The third ever Russian Grand Prix at Sochi was won by Nico Rosberg after he charged off from pole not to come under threat again. Lewis Hamilton finished an unhappy second while Kimi Raikkonen completed the podium for Ferrari in third place.
Zero more and he gets no penalty at all. Why did they even bother with rules like that?RZS10 wrote:Just a reprimand for Lewis, second of the season - One more and he drops on the grid by 10
No, we swear we wouldn't, it's all misunderstanding.
So Hamilton just got those championships because Rosberg had a crappy crew.3jawchuck wrote:This is what happens when your team swap your race crew for the other guy's :vripper wrote:If Rosberg doesn't mess something at start he's going to have a super easy victory
/s
I think they are closer, but they are probably not working the tyres well on this track.GPR-A wrote:What's going on with Ferrari? They brought PU upgrades and a new front wing and landed up 8 tenths behind (Nico's Q2 against Vettel's Q3 best times)? Nico's pole time is actually slower than the Q2 time and it was natural given the fact that Lewis was out of contention. It would be a safe assumption that the times would have been much better on Mercedes' cars if both would have gone for pole, probably dipping under 1:35.xxx. So the difference to Ferrari would have been larger too.
And in Chinese GP, they claimed the gap to Mercedes was just 1 tenth.
Sky showed some nice comparisons. They (Surer) claim the rear suspension to be the gamechanger: Merc is running a much softer suspension and, thus, has more traction out of the corners. It looks nearly like the blown diffusor RedBulls when exiting the corners like on rails. On the other hand the Ferraris had a lot of power oversteer. Surer said most cars you can not run as soft as the Merc as the driver would loose the feeling for the car.ringo wrote:I think they are closer, but they are probably not working the tyres well on this track.GPR-A wrote:What's going on with Ferrari? They brought PU upgrades and a new front wing and landed up 8 tenths behind (Nico's Q2 against Vettel's Q3 best times)? Nico's pole time is actually slower than the Q2 time and it was natural given the fact that Lewis was out of contention. It would be a safe assumption that the times would have been much better on Mercedes' cars if both would have gone for pole, probably dipping under 1:35.xxx. So the difference to Ferrari would have been larger too.
And in Chinese GP, they claimed the gap to Mercedes was just 1 tenth.
What's wrong with Ferrari? Nothing, it's same as China where they were 0,1 behind:basti313 wrote:Sky showed some nice comparisons. They (Surer) claim the rear suspension to be the gamechanger: Merc is running a much softer suspension and, thus, has more traction out of the corners. It looks nearly like the blown diffusor RedBulls when exiting the corners like on rails. On the other hand the Ferraris had a lot of power oversteer. Surer said most cars you can not run as soft as the Merc as the driver would loose the feeling for the car.ringo wrote:I think they are closer, but they are probably not working the tyres well on this track.GPR-A wrote:What's going on with Ferrari? They brought PU upgrades and a new front wing and landed up 8 tenths behind (Nico's Q2 against Vettel's Q3 best times)? Nico's pole time is actually slower than the Q2 time and it was natural given the fact that Lewis was out of contention. It would be a safe assumption that the times would have been much better on Mercedes' cars if both would have gone for pole, probably dipping under 1:35.xxx. So the difference to Ferrari would have been larger too.
And in Chinese GP, they claimed the gap to Mercedes was just 1 tenth.
One stop = tyre management equally important as top speed (stretching stints(?), pace around pitstops) , the goal is the second place and competition is Williams. Max speed http://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-o ... ormation-0:Konpattsh wrote:I don't know if i'm mistaken but during FP3 & Qualification looks like vettel was doing really fast sector 2 and good sector 3. Perhaps he choose a race setup for passing other cars on certain places like at turn 13 and to be able to stay close enough to get drs easily. As he new already he will have 5 places grid penalty
Seems like you did not really understand my post. I am not talking about tires.iotar__ wrote:What's wrong with Ferrari? Nothing, it's same as China where they were 0,1 behind:basti313 wrote:Sky showed some nice comparisons. They (Surer) claim the rear suspension to be the gamechanger: Merc is running a much softer suspension and, thus, has more traction out of the corners. It looks nearly like the blown diffusor RedBulls when exiting the corners like on rails. On the other hand the Ferraris had a lot of power oversteer. Surer said most cars you can not run as soft as the Merc as the driver would loose the feeling for the car.ringo wrote:
I think they are closer, but they are probably not working the tyres well on this track.
- China Rosberg - 1st F 0,51 - 2nd F 0,84
- Russia - 1st F 0,71 - 2nd F 1,14
A. Two tenths = Rosberg's lap 0,1 better, better Ferrari 0,1 worse, second Ferrari even worse (driver). Making up 0,8 and using Q2 vs Q3 because you liked it is all wrong. Not everyone got better on the second run in Q3, plus Hamilton wasn't there in China either (wrong anyway).
B. So now it's softs that Ferrari supposedly have a problem with and Merc is perfect at? I thought it was mediums which they don't run at all. How do you explain qualifying then which is on supersofts? I guess that covers all three compounds. Only hope is US and H but the pattern is not optimistic
