2018 British Grand Prix, Silverstone, July 6-8

[Phil]

It's interesting how they can 'wipe the floor' with the rest when running 1-2 but don't have the pace over the rest to find 8 seconds? I'm not sure in what dictionary that is wiping the floor.

Because at that point, the circumstance of the race changed. It was no longer a normal 1-stop race while in clean air and dictating pace, it was a game of being in 4th, in traffic behind a Ferrari that had DRS as well while being boxed in from Vettel coming in from behind. With limited intel on what would happen on those softs with such high track temperatures, they [Hamilton] overheated the tire and lost performance on them while also having blistering and risk of a delaminating tire. This dictated the pace.

Before this happened, Hamilton/Mercedes showed very good pace relative to the Ferraris. It was only when the tires overheated, that they were forced to manage more aggressively (without much success because it was too late). Back to my 1-2 non-VSC scenario and that would have not happened or been way better manageable because they had a significant margin ahead. As said, the VSC and not pitting was a game-changer.

Again; On the SS, the Mercedes was the car setting the pace, even vs. the Ferraris when they put on fresh softs during the VSC phase. Mercedes still pitted because they wanted to stay ahead of Vettel and knew they would likely lose position anyway. Also under normal circumstances, overtaking a very similar paced car on such a track would have been highly unlikely, as was pretty much evident by Kimi on Ricciardo or the other way around.

[GrayGreat]

It's interesting how they can 'wipe the floor' with the rest when running 1-2 but don't have the pace over the rest to find 8 seconds? I'm not sure in what dictionary that is wiping the floor.

Because at that point, the circumstance of the race changed. It was no longer a normal 1-stop race while in clean air and dictating pace, it was a game of being in 4th, in traffic behind a Ferrari that had DRS as well while being boxed in from Vettel coming in from behind. With limited intel on what would happen on those softs with such high track temperatures, they [Hamilton] overheated the tire and lost performance on them while also having blistering and risk of a delaminating tire. This dictated the pace.

Before this happened, Hamilton/Mercedes showed very good pace relative to the Ferraris. It was only when the tires overheated, that they were forced to manage more aggressively (without much success because it was too late). Back to my 1-2 non-VSC scenario and that would have not happened or been way better manageable because they had a significant margin ahead. As said, the VSC and not pitting was a game-changer.

Again; On the SS, the Mercedes was the car setting the pace, even vs. the Ferraris when they put on fresh softs during the VSC phase. Mercedes still pitted because they wanted to stay ahead of Vettel and knew they would likely lose position anyway. Also under normal circumstances, overtaking a very similar paced car on such a track would have been highly unlikely, as was pretty much evident by Kimi on Ricciardo or the other way around.

I think Nuvolari meant why Hamilton was unable to increase the gap to car behind, when others pitted, because you said Mercedes was fastest on SS tyres and those had no blistering, an he was in clean air, not 4th.

Same for everyone. Car's / driver's fault if tyres were overheating and blistering.

Ferraris that were in traffic, or fighting other cars. But lets just ignore the facts. Even if for a second we assume that Mercedes had better pace than Ferraris at that point, why not stay out longer and increase the gap?

Same as above.

If pace was so much better on SS, even better than Ferrari on new Softs, why worry about losing position and why not just keep out and increase the gap?

Vettel overtook Hamilton, on track, if you did not notice, which brings me to your previous post, where you replied to Vanja (he said Mercedes is not more aero efficient than Ferrari), he is actually correct, because we have seen multiple times now that Mercedes cars find it more difficult to overtake, relative to other cars, even with their 'wiping the floor' capabilities (according to you).

[TAG]

Mercedes threw away the race by not pitting, they likely caused the DNF as well due to the higher temps of not running in clean air. Move on people, Silverstone this weekend. Enjoy the show.

[Lca1443]

Mercedes threw away the race by not pitting, they likely caused the DNF as well due to the higher temps of not running in clean air. Move on people, Silverstone this weekend. Enjoy the show.

So their car will fail if not running in clean air? I doubt they are that ignorant/confident.

[Just_a_fan]

Vettel overtook Hamilton, on track, if you did not notice, which brings me to your previous post, where you replied to Vanja (he said Mercedes is not more aero efficient than Ferrari), he is actually correct, because we have seen multiple times now that Mercedes cars find it more difficult to overtake, relative to other cars, even with their 'wiping the floor' capabilities (according to you).

Vettel overtook an ailing Hamilton. Hamilton had already said on the radio that he felt like the power was going. That and tyres that wouldn'#t last on the Merc. One thing we can say with some confidence is that the Ferrari was much happier and much more gentle on the tyres than the other two teams.

[LM10]

Ferrari should be stronger this year because theoretically this car has a greater aero efficiency due to the longer wheelbase. But, facts have shown us until now that Mercedes seems to be clearly stronger, so the Italians need to improve the aero efficiency.

Mercedes has more powerful PU, not better aero efficiency. They weren't that strong at all on race day in Austria, they were weaker in Canada and in Monaco. I'm not counting Spain and France for obvious reasons. Mercedes were strong in Qualy in Austria because of more powerful PU than before (unlike Ferrari, which is "only" more reliable and uses less fuel) and because of track temp. Also, Seb messed his lap, so all in all kind of like China reversed.

It's a bit of a mysterious thing. If we assume that Mercedes has a more powerful PU then it's quite interesting that Kimi on a 5 races old spec 1 engine was almost matching the times of Mercedes at the end of S1 and S2, but losing several tenths in the last sector (Vettel was even closer to Mercedes despite having been a tenth slower than Kimi in S1). In addition to that it also must be considered that Mercedes had a big upgrade which according to Bottas noticeably stabilized the rear and thereby must have made them more competitive in the first 2 sectors.
So the question is why Mercedes was way quicker through those fast corners in S3 and if it was for the more powerful PU the only thing which I could think of would be a setup with more downforce being allowed due to more power. But then again: Why were they constantly slower than Ferrari in S2 when we assume they had more downforce and a stabilized rear which should have given them much better traction (also spec 2.1 is told to have increased traction)? The only part where Mercedes was significantly faster and where they got the first row was S3.

Let's see how it's gonna be in Silverstone. I think Qualifying will be pretty one-sided, but I hope the race is gonna be exciting.

[Big Tea]

Vettel overtook Hamilton, on track, if you did not notice, which brings me to your previous post, where you replied to Vanja (he said Mercedes is not more aero efficient than Ferrari), he is actually correct, because we have seen multiple times now that Mercedes cars find it more difficult to overtake, relative to other cars, even with their 'wiping the floor' capabilities (according to you).

Vettel overtook an ailing Hamilton. Hamilton had already said on the radio that he felt like the power was going. That and tyres that wouldn'#t last on the Merc. One thing we can say with some confidence is that the Ferrari was much happier and much more gentle on the tyres than the other two teams.

Max did not seem to have any tyre problems. It could just be the the style of driving required from each car.

[Nuvolari]

It's interesting how they can 'wipe the floor' with the rest when running 1-2 but don't have the pace over the rest to find 8 seconds? I'm not sure in what dictionary that is wiping the floor.

Because at that point, the circumstance of the race changed. It was no longer a normal 1-stop race while in clean air and dictating pace, it was a game of being in 4th, in traffic behind a Ferrari that had DRS as well while being boxed in from Vettel coming in from behind. With limited intel on what would happen on those softs with such high track temperatures, they [Hamilton] overheated the tire and lost performance on them while also having blistering and risk of a delaminating tire. This dictated the pace.

Before this happened, Hamilton/Mercedes showed very good pace relative to the Ferraris. It was only when the tires overheated, that they were forced to manage more aggressively (without much success because it was too late). Back to my 1-2 non-VSC scenario and that would have not happened or been way better manageable because they had a significant margin ahead. As said, the VSC and not pitting was a game-changer.

Again; On the SS, the Mercedes was the car setting the pace, even vs. the Ferraris when they put on fresh softs during the VSC phase. Mercedes still pitted because they wanted to stay ahead of Vettel and knew they would likely lose position anyway. Also under normal circumstances, overtaking a very similar paced car on such a track would have been highly unlikely, as was pretty much evident by Kimi on Ricciardo or the other way around.

Again, I reiterate my point. A car that is only fast out in front is not a dominant car; it is simply a car that has a very narrow performance window. Given the circumstance, any one of the cars from Ferrari and RBR could have won that race, if they were in clean air. Verstappen was also overheating and blistering his fronts and he was in clean air for most of the race, yet was keeping pace with the Ferraris.

Silverstone is a very different prospect. I think many will be surprised with Ferrari's pace here.

[Just_a_fan]

Vettel overtook Hamilton, on track, if you did not notice, which brings me to your previous post, where you replied to Vanja (he said Mercedes is not more aero efficient than Ferrari), he is actually correct, because we have seen multiple times now that Mercedes cars find it more difficult to overtake, relative to other cars, even with their 'wiping the floor' capabilities (according to you).

Vettel overtook an ailing Hamilton. Hamilton had already said on the radio that he felt like the power was going. That and tyres that wouldn'#t last on the Merc. One thing we can say with some confidence is that the Ferrari was much happier and much more gentle on the tyres than the other two teams.

Max did not seem to have any tyre problems. It could just be the the style of driving required from each car.

Maybe. Max was at the front controlling his pace. Danny had issues when driving in traffic and trying to race, as did Hamilton. Vettel didn't and neither did Kimi. That suggests the Ferrari was better on the tyres all round. The Merc and RedBull ok only when able to control their pace.

[Fulcrum]

Ferrari should be stronger this year because theoretically this car has a greater aero efficiency due to the longer wheelbase. But, facts have shown us until now that Mercedes seems to be clearly stronger, so the Italians need to improve the aero efficiency.

Mercedes has more powerful PU, not better aero efficiency. They weren't that strong at all on race day in Austria, they were weaker in Canada and in Monaco. I'm not counting Spain and France for obvious reasons. Mercedes were strong in Qualy in Austria because of more powerful PU than before (unlike Ferrari, which is "only" more reliable and uses less fuel) and because of track temp. Also, Seb messed his lap, so all in all kind of like China reversed.

It's a bit of a mysterious thing. If we assume that Mercedes has a more powerful PU then it's quite interesting that Kimi on a 5 races old spec 1 engine was almost matching the times of Mercedes at the end of S1 and S2, but losing several tenths in the last sector (Vettel was even closer to Mercedes despite having been a tenth slower than Kimi in S1). In addition to that it also must be considered that Mercedes had a big upgrade which according to Bottas noticeably stabilized the rear and thereby must have made them more competitive in the first 2 sectors.
So the question is why Mercedes was way quicker through those fast corners in S3 and if it was for the more powerful PU the only thing which I could think of would be a setup with more downforce being allowed due to more power. But then again: Why were they constantly slower than Ferrari in S2 when we assume they had more downforce and a stabilized rear which should have given them much better traction (also spec 2.1 is told to have increased traction)? The only part where Mercedes was significantly faster and where they got the first row was S3.

Let's see how it's gonna be in Silverstone. I think Qualifying will be pretty one-sided, but I hope the race is gonna be exciting.

Kimi ran less wing, unsurprising he was relatively quick in S1 and slower in S3.

[dans79]

Silverstone is a very different prospect. I think many will be surprised with Ferrari's pace here.

Maybe by how bad it might be!
http://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari-c ... stone.html

"On paper, Silverstone looks quite difficult for us. Aerodynamics are very important and it will be a difficult race for us, so we have to stay focused," Arrivabene told Sky Italia.

I Can't remember Arrivabene ever making a statement like this prior to the weekend.

[LM10]

Silverstone is a very different prospect. I think many will be surprised with Ferrari's pace here.

Maybe by how bad it might be!
http://www.grandprix.com/news/ferrari-c ... stone.html

"On paper, Silverstone looks quite difficult for us. Aerodynamics are very important and it will be a difficult race for us, so we have to stay focused," Arrivabene told Sky Italia.

I Can't remember Arrivabene ever making a statement like this prior to the weekend.

Does Arrivabene think that Ferrari's aerodynamics are not good?

[Just_a_fan]

I think Ferrari might be thinking that the best thing to do is play the underdog. People like underdogs, for a start, but it also helps with expectation control. It's not a bad plan and one that Hamilton, for one, has been using most of the season every time he says "the Ferrari is the car to beat".

[DVB]

It's cool from Ferrari to play the underdog. Just imagine they seem to roll the dice on they're hand. Beating Merc at Silverstone (Lewis home ground), will for sure leave them a very bad taste!

[Just_a_fan]

Exactly - going to Silverstone with the whole "we're on a roll now boys" attitude will look very silly if it goes even a little bit wrong. Much better to go in low and surprise everyone.