2019 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, May 23-26

[LM10]

I’ve never seen an F1 car with better direction change than the Mercedes W10. It looks unreal.
However they managed to do it, it is the product of either geniuses or wizards.

Which is quite amusing when one remembers some people on the forum continually stating that the Merc's long wheelbase prevents it from being nimble. I love your idea of wizards! "Wizards in the workshop" has a ring to it.

[Jolle]

I looked up Monaco pole times throughout the decades:

1929: William Grover-Williams (Bugatti) 2:15.0
1959: Stirling Moss (Cooper-Climax) 1:39.6
1969: Jackie Stewart (Matra-Ford) 1:24.6
1979: Jody Scheckter (Ferrari) 1:26.45
1989: Ayrton Senna (McLaren-Honda) 1:22:308
1999: Mika Häkkinen (McLaren-Mercedes) 1:20.547
2009: Jenson Button (BrawnGP-Mercedes) 1:14.902

The 1979 seems a little odd, as it is nearly two seconds slower than Stewart's lap ten years earlier? Other than that, it gives a good idea of the progress throughout the years, especially as Monaco is one of the least aero-sensitive F1 tracks. There were no races in 1939 and 1949.

Hamilton's fastest lap in P2 was 1:11.118

Incredible how much faster these cars are, at roughly half the fuel consumption.

The swimming pool was added in 1972 (and some other modifications to the track)

[Juzh]

hamilton monaco fp2 1.11.245

https://streamable.com/lfwic

[hollus]

Wow, that video. What happened to "the onboards look so slow nowadays compared to decades ago"? Lower the camera, include side objects, add a bit of shaking, and WOW!!! At parts it looks like a bad old movie where they double the speed to make it look like the cars are fast!

Do the other cars look like this in the onboards at all?

[sosic2121]

Incredible how much faster these cars are, at roughly half the fuel consumption.

IMO totally irrelevant and misleading.

Especially during Q when car spends more fuel than during race, and 4MJ of energy from battery!

[TAG]

Incredible how much faster these cars are, at roughly half the fuel consumption.

IMO totally irrelevant and misleading.

Especially during Q when car spends more fuel than during race, and 4MJ of energy from battery!

They're much much faster... that part isn't irrelevant is it.

[Restomaniac]

Incredible how much faster these cars are, at roughly half the fuel consumption.

IMO totally irrelevant and misleading.

Especially during Q when car spends more fuel than during race, and 4MJ of energy from battery!

How’s it irrelevant? The battery isn’t the work of fairies it’s recovered energy. Which means a modern F1 car with a little 1.6l V6 is kicking out power that beats a far bigger engine in cylinders and cubic capacity.

[Sieper]

Well, it could be considered irrelevant. It’s the rules that determine that. With pre 2017 wings and tire widths these speeds would simply be impossible.

[Phil]

I love Monaco. Yes the race might be a procession, but i dont care. Seeing cars go through that city at full throttle is a sight to behold and IMO incredibly dangerous. We should enjoy it while it lasts, not sure how long it will last and if sonetime in the future it doesnt, if we’ll ever get something like it again.

It’s just insane.

[Restomaniac]

Well, it could be considered irrelevant. It’s the rules that determine that. With pre 2017 wings and tire widths these speeds would simply be impossible.

This is true but just on power outputs vs engine size compared to previous engines these are the work of genius. That isn’t irrelevance.

[sosic2121]

Much faster, yes. But only during Q.

Not so much during race when they actually use those 105kg and when they have to recharge those batteries.
On top of that these cars are hybrids.

These cars have huge tires with no threads, huge wings and are 2 meters wide.

[sosic2121]

Well, it could be considered irrelevant. It’s the rules that determine that. With pre 2017 wings and tire widths these speeds would simply be impossible.

This is true but just on power outputs vs engine size compared to previous engines these are the work of genius. That isn’t irrelevance.

Remember 80s? 1.5L 1500hp?

vs todays 1.6L 800hp

[Juzh]

Wow, that video. What happened to "the onboards look so slow nowadays compared to decades ago"? Lower the camera, include side objects, add a bit of shaking, and WOW!!! At parts it looks like a bad old movie where they double the speed to make it look like the cars are fast!

Do the other cars look like this in the onboards at all?

P05 albon monaco fp2 1.12.031
https://streamable.com/cyvx3

[Restomaniac]

Much faster, yes. But only during Q.

Not so much during race when they actually use those 105kg and when they have to recharge those batteries.
On top of that these cars are hybrids.

These cars have huge tires with no threads, huge wings and are 2 meters wide.

’these cars are hybrids’. Yes that’s the point though these modern PU’s are kicking out more horses that far bigger engines.

If you could put these modern PU’s in classic cars back in the day they would more than hold their own using less fuel. That isn't irrelevant when you consider they are not binned every time the car ends up in the garage between any session.

[Restomaniac]

Well, it could be considered irrelevant. It’s the rules that determine that. With pre 2017 wings and tire widths these speeds would simply be impossible.

This is true but just on power outputs vs engine size compared to previous engines these are the work of genius. That isn’t irrelevance.

Remember 80s? 1.5L 1500hp?

vs todays 1.6L 800hp

Number of cylinders, lifespan, fuel allowance, etc?