2015 Malaysian Grand Prix - Sepang

[dans79]

No, read the article, there is no mention of thermal degradation. You are making up that part.

Perhaps you should read more articles, than just the ones that support your point of view.

Actually that article was brought to my attention in an attempt to justify your point of view...
No need to get uptight about Jacky's article.

lol

[SectorOne]

there comes a time when you look at a situation and say hmmmm do i push and wear out this engine that i have to do 3 more GPs with when i have no realistic chance of catching mercedes or do i bring the
car home and take the points? i suspect ferrari did that....

So Mercedes did not? They were like "naaahh, good engine, "push like a hell" to borrow some words from Trulli.

Or maybe...just maybe Mercedes has the same amount of allowed engines to use in the season as Ferrari and just maybe will think the same way. (especially when they were 35 seconds up the road from nearest competitor)

[Andres125sx]

No, read the article, there is no mention of thermal degradation. You are making up that part.

Perhaps you should read more articles, than just the ones that support your point of view.

Actually that article was brought to my attention in an attempt to justify your point of view...
No need to get uptight about Jacky's article.

Right, but looks like you only read the part that supports your point of view.... even when I quoted his final conclusion

Let´s try again

That said, it's still too early to say if Ferrari can emerge as a real challenger for this year's title, especially since the excessive heat in Malaysia, with track temperatures reaching 62°C, may have been a disadvantage for Mercedes. Temperatures in China will certainly be a lot lower.

[Chene_Mostert]

Yes, it says "may have been"

[dans79]

Yes, it says "may have been"

lol, that's what you are going to hang your hat on.

[turbof1]

It's getting a bit feisty around here guys. No need to agree with eachother of course, but keep it more respectfull and less personal.

As far as the indications go, it is not that likely Ferrari will repeat this in China. Ferrari surely earned every bit of the victory in Malaysia by matching, and I am saying matching meaning not slower or quicker, Mercedes' pace, and making the correct choices concerning strategy.

Different people from both Mercedes and more importantly Ferrari in the meanwhile all have acclaimed the heat helped Ferrari in Malaysia, and a repeat is less likely in colder conditions. Scarbs told us that the Mercedes race pace was the same as last year's race. Certainly in similar conditions the race pace should be minimal a second quicker, but the fact is that temperatures were higher and Mercedes looked to have struggled massively because of that. Again, a repeat of that in cooler conditions is not that likely.

I however also want to stress on 2 things:
-Ferrari earned that victory fair and square, again through matching Mercedes their pace and making the difference with strategy.
-Ferrari looked to have been underestimated during testing, even though they did those tests well. Their car is massively better then last year. It's not completely unthinkable they might outdevelop Mercedes throughout the season, although not all too likely either since both have comparable resources concerning capital and human resources.

So there you have it. Malaysia showed the weakness of Mercedes and the strengths of Ferrari. The latter will clearly be best of the rest anyhow for the rest of the season, being in prime position to pounce when Mercedes is struggling to take one or other hurdle. Mercedes on the other hand does not have such a pace advantage anymore to afford bumps in the road.

[Chene_Mostert]

Yes, it says "may have been"

lol, that's what you are going to hang your hat on.

No, I'll be hanging my hat on the fact that in the last race Ferrari had the pace to compete with Mercedes AMG Petronas F1. Also that the good consistent pace was evident from the first day of testing.
I'll also be hanging my hat on the fact that I'm not the one having to "calculate" excuses for the poor showing of Mercedes AMG Petronas F1.

[ferkan]

How did Scarbs get to the conclusion that Merc was lapping same times as 2014? Because that is not the case from what I'm looking at. His last stint on hard was ~1 second faster on avg in comparison to last year on mediums.

Did anybody find strange when Hamilton on fresh tires and full fuel couldn't make any sort of gap until SC came? I've seen Rosberg getting further at the back, but Vettel was completely in DRS zone. I reckon he would take Hamilton on the track in few lap time.

Also Turbo1, I wouldn't put to much into what Allison said after race. In his interview from this week (Gazzetta) he said they are looking to be as competitive in Shanghai as they were in Sepang. So there is that...

[Andres125sx]

-Ferrari looked to have been underestimated during testing, even though they did those tests well. Their car is massively better then last year.

This remind me... last week I watched an interview with Roberto Merhi, Manor driver. Manor use Ferrari engine, but 2014 version.

He said their´re willing to receive 2015 unit, wich is 2 seconds quicker

Not sure how that compares to the rest of the PU´s, but that´s surely a huge step forward

He also said when they can upgrade to 2015 car it will be around 1,5 seconds quicker, so when using 2015 car and 2015 PU they will be around 3.5 seconds quicker. Even so they will be last on the grid, but then pretty close to the rest.

I can´t imagine how excited they must be about this, improving 3.5 seconds/lap must be... =D>

Probably one of the biggest improvements from one race to the next (whatever it is, the next or in 4 months) in F1 history

[dans79]

Yes, it says "may have been"

lol, that's what you are going to hang your hat on.

No, I'll be hanging my hat on the fact that in the last race Ferrari had the pace to compete with Mercedes AMG Petronas F1. Also that the good consistent pace was evident from the first day of testing.
I'll also be hanging my hat on the fact that I'm not the one having to "calculate" excuses for the poor showing of Mercedes AMG Petronas F1.

I'm not sure you understand the difference between an "excuse" and a group of people having a technical discussion about how the many aspects of F1 design & tactical decisions can drastically effect the outcome of a race.

for example take how Ferrari/Alonso won the 2103 Spanish grand Prix with what was at best the 2nd/3rd best car. They caught everyone off guard buy getting the strategy just right. By the time rest of the grid figured out what was going on, it was to late.

[turbof1]

I personally wouldn't go as far as telling Ferrari was the lesser of Mercedes for Sepang. Again I felt they were actually on equal ground. When both Hamilton and Vettel were on the same stint and tyres, for the last stint, Hamilton made a few seconds progress in the first few laps of said stint, but then dropped off to equal pace. I believe if the stint went on, Hamilton would eventually have lost those seconds again, meaning it is roughly equal considering it's balancing between tyre life and ultimate pace.

It also means that if conditions are a bit more normal, the Mercedes should, and I emphasizing 'should' because in all honestly few people gave Ferrari a nickle for the race win in Sepang, be back to its winning ways in China.

I'm curious how things will go at Barcelona, another rough circuit on the tyres.

[ferkan]

I'm not sure you understand the difference between an "excuse" and a group of people having a technical discussion about how the many aspects of F1 design & tactical decisions can drastically effect the outcome of a race.

for example take how Ferrari/Alonso won the 2103 Spanish grand Prix with what was at best the 2nd/3rd best car. They caught everyone off guard buy getting the strategy just right. By the time rest of the grid figured out what was going on, it was to late.

Wouldn't make that kind of comparison with this years Malaysia. Hamilton was 10 seconds down on SV when he got out of the traffic after his pit stop. He had 50 laps to overturn that deficit but race finished with the same time difference. Ferrari won fair and square, tire degradation or not.

The thing is Ferrari's race pace is far to close to Merc for them to feel safe once when tire management comes into play.

[dans79]

Wouldn't make that kind of comparison with this years Malaysia.

I think it's a very good comparisons, because it highlights how a teams strategy call could drastically effect the outcome of the race.

Hamilton was 10 seconds down on SV when he got out of the traffic after his pit stop. He had 50 laps to overturn that deficit but race finished with the same time difference. Ferrari won fair and square, tire degradation or not.

As I and several others have said, that's because the tire/pit-stop strategy Merc decided to run was idiotic.

The thing is Ferrari's race pace is far to close to Merc for them to feel safe once when tire management comes into play.

That I agree with.

[godlameroso]

-Ferrari looked to have been underestimated during testing, even though they did those tests well. Their car is massively better then last year.

This remind me... last week I watched an interview with Roberto Merhi, Manor driver. Manor use Ferrari engine, but 2014 version.

He said their´re willing to receive 2015 unit, wich is 2 seconds quicker

Not sure how that compares to the rest of the PU´s, but that´s surely a huge step forward

He also said when they can upgrade to 2015 car it will be around 1,5 seconds quicker, so when using 2015 car and 2015 PU they will be around 3.5 seconds quicker. Even so they will be last on the grid, but then pretty close to the rest.

I can´t imagine how excited they must be about this, improving 3.5 seconds/lap must be... =D>

Probably one of the biggest improvements from one race to the next (whatever it is, the next or in 4 months) in F1 history

It doesn't add up evenly like that, it's the rule of diminishing returns. They probably say their total package will improve by moving to 2015 components.

Ferrari was on average about a second and a half per lap faster than last year. Mercedes also improved but only one second per lap on average. In fact just about everyone gained about 1 to 1 1/2 seconds.

[giantfan10]

there comes a time when you look at a situation and say hmmmm do i push and wear out this engine that i have to do 3 more GPs with when i have no realistic chance of catching mercedes or do i bring the
car home and take the points? i suspect ferrari did that....

So Mercedes did not? They were like "naaahh, good engine, "push like a hell" to borrow some words from Trulli.

Or maybe...just maybe Mercedes has the same amount of allowed engines to use in the season as Ferrari and just maybe will think the same way. (especially when they were 35 seconds up the road from nearest competitor)

at what point did i say mercedes didnt? in a one stop race with their rear guard massa holding up the competition i'm willing to bet they cruised after the only pit stop