142 replies to this topic

[bankoq]

Ok, I want to know which car do you think is the best one on the grid in wet conditions. I mean wet conditions like in Silverstone and most of the race on Monza - not drying up track. Try to not count driver's factor - only car.

My vote goes to McLaren MP4-23 and slighty behind are Toro-Rosso cars. Then both BMWs & Alonso in R28. A bit behind them TF108 and F2008 on similar level.

Give your vote please.

[Risil]

The RB4 is brilliant in wet conditions too. Webber's pace, if not result, at Silverstone and Monza were very impressive. You should probably have merged the RB4 and STR3 categories, anyhow.;) And Hamilton's driving seems to suit the Mclaren's performance in wet conditions perfectly, to a degree perhaps unprecedented in F1. He has an approach so different from Kovalainen's that it actually affects tyre strategies (like Turkey, possibly Hungary), but in some conditions it is awesomely effective.

[Ricardo F1]

The fastest? Certainly the McLaren with Lewis Hamilton at the wheel seems rather quick.

[Chilled Phill]

To be honest, it's more to do with the driver rather than the car. However, if it's just the car then I would say the McLaren...

[bankoq]

Well, I tried to search a bit for some information about the cars and what I found is that Michael Schumacher admitted that F2008 is very difficult to drive in wet conditions and Heikki Kovalainen saying that their car has plenty of grip in wet comparing to their opponents. Toro-Rosso are greatly balanced in bad conditions what has been seen already in 2007.

[Rambazamba]

Obviously all the Newey cars (which also includes the McLaren)

[fnz]

Who voted R28

[karlth]

The Renault seems very quick in the wet, at least one of the drivers is so it must be the car.

[mariuszek]

Originally posted by Chilled Phill
To be honest, it's more to do with the driver rather than the car. However, if it's just the car then I would say the McLaren...

I think people tend to underestimate just how important in the wet it is to have a car which is suitable to such conditions. Of course there are drivers who, on average, are better in the rain than others, but even if you are Schumacher and have a car which is unstable under braking and has bad traction, you won't do much with it.
If we assume it's about 85/15 in the car's favour when it comes to what's more important in the dry (the car/setup vs. the driver), I'd say it's like 70/30 in the wet. So the car is still the most important factor IMHO.

[Kooper]

The Mercedes safety car looks pretty quick in monsoon conditions... not so quick on a drying track.

[karlth]

Originally posted by mariuszek

I think people tend to underestimate just how important in the wet it is to have a car which is suitable to such conditions. Of course there are drivers who, on average, are better in the rain than others, but even if you are Schumacher and have a car which is unstable under braking and has bad traction, you won't do much with it.
If we assume it's about 85/15 in the car's favour when it comes to what's more important in the dry (the car/setup vs. the driver), I'd say it's like 70/30 in the wet. So the car is still the most important factor IMHO.

Rain is the great equalizer, especially this year with no electronic assistance and equal tires.

The reason is because being fast in wet is all about finding grip and managing heat in the tires. There are of course differences but unless you want all the drivers in equal cars this is as close we can get in F1.

[GerardF1]

Originally posted by Rambazamba
Obviously all the Newey cars (which also includes the McLaren)

trying to start another spy scandal?

Newey has been gone long enough that I don't think there is much of his work in the car - if any

[Ricardo F1]

Not to mention Newey's cars were notoriously poor in the wet.

[Perigee]

Must be the Toro Rosso....look, it's even comes with an umbrella!

http://www.autosport...EGG5MP0FLXNUP-2

[bankoq]

Originally posted by karlth


Rain is the great equalizer, especially this year with no electronic assistance and equal tires.

The reason is because being fast in wet is all about finding grip and managing heat in the tires. There are of course differences but unless you want all the drivers in equal cars this is as close we can get in F1.

You can do nothing if the car doesn't allow you to manage the heat in the tires because it doesn't generate the heat.

People say it's about 80/20 in cars favour in dry and imho it's 65/35 or 60/40 in wet conditions but I'd really love to hear some drivers' opinions.

[alg7_munif]

I wanted to vote for McLaren but after looking at Heiki's performance, I think that Toro Rosso would be better.

[mariuszek]

Originally posted by karlth


Rain is the great equalizer, especially this year with no electronic assistance and equal tires.

The reason is because being fast in wet is all about finding grip and managing heat in the tires. There are of course differences but unless you want all the drivers in equal cars this is as close we can get in F1.

As I said wet weather does level the playing field to a certain extent, but not that MUCH as some of people tend to believe. The fact that three Red Bulls qualified in top 4 at Monza, and then two of them posted two of the three fastest laps of the race, what does that tell you?
In the wet it's still the car that counts. Not as important as in the dry, but it's still the most important factor in determining the result.

[Lazy Prodigy]

The McLaren with Hamilton hands down

[jk]

McLaren is the best in the wet. That Vettel is much better than Kovalainen is another issue.

[pUs]

Two people voting F2008..

Well, I guess the car can be quick in full wet conditions. But it seems mighty tricky to drive on the edge consistently in those kind of situations. Cars like Mac and the STR always look smooth in comparsion.

[Craven Morehead]

Originally posted by Kooper
The Mercedes safety car looks pretty quick in monsoon conditions... not so quick on a drying track.

I'd say its pretty good in the dry too. It seems to be leading whenever its out on the track.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by bankoq


You can do nothing if the car doesn't allow you to manage the heat in the tires because it doesn't generate the heat.

Exactly. I´m surprised karlth keeps sticking with this opinion, even after seeing Hamilton struggling vs Webber...despite of his pace with extreme wets. From 2 seconds faster to 2 seconds slower. Poor Lewis must have experienced amnesia or something. While Kimi got his memory back, it seems. Amazing how two fast drivers experienced opposite changes of pace...simultaneously. After the race, you had Kimi complaining about low temps and Lewis complaining about overheating. Not to mention, you had Ferrari/McLaren engineers backing them up, saying it was the car. Not crappy driving by Kimi at the beginning and Lewis in the end. Did these two share some kind of psychic connection? One becomes faster -> another becomes slower.

I tried to explain some of the differences in another thread (post 27)

http://forums.autosp...threadid=103866

To summarize: DRY or WET, car/tyres/setup are #1 priority. It is not like superior grip/balance/etc magically disappears. People who claim equipment doesn´t matter on wet have never raced on wet. Sorry, but that´s the way it is...

[Risil]

Originally posted by Spunout


To summarize: DRY or WET, car/tyres/setup are #1 priority. It is not like superior grip/balance/etc magically disappear. People who claim equipment doesn´t matter on wet have never raced on wet. Sorry, but that´s the way it is...

It's strange that this suddenly seems to have made itself so apparent this year, though. Is it control tyres? Aggressive car development? Just the result of having two very different drivers as teammates in the top teams?

[BMW_F1]

Originally posted by pUs
Two people voting F2008..

Well, I guess the car can be quick in full wet conditions. But it seems mighty tricky to drive on the edge consistently in those kind of situations. Cars like Mac and the STR always look smooth in comparsion.

I was one of them, their main problem is changing conditions. When the circuit is under heavy rain, Massa's times were unmatched in Monza and Monaco, first stint.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by Risil


It's strange that this suddenly seems to have made itself so apparent this year, though. Is it control tyres? Aggressive car development? Just the result of having two very different drivers as teammates in the top teams?

Good question! Hmm. I think control tyres are huge factor. During tyre war era Michelin/BStone wanted to make sure their "clients" were happy with tyres provided by them. Now, that is less important. Cannot cope with low temps? Have too much wear? Tough luck...

[rodlamas]

Originally posted by BMW_F1


I was one of them, their main problem is changing conditions. When the circuit is under heavy rain, Massa's times were unmatched in Monza and Monaco, first stint.

What about Silverstone, when Lewis was 6 seconds per lap faster than Massa in moonson conditions?

[Risil]

Originally posted by Spunout


Good question! Hmm. I think control tyres are huge factor. During tyre war era Michelin/BStone wanted to make sure their "clients" were happy with tyres provided by them. Now, that is less important. Cannot cope with low temps? Have too much wear? Tough luck...

It's been good for racing, IMO. And to an extent the opposite of the homogenising effect pundits were predicting when the control tyre rule was introduced. Strip away most of the aerodynamic turbulence, and we should see the tyre/race dynamics have a far more pronounced effect on track position, which can only be a good thing.

[BMW_F1]

Originally posted by rodlamas


What about Silverstone, when Lewis was 6 seconds per lap faster than Massa in moonson conditions?

To me that result was based on a very poor setup work by Ferrari mechanics combined with a fabulous effort by Lewis

[HoldenRT]

McLaren but the Ferrari is no slouch either. In certain windows (the majority of them) the McLaren is strongest but if it's a time to be easier on tyres the Ferrari excells. Like at the end of the first stint at Silverstone where Kimi was catching Lewis. People can say Lewis burns tyres but it's also a chassis characterisitic.

[hello86]

Will those rain tyres stay the same next year?

[yr]

Originally posted by karlth
The Renault seems very quick in the wet, at least one of the drivers is so it must be the car.

Renault seems very quick in wet? When was that? Apart from one lap where Alonso raced with wet tyres against drivers with dry tyres in Spa, I don´t recall thinking during wet races "Wow, that Renault is really fast in the hands of Alonso". Care to give examples what you were on about?

[Spunout]

Originally posted by Risil


It's been good for racing, IMO. And to an extent the opposite of the homogenising effect pundits were predicting when the control tyre rule was introduced. Strip away most of the aerodynamic turbulence, and we should see the tyre/race dynamics have a far more pronounced effect on track position, which can only be a good thing.

I agree. Add no refuelling / no tyre changes and things will get better. Eg in Monaco 2005 Renault looked fast, but eventually tyres got cooked and you had Fernando hanging on, battling Williams guys. And who can forget Nurb thriller! 2006 it was easier to find consistent speed, plus different fuel strategies were nullified by tyre changes. This year it´s fascinating how Ferrari and McLaren represent the opposite ends of spectrum. Think Monza: when Hamilton became faster, Räikkönen became slower - and vice versa. Even on same stint, with same tyres, in relatively similar conditions. That´s great; more passing, more exciting GPs. And sometimes, midpack team finding that delicate balance, resulting in surprise winner.

More of this, I say Imagine 2008 with less aero/turbulance + refuelling ban...

[Spunout]

Originally posted by HoldenRT
McLaren but the Ferrari is no slouch either. In certain windows (the majority of them) the McLaren is strongest but if it's a time to be easier on tyres the Ferrari excells. Like at the end of the first stint at Silverstone where Kimi was catching Lewis. People can say Lewis burns tyres but it's also a chassis characterisitic.

Yep. First stint/Silverstone 08, last stint/Monza 08, China 07, etc...

[craftverk]

Fact of the matter is that F1 cars were designed for the dry, and any advantage a car has over the others in the wet is negligible. Wet weather driving is down to the driver, always has and always will be.

[Risil]

Originally posted by Spunout


I agree. Add no refuelling / no tyre changes and things will get better.

I think we're closer to this coming about than many people realise, too. 2005 showed that there was an incentive to make the drivers work harder managing their tyres, and proved that it did improve the racing, if not the safety or the tyre suppliers' workload. Provided 2009 aero turbulence levels restore overtaking as possible/normal in F1, I think pitstop-encouraging regulations could find themselves on the way out.

And there's been very little cause for optimism since 2003.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by craftverk
Fact of the matter is that F1 cars were designed for the dry, and any advantage a car has over the others in the wet is negligible. Wet weather driving is down to the driver, always has and always will be.

Myth. When you design cars for dry, gaps on wet increase. Not the other way around.

[karlth]

Don't know if this has been posted before, it from a short Q&A with Hamilton earlier today or yesterday. He is discussing what is demanded from a driver in the wet:

"The key to racing in the wet is to get the tyres up to their optimal operating temperature where they can perform at their best, it is also important to find the grip levels. Driving styles also change depending on the weather conditions and you need to occasionally drive different lines to find where the grip is on the track. You need to have lightning reactions for driving in the wet as you never know what to expect, but I feel that my reactions have been good - I can be on the limit and be comfortable in changing conditions. The race at Monza was a typical example, I found the grip levels of my tyres very quickly and then tried to manage them during the race to maximise the life of the tyres while still gaining performance."

[karlth]

Originally posted by Spunout


Myth. When you design cars for dry, gaps on wet increase.

What do you mean by that?

[Chris Glass]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Not to mention Newey's cars were notoriously poor in the wet.

Damon Hill seemed to go well in them though and vettel just dominated italy in a newy car. So many excuses get invented for drivers who cant drive in the wet.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by yr


Renault seems very quick in wet? When was that? Apart from one lap where Alonso raced with wet tyres against drivers with dry tyres in Spa, I don´t recall thinking during wet races "Wow, that Renault is really fast in the hands of Alonso". Care to give examples what you were on about?

Perhaps Alonso too experienced sudden amnesia?

He used to be 1.5-2 secs faster than the rest of the field (Hungary 2006). As explained by some of the posters here, on wet all cars are equal. That means Alonso became 5 secs faster between 2001 and 2006, only to lose some of his speed in 2007-08. I can only wish speedy recovery for poor Fernando.

F1 being about the car...even on wet??? Yeah, right :

[Chris Glass]

Originally posted by Spunout


Exactly. I´m surprised karlth keeps sticking with this opinion, even after seeing Hamilton struggling vs Webber...despite of his pace with extreme wets. From 2 seconds faster to 2 seconds slower. Poor Lewis must have experienced amnesia or something. While Kimi got his memory back, it seems. Amazing how two fast drivers experienced opposite changes of pace...simultaneously.

There is nothing amazing about it at all, infact its simple. Lewis simply over heated his tyres from pushing too hard, and Kimi started going fast because the track dried up.

The question is which car is best in wet conditions is impossible to answer because they are being driven by different drivers. If the Mclaren is so good in the wet then where has heikki been all year? If Ferrari is so bad in the wet why was Massa so quick at Monaco at the start?

[Bloggsworth]

It's a symbiotic relationship, separating car and driver is nearly impossible and does justice to neither.

[bankoq]

Originally posted by craftverk
Fact of the matter is that F1 cars were designed for the dry, and any advantage a car has over the others in the wet is negligible. Wet weather driving is down to the driver, always has and always will be.

I think it's completely and urban legend.

Just to mention Mario Theissen words after last race (he debunks the myth):

Mario Theissen (BMW Motorsport Director) : "As expected, it was an action packed race, but not for the man in front. Under these difficult circumstances Toro Rosso had the best car, and Sebastian Vettel managed to score his and the team's maiden victory with this excellent performance. Hats off to them! For us as well it worked out perfectly today. The decisive part was the race strategy. We were able to pit late with both cars and changed to intermediates during our single pit stop. It was perfect timing, so both drivers were able to move up a lot of positions. Neither Robert nor Nick made a single mistake. Robert claimed the tenth podium finish for our team, Nick came in a strong fifth, and the team leaves Europe with another ten points in its pocket - Monza again was a good place for the BMW Sauber F1 Team."

But to be completely sure how important car is in wet conditions we should listen what do the drivers have to say. If anyone can provide some links with drivers' opinions I would be grateful.

I even dare in to point that differences between cars might be bigger than in dry conditions. It is well known fact that McLaren car heats up the tires very quickly while F2008 has big problems with it. And it becomes more apparent in wet conditions.

[F1Champion]

Well its definately not the F2008. It struggles far too much to generate tyre temperature. In the dry with rain the tyre temp disappear and in the full rain the rain tyres (with full tread blocks generating heat) still can't generate enough tyre temp. Read Kimi's comments after Monza, the car only came alive in the final stint but it was nowhere before then. A major headache for Ferrari at the moment.

[Apex]

Originally posted by bankoq
Try to not count driver's factor - only car.

---

Then both BMWs & Alonso in R28.

[karlth]

I agree with many Raikkonen fans who say that he has had problems with getting heat into the tires. We only had to see how much Hamilton struggled in Q2 to understand how important that aspect is. Raikkonen's problem is costing him dearly in qualifying and in the wet, it is only on a drying track when that weakness is a non issue when Kimi finally shines.

We have had 4 rain affected races this season and in stable or increasing wet conditions Raikkonen has been simply miles off the pace whereas his teammate has sometimes managed to perform.

So the finger must be pointed at the combination of Raikkonen and the F2008.

[mariuszek]

Originally posted by craftverk
Fact of the matter is that F1 cars were designed for the dry, and any advantage a car has over the others in the wet is negligible. Wet weather driving is down to the driver, always has and always will be.

Yeah, and the fact that Alonso was challenging for poles and wins last year in the wet, while now he's fighting just to be in Q3 and score any points when it rains, it really shows it's the driver that matters when it rains, not the car

[BMW_F1]

Originally posted by F1Champion
Well it definately not the F2008. It struggles far too much to generate tyre temperature. In the dry with rain the tyre temp disappear and in the full rain the rain tyres (with full tread blocks generating heat) still can't generate enough tyre temp. Read Kimi's comments after Monza, the car only came alive in the final stint but it was nowhere before then. A major headache for Ferrari at the moment.

then Massa and Kimi must have driven two cars which were completely different.

[bankoq]

Originally posted by Apex

Piquet is the worst driver on the grid at the moment. By saying Alonso I meant that he's fulfilling car's potential so must be indicator of R28 potential.

[Spunout]

I love the transparency of BMW_F1´s posts; anything to make KR look bad