Jump to content


Photo

The Gap


  • Please log in to reply
79 replies to this topic

#1 pottiella

pottiella
  • Member

  • 342 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 11 May 2008 - 18:27

A lot of talk about 'the gap' between McLaren and Ferrari, or BMW and McLaren...but what about the rest?

More specifically:

Can Renault close the gap (performance-wise) to BMW over the coming races?

Are BMW falling back from McLaren a little?

Are Red Bull realistically stronger than Renault but the driver makes the difference now in results?

Who is stronger, Williams or Toyota? Have they fallen back from Renault and Red Bull?

Advertisement

#2 Andrew Ford &F1

Andrew Ford &F1
  • Member

  • 246 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 11 May 2008 - 19:55

There are so many questions that I cannot answer. And that means that the championship is rather exciting. McLaren and BMW aren't that far away from Ferrari, there would be some tracks to which their cars would be better suited than the reds. Williams and Toyota seem to be levelled at the moment, it's interesting who'll finish ahead on points and Red Bull might produce a surprise or two and don't count out Renault, I think that Alonso will win one GP this year, albeit a very bizarre one.

#3 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 11 May 2008 - 19:57

Hopefully people will acknowledge LH's car setup and development skills. McLaren was closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year.

#4 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 11 May 2008 - 20:01

Indeed, LH is singlehandedly dragging McLaren forward in a way donkey's like Alonso couldn't hope too. I suspect his sexy smile alone gives them 3 or 4 tenths :up:

#5 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,503 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 11 May 2008 - 20:16

Originally posted by internetf1
Hopefully people will acknowledge LH's car setup and development skills. McLaren was closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year.


Sigh.

.......

I expect it to become tight on some tracks between BMW, and Renault & Red Bull. Between Renault and Red Bull it will come down to who switches attention to next year first. Honda will probably slide (further) down as they will only get one major upgrade this year.
Williams v Toyota is interesting but I expect Rosberg to be important here.

#6 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 11 May 2008 - 20:33

Renault, Red Bull, Williams and Toyota are roughly on the same level. Trulli was held up for half of the race, also his strategy was weird and non-symmetrical (very long middle stint), yet he finished 20 secs behind Alonso. In the midfield battles starts and other tiny details count, who will finish ahead of behind.

BMW I suspect is starting to fade a bit, but they will stay comfortably ahead of the midfield group like they did last year. McLaren was poor in Bahrain, but has become better with every race. They should be great at Monaco and Canada, but they seem to become more competitive on aero tracks too, so the title fight is still wide open.

Fourth place in the Constructors champ will be decided by the Safety Car rule.

#7 pottiella

pottiella
  • Member

  • 342 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 11 May 2008 - 21:04

Originally posted by Group B
Indeed, LH is singlehandedly dragging McLaren forward in a way donkey's like Alonso couldn't hope too. I suspect his sexy smile alone gives them 3 or 4 tenths :up:


So much for trying to start up intellegent conversation and debate.

Clearly I was naive to think Autosport's forum would be better than this, but you get the same old tosspots everywhere.

Thanks to the rest for saying something sensible.

Yes, the 4 teams in the middle are still exchanging places, yet I do think Renault and Red Bull have a slight edge now. I've always thought they are better at in-season development than Williams and Toyota, who have both in recent years started off strong to fall away as the season progresses.

I have a weird feeling too that Alonso will come close to a win this year, under bizarre circumstances, but whether he'll win or not I don't know. His season this year reminds me of Schumi in 2005...just fighting for points, but getting stronger as the year goes on - and one win against all odds.

I think we'll know around Silverstone if Renault can catch BMW...and if they don't then it'll be more a case of BMW keeping up with McLaren and Ferrari and Red Bull keeping up with Renault. Monaco and Canada are deceptive races...

#8 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 12 May 2008 - 09:10

Originally posted by pottiella


So much for trying to start up intellegent conversation and debate.

Clearly I was naive to think Autosport's forum would be better than this, but you get the same old tosspots everywhere.

Thanks to the rest for saying something sensible.

Yes, the 4 teams in the middle are still exchanging places, yet I do think Renault and Red Bull have a slight edge now. I've always thought they are better at in-season development than Williams and Toyota, who have both in recent years started off strong to fall away as the season progresses.

I have a weird feeling too that Alonso will come close to a win this year, under bizarre circumstances, but whether he'll win or not I don't know. His season this year reminds me of Schumi in 2005...just fighting for points, but getting stronger as the year goes on - and one win against all odds.

I think we'll know around Silverstone if Renault can catch BMW...and if they don't then it'll be more a case of BMW keeping up with McLaren and Ferrari and Red Bull keeping up with Renault. Monaco and Canada are deceptive races...

I wasn't responding to the initial post (yours); if I was I'd have quoted it. I was responding to internetf1's attempt to champion Hamilton some more. Given that he's posted 80 times in 24 hours, on top of the ITV love in, I don't think we really need another mound of Lewis adoration.

As it happens I think your thread subject was a pretty good one, but sadly you lose points for being totally inadequate when it comes to reading responses in context. Oh well :

#9 Arion

Arion
  • Member

  • 2,353 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 10:42

Originally posted by Group B

I wasn't responding to the initial post (yours); if I was I'd have quoted it. I was responding to internetf1's attempt to champion Hamilton some more. Given that he's posted 80 times in 24 hours, on top of the ITV love in, I don't think we really need another mound of Lewis adoration.

As it happens I think your thread subject was a pretty good one, but sadly you lose points for being totally inadequate when it comes to reading responses in context. Oh well :


Despite saying the thread suject was a good one, you chose to repond to internetf1......:rolleyes:
I don't think pottiella misunderstood your post, he just doesn't want his thread got hijacked by flamebaiting.

#10 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 10:45

Originally posted by Group B

I wasn't responding to the initial post (yours); if I was I'd have quoted it. I was responding to internetf1's attempt to champion Hamilton some more. Given that he's posted 80 times in 24 hours, on top of the ITV love in, I don't think we really need another mound of Lewis adoration.

As it happens I think your thread subject was a pretty good one, but sadly you lose points for being totally inadequate when it comes to reading responses in context. Oh well :


So when it's people bashing LH for his lack of setup and development skills it's a valid point, but when people praise him for his ability to bring McLaren closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year, it's a love fest?

#11 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 12 May 2008 - 10:50

Originally posted by Arion


Despite saying the thread suject was a good one, you chose to repond to internetf1......:rolleyes:
I don't think pottiella misunderstood your post, he just doesn't want his thread got hijacked by flamebaiting.

It already had been. Or was the thread title 'Please Post Yet More Lewis Love Here'? :rolleyes:
Anyway, I suggest we all shut up and stop bickering so that the thread, can indeed, return to it's initial subject. :kiss:

#12 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 10:57

Originally posted by internetf1


So when it's people bashing LH for his lack of setup and development skills it's a valid point, but when people praise him for his ability to bring McLaren closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year, it's a love fest?


Use your head, do you really think it is his setup skills that have brought McLaren closer to Ferrari at Turkey when compared to last year, or just maybe it is because Ferrari have shortened their wheelbase sacrificing speed on fast tracks like Turkey in favour of better speed on the twisty stuff while Mclaren have done the complete opposite...Listen to the comments of Whitmarsh and Haug for once regarding this years Mclaren chassis.

Yes there has been a contraction between the teams this year on the fast tracks, but the key is the advantage they carry across the season as a whole. Ferrari was not competitive on a number of slower circuits last year and lost too much time in the twisty stuff, this year Mclaren seem to be suffering the same problems...I think it is more to do with development direction of both teams then Lewis' setup technique.

Given your ideology on this point, when Mclaren suffer in Monaco in two weeks will that be because Lewis has a bad setup and poor development or because Mclaren has a bad car? The problem with Lewis fan boys is that when he has a good race it is his silky skills doing the work, but when he has a shocker it is the teams fault.

There are very few unbiased views here, you may think mine are attacking Lewis but please, i provide some plausible facts and questions that need to be asked which continually get ignored by lewis's fan club simply because they dont suggest Lewis as doing the best job, especially when compared to his team mate.

#13 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:00

Originally posted by internetf1


So when it's people bashing LH for his lack of setup and development skills it's a valid point, but when people praise him for his ability to bring McLaren closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year, it's a love fest?

Not at all; the point is that you were drawing a extremely subjectective and simplistic conclusion in order to heap praise on LH. I'm not saying he's either a good or bad developer, but the relative gap between two teams at two races a year apart is not a fantastic or singular indicator; there are rather more factors involved. Giving the guy more credit than is reasonably due is no less irritating than giving him more flack, and will only irk people and make the latter increase. The guy's obviously a top driver, but I think many people would be able to appreciate him better if the hype were turned down a touch.

#14 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:01

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso


Use your head, do you really think it is his setup skills that have brought McLaren closer to Ferrari at Turkey when compared to last year, or just maybe it is because Ferrari have shortened their wheelbase sacrificing speed on fast tracks like Turkey in favour of better speed on the twisty stuff while Mclaren have done the complete opposite...Listen to the comments of Whitmarsh and Haug for once regarding this years Mclaren chassis.

Yes there has been a contraction between the teams this year on the fast tracks, but the key is the advantage they carry across the seasons as a whole. Ferrari was not competitive on a number of slower circuits last year and lost too much time in the twisty stuff, this year Mclaren seem to be suffering the same problems...I think it is more to do with development direction of both teams then Lewis' setup technique.

Given your ideology on this point, when Mclaren suffer in Monaco in two weeks will that be because Lewis has a bad setup and poor development or because Mclaren has a bad car. The problem with Lewis fan boys is that when he has a good race it is his silky skills doing the work, but when he has a shocker it is the teams fault.

There are very few unbiased views here, you may think mine are attacking Lewis but please, i provide some plausible facts and questions that need to be asked which continually get ignored by lewis's fan club simply because they dont suggest Lewis as doing the best job, even when compared to his team mate.


Can I ask you something. Did you defend Hamilton last year, when it was suggested that Lewis doesn't know how to setup his car and did you critisize Alonso fans for stating that McLarens speed was due Alonsos development skills?

I am just providing facts to dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso. Nothing wrong with defending Hamilton is there? People here can do nothing but bash Hamilton, but whenever someone dares to praise him just one bit, everyone goes bonkers.

#15 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:05

Originally posted by internetf1
I am just providing facts to dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso.

I am always interested in facts, but somehow they seem to have gone missing here. Did you accidentally delete them or something? Can you please post it again because facts that can "dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso" is just as interesting as facts that can dismiss the claims of the opposite.

Thanks

#16 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:11

Originally posted by StefanV

I am always interested in facts, but somehow they seem to have gone missing here. Did you accidentally delete them or something? Can you please post it again because facts that can "dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso" is just as interesting as facts that can dismiss the claims of the opposite.

Thanks


McLaren won at OZ, a ferrari track and has been closer in pace to ferrari compared to last year in sepang, spain and turkey which are Ferrari tracks as well.

#17 Johny Bravo

Johny Bravo
  • Member

  • 2,599 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:14

Originally posted by internetf1
Hopefully people will acknowledge LH's car setup and development skills. McLaren was closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year.


Hopefully Kimi will cut that hole again into the Ferrari's nose in Monaco. It was a very clever idea from Kimi, which he actually got whilst having a shit.

#18 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:16

Originally posted by StefanV

I am always interested in facts, but somehow they seem to have gone missing here. Did you accidentally delete them or something? Can you please post it again because facts that can "dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso" is just as interesting as facts that can dismiss the claims of the opposite.

Thanks


Thanks stefan, you beat me to the punch.

InternetF1 - No i did not defend Lewis last year, and if you want to know the reason why, just look at Silverstone 2007 for the answer.

But i did criticise Alonso for claiming he brought 0.6 seconds to the car, he didn't but he extracted the most out of it through superior setup, and it was widely stated within McLaren that the drivers 'shared' setups, although Alonso claimed this all to be one way only. Even so, such a statement from Alonso was arrogant and against team spirits, this is what i criticised.

If you know what happened in Silverstone 2007, with respect to the setups, Alonsos games with Lewis and Lewis's setup adjustment during the race then i think any argument praising the setup ability of Lewis will become void.

For the record, i don't think lewis is bad at setting up his car, but i do think Alonso is better. I also think McLaren have not understood the long wheelbase concept well enough and this is proving difficult to get around this year especially for the drivers.

But as Stefan said, you claim to provide facts, but all you have provided is opinion. Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one. Still waiting for the facts.

#19 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:23

Originally posted by internetf1


McLaren won at OZ, a ferrari track and has been closer in pace to ferrari compared to last year in sepang, spain and turkey which are Ferrari tracks as well.


Oz was not really a good indication of pace, so far we have been on fast sweeping circuits which suited the F2007 more then the F2008, but the F2007 struggled on the slower circuits. Seeing as we have not yet raced on a slower circuit a true comparison is not yet available. Wait until after Monaco.

Yes McLaren got closer to Ferrari on the fast tracks, they got closer but still lost. Now if Ferrari beat Mclaren on the slower tracks then it would suggest that Ferrari have got the balance just right on the F2008 to be competitive on both types of circuits throughout the whole year; something they missed in 2007.

This is what i am trying to get through to so many; 2008 is not 2007, teams have learnt from their mistakes, some teams have developed their chassis from 2007, while others have copied the chassis of their competitors from 2007 in their 2008 car. Only one team will find the right balance.

So far Ferrari have a better car on the fast sweeping circuits, i think this is a fair statement given the stats, and if they perform better at Monaco and Hungary then i think there would be enough evidence to say that they have got it right this year when compared to their competition.

Advertisement

#20 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:25

Originally posted by Johny Bravo


Hopefully Kimi will cut that hole again into the Ferrari's nose in Monaco. It was a very clever idea from Kimi, which he actually got whilst having a shit.

......... :rotfl:

#21 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:28

Originally posted by internetf1


McLaren won at OZ, a ferrari track and has been closer in pace to ferrari compared to last year in sepang, spain and turkey which are Ferrari tracks as well.

Is that the facts to "dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso"?

I don't want to seem ungrateful for your efforts, but you are aware of the facts both Ferrari and McLaren was racing other cars this year than they did last year? You might also want to consider that both Massa and Kimi retired in OZ.

#22 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:38

Originally posted by StefanV

Is that the facts to "dismiss all those claims from last year as well as the claims that McLaren would fall back drastically off the pace without Alonso"?

I don't want to seem ungrateful for your efforts, but you are aware of the facts both Ferrari and McLaren was racing other cars this year than they did last year? You might also want to consider that both Massa and Kimi retired in OZ.


Massa didn't have any problems in qualifying and yet he only qualified 4th. And in the race, his pace was nowhere before he retired. Nice try though.

#23 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:44

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso

If you know what happened in Silverstone 2007, with respect to the setups

Kimi has already had setup problems twice this year. Does he not know how to setup cars? Lewis was on Alonso's pace even after Silverstone. It's funny really, it seems people don't like to see Hamilton get praised. If he is getting bashed people like Italian Tifoso will just stand back and enjoy the show instead of defending him. Have you seen the amount of bashing Hamilton gets on this board and others? It's unreal.

#24 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:44

Originally posted by internetf1


Massa didn't have any problems in qualifying and yet he only qualified 4th. And in the race, his pace was nowhere before he retired. Nice try though.


I seem to recall a first corner brain fart by Massa and then a race stuck on the gearbox of other cars before his DNF. Not quite the ideal race to deduce relative race pace performance. But of course you took those variables into account didn't you?

#25 AFCA

AFCA
  • Member

  • 6,661 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:46

A few random quotes...

Baldisserri: ''We would have celebrated a 1-2 victory if Hamilton hadn't overtaken Massa in the middle part of the race. Between Hamilton and Raikkonen there was a difference of one or two seconds.''

Hamilton: ''We've caught up with Ferrari. Whitmarsh specifies: ''We keep losing time on Ferrari in the slow corners. We were closer to them because the amount of fast corners is greater in Istanbul than in Barcelona.''

This is exactly what made BMW Sauber chanceless. The F1.08 copes better with slow corners than with faster ones. Kubica: ''By collecting 9 points we've actually done well considering our car doesn't particularly suit the Istanbul track.''

Heidfeld: ''Considering P9 on the grid I have to be satisfied with P5 in the end. I couldn't do more than that today.''

Kubica can hardly wait to go to Monaco: ''That is where our car could exploit its strong points and perhaps it might be my lucky day...''

Briatore: ''Unfortunately Alonso made a mistake in his qualifying lap, otherwise he would have been further up the grid.'' Again Renault adopted an aggresive strategy, Alonso: ''Meanwhile most teams have understood that you won't get anywhere when you start from P9 or P10 with a lot of fuel.''

Webber on his race: ''I tried to follow Alonso but he was a bit too quick for me. Because Rosberg wasn't a threat to me I dozed off a little in the middle part of the race.''

The Australian hails the progress the team has made: ''In terms of sheer speed we haven't been as close to the top as is the case now.''

Rosberg on his race: ''Every lap I was on the limit, otherwise I wouldn't have gained points. Renault and Red Bull are clearly ahead of us now. We must absolutely respond otherwise it will soon be a hard story for us. It's positive that the next two races in Monaco and Montreal should favour our car.''

Glock (whose one stop strategy didn't pan out as was hoped for) on his race: ''I could have gone faster but most of the time I was stuck behind other drivers.''


#26 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:48

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso


I seem to recall a first corner brain fart by Massa and then a race stuck on the gearbox of other cars before his DNF. Not quite the ideal race to deduce relative race pace performance. But of course you took those variables into account didn't you?


Sorry but if Ferrari was faster or as fast as McLaren then they would have been closer to Macca in qualifying. Just look at Massa's Q2 pace.

#27 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:54

Originally posted by internetf1


Sorry but if Ferrari was faster or as fast as McLaren then they would have been closer to Macca in qualifying. Just look at Massa's Q2 pace.


Just so i am not misunderstanding you, are you trying to use an irregular track such as Albert Park with its stop start nature as a form of performance barometer between the Ferrari and Mclaren chassis while discounting the following 4 races where Ferrari won and outpaced McLaren?

Not to mention you are using Q2 where the top 10 get through as an indication of outright speed where all that matters is that you are in the top 10 and make it to Q3...

Please give a little more thought to your posts as you are really letting yourself down. :|

#28 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:56

Originally posted by internetf1


Massa didn't have any problems in qualifying and yet he only qualified 4th. And in the race, his pace was nowhere before he retired. Nice try though.

I was just making some observations which I backed up with facts. You seem to believe that your opinions are facts. They are not. I could counter your arguments by saying like "Kimi ran out of guel in Q" and "was the quickest driver in Oz" and that the "Ferrari track" in Malaysia was actually won by Alonso last year, so that your observation that McLaren was "closer" this year seem odd. I could also point out that it seems odd that they were closer also in Barcelona, a race that was won last year by Massa, 6 seconds before Hamilton with Alonso third, while the gap this year was quite similar (the actual gap is irrelevant since we know they all go ECO on the last stint) but the best McLaren was only third. I could say a lot more. But I don't, because I was interested in facts and you do not seem to have any. Therefore I leave this discussion with you.

#29 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:57

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso


Just so i am not misunderstanding you, are you trying to use an irregular track such as Albert Park with its stop start nature as a form of performance barometer between the Ferrari and Mclaren chassis while discounting the following 4 races where Ferrari won and outpaced McLaren?

Not to mention you are using Q2 where the top 10 get through as an indication of outright speed where all that matters is that you are in the top 10 and make it to Q3...

Please give a little more thought to your posts as you are really letting yourself down. :|


No I'm just saying that McLaren has been a lot closer to Ferrari at Ferrari tracks. Ok then, might as well look at Q3. Massa qualified 4th. Not exactly fast is it?

#30 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:59

Originally posted by StefanV

I was just making some observations which I backed up with facts. You seem to believe that your opinions are facts. They are not. I could counter your arguments by saying like "Kimi ran out of guel in Q" and "was the quickest driver in Oz" and that the "Ferrari track" in Malaysia was actually won by Alonso last year, so that your observation that McLaren was "closer" this year seem odd. I could also point out that it seems odd that they were closer also in Barcelona, a race that was won last year by Massa, 6 seconds before Hamilton with Alonso third.
This year the gap was quite similar (the actual gap is irrelevant since we know they all go ECO on the last stint) but the best McLaren was only third. I could say a lot more. But I don't, because I was interested in facts and you do not seem to have any. Therefore I leave this discussion with you.


Yeah and just ignore Turkey where the best McLaren was 3rd last year and 2nd this year. So on some tracks they've improved, while on some tracks they've remained the same. Over all, they've improved.

#31 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:00

Originally posted by internetf1


Sorry but if Ferrari was faster or as fast as McLaren then they would have been closer to Macca in qualifying. Just look at Massa's Q2 pace.

Is this "facts" again?


(I know, I have already left discussion, but I heard that from the door and could not help commenting)

#32 internetf1

internetf1
  • Member

  • 154 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:02

Originally posted by StefanV

Is this "facts" again?


(I know, I have already left discussion, but I heard that from the door and could not help commenting)


Yes it's facts. Massas Q2 and Q3 pace was way off McLaren. Anyway I have got an exam to attend. We can resume this discussion later. It seems people can't digest Hamilton getting praised so they have to to dig around, finding every minuscule flaw and making into it into a mountain..

#33 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:05

Originally posted by internetf1
Anyway I have got an exam to attend.

If you apply logic and use facts the same way as you have done in this thread, you will fail that exam. Sorry.

#34 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,220 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:08

Originally posted by internetf1
Hopefully people will acknowledge LH's car setup and development skills. McLaren was closer to Ferrari in Turkey than last year.


Indeed, great skill to be the only one of 20 drivers not able to make his tyres last long enough for the optimum 2-stop strategy. Very impressive.

#35 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:10

Originally posted by StefanV

If you apply logic and use facts the same way as you have done in this thread, you will fail that exam. Sorry.


I think we are wasting our time. InternetF1, you should study and discuss this later. We will all be better off for it. Good luck in your exam.

#36 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:22

James Allens thoughts on "The Gap"

Hamilton OTs Massa. At that point Lewis was seven laps into a 16-lap stint, which meant that his car had just 22 kilos of fuel in it; whereas Massa was just four laps into a 21-lap stint, so his car had 48 kilos of fuel on board, 26 kilos more than Lewis, which equates to nine-tenths of a second per lap slower.

This is pretty much exactly the margin Lewis was pulling out over him at the time and shows that the McLaren and Ferrari were very well matched this weekend in race conditions.

It looks as though Ferrari and BMW – who were two-tenths slower than Ferrari here – have stood still in relative terms, while McLaren have improved to be less than a tenth off the Ferrari.

#37 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:57

Originally posted by Mika Mika
James Allens thoughts on "The Gap"

Hamilton OTs Massa. At that point Lewis was seven laps into a 16-lap stint, which meant that his car had just 22 kilos of fuel in it; whereas Massa was just four laps into a 21-lap stint, so his car had 48 kilos of fuel on board, 26 kilos more than Lewis, which equates to nine-tenths of a second per lap slower.

This is pretty much exactly the margin Lewis was pulling out over him at the time and shows that the McLaren and Ferrari were very well matched this weekend in race conditions.

It looks as though Ferrari and BMW – who were two-tenths slower than Ferrari here – have stood still in relative terms, while McLaren have improved to be less than a tenth off the Ferrari.


Yep great info Mika, but one thing that was not considered was the different tyre compounds they were both using at the time. Ferrari had problems with their second set of softs and openly stated that the hard compound was better for the race...So how much do you think the different compounds are worth??? Or do you think they are exactly the same as James Allen because he intentionally chose not to mention this.

It is almost as if Allen is trying to justify in his own mind that Lewis and Mclaren are on par with Ferrari because he omits important info on the tyre strategy. Very poor for someone as seasoned as Allen, but what would i know? :lol:

#38 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 13:28

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso


Yep great info Mika, but one thing that was not considered was the different tyre compounds they were both using at the time. Ferrari had problems with their second set of softs and openly stated that the hard compound was better for the race...So how much do you think the different compounds are worth??? Or do you think they are exactly the same as James Allen because he intentionally chose not to mention this.

It is almost as if Allen is trying to justify in his own mind that Lewis and Mclaren are on par with Ferrari because he omits important info on the tyre strategy. Very poor for someone as seasoned as Allen, but what would i know? :lol:


Not really wanting to play James Allen advocate here, but below is data showing that Ferrari were faster on softs than on hard tyres:
(note Ferraris FL was set on softs and was 0.7 faster than their fastest hard tyre time)

From (http://www.fia.com/r...ap_Analysis.pdf)

Massa
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (1st set) 1:27.3 (with in/oputlaps and SC removed)
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (2nd set) 1:27.6 (with in/oputlaps removed) (reported problem set of tyres)
Ferrari Average Pace on on Hard tyres 1:27.8 (with in/outlaps and Massa final lap removed)

Ham
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (1st Set) 1:27.4 (with in/oputlaps and SC removed)
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (2nd Set)1:27.2 (with in/oputlaps removed)
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (3rd Set)1:27.1 (with in/oputlaps removed)
McLaren Avrage Pace on on Soft tyres 1:27.8 (with in/outlaps and Massa final lap removed)

#39 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 13:41

Originally posted by Mika Mika


Not really wanting to play James Allen advocate here, but below is data showing that Ferrari were faster on softs than on hard tyres:
(note Ferraris FL was set on softs and was 0.7 faster than their fastest hard tyre time)

From (http://www.fia.com/r...ap_Analysis.pdf)

Massa
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (1st set) 1:27.3 (with in/oputlaps and SC removed)
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (2nd set) 1:27.6 (with in/oputlaps removed) (reported problem set of tyres)
Ferrari Average Pace on on Hard tyres 1:27.8 (with in/outlaps and Massa final lap removed)

Ham
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (1st Set) 1:27.4 (with in/oputlaps and SC removed)
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (2nd Set)1:27.2 (with in/oputlaps removed)
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (3rd Set)1:27.1 (with in/oputlaps removed)
McLaren Avrage Pace on on Soft tyres 1:27.8 (with in/outlaps and Massa final lap removed)


It is no coincidence that the last stint for LH and FM had the same average speed, more about controlling the race to the finish then pushing. Also once again we are not taking into account fuel load differences between the Ferrari and Mclaren.

Also Ferrari's fastest times was on softs as this is when they conducted their in laps before pitstops. Mika one can make statistics look like anything they like.

But if the Ferrari team clearly states that the hards were the better way to go due to grip consistency then who are we to argue. The average laptimes are useful but only if you take into account fuel loads and the part of the race in which they occur. Trying to compare average laps in the first part of the race before pitstops when the drivers are pushing to the last part of the race after the stops is not going to give you an accurate representation of the performance of either the teams or the compounds. If you could omit those variables then we would have some useful info.

Advertisement

#40 Johny Bravo

Johny Bravo
  • Member

  • 2,599 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 12 May 2008 - 13:44

Originally posted by Mika Mika


Not really wanting to play James Allen advocate here, but below is data showing that Ferrari were faster on softs than on hard tyres:
(note Ferraris FL was set on softs and was 0.7 faster than their fastest hard tyre time)

From (http://www.fia.com/r...ap_Analysis.pdf)

Massa
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (1st set) 1:27.3 (with in/oputlaps and SC removed)
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (2nd set) 1:27.6 (with in/oputlaps removed) (reported problem set of tyres)
Ferrari Average Pace on on Hard tyres 1:27.8 (with in/outlaps and Massa final lap removed)

Ham
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (1st Set) 1:27.4 (with in/oputlaps and SC removed)
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (2nd Set)1:27.2 (with in/oputlaps removed)
McLaren Average Pace on Hard tyres (3rd Set)1:27.1 (with in/oputlaps removed)
McLaren Avrage Pace on on Soft tyres 1:27.8 (with in/outlaps and Massa final lap removed)


Considering that Ferrari was better on softs in the past few races, while Mclaren the opposite, it might be plausible that those cars' setup were biased towards their [supposed to be] better tyre.

But as the temps were lower than expected [and it might have resulted in the hards working better relatively], it could well be possible that Ferrari could have had a better overall race pace if they altered their setup towards hard tyres and were using soft-hard-hard.

Who knows, just a thought.

#41 archstanton

archstanton
  • Member

  • 425 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 13:47

excellent, mika mika gives me the opportunity to re-post this chart and confirm the analysis:
always good to have the numbers before conjecture.
Posted Image

fastest way round the distance : ferrari would have done three stints on soft if allowed, lewis would obviously have preferred to stick with hards.

that light-fuel/hard gap to fatfuel/soft right in the middle of the graph is the whole story of sunday afternoon's podium.

#42 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 13:50

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso


It is no coincidence that the last stint for LH and FM had the same average speed, more about controlling the race to the finish then pushing. Also once again we are not taking into account fuel load differences between the Ferrari and Mclaren.

Also Ferrari's fastest times was on softs as this is when they conducted their in laps before pitstops. Mika one can make statistics look like anything they like.

But if the Ferrari team clearly states that the hards were the better way to go due to grip consistency then who are we to argue. The average laptimes are useful but only if you take into account fuel loads and the part of the race in which they occur. Trying to compare average laps in the first part of the race before pitstops when the drivers are pushing to the last part of the race after the stops is not going to give you an accurate representation of the performance of either the teams or the compounds. If you could omit those variables then we would have some useful info.


This analysis included the fastes laps set on each set of tyres.

Okay eliminating Massa's heavy laptime to put him on the sam fuel as Lewis and:
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (1st set) 1:27.4 (Heavy laps removed to put on similar fuel as Mercedes)
Ferrari Average Pace on Soft tyres (2nd set) 1:27.5 (Heavy laps removed to put on similar fuel as Mercedes)
Ferrari Average Pace on Hard tyres 1:27.8 (Heavy laps removed to put on similar fuel as Mercedes)

As to the press conference "Ferrari team clearly states that the hards were the better way to go" I dont believe them any more than I believe Whitmarsh saying Heikki would have won....



#43 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 13:52

Originally posted by Johny Bravo


Considering that Ferrari was better on softs in the past few races, while Mclaren the opposite, it might be plausible that those cars' setup were biased towards their [supposed to be] better tyre.


I agree Ferrari may have bias their setup toward the soft tyre and Mercedes may have bias their setup toward the Hard tyre.

#44 Obi Offiah

Obi Offiah
  • Member

  • 8,410 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 12 May 2008 - 14:03

Originally posted by as65p


Indeed, great skill to be the only one of 20 drivers not able to make his tyres last long enough for the optimum 2-stop strategy. Very impressive.


Hi as65p

Why did McLaren choose to pit Kova three times, four if you include the tyre damage?.

Also the damage suffered on Lewis' right front last year happened on the soft tyre and comments over the weekend suggested it was a structural issue not a wear issue. The whole thing is a little strange as Kova would have run a very long first stint on the prime tyres.

Obi

#45 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,431 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 12 May 2008 - 14:32

Originally posted by pottiella
Are Red Bull realistically stronger than Renault but the driver makes the difference now in results?


Gee that'd make Alonso 3 to 4 tenths quicker per lap than Webber which is highly unlikely.

The problem is that Piquet has been so bad we can't get a read on how good the Renault is ... or isn't.

#46 archstanton

archstanton
  • Member

  • 425 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 14:48

Originally posted by Obi Offiah


Why did McLaren choose to pit Kova three times, four if you include the tyre damage?.

Also the damage suffered on Lewis' right front last year happened on the soft tyre and comments over the weekend suggested it was a structural issue not a wear issue. The whole thing is a little strange as Kova would have run a very long first stint on the prime tyres.

Obi


to confirm what you are saying, bridgestone were limiting both drivers to max 20lap stints for safety ... that is why they couldn't load heikki up with fuel and switch to a long one stopper after the puncture (as they normally would)

and yes, concerns about internal stuctural damage is a bit more involved and complicated and not really the same thing as tyre-wear, probably best not to let people try and confuse them.

#47 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,220 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 12 May 2008 - 15:30

Originally posted by Obi Offiah


Hi as65p

Why did McLaren choose to pit Kova three times, four if you include the tyre damage?.

Also the damage suffered on Lewis' right front last year happened on the soft tyre and comments over the weekend suggested it was a structural issue not a wear issue. The whole thing is a little strange as Kova would have run a very long first stint on the prime tyres.

Obi


It's all explained pretty comprehensively in this article on the front page:

"In actual fact, nobody else has had a repetition of any of those problems this year, with the exception of Lewis"

That doesn't leave much room for interpretation, I'd say.

What they did with Kova after his race was ruined for him in the first corner hasn't had much to do with Lewis tyre trouble.

Apparently, as I understood it, something in LH's driving style caused a different load (to all other car/driver combinations) on the tyre, particularily through turn 8. I have no clue how that would work, maybe we should ask Peter Windsor :drunk:

Whatever, my point in response to "LH is brilliant a setting up the car" from our latest troll pet was that if that were true, he ought to be able and adjust his setup and/or driving style for that particular corner. Apparently he wasn't.

Now in the end it's more than consolation that he drove a quite stunning race to make up for this deficiency. The doubt remains if without the (self-inflicted) issue he could have contested for victory, but the end-result certainly wasn't bad.

#48 Walsingham

Walsingham
  • Member

  • 1,097 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 May 2008 - 15:36

Why is BMW already written off? In OZ it looked like McLaren has both championships in their pocket. After 5 gps BMW is still ahead of them in WCC.

In Barcelona they were more or less on pace with Maccas. Turkey was never good for BMW and this year it was very unusual gp - hardest tyres on cold track and BMW had problems with set-up so I dont see what makes everybody belive that McLaren is now clearly out of BMW's range while on most representative track in normal conditions right after McLaren's "quantum leap" in development Lewis finished ahead only thanks to Kubica's poor start?

#49 archstanton

archstanton
  • Member

  • 425 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 May 2008 - 15:48

in another article, you will see mclaren explain why they couldn't put heikki onto a long stint after the puncture, to a lesser extent he was having identical problems to lewis.

if the problem was just lewis, heikki would have been tanked-up and run long to try and get near the points ... they couldn't and he needed extra stops. both drivers, let me repeat that for you, both drivers had been given a 20lap safety limit by bridgestone engineers.

if there is something fundamental in all the interactions of chassis, tyre construction and circuit layout, then sometimes you need to work around it best you can ... it's not always as simple as blame a driver.

do you blame all the michelin drivers for all "overdriving" or "poor setup" at indy a few years ago?

i appreciate you have an agenda that you feel the need to pursue, but the facts are the facts, they are awkward like that, we all saw the same race, and how many stops all the drivers did ... so howabout a time-out, a proper think about it, and then a calm reconsideration of what happened based on all that we saw on the tv, eh?

#50 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,220 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 12 May 2008 - 15:53

Originally posted by archstanton
in another article, you will see mclaren explain why they couldn't put heikki onto a long stint after the puncture, to a lesser extent he was having identical problems to lewis.

if the problem was just lewis, heikki would have been tanked-up and run long to try and get near the points ... they couldn't and he needed extra stops. both drivers, let me repeat that for you, both drivers had been given a 20lap safety limit by bridgestone engineers.

if there is something fundamental in all the interactions of chassis, tyre construction and circuit layout, then sometimes you need to work around it best you can ... it's not always as simple as blame a driver.

do you blame all the michelin drivers for all "overdriving" or "poor setup" at indy a few years ago?

i appreciate you have an agenda that you feel the need to pursue, but the facts are the facts, they are awkward like that, we all saw the same race, and how many stops all the drivers did ... so howabout a time-out, a proper think about it, and then a calm reconsideration of what happened based on all that we saw on the tv, eh?


Eh, what about

"In actual fact, nobody else has had a repetition of any of those problems this year, with the exception of Lewis"

you do not understand?