3953 replies to this topic

[kosmos]

Fernando Alonso vs Kimi Räikkönen 2014 Part I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please be respectful with both drivers and their respective supporters.

Edited by kosmos, 25 May 2014 - 14:12.

[noikeee]

So a thread lasted 4 races. At this average we're bound to finish the 2014 season in Part V. 5 threads of impossibly unbearable endless bullshit.   

[aray]

So a thread lasted 4 races. At this average we're bound to finish the 2014 season in Part V. 5 threads of impossibly unbearable endless bullshit.   

true....let us all piss together in this thread too...

[Gorma]

Crespo

sniper80, on 22 Apr 2014 - 17:29, said:

As a Kimi fan, I'm disappointed in his results so far for Ferrari. It was to be exptected that he would be slower than Alonso in the first races, as the car is built for Alonso & the team is built around the Spaniard.

How is this still being taken as a fact?

Frankly Ferrari would be the biggest bunch of idiots if they wouldn't build the team and car around Alonso. No point in building the car how Massa or Gene or De La Rosa likes it. Certainly there was no point in building the team around Massa considering how he performed. I think they learned from their mistake when they didn't do it for Kimi in 2007-2009. Sure now they'll also have Kimi's input when designing the updates and next years car, but there is no denying the fact that priority number one has been Alonso. 

[SophieB]

true....let us all piss together in this thread too...

How about not? And instead make decent and constructive posts in it.

[aray]

How about not? And instead make decent and constructive posts in it.

hell will freeze over before we can keep it decent..you know it too ma'am...  

[Hanzo]

How about not? And instead make decent and constructive posts in it.

 

I think this bunch is too used to the nice and soft "Domenicali" approach in this thread...

Don't be afraid to put your sunglasses on and try a new and more strict "Mattiacci" approach   

 

[Astro]

No way jose. The thread was cut in the most interesting exchange in a long long time as far as I am concerned. I am reposting it (from mzvztag in reply to Alexandros' post)

 

Again, you provided no explanations on how you determined the "driving style" parameters for Alonso or Kimi. But never mind as your basic argument is flawed.

 

The fastest way around the track would be to brake on the straight to the velocity that produces the lateral friction force that is equal to the centripetal force for the initial radius of curvature, with the radius of curvature being most often the largest possible radius (entry/exit on the outside, touching inner border on the apex) but it's not always so, because the exit trajectory depends also on the next curve and the required trajectory for it, if the next curve is close so a compromise might be needed. But it's out of scope of this explanation as it changes nothing.

 

Then, when the car slows down to just this marginal speed, the fastest way from the physics point of view would be for the car to instantenously change the direction to a curved one with the above described radius because that way the least time is lost to slowing down to the required velocity - if you don't do it instantenously, you need to slow down earlier to the max. speed supported by your "transitional" curve.

 

Then, if the trajectory through the curve is circular, the same speed is maintained until the exit. If the curve tightens, the speed must be proportionally reduced. If the curve opens, the speed must be increased to keep the car on the balance between the lateral friction and centripetal forces.

 

Then, at the exit of the curve, again the fastest way would be to instantenously direct the car into a straight trajectory because that way the power can be applied as early as possible, while with the gentle "transition" curve the car still depends on the lateral friction that is not the limiting factor on the straight.

 

Let me put it this way: if you don't change the directions instantenously, then you spend more time cornering and less driving straight, meaning that you have less speed because cornering is slower than full throttle on the straight.

 

(10 is for constructive)

 

Now continue...

[jrwb6e]

 

Crespo

Frankly Ferrari would be the biggest bunch of idiots if they wouldn't build the team and car around Alonso. No point in building the car how Massa or Gene or De La Rosa likes it. Certainly there was no point in building the team around Massa considering how he performed. I think they learned from their mistake when they didn't do it for Kimi in 2007-2009. Sure now they'll also have Kimi's input when designing the updates and next years car, but there is no denying the fact that priority number one has been Alonso. 

 

 

Just because you say Ferrari is designing everything around Alonso doesn't make it true.  As has been stated many times in the old thread, Kimi has a particular driving style that does not suit these tires and a colder track.  Alonso can utilize multiple driving styles when the need arises.

 

As far as we understand, Kimi is the only driver who has taken time away from general development in Maranello to make him custom parts.

[Ferrari2183]

Maybe the new nose will allow for a more competitive Raikkonen.

The results compared to Alonso are just not there yet... Coupled with the fact that Domenicali is gone and you have a guy under immense "Italian/Ferrari" pressure.

I sure hope he pulls through and gives us a nice team-mate battle going forward.

[Ferrari2183]

Just because you say Ferrari is designing everything around Alonso doesn't make it true. As has been stated many times in the old thread, Kimi has a particular driving style that does not suit these tires and a colder track. Alonso can utilize multiple driving styles when the need arises.

As far as we understand, Kimi is the only driver who has taken time away from general development in Maranello to make him custom parts.

And this where I think Ferrari are getting it wrong... They should focus on getting the overall performance of the car up to a very high standard. This in itself will widen the setup window and the rest will take care of itself.

Not to mention that too much emphasis on fixing Raikkonen's issues is bound to upset Alonso at some point and rightly so.

[jrwb6e]

And this where I think Ferrari are getting it wrong... They should focus on getting the overall performance of the car up to a very high standard. This in itself will widen the setup window and the rest will take care of itself.

Not to mention that too much emphasis on fixing Raikkonen's issues is bound to upset Alonso at some point and rightly so.

 

At least Kimi admitted his driving style is the problem with the new rules and tires.  I agree general development should be the focus for this year and next year's car, not for a specific driver.  If Kimi can't adjust, get someone in there who will and won't cost 20 million a year.

 

I honestly believe Hulkenberg has been made out better than he really is (driving against lackluster teammates), but he would be an inexpensive option.

[Gorma]

Just because you say Ferrari is designing everything around Alonso doesn't make it true.  As has been stated many times in the old thread, Kimi has a particular driving style that does not suit these tires and a colder track.  Alonso can utilize multiple driving styles when the need arises.

 

As far as we understand, Kimi is the only driver who has taken time away from general development in Maranello to make him custom parts.

So they don't spend four years designing the car how Alonso likes it, but are willing to do it for Kimi?

Edited by Gorma, 22 April 2014 - 16:04.

[Gorma]

 If Kimi can't adjust, get someone in there who will and won't cost 20 million a year.

I think most would have a different opinion if the car had been designed for Kimi the last four years and it would be Alonso doing the adjusting.  Kimi and Alonso just have different driving styles and want different things from their cars. Ferrari knew this when they hired Kimi so I don't see it being a problem. If anything it is a good thing as it forces the team to explore different paths. 

[Seanspeed]

I think they learned from their mistake when they didn't do it for Kimi in 2007-2009.

They worked on making the car better. If Kimi doesn't like the changes even though the car is faster(as the other driver showed), then boo hoo, cuz that's on Kimi. Ferrari did exactly what they should have done.

People completely overrate how much a car is designed for specific drivers. Teams make cars which they think will go fast. Its then up to the drivers to make the most of it. That's what they are hired to do.

[jrwb6e]

They worked on making the car better. If Kimi doesn't like the changes even though the car is faster(as the other driver showed), then boo hoo, cuz that's on Kimi. Ferrari did exactly what they should have done.

People completely overrate how much a car is designed for specific drivers. Teams make cars which they think will go fast. Its then up to the drivers to make the most of it. That's what they are hired to do.

 

Great post.  The idea that Ferrari built a car around Alonso with completely different aero and engine rules for 2014 is ridiculous.  Teams build cars that are fast and balanced, and it is up to the drivers to extract the most from them.  That is what separates the top-tier drivers from the pretenders.

Edited by jrwb6e, 22 April 2014 - 16:22.

[kosmos]

 If anything it is a good thing as it forces the team to explore different paths. 

 

In my opinion this is not the right time for different paths, the team is already on the back foot, Mercedes advantage is too big, they should focus all their resources to improve the car. The time to go in a different path for Kimi is when they start to design next year car, not now.

 

But the truth is that we don't know what the team is doing, or how many resources they are using to help Kimi, maybe helping Kimi means nothing to the development of the car.

 

 

By the way, this Ferrari spend the last 4 years developing the car for Alonso is BS, they have worked in making a fast car, they have that luxury with Alonso, they don't need to take his hand, he deals with it.

[Alexandros]

Let me put it this way: if you don't change the directions instantenously, then you spend more time cornering and less driving straight, meaning that you have less speed because cornering is slower than full throttle on the straight.

 

 

Larger directional change = more kinetic energy converts to tire friction = more momentum lost = more time lost while the car is near the apex = more time lost as the car needs to regain its velocity (and of course you chew the tires).

 

Additionally, the car becomes unstable as the driver asks from the car to perform a sharp turn, due to weight transfer which pressurizes the external tires, suspension etc. The car is kind-of-useless in terms of being able to properly accelerate while the tires and suspensions are rebalancing themselves. Some times even the grip levels themselves fluctuate mid corner due to this rebalancing, depending the forces exerted during corner entry.

 

There are also some aero considerations but these affect mid and high speed corners. For example a very grippy car that performs a very sharp turn can actually lean on one side which upsets how the airflow goes under the floor. This was more the case like 10 years ago, rather than now where the car will simply slide. The aero package is also designed to operate on a straight line, so the less turning there is, the better the airflow is directed through the wings and bodywork => more df => faster cornering speeds. 

Edited by Alexandros, 22 April 2014 - 16:25.

[discover23]

But the truth is that we don't know what the team is doing, or how many resources they are using to help Kimi, maybe helping Kimi means nothing to the development of the car.

I really hope this is the case.

Edited by discover23, 22 April 2014 - 16:26.

[Watkins74]

I have never worked on a F1 team but I assume a team with Ferrari's resources can dedicate a portion of that to helping Kimi without causing the overall effort to suffer. I think it may hurt at a team like Lotus though.

[Atreiu]

I hope Kimi steps it up a notch and gives Alonso a real run for his money.

[jrwb6e]

I hope Kimi steps it up a notch and gives Alonso a real run for his money.

 

I hope so too because if Kimi can be competitive it will help Ferrari be in the running for second in the constructor's championship.  Even with Alonso's third in China, Ferrari lost ground to Red Bull.

[mardmarium]

In my opinion this is not the right time for different paths, the team is already on the back foot, Mercedes advantage is too big, they should focus all their resources to improve the car. The time to go in a different path for Kimi is when they start to design next year car, not now.

 

But the truth is that we don't know what the team is doing, or how many resources they are using to help Kimi, maybe helping Kimi means nothing to the development of the car.

 

 

By the way, this Ferrari spend the last 4 years developing the car for Alonso is BS, they have worked in making a fast car, they have that luxury with Alonso, they don't need to take his hand, he deals with it.

 

Yes, as I said, it is what it is. Alonso deals with whatever tools he is given, clearly an asset for the team and  what is expected to happen. The engineers working in making a fast car and the top driver dealing with it, everybody doing their job.    

[Radion]

I hope so too because if Kimi can be competitive it will help Ferrari be in the running for second in the constructor's championship.  Even with Alonso's third in China, Ferrari lost ground to Red Bull.

Yes, this is where 'having different development paths' come into play.

If alonso can deal with whatever ferrari gives him and still finish around the podium, then good. But he won't be able to fight against redbull all alone. So ferrari has to get Kimi back into play if they want to be able to challenge for at least second in the wcc.

 

But I'm pretty sure ferrari has the ressources to provide kimi with new updates while still being able to maintain their main development path. They proved it in bahrain and china. 

[REDalert]

Just because you say Ferrari is designing everything around Alonso doesn't make it true.  As has been stated many times in the old thread, Kimi has a particular driving style that does not suit these tires and a colder track.  Alonso can utilize multiple driving styles when the need arises.

 

As far as we understand, Kimi is the only driver who has taken time away from general development in Maranello to make him custom parts.

 

As far as we know, Alonso is the only current Ferrari driver who could and did give some feedback/wishes when FI4T was designed and made.

When Kimi was signed, it was way too late to make any effect to the basic design.

If Kimi would've been Ferrari driver in 2013, there wouldn't be need for those special "Kimi parts". 

Edited by REDalert, 22 April 2014 - 21:29.

[Nemo1965]

I am in two minds about 'developing the car for driver A' or something like that. One the hand I think that a F1 team tries to develop a car that goes fast and the driver has to deliver that speed, independent from the fact that he likes understeer of oversteer. On the other hand there have been drivers in the past that were highly succesfull in a certain type of car with VERY specific characteristics.. and other topdrivers could not make heads or tail of it.

 

Example: The incredible short-wheel based Tyrrels that Jacky Stewart drove to worldchampionships. He could drive it. Cevert could drive it. Their successors (Scheckter and others) could not deal with it. They only started to win with Tyrrels when Maurice Philipe (I believe) developed longer based-models.

 

Example: Michael Schumacher and his Benetton-cars. Very compact. Incredibly twisty and nervous. Most teammates just did not come close. I remember that Jos Verstappen in 1993 tested with the 'old' Benetton (of that year). He was almost as fast as Michael. Came the new model (for 1994): he was over a second slower. Then, when Schumacher went to Ferrari, Berger and Alesi drove the championship-winning car. They were astonished how hard it was to drive.

 

But then again: was that down to the design, or just the set-up of the car? Because if you lead-driver has been setting up a car for two years to his liking, the alternatives you have to redevelop, again.

 

Regarding Alonso and Raikkonen: if this had been about the 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013 car, I thought this 'developed around' Alonso would be plausible. But with the new engine-rules, the disappearance of the blown diffusor, the disappearing of the coanda-exhausts, the lowered front-nose... the Ferrari technicians and engineers simply can't have known enough about all that stuff to even consider design it 'around' Alonso.

[Fontainebleau]

I have a very silly OT question about the OP - Kosmos, where did you get the Raikkonen pic? Doesn't the head look smaller than it should be?

 

I know it's absurd, but it has kept me wondering for some time now...

[Nemo1965]

I have a very silly OT question about the OP - Kosmos, where did you get the Raikkonen pic? Doesn't the head look smaller than it should be?

 

I know it's absurd, but it has kept me wondering for some time now...

 

I understand your fascination. Do you know that your head is 1,5 times bigger than you see it in the mirror?  Take a crayon, stand with your nose against a mirror, and draw a circumference of your head on the mirror. Then take six steps back. Logic and geometry would tell you that your head - being further away - should be smaller than the drawn 'head' in the reflection because of the distance. But you have to stand really far away from the mirror (probably more feet than your living room is big) to get the head not to fill the drawn head in the mirror anymore.

 

Off topic yes...

 

But the answer is in there, too. By using a wide lense or a tele-lense, our vision of the human head in a photographed can be fooled...

Edited by Nemo1965, 22 April 2014 - 22:26.

[jrwb6e]

As far as we know, Alonso is the only current Ferrari driver who could and did give some feedback/wishes when FI4T was designed and made.

When Kimi was signed, it was way too late to make any effect to the basic design.

If Kimi would've been Ferrari driver in 2013, there wouldn't be need for those special "Kimi parts". 

 

A top-tier driver doesn't need special parts.

[andrea303]

 

Regarding Alonso and Raikkonen: if this had been about the 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013 car, I thought this 'developed around' Alonso would be plausible. But with the new engine-rules, the disappearance of the blown diffusor, the disappearing of the coanda-exhausts, the lowered front-nose... the Ferrari technicians and engineers simply can't have known enough about all that stuff to even consider design it 'around' Alonso.

 

LOL. 

 

De facto is that Ferrari has been designed for Alonso's preferences since 2010 till 2014. When Kimi was signed it was too late to change the whole concept. Quite frankly I understand why, because they know what kind of feedback Alonso can give. They know how adaptive he is. The team has been built around him. Ferrari paid 30 million euros for Kimi not to drive  Formula 1 in 2010. All that has been said here doesn't take anything away from Alonso's greatness, it's just that Ferrari in 2010-2013/2014 was Alonso's team. Now they concentrate on both drivers more. He still has a huge support there.

 

De facto secondo is that Kimi was signed to Ferrari for the new era in Ferrari's pecking order. Kimi wasn't signed to be another Massa. Ferrari's principles changed (thanks to Domenicali) and they gathered a super duo to their services for this season. They want to and they need to deliver a better suited car for Kimi because if it's for the good of Kimi, it's for the good of Ferrari and so for the good of Alonso. We can discuss this after Kimi has complained all season and the known issues are still not fixed. 

Ferrari has everything organized. They have a small department (the best engineers who know Kimi) dedicated for Kimi. It's not really hurting the team's overall evolution because they have Maranello in full steam at the very moment. The engine department, aero department -- everything is under development. This is how the team rolls these days and they want to score podiums and double wins. I'm pretty sure that even Alonso wants Kimi to stand with him at the podium. 

 

I remember that I read in 2008 or 2009 that some of Kimi's engineers were "pissed" for Kimi's demands for getting the car to match his preferences. In fact, it was never good enough except late 2009. Kimi was very happy with the feeling and balance. Not with the speed of course. The car's development was basically shut down after July 2009, but still Kimi delivered amazing results with the car. He was happy with how the car was handling and coming from Kimi's mouth, that's rare.

 

I think KImi and Ferrari have learned their lesson and they are now working more closely together. The rules are what makes it more difficult since most teams are still in the middle of the learning process with these new regulations. And as it's been said from Ferrari, this year even the smallest tweaks or fixes take much more time. 

 

In a nutshell: if there's 10 people working with Kimi to get better suited car for him, it's just a small tear drop in the ocean. As Domenicali said: they are working to get Kimi more comfortable because he deserves it. I hope that even the strongest Alonso fans hope that he gets what he needs so we can watch our drivers racing flat-out together with the Red.

Edited by andrea303, 23 April 2014 - 00:43.

[Callisto]

A top-tier driver doesn't need special parts.

Imo or fact?

[fque]

So much myth and excuses.
Years ago, Ferrari asked Schumi to test the Ferrari while Kimi was racing for Ferrari.
Years ago some praised Kimi been pure driver, who just show up and drive. (I think it was Brundle).
Years ago when F1 was lacking stars and Mika was near retirement, came aLong a rather good looking finn, since then the brit media jumped on the band wagon to sell magzines.
Alonso werent so lucky, having to fight against brit driver and team. Brit hates him.
Driving style such a hot topic, yet all the experts fail to understand how Alonso extract every bit of Michelin and replicate.
But lets just look at the facts, even in the self destructing year of 07, Alonso was bearly beaten by 1 point.
Looking at 05/06 Season, those were two of the highest possible bench marks with no clear advantage in the car.
When did Schumi scored 100 plus points and still lose the wdc?
The truth is, never in Kimi's career had he needed to face such talent on the other side of the garage. He only just realised someone else managed to find more speed in the sam car, lap after lap, race after race.
The only thing Alonso isnt good at was picking teams, otherwise he might have just equalled or surpassed Prost on many levels.

[fque]

I remember last time JPM needed special parts and Kimi didnt. In the end Kimi beat JPM quite convincingly. And of course, Brit media praised about it.

[fque]

I stopped reading f1 magzine for a long time.
But I remember last time they criticized Alonso not working on his skill to beat Hamilton, I wonder if they will say the same for Kimi. I doubt it, they have long sold Kimi as the fastest man, now they will continue to defend him.

[fque]

I forgot to mention cars developed for Alonso might also be another myth.
He drove pretty well in Mclaren, not designed for him.
He managed to keep up with Ferrari when they decided mass damper was illegal.
He nealy took wdc in the Ferrari the first time. Non of these cars were designed for him or designed for him and got a major change(mass damper removal).

[boldhakka]

Kimi is turning out to be one good development driver, isn't he? His preferences and demands forces a point of view on the design philosophy of the car. It gives the engineers a stake in the ground to work towards; one that is more meaningful than "more downforce, more power" which a lesser driver might have asked for. It's good to see him asserting himself and making Ferrari invest resources in making the car better to drive. It'll be great if they can make a 2009-style improvement in mapping things to his style. If he ever says the car is "cool to drive", like he did in late 2009, then we know they've hit the sweet spot. 

 

They've tried the other way for the last so many years, and it's gotten them nowhere. If they fail, it won't be from lack of trying - and that's the way it should be. 

[Astro]

Larger directional change = more kinetic energy converts to tire friction = more momentum lost = more time lost while the car is near the apex = more time lost as the car needs to regain its velocity (and of course you chew the tires).

 

I agree with the tire chewing, but assuming the car has enough grip to make both movements and the tires are durable (as in 2005), how is it possible to lose more momentum by the friction produced in a directional change than in lifting/braking and turning a bit earlier?

 

 

 

Additionally, the car becomes unstable as the driver asks from the car to perform a sharp turn, due to weight transfer which pressurizes the external tires, suspension etc. The car is kind-of-useless in terms of being able to properly accelerate while the tires and suspensions are rebalancing themselves. Some times even the grip levels themselves fluctuate mid corner due to this rebalancing, depending the forces exerted during corner entry.

 

 

When I see the videos below, if there is any rebalancing effect, it must be very marginal. It seems to me the effect of speed and angle in cornering is much more important in making the turn more or less scrapy, not the way of turning the car.

 

Kimi and Alonso are much more precise in corner entry/exit than Fisichella. Kimi is very smooth at entering the corner and Alonso is much sharper, but my impression is that the "smooth" style might sacrifice a bit of speed for the sake of precision, while the sharper turn can squeeze speed for a bit longer but it is potentially more difficult to pull off with precision.

 

Alonso (Spain 2005)

 

Fisichella (Spain 2005)

 

Kimi (Spain 2005)

 

And mind you, I don't believe "driving style" makes much of a difference at the end for raw speed at one lap. Otherwise, the net effect would be more noticeable in qualifying laps. Usually the difference is down to some less than perfect cornering. In long runs is another matter, because you can make the tires suffer more or less with less durable tires (e.g. Pirelli). But in my opinion, with durable tires, the raw pace would be down, mostly, to precision lap after lap, not driving style.

Edited by Astro, 23 April 2014 - 02:45.

[Cyanide]

Energy harvesting and fuel saving are also not helping him. 

 

If he has to drive even more tenderly than he's accustomed to, he has more tyre heating problems than normal. 

 

I really would like to have a detailed explanation on how he is so gentle on the tyres. I mean, you'd think more aggressive out-laps, tyre heating or heavier braking should work, but obviously it's much more complicated than that. 

[boldhakka]

No tyre warmers next year.   Should be fun. But I think Pirelli is against the idea, so there's some hope.

[kosmos]

I have a very silly OT question about the OP - Kosmos, where did you get the Raikkonen pic? Doesn't the head look smaller than it should be?

 

I know it's absurd, but it has kept me wondering for some time now...

 

 

Got it from Ferrari.com but I can apply some surgery on him if you want, but his fans may not like it

[Alexandros]

I agree with the tire chewing, but assuming the car has enough grip to make both movements and the tires are durable (as in 2005), how is it possible to lose more momentum by the friction produced in a directional change than in lifting/braking and turning a bit earlier?

 

If a driver goes hot into a corner and then uses the tires to reduce speed by suddenly turning a lot, his exit speeds will suck because he is still reducing speed by mid-corner, instead of accelerating by that point. A brake earlier, point-and-shoot with increasing the speed approach will provide a much faster exit speed. The gains in terms of laptime is not in the corner itself but rather the whole lap. You have to treat each corner as a preparation for the next corner or straight instead of an isolated corner. This sums up the difference between fast entry / slow exit vs slow entry / fast exit. In a few cases the fast entry / slow exit is the preffered option but in most cases it's the other way around.

 

When degredation is added into the mix, the more preserved tires will also add a compound effect of reduced times for every consequent lap, as they grip more - allowing higher cornering speeds, later braking and earlier acceleration. Thus a driver who is chewing his tires is penalized in terms of laptime for the duration of his stint. It is not a problem if the tires are too hard anyway.

 

When I see the videos below, if there is any rebalancing effect, it must be very marginal. It seems to me the effect of speed and angle in cornering is much more important in making the turn more or less scrapy, not the way of turning the car.

 

There's always a weight transfer effect that needs to be rebalanced, but it's not necessarily visible. If the cars of a certain season are leaning to one side when cornering, it could be visible. In some 2004 videos you can see it. Traction control helps to circumvent the traction issue a bit while mid-corner and trying to accelerate with the car still trying to rebalance itself.

 

Kimi and Alonso are much more precise in corner entry/exit than Fisichella. Kimi is very smooth at entering the corner and Alonso is much sharper, but my impression is that the "smooth" style might sacrifice a bit of speed for the sake of precision, while the sharper turn can squeeze speed for a bit longer but it is potentially more difficult to pull off with precision.

 

The ideal way to compare would be to have telemetries of both drivers in the same car so we can see precisely who is gaining what and where without having to feel which should be better. Another alternative is the car overlap feature of the TV. In Malaysia there was a car overlap of Kimi's lines and the journalists were like "oh, Kimi goes too wide - he's doomed, he can't be faster" but by the end of the corner he was ahead of the other car that was overlaid over him. They looked quite foolish after that. I think the one commentator was actually an ex-f1 driver (brunno?).

[Alexandros]

I really would like to have a detailed explanation on how he is so gentle on the tyres. I mean, you'd think more aggressive out-laps, tyre heating or heavier braking should work, but obviously it's much more complicated than that. 

 

When entering a corner, he avoids very late braking and prefers a balanced / early acceleration with the widest possible exit angle. He is steering the steering wheel in the least way possible / the minimum degree required to make a corner.

Edited by Alexandros, 23 April 2014 - 04:32.

[boldhakka]

Lorenzo De Luca @LorenzoDL83 · 10m

#Ferrari is studying new smoother power delivery electronic maps to help #Kimi driving style

[KnucklesAgain]

Who is Lorenzo de Luca?

[motorhead]

A top-tier driver doesn't need special parts.

 

Are you sure Alonso hasn't got any "just for him" solutions in his car?

[tmzxaar]

Are you sure Alonso hasn't got any "just for him" solutions in his car?

Ofc the special parts would help him, which is logical. But he was doing great from the get go, doesn't necessarily need them to be competitive.

Edited by tmzxaar, 23 April 2014 - 06:48.

[Astro]

 

If a driver goes hot into a corner and then uses the tires to reduce speed by suddenly turning a lot, his exit speeds will suck because he is still reducing speed by mid-corner, instead of accelerating by that point. A brake earlier, point-and-shoot with increasing the speed approach will provide a much faster exit speed.

 

Of course, if he enters hot nothing works. But what I am asking is this:

 

 

Both arrive to the apex, only one turns sharper (red line) than the other (green line). You are saying that the sharper direction change will make the red car lose more momentum due to friction. That's what I don't understand.

 

The gains in terms of laptime is not in the corner itself but rather the whole lap. You have to treat each corner as a preparation for the next corner or straight instead of an isolated corner. This sums up the difference between fast entry / slow exit vs slow entry / fast exit. In a few cases the fast entry / slow exit is the preffered option but in most cases it's the other way around.

 

Yes, that I know. I am assuming the corner entry/exit is optimized for the whole lap, not for a particular corner.

 

 

When degredation is added into the mix, the more preserved tires will also add a compound effect of reduced times for every consequent lap, as they grip more - allowing higher cornering speeds, later braking and earlier acceleration. Thus a driver who is chewing his tires is penalized in terms of laptime for the duration of his stint. It is not a problem if the tires are too hard anyway.

 

Yes, I agree with this.

 

 

The ideal way to compare would be to have telemetries of both drivers in the same car so we can see precisely who is gaining what and where without having to feel which should be better. Another alternative is the car overlap feature of the TV. In Malaysia there was a car overlap of Kimi's lines and the journalists were like "oh, Kimi goes too wide - he's doomed, he can't be faster" but by the end of the corner he was ahead of the other car that was overlaid over him. They looked quite foolish after that. I think the one commentator was actually an ex-f1 driver (brunno?).

 

Telemetry would be much better, for sure. But I prefer to bring videos rather than write about optimal lines without telemetry. In any case, there are things we know that make me think these optimal lines do not give you a very complete picture of anything. If you take the Q2s of Massa and Raikkonen (without incidents), you get that Raikkonen was able to beat Massa in 7, 5 and 4 occasions in 2007, 08 and 09 respectively. If we assume Raikkonen has the most optimal line, then the only reason he did not go faster than his team mate must be due to lack of precision (be car characteristics or whatever comes to mind). We also know how that went between Massa and Alonso, who in theory has sub-optimal lines.

 

If we look at the results, driving styles didn't give us the average results that we would expect. So I think there must be more important things than taking optimal lines. Taking them with precision (right speed and angle of entry/exit) is for me the number one candidate (I think Alonso said something about it once).

Edited by Astro, 23 April 2014 - 07:09.

[Miggeex]

Ofc the special parts would help him, which is logical. But he was doing great from the get go, doesn't necessarily need them to be competitive.

 

In the car there are for sure lots of designs that have been done based on Alonso's data and feedback. They've got so much information of him from recent years. Wouldn't make sence if his opinions and preferences wouldn't been considered in the design progress.

 

But that's how it's supposed to be at this point. They had to build the car based on Alonso's feelings and that's a good thing since Ferrari had no recent data from Kimi. It must've been better for Ferrari to see whether it just happens to fit Kimi also. In the beginning it didn't look too bad, other than a bit lost setup wise. Now it seems though that cold races will be a problem. 

[Cyanide]

Who is Lorenzo de Luca?

 

Some random fan on twitter who pretends to know stuff. 

Edited by Cyanide, 23 April 2014 - 07:26.

[Nemo1965]

Of course, if he enters hot nothing works. But what I am asking is this:

 

 

Both arrive to the apex, only one turns sharper (red line) than the other (green line). You are saying that the sharper direction change will make the red car lose more momentum due to friction. That's what I don't understand.

 

 

Yes, that I know. I am assuming the corner entry/exit is optimized for the whole lap, not for a particular corner.

 

 

 

Yes, I agree with this.

 

 

 

Telemetry would be much better, for sure. But I prefer to bring videos rather than write about optimal lines without telemetry. In any case, there are things we know that make me think these optimal lines do not give you a very complete picture of anything. If you take the Q2s of Massa and Raikkonen (without incidents), you get that Raikkonen was able to beat Massa in 7, 5 and 4 occasions in 2007, 08 and 09 respectively. If we assume Raikkonen has the most optimal line, then the only reason he did not go faster than his team mate must be due to lack of precision (be car characteristics or whatever comes to mind). We also know how that went between Massa and Alonso, who in theory has sub-optimal lines.

 

If we look at the results, driving styles didn't give us the average results that we would expect. So I think there must be more important things than taking optimal lines. Taking them with precision (right speed and angle of entry/exit) is for me the number one candidate (I think Alonso said something about it once).

 

Very interesting stuff. It hurts my head but... very interesting stuff.

 

There's one thing that intrigued me for years, and that was a comparison of Schumachers and Herberts telemetry at Silverstone in 1995 (Stowe? Beckets?)

 

Anyway, the telemetry showed that Herbert braked later, had a higher exit-speed and a smoother line through the corner than Schumacher. Classis good driving, one would say. Still he lost about 0.4 seconds to Schumacher in that corner alone! Schumacher braked earlier, had a lower exit-speed, had a much more nervous line (with a lot of steering and throttle input mid-corner)... but the trick was that his speed DURING the corner was constant and higher than that of Herbert.

 

Conclusion: what works, works. I don't think there is 'a best way' through any corner.