2020 Turkish Grand Prix - Instanbul Park, Nov 13 - 15

[NathanOlder]

How did Perez's tyres look ? He said they had no life left at all, so if we can see them, then we know what they look like when they are done. Lewis ddnt seem too bothered on his (not the end of life) as he turned down a free pit stop with 2 or 3 laps to go.

[Just_a_fan]

How did Perez's tyres look ? He said they had no life left at all, so if we can see them, then we know what they look like when they are done. Lewis ddnt seem too bothered on his (not the end of life) as he turned down a free pit stop with 2 or 3 laps to go.

Struggling to find decent images to compare them.

[PlatinumZealot]

Isn't this just showing the difference between the cars. Mercedes are kind to the tyres - they took time to warm the tyres all weekend. Ferrari are able to heat their tyres much quicker and of course that also means they wore them quicker.

The contact patches look similar at least. So the kinematics were not much different. One could say even the tyre pressures were not far off either. I feel the strategist should have decided to leave Vettel on the track.

Vettel's tyres had done 25 laps compared to Hamilton's 50 laps and they look the same. Do you think Vettel's tyres would have looked like that after another 25 laps? Really?

You missed my point in my first post on this. I said it seemed that the tyre wear had plateaued. It is not a coincidence that the two drivers that have demonstrated lengthening out the stint on inters did it again this race. It was a gamble for sure, but based on past experience they might have expected that the second life of inters as slicks was going to come, and they only had to be careful not to burn them out or slide off the track until then.

I really cannot believe that one car extend a tyre by 25 laps more. I feel Ferrari and RedBull missed a trick.

[PlatinumZealot]

To me it doesnt matter.

RedBull did not notice it and Max did not notice it.

Means it had no effect. The car was going slow anyway in the rain. The fastest speed they went was 170mph on the back straight and through the corners they were maybe 90mph. Nothing of concern. Max didn't even feel any weird imbalance to report. He was the fastest on track and carving it up like a Turkish shish-kebab.

I have watched the general television broadcast only (all sessions) and Max had been reporting understeer all weekend. He also wondered why he was not able to even keep up with the Mclaren's (I think that was stint in in Q1) or maybe during FP3, don't remember but that was what was broadcasted in the TV feed for everyone to hear. How did you come to the conclusion Max did not notice anything?

Because he was driving around the problem just fine at least from the start of the race. It did not not seem to stop him from being fastest. The front wing flap angle would increase or reduce DF on one side of the car. What does this mean in the turns? The Turkey track puts more load on the right side of the car. We do not know which side of the car the flap angle was different and whether it was too high or too low. But what we do know is that Max was pretty handy for the race. He normally wears his heart on his sleeve and is sensitive to the car. That he did not complain about understeer or oversteer in turn XYZ in the race... I can assume he was handling the car just fine. It is just a theory from me however.

[El Scorchio]

The contact patches look similar at least. So the kinematics were not much different. One could say even the tyre pressures were not far off either. I feel the strategist should have decided to leave Vettel on the track.

Vettel's tyres had done 25 laps compared to Hamilton's 50 laps and they look the same. Do you think Vettel's tyres would have looked like that after another 25 laps? Really?

You missed my point in my first post on this. I said it seemed that the tyre wear had plateaued. It is not a coincidence that the two drivers that have demonstrated lengthening out the stint on inters did it again this race. It was a gamble for sure, but based on past experience they might have expected that the second life of inters as slicks was going to come, and they only had to be careful not to burn them out or slide off the track until then.

I really cannot believe that one car extend a tyre by 25 laps more. I feel Ferrari and RedBull missed a trick.

It's a really interesting case of how a weakness evolved into a strength for the Mercedes car over the course of a race. The big struggle with getting the tyres up to temperature and the subsequent time losses in qualifying and the race were all gained back by staggering tyre life, both things by virtue of the car being so kind on tyres. (Combined with Hamilton's ability to really look after his tyres, as well)

It felt like a literal hare and tortoise story playing out. But it did give us a fascinating race.

[Just_a_fan]

The contact patches look similar at least. So the kinematics were not much different. One could say even the tyre pressures were not far off either. I feel the strategist should have decided to leave Vettel on the track.

Vettel's tyres had done 25 laps compared to Hamilton's 50 laps and they look the same. Do you think Vettel's tyres would have looked like that after another 25 laps? Really?

You missed my point in my first post on this. I said it seemed that the tyre wear had plateaued. It is not a coincidence that the two drivers that have demonstrated lengthening out the stint on inters did it again this race. It was a gamble for sure, but based on past experience they might have expected that the second life of inters as slicks was going to come, and they only had to be careful not to burn them out or slide off the track until then.

I really cannot believe that one car extend a tyre by 25 laps more. I feel Ferrari and RedBull missed a trick.

The question is not whether they could have extended but whether, had they done so, the tyres would have worn too far. If they had done so, the cars would have lost pace at a high rate and also risked a failure. Indeed, Hamilton's worry was that he would suffer a mechanical failure of the tyre and the team were able to tell him that Bottas's tyres showed sufficient rubber left - on their car - to be able to go the distance.

Maybe Mercedes were lucky in that they weren't, in the initial part of the race, actually fighting for the win/podium. They were in the position of being able to see what happened and let the race come to them by allowing Hamilton to roll the dice on staying out. Maybe Ferrari / RedBull didn't feel they had that option. Mercedes really had nothing to lose, did they?

[El Scorchio]

Vettel's tyres had done 25 laps compared to Hamilton's 50 laps and they look the same. Do you think Vettel's tyres would have looked like that after another 25 laps? Really?

You missed my point in my first post on this. I said it seemed that the tyre wear had plateaued. It is not a coincidence that the two drivers that have demonstrated lengthening out the stint on inters did it again this race. It was a gamble for sure, but based on past experience they might have expected that the second life of inters as slicks was going to come, and they only had to be careful not to burn them out or slide off the track until then.

I really cannot believe that one car extend a tyre by 25 laps more. I feel Ferrari and RedBull missed a trick.

The question is not whether they could have extended but whether, had they done so, the tyres would have worn too far. If they had done so, the cars would have lost pace at a high rate and also risked a failure. Indeed, Hamilton's worry was that he would suffer a mechanical failure of the tyre and the team were able to tell him that Bottas's tyres showed sufficient rubber left - on their car - to be able to go the distance.

Maybe Mercedes were lucky in that they weren't, in the initial part of the race, actually fighting for the win/podium. They were in the position of being able to see what happened and let the race come to them by allowing Hamilton to roll the dice on staying out. Maybe Ferrari / RedBull didn't feel they had that option. Mercedes really had nothing to lose, did they?

True about Merc waiting- they were in the position RBR and Ferrari are sometimes when they are able to just see what's happening and react (or not) to circumstance and try something a little different, and sometimes it pays off big.

[Sieper]

To me it doesnt matter.

RedBull did not notice it and Max did not notice it.

Means it had no effect. The car was going slow anyway in the rain. The fastest speed they went was 170mph on the back straight and through the corners they were maybe 90mph. Nothing of concern. Max didn't even feel any weird imbalance to report. He was the fastest on track and carving it up like a Turkish shish-kebab.

I have watched the general television broadcast only (all sessions) and Max had been reporting understeer all weekend. He also wondered why he was not able to even keep up with the Mclaren's (I think that was stint in in Q1) or maybe during FP3, don't remember but that was what was broadcasted in the TV feed for everyone to hear. How did you come to the conclusion Max did not notice anything?

Because he was driving around the problem just fine at least from the start of the race. It did not not seem to stop him from being fastest. The front wing flap angle would increase or reduce DF on one side of the car. What does this mean in the turns? The Turkey track puts more load on the right side of the car. We do not know which side of the car the flap angle was different and whether it was too high or too low. But what we do know is that Max was pretty handy for the race. He normally wears his heart on his sleeve and is sensitive to the car. That he did not complain about understeer or oversteer in turn XYZ in the race... I can assume he was handling the car just fine. It is just a theory from me however.

Well, and this was indeed not broadcasted (I think) he did say he was massively underwinged when he came in for the pitstop. radioed it in to his engineer Gianpiero Lambiase. After the adjustment the 7 degrees difference existed (not sure about before that but there must have been problems earlier on as well 3,5 degrees adjustment is way to much for any normal change (even if one makes it in the right and the other in the wrong direction). It was a brand new wing (that needed to be screwed in the opposite direction as before on the older wing. In the RB16 thread you can clearly see that all elements or loose from the footplate now, before just 2.

In Q3 they were all gathered around it, Paul Monaghan included. Head scratching and all. It was the left hand side that was too low. Maybe that was the "luck" as this circuit goes counterclockwise so right front wheel gets most load in most (lefthand) corners. When he spun behind Perez it was a right hand corner though (so left side most loaded). it can't have helped.

[Sieper]

You missed my point in my first post on this. I said it seemed that the tyre wear had plateaued. It is not a coincidence that the two drivers that have demonstrated lengthening out the stint on inters did it again this race. It was a gamble for sure, but based on past experience they might have expected that the second life of inters as slicks was going to come, and they only had to be careful not to burn them out or slide off the track until then.

I really cannot believe that one car extend a tyre by 25 laps more. I feel Ferrari and RedBull missed a trick.

The question is not whether they could have extended but whether, had they done so, the tyres would have worn too far. If they had done so, the cars would have lost pace at a high rate and also risked a failure. Indeed, Hamilton's worry was that he would suffer a mechanical failure of the tyre and the team were able to tell him that Bottas's tyres showed sufficient rubber left - on their car - to be able to go the distance.

Maybe Mercedes were lucky in that they weren't, in the initial part of the race, actually fighting for the win/podium. They were in the position of being able to see what happened and let the race come to them by allowing Hamilton to roll the dice on staying out. Maybe Ferrari / RedBull didn't feel they had that option. Mercedes really had nothing to lose, did they?

True about Merc waiting- they were in the position RBR and Ferrari are sometimes when they are able to just see what's happening and react (or not) to circumstance and try something a little different, and sometimes it pays off big.

Plus they have RP in the mix. Perez would have never pitted out and away before Max. Just hold him up and have Lance win.

Lewis did actually make an attempt at Vettel. Or did we all forget about that? Failed badly (cost him an extra position). It was not a question of waiting, they were trying but just not capable. In fact, If lewis hadn't missed turn 9 (and loose position to Vettel and Verstappen) It would (should really) have been him stuck behind Perez.

[Just_a_fan]

Lewis did actually make an attempt at Vettel. Or did we all forget about that? Failed badly (cost him an extra position). It was not a question of waiting, they were trying but just not capable. In fact, If lewis hadn't missed turn 9 (and loose position to Vettel and Verstappen) It would (should really) have been him stuck behind Perez.

Yes Lewis had an attempt and then realised he didn't have the brake temperature or tyre grip to make the move work. So he bailed out. And didn't hit Vettel. Unlike a number of drivers who try these moves and take themselves and the other driver out of the race, or cause damage that hampers one/both of them. It wasn't a "failed badly", it was a "failed well" really.

And the Merc's inability to get enough temperature in to the tyres early on actually helped in the end because they knew that pitting for fresh inters wouldn't really work - by staying out, Hamilton was able to keep what temperature he had in the tyres and then as the line got steadily drier he was able to work the tyres harder, feeling the progression of that particular set of tyres. Changing tyres means the driver has to feel what he has under him and that takes a lap or even two. That would mean the tyres would probably cool even further - remember that they come out of the blankets at less than the temperature they run on the track - so he'd have been back to fighting the tyres and waiting for them to come back to him. And he'd have finished off the podium.

Hamilton realised this and said to the team "leave me out". He knew pitting for a second set of inters when everyone else did would be the wrong thing to do. He rolled the dice, the team let him, they both got it right this time.

[PlatinumZealot]

Yes that was a good onboard showing how Lewis played it really safe. As soon as he saw his car closing too fast he switched over to run wide and avoid an accident.

[Sieper]

Yes, that was a really comfortable way to loose track position to Albon. My point is not that he indeed chose a spot where you can bail out. In fact, Max was also trying to line up for this same spot against Perez. No, my point is that now the perogative is he was sensibly waiting it out, I don’t think that was the aim. He just lost two spots to vettel and Verstappen after the T9 off track excursion , that caused him to be further down. Then he lost one more position to Albon after the Vettel attempt. He was trying but not succeeding in the first stint. Then he could stay out and his tires worn as the track got a little dryer (still wet) just as he was there and not in the Mix.

And Lewis was sure trying tombe there, track position was king, that is also why he took quite some risk with Riccardo at the start. The fact it was a bit unsuccessful in the end aided his victory chances.

[Just_a_fan]

Yes, that was a really comfortable way to loose track position to Albon. My point is not that he indeed chose a spot where you can bail out. In fact, Max was also trying to line up for this same spot against Perez. No, my point is that now the perogative is he was sensibly waiting it out, I don’t think that was the aim. He just lost two spots to vettel and Verstappen after the T9 off track excursion , that caused him to be further down. Then he lost one more position to Albon after the Vettel attempt. He was trying but not succeeding in the first stint. Then he could stay out and his tires worn as the track got a little dryer (still wet) just as he was there and not in the Mix.

And Lewis was sure trying tombe there, track position was king, that is also why he took quite some risk with Riccardo at the start. The fact it was a bit unsuccessful in the end aided his victory chances.

Lewis was trying an overtake on Vettel because he was quicker than Vettel. Getting past him would have aided him to get and keep even more tyre temperature. Being stuck behind Vettel wasn't helping him. So he tried an overtake in a safe place, and bailed out when it was obviously not going to work out. And he lost a spot. But that was all he lost. His earlier loss of track position at T9 was because his tyres were not working properly. But he didn't lose anything other than a couple of places, no harm done, carry on.

Compare to Max's attempt to pass Perez (who he was quicker than just as Hamilton was quicker than Vettel) that resulted in a big spin - could have been race ending had it gone towards the barriers over the grass - a loss of places to Albon, Vettel and Hamilton behind plus an additional loss of track time by having to pit to replace flat spotted tyres. That was just down to Max being impatient and not thinking through what might happen. That corner, T11, was very wet and any instability in the car would likely result in a spin. So crossing the wake of the car in front at that point was just asking for a big spin. And that's what he got. It was a great save to avoid the crossing the grass in to the barrier.

Two attempts to overtake with very different outcomes - caused by a different level of experience I think. Lewis has made those mistakes in the past, Max is making them now. Max will, hopefully, learn and take that experience forward. We will all watch with interest to see if he does.

[PlatinumZealot]

Yes, that was a really comfortable way to loose track position to Albon. My point is not that he indeed chose a spot where you can bail out. In fact, Max was also trying to line up for this same spot against Perez. No, my point is that now the perogative is he was sensibly waiting it out, I don’t think that was the aim. He just lost two spots to vettel and Verstappen after the T9 off track excursion , that caused him to be further down. Then he lost one more position to Albon after the Vettel attempt. He was trying but not succeeding in the first stint. Then he could stay out and his tires worn as the track got a little dryer (still wet) just as he was there and not in the Mix.

And Lewis was sure trying tombe there, track position was king, that is also why he took quite some risk with Riccardo at the start. The fact it was a bit unsuccessful in the end aided his victory chances.

So many times we see in wet races that you can afford some risk earlier in the race and come back later. Later in the race though opportunities dry up.

[NathanOlder]

Talking about Lewis running wide at T9, was he the only driver I saw actually go round the bollard that was placed way out wide ? I mean, when you see the incident , he didnt run too wide and wasnt far off track, yet he then turned hard right to go round the bollard as they were obviously told this in the driver briefing. Perez for instance was 4 wheels off the track there on the last lap, didnt go round the bollard, and nothing was done. If he went round the bollard, it would have been a Ferrari 2-3 with Perez 4th or 5th.