Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 20 votes

Ferrari F2012 part IV


  • Please log in to reply
1886 replies to this topic

#1001 e34

e34
  • Member

  • 718 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 14:47

If Fernando had the same old car like Felipe in Austin, would he be in challenge for the victory?


I think anyone having a definitive answer to that question could get a high-rank position at Maranello right now. I am afraid that F2012 is so overedited that nobody has a clue anymore about which version is better.

Advertisement

#1002 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 15:06

And Fry said he regrets not developing DDRS for the F2012.



I don't understand this, he has no regrets about something that has made our rivals faster? :confused:

#1003 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 15:18

I don't understand this, he has no regrets about something that has made our rivals faster? :confused:


I didn't read it like that mate. I read that originally he thought it wasn't worth the time but after seeing what RB did with it, he regrets not developing it. My Italian is rusty. I will see what translator says but pretty sure he said he regrets not developing DDRS.

#1004 showtime

showtime
  • Member

  • 2,668 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 21 November 2012 - 15:22

I don't understand this, he has no regrets about something that has made our rivals faster? :confused:


Well they surely were developing other areas instead, what if they gained more from this other areas than they would have gained from DDRS?

#1005 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 15:30

I don't understand this, he has no regrets about something that has made our rivals faster? :confused:


Maybe he means he has no regrets designing an update that was not going to work (see windtunnel). Saved precious time.

#1006 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 21 November 2012 - 16:04

The F2013 will retain the front pull rod suspension. And Fry said he regrets not developing DDRS for the F2012. Next years car will be an evolution of the F2012.



Quote?

#1007 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 2,507 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 16:13

I don't understand this, he has no regrets about something that has made our rivals faster? :confused:

No, the line you quoted states that "Fry said he regrets not developing DDRS for the F2012". Perhaps it makes more sense if you cut the sentence in two:

"Fry said he regrets..." <--- Fry regrets something.
"... not developing DDRS for the F2012." <--- Ferrari did not develop DDRS for the F2012.

In other words, if it had said that he "doesn't regret developing", it would mean that they did develop it, and that he does not regret it. Rather, Fry regrets that Ferrari did not develop DDRS.

I'm sorry if this is overly obvious, but I'm not sure what your native language is. In certain cases the word 'not' in the combination "regrets not developing" might relate to regret, rather than to developing. This is not the case in this situation.

:)

#1008 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 16:24

No, the line you quoted states that "Fry said he regrets not developing DDRS for the F2012". Perhaps it makes more sense if you cut the sentence in two:

"Fry said he regrets..." <--- Fry regrets something.
"... not developing DDRS for the F2012." <--- Ferrari did not develop DDRS for the F2012.

In other words, if it had said that he "doesn't regret developing", it would mean that they did develop it, and that he does not regret it. Rather, Fry regrets that Ferrari did not develop DDRS.

I'm sorry if this is overly obvious, but I'm not sure what your native language is. In certain cases the word 'not' in the combination "regrets not developing" might relate to regret, rather than to developing. This is not the case in this situation.

:)


:up: makes more sense to me now, thanks.


#1009 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 16:45

Quote?

http://www.omnicorse...ia-il-super-drs

#1010 showtime

showtime
  • Member

  • 2,668 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 21 November 2012 - 16:58

NEGATO L’USO DEL SUPER DRS Pat Fry, inoltre, ha spiegato anche di non essersi pentito di non aver sviluppato di Doppio DRS sulla F2012: la soluzione è stata vagliata dai tecnici aerodinamici di Maranello, ma non è mai stata realizzata e provata sulla Rossa.


Pat Fry, has explained that he does not regret not having developed a DDRS for the F2012: The solution has been analysed by the aerodynamic technicians at Maranello but it has never been built and tested in the red car.



#1011 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 21 November 2012 - 17:10

http://www.omnicorse...ia-il-super-drs


Fry said that he do not regret not developing the DDRS, the device was evaluated by aerodinamicist in Maranello but never manufactured nor tested. Mercedes and Lotus tried it but never got advantage from that solution that is complicated to set uo. While RB could make the solution work(integrate) with their package it was not decisive in the winning performance of SV.

#1012 rsaca

rsaca
  • Member

  • 351 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 21 November 2012 - 17:36

Hi guys,

I was at Austin this weekend and couldn't understand how Fernando was slower in Qualifying when he had very good pace in the three practice sessions. I noticed on Turn 12 (hairpin right after the DRS straight) that when Felipe accelerated at the exit of the hairpin, the rear would always "twitch". Alonso was very smooth, not only in the downshifting, where he would go from 7,6,5,4 and then he would pause for a bit, and then go 3,2. I really thought the updates were working because he did seem quicker, although he was very busy in the cockpit, trying to take care of the steering. This was the complete opposite of the Red Bulls, were it seemed they would have minimal steering inputs.

Oh and I have a feeling Alonso will have a magic trick up his sleeve on the rain at Interlagos.

Here's my YouTube channel with some videos I uploaded from the FP and the race.

YouTube page

#1013 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 01:30

Fry said that he do not regret not developing the DDRS, the device was evaluated by aerodinamicist in Maranello but never manufactured nor tested. Mercedes and Lotus tried it but never got advantage from that solution that is complicated to set uo. While RB could make the solution work(integrate) with their package it was not decisive in the winning performance of SV.


Thanks for the clarification mate. Interesting Fry feels that way. I think he's an honest man and if he doesn't regret not developing DDRS, he's earned my trust to the point I'm ok with it. I personally like his brutally honest style, whether it's something we want to hear or it isn't, he tells the truth.

#1014 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 22 November 2012 - 01:53

I've not got time to look now, I will in a bit.

Certainly in the first stint Massa was putting in fastest laps as soon as he got in clean air. He was on the pace of the leader until the first stop. Then he had traffic to deal with after his stop, then he got back on the pace of the leaders, then he had nowhere to go (wasn't going to beat Alonso, was he?) and backed off. I don't reckon he was more than a tenth or so off Vettel's pace. Maybe on it. But because of the race situation he didn't keep that pace up consistently.

That's what it looked like to me.

Of course, I have been known to be wrong.


Looking at Kosmos' date, Felipe appears to have lost time in two 6-lap stints in the race. After 6 laps, I believe the lap he gets by Schumacher, he's +22 secs to Vettel. In the next 15 or so laps before Vettels stop this only increases by 3 seconds. The second is around the pit stops. Whilst Felipe's pace may have been better than a lot of the guys around him at the time, it looks simply to have been the wrong decision to leave him out for so long as when the tyres stabilise he's now 38 seconds behind Vettel, again a lot of time lost in just a few laps. Throughout the last 26 laps or so, the gap only grows by about 7 seconds. So probably not enough pace to challenge for victory, but probably a very competitive third.

#1015 Craven Morehead

Craven Morehead
  • Member

  • 4,577 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 22 November 2012 - 02:39

So, do we know if they had different diffusers in Texas?

#1016 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 02:42

So, do we know if they had different diffusers in Texas?


We do

http://www.formula1....2/882/1028.html

#1017 Craven Morehead

Craven Morehead
  • Member

  • 4,577 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 22 November 2012 - 02:53

Thanks :)

#1018 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 3,049 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 08:41

Next years car will be an evolution of the F2012.

Good. Hopefully they'll make the original concept work, rather than developing the mongrel Clifford's become.

#1019 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 3,049 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 08:45

Looking at Kosmos' date, Felipe appears to have lost time in two 6-lap stints in the race. After 6 laps, I believe the lap he gets by Schumacher, he's +22 secs to Vettel. In the next 15 or so laps before Vettels stop this only increases by 3 seconds. The second is around the pit stops. Whilst Felipe's pace may have been better than a lot of the guys around him at the time, it looks simply to have been the wrong decision to leave him out for so long as when the tyres stabilise he's now 38 seconds behind Vettel, again a lot of time lost in just a few laps. Throughout the last 26 laps or so, the gap only grows by about 7 seconds. So probably not enough pace to challenge for victory, but probably a very competitive third.

Yep, that's how it reads. And don't forget, by the time he was up to fourth he had no reason to push, so it's reasonable to assume he could have gone at least a bit quicker.

Advertisement

#1020 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:16

Thanks for the clarification mate. Interesting Fry feels that way. I think he's an honest man and if he doesn't regret not developing DDRS, he's earned my trust to the point I'm ok with it. I personally like his brutally honest style, whether it's something we want to hear or it isn't, he tells the truth.


To be honest is a great quality but maybe he is a stubborn, quality that I do not want in a team manager.

#1021 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 13:34

To be honest is a great quality but maybe he is a stubborn, quality that I do not want in a team manager.


Maybe he is stubborn, I don't know but I do know he had his reasons for not developing DDRS. So does/did McLaren who are just as fast as Red Bull but without DDRS. So in regards to DDRS, it seems that Ferrari & McLaren Engineers are in agreement.
I am of a personal opinion that DDRS isn't the sole cause of the RB8 pace. And the McLaren shows its not needed to beat Red Bull. So I will trust Fry's decision.

#1022 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 22 November 2012 - 13:42

To be honest, they had some much on their plate, even with moments running like headless chickens, that to introduce another element in the car, could have been detrimental. We are not going to lost the title because the DDRS, but it could have helped a little if it was implemented right, something that it's not easy.


By the way, on the PC a patetic journo tried to diminish Fernando's title (if he wins it) because the alternator issue. You can smell the fear even when we are 13 point down and with a slower car :rolleyes:

#1023 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 13:48

To be honest, they had some much on their plate, even with moments running like headless chickens, that to introduce another element in the car, could have been detrimental. We are not going to lost the title because the DDRS, but it could have helped a little if it was implemented right, something that it's not easy.


By the way, on the PC a patetic journo tried to diminish Fernando's title (if he wins it) because the alternator issue. You can smell the fear even when we are 13 point down and with a slower car :rolleyes:


Yeah mate I agree, introducing DDRS would've complicated even more the complicated F2012. And as I said above its not a "must have" to win races. Obviously it would help but there are other parts of the car that need serious attention. Hopefully these get sorted for 2013.

#1024 OneAndOnly

OneAndOnly
  • Member

  • 380 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 13:50

Maybe he is stubborn, I don't know but I do know he had his reasons for not developing DDRS. So does/did McLaren who are just as fast as Red Bull but without DDRS. So in regards to DDRS, it seems that Ferrari & McLaren Engineers are in agreement.
I am of a personal opinion that DDRS isn't the sole cause of the RB8 pace. And the McLaren shows its not needed to beat Red Bull. So I will trust Fry's decision.

DDRS somehow was required for RBR since their cars are quite draggy and Renault engines allegedly have less power than Mercedes and Ferrari. They have to go for every solution that will give them straightline speed. Ferrari had same problem with top speed, but their problem was somewhere else so it was solved somewhere else (F2012 wasn't designed to be slower on straights). Lower top speeds for RBR are there because Newey wants so (trade off for more DF I guess), but why not use solution that will correct some intentional design flaw?

#1025 Gintonious

Gintonious
  • Member

  • 1,035 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:04

Just a query for Brazil.

It would seem that the race could very well be a wet one, and that we have gone well in the wet, but since other teams have improved since the last wet race, does it still mean that we will go well?

Or is it mainly down to mechanical grip, or our front suspension?

#1026 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:07

Maybe he is stubborn, I don't know but I do know he had his reasons for not developing DDRS. So does/did McLaren who are just as fast as Red Bull but without DDRS. So in regards to DDRS, it seems that Ferrari & McLaren Engineers are in agreement.
I am of a personal opinion that DDRS isn't the sole cause of the RB8 pace. And the McLaren shows its not needed to beat Red Bull. So I will trust Fry's decision.



Ok, but McLaren could win, we do not. They are in agreement but they showed they were right Pat do not. And if DDRS is not significant in SV victories what is it?

I understand that many times you have to bet on what development line you are going to follow and I will be ok with wrong bets (as statistically frequents in the others top teams).

#1027 showtime

showtime
  • Member

  • 2,668 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:16

Ok, but McLaren could win, we do not. They are in agreement but they showed they were right Pat do not. And if DDRS is not significant in SV victories what is it?

I understand that many times you have to bet on what development line you are going to follow and I will be ok with wrong bets (as statistically frequents in the others top teams).


It's not a question of betting but making numbers. They though there was more to gain from developing other areas of the car. The fact that this work will be useful for 2013, unlike most of the DDRS is also a bonus.

#1028 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:21

Lower top speeds for RBR are there because Newey wants so (trade off for more DF I guess), but why not use solution that will correct some intentional design flaw?

I don't think the F2012 has any intentional design flaw. As for why not develop it, see below.

Ok, but McLaren could win, we do not. They are in agreement but they showed they were right Pat do not. And if DDRS is not significant in SV victories what is it?

I understand that many times you have to bet on what development line you are going to follow and I will be ok with wrong bets (as statistically frequents in the others top teams).

I understand what you're saying mate but McLaren also started off the season ahead of Ferrari. They've basically always been ahed in the 2012 development race, IMHO. McLaren have proved you don't need DDRS to beat RB and I think maybe if Ferrari would have taken time to seriously develop it, they may not be where they're at today. Meaning Fer might not have a shot at the WDC. Taking time out to develop DDRS may have taken away precious development time from some of the other things that have been introduced. DDRS is a large task & would require many resources. Resources that wouldn't ave been focused on the updates the team did bring. You also have the ongoing problem of the wind tunnel. Trying to develop DDRS in a tunnel that's not working well could very well have been a nightmare. Especially when you consider the DDRS would have started development long before Ferrari mentioned they were stopping use of the Maranello tunnel.
Just my opinion mate.

#1029 Ravenak

Ravenak
  • Member

  • 939 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:30

Since yesterday, chances of rain have faded a bit on Saturday qualy time, but stay the same on Sunday.

Posted Image

Posted Image

#1030 rsaca

rsaca
  • Member

  • 351 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:32

What truly worries me is the development slump we saw in Austin specifically, after another straight line test and using the Cologne wind tunnel, I don't understand how the diffuser didn't work.

For the F2013, I really hope Loic Bigois can help us in starting with a decent car from day one (no offense to Clifford).

In any case, from where we where since pre-season testing and enduring the "doom and gloom" in this forum, I think we can be a bit satisfied that we are fighting for the WDC in the last race. We haven't given up and I have a feeling an alternator, water leak, rain and just plain misfortune will hit Vettel at Interlagos.

I believe Alonso will have his best magic trick up his sleeve this weekend.

#1031 e34

e34
  • Member

  • 718 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 14:42

Ok, but McLaren could win, we do not. They are in agreement but they showed they were right Pat do not. And if DDRS is not significant in SV victories what is it?

I understand that many times you have to bet on what development line you are going to follow and I will be ok with wrong bets (as statistically frequents in the others top teams).


But with almost every development restricted or forbidden, everybody has to compete on flexi-things, and there Ferrari seems to be a little lost. Add to that the fact that Ferrari engine seems to be the less flexible when it comes to "alternative uses", so to say, and Ferrari, which obviously cannot change engine provider, is faced with an uphill battle. It is doing OK, in current F1 the fiercest battle is in areas outside Ferrari traditional strenghts.

And while it is true that regulations are the same for everybody, it is also true that teams carry legacy organisations and structures from the past, and when those structures are no longer useful, they become a deadweight. If the engine was king again, Newey's approach (first aerodynamics, then the rest) could have its flaws exposed, as it did in the past. With the current regulations, his approach is the best.

#1032 showtime

showtime
  • Member

  • 2,668 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 November 2012 - 15:12

Since yesterday, chances of rain have faded a bit on Saturday qualy time, but stay the same on Sunday.


Not good news, with the usual grid positions Vettel will have it easy even if it's a wet race.


#1033 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 22 November 2012 - 15:19

But with almost every development restricted or forbidden, everybody has to compete on flexi-things, and there Ferrari seems to be a little lost. Add to that the fact that Ferrari engine seems to be the less flexible when it comes to "alternative uses", so to say, and Ferrari, which obviously cannot change engine provider, is faced with an uphill battle. It is doing OK, in current F1 the fiercest battle is in areas outside Ferrari traditional strenghts.

And while it is true that regulations are the same for everybody, it is also true that teams carry legacy organisations and structures from the past, and when those structures are no longer useful, they become a deadweight. If the engine was king again, Newey's approach (first aerodynamics, then the rest) could have its flaws exposed, as it did in the past. With the current regulations, his approach is the best.



I completely agree, and for that reasons I do not expect Ferrari building a dominant car in this F1 dominated by aerodinamics stunts and really I do not care. To me is Ok see the team fighting on reliability, good pit stops and srategy.

#1034 HPT

HPT
  • Member

  • 1,222 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 15:31

Just a query for Brazil.

It would seem that the race could very well be a wet one, and that we have gone well in the wet, but since other teams have improved since the last wet race, does it still mean that we will go well?

Or is it mainly down to mechanical grip, or our front suspension?


I think Ferrari does not have the same advantage in the wet now. In the beginning of the year they were able to warm their tires much quicker than the rest while McLaren in particular suffered from this. But somewhere along the lines, Ferrari have reverted to having difficulty warming up their tires, possibly as a result of needing to improve tire wire. In Austin, both RBR and McLaren were able to warm their tires up much quicker.

#1035 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 15:38

I think Ferrari does not have the same advantage in the wet now. In the beginning of the year they were able to warm their tires much quicker than the rest while McLaren in particular suffered from this. But somewhere along the lines, Ferrari have reverted to having difficulty warming up their tires, possibly as a result of needing to improve tire wire. In Austin, both RBR and McLaren were able to warm their tires up much quicker.

Fully agree with you.

It's something that puzzles me quite a bit. Because tire warming is not something relative (as long as the tires remained the same), either you're able to bring them in their working window within reasonable time, or you are not able.
Tire wear, I don't know. It wasn't that bad in Germany for example, when they had no issues to bring them into the working window.

Strange thing methinks.

#1036 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 22 November 2012 - 15:41

But somewhere along the lines, Ferrari have reverted to having difficulty warming up their tires, possibly as a result of needing to improve tire wire. In Austin, both RBR and McLaren were able to warm their tires up much quicker.


Seems to me that this issue appeared suddemly in Austin.


#1037 Gintonious

Gintonious
  • Member

  • 1,035 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 15:50

Austin is a bit of a one off considering that the track was brand new and had zero grip, the surface was also quite sleek and not grippy in terms of the traditional sense of a track.

#1038 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,650 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:04

Seems to me that this issue appeared suddemly in Austin.

Which is why I dont think we can say that we have warm-up issues just yet. Or that others are better at it. It was a one-off thing. It'd be different if there had been a pattern of it the past half a dozen races or something.

I also think the Ferrari's wet-weather abilities have been somewhat exaggerated this year as well. Yes, its gone well in these situations, but I'm not sure its always been the 'best' like a lot of people want to say. Like in Malaysia, the Mclarens(plural) were quicker at the start of the race. Alonso was doing well, too, but it definitely didn't seem as if there was any big advantage there. There was a point in the middle of the race where it was slightly faster than Lewis and Perez, but not by a large amount. That advantage was erased quickly though and Perez started showing better pace as the track dried a bit. In contrast, Massa was nowhere that race. Where was his wet weather ability?

Then we've got Silverstone qualifying. After Q2, it actually looked like Lewis was the one with the advantage. But conditions were a bit different in Q3 and Alonso pulled out a great lap to take pole position while Mclaren fell out of their 'window' and struggled. Massa was 1.3 seconds off the pace of Alonso, for reference.

Hockenheim then. Q2 again - it didn't seem as if Alonso or Ferrari had any great advantage once it started raining. Lewis looked fastest again while many others were ahead of Alonso. Massa didn't even make it out of Q2. But again, conditions changed for Q3 and Alonso put in a fantastic lap again for pole.

I think what I've taken from all this is that the Ferrari tends to be consistently pretty good in the wet, never terrible or anything, but only in specific circumstances does it really have any actual advantage over the others and even then, its nothing dramatic. I think doing well has been a combination of that and very good driving from Alonso when it counts. If you just looked at Massa, you wouldn't really think the Ferrari was anything special in the wet in the least.

Rain in Brazil might not mean we'll suddenly be incredibly competitive, but it does provide a chance for the normal order of things to be mixed up and for mistakes and SC's and whatnot, which is pretty much Ferrari's only hope. In the dry, I think the only thing we could hope for is Vettel to collide with somebody or for him to have a mechanical issue that takes him out of the picture. So I'm hoping for rain. I know the championship is a long shot and I dont expect it, but if the chance is still there, its still there and I'll be crossing my fingers for it. Plus rain could make things interesting in general. Its been a pretty dry season overall.

#1039 topical

topical
  • Member

  • 2,300 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:06

Wet or dry, the fact remains that Ferrari need something freakish to happen - in the dry most probably a mechanical DNF for Vettel, in the wet a crash by Vettel - to have any hope. The question is, which is more likely - a mechanical DNF in the dry or a crash in the wet? And is Alonso more likely to get a podium in the wet or dry? It's very hard to the answer to these questions. Equally I wouldn't be at all surprised, after all this feverish speculation about weather, to see a dry race from start to finish and Vettel cruise to victory. Only 3 days till we find out.

Advertisement

#1040 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:12

If you just looked at Massa, you wouldn't really think the Ferrari was anything special in the wet in the least.



Unfortunatly Massa is not reference.

#1041 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:20

Maybe we have been misguided by the fantastic qualification laps of Alonso in the wet, which flattered the car.
In the wet, performance differences might be equalised a bit, enough to put Alo on pole.

#1042 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:20

Maybe we have been misguided by the fantastic qualification laps of Alonso in the wet, which flattered the car.
In the wet, performance differences might be equalised a bit, enough to put Alo on pole.

#1043 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,204 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:44

Maybe we have been misguided by the fantastic qualification laps of Alonso in the wet, which flattered the car.
In the wet, performance differences might be equalised a bit, enough to put Alo on pole.


I don't think anyone has been misguided. The F2012 goes well in the wet. Better than most of the other cars. I just think that difference may be a little less than what is has been earlier in the season. :up:

#1044 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,650 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:53

Unfortunatly Massa is not reference.

Sure he is. Anybody in the other seat would be a reference so long as they're a known quantity.

#1045 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:58

Ok I started my rain dance.

#1046 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 16:59

I don't think anyone has been misguided. The F2012 goes well in the wet. Better than most of the other cars. I just think that difference may be a little less than what is has been earlier in the season. :up:

HPT and I am thinking that it went well in the wet because of quick tyre warming.
Now this does seem to be an issue or at least no longer an advantage.

Hence i am doubting that the F2012 "goes well in the wet" relatively to the others at this stage of the season.

And therefore I am speculating that even in summer it wasn't the F2012 who was going better than the other cars in the wet, but it was Alo who had the edge and not necesarily the car.

#1047 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,218 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 22 November 2012 - 17:10

HPT and I am thinking that it went well in the wet because of quick tyre warming.
Now this does seem to be an issue or at least no longer an advantage.

Hence i am doubting that the F2012 "goes well in the wet" relatively to the others at this stage of the season.


Exactly.


#1048 SCUDmissile

SCUDmissile
  • Member

  • 3,955 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 17:32

To be honest, they had some much on their plate, even with moments running like headless chickens, that to introduce another element in the car, could have been detrimental. We are not going to lost the title because the DDRS, but it could have helped a little if it was implemented right, something that it's not easy.


By the way, on the PC a patetic journo tried to diminish Fernando's title (if he wins it) because the alternator issue. You can smell the fear even when we are 13 point down and with a slower car :rolleyes:

I have also noticed that Ferrari does put fear into the hearts of their rivals. Not just now, but 2010, 2008, 2007 and 2006.

Remember Austin was a bit of an anomaly being new, because of the track conditions and temperatures. And that the inters work well for the Ferrari.

On the F2013, it is probably good that its an evolution. I think we need to be honest and say that the F2012 was born bad, so it was going to be difficult to develop it. They have done amazing to be in the WDC with a car that was the best part of 2 secs off the pace.
I hope with a clean slate they can right a few wrongs and do it with a proper wind tunnel.

Edited by SCUDmissile, 22 November 2012 - 17:47.


#1049 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 5,087 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 17:33

Seems to me that this issue appeared suddemly in Austin.

he was pretty slow in abu dhabi SC restarts as well.
but could be down to pirelli bringing harder tyres than needed, and the issue wouldn't appear with wets & inters.

#1050 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 22 November 2012 - 17:41

Sure he is. Anybody in the other seat would be a reference so long as they're a known quantity.



Well Massa is not a known quantity.