Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 9 votes

Renault Technical Thread (R.S.19)


  • Please log in to reply
5149 replies to this topic

#3101 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 10,624 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 14 April 2019 - 14:16

Luckily no hw issue, so no penalty in Baku.

WTF, SW error?

Advertisement

#3102 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 14 April 2019 - 14:26

WTF, SW error?


Yeah, the article is on the main page.

#3103 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 5,188 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 14 April 2019 - 14:47

I don’t know how it being (apparently) a software issue makes it any better. It just points to yet another area where they make race ending mistakes.

#3104 Laster

Laster
  • Member

  • 1,989 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 14 April 2019 - 14:56

It makes it better in that Hulk won’t take a penalty in Baku for a MGU-K change.

#3105 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 5,188 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 14 April 2019 - 15:00

It makes it better in that Hulk won’t take a penalty in Baku for a MGU-K change.


That’s true. Here’s for small mercies.

#3106 vee10

vee10
  • Member

  • 176 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 14 April 2019 - 15:00

Remarkable how Renault is 4th in the WCC despite having 4/6 car failures, and thus only scoring 2 car finishes after 3 races.

 

 

Does not say a lot for the rest of the field does it? The current darlings of F1, The Gunther F1 team are terrible in race trim. Pretty poor show all round unless your a Mercedes.



#3107 rootten

rootten
  • Member

  • 982 posts
  • Joined: October 16

Posted 14 April 2019 - 16:11

Have a listen to the latest Missed Apex podcast. The ex-TP of Lotus during the Allison years said that they lost all their top dogs including Allison after breaching their contracts due to missing 1 or 2 months of paying them. That allowed them all to make moves to other teams without the usual gardening leave. Nick Chester was one who stayed on - that probably says everything you need to know.

 

Yeap, I remember reports long time ago that when Boulier moved from Lotus to McLaren he handpicked be best guys from Lotus

 

But Renault is building up headcount and putting together a structure since they rejoined, this is a slow process unfortunatelly



#3108 restless

restless
  • Member

  • 562 posts
  • Joined: August 15

Posted 14 April 2019 - 16:17

Yeah, the article is on the main page.

They "think" its soft problem.

rather Abiteboul thinks...



#3109 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 20,839 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 14 April 2019 - 16:24

Quick at all three circuits so far.

Still lacking major performance versus the top 3, but I suspect they aren't too far away from unlocking something.

Edited by TomNokoe, 14 April 2019 - 16:25.


#3110 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 6,104 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 14 April 2019 - 16:35

Quick at all three circuits so far.

Still lacking major performance versus the top 3, but I suspect they aren't too far away from unlocking something.

I'm usually a positive person but I don't see any unlocking of anything happening. No where near red bull.

#3111 ch103

ch103
  • Member

  • 1,848 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 14 April 2019 - 16:46

So RIC got lapped with 2 laps to go in the race I think.  Does anyone know what lap the Renault was lapped in 2018?  



#3112 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 10,624 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 14 April 2019 - 16:48

Yeap, I remember reports long time ago that when Boulier moved from Lotus to McLaren he handpicked be best guys from Lotus

But Renault is building up headcount and putting together a structure since they rejoined, this is a slow process unfortunatelly

He did Renault a favor with that one. :)

#3113 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 14 April 2019 - 17:17

So RIC got lapped with 2 laps to go in the race I think. Does anyone know what lap the Renault was lapped in 2018?


It wasn't because of SC in the middle of the race.

#3114 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 14 April 2019 - 17:21

So RIC got lapped with 2 laps to go in the race I think.  Does anyone know what lap the Renault was lapped in 2018?  

 

 

It's not easy to make a straight comparison. Keep in mind that Ric did a 1 stop strategy, while the leaders ran a 2 stop strategy where they spent most of the race on the prefered and quicker mediums. Different tires involved and different tire saving strategies at different times for everyone involved.  Either way, we ain't close.


Edited by ARTGP, 14 April 2019 - 17:22.


#3115 MortenF1

MortenF1
  • Member

  • 21,908 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 14 April 2019 - 18:01

I have developed a soft spot for Renault, and really hope they can discover something soon, that sees them make a five tenths inroad on the rest. They need better average pace to be able to make an upset at for instance Monaco. As it is now they are to much off the pace.

#3116 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 14 April 2019 - 20:42

Interesting details:
"We think it’s something that is outside of the part itself, we don’t think that the part that Nico was using was damaged. We think it’s a software issue, we think we need to change something on the software to deal with something that was changed in the hardware.

“That’s why we were hoping to try and fix it in the course of the race. Maybe it was not broadcast, but there were a number of actions that Nico was trying to do. He could not go as far as rebooting the whole car.

“That’s almost what was necessary. If you want to drive the car now, you could, it’s working absolutely fine! It’s a typical software problem – you have a ‘freeze’ you need to reboot. It’s pretty much what we were trying to do on track, but it didn’t work.”

https://www.motorspo...-china/4370726/

Edited by eREr, 14 April 2019 - 20:42.


#3117 Amz964

Amz964
  • Member

  • 349 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 14 April 2019 - 20:51

Interesting details:
"We think it’s something that is outside of the part itself, we don’t think that the part that Nico was using was damaged. We think it’s a software issue, we think we need to change something on the software to deal with something that was changed in the hardware.

“That’s why we were hoping to try and fix it in the course of the race. Maybe it was not broadcast, but there were a number of actions that Nico was trying to do. He could not go as far as rebooting the whole car.

“That’s almost what was necessary. If you want to drive the car now, you could, it’s working absolutely fine! It’s a typical software problem – you have a ‘freeze’ you need to reboot. It’s pretty much what we were trying to do on track, but it didn’t work.”

https://www.motorspo...-china/4370726/


Hope it's just a one off with the new spec. That being said it's still worrying that this could happen, at least all the other cars finished with no other issues with the MGU-K.

Does anyone know if the team is bringing any updates to Baku or Spain? as I know they bought a some updates here suspension and underbody etc

#3118 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 3,166 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 14 April 2019 - 22:13

:rolleyes:  Based on what evidence? It's easy to be drawn into the idea that Renault have the weakest engine, I admit myself to have fallen for this trap. But really there is no solid undiluted evidence suggesting such.

 

Only because Renault have come out and said they are behind Ferrari and Merc, have I now accepted this. If they are saying it, it means they have gone through the factual data, corrected for downforce and drag levels to make the conclusion. It's still very much up in the air if Renault or Honda have it better. From what little I read in unreliable media, Honda might have a little more in qualy, but Renault have more in the race.

 

And you have done what to make your conclusion? 

 

You didn't present any sort of evidence.... Just PR talk from Renault. What are they going to say? "We are obviously the worst PU on the grid"? The fact that the factory Renault team can't even break away from midfield teams when their chassis budget is twice as much is damning enough.

 

Poor Cyril.. How did he calculated this 1s to Merc? It was more than 1.5s per lap (~100s during 56 laps, which is 1.8s/lap). If the target was 0.7s, then this is a massive failure.

 

The gap was around 2s per lap to the front runners before Merc switched to cruise mode. 



#3119 massivechicken

massivechicken
  • Member

  • 47 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 14 April 2019 - 22:57

I'm usually a positive person but I don't see any unlocking of anything happening. No where near red bull.



I agree, the are in big trouble this year if early indicators are anything to go by.

Advertisement

#3120 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,206 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 15 April 2019 - 09:24

You didn't present any sort of evidence.... Just PR talk from Renault. What are they going to say? "We are obviously the worst PU on the grid"? The fact that the factory Renault team can't even break away from midfield teams when their chassis budget is twice as much is damning enough.

 

 

The gap was around 2s per lap to the front runners before Merc switched to cruise mode. 

 

Nope that's an ignorant reasoning at best ("car is not fast because of weak PU") .

The numbers; the GP data, the speed traps and the driver statements prove that the PU made big gains performance wise compared to 2018, maybe the biggest on the grid. Those are hard evidences. So the PU can't be the "weakest" PU today. It's the least reliable (k) yes. 

The car lost ground this year in China* because of the chassis which is a very conservative evolution of the RS18. It has the same strengths and weak points and didn't gain enough DF (when DF counts) compared to the others...  The chassis is the weak point this year regarding performance, like Hulkenberg said.

 

*but we should wait to see 2/3 other tracks to confirm or infirm what we saw in China though...


Edited by Alburaq, 15 April 2019 - 09:46.


#3121 statman

statman
  • Member

  • 4,820 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 15 April 2019 - 11:55

Nope that's an ignorant reasoning at best ("car is not fast because of weak PU") .

The numbers; the GP data, the speed traps and the driver statements prove that the PU made big gains performance wise compared to 2018, maybe the biggest on the grid. Those are hard evidences. So the PU can't be the "weakest" PU today. It's the least reliable (k) yes. 

The car lost ground this year in China* because of the chassis which is a very conservative evolution of the RS18. It has the same strengths and weak points and didn't gain enough DF (when DF counts) compared to the others...  The chassis is the weak point this year regarding performance, like Hulkenberg said.

 

*but we should wait to see 2/3 other tracks to confirm or infirm what we saw in China though...

 

Unless all the engines are placed on the bench and are measured by let's say the FIA, all these 'facts' are useless.

 

Speed traps are useless because of config. Williams used to top the sheets and were being lapped while Verstappen was winning races being at the bottom. Not too mention the influence of tows/drs overtakes etc.

 

Driver reactions are useless because none of the Renault drivers are going to say anything bad about their employer, of course they say it's a powerful and great engine. Well except Verstappen for the last 2 years.

 

Year-on-year comparisons are also useless because of new rules and regulations (incl. tyres), external factors such as weather. You could for example say:

 

2019 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.958

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.236

 

2018 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.532

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.795

 

I could say that the Renault engine is worse than last year, while the Honda is step forward.

 

Would I say that? No. Because it's a combination of driver/car/engine. There's no way for us to to make any sense of these performances.

 

The only thing, that everyone can see, is that the reliability of the Renault engine package is abysmal.



#3122 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 10,624 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 15 April 2019 - 12:35

Comparing the 2 is hard. Mercedes lost 1 tenth, Vettel 8 tenths, Verstappen 3 tenths, Hulk 4 tenths, Perez 3 tenths, etc.



#3123 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 17:56

Unless all the engines are placed on the bench and are measured by let's say the FIA, all these 'facts' are useless.

 

Speed traps are useless because of config. Williams used to top the sheets and were being lapped while Verstappen was winning races being at the bottom. Not too mention the influence of tows/drs overtakes etc.

 

Driver reactions are useless because none of the Renault drivers are going to say anything bad about their employer, of course they say it's a powerful and great engine. Well except Verstappen for the last 2 years.

 

Year-on-year comparisons are also useless because of new rules and regulations (incl. tyres), external factors such as weather. You could for example say:

 

2019 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.958

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.236

 

2018 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.532

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.795

 

I could say that the Renault engine is worse than last year, while the Honda is step forward.

 

Would I say that? No. Because it's a combination of driver/car/engine. There's no way for us to to make any sense of these performances.

 

The only thing, that everyone can see, is that the reliability of the Renault engine package is abysmal.

 

:up:  :up:  It's great to hear someone understand and acknowledge the complexity of the matter..


Edited by ARTGP, 15 April 2019 - 17:57.


#3124 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 18:00

 

Q: How much work have you done on the starts since the start of the season? LH: No more than I did in the previous year – but it clearly is an area that I’ve struggled with and it’s not like it’s only this year: it’s been something I’ve struggled with over the years – 2016, you could say, was one of the worst. Probably back in 2007, 2008 was also really poor period of time for starts, particularly against the Ferraris who were very, very strong with it. Last year was actually a really strong year for me. I think I just finished second overall of quickest starts throughout the year to, I think it was Carlos Sainz or something like that. Arguably it was first – but it’s dependent on the GPS! The first few races have been difficult for me off the line, so it’s nice to finally kind of redeem myself and rectify that. Naturally the next 18 races can still be up and down – just have to keep working at it.

 

I have come across a rather obscure and unusual hint at the performance of the Renault factory team off the start line in 2018 (which would be consistent with the observations of 2019 thus far). This is transcript from Lewis Hamilton in China post race presser. Anyone know if the start speed stat he refers to are publicly available?  I suspect that Lewis might be referring to some internal memo type analysis done at Mercedes using actual GPS data, rather than anything that would be publicly available.

 

Anyway, if true, I would think there is some kind of trickery. The Renault's do seem to start quite well. I know we had softs off the line, but we arguably got off the line better than Gasly also on softs, and Verstappen on the Hards.


Edited by ARTGP, 15 April 2019 - 18:02.


#3125 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 15 April 2019 - 18:23

I'm usually a positive person but I don't see any unlocking of anything happening. No where near red bull.


Should we not first wait for the by Ricciardo suggested changes like mentioned couple days back/last week? I suspect after Spain we could see a improvement. Past weekend Sainz had a better race pace while broken car, so there should also be far more possible with the Renault car imo.

#3126 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 18:25

Should we not first wait for the by Ricciardo suggested changes like mentioned couple days back/last week? I suspect after Spain we could see a improvement. Past weekend Sainz had a better race pace while broken car, so there should also be far more possible with the Renault car imo.

 

That analysis was tragically flawed...go back to the McLaren thread to see why.  


Edited by ARTGP, 15 April 2019 - 18:43.


#3127 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 15 April 2019 - 18:43

That analysis was faulty...go back to the McLaren thread to see why.

 

I did read it, but it also not makes Ricciardo's pace automatically better as fact. It's not like the car was less broken for instance. The tires will have influenced, but same counts for driving in between the back markers and more cars you have to let by after blue flag. I at least don't see Renault as clear 4th team atm. but i do suspect there could be more potential in the car/team.



#3128 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 18:53

 I did read it, but it also not makes Ricciardo's pace automatically better as fact. It's not like the car was less broken for instance. The tires will have influenced, but same counts for driving in between the back markers and more cars you have to let by after blue flag. I at least don't see Renault as clear 4th team atm. but i do suspect there could be more potential in the car/team.

 

 

I don't think you got the gist of it. The chart shows the cherrypicked 25 fastest laps set during a 56 lap race. See what I wrote there again. Those fast laps won't include passing backmarkers or letting front runners past unless the DRS was convenient on that lap so that's not relevant.

 

Sainz and Lando had 2 pit stops with new tires each time, driving in clear air and nothing to lose if they overcooked the tires. Ricciardo pitted from Lap 18 off of the awful soft tires that he ran during qualifying, and had to make a conscious effort to manage his Hards until the end or get eaten up by Perez, Raikkonen, and Albon. Very different circumstances.

 

The chart doesn't even make sense to discuss race pace.  Kimi is ahead in that table, despite finishing 9 seconds behind us. That shows that his "slow" laps (the other 31 laps) were even slower than our "slow" laps... That's extremely revelant. And shows how well Ricciardo managed his tires. Sure you can go for some blitzing laps, but then suffer at the end with very slow laps.


Edited by ARTGP, 15 April 2019 - 18:57.


#3129 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 15 April 2019 - 19:36

I don't think you got the gist of it. The chart shows the cherrypicked 25 fastest laps set during a 56 lap race. See what I wrote there again. Those fast laps won't include passing backmarkers or letting front runners past unless the DRS was convenient on that lap so that's not relevant.

Sainz and Lando had 2 pit stops with new tires each time, driving in clear air and nothing to lose if they overcooked the tires. Ricciardo pitted from Lap 18 off of the awful soft tires that he ran during qualifying, and had to make a conscious effort to manage his Hards until the end or get eaten up by Perez, Raikkonen, and Albon. Very different circumstances.

The chart doesn't even make sense to discuss race pace. Kimi is ahead in that table, despite finishing 9 seconds behind us. That shows that his "slow" laps (the other 31 laps) were even slower than our "slow" laps... That's extremely revelant. And shows how well Ricciardo managed his tires. Sure you can go for some blitzing laps, but then suffer at the end with very slow laps.

I have it just about the time difference between sainz and Ricciardo when he came back on track lap 2 and end race, if I understood correct, Sainz gained something like 8 seconds on Ricciardo during the race. Can check later on that McLaren head to head site, now on tablet.

Edit: He indeed did gain that time. http://en.mclarenf-1...r2=Carlos Sainz tires play role for sure, but other aspects as broken car also. You may agree or not, I don't care. It's just how I see it atm.. I have no favourite, i want them both joining in the podium fights as soon as possible and just look for positive signs for that.

Edited by Maxioos, 15 April 2019 - 19:45.


#3130 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 19:40

I have it just about the time difference between sainz and Ricciardo when he came back on track lap 2 and end race, if I understood correct, Sainz gained something like 8 seconds on Ricciardo during the race. Can check later on that McLaren head to head site, now on tablet.

 

That's correct. But Ricciardo and Sainz were never racing each other directly. One could have been tire saving, the other not. Who really knows. I don't know that Renault race pace was any good, if it was a lap down at the end, but they are making some pretty bold claims in that thread that Mclaren have best of the rest race pace when there is factually lot of uncertainty that they ignored.


Edited by ARTGP, 15 April 2019 - 19:41.


#3131 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 15 April 2019 - 19:41

Sainz theoretically did 2 pit stops, but he pitted after lap 1 and switched from medium to hard., so it was a one stop strategy for all practical purposes -Hard-Soft. Sainz had floor damage  yet showed a more consistent pace right throughout the race on both types of tyres.

 

Also Sainz was told to save tyres according to Mclaren-live, so he also was in tyre saving mode for large parts of the race.


Edited by Quickshifter, 15 April 2019 - 19:46.


#3132 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 19:48

Sainz theoretically did 2 pit stops, but he pitted after lap 1 and switched from medium to hard., so it was a one stop strategy for all practicaly purposes -Hard-Soft. Sainz had floor damage  yet showed a more consistent pace right throughout the race on both types of tyres.

 

I don't know. Seems like too many variables to say McLaren are best of the rest. Dan hasn't exactly been the Renault benchmark thus far (despite qualifying) and Nico didn't get to run his race. In addition to other variables such as Dan starting on used softs, while Sainz had new hards and new mediums and nothing to lose for most of the race.

 

At minimum, we wait for Baku and Barcelona, not jump to the conclusion that McLaren are best of the rest after China 



#3133 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 15 April 2019 - 19:55

I don't know. Seems like too many variables to say McLaren are best of the rest. Dan hasn't exactly been the Renault benchmark thus far (despite qualifying) and Nico didn't get to run his race. In addition to other variables such as Dan starting on used softs, while Sainz had new hards and new mediums and nothing to lose for most of the race.

 

At minimum, we wait for Baku and Barcelona, not jump to the conclusion that McLaren are best of the rest after China 

 

Renault had much superior pace in qualifying than Mclaren, so the car has inherent pace but for some reason it did not translate in to race even taking tyre saving in to account. I am with you in that it is bot totally clear as to who has the best car overall and also that it will vary from track to track. Haas clearly has huge tyre issues so at this point in time it is between the two Renault powered cars for the 4th spot unless Haas get on top of their tyre issues in the race.



#3134 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 20:35

Renault had much superior pace in qualifying than Mclaren, so the car has inherent pace but for some reason it did not translate in to race even taking tyre saving in to account. I am with you in that it is bot totally clear as to who has the best car overall and also that it will vary from track to track. Haas clearly has huge tyre issues so at this point in time it is between the two Renault powered cars for the 4th spot unless Haas get on top of their tyre issues in the race.

 

All good. Agreed. There is no clear picture. Haas can become a problem too. 



#3135 vee10

vee10
  • Member

  • 176 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 20:49

Nico trying ctrl+alt+delete.

 

https://www.formula1...JIunsp1F3P.html



#3136 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 15 April 2019 - 20:52

All good. Agreed. There is no clear picture. Haas can become a problem too. 

 

I think all but Williams are still in the fight and could all get the upper hand during the season. And if there are DNF's by the normal top 6, than it dependent who than grabs the big points that could influence p4 fight massive. Alfa, STR and Racingpoint have all 3 scored points in all 3 races. Would you rather be reliable and find speed, or less reliable and more speed (and possible/likely penalties)?

 

At the moment speed wise, both Renault teams look good, but it could still lead in no Renault engine team in the top 5 WCC at the end of the season. I at least not yet bet on Renault/McLaren p4/5.



#3137 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 April 2019 - 22:21

Sainz theoretically did 2 pit stops, but he pitted after lap 1 and switched from medium to hard., so it was a one stop strategy for all practical purposes -Hard-Soft. Sainz had floor damage yet showed a more consistent pace right throughout the race on both types of tyres.

Also Sainz was told to save tyres according to Mclaren-live, so he also was in tyre saving mode for large parts of the race.


I think Sainz didn't have floor damage, just bargebord was damaged when his front wing hit it. Lando's floor was heavily damaged iirc.

So Sainz gained 8s with a much better tyre strategy if we count their race from lap 2. H-M was a much better choice than S-H and he gained only 8s with this. I would not say Mclaren had the better car on Sunday.

#3138 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 15 April 2019 - 23:22

Did anyone catch all the smoke coming out the back of the RS19s during practice and qualy as they exited the hairpin in Shanghai?



#3139 MrRat

MrRat
  • Member

  • 1,343 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 16 April 2019 - 00:30

I think Sainz didn't have floor damage, just bargebord was damaged when his front wing hit it. Lando's floor was heavily damaged iirc.

So Sainz gained 8s with a much better tyre strategy if we count their race from lap 2. H-M was a much better choice than S-H and he gained only 8s with this. I would not say Mclaren had the better car on Sunday.

 

1)Sainz used H and S. Not H-M. So there goes your argument.

 

2)Hulk had a MUCH better tire choice in Bahrain. New tires all through the race vs Norris who started on old softs and ended the race on old softs and yet Hulk was just 2.5s ahead of him when he retired.  See how I just used your argument against you? Renault was not a better race car on sunday in Bahrain using your argument.

 

3)Sainz had damaged to his entire boomerang that would disrupted flow to the back of the car AND the leading edge of the floor in the bargeboard area. There is no way a damage that big would have not caused major diffusor performance drop because sealing of the diffusor and rear wing efficiency as well diffusor efficiency would drop. Loss of a major bargeboard component would have affected R-L aero balance.. If anything, he probably lost over a tenth because of that. 

 

So as of now, the facts say that Sainz used Hards and softs, Sainz had significant damage and Sainz was faster than Ricciardo by 9 seconds while being in no man's land for 95% of the race vs Ricciardo who was being pushed by Perez for 100% of the race. 

This is not my opinion. I have not passed a judgment on what car was faster. I presented facts and water is wet, you can't argue against that.
 


Edited by MrRat, 16 April 2019 - 00:40.


Advertisement

#3140 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 April 2019 - 00:48

1)Sainz used H and S. Not H-M. So there goes your argument.

 

2)Hulk had a MUCH better tire choice in Bahrain. New tires all through the race vs Norris who started on old softs and ended the race on old softs and yet Hulk was just 2.5s ahead of him when he retired.  See how I just used your argument against you? Renault was not a better race car on sunday in Bahrain using your argument.

 

3)Sainz had damaged to his entire boomerang that would disrupted flow to the back of the car AND the leading edge of the floor in the bargeboard area. There is no way a damage that big would have not caused major diffusor performance drop because sealing of the diffusor and rear wing efficiency as well diffusor efficiency would drop. Loss of a major bargeboard component would have affected R-L aero balance.. If anything, he probably lost over a tenth because of that. 

 

So as of now, the facts say that Sainz used Hards and softs, Sainz had significant damage and Sainz was faster than Ricciardo by 9 seconds while being in no man's land for 95% of the race vs Ricciardo who was being pushed by Perez for 100% of the race. 

This is not my opinion. I have not passed a judgment on what car was faster. I presented facts and water is wet, you can't argue against that.
 

 

So McLaren is massively faster than the midfield if they can gain 9 seconds with all that aero damage. What you describe is more than 1 tenth.  Look at how Hamilton was nowhere in Australia with the loss of a little flick up in front of the rear tire. With damage that severe to the bargeboard, Mclaren is actually massively faster then the midfield when they don't have damage right?


Edited by ARTGP, 16 April 2019 - 00:51.


#3141 MrRat

MrRat
  • Member

  • 1,343 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 16 April 2019 - 00:57

So McLaren is massively faster than the midfield if they can gain 9 seconds with all that aero damage. What you describe is more than 1 tenth.  Look at how Hamilton was nowhere in Australia with the loss of a little flick up in front of the rear tire. With damage that severe to the bargeboard, Mclaren is actually massively faster then the midfield when they don't have damage right?

 

 

I am not going to say if McLaren was faster than midfield or best of the rest pace or whatever mainly because they ran a very different race.

The facts are,

 

1)He gained 9 seconds on Ricciardo and ran Hards and Softs.

 

2)He did it with a carr that had significant damage.

 

That's all I am saying. How much damage he had? Look at the photos,

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

See how the boomerang is broken and the curved leading edge of the floor  is missing.

 

Spoiler

 

Here is a photo from another Angle that shows number 55 so we don't get the usual "muhhh thats Norris" :p,

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

Just in case you want to compare what the floor and the boomerang normally looks like,

 

https://imgur.com/a/8QqbKpd

See how the entire component that joins the boomerang to the floor is missing?

 

Tell me that he did not lose at least a tenth per lap because of that damage.


Edited by MrRat, 16 April 2019 - 08:04.


#3142 Booky36

Booky36
  • Member

  • 209 posts
  • Joined: February 19

Posted 16 April 2019 - 09:34

https://streamable.com/5snuh

 

Software problem still unfixed 



#3143 Booky36

Booky36
  • Member

  • 209 posts
  • Joined: February 19

Posted 16 April 2019 - 09:39

I did read it, but it also not makes Ricciardo's pace automatically better as fact. It's not like the car was less broken for instance. The tires will have influenced, but same counts for driving in between the back markers and more cars you have to let by after blue flag. I at least don't see Renault as clear 4th team atm. but i do suspect there could be more potential in the car/team.

 

 

I can see RB at a clear 3th , yet last year with a double DNF they scored more point at this point , will be a tough season for  them with thier new genius engine provider ..



#3144 Thatfastguy

Thatfastguy
  • Member

  • 1,061 posts
  • Joined: April 18

Posted 16 April 2019 - 09:50

I can see RB at a clear 3th , yet last year with a double DNF they scored more point at this point , will be a tough season for  them with thier new genius engine provider ..

 

Because that has everything to do with the lack of speed and reliability Honda provides compared to Renault right?  :lol:



#3145 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 29,318 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 16 April 2019 - 09:54

I can see RB at a clear 3th , yet last year with a double DNF they scored more point at this point , will be a tough season for  them with thier new genius engine provider ..

Is this how it works in here? A comment about Renault is countered with a negative comment about Red Bull? :drunk:



#3146 Laster

Laster
  • Member

  • 1,989 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 16 April 2019 - 10:05

Too difficult to judge Mclaren’s race pace at the moment, they haven’t really had a clean weekend yet for one reason or another (mostly people crashing into them.) Even Norris race in Bahrain was compromised with his first lap tangle with Dan. Right now the one certainty is the midfield is tight, and pretty much every team has some excuse fo fall back on for why they haven’t maximised their results, and some ray of light pointing to them having a promising season.

Basically we need to get through more races and see a larger pattern develop, and who gets on top of the issues holding them back the fastest.

#3147 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 16 April 2019 - 10:52

I can see RB at a clear 3th , yet last year with a double DNF they scored more point at this point , will be a tough season for  them with thier new genius engine provider ..

 

Why do you bring RBR in this topic? Why? Why?

 

Edit, why not commenting on anything i stated in the post you respond at? Why do you think it's a dig or complaining about Renault?


Edited by Maxioos, 16 April 2019 - 10:56.


#3148 danstheman

danstheman
  • Member

  • 409 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 16 April 2019 - 13:06

Is this how it works in here? A comment about Renault is countered with a negative comment about Red Bull? :drunk:

 

If you start posting in other team or driver threads then perhaps you would have less judgement from those here. Pretty obvious he/she was being sarcastic/taking the piss

 

I swear there must be an anti Max or anti RB alarm that goes off somewhere alerting certain posters



#3149 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 April 2019 - 14:40

Currently sitting 4th tied with Alfa, in the WCC despite all the issues, which I find hilarious.  

 

It's significant that midfield is only fighting for places in 7th to 10th. We should be sitting on minimum 20 points with a double points finish in Bahrain and China, but I digress...

Renault don't lose much on the bad days.


Edited by ARTGP, 16 April 2019 - 14:45.


#3150 Laster

Laster
  • Member

  • 1,989 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 16 April 2019 - 17:21

Last year the most points a team took from the midfield was by Haas 22 points in Austria (if memory serves.) 10 points is generally considered an excellent weekend in the midfield, but there are days when those out front fall apart and a team can make massive gains. Reliability is a key factor in being there for those days where the top three mess up.