Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
raymondu999 wrote:
Happened to Renault runners too to be honest. For Fernando's case in Germany; Nando was out of fuel. Ditto Button in Suzuka.
I can only remember webber told to preserve fuel only once, but they have never run out of it. For Merc engine I think it did happen on several occasions in last season.
And Ferrari whom at various stages of certain GP where in fuel save mode.
raymondu999 wrote:Webber stopped several times. Such as after the first race in Melbourne
I dont recall Webber having as many incidents as Hamilton, Button Schumacher or Rosberg.
There is also a very easy explanation for Webber having the fuel problems and Vettel not....his engineers devised a lighter fuel strategy to get him ahead of Vettel in Qualifying.
Those are the figures needed to get to an average first stop of lap 24.59 using simulated data. I have still to do the actual first stop data whitch will give me a more accurate picture, i admit that.
I am using the 2009 data, when the FIA gave out post quali weights, and the weight of the car was 605KG.
Using Williams data from 2009 the lighter cars used on average 2.52kg per average lap using the Toyota RVX-09 power plant. Last year it was 2.64KG per average race lap with the Cosworth CA2011k power plant. The average race lap is arround 5.2Km to my records. There is a fuel effect of roughly 0.3 seconds in carrying a extra 10KG arround the track on that average lap.
Tank wise, the largest needed per race is 165.3 kilos in Valencia. The smallest tank is actually Monza at 148.4 kilos.
If you takje tha average race to be 60 laps, and cars stopping arround lap 25 for the first stop if they were on a decent first stint, the Renault is more fuel efficient. Whitch if you think has 2 advantages, firstly you are slightly faster arround a lap than your competition and the second for 2009 was you spent about 4 tenths less filling up.
In 2011/2012, 2.64 kilos over 25 laps isnt that much, but when you take into the thinking that you have to run with the car as light as posible, posibly as much as 14 to 17 laps short in fuel and going into fuel save, you are running the car with at 14 laps less fuel you save 37 kilos. That gives you an 11.1 second saving in time over a race. Over the first lap that would be arround 1.2 seconds quicker in theory.
It means that if you think that Red Bull, Vettel especially, last year sprinted off on the first lap or two and destroyed the feild then and then managed his fuel to the end. It figures that he pulled out up to a 2 second gap on the first lap on more than one occasion i can think of. He was out the DRS zone and when everyone was tripping up over themselvs, using more fuel in the battles that were waged behind him he was consiously using slightly less managing a gap and his tyres, driving to an optimal if you wish.
The Renault is the most fuel efficient, and is arround 40hp down on power to the Mercedes and Ferrari, but using inteligent strategy to leas from lights to flag means they have an advantage. What i think is that the guys need to sort their battles out quicker on the track. As Jenson showed in Suzuka, even though he ran short on fuel to make it arround the slow down lap and have 1 kilo avalable for testing, the pace of the Mercedes powered cars can run down a Renault powered car and beat them on track for pace, and he is more than a match for Vettel on tyre management.
This year with the EBDs gone the cars have arround 20hp more on tap. Whitch meand the Renalut could be at a larger advanatage, but we will see come Austrailia.
It shouldn't be any surprise that the Renault gives slightly better fuel consumption if it, as is widely reported and established in 2009, produces less power. Nor should it be any surprise that it would run slightly cooler etc. etc. if that was the case.
In reality all the engines are very equal, same size, weight etc. To suggest that any team is having to do anything wildly different in terms of packaging for each engine is well, well wide of the mark. The differences there appear to be are all related to horsepower since that is the only limiting factor. Given that Mercedes can choose when and where to use their power for track position and for fuel saving I know what engine I would choose if I had a choice.
Just done tha figures, Renault powered cars can go one lap longer than Mercedes powered ones as well.
However, there is some shock results of mine, Ferrari cars can go arround a third of a lap longer than the Mercedes cars and the Toyota RVX-09 has better fuel efficiency than the Renault as well, it can do 1.1 lap longer than the RS27 power plants. The BMW engine was a gas guzzeler as it can only manage 16.7 laps of a race in 2009 before refueling.
I got theese figures:
Mercedes FO108W 17.3
Ferrari 056 17.6
BMW P86/9 16.7
Renault RS27-2009 18.3
Toyota RVX-09 19.4
Average 17.8
raymondu999 wrote:Not as many; admittedly; but it did happen. How do you mean lighter fuel strategy? Qualifying is done on fumes
Apologies...lighter fuel loads at the start of a race. To get the jump on Vettel and then "cruise" mid point for a couple of laps....
It would seem to me that Vettel's engineers would probably have a similar strategy given how Vettel has typically cruised to victories after blistering opening stints.
raymondu999 wrote:Webber stopped several times. Such as after the first race in Melbourne
Webber stopped after Melbourne because he was upset that the team informed him that Vettel would fight for the win when Mark requested if Vettel was challenged to give him 1st for home glory.
Hence why he was tailing him at Silverstone as a form of retribution until Christian Horner told him to back off Vettel.
Not a Webber or Red Bull fan so yeah
Off topic: Hope the Red Bulls break down all year and have many DNFs....
If someone said to me that you can have three wishes, my first would have been to get into racing, my second to be in Formula 1, my third to drive for Ferrari.
munudeges wrote:It shouldn't be any surprise that the Renault gives slightly better fuel consumption if it, as is widely reported and established in 2009, produces less power. Nor should it be any surprise that it would run slightly cooler etc. etc. if that was the case.
In reality all the engines are very equal, same size, weight etc. To suggest that any team is having to do anything wildly different in terms of packaging for each engine is well, well wide of the mark. The differences there appear to be are all related to horsepower since that is the only limiting factor. Given that Mercedes can choose when and where to use their power for track position and for fuel saving I know what engine I would choose if I had a choice.
I believe they are talking about packaging the car around the engine. If you have a more efficient and cooler engine, you will be able to build a tighter packaging around it.
