On the back of his first pole position last weekend, Mercedes driver Valtteri Bottas topped the second day of in-season testing at Sakhir. The Finn ejoyed a trouble-free day and completed a massive 143 laps.
Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
We know that the tires are going to be more durable this year. They are wider, plus Pirelli is lowering the minimum tire pressure limits. This means more grip and less degradation, so there is a good chance that this year's soft will equate to last year's medium, perhaps even better.
Another thing to note is that the soft(yellow) tire is going to be available at every gp, because of the 3 tire compound rule. Now because the tires are going to be more durable, Pirelli might go one step softer for some GPs which means that some races where medium was available last year, might not be available this year so perhaps Mercedes is trying to optimize their car around the tire that is going to be used mostly.
Good points. Someone tell this to Ferrari please! They are going on and on with Mediums.
If I recall correctly Toto said last year that mercedes used mainly the mediums because their test program needed to do a lot of laps. They did almost 700 laps in the first 4 days which they would be eating through a lot more tyre sets if they were using the softer compounds. This year clearly there is a need to allocate more of the testing program to understanding the new tyres so its normal they are using a more variable palette of colours in their rubber.
Logie wrote:Is it true Sauber are using 2016 PU? Is that the plan for the 2017 season or just first test? Would be a shame as the car looks tidy.
NM found a news article about it, Sauber can spent more money on Aero with cheaper engines in 2017
Why spend money on Aero R&D, when the new PU could potentially deliver similar performance, if the same money is paid to Ferrari? It's a chicken headache situation. You pay money to buy more power and settle with compromised Aero OR compromise with power and spend on Aero R&D.
Except the 16 engine now has to last an extra race and more time on full throttle, so will they have to run it in a lower average power setting than Ferrari last year? And that's before the 17 engines move further away from them with their development.
I don't think they will save engine life by reducing power. That would be pretty stupid. They can really take a penalty here or there when well timed, especially since they will probably start from the end every race almost. better to use all the already limited juice. Plus I bet engine costs won't be very high for an extra "old" PU
Does anyone know what was the stint length that Ricciardo did? He started with 1m21.153s (at 16:46) on Softs and was still lapping in 1m21.xxx when the chequered flag came up (at 17:27). Not sure how many did he do? Before he started the stint, he had completed 31 laps and then the final tally was showing 48. Not sure what happened in between.
Assuming he did a 15 lap stint and it was like a third stint of a race, it is still quite a performance change compared to 2016 Race, where the best stint was the second stint in 1m28.xxx.
On third day of testing last year, on his long stints, Kvyat was doing 1m31.xxx on Mediums.
Last edited by GPR-A duplicate2 on 01 Mar 2017, 14:47, edited 1 time in total.
GPR-A wrote:Why spend money on Aero R&D, when the new PU could potentially deliver similar performance, if the same money is paid to Ferrari? It's a chicken headache situation. You pay money to buy more power and settle with compromised Aero OR compromise with power and spend on Aero R&D.
You could argue that in Sauber's case there is much more performance to unlock from the aero side of things. In all honesty, I think the 2016 Ferrari engine will stand up fairly well to the 2017 one. Sensible decision on their part for me.
Plus, new aero regs, so better to have a good aero car which will be developed on over the next few seasons.
They can then fit the latest Ferrari (or other supplier) PU next year in the knowledge that they have a good understanding of the new regs.
If they'd built a more basic aero car then they'd be playing catch-up in coming seasons.
Favourite driver: Lando Norris
Favourite team: McLaren
Turned down the chance to meet Vettel at Silverstone in 2007. He was a test driver at the time and I didn't think it was worth queuing!! 🤦🏻♂️
I'm kinda pleased to see Stroll in the gravel so much (not to mention other drivers) - not as a disrespect to him or Williams but because it's indicative that there's now a big step up to Formula 1 again, even for some of those who have only driven recent F1 cars (note that Massa had a big tank slapper and caught it).
Stroll will learn but it's good that it's not easy for him.
f1316 wrote:I'm kinda pleased to see Stroll in the gravel so much (not to mention other drivers) - not as a disrespect to him or Williams but because it's indicative that there's now a big step up to Formula 1 again, even for some of those who have only driven recent F1 cars (note that Massa had a big tank slapper and caught it).
Stroll will learn but it's good that it's not easy for him.
I thought the same. Didn't Bottas smack the wall on a corner yesterday too?
marvin78 wrote:That's wat Mercedes does since 2014: try to fool everyone. It's boring by the way.
So what if its boring. Its testing, not qualifying or race day!
As you say it. It's boring, that they try to fool everyone ("Ferrari is hard to beat"... etc. from 2016) and that it is so obvious.
I know what testing is. That really is not the point.
I think you're forgetting quite how close Ferrari were at the beginning of 2016. They were only a tenth or two off in the race. They were beaten easily in qualifying but Ferrari only chose to do one run to save tyres. Ferrari were hard to beat in the race and only a bad strategy call gifted the win to Mercedes. the end of 2016 it was a completely different story as Merc developed their way into the distance. but it was quite close at the beginning of the season.
f1316 wrote:I'm kinda pleased to see Stroll in the gravel so much (not to mention other drivers) - not as a disrespect to him or Williams but because it's indicative that there's now a big step up to Formula 1 again, even for some of those who have only driven recent F1 cars (note that Massa had a big tank slapper and caught it).
Stroll will learn but it's good that it's not easy for him.
That's one of the things Bernie wanted, to make the cars harder to drive.
f1316 wrote:I'm kinda pleased to see Stroll in the gravel so much (not to mention other drivers) - not as a disrespect to him or Williams but because it's indicative that there's now a big step up to Formula 1 again, even for some of those who have only driven recent F1 cars (note that Massa had a big tank slapper and caught it).
Stroll will learn but it's good that it's not easy for him.
I thought the same. Didn't Bottas smack the wall on a corner yesterday too?
F1 cars now have become true monsters. Almost a 1000 bhp, wider tires, relatively low grip. Even the more experienced drivers on the grid are having a handful. It's great to see the drivers needing to work for their money. Hamilton told after his first day that he's bruised and bumped because of the car.
I love how everyone is saying, 'it's just testing' clinging on to dear life and hope that someone can take it to the Mercedes-Benz team. IMO, from my 23 years experience of watching the sport, I feel Mercedes has increased their advantage from previous years. What's worse for us fans is that from a good driver in the second car, we've now got a mediocre one. Unless Daimler decide to pull the plug on F1, the WCC is decided and if LH has 80% of the reliability Bottas has, the WDC is done as well.
"Sebastian there's very, you're a member of a very select few.. Stewart, Lauda, Piquet, Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio.. VETTEL!"
Gerhardsa wrote:
So what if its boring. Its testing, not qualifying or race day!
As you say it. It's boring, that they try to fool everyone ("Ferrari is hard to beat"... etc. from 2016) and that it is so obvious.
I know what testing is. That really is not the point.
I think you're forgetting quite how close Ferrari were at the beginning of 2016. They were only a tenth or two off in the race. They were beaten easily in qualifying but Ferrari only chose to do one run to save tyres. Ferrari were hard to beat in the race and only a bad strategy call gifted the win to Mercedes. the end of 2016 it was a completely different story as Merc developed their way into the distance. but it was quite close at the beginning of the season.
I didn't forget that. For me it was part of the fooling.
