I hate to point out that the data you mentioned in your post re fuel loads, how hard they pushed tired, new vs old tires was not the data you actually got. Anyway cba to split ends as I don't really care just found it funny morE than anything.
Chinese Grand Prix 2015, Shanghai - Race 3/19
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
I hate to point out that the data you mentioned in your post re fuel loads, how hard they pushed tired, new vs old tires was not the data you actually got. Anyway cba to split ends as I don't really care just found it funny morE than anything.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Again, new vs old tires IS known now and how hard they pushed is precisely the data I got, but apart from that.
10 laps into a stint how hard they pushed depends on if they are planning an 11, 18, 38 lap stint. 1:42.5 say is slow on a 8 lap stint, great on a 15 lap stint and absolutely phenomenal on a 30 lap stint(basically impossible also). You get this data from seeing how many laps the tires did and how long the stint was. Neither of these pieces of data is available midway through a stint(age of tires can be but the data is confirmed after the race).
Fuel loads, again, without knowing stint length and tire life there is zero way to even estimate what the pace is like regardless of fuel. With stint length, lap times(again also wasn't available during practice) and tire life then you have ONE variable left, which is why I said exactly that, if Rosberg was on higher fuel their pace on mediums is very strong, if same as Kimi, then Kimi may have the advantage.
Fuel is one and fairly easy to quantify variable, because there are effectively two possibilities. With the rest it changes the perception of their speed entirely.
The drop off at the end of a stint is also important to see. For instance Mclaren on the mediums did 11-12 laps(with 4-5 laps on them previously) and showed no drop off at all, but also slow pace. From that I would say they were saving engine a little or managing temps, tire life/absolute speed wasn't the limit hence no drop off.
Vettel and Hamilton both dropped off about a second a lap from start to end of stint, they did the same length stint(16 laps) and had almost the same amount of usage before that stint. If for instance Hamilton did 16 laps but dropped off 2 seconds start to finish it would both indicate he couldn't of gone much longer and if Vettel had been a second slower but shown no drop off at all after 16 laps it suggests Hamilton would not be able to go much longer and Vettel still had tire life left. None of this you could know 10 laps into that stint. However we saw Vettel drop off a second also and only a lap or two after Hamilton. Hamilton was faster over the stint length by a decent margin and Vettel's times didn't show the ability to go dramatically longer without drop off. A second a lap slower over 10 laps but being able to go twice as long means Hamilton gains 10 seconds but has to pit an extra time losing 25-35seconds.... not good. If Hamilton is a second a lap faster and can go 16 laps while Vettel can only go 18-19.... then it's great. You can't remotely quantify these things mid stint, Hamilton may have stopped lap 11 and Vettel may have gone to do 25 laps.
Mid stint you go from almost no data to post race you have everything but fuel amount, which you can make an educated guess based on times. Because it's still unknown... I offered up an opinion on both of the only two possibilities.
10 laps into a stint how hard they pushed depends on if they are planning an 11, 18, 38 lap stint. 1:42.5 say is slow on a 8 lap stint, great on a 15 lap stint and absolutely phenomenal on a 30 lap stint(basically impossible also). You get this data from seeing how many laps the tires did and how long the stint was. Neither of these pieces of data is available midway through a stint(age of tires can be but the data is confirmed after the race).
Fuel loads, again, without knowing stint length and tire life there is zero way to even estimate what the pace is like regardless of fuel. With stint length, lap times(again also wasn't available during practice) and tire life then you have ONE variable left, which is why I said exactly that, if Rosberg was on higher fuel their pace on mediums is very strong, if same as Kimi, then Kimi may have the advantage.
Fuel is one and fairly easy to quantify variable, because there are effectively two possibilities. With the rest it changes the perception of their speed entirely.
The drop off at the end of a stint is also important to see. For instance Mclaren on the mediums did 11-12 laps(with 4-5 laps on them previously) and showed no drop off at all, but also slow pace. From that I would say they were saving engine a little or managing temps, tire life/absolute speed wasn't the limit hence no drop off.
Vettel and Hamilton both dropped off about a second a lap from start to end of stint, they did the same length stint(16 laps) and had almost the same amount of usage before that stint. If for instance Hamilton did 16 laps but dropped off 2 seconds start to finish it would both indicate he couldn't of gone much longer and if Vettel had been a second slower but shown no drop off at all after 16 laps it suggests Hamilton would not be able to go much longer and Vettel still had tire life left. None of this you could know 10 laps into that stint. However we saw Vettel drop off a second also and only a lap or two after Hamilton. Hamilton was faster over the stint length by a decent margin and Vettel's times didn't show the ability to go dramatically longer without drop off. A second a lap slower over 10 laps but being able to go twice as long means Hamilton gains 10 seconds but has to pit an extra time losing 25-35seconds.... not good. If Hamilton is a second a lap faster and can go 16 laps while Vettel can only go 18-19.... then it's great. You can't remotely quantify these things mid stint, Hamilton may have stopped lap 11 and Vettel may have gone to do 25 laps.
Mid stint you go from almost no data to post race you have everything but fuel amount, which you can make an educated guess based on times. Because it's still unknown... I offered up an opinion on both of the only two possibilities.
Last edited:
Where on that timing sheet spreadsheet does it state age of tires? In fact on a ferrari forum I frequent it states that Vettel did his fast run, two outlaps and then pitted. He then used the same set of scrubbed tires on his long stint. It would potentially explain why Vettel was slower and not able to stretch the stint, how true that is I don't know but it's hard to make conclusive judgements on the age of tires used.
The graphic below if i have interpreted it correctly shows what tires they used in FP2, hamilton used 3 sets of softs to Vettels 2. Like I said you're being pretty hard and fast with your judgement on the tires whilst I think we simply don't have all the information to make any significant predictions on what race pace is like. What is clear is that Merc are fast, especially on 1 lap pace. I agree it looks like Merc has better pace on the softs on the long run timings but how true that is of actual race pace is an unknown.
Anyway you're entitled to your opinion so I'll leave this discussion now.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I didn't say it said tire life on the timing sheet, in my original post you decided to take umbrage with I specifically pointed out that with both sources of information(the f1 website and the timing sheet) I had the data required.
I've also explained, Basically every team used a single set of mediums and a single set of soft tires. Everyone did their long run on used tires, Hamilton and Vettel. Both used them for their qualifying type run, Vettel did 2 laps extra earlier in the fast run though they weren't fast laps as you can see in the timing sheet. The only issue with the F1 website is that you have to work around what is horrifically laid out data. Each one of those tire symbols is just what they left the pits on, not denoting a new set of tires. For Vettel, well I'll do it off memory because the f1 site, as in everything else it does wrong, doesn't have the more detailed(yet also partly incorrect ) session data for previous sessions, just the fastest laps listed.
The last stint by Vettel was actually on softs, not mediums, that was the 16 lap stint. The two medium's listed before were just single outlaps, making changes or testing engine, doing whatever, quite a few teams go out with tires doing that. He then went in and got softs and did 16 laps. Kimi likewise, he only used one of each type of tire, those are just multiple pit in/out laps, and he did his long run on mediums, not softs, which isn't even shown.
F1's data accuracy is... questionable. Hence again after the race using various sources and what we know from visual confirmation. Crofty I believe mentioned Vettel was actually on softs but the data was telling him mediums.
The only thing they seemingly got right was the numbers, in the live data they list number of laps next to each of those tire symbols and those appear to be accurate, ish. In reality you have say medium and it says 5 next to it to say they did 5 laps on that stint, later on it will have another M and 9 next to it but that means it's done 9 laps total so 4 laps for that stint, the problem is when they add the number to the wrong tire, when you work out the right tire you can add up the numbers accurately... it's almost the only useful feature of that entire website tbh. YOu can use the video and the timing data to actually work out which tires they were on then add them up yourself and that is how you end up with tire life for each kind of tire. As said Vettel/Ham did 16 laps on softs, Ham did 3 laps on them earlier and Vettel did 5. 2 lap tire life difference, Ham 1 second per lap faster for the majority of the stint, dropped off a couple laps earlier but not enough to make him slower than Vettel.
So as said, maybe Vettel/Ferrari have a few laps extra life, but think about this in regards to the race. If Hamilton is out front and Vettel sat in his dirty air, that will change quickly in race. If Vettel gets a good start he may get ahead however Hamilton will be faster most likely.
I've also explained, Basically every team used a single set of mediums and a single set of soft tires. Everyone did their long run on used tires, Hamilton and Vettel. Both used them for their qualifying type run, Vettel did 2 laps extra earlier in the fast run though they weren't fast laps as you can see in the timing sheet. The only issue with the F1 website is that you have to work around what is horrifically laid out data. Each one of those tire symbols is just what they left the pits on, not denoting a new set of tires. For Vettel, well I'll do it off memory because the f1 site, as in everything else it does wrong, doesn't have the more detailed(yet also partly incorrect ) session data for previous sessions, just the fastest laps listed.
The last stint by Vettel was actually on softs, not mediums, that was the 16 lap stint. The two medium's listed before were just single outlaps, making changes or testing engine, doing whatever, quite a few teams go out with tires doing that. He then went in and got softs and did 16 laps. Kimi likewise, he only used one of each type of tire, those are just multiple pit in/out laps, and he did his long run on mediums, not softs, which isn't even shown.
F1's data accuracy is... questionable. Hence again after the race using various sources and what we know from visual confirmation. Crofty I believe mentioned Vettel was actually on softs but the data was telling him mediums.
The only thing they seemingly got right was the numbers, in the live data they list number of laps next to each of those tire symbols and those appear to be accurate, ish. In reality you have say medium and it says 5 next to it to say they did 5 laps on that stint, later on it will have another M and 9 next to it but that means it's done 9 laps total so 4 laps for that stint, the problem is when they add the number to the wrong tire, when you work out the right tire you can add up the numbers accurately... it's almost the only useful feature of that entire website tbh. YOu can use the video and the timing data to actually work out which tires they were on then add them up yourself and that is how you end up with tire life for each kind of tire. As said Vettel/Ham did 16 laps on softs, Ham did 3 laps on them earlier and Vettel did 5. 2 lap tire life difference, Ham 1 second per lap faster for the majority of the stint, dropped off a couple laps earlier but not enough to make him slower than Vettel.
So as said, maybe Vettel/Ferrari have a few laps extra life, but think about this in regards to the race. If Hamilton is out front and Vettel sat in his dirty air, that will change quickly in race. If Vettel gets a good start he may get ahead however Hamilton will be faster most likely.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 6,243
- Location
- North of Watford Gap
Awesome power slide from Maldonado. 
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Not 100% sure about Vettel and Kimi will certainly wonder with his time. From FP3 only 2 cars didn't get below a 1:40, 15th was a 1:39.694 and that was a Mclaren. Kimi's current time certainly isn't safe but with track generally getting faster with and throughout each session. Well, Nasr/Ericcson were 13/14th this morning in mid 1:39's. They've improved.
Think Kimi will at least come out on softs, Vettel might risk it, or try another medium run.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Though he got more wins before the ban, Hamilton out raced him on track basically every race. The few times Hamilton was stuck behind Rosberg if there was a gap after pits he could close it and sit within a second and looked for that overtake, most of the time making it unless the track made it difficult. When Rosberg was behind he got close but if it got sub 1.5seconds Hamilton eased it out at will. It was clear all the time Hamilton was faster.
I do think and did think Rosberg would realise getting pole wasn't enough and that he might set up some raw one lap speed for better race pace. He has been much less competitive in qualifying but closer in race pace.. though I still think he was controlled nicely by Hamilton in Australia. I don't think he'll ever compete with Hamilton. One difference was though that his fuel usage was closer to Hamilton in Australia.. he may have more fight in him over the season if he can be more fuel efficient and have more to fight with at the right stages.
I do think and did think Rosberg would realise getting pole wasn't enough and that he might set up some raw one lap speed for better race pace. He has been much less competitive in qualifying but closer in race pace.. though I still think he was controlled nicely by Hamilton in Australia. I don't think he'll ever compete with Hamilton. One difference was though that his fuel usage was closer to Hamilton in Australia.. he may have more fight in him over the season if he can be more fuel efficient and have more to fight with at the right stages.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
It sounds ridiculous, completely awful. All the other engines had dodgy sounds last year but basically in testing only and it improved day to day. Ferrari generally sounded different/weirder but not bad, Renault sounded the worst for the longest but still sounded pretty smooth by Australia.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 6,243
- Location
- North of Watford Gap
Brundle's criticised Kvyat, saying he's been a bit ragged, but the poor kid's barely had any running. The bulk of Red Bull's problems have befallen his car.
Off-throttle, yes, but I think that's intentional cylinder cutting to save fuel. It's not just a starter map as people thought in testing - it looks intentional.
All of the cars sound weirder off throttle this year anyway.
Off-throttle, yes, but I think that's intentional cylinder cutting to save fuel. It's not just a starter map as people thought in testing - it looks intentional.
All of the cars sound weirder off throttle this year anyway.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Kvyat in 15th currently half a second up on where Vettel was on his medium tires, another half second on where Kimi was.
Ferrari no where near on pace on mediums. Mclarens, not great at all. Even the FI's beat them and honestly, Perez though not happy and not fast all weekend so far but 3/10ths faster than Hulk.
Ferrari no where near on pace on mediums. Mclarens, not great at all. Even the FI's beat them and honestly, Perez though not happy and not fast all weekend so far but 3/10ths faster than Hulk.
.Ferrari clearly can't get the tyres up to temp for 1 lap pace. Merc are just better on the mediums for q1.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 6,243
- Location
- North of Watford Gap
Ferrari aren't going to win the title. Obviously they've made a big step and will challenge Mercedes here and there, but they're not going to beat Mercedes over the year.
2016 looks tasty though.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
They all cut cylinders off throttle yet the Mclaren still sounds dramatically worse.... however that could be ERS problems. Other teams are harvesting the turbo energy into the mgu-h, the Mclaren is struggling with harvesting energy and when there is too much energy it gets dumped out the waste gate. That is also supposedly why the Ferrari had the oddest sound last year, underpowered mgu-h, excessive waste gate usage. Ferrari has the biggest sound improvement after they focused on fixing the mgu-h, making the turbo and compressor bigger, yet using the waste gate less. They are harvesting way more power than they did last year, Mclaren are unable to harvest that energy.
I said a couple of races ago, the more we hear about the Mclaren the more it sounds like they have the same issues as Ferrari(maybe not the same cause though), they struggle to harvest electrical power and like Ferrari it means they have less power FAR less efficiency and they end up going even slower to save the fuel.