2018 Canadian Grand Prix, Montreal June 8-10

[Morteza]

[foxmulder_ms]

Hamilton is getting old like me. I am disappointed with him today.

[Chuckjr]

Wonder if the contract hang up is messing with Lewis' focus?

Congrats to Vettel.

McLaren...holy god. What a disaster. Behind Sauber?? If Red Bull choose Honda, that will say a lot.

[godlameroso]

It's a long race with at least one safety car.

[JPBD1990]

Just curious: How big should have been the gap between Ferrari with the updated engine (gain of just about 10 hp) and Mercedes for you not to talk like you do right now? Vettel told that he in fact had a mistake in his last run which cost him time. He told he should have been faster.
Let's say 2 tenths difference. Would this have been enough in your opinion to not tell that Ferrari was down on power?

New engine should be at least 1/10th faster than the Australia performance of the initial version (which even in Baku could outdrag a Mercedes getting an extra tow). The Mercedes engine has 6 races under its belt, including those where it was turned up several times to clear traffic and chase leaders so... end of life engine vs cutting edge iteration of a better engine? Half a second?

You'd hope it'd be that much, given all the money spent on PU development and the amount of complaints about this being an engine formula of the past few years.

I'd also be careful arguing that 'really, Ferrari should've been even faster because Vettel said so'. What's the time difference between Bottas and Hamilton usually? If Hamilton had been 'on it' today, what would Merc's maximum pace have been? Faster than Bottas? How much by? A tenth? Two? Makes him faster than Ferrari...with an exhausted engine.

Dude, I know this forum is mostly about massaging everyone’s own egos so your statement is likely riddled with bias... but if you think ANY engine manufacturer is finding half a second from one iteration to the next, 5 years into the formula, after 6-8 years of development... you’re watching a different series.

I know it may suit your “Mercedes would have walked this if Lewis was on form, if they liked the HS tyres, if they had brought their new engine” narrative, but none of that happened. It’s that simple.

Nobody seems to be able to enjoy sport without tearing down the competition. I thought qualifying was great, I think the top 3 makes for a really interesting race, I think Ferrari + Vettel simply did the best job yesterday (just like ricc/redbull in Monaco, ham/Mercedes in Spain, etc).

Everyone needs to get over themselves a little bit.

[JPBD1990]

Additionally, it’s been said in previous pages of this thread - but the narrative that the Mercedes engine will be severely handicapped because it’s done 6 races is just patently wrong. They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs”. Even Bottas said in interviews leading into the weekend that “it’s not like the old engine is a bad engine”.

This is what Mercedes do every weekend. They position themselves as the underdog, because they know people are sick of the “predictability” of them winning. It’s pure and simple marketing, and they’re great at it. Now if they win, they did it on an engine with 8000km on it! What a marvel of engineering, right?! Even though, them and all of their customer teams are running the same spec engine. They simply wouldn’t do that if it was a crusty ol unit only laps from exploding.

[Restomaniac]

Additionally, it’s been said in previous pages of this thread - but the narrative that the Mercedes engine will be severely handicapped because it’s done 6 races is just patently wrong. They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs”. Even Bottas said in interviews leading into the weekend that “it’s not like the old engine is a bad engine”.

This is what Mercedes do every weekend. They position themselves as the underdog, because they know people are sick of the “predictability” of them winning. It’s pure and simple marketing, and they’re great at it. Now if they win, they did it on an engine with 8000km on it! What a marvel of engineering, right?! Even though, them and all of their customer teams are running the same spec engine. They simply wouldn’t do that if it was a crusty ol unit only laps from exploding.

‘They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs” ‘. Yes because they shelved the new engine just because they wanted to. It had nothing to do with it having a design fault that meant it’s failure chances were far higher. Are you aware that this engine was scheduled to be reused at one of the none power tracks? Why do you think that is?

Sorry but your arguement is very flawed and it’s pretty much.
‘If this engine was that down on power they would use an engine that has a far higher chance of failure. So Mercedes doing this is just them playing a little game.’

No team would purposely hamstring themselves like this. Your narrative is way off.
What has actually happened is that the current Mercedes engine IS down on power but as it was planned to be reused is not a ‘crusty ol unit only laps from exploding’ they could not discount the exploding bit on the new unit however.

[JPBD1990]

Additionally, it’s been said in previous pages of this thread - but the narrative that the Mercedes engine will be severely handicapped because it’s done 6 races is just patently wrong. They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs”. Even Bottas said in interviews leading into the weekend that “it’s not like the old engine is a bad engine”.

This is what Mercedes do every weekend. They position themselves as the underdog, because they know people are sick of the “predictability” of them winning. It’s pure and simple marketing, and they’re great at it. Now if they win, they did it on an engine with 8000km on it! What a marvel of engineering, right?! Even though, them and all of their customer teams are running the same spec engine. They simply wouldn’t do that if it was a crusty ol unit only laps from exploding.

‘They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs” ‘. Yes because they shelved the new engine just because they wanted to. It had nothing to do with it having a design fault that meant it’s failure chances were far higher. Are you aware that this engine was scheduled to be reused at one of the none power tracks? Why do you think that is?

Sorry but your arguement is very flawed and it’s pretty much.
‘If this engine was that down on power they would use an engine that has a far higher chance of failure. So Mercedes doing this is just them playing a little game.’

No team would purposely hamstring themselves like this. Your narrative is way off.
What has actually happened is that the current Mercedes engine IS down on power but as it was planned to be reused is not a ‘crusty ol unit only laps from exploding’ they could not discount the exploding bit on the new unit however.

That wasn’t my point at all, and of course I don’t think they delayed the engine to play games. My point about marketing is relevant because they couldn’t bring the update - not that they delayed the upgrade for the sake of that narrative.

My point was that everyone’s like “wow, Ferrari was only 8 hundredths away from Bottas even though he’s got a super old engine”. Well, the engine, as you rightly point out, is absolutely fine and was in fact scheduled to be at another event regardless. Sure, I have no doubt that it is down on power. But the other commentor was making the point that between Mercedes old engine and ferrari’s new engine should equate to .5 per lap! That’s ludicrous. May as well bring a new engine to every 3rd event if you’re going to be half a second faster than the next fastest car, who cares about grid penalties?

[iotar__]

Personally i think Hamiltons performance was down to the HS not being in the ideal range.

Wonder if the contract hang up is messing with Lewis' focus?

This is what we're dealing with here.

A. He's never quicker and Bottas slower for that reason of course. Always perfect range for both when you like the result . I though it was clear that, and I quote: "Bottas is struggling with tyres" and pole for Hamilton was a formality?
B. Same contract delay like in every other race? What a burden anyway.

Where are the headlines - old engine cost Mercedes a pole?

[popovic94]

Just curious: How big should have been the gap between Ferrari with the updated engine (gain of just about 10 hp) and Mercedes for you not to talk like you do right now? Vettel told that he in fact had a mistake in his last run which cost him time. He told he should have been faster.
Let's say 2 tenths difference. Would this have been enough in your opinion to not tell that Ferrari was down on power?

New engine should be at least 1/10th faster than the Australia performance of the initial version (which even in Baku could outdrag a Mercedes getting an extra tow). The Mercedes engine has 6 races under its belt, including those where it was turned up several times to clear traffic and chase leaders so... end of life engine vs cutting edge iteration of a better engine? Half a second?

You'd hope it'd be that much, given all the money spent on PU development and the amount of complaints about this being an engine formula of the past few years.

Half a second? I'm not an expert, but I doubt an engine loses about 30 hp over the course of 6 races? Mercedes had to fight in a few races, but put it in cruise control in at least two races.

It was told that Ferrari's suspected ERS trick would give them 20 hp which would be equal to 0.3 seconds (in Baku). Let's say they don't have this gain anymore and considering their engine update was worth 10 hp shouldn't they still have been behind Mercedes on a power sensitive track?
In his second run in Q3 Vettel was 1 tenth faster than in his first run after S1 and S2, but made a mistake in S3 and therefore almost didn't improve. If it was not for the mistake, he should have been faster than Bottas by 2 tenths.

Nico Rosberg said on Sky F1 after FP3 something like old engine is costing them 5 tenths, he would know information like that.

[Restomaniac]

Additionally, it’s been said in previous pages of this thread - but the narrative that the Mercedes engine will be severely handicapped because it’s done 6 races is just patently wrong. They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs”. Even Bottas said in interviews leading into the weekend that “it’s not like the old engine is a bad engine”.

This is what Mercedes do every weekend. They position themselves as the underdog, because they know people are sick of the “predictability” of them winning. It’s pure and simple marketing, and they’re great at it. Now if they win, they did it on an engine with 8000km on it! What a marvel of engineering, right?! Even though, them and all of their customer teams are running the same spec engine. They simply wouldn’t do that if it was a crusty ol unit only laps from exploding.

‘They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs” ‘. Yes because they shelved the new engine just because they wanted to. It had nothing to do with it having a design fault that meant it’s failure chances were far higher. Are you aware that this engine was scheduled to be reused at one of the none power tracks? Why do you think that is?

Sorry but your arguement is very flawed and it’s pretty much.
‘If this engine was that down on power they would use an engine that has a far higher chance of failure. So Mercedes doing this is just them playing a little game.’

No team would purposely hamstring themselves like this. Your narrative is way off.
What has actually happened is that the current Mercedes engine IS down on power but as it was planned to be reused is not a ‘crusty ol unit only laps from exploding’ they could not discount the exploding bit on the new unit however.

That wasn’t my point at all, and of course I don’t think they delayed the engine to play games. My point about marketing is relevant because they couldn’t bring the update - not that they delayed the upgrade for the sake of that narrative.

My point was that everyone’s like “wow, Ferrari was only 8 hundredths away from Bottas even though he’s got a super old engine”. Well, the engine, as you rightly point out, is absolutely fine and was in fact scheduled to be at another event regardless. Sure, I have no doubt that it is down on power. But the other commentor was making the point that between Mercedes old engine and ferrari’s new engine should equate to .5 per lap! That’s ludicrous. May as well bring a new engine to every 3rd event if you’re going to be half a second faster than the next fastest car, who cares about grid penalties?

Its fine as it's not about to go bang but it's going to be well down on power (as engines become with use).

You are missing a key point though.
It's a old Spec 1 engine Vs a new Spec 2 engine. It's a new Spec Ferrari engine for a reason!

0.5s difference on a track like Canada (which is the key point)? Easily.
So your idea of bringing a new engine to every event only works if every event gets a better Spec engine too.

[komninosm]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DfSJlMWXcAAvRaA.jpg

I've lost track of the rules for tires.
How many do they get? Race tires only 6 total?

[mwillems]

Additionally, it’s been said in previous pages of this thread - but the narrative that the Mercedes engine will be severely handicapped because it’s done 6 races is just patently wrong. They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs”. Even Bottas said in interviews leading into the weekend that “it’s not like the old engine is a bad engine”.

This is what Mercedes do every weekend. They position themselves as the underdog, because they know people are sick of the “predictability” of them winning. It’s pure and simple marketing, and they’re great at it. Now if they win, they did it on an engine with 8000km on it! What a marvel of engineering, right?! Even though, them and all of their customer teams are running the same spec engine. They simply wouldn’t do that if it was a crusty ol unit only laps from exploding.

‘They wouldn’t have continued with it if it was “on its last legs” ‘. Yes because they shelved the new engine just because they wanted to. It had nothing to do with it having a design fault that meant it’s failure chances were far higher. Are you aware that this engine was scheduled to be reused at one of the none power tracks? Why do you think that is?

Sorry but your arguement is very flawed and it’s pretty much.
‘If this engine was that down on power they would use an engine that has a far higher chance of failure. So Mercedes doing this is just them playing a little game.’

No team would purposely hamstring themselves like this. Your narrative is way off.
What has actually happened is that the current Mercedes engine IS down on power but as it was planned to be reused is not a ‘crusty ol unit only laps from exploding’ they could not discount the exploding bit on the new unit however.

That wasn’t my point at all, and of course I don’t think they delayed the engine to play games. My point about marketing is relevant because they couldn’t bring the update - not that they delayed the upgrade for the sake of that narrative.

My point was that everyone’s like “wow, Ferrari was only 8 hundredths away from Bottas even though he’s got a super old engine”. Well, the engine, as you rightly point out, is absolutely fine and was in fact scheduled to be at another event regardless. Sure, I have no doubt that it is down on power. But the other commentor was making the point that between Mercedes old engine and ferrari’s new engine should equate to .5 per lap! That’s ludicrous. May as well bring a new engine to every 3rd event if you’re going to be half a second faster than the next fastest car, who cares about grid penalties?

A new engine vs an engine 6 races old is going to have a difference performance gap vs an engine one or two races old, so not a great point. The engines operate to very high tolerances. Of course, after 6 races the parts will be very stressed and worn. And of course, the new spec may have more power to add to that.

[LM10]

Why don't we look at 2017 to try to compare it to this year? There Mercedes introduced it's new spec engine in Spa to still be able to burn 1.2 l oil instead of 0.9 l. Ferrari was still using their worn engine. No need to mention that Mercedes' engine was crystal clear the benchmark last year anyway (probably still is, but last year it was way clearer).

To sum it up: Mercedes with a brand new engine and with the most powerful engine anyway (even if there were the exact circumstances for both manufacturers).

In Q3 Hamilton was just under 2.5 tenths up to Vettel on P2. Considering the mentioned factors, shouldn't we have expected a way bigger gap on a power sensitive track like Spa which in addition to that also favored Mercedes aero wise?

[GPR-A duplicate2]

First engine of the season that runs every single practice sessions for 7 races, 7 qualifying and 6 races is not equal to a second engine of a season where it was used in conjunction with first engine of the season. That was 2017 ferrari. So the difference in performance for last year's ferrari at spa, should comparatively smaller.