Jump to content


Photo

Does the Mclaren MP4-25 shred tyres?


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 Tstag

Tstag
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:28

Last 2 races have been interesting. In this race it didn't take any time at all for Lewis to destroy the tyres. But I'm not convinced it's him. Jenson has struggled with tyres this year and I note that in the last race Lewis's car was destroying tyres with in 1 lap of exiting the pits. In other words Lewis didn't even have time to wreck the tyres....

What does a car that shreds tyres so quickly in the hands of 2 skilled drivers indicate? Lack of balance? Poor aero pack? Not enough downforce? All of the above?

Advertisement

#2 Crafty

Crafty
  • Member

  • 4,056 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:34

I've asked the question elsewhere previously.

I think theres something in the way the chassis geometry is designed that causes tyre wear. Far from an expert but I don't see how aero could cause it.

#3 Tstag

Tstag
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:38

I've asked the question elsewhere previously.

I think theres something in the way the chassis geometry is designed that causes tyre wear. Far from an expert but I don't see how aero could cause it.


In the previous race it wasn't even wearing evenly on the tyres. The fact that in this race Lewis was screaming about having no grip at all makes me wonder even more.

#4 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,723 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:38

previous race was under saftey car aswell
normaly its sliding the tyre that will wear it out, scrubbing rather than rolling across the surface

in singapore it was the rears, koera the fronts, brazil all round?

I think they might be pushing more through the stint, and earlier on they would cruise far more

#5 Gilles12

Gilles12
  • Member

  • 853 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:40

I've asked the question elsewhere previously.

I think theres something in the way the chassis geometry is designed that causes tyre wear. Far from an expert but I don't see how aero could cause it.


Not enough Aero

#6 eoin

eoin
  • Member

  • 5,010 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:41

Some cars are better on a green track than others. Maybe McLaren struggled today as there was no rubber on the track from friday/saturday.

#7 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:42

Last 2 races have been interesting. In this race it didn't take any time at all for Lewis to destroy the tyres. But I'm not convinced it's him. Jenson has struggled with tyres this year and I note that in the last race Lewis's car was destroying tyres with in 1 lap of exiting the pits. In other words Lewis didn't even have time to wreck the tyres....


They are doing it deliberately to give the trolls something to start tenuous threads about. :kiss:


#8 Anomnader

Anomnader
  • Member

  • 8,616 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:43

It was struggling on the early laps not due to tyres wearing but due to them not getting enough heat into them, once several laps have gone they get up to speed.

#9 Cenotaph

Cenotaph
  • Member

  • 2,317 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:43

a better question

is lewis' "no grip" the new massa's "for sure"?

#10 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:44

The car does not seem to get on very well with the Bridgestone supersoft that is "for sure".

In general I think the developments they have had to make to be competitive in terms of speed (EBD and exhaust overrun) have made the car a bit harder on the tyres than the Red Bull and Ferrari but not significantly so.

Hamilton was struggling for grip from the very first lap today and that cannot be due to wear given that the quali laps were 4-5 seconds off what they would have been on a dry track-

Edited by Dunder, 07 November 2010 - 19:44.


#11 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:44

Not enough Aero


Lewis was askingif his F-Duck was functioning.

#12 goat0063

goat0063
  • Member

  • 279 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:47

Lewis was askingif his F-Duck was functioning.

Maybe he had a duck stuck in it.......

#13 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,240 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 19:57

Last 2 races have been interesting. In this race it didn't take any time at all for Lewis to destroy the tyres. But I'm not convinced it's him. Jenson has struggled with tyres this year and I note that in the last race Lewis's car was destroying tyres with in 1 lap of exiting the pits. In other words Lewis didn't even have time to wreck the tyres....

What does a car that shreds tyres so quickly in the hands of 2 skilled drivers indicate? Lack of balance? Poor aero pack? Not enough downforce? All of the above?


Shred tyres? That's a bit of an exaggeration. The only race where this has been true was Singapore.

#14 Bonaventura

Bonaventura
  • Member

  • 7,698 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:11

Last 2 races have been interesting. In this race it didn't take any time at all for Lewis to destroy the tyres. But I'm not convinced it's him. Jenson has struggled with tyres this year and I note that in the last race Lewis's car was destroying tyres with in 1 lap of exiting the pits. In other words Lewis didn't even have time to wreck the tyres....

What does a car that shreds tyres so quickly in the hands of 2 skilled drivers indicate? Lack of balance? Poor aero pack? Not enough downforce? All of the above?

Interesting is , that Button destroyes his tyres earlier than Lewis, and both struggling with balance and grip
so it can't be only (the driving style of ) the drivers.

#15 mstar

mstar
  • Member

  • 1,105 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:16

mclaren been struggling with tyre wear rate compared to rbs and ferrari since start of the season. only after turkey we saw a large percent of wear rate compared to others. so no its not been a recent development.

Edited by mstar, 07 November 2010 - 20:16.


#16 chapilinux

chapilinux
  • Member

  • 136 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:19

Does the Mclaren shred tyres?


You mean Hamilton. And the answer is yes. Probably, the weakest point of the driver.

Edited by chapilinux, 07 November 2010 - 20:21.


#17 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:20

Umm wasn't the basic design brief for the MP4-25 to be easy on the tyres?

#18 f1fastestlap

f1fastestlap
  • Member

  • 1,894 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:21

You mean Hamilton. And the answer is yes. Likely, the weakest point of the driver.

:lol:
You still in 2007?
That myth as long gone.

Edited by f1fastestlap, 07 November 2010 - 20:22.


#19 chapilinux

chapilinux
  • Member

  • 136 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:22

:lol:
You still in 2007?
That myth as long gone.


We are at 2010, as far as i know. :wave:

Yeah, myths. All around Ham are myths. All.

Edited by chapilinux, 07 November 2010 - 20:23.


Advertisement

#20 Bonaventura

Bonaventura
  • Member

  • 7,698 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:35

You mean Hamilton. And the answer is yes. Probably, the weakest point of the driver.

:well: Button had to pit earlier at many races because of worn out tyres

Is he the better tyre shredder ?

#21 sosidge

sosidge
  • Member

  • 1,631 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 20:45

Today was interesting.

Hamilton got flustered as soon as Alonso passed him and started the tell-tale whingeing about the car (even asking if the f-duct was working!). Brundle in the commentary box said that Lewis had gone out very hard on the primes after his pitstop - proved to be right. The SC came at just the right time for him.

Jenson seemed to be managing the car a lot better on the tyres and I suspect his pitstop under the SC was tactical to keep him behind Lewis.

So, yes, Hamilton is hard on tyres. We've had another example of it today, although I'm sure his fans will be quick to deny it as usual.

Having said that, the McLaren is an odd car. It looks like it floats on the track rather than gripping it. If it wasn't for it's superior F-duct and Hamilton's ability to wring laptimes out of poor cars, it would be some way off the pace.

#22 Bonaventura

Bonaventura
  • Member

  • 7,698 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 21:06

Today was interesting.

Hamilton got flustered as soon as Alonso passed him and started the tell-tale whingeing about the car (even asking if the f-duct was working!). Brundle in the commentary box said that Lewis had gone out very hard on the primes after his pitstop - proved to be right. The SC came at just the right time for him.

Jenson seemed to be managing the car a lot better on the tyres and I suspect his pitstop under the SC was tactical to keep him behind Lewis.

So, yes, Hamilton is hard on tyres. We've had another example of it today, although I'm sure his fans will be quick to deny it as usual.

Having said that, the McLaren is an odd car. It looks like it floats on the track rather than gripping it. If it wasn't for it's superior F-duct and Hamilton's ability to wring laptimes out of poor cars, it would be some way off the pace.

Lewis was 9! laps longer on the soft tyres than Button at the first stint
HAM:"My tyres are going off"
PIT: "OK Lewis, you're still faster than the cars behind you."

As soon as Lewis was on the primes he was faster than Button,
he tried to chase Alonso, while Button was happy to be where he was, and was not pushing so much
Do we know if the F-Duct was working?
"Down the straights in particular I didn't feel the 'F Duct' [aerodynamic device] was working, I was struggling to overtake backmarkers and Fernando just shot past me. "
The McLaren had no chance against the Williams on the straights, is this normal?

What about qualy yesterday, and Korea ( &Canada, Australia), as Button ruined his tyres very quick?

#23 tohru222

tohru222
  • Member

  • 109 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 21:08

"Does the Mclaren shred tyres?" Not McLaren, but Hamilton. :rotfl:

#24 Dalton007

Dalton007
  • Member

  • 2,930 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 07 November 2010 - 21:16


Not enough downforce, so the tyre doesn't heat up fast enough.


#25 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 21:39

Hamilton got flustered as soon as Alonso passed him and started the tell-tale whingeing about the car (even asking if the f-duct was working!). Brundle in the commentary box said that Lewis had gone out very hard on the primes after his pitstop - proved to be right. The SC came at just the right time for him.


Hamilton's first stint on primes was 31 laps. His last lap before pitting again was the 8th fastest of the stint and faster than the first half dozen. Hardly a drop off, or are facts not part of this argument?

#26 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,333 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 21:42

Easy answer - yes it does. It has nothing to do with Hamilton.

#27 Mr2s

Mr2s
  • Member

  • 794 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 22:19

Good question, because in other threads according to a certain element of Lewis's fans, he has apparently "made mistakes" and "handed the last 2 races to Alonso". Suggesting he would have gone on to claim higher positions and holding off Alonso who we know had good tyres left.





#28 Watkins74

Watkins74
  • Member

  • 5,735 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 22:25

Hamilton's first stint on primes was 31 laps. His last lap before pitting again was the 8th fastest of the stint and faster than the first half dozen. Hardly a drop off, or are facts not part of this argument?

You need to learn about fuel burnoff and it's effect on a cars performance via weight reduction. Google it.

#29 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,396 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 00:29

Not enough downforce, so the tyre doesn't heat up fast enough.

So Mclaren had more downforce earlier in the season? :well:

This tire wear problem is fairly recent. It clearly has nothing to do with lack of downforce, though I wouldn't rule out an aerodynamic balance issue. Earlier in the season, the Mclarens were being talked about as having the best tire wear of all the top 3.

I agree with Dunder that perhaps the upgrades they've been introducing to increase their qualifying pace and whatnot have perhaps had an impact on how it uses the tires.

#30 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 00:52

You need to learn about fuel burnoff and it's effect on a cars performance via weight reduction. Google it.


Thank you for your words of wisdom :rolleyes: I was pleased to note that every other driver on the grid was exactly 0.045 (the difference per lap between Vettel's opening lap and his fastest) seconds per lap faster than their previous regardless of tyre wear, traffic, pit stops, and safety cars. I am pleased that you have conclusively proved, once again, that Hamilton is the Great Destroyer of Tyres.




#31 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 00:54

But what exactly went wrong with the car? In the first half of the season, there was a clear pattern of McLaren being much, much closer to Red Bull on race day, to the extent where it actually had the fastest car at Istanbul when loaded with fuel. And this wasn't an anomalous track like Canada which was always going to give a skewed picture of the team's relative performance - Istanbul is full of corners where you'd expect Red Bull to have the edge, particularly turn 8. At this stage of the season it looked like McLaren were going to catch Red Bull, and Ferrari looked dead in the water after Valencia and their big update not yielding enough performance to overhaul McLaren, nevermind Red Bull at a track which was meant to suit the Ferrari.

Then come Hockenheim when McLaren ran their EBD for the first time in earnest, and they weren't any closer to Red Bull on race day, if anything they were further away. Spa saw a return to form, but this was purely because of its layout, mixed conditions and how much of an advantage the f-duct was there, witness Kubica's pace once Renault had fitted their own. Never again this season were McLaren to be better off on race day than they were in qualifying.

It would appear that McLaren have been, whisper it, out-developed by Ferrari and Red Bull. And although it is billed now as the third fastest car of 2010 lacking in downforce to its rivals, in terms of high speed cornering it still retains a slight edge over Ferrari as you could see in qualifying at Suzuka, just as it had done way back at Barcelona. Is it really downforce that it's lacking, or is it something else?

I'll admit, I assumed after Istanbul that McLaren would have a straight two way fight with Red Bull for the title, but as it turned out McLaren regressed back to where they had been at the start of the season.

Pretty puzzling.

#32 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,190 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 01:00

If this is all about the second stop, I think they did it cos it was free, no position lost, and more pace.

If this is all about the first stop... he went long enough!! Don´t know what´s this all about. :drunk:

#33 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 November 2010 - 07:04

So Mclaren had more downforce earlier in the season? :well:

This tire wear problem is fairly recent. It clearly has nothing to do with lack of downforce, though I wouldn't rule out an aerodynamic balance issue. Earlier in the season, the Mclarens were being talked about as having the best tire wear of all the top 3.

I agree with Dunder that perhaps the upgrades they've been introducing to increase their qualifying pace and whatnot have perhaps had an impact on how it uses the tires.


Probably the EBD I just doen think McLaren have got it working as well as the others. Beofe it was introduced they had the better of Ferrari - but the EBD has been a game changer! it's the DDD of 2010 much more so than the f-duck

#34 seahawk

seahawk
  • Member

  • 3,132 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 07:49

I would think that McLaren traded some race speed for qualifying speed.

#35 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,089 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 08:37

How do you guys reconcile the comments by Whitmarsh that Lewis was perhaps a bit too hard on the tires initially after each change, with the idea that the car is inherently demanding of it's tires? Eg the wear vs thermal argument.

#36 Crafty

Crafty
  • Member

  • 4,056 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 08 November 2010 - 08:52

But what exactly went wrong with the car? In the first half of the season, there was a clear pattern of McLaren being much, much closer to Red Bull on race day, to the extent where it actually had the fastest car at Istanbul when loaded with fuel. And this wasn't an anomalous track like Canada which was always going to give a skewed picture of the team's relative performance - Istanbul is full of corners where you'd expect Red Bull to have the edge, particularly turn 8. At this stage of the season it looked like McLaren were going to catch Red Bull, and Ferrari looked dead in the water after Valencia and their big update not yielding enough performance to overhaul McLaren, nevermind Red Bull at a track which was meant to suit the Ferrari.

Then come Hockenheim when McLaren ran their EBD for the first time in earnest, and they weren't any closer to Red Bull on race day, if anything they were further away. Spa saw a return to form, but this was purely because of its layout, mixed conditions and how much of an advantage the f-duct was there, witness Kubica's pace once Renault had fitted their own. Never again this season were McLaren to be better off on race day than they were in qualifying.

It would appear that McLaren have been, whisper it, out-developed by Ferrari and Red Bull. And although it is billed now as the third fastest car of 2010 lacking in downforce to its rivals, in terms of high speed cornering it still retains a slight edge over Ferrari as you could see in qualifying at Suzuka, just as it had done way back at Barcelona. Is it really downforce that it's lacking, or is it something else?

I'll admit, I assumed after Istanbul that McLaren would have a straight two way fight with Red Bull for the title, but as it turned out McLaren regressed back to where they had been at the start of the season.

Pretty puzzling.


Good stuff, added to this is clear the development of the car has moved away from Button, who is currently struggling to get a handle on the car.
It also emerged that Button has changed engineer 3 times this season and Lewis, although handling the media much better is clearly frustrated with the car. All is not well in Woking at the moment.

Ross : I dont think hamilton was particularly hard on the tyres in korea but they were done 5 laps from the end ? This is after he'd dropped off all front wing and opened the diff only a few laps after his pit stop.

#37 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,089 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 08 November 2010 - 08:57

Lots of people were wearing out their tires in Korea, and the nature of the track and the weather conditions means it shouldn't be used as an example for or against any driver.

#38 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:08

So why Alonso was equally faster than Hamilton, with old tyre ?

Fastest lap :

01. Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 66 1:13.851
02. Fernando Alonso Ferrari 67 1:13.855 +0.004

Edited by Massa, 08 November 2010 - 09:09.


#39 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:12

So why Alonso was equally faster than Hamilton, with old tyre ?

Fastest lap :

01. Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 66 1:13.851
02. Fernando Alonso Ferrari 67 1:13.855 +0.004


Maybe he was just faster?


Advertisement

#40 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:14

With tyre wo have already 40 laps ? It's strange no ?

#41 Tombstone

Tombstone
  • Member

  • 1,018 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:19

With tyre wo have already 40 laps ? It's strange no ?


?

#42 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:22

I think it's strange that Alonso was faster than Hamilton, while Hamilton have fresh tyre

#43 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:25

?


I think some people are having difficulty understanding that Alonso was faster than Hamilton pretty much all race, not because Hamilton had worn his tyres to the canvas before getting out of the pit lane but because the Ferrari, on that day and with that driver, was a faster package.

We know the tyres can go a long, long way in races. Apparently the only explanation for somebody on the 15th lap of a stint only being slightly faster than somebody on the 40th is one has looked after the tyres better and the other is The Great Destroyer of Tyres (they actually quake in the pitlane when he walks by)


#44 Tstag

Tstag
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:38

So why Alonso was equally faster than Hamilton, with old tyre ?

Fastest lap :

01. Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 66 1:13.851
02. Fernando Alonso Ferrari 67 1:13.855 +0.004


Hamilton had fresh tyres on by then, wheras Alonso's were getting worn. So in actual fact Lewis's faster lap time is nothing to write home about. It's actually indicative of how bad the Mclaren is against the RBR and Ferrari. And I say this as a Mclaren fan.

I do think something is up when both Jenson and Lewis can't get the tyres to stop wearing so quickly. Jenson does not destroy tyres, he's well known for being a very smooth driver. So if he's destroying them even quicker than Lewis then I would suggest the car just won't let the drivers heat them up. I'm starting to hate this car more than last years....

#45 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 8,890 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:45

With tyre wo have already 40 laps ? It's strange no ?

Just leave him to believe what he wants to. He tries to refute the claim but he offers no reasonable explanation as to why Hamilton could match Alonso on pace when they both had new primes but fell off the pace later. Alonso only turned down his engine after the switch to primes took place.
..

Nobody is saying that Hamilton is a destroyer of tyres and nobody is saying that the Ferrari was not the faster car. I am saying that Hamilton took the life out of his tyres in the early going. It's fairly simple to understand but it seems that some Hamilton fans can't grasp it and have to result to inane taunts.

Hell, even Brundle said that Hamilton may have been too hard on his primes in the early going but Brundle is from the BBC so his opinion doesn't count despite his farts having more knowledge about F1 than all of us combined...

#46 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:52

Hell, even Brundle said that Hamilton may have been too hard on his primes in the early going but Brundle is from the BBC so his opinion doesn't count despite his farts having more knowledge about F1 than all of us combined...


You have the tenses all mixed up. Brundle did not say that Hamilton may have been too hard on the primes when he put in the hot laps, but expressed caution that Hamilton shouldn't be too hard on the primes when he was putting in the hot laps. As it turned out, he wasn't.

#47 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:03

You have the tenses all mixed up. Brundle did not say that Hamilton may have been too hard on the primes when he put in the hot laps, but expressed caution that Hamilton shouldn't be too hard on the primes when he was putting in the hot laps. As it turned out, he wasn't.



Brundle said Hamilton probably took too much out of his primes on the first laps.
To be honest Whitmarsh said the same on the forum ... Hamilton probably pushed his tyres a bit too much.

It happens, deal with it, it doesn't mean Hamilton is "bad" ... just means he probably pushed the tyres more than he should have on this particular occasion. It's not the end of the world nor is it some major dig at Lewis' talent.

#48 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:09

Just leave him to believe what he wants to. He tries to refute the claim but he offers no reasonable explanation as to why Hamilton could match Alonso on pace when they both had new primes but fell off the pace later. Alonso only turned down his engine after the switch to primes took place.
..

Nobody is saying that Hamilton is a destroyer of tyres and nobody is saying that the Ferrari was not the faster car. I am saying that Hamilton took the life out of his tyres in the early going. It's fairly simple to understand but it seems that some Hamilton fans can't grasp it and have to result to inane taunts.

Hell, even Brundle said that Hamilton may have been too hard on his primes in the early going but Brundle is from the BBC so his opinion doesn't count despite his farts having more knowledge about F1 than all of us combined...


I completely agree, he could have gone slower and preserved his tyres more.

I'm not sure how that would have particularly helped him though, even going at that pace he was 10 secs behind alonso, if he'd gone slower he'd be further behind but with tyres that were in better shape...

#49 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,897 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:13

Brundle said Hamilton probably took too much out of his primes on the first laps.
To be honest Whitmarsh said the same on the forum ... Hamilton probably pushed his tyres a bit too much.

It happens, deal with it, it doesn't mean Hamilton is "bad" ... just means he probably pushed the tyres more than he should have on this particular occasion. It's not the end of the world nor is it some major dig at Lewis' talent.


Of course he took out too much of his primes and if you guys were carefully watching the LT it was barely enough to keep up with Alo on pace who wasn't even pushing it.
Look at the RBR's after the SC when they put the hammer down on old tyres.

So what was the alternative? Of course he could've done what Button was doing, drive a steady 0,5-0,6 sec. slower in no man's land.

The car is not good enough, simply put.

Edited by peroa, 08 November 2010 - 10:14.


#50 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:58

Lots of people were wearing out their tires in Korea, and the nature of the track and the weather conditions means it shouldn't be used as an example for or against any driver.


That is possibly true in Brazil, he set some very fast laps when he switched on to the harder tyre.

If you look back to the start of Singapore however (also the supersoft) both Button and Hamilton had horrible degradation and at the end of the stint were lapping slower that the STRs and Saubers. The exhaust overrun in that race sounded especially aggressive (I acknowledge that could have been just acoustics) but the correlation between McLaren having these tyre issues and the introduction of this ignition retardation system (at Spa) looks quite strong to me.

Edited by Dunder, 08 November 2010 - 12:59.