- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
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.
SiLo wrote:That's a very sensible way to look at things, and good use of previous knowledge about the fuel levels they run. The Mercedes always looks heavy and lethargic during testing.ironrose wrote:Andrew Benson Theory:
Right, now the dust has settled after that little pre-lunch lap-time excitement, let’s have a little think about what it might all mean. Sebastian Vettel set a 1:19.0 on ultras and a 19.3 on super-softs in the Ferrari. But a) it seems he may have deliberately backed off on both those laps; and b) he did a 19.3 on the softs - which should theoretically be at least a second slower than the ultras and 0.6-0.7secs off the supers. So let’s take that 19.3 as his benchmark.
Meanwhile, Lewis Hamilton did a 19.3 on the ultra-softs. But we already know he can do at least a 19.84 on the softs from Tuesday.
In theory, that puts the Ferrari 0.5secs up on the Mercedes. However… Traditionally, Ferrari run less fuel in their cars in testing than Mercedes do. Of course it’s possible that they have changed that, but let’s assume for a moment that both teams are doing the same as normal.
Mercedes are widely believed to run about 60kg of fuel in their car in testing - that’s two seconds’ worth; Ferrari about 30kg - that’s one second.
So if that’s the case here, Vettel’s potential quickest lap on qualifying-level low fuel is an 18.3 on softs. Hamilton’s is a 17.8. A half-second advantage for the Mercedes. Which based on recent history, is probably about what would be expected. Perhaps that’s why Vettel said Ferrari have a lot of work to do...
Come on Gary Anderson ... Lets hear yours ...
Gary Anderson will probably claim that Ferrari are a second quicker than everyone else somehow.
f1316 wrote:SiLo wrote:That's a very sensible way to look at things, and good use of previous knowledge about the fuel levels they run. The Mercedes always looks heavy and lethargic during testing.ironrose wrote:Andrew Benson Theory:
Right, now the dust has settled after that little pre-lunch lap-time excitement, let’s have a little think about what it might all mean. Sebastian Vettel set a 1:19.0 on ultras and a 19.3 on super-softs in the Ferrari. But a) it seems he may have deliberately backed off on both those laps; and b) he did a 19.3 on the softs - which should theoretically be at least a second slower than the ultras and 0.6-0.7secs off the supers. So let’s take that 19.3 as his benchmark.
Meanwhile, Lewis Hamilton did a 19.3 on the ultra-softs. But we already know he can do at least a 19.84 on the softs from Tuesday.
In theory, that puts the Ferrari 0.5secs up on the Mercedes. However… Traditionally, Ferrari run less fuel in their cars in testing than Mercedes do. Of course it’s possible that they have changed that, but let’s assume for a moment that both teams are doing the same as normal.
Mercedes are widely believed to run about 60kg of fuel in their car in testing - that’s two seconds’ worth; Ferrari about 30kg - that’s one second.
So if that’s the case here, Vettel’s potential quickest lap on qualifying-level low fuel is an 18.3 on softs. Hamilton’s is a 17.8. A half-second advantage for the Mercedes. Which based on recent history, is probably about what would be expected. Perhaps that’s why Vettel said Ferrari have a lot of work to do...
Come on Gary Anderson ... Lets hear yours ...
Gary Anderson will probably claim that Ferrari are a second quicker than everyone else somehow.
If you knew you were running low fuel - lower than your rivals usually do - why would you feel the need to back off/sandbag? What would be the point unless you're intentionally trying to hide performance?
Can we also be clear that Gary Anderson has absolutely zero pro-Ferrari leaning, in fact it's always coming across as quite the opposite - in all his previous broadcasting jobs, I've never heard him say one nice thing about any Ferrari car; because he now thinks the 2017 Ferrari is good, we shouldn't suddenly be treating him like a fan boy.
I'm certain that when Lewis says Ferrari are the ones to beat, he's playing games; likewise though, I think the same is true when Vettel downplays their chances (and backs off on his quick laps).
The idea that the teams are always at a certain fuel levelironrose wrote:Andrew Benson Theory:
Right, now the dust has settled after that little pre-lunch lap-time excitement, let’s have a little think about what it might all mean. Sebastian Vettel set a 1:19.0 on ultras and a 19.3 on super-softs in the Ferrari. But a) it seems he may have deliberately backed off on both those laps; and b) he did a 19.3 on the softs - which should theoretically be at least a second slower than the ultras and 0.6-0.7secs off the supers. So let’s take that 19.3 as his benchmark.
Meanwhile, Lewis Hamilton did a 19.3 on the ultra-softs. But we already know he can do at least a 19.84 on the softs from Tuesday.
In theory, that puts the Ferrari 0.5secs up on the Mercedes. However… Traditionally, Ferrari run less fuel in their cars in testing than Mercedes do. Of course it’s possible that they have changed that, but let’s assume for a moment that both teams are doing the same as normal.
Mercedes are widely believed to run about 60kg of fuel in their car in testing - that’s two seconds’ worth; Ferrari about 30kg - that’s one second.
So if that’s the case here, Vettel’s potential quickest lap on qualifying-level low fuel is an 18.3 on softs. Hamilton’s is a 17.8. A half-second advantage for the Mercedes. Which based on recent history, is probably about what would be expected. Perhaps that’s why Vettel said Ferrari have a lot of work to do...
Come on Gary Anderson ... Lets hear yours ...
14:28 During the first stint, with both on soft tyres, Vettel averaged 1m25.1s over 14 laps. Plus, he spent two laps tucked up behind Kvyat. Ricciardo averaged 1m26.3s over 12 laps. Advantage Ferrari so far.
KARUN CHANDHOK: Been to see cars at Turn 3, 4 and 5 now. The Ferrari and Mercedes are in a class of their own. I find it really interesting that the Mercedes looks to have much less rake than the Red Bull or Force India who have traditionally had the higher rear ride height, but also less than the Ferrari. They're obviously still generating the front downforce somehow. At turn 5 it's clear that the driveability and traction from the Merc is still the gold standard though.
Beat me by mere secondsSevach wrote:KARUN CHANDHOK: Been to see cars at Turn 3, 4 and 5 now. The Ferrari and Mercedes are in a class of their own. I find it really interesting that the Mercedes looks to have much less rake than the Red Bull or Force India who have traditionally had the higher rear ride height, but also less than the Ferrari. They're obviously still generating the front downforce somehow. At turn 5 it's clear that the driveability and traction from the Merc is still the gold standard though.
We have to be fast here too =D>Restomaniac wrote:Beat me by mere secondsSevach wrote:KARUN CHANDHOK: Been to see cars at Turn 3, 4 and 5 now. The Ferrari and Mercedes are in a class of their own. I find it really interesting that the Mercedes looks to have much less rake than the Red Bull or Force India who have traditionally had the higher rear ride height, but also less than the Ferrari. They're obviously still generating the front downforce somehow. At turn 5 it's clear that the driveability and traction from the Merc is still the gold standard though.
Damn you caught meSevach wrote:We have to be fast here too =D>Restomaniac wrote:Beat me by mere secondsSevach wrote:
You weren't sandbagging, right?
