2018 British Grand Prix, Silverstone, July 6-8

[bigpat]

I think the fact that a few races ago, that the FIA and Ferrari came to an agreement regarding their engine irregularitys says it all.

Martin Brundle openly said that he believed a deal was done between the FIA & Ferrari, and the Ferrari's could race on.
Funnily enough on air, Niki Lauda said, in effect:" now there has been a ruling and from now on the Ferrari engine is legal". Niki was a long time Ferrari consultant, so he knows the inner
machinations of backroom deals in F1. And Toto Wolff new better than to publically comment on it at the time, and since...

Ferrari engined speed at Silverstone was surprising given no public stated engine upgrades. Their aero updates seemed to have shed a fair of drag!!!

[Hammerfist]

I can't confirm it, you're right. But there was no news about him using new spec parts. It can very well be the case, but wouldn't this mean that he would already be at the limit right now? So when spec 3 is being introduced, he gets a penalty? Maybe I'm missing a point. Thank you for answering!

Ripper confirmed basically what you are saying. So yes, the spec 1 ICE mixed with spec 2 components (there are going to be updates on those, no matter how small) is a strong PU.

Interestingly, he did receive the Canada spec turbo charger. Going from what Rosberg said, and he really seems convinced, this component is crucial. More pressure in the PU means more drive for the mgu-h.

I think this also speaks to why their PU was so important on a fairly long circuit with a lot of full throttle - it’s not necessarily about having more peak power, as the electrical power is capped, but it’s about being able to have that peak power for more of such a long lap.

This is the part that gets me. I thought that the maximum time that they could use the electrical power is also capped. If I remember correctly, electrical power is capped at 33secs per lap.

[Manfer]

I think the fact that a few races ago, that the FIA and Ferrari came to an agreement regarding their engine irregularitys says it all.

Martin Brundle openly said that he believed a deal was done between the FIA & Ferrari, and the Ferrari's could race on.
Funnily enough on air, Niki Lauda said, in effect:" now there has been a ruling and from now on the Ferrari engine is legal". Niki was a long time Ferrari consultant, so he knows the inner
machinations of backroom deals in F1. And Toto Wolff new better than to publically comment on it at the time, and since...

Ferrari engined speed at Silverstone was surprising given no public stated engine upgrades. Their aero updates seemed to have shed a fair of drag!!!

You should give yourself a "bigpat" on your back for coming up with this story.

[seventhsin]

I believe it's a maximum of 4MJ that can be sent from the ES to the K per lap. At the Ks Max output that equates to 33s/lap. It'd not a time cap it's an energy cap.

Energy transfer from the H to the K is not capped in the same way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my understanding from the information I've read here.

[bigpat]

I think the fact that a few races ago, that the FIA and Ferrari came to an agreement regarding their engine irregularitys says it all.

Martin Brundle openly said that he believed a deal was done between the FIA & Ferrari, and the Ferrari's could race on.
Funnily enough on air, Niki Lauda said, in effect:" now there has been a ruling and from now on the Ferrari engine is legal". Niki was a long time Ferrari consultant, so he knows the inner
machinations of backroom deals in F1. And Toto Wolff new better than to publically comment on it at the time, and since...

Ferrari engined speed at Silverstone was surprising given no public stated engine upgrades. Their aero updates seemed to have shed a fair of drag!!!

You should give yourself a "bigpat" on your back for coming up with this story.

Really? Just co incidence the FIA were monitoring the MGU K output and software programs on the Ferrari PU's???
Just watch the Sky Sports coverage of the Monaco race. Brundle and Lauda don't pull punches. Not the first time the red team have been granted a favourable result by the FIA. Commercial considerations are always a factor....

But then again, I might have made all this up, right?

[marvin78]

Even if you did not make it up that does not mean, that the whole story (which never was very logical in all it's parts) is not made up at all. Their might have been suspicions but everything else around that is not proven or even believable.

[Cannonballer]

If you guys want to settle scores, go meet up a place where you can baseball club eachother.

Bat. It’s a baseball bat, not club.

This is technical and factual forum, details matter.

Fair enough . Does that mean I'll have to ban myself ?

Club is the appropriate verb though:
". . . can use a baseball bat to club each other."

[bigpat]

Even if you did not make it up that does not mean, that the whole story (which never was very logical in all it's parts) is not made up at all. Their might have been suspicions but everything else around that is not proven or even believable.

Which part isn't logical? Not baiting you, just want to make my view clear....

[Vanja #66]

Ah, the British media and Mercedes sulking over missing something that was right in front of their nose. They could accept losing C'ships to Ferrari, they won't accept losing engine advantage.

But of course, not a single reason for any other team to sulk over Mercedes requesting special tyres for three races. Not a single reason for any other team to sulk over Mercedes breaking gentleman's engine agreement last year. Not a single reason for any other team to sulk over special Pirelli test in 2013. Got to love it

[marvin78]

Even if you did not make it up that does not mean, that the whole story (which never was very logical in all it's parts) is not made up at all. Their might have been suspicions but everything else around that is not proven or even believable.

Which part isn't logical? Not baiting you, just want to make my view clear....

In the story, they draw a conclusion out of GPS data: They have an advantage so something must be illegal (in other words). That's not logical. The whole story is based on "if someone builds a PU that's on par or even with the one from Mercedes, it must be illegal" (that also COULD mean, that Mercedes has the opinion that the values of their PU can only be reached with illegal methods). That's not said in words but implied. I do think, that Ferrari has found something but there is no logical explanation for calling it outright illegal. And for me the logical end of the story is: the FIA checked it, so it is legal. I don't believe that there is a side deal until it is proven. So, if I would believe it, that would not be logical.

[Gothrek]

For anyone more interested in the Rai-Ham clash. This really shows how it was not intentional:
https://youtu.be/7rlDGjWZ7GI

Gets interesesting as of minute 4:30.

But Kimi locks up so early, he steering is always to the right. Upon seeing this it is wuite clear.

[gdanielwesley]

I believe it's a maximum of 4MJ that can be sent from the ES to the K per lap. At the Ks Max output that equates to 33s/lap. It'd not a time cap it's an energy cap.

Energy transfer from the H to the K is not capped in the same way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my understanding from the information I've read here.

Yes H to K or ES is not limited..so they can harvest energy and deploy it instantaneously if they can.


From F1 website

https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... d_ERS.html

A maximum of 4MJ per lap can be transferred from the ES to the MGU-K (and then in turn to the drivetrain).

A maximum of 2MJ per lap can be transferred from the MGU-K to the ES.

An unlimited amount of energy can be transferred between the MGU-H and the ES and/or MGU-K.

[rscsr]

Even if you did not make it up that does not mean, that the whole story (which never was very logical in all it's parts) is not made up at all. Their might have been suspicions but everything else around that is not proven or even believable.

Which part isn't logical? Not baiting you, just want to make my view clear....

In the story, they draw a conclusion out of GPS data: They have an advantage so something must be illegal (in other words). That's not logical. The whole story is based on "if someone builds a PU that's on par or even with the one from Mercedes, it must be illegal" (that also COULD mean, that Mercedes has the opinion that the values of their PU can only be reached with illegal methods). That's not said in words but implied. I do think, that Ferrari has found something but there is no logical explanation for calling it outright illegal. And for me the logical end of the story is: the FIA checked it, so it is legal. I don't believe that there is a side deal until it is proven. So, if I would believe it, that would not be logical.

What the PR machinery says is usually not based on GPS data. F1 teams usually want to spin a narrative to appease sponsors or fans. It is always a supplied part and not the team. Therefore they say that they don't have as much top speed, therefore they must have less power. When we as fans sometimes get GPS data, the different engines show more or less the same acceleration. Therefore the teams overstate how much a different engine would give them.

[BwajSF]

Even if you did not make it up that does not mean, that the whole story (which never was very logical in all it's parts) is not made up at all. Their might have been suspicions but everything else around that is not proven or even believable.

Which part isn't logical? Not baiting you, just want to make my view clear....

In the story, they draw a conclusion out of GPS data: They have an advantage so something must be illegal (in other words). That's not logical. The whole story is based on "if someone builds a PU that's on par or even with the one from Mercedes, it must be illegal" (that also COULD mean, that Mercedes has the opinion that the values of their PU can only be reached with illegal methods). That's not said in words but implied. I do think, that Ferrari has found something but there is no logical explanation for calling it outright illegal. And for me the logical end of the story is: the FIA checked it, so it is legal. I don't believe that there is a side deal until it is proven. So, if I would believe it, that would not be logical.

Exactly....
There seems to be a notion going around that if there is anything anyone performing better than Merc it has to be illegal. When a Team does a good job of designing something that makes it on par with the competition acknowledge thier effort rather than criticizing it even after FIA has cleared it of all doubts..
Merc wanted n wished for close racing all the years they dominated and now that they have Ferrari doing it they play dirty tricks and politics from the start of the year telling this that is illegal and now this foolish acquisitions...
They are not showing thier class of being the reining world championship team... Pity..

[marvin78]

They are not showing thier class of being the reining world championship team... Pity..

They never did that.