2019 pre season launches, testing, dates, discussion, banter.

[Capharol]

The tire thing has changed so much that frankly I don't really remember what was decided with Pirelli. I know they're only bringing soft, medium and hard to each race with the compounds varying based on compounds used this year but are they keeping the entire "range" of compounds used in the 2018 season?

the tyre-range stays as it is i believe, they only called it different.
US, SS, HS names are gone these are now called softs

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13823 ... es-in-2019

They are not called softs. It depends on which of the 3 compounds for every race weekend is the softest and that's gonna be called soft. Hard would then be the hardest of those 3 and medium the one in the middle. Hard, medium and soft are the terms which are gonna be used, regardless of the actual tyre.

To give an example: Let's say the tyres available for Monaco would be SS, US and HS. Even though all of them are softs, in this case SS would be called hard, US medium and HS soft.

Another example: M, S and SS are available. M is the hardest, so it's called hard, S would be medium and SS soft.

yes you are correct, forgotten to write that aswell

[TAG]

To give an example: Let's say the tyres available for Monaco would be SS, US and HS. Even though all of them are softs, in this case SS would be called hard, US medium and HS soft.

When you sit and read that you realise how silly the naming had got. SuperSoft, UltraSoft, HyperSoft. Silly.

Having "Hard", "Medium" and "Soft" makes more sense for everyone except, perhaps, the geekiest tyre geek. And they are still catered for because the headline names the tyres still have the same silly compound names behind them.

What it will make is comparative lap times year to year impossible for fantasy league pole times picks. Unless we know if the soft tire this year was the S or the US or the SS from last year.

[dans79]

If RB makes a higher percentage of their total downforce from the floor and its sealing, then they will be harder hit by any loss of that floor downforce. A team that got more from the wings, in comparison, ought to be happier because the wings are bigger and the floor might be less effective next year - so they win.

This,

I've seen so much disinformation this off season about how the rules are changing and who they are likely to effect most.

[McMrocks]

Not sure if this is the correct thread but i believe we can count the following as pre season banter.

I've just read that the fuel limit was raised to 110Kg for the race. So far this went pretty unnoticed by me so i had to check it - and yes FiA's sporting rules state 110kg.

Now there is the question who asked for it. If i remember correctly most teams weren't even close to the maximum fuel except for maybe a couple of races. "Lift and cost" was necessary because simulations showed that it is faster to start with a lighter car.

For 2019 the drag should be almost the same or just a little bit increased(larger front and rear wing but less outwash and smaller barge boards and easier brake ducts). So which team or which engine manufacturer was afraid of reaching the fuel limit in 2019?

[Peter1919]

So which team or which engine manufacturer was afraid of reaching the fuel limit in 2019?

Honda seem to have been the team that has struggled the most with fuel limits

[GPR-A]

So which team or which engine manufacturer was afraid of reaching the fuel limit in 2019?

Honda seem to have been the team that has struggled the most with fuel limits

No idea why FIA increased the fuel allowance as some teams weren't even carrying the allowed 105 kg.
F1 bosses 'fooled' by teams to increase fuel limit - Szafnauer

"If you don't do a good job, should you work harder within the rules that everyone agreed to, or should you change the rules?

"That's what I don't like. 'I didn't do a good job, let me change the rules'.

"They fooled the FIA and Liberty, and what they were really trying to do was regain that competitive advantage," added the American.

"I can half understand going from 100 to 105, because the cars changed so significantly, the dimensions changed, the downforce levels, the drag, the wings got bigger.

"I can understand all that, that's logical. But to just go from 105 to 110, because...? It's illogical."

McLaren's Fernando Alonso doubts any increase in fuel capacity or the ability to run full throttle from start to finish will lead to more exciting races.

"I don’t think it’s going to change much, to be honest," Alonso told Motorsport.com.

"It’s good, it’s in the right direction, it’s a little bit strange to save fuel in some races.

"Maybe there are a few occasions, Bahrain was one – we had to save fuel in the last couple of laps and maybe it stopped me and [Nico] Hulkenberg having a fight. But this happens once a year, once every two years.

"In terms of adding 5kg of fuel and suddenly seeing fantastic racing, [it] is not going to happen. It was a very rare occasion that we have to save fuel that much that it prevents some fights."

[LM10]

So the ones having fooled FIA are RBR?

Cars with better fuel consumption will still have an advantage anyway, but RBR with such good race pace and tyre wear are surely going to like the possibility of pushing more. Also their plan to use 2 more engines than others can be seen as a part of this puzzle.

[Juzh]

So which team or which engine manufacturer was afraid of reaching the fuel limit in 2019?

Honda seem to have been the team that has struggled the most with fuel limits

No idea why FIA increased the fuel allowance as some teams weren't even carrying the allowed 105 kg.
F1 bosses 'fooled' by teams to increase fuel limit - Szafnauer

"If you don't do a good job, should you work harder within the rules that everyone agreed to, or should you change the rules?

"That's what I don't like. 'I didn't do a good job, let me change the rules'.

"They fooled the FIA and Liberty, and what they were really trying to do was regain that competitive advantage," added the American.

"I can half understand going from 100 to 105, because the cars changed so significantly, the dimensions changed, the downforce levels, the drag, the wings got bigger.

"I can understand all that, that's logical. But to just go from 105 to 110, because...? It's illogical."

Otmar's statement here 100% confirms some engines had a big enough of an advantage for him to literally go out of his way saying the fia were fooled, in this case probably by a RB/honda/renault unholy alliance. If it made no difference whatsoever no one would care or talk about it, yet here we have a team principal of a team with a mercedes engine in their car crying out how their competitive advantage will get eroded somewhat with the extra fuel allowance.

So no, in fact the fia wasn't fooled at all, what they did with this very simple rule change is they curbed mercedes/ferrari advantage of the fuel front. In theory.

[Juzh]

If i remember correctly most teams weren't even close to the maximum fuel except for maybe a couple of races. "Lift and cost" was necessary because simulations showed that it is faster to start with a lighter car.

Not sure which F1 you were watching, but with severly increased race pace since 2017, the amount of lift and coast on some tracks was comical. And with the current engine regs more power fundamentally means less fuel consumption, thus allowing better engines to be even better wherever fuel is a problem, since they have to save less. Talk about a snowball effect.. This change is good.

For 2019 the drag should be almost the same or just a little bit increased(larger front and rear wing but less outwash and smaller barge boards and easier brake ducts). So which team or which engine manufacturer was afraid of reaching the fuel limit in 2019?

Drag will be higher, it's just a fact. You can't comapare a little brake duct and bargeboard change against massive wing increases. Not to mention lack of outwash effect will add tons of extra drag all on its own, before the extra frontal sizes are taken into consideration.

[GPR-A]

So no, in fact the fia wasn't fooled at all, what they did with this very simple rule change is they curbed mercedes/ferrari advantage of the fuel front. In theory.

In essence, change the rules to favor those who didn't do as good a job as the others. That is what Otmar is complaining.

But the question is, how is the increase in fuel limit is going to help? If Mercedes and Ferrari have an advantage, then they will carry it forward. The cars that are using Mercedes/Ferrari PU will start the races on lower fuel loads than cars are using other manufacturer's PU. That in itself is going to be an advantage. The flow flow rate hasn't changed.

[Big Tea]

Honda seem to have been the team that has struggled the most with fuel limits

No idea why FIA increased the fuel allowance as some teams weren't even carrying the allowed 105 kg.
F1 bosses 'fooled' by teams to increase fuel limit - Szafnauer

"If you don't do a good job, should you work harder within the rules that everyone agreed to, or should you change the rules?

"That's what I don't like. 'I didn't do a good job, let me change the rules'.

"They fooled the FIA and Liberty, and what they were really trying to do was regain that competitive advantage," added the American.

"I can half understand going from 100 to 105, because the cars changed so significantly, the dimensions changed, the downforce levels, the drag, the wings got bigger.

"I can understand all that, that's logical. But to just go from 105 to 110, because...? It's illogical."

Otmar's statement here 100% confirms some engines had a big enough of an advantage for him to literally go out of his way saying the fia were fooled, in this case probably by a RB/honda/renault unholy alliance. If it made no difference whatsoever no one would care or talk about it, yet here we have a team principal of a team with a mercedes engine in their car crying out how their competitive advantage will get eroded somewhat with the extra fuel allowance.

So no, in fact the fia wasn't fooled at all, what they did with this very simple rule change is they curbed mercedes/ferrari advantage of the fuel front. In theory.

What they effectively did was to convert it to a weight advantage (at some tracks)

[ME4ME]

The fuel limit is pointless. People with a superior PU will rightfully gain an advantage being it through reduce lift and coast or through carrying less fuel. Those with an inferior PU will rightfully be disadvantaged either way as well.

Why there is a fuel limit is beyond me since 2014. It makes no difference what so ever in the majority of races where teams are not fuel limited. However it has an negative impact on racing in the minority of races where teams are limited and are forced to save fuel rather than go into racing another car.

They migth as well get rid of the limit all together.

[Capharol]

maybe this article helpd you understand it better

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/tech ... s-limited/

[ME4ME]

maybe this article helpd you understand it better

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/tech ... s-limited/

F1 2014: Why fuel flow is limited
That's not what we're talking about.

[Capharol]

maybe this article helpd you understand it better

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/tech ... s-limited/

F1 2014: Why fuel flow is limited
That's not what we're talking about.

you wrote the fuel limit is pointless and that it is beyond you why.... so i gave you the article on the why.
so in that way we talked about the why

tbh I, myself don't understand te article because its to technical for me, i thought it might help you