enough

The idea that Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 struggled in the "higher" temperatures is just some made up excuse by serious Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 supporters.
Is there any official info to support this?

I´m far from a Mercedes supporter, but facts talk by theirselves

The official info is Melbourne and Sepang races

There´re also many analysis for both races, and this is common conclusion, not just mine

BTW race results are not facts or official info, they are results.
And were are the "many Analyses" that you speak of? I see a lot of comments & reports that use the word "probably".

The facts are that Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 was out paced during the Sepang race.
As for Melbourne, the general consensus is that the track does not reflect correctly relative performance, but maybe that excuse is only relevant if the results are in favour of Mercedes AMG Petronas F1?
Also consider that Ferrari lost 20sec to Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 in the first 17 laps being stuck behind a slow Williams.
But again the excuse of slower cars in front only holds water if it tips the results in favour of Mercedes AMG Petronas F1?
So lets see what facts we get from Shanghai, by no means will it be a guaranteed Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 victory.