2012 Testing - Jerez 7-10 February

[jenkF1]

when you start screwing around with exhaust frequency does it not affect the rpm? And are you saying that its almost 'energised' by the air passing , like your analagy, over it? sorry you will have to bear with me

[toobs1234]

That IS a resonator. It certainly doesn't "store" up pressure to release when off throttle.

That's some pretty poor analysis. Is this Scarbs guy a nutcase or is this just a one off?

[Hail22]

That IS a resonator. It certainly doesn't "store" up pressure to release when off throttle.

That's some pretty poor analysis. Is this Scarbs guy a nutcase or is this just a one off?

I find it offensive you calling Scarbs a "Nutcase" the guy has been entrenched in the sport for decades, he has technical knowledge and unlike media outlets he actually takes the time to investigate rumours rather then speculate.

[jenkF1]

That IS a resonator. It certainly doesn't "store" up pressure to release when off throttle.

That's some pretty poor analysis. Is this Scarbs guy a nutcase or is this just a one off?

whats your analysis then? I don't put blind faith in scarbs words, I may not be an expert in this field but I know from experience Scarbs is far far from a nutcase.

[toobs1234]

I find it offensive you calling Scarbs a "Nutcase" the guy has been entrenched in the sport for decades, he has technical knowledge and unlike media outlets he actually takes the time to investigate rumours rather then speculate.

I didn't call him a nutcase. I asked if he was a nutcase or if this was a oneoff brain fart.

I haven't read his web site, just the posting someone linked to. That post is clearly based upon some misconceptions. Don't take my word for it, though. Educate yourself. Engine intakes and exhausts are finely tuned acoustical systems. Look up quarter wave and helmholtz resonators. It's most likely one or the other.

One thing is for sure, it's not "accumulating" pressure to release during off throttle. Just think about how much air is passing an F1 car at speed and how little air would be stored in that tiny reservoir. You don't have to be an engineer to realize that's nonsense.

[Mandrake]

Can anyone of you enlight me about why it makes sense to sandbag during testing? I mean It's not like mclaren for instance are not putting in all the effort they can into having the best car possible come race 1. If redbull showed their cards now, nobody would or could develop any faster, could they?

[Hail22]

Can anyone of you enlight me about why it makes sense to sandbag during testing? I mean It's not like mclaren for instance are not putting in all the effort they can into having the best car possible come race 1. If redbull showed their cards now, nobody would or could develop any faster, could they?

Based on the current RRA there is all possibility that Mclaren, Ferrari, Mercedes and maybe Lotus could easily copy parts as they have their own wind tunnels, large team base thus faster production overturn.

So Jerez was a "launch car" test not a 2012 WDC main car test.

You will see at Barcelona that the front runners cars will be either slightly or completely different, as we know already red bull were running a custom version of the RB7 with RB8 components.

[muz]

They aslo sandbag to not draw attention to certain parts, for instance a slot here/vane there might look innocent enough if the car is going at average speed, however if it's suddenly fast then all of these parts will be scrutinised more closely

Great example is the F duct, nobody seemed to really care about mclaren's little duct on the bonnet, until it became clear they were multiple MPH quicker down the straight - another is the 2nd brake pedal, only noticed as brakes were glowing coming OUT of corners -

[Mandrake]

Apart from the obvious kph advantage the F-Duct offered or the 2nd brake pedal, there are not too many things to copy that lead to a giant gain in performance, are there? Even the cracks of this forum only have a vague understanding of why the RedBull was so quick the last two seasons (use of ellipses etc. )

So if RedBull gave it the full beans now, how would another team be able to spot THAT detail making RedBull fast? To my understanding it is the whole package, lots of excellent solutions working together very well. So the only chance would be copying the whole car.

It may be that the one or the other car looks fundamentally different come Melbourne, but that would even more be a reason not to hold back your performance because whatever the other teams see and copy, is not what will on the final car.

[Richard]

It's not that teams sandbag, rather they are trying to test parts and different set ups against a common baseline. You need divers doing consistent laps for that. They'd be interested in a lot more than just raw speed. For example a diver does two identical laptimes with two set ups, then they can see if one set up heats the tyre more than the other.

There is also the need to test for reliability with long runs, hence high fuel loads and conserving tyres.

[Maynard G. Krebs]

I really doubt if anyone is sandbagging. When 10ths of a second make the difference between being competitive or not, you need to know if you have those 10ths. A team would have to be extremely confident in their car to go testing and not go as fast as they can at some point. They may not have shown their full speed yet, but surely they will next test. After all, if they need to change something they will need a little time to get it done.

[Forza]

The stats are incorrect and I remove the original post.

[raymondu999]

Oh they'd be running flat out for sure. But I don't think they'll do it at 0 fuel - they'd probably do it on, say, hard tyres, and maybe 50 laps of fuel. That way the team will know where they are.

[Richard]

Put it this way, Q3 times in Melbourne will be faster than Q2, and Q2 faster than Q1. It is normal that Q1 is faster than FP2, and FP2 is faster than FP1.

We see mid level teams setting fastest times in final winter testing sessions, then dropping back to mid field in qualifying in Melbourne. We also see the gap between RB and the others get wider in Melbourne compared to testing, as if they have pulled out some extra speed from somewhere.

So that shows the teams' objectives are not always targeting the fastest glory time, rather the focus is consistent methodical testing against a consistent baseline.

I agree that is not sand bagging in terms of deliberately driving slowly, but the testing regime does result in slower lap times and a lack of glory runs.

[raymondu999]

I wonder if they set aside some of the pre-season testing mileage to not work on just their testing regime in terms of developing the car and baseline setups for their drivers; but for the drivers to try and adjust their driving styles to the characteristics of their new packages.