Track Observations for Winter 2012 testing

It was underweight.

No it was not underweight. Nor was it illegal. Szoelloe explained what the problem was, they had to increase the ride height as they kept breaking the floor

I've added which test it was rather than each individual date for every comment, which would take ages, and I think this is clear enough anyway. I'll add information from the next test underneath the Jerez section.

Edited by Brandz07, 13 February 2012 - 14:03.

I've added which test it was rather than each individual date for every comment, which would take ages, and I think this is clear enough anyway. I'll add information from the next test underneath the Jerez section.

Was going to suggest that. Most logical way of doing it without killing yerself

did DanardiF1 ever post about friday?

Great pictures Payas! Thank you!

Bumping this back up for anyone visiting the second test.

Bumping this back up for anyone visiting the second test.

Good call. Any contributions from track side spies much appreciated.

anyone have any info for us?

From the MP4-27 thread:

Photographer at Catalunya today:

Jamey Price @jameypricephoto

I'd say the @redbullracing RB8 looks strong (surpised?). So does #Mclaren. #Ferrari looks like a beast to handle and the #Caterham is LOUD.

From the MP4-27 thread:

Photographer at Catalunya today:

Jamey Price @jameypricephoto

I'd say the @redbullracing RB8 looks strong (surpised?). So does #Mclaren. #Ferrari looks like a beast to handle and the #Caterham is LOUD.

So it wasn't just us at Jerez who thought that.

So it wasn't just us at Jerez who thought that.

Indeed.

Infact, the whole thing looks like a cut'n'paste from Jerez.

did DanardiF1 ever post about friday?

I did not, as I wasn't there! Had to go to Seville that night, and for logistics and money ease I didn't go to the track but went to Seville in the morning...

I did not, as I wasn't there! Had to go to Seville that night, and for logistics and money ease I didn't go to the track but went to Seville in the morning...

aha, fair enough

http://peterwindsor....lona-testing-2/

good observations

http://peterwindsor....lona-testing-2/

good observations

great read.

http://peterwindsor....lona-testing-2/

good observations

horrible observations for my taste. Instead of analysing the cars, Windsor prefer to hype certain drivers, ie LH, and does some very ridiculous "analysis".

What does he knows about driving technique to make such remarks? I think he's just pleasing the masses and saying what the mayority of people wanna hear, ie LH is great.

Absolutely useless insights and I regret to have read it

horrible observations for my taste. Instead of analysing the cars, Windsor prefer to hype certain drivers, ie LH, and does some very ridiculous "analysis".

What does he knows about driving technique to make such remarks? I think he's just pleasing the masses and saying what the mayority of people wanna hear, ie LH is great.

Absolutely useless insights and I regret to have read it

Disagree. Windsor is a man incredibly interested in the mechanics of driving, and has spent his life and career watching drivers work on their art. I think he has a great eye for driving technique.

@Kubicca- Please! Just because you dislike Hamilton praise doesn't mean he is less deserving of it. Winsor was speaking of driving lines and turn in and car behavior. All you notice was him saying Hamilton's skills in the car were good to watch.

Edited by TF110, 21 February 2012 - 21:29.

Disagree. Windsor is a man incredibly interested in the mechanics of driving, and has spent his life and career watching drivers work on their art. I think he has a great eye for driving technique.

Yes, but he's gone to extremes sometimes and taken it too far. I'll never forget his article on the friction circle in F1Racing.

@Kubicca- Please! Just because you dislike Hamilton praise doesn't mean he is less deserving of it. Winsor was speaking of driving lines and turn in and car behavior. All you notice was him saying Hamilton's skills in the car were good to watch.

I had to check the calendar 14th passed us already, so much love for just one driver.

With comments like this :

"Given the radius that Fernando would proscribe, how did Lewis get the McLaren’s nose to tuck into Three? By superbly soft initial steering inputs and velvety use of the throttle. "

how can anyone take PW seriously ...

With comments like this :

"Given the radius that Fernando would proscribe, how did Lewis get the McLaren’s nose to tuck into Three? By superbly soft initial steering inputs and velvety use of the throttle. "

how can anyone take PW seriously ...

Because he's a writer, who likes the 'poetry' of the driver.

Great read. Contains much involuntary humour.

how can anyone take PW seriously ...

Not me that's for sure, I've seen him write some utter bollocks on occasions

he sure loves lewis, thats for sure.

Yes, but he's gone to extremes sometimes and taken it too far. I'll never forget his article on the friction circle in F1Racing.

That one still makes me chuckle now. The man is a complete prat and any insight he may be able to offer is drowned out by the absolute drivel he spouts regarding 'heavy second stage turn-in' or whatever phrase he's just made up.

he sure loves lewis, thats for sure.

Colleagues don´t call him Windsorventura for nothing...

horrible observations for my taste. Instead of analysing the cars, Windsor prefer to hype certain drivers, ie LH, and does some very ridiculous "analysis".

What does he knows about driving technique to make such remarks? I think he's just pleasing the masses and saying what the mayority of people wanna hear, ie LH is great.

Absolutely useless insights and I regret to have read it

I would guess far more than you, and I would read him before reading any bilgiferous drivel from you any time.

I had to check the calendar 14th passed us already, so much love for just one driver.

#Irony

I had to check the calendar 14th passed us already, so much love for just one driver.

Mr Pot, what did you call that Kettle?

horrible observations for my taste. Instead of analysing the cars, Windsor prefer to hype certain drivers, ie LH, and does some very ridiculous "analysis".

What does he knows about driving technique to make such remarks? I think he's just pleasing the masses and saying what the mayority of people wanna hear, ie LH is great.

Absolutely useless insights and I regret to have read it

I bet you didn't mind the plethora of Mark Hughes' articles on Kubica

With comments like this :

"Given the radius that Fernando would proscribe, how did Lewis get the McLaren’s nose to tuck into Three? By superbly soft initial steering inputs and velvety use of the throttle. "

how can anyone take PW seriously ...

I think he needs an Annie Hall/Marshall Mcluhan moment.

Lewis Hamilton: I heard what you were saying! You know nothing of my driving! etc etc

Anyway journalists are notoriously bad at Maths & Physics but wonderful at english, drama and speaking, they're normally much more arty-farty and don't really comprehend realistic measurable physical circumstances and its sensitive and variable behaviour

horrible observations for my taste. Instead of analysing the cars, Windsor prefer to hype certain drivers, ie LH, and does some very ridiculous "analysis".

What does he knows about driving technique to make such remarks? I think he's just pleasing the masses and saying what the mayority of people wanna hear, ie LH is great.

Absolutely useless insights and I regret to have read it

He also has a severe Pastorphilia. Just wait for Maldonado to go out Thu and Fri (if PW goes back to Barcelona, he's traveling back to UK for the next Flying Lap episode).

I don't doubt he has a good eye, but that reads almost like a romance novel... c'mon!

He also has a severe Pastorphilia. Just wait for Maldonado to go out Thu and Fri (if PW goes back to Barcelona, he's traveling back to UK for the next Flying Lap episode).

I don't doubt he has a good eye, but that reads almost like a romance novel... c'mon!

I do admit that Peter can be a little melodramatic in his appraisals of drivers, but he is a fan like all of us, and enjoys the human element of F1 as much as the technical and political sides...

Just wish someone took nick heidfeld to barcelona, he was absolutely spot on last year with his observations.

With comments like this :

"Given the radius that Fernando would proscribe, how did Lewis get the McLaren’s nose to tuck into Three? By superbly soft initial steering inputs and velvety use of the throttle. "

how can anyone take PW seriously ...

I would normally agree that you shouldn't always take Windsor seriously, but I would never claim he doesn't know what he's talking about at all. He just gets carried away with things and kind of romanticizes the techniques drivers use, often not giving much credence to the fact that a car will often dictate driving style more than the driver's preferences.

BUT....

Turn 3 at Barcelona is a notoriously difficult car to enter optimally and there is more than one approach, which he does explain with photos in that article. If you compromise the 2nd corner a tad, you can come back over to the left and theoretically carry more speed into the entry, where you can hit the apex naturally and get on full-throttle as soon as possible(Alonso). OR, you can not compromise the 2nd corner as much, but you'll have to deal with a bit more difficulty getting the car turned-in for Turn 3(Lewis). From that line, its very easy to be too eager with the throttle and/or steering while keeping the car tight to the ideal line. What Windsor is saying is that Lewis manages it very well and can get away with it due to his skill, which could very well be true.

What he doesn't mention is that a lighter fuel load, having grippier tires, making this corner a priority when setting up the car, or simply having more downforce could also make this possible as well.

I like to read what he has to say, but definitely dont treat it as the gospel. That goes for pretty much anybody commenting on their observations of how a driver or car behaves on-track. What I like about threads like this is that there is often patterns to find between multiple people's observations, which is where I look for the truth. Not in any one single person's experience.

Edited by Seanspeed, 21 February 2012 - 23:34.

I would normally agree that you shouldn't always take Windsor seriously, I would never claim he doesn't know what he's talking about at all. He just gets carried away with things and kind of romanticizes the techniques drivers use, often not giving much credence to the fact that a car will often dictate driving style more than the driver's preferences or talking about how fuel loads and different tires will affect the behavior and grip levels of a car.

BUT....

Turn 3 at Barcelona is a notoriously difficult car to enter optimally and there is more than one approach, which he does explain with photos in that article. If you compromise the 2nd corner a tad, you can come back over to the left and theoretically carry more speed into the entry, where you can hit the apex naturally and get on full-throttle as soon as possible. OR, you can not compromise the 2nd corner as much, but you'll have to deal with a bit more difficulty getting the car turned-in for Turn 3. From that line, its very easy to be too eager with the throttle and/or steering while keeping the car tight to the ideal line. What Windsor is saying is that Lewis manages it very well and can get away with it due to his skill, which could very well be true.

What he doesn't mention is that a lighter fuel load, having grippier tires, making this corner a priority when setting up the car, or simply having more downforce could also make this possible as well.

I like to read what he has to say, but definitely dont treat it as the gospel. That goes for pretty much anybody commenting on their observations of how a driver or car behaves on-track. What I like about threads like this is that there is often patterns to find between multiple people's observations, which is where I look for the truth. Not in any one single person's experience.

Good post. It's like reading a review of an album or something to me... a good review will give you the best idea of what to expect from the album, but can't beat listening to it yourself and forming your own opinions.

And the way he treats F1 drivers is very like how someone would view a musician or artist, sometimes to the detriment of his overall view as it can negate the technical element of what that driver can do.

I would normally agree that you shouldn't always take Windsor seriously, but I would never claim he doesn't know what he's talking about at all. He just gets carried away with things and kind of romanticizes the techniques drivers use, often not giving much credence to the fact that a car will often dictate driving style more than the driver's preferences.

BUT....

Turn 3 at Barcelona is a notoriously difficult car to enter optimally and there is more than one approach, which he does explain with photos in that article. If you compromise the 2nd corner a tad, you can come back over to the left and theoretically carry more speed into the entry, where you can hit the apex naturally and get on full-throttle as soon as possible(Alonso). OR, you can not compromise the 2nd corner as much, but you'll have to deal with a bit more difficulty getting the car turned-in for Turn 3(Lewis). From that line, its very easy to be too eager with the throttle and/or steering while keeping the car tight to the ideal line. What Windsor is saying is that Lewis manages it very well and can get away with it due to his skill, which could very well be true.

What he doesn't mention is that a lighter fuel load, having grippier tires, making this corner a priority when setting up the car, or simply having more downforce could also make this possible as well.



I never said that he doesn't know what is he talking about , he is very knowladgeable about F1 for all I know , but his way of writing is ridiculous at best as is his never ending sick love for certain driver ....

I like to read what he has to say, but definitely dont treat it as the gospel. That goes for pretty much anybody commenting on their observations of how a driver or car behaves on-track. What I like about threads like this is that there is often patterns to find between multiple people's observations, which is where I look for the truth. Not in any one single person's experience.

Edited by ASFA2011, 22 February 2012 - 00:03.

#Irony

Mr Pot, what did you call that Kettle?

I like almost all drivers on the grid, plus im not peter windsor, the trackside commentator.

And I cannot believe you boys didnt have a chuckle reading this one sided declaration of love. It was so sweet...

Yes, but he's gone to extremes sometimes and taken it too far. I'll never forget his article on the friction circle in F1Racing.

I didn't see that one, maybe somebody can post it later.

I would guess far more than you, and I would read him before reading any bilgiferous drivel from you any time.

Well, if you like his analysis then you indeed would guess far more than me.

I bet you didn't mind the plethora of Mark Hughes' articles on Kubica ;)

I didn't even see those. I think Lewis is a great driver but testing is not to measure drivers, but cars. PW missed the whole point of it. He should focus on cars stability, speed through corners and etc so that we can have better idea for who have more downforce.

Anyway journalists are notoriously bad at Maths & Physics but wonderful at english, drama and speaking, they're normally much more arty-farty and don't really comprehend realistic measurable physical circumstances and its sensitive and variable behaviour

You hit the nail in the head. People who think this kind of "driving analysis" from PW is accurate are those who also understands more of drama, languange and speaking. For those who actually understands more of physics, you see clearly how much romance PW put into it. In the part where he wrote that Lewis would probably say he had too much oversteer in T4 but he, PW, would say it was very effective, one can really see that he doesn't know what he's saying in many ocasions. Specially in mid-high speed corners, oversteer is never the best way, by definition, as it implies the car's back is sliding rather than turning. The back will turn around the car axis which will make it head inner the turn but completely compromises max speed possible through the corner.

PW does have considerable knowledge in physics of driving but he just put to much romance and his make believe into it. Sometimes you can see a driver very skillfully and flamboyantly control a car through a certain corner but ultimately going slower than possible.

To put in shorter words: driving "pretty and flamboyant" isn't necessarily the fastest way.

Just wish someone took nick heidfeld to barcelona, he was absolutely spot on last year with his observations.

Heidfeld analysis is WAY more accurate than PW's, much more technical with correct physics knowledge to do so.

Bloggsworth, I suggest you to read comments from Nick to know what I'm talking about. This guys is absolutely precise in analysing car/driver through a specific corner. The correlation between his insights and what becomes reality in the season is

What he doesn't mention is that a lighter fuel load, having grippier tires, making this corner a priority when setting up the car, or simply having more downforce could also make this possible as well.

Edited by Kubiccia, 22 February 2012 - 00:40.

I thought he was starting to sound like an Alonso fanboy lately, funny how perceptions differ. I don't take his show\podcast\whatever or the blog seriously as a result. Allen is another but at least there's a fair amount of concrete info\paddock gossip on his blog, well worth the visit.

Though he (Windsor) does the over-the-top thing with a lot of them, I can see how the latest instalment would have pissed some of you off.

Still, it's his blog and it isn't a paid piece, none of my business.

The trick with Windsor is to sort the wheat from the chaff. He's got a decent eye technically, I think. But it's often obscured by irrelevancies and a particular agenda/sentiment towards a driver.

He is at least one of the few journalists that attempts to inform the fans in a more nuanced fashion, he's had some interesting things to say about the various driving styles of the top guys, for example. I appreciate that, even if I don't 100% trust his analysis.

Edited by goingthedistance, 22 February 2012 - 00:57.

windsor might be a hamilton fan boy, but he said the red bull was the better car from his observations.

With comments like this :

"Given the radius that Fernando would proscribe, how did Lewis get the McLaren’s nose to tuck into Three? By superbly soft initial steering inputs and velvety use of the throttle. "

how can anyone take PW seriously ...

Exactly. I mean, could it be that the McLaren simply has more grip and can change direction using angles more acute than the Ferrari? No...it must be due to superbly soft oh I've got a hardon now steering inputs and velvety I'm thinking of a bed with velvet sheets with me in Lewis' arms use of the throttle. Gimme a break!

Just to be clear, I wasn't criticizing Hamilton in the post above and I'm not sure if Windsor has more love for Hamilton than other drivers or not. But I really can't stand the way he 'analyzes' what drivers do, often without even looking at telemetry. Like another poster have said, I read his friction circle article on F1 Racing too, and I find that one of the biggest bullshit to have ever been written.

My opinion of course

I know it's off topic, but it's just amazing how Mclaren seems to be fast with such low nose when "the higher the nose, the better" is the norm.

It is amazing, it's almost like there are hundreds, thousands of components and variables that make up a fast car...

How some of you come to the conclusion that Windsor is a fanboy is beyond me. Maybe he should romanticise your chosen one before you take note.

You people are going on like driving style doesn't matter in gaining time around a circuit. Well it does.

I said it at the previous test when people were criticising Windsor's observations that all you had to do is look back to his Silverstone analysis. He found himself a position near at Maggots/Beckets/Chapel complex and from his observations could identify that the Ferrari of Alonso in particular was very quick through there, quicker than the Red Bulls. Lo and behold come race day this exactly how it transpired as it was the very sector where Alonso was making up buckets of time compared to others.

I enjoy Windsor's articles, sure he has written some tripe in the past but then again which journalist hasn't. And yes he might have a favourite as well but that alone shouldn't deter from his objectivity.

Seanspeed is correct in that there are other factors at play but Windsor is not privy to that information and above all was only reporting on what he saw at the time at various points of the circuit.

How some of you come to the conclusion that Windsor is a fanboy is beyond me. Maybe he should romanticise your chosen one before you take note.

You people are going on like driving style doesn't matter in gaining time around a circuit. Well it does.

I said it at the previous test when people were criticising Windsor's observations that all you had to do is look back to his Silverstone analysis. He found himself a position near at Maggots/Beckets/Chapel complex and from his observations could identify that the Ferrari of Alonso in particular was very quick through there, quicker than the Red Bulls. Lo and behold come race day this exactly how it transpired as it was the very sector where Alonso was making up buckets of time compared to others.

I enjoy Windsor's articles, sure he has written some tripe in the past but then again which journalist hasn't. And yes he might have a favourite as well but that alone shouldn't deter from his objectivity.

Seanspeed is correct in that there are other factors at play but Windsor is not privy to that information and above all was only reporting on what he saw at the time at various points of the circuit.

+1

Whatever everyone else's opinons are, Peter's the one at the track watching these cars. His Jerez notes tallied very well with what I was seeing as well, so I'm inclined to believe him once you delve past the romanticism (which is actually much nicer than some of the bare bones reporting you get in F1...).

Just to be clear, I wasn't criticizing Hamilton in the post above and I'm not sure if Windsor has more love for Hamilton than other drivers or not. But I really can't stand the way he 'analyzes' what drivers do, often without even looking at telemetry. Like another poster have said, I read his friction circle article on F1 Racing too, and I find that one of the biggest bullshit to have ever been written.

My opinion of course

What was that all about i've never heard of it?
Agree that peter can be abit OTT and says things that make him sound like he's talking BS.