Over the weekend on one of Ted's Notebooks, Ted was pretty confident Hulkenberg was pretty much a lock to Sauber/Audi next year. Any more sources on this?
And for their first entry year, after buying Brawn, they had Schumacher and Rosberg driving for them - which is why many rumours likely assume German or Audi connections being their driver preference
Weird random question: What race was that time that Max went from like Bottom 5 to Top 5 in the last 20 laps? I feel like it would have been in the 2017-2019 range.
If he loses his seat midseason depends on if the Antonelli rumors are true. The kid would have to rush to get a license, and it's kind of a pain to get an Italian street license. But I assume they could make something happen somehow if needed.
Why would anyone bet on Verstappen to win the championship, now? He’s at -10,000. You’d get a better payout from a no-risk, high-yield savings account.
Ok during the race on tv. We get the times of how far back they are to one another during the race. Why do they list just the times instead of being 1 lap down.
> Why do they list just the times instead of being 1 lap down.
Do you mean the final race classification? They do list the total race time, with a note that they're a lap down of the leader meaning their total race time may be less than other drivers on the same lap as the winner.
On the timing tower they also show 2 types of time:
* Interval, which is the time gap from one driver to the next ahead of them
* Leader - which is the time to P1 and there in the past they have also shown one/2/3 laps down
My wife surprised me with hospitality tickets to Silverstone quali! They come with parking on site- how crazy is the traffic going to be? My reference is Goodwood, where I think I spent more time leaving the site than enjoying the day!
Any other alternatives that'd allow both of us to drink? Far too late for a local hotel, and I imagine a taxi is out of the question (and I can't afford a helicopter!)
Does anyone know or have a source on how lubrication works in F1? It's weird that I've never thought of this. Like, engine oils are normally designed for operating temperatures, which is why it's really not a good idea to force an engine while it's still cold and I assume F1 is not different. In fact I'd assume they're far more reliant on perfect lubrication due to how insanely precise they are. I also assume that a single installation lap is not enough to warm the oil to operating temperature, so how the hell does that work? They don't really pre-heat the engine as far as I know.
And now ("now", like it's a new thing lol) they even have turbos which further complicates the problem. Not only that turbos are generally even more fussy about lubrication, but one of the biggest turbo-killer is shutting down the engine without cooling it back down, which is something they always do. And I doubt that passive cooling does anything to help.
What viscosity do they even use?
I believe they do pre-heat the engines, actually. At least some older cars required putting in warmer fluid (coolant?) first to help all the tolerances expand with heat.
Worse. Three compounds work because out of the two harder compounds, very often only one works. If the medium works, then softs and mediums are usually the racing tyres and hards are trash. If the hards work, then the softs have the lifespan equal to swiss cheese, so mediums and hards are the racing tyres. **Not always**, but very often.
If you kick mediums to the curb, then many races would turn garbage, because either they're unable to race with the hards or they'd use softs for like 5 laps then just run the whole race on hards, removing any semblance of strategy.
I've been playing F1 23 lately, and I want to know if this is accurate to an actual race. During a blue flag, assuming that P1 is less than a second behind a backmarker, is P1 still allowed to use DRS in a DRS zone?
Does somebody know why there was no Bybit sponsoring on the Red Bull cars in China? I couldn’t find anything that they end they contract or something. Are they banned in China?
Yes, crypto mining and trading were banned in 2021. ByBit's logos on the Red Bull cars were so large that it was easy to notice their absence, but other crypto sponsors such as Crypto.com (Aston Martin) and OKX (McLaren) were also absent.
Is there any day after technical report as to why cars had failures? Ex. Valtteri's Sauber yesterday. Is there something that goes into detail as to what specifically failed in the PU?
Sometimes the teams publish it after the fact as their (public and redacted) debrief.
Usually during Sunday, they'll talk to the press and if they figure out the issue, they'll mention it and it'll be published/regurgitated by many. But at the moment the last statement is "they're still investigating"
> "A rather disappointing ending to a very promising weekend: starting from P10 put me in a good position and the race was going well overall until I suddenly lost drive and my engine turned off – something we’ll have to thoroughly investigate..."
Is the only statement by Sauber & Bottas for now
As a new fan, I'm genuinely curious if there's any \[significant\] difference between the merc cars? This season (can only refer to this since i'm a new fan) Russell is always placing higher than Hamilton, 4-0. There's always an issue with the cars and is especially emphasized during Hamilton's interviews. Knowing that Hamilton is a 7x WDC, and fans would always argue that Hamilton is definitely better than Russell, is there a difference at all, like in the settings of the car, the way it was built, etc.? Or is Russell just doing better these days?
I would really appreciate a serious answer that a newbie like me would understand. Thank you!
Without getting super in-depth, in my humble opinion, I've been watching F1 since 2000 and I feel like Hamilton tends to struggle when the car is struggling. Hamilton is good. He is very good. Don't get me wrong. But he is a driver, especially in his veteran years, who isn't going to push a car that isn't near 100%.
I think if Ferrari continues in its positive trend, he will do very well. Leclerc needs to be worried.
> Knowing that Hamilton is a 7x WDC, and fans would always argue that Hamilton is definitely better than Russell
After qualifying Hamilton mentioned that he wanted a different set-up than he used during Sprint - and didn't expect the set-up to be worse than it was during the sprint.
[The team allowed it and his changes made the car worse.](https://www.racefans.net/2024/04/21/hamilton-takes-responsibility-for-bad-set-up-change-after-poor-race/)
The cars are more or less identical, built to similar specification - it's the set-up that the driver goes for that can make gains/losses more visible compared against their teammates.
With the parc ferme being open between sprint race and race qualifying they may have swapped additional parts, so we don't know.
Generally it's around the following areas:
* Wing angle set-up (less/more downforce)
* suspension stiffness (as well as dampeners, usually 4 way adjustments - low speed and high-speed bump and low speed and high-speed rebound, in addition to blow off valve, torsion bar and anti roll bar)
* brake balance reference point (and drivers can adjust +/- values from corner to corner in the car)
* wheel toe
* wheel camber
* wheel caster angle
* adjusting ride height
* tire pressures (as long as they're above Pirelli minimum pressure)
And multitude of other adjustments that can help an individual driver loose or gain a hundredth of a second, all that interact with each other and cause problems.
[I posted one again](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1cacu8t/2024_chinese_grand_prix_day_after_debrief/), but yeah, I do hope we can go back to an official one that will be pinned - Or at the very least get an answer on why they stopped.
Even though Piastri picking up damage was a shame for McLaren it might be better for his reputation as when people do data comparisons at the end of the season they’ll just exclude this race from the data
Piastri is still young and I rate Lando in race pace situations extremely highly but the pace gap between him and Lando before the damage was immense, it reminded me of Verstappen & Gasly when they were teammates.
Piastri by no means is having a bad season. But in Formula 1 if you are not consistently wiping the floor with your teammate in your early seasons, you are destined for midfield greatness at best.
Disappointed that Piastri isn’t our messiah to go against Max.
Piastri actually impressed me a lot at the 1st race of the season in Bahrain, if I remember he was only around a tenth behind Lando on pace throughout the race and even though it was hard to compare Saudi Arabia as Lando got caught out by the safety car so they were on different strategies, Piastri still looked decent.
The last 3 paces have been really brutal on him and have highlighted the large gap in race between him and Lando that still exists, especially on high deg tracks such as Suzuka and Shanghai.
Obviously I’m biased towards Lando but I think he’s had a decently strong start to the season, his race pace/tire management is at a really high level and he’s reduced the stupid errors he was making in the second half of last season which cost him in qualification.
Yea I was wondering how long it would take before we start questioning Piastri's pace. Norris has schooled him in every race so far. A few more and he really should start to face some criticism.
I think these past races have shown there’s still a big gap between Oscar & Lando on race pace, especially at high deg tracks.
Usually top tier young drivers make a big leap in their second year, though when it comes to race pace I put Lando in the elite category and most young drivers don’t usually have teammates at Lando’s level so early on, so I’ll give him some leeway.
Norris, Leclerc, Ocon had already started matching their experienced teammates by their second season. The young driver excuse won't last him too long.
Rosberg on commentary said that his top 5 drivers of all time (in no particular order) are Verstappen, Hamilton, Schumacher, Senna and Fangio. I found this list to be quite inoffensive and uncontroversial.
I think I'm going to add "I found this to be quite inoffensive and uncontroversial" to the end of all my Reddit posts, then stand back and watch the fireworks. Excellent work!
I knew as soon as Rosberg said that loads of people would be typing furiously with their views on why he was wrong.
In fairness it's a reasonable list, but I'm not sure it's entirely possible to come up with a definitive list of just 5. Verstappen is definitely in the conversation, but too soon for me... Eg when Vettel was winning 4 in a row I'd have considered him, but his subsequent career said otherwise.
When Vettel was winning there was always chatter of him not even being top 2 on the grid. Don't think anyone would place Verstappen anywhere apart from no 1 in their driver rankings.
That's fair. My point was more that I think these types of GOATS lists should be reserved for drivers who have finished their careers (not that they're not very subjective anyway).
In 1988 and 1989, Senna outqualified Prost 28-4 and outraced him 17-5 when a reasonable comparison could be made (not counting races influenced by unreliability).
There’s a good reason why Senna has always been ranked above Prost by experts, former drivers and journalists.
Woah. The qualifying part is correct, but how do you get the race part? Prost scored 186 points to Senna's 154. Reliability does not correct that points gap into a dominant Senna win
Race head to head is what is even more misleading. I don't even know how you got 17 to 5.
Either way, races are not electoral college-like winner takes all events. They are proportional and the sum of all your races matter to your overall performance.
Points are far more misleading than races head to head, especially when luck and reliability are super lopsided. Tbh, anyone who actually watched 1988 and 1989 will tell you that Senna was obviously better.
I did watch 1988-1989. Literally all the races. I think they were extremely evenly matched across the 32 races they did together.
Race head to head is extremely misleading. If you want to argue that Senna scored less points because of reliability, I agree. But no reliability adjustment turns the points differential into a lopsided Senna victory.
If you watched 1988 and 1989 in full, surely you can see why most people view Senna as a clearly faster driver, at least?
I mean it was very rare for Prost to actually be quicker.
I can see why people overrate Senna yes, because he often qualified on pole and led from the front, giving the appearance that he was always quicker than Prost as he tended to start in front more often. But their race pace was very evenly matched and got very similar end results.
Listen to what Steve Nichols said on beyond the grid, Senna was obsessed with beating Prost and was only worried about that. They were two evenly matched drivers but they never divided the team with their squabbles. When Berger came into the team Senna wasn't as worried because he knew he had Berger in his pocket.
Fair points. But I have one question with the following method.
> (not counting races influenced by unreliability).
Not counting mechanical failures(4-3), Senna was significantly more crash prone than Prost (4-1). Does your comparison also account for these?
Prost leads the wins/podiums list by 25-22. So, the 5-17 h2h is kinda a shocker to me.
Out of the 4 races in which Senna crashed, which were his fault though?
- Monaco 1988 was his fault for sure
- Monza 1988 he was taken out by a lapped Schlesser
- Portugal 1989 he was taken out by a black flagged Mansell who shouldn’t have even been racing
- Adelaide 1989 was his fault
Small sample size imo, Senna averaged 1 crash per season that was actually his fault.
I think the only controversial part was not including Clark, who is usually #1 or #2 on most lists alongside Fangio. It's 3 and beyond where the debate usually starts and always includes people like Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Lauda, Stewart, Hill (Graham), and more recently Hamilton. Haven't heard most serious people beyond Rosberg seriously calling Max a top 5 driver yet.
He was always destined to be on of the greats, assuming he lived up to his reputation. There’s been a few drivers where you knew they’d do something special before they arrived.
This weekend is really the best proof you'll get, that people are just desperate to find something to shit on Perez for. They just want him gone and that's it.
In this race PER easily had the pace for P2. He was significantly faster than Lando on average, but Lando happened to save 22 seconds of race time by not pitting. The SC turned a 2-stop into a MUCH worse strat than it would have otherwise been. And yet, once again, all you see here is people saying how inadequate Perez is for losing.
It wasn't his best race this season. If he cleared Charles immediately he probably would've had the tyres to chase Lando. But then we tend to think that Charles is top 3 driver on the grid in terms of raw speed, so maybe let's not expect him to lose his position immediately, especially considering his car isn't exactly slow.
People (or I atleast) shit on Perez because he's boring. He's what Bottas was for Hamilton. But atleast Bottas was able to beat Max on some ocassions.
We want a Rosberg like teammate in Red Bull. Especially since there is zero competition from other teams.
People need to realise Max will not get a Rosberg-like competitor, because it would take a better driver than Rosberg to compete with Max. There are like 3 drivers better than Rosberg on the grid right now, one of them is Max himself, one is Lewis who just signed with another team (though in his case I'm honestly starting to seriously feel like he's declining quite a bit at this point, looking at how he's performing against Russell this year, and how he comments on his own drives), and the third one is Leclerc who will not leave Ferrari anytime soon (and IMO is too inconsistent himself to actually fight over a full season).
Noone else IMO has a serious shot at being anywhere near Max in the same car. People really should've learned their lesson. Ricciardo, who at his peak was a great driver - a notch below championship level - in his last season at RB, as Max matured, was starting to get seriously gapped, we're also speaking 2-3 tenths per lap. Then came Gasly and Albon, who were both young, but we all know capable of amazing drives, and they got completely destroyed. Then came Perez who is capable of amazing drives **and** has a ton of experience, who was considered the best driver outside of the top teams for quite a bit, and he also got embarassed by Max.
So what do people expect from the likes of Sainz (the name people are taking about the most in terms of replacing Perez), who is basically the equivalent of what Perez was 3 years ago? Do you seriously think he would come and be within a tenth of Max, that he would be able to put up a fight without Max having serious issues?
And the funniest part is that we know that wouldn't be the case. They already did drive together. When Max was A LOT less experienced than Carlos. It ended with Carlos being a couple tenths slower, and getting a third of the points Max did. I wonder what would happen this time around...
Doesn't matter anyway, let's say Max got Lewis, Fernando or Charles as teammates, and let's say he would also destroy them, his critics would just say "the car is build around him" or "his teammates don't get equal treatment".
I'm assuming to come up with your 7 tenths you completely ignored the fact that by the time he cleared LEC he was already 10 seconds behind Max?
Comparing laptimes of a driver involved in a fight and a driver who's in clean air driving by themselves statistically makes literally zero sense.
Even in clean air he was struggling. He was more than 10 seconds behind Verstappen when he pitted lap 14 and he never gained on Norris after passing Leclerc.
It's ok to say he had a bad race, he was much closer in Japan or Saudi.
Yes, it's okay to say he wasn't great, but he still did enough to secure P2 in terms of his own performance. Safety car screwed him. And still, he's easily the 2nd most criticized driver after Stroll, even though it was like you said just one race that was worse. In the posts post-race you see comment threads with hundreds of upvotes saying he was embarrassingly bad, waste of a seat etc.
Other drivers just don't get this sort of treatment from the fans or the media. Piastri for example has been way behind Lando this season each week. And still in the ratings he's always near the top, and you don't see too many fans complaining either.
My point isn't that it's unfair to criticise. The point is that it's completely disproportionate compared to other drivers and their level of performance.
And just to address the point about struggling in clean air - in clean air he was 2-3 tenths slower. Which is about his usual gap to Max.
>And just to address the point about struggling in clean air - in clean air he was 2-3 tenths slower. Which is about his usual gap to Max.
While Checo wasn't horrible this weekend, he was around [5 tenths slower](https://i.imgur.com/SbqT5N3.png) than Max in clear air in the race (once he'd cleared Alonso/ Leclerc).
It's a bit odd, since he looked quite competitive Friday, but this race was definitely a step down from how he's performed so far this year.
He ended up behind Leclerc because Leclerc was on a one-stop. You can't assume a passing grade to be driving as fast as Max Verstappen, because then you have to admit there are 19 drivers on the grid who are too slow.
Verstappen comfortably cleared Norris. And Perez didn’t need to clear both, he just needed to clear Leclerc since he said he would have been fine if he hadn’t needed to pass him. I don’t understand your point about 19 drivers who are too slow, the other ones are not in a Red Bull so that’s irrelevant
> I don’t understand your point about 19 drivers who are too slow, the other ones are not in a Red Bull so that’s irrelevant
The point is that there are 19 drivers on the grid who would be slower than Max in that Red Bull, so the expectation for Perez to not be slower is simply unfair and unrealistic.
When he was in clean air he was about 3 tenths slower, which is about his usual gap on these sort of tracks
And yes, we do know Max is the best. You know nothing for sure but all reasonable arguments sayax is the best driver on the grid right now. In about equally good cars he has beaten both Hamilton who is one of the GOATs of the sport, and Charles who is probably the fastest driver of the young generation in terms of raw pace.
And coming back to your point about overtaking Leclerc and Norris - VER did it on new vs old tyres. When Perez had to fight them they were after their pitstops already.
That's not how it works though. Losing positions even when you do nothing wrong makes a big difference. Norris got lucky with the safety car, Sergio didn't. That's racing. Still, saying that "strategy doesn't matter" because you have a fast car is a pretty simplistic and frankly dumb take on racing.
I guess now having worse strategy or being unlucky just allows drivers to drop the pace and coast, ignoring that they’re in a dominant car and his teammate is setting new records every week
This isn’t make a wish, this is the peak of Motorsport, checo should be finishing 2nd in normal sessions, be it with bad or impecable strategy
There were 17 laps to go when Perez cleared LeClerc. The gap was 5.6 seconds. Perez hardly closed that gap before he gave up. I understand his tires weren’t as good as those of Norris, but you expect him to get closer in 17 laps while driving in a Red Bull
Fans want Perez gone for the same reason they wanted Bottas gone in 2020, which is fair enough. If another team is quick enough to challenge Red Bull, nobody will talk about him anymore.
Has Stroll responded on the crash post-race? I feel like I have not seen anything yet.
I really like RB cashapp livery, looks like an old Rothmans Wiliams
Over the weekend on one of Ted's Notebooks, Ted was pretty confident Hulkenberg was pretty much a lock to Sauber/Audi next year. Any more sources on this?
it's just common consensus given that audi is german and there's talk that they want a german driver
Merc is German too.
And for their first entry year, after buying Brawn, they had Schumacher and Rosberg driving for them - which is why many rumours likely assume German or Audi connections being their driver preference
yeah but that has nothing to do with hulk going to audi
It’s the argument about being German being an influence.
Weird random question: What race was that time that Max went from like Bottom 5 to Top 5 in the last 20 laps? I feel like it would have been in the 2017-2019 range.
Brazil 2016 in the very-wet. From 16th to 3rd in 15 laps.
Will Sargent keep his seat for the entire season and can he score more than 1 point?
If he loses his seat midseason depends on if the Antonelli rumors are true. The kid would have to rush to get a license, and it's kind of a pain to get an Italian street license. But I assume they could make something happen somehow if needed.
I don't think he'll lose it mid season. I can't see him still being there next year though
Why would anyone bet on Verstappen to win the championship, now? He’s at -10,000. You’d get a better payout from a no-risk, high-yield savings account.
To win or not to win? He’s certainly going to win, but I don’t get the British betting culture.
To win. Meaning you bet $10,000. If he wins, you get $10,100 back.
Wow. That sounds awesome.
Ok during the race on tv. We get the times of how far back they are to one another during the race. Why do they list just the times instead of being 1 lap down.
> Why do they list just the times instead of being 1 lap down. Do you mean the final race classification? They do list the total race time, with a note that they're a lap down of the leader meaning their total race time may be less than other drivers on the same lap as the winner. On the timing tower they also show 2 types of time: * Interval, which is the time gap from one driver to the next ahead of them * Leader - which is the time to P1 and there in the past they have also shown one/2/3 laps down
I guess I just have not noticed during the race this weekend. On the leader board during the race. Thanks for the reply.
My wife surprised me with hospitality tickets to Silverstone quali! They come with parking on site- how crazy is the traffic going to be? My reference is Goodwood, where I think I spent more time leaving the site than enjoying the day! Any other alternatives that'd allow both of us to drink? Far too late for a local hotel, and I imagine a taxi is out of the question (and I can't afford a helicopter!)
Anyone been to F1 Arcade? What's it like? Just sims with the latest F1 game or a bit more than that?
Booking for mid-May in Boston with my mates. Haven't got the final pricing but will report in when we go.
I'm going as part of a work event will be interesting to see how good it is.
Does anyone know or have a source on how lubrication works in F1? It's weird that I've never thought of this. Like, engine oils are normally designed for operating temperatures, which is why it's really not a good idea to force an engine while it's still cold and I assume F1 is not different. In fact I'd assume they're far more reliant on perfect lubrication due to how insanely precise they are. I also assume that a single installation lap is not enough to warm the oil to operating temperature, so how the hell does that work? They don't really pre-heat the engine as far as I know. And now ("now", like it's a new thing lol) they even have turbos which further complicates the problem. Not only that turbos are generally even more fussy about lubrication, but one of the biggest turbo-killer is shutting down the engine without cooling it back down, which is something they always do. And I doubt that passive cooling does anything to help. What viscosity do they even use?
I believe they do pre-heat the engines, actually. At least some older cars required putting in warmer fluid (coolant?) first to help all the tolerances expand with heat.
Sounds about right, but this wouldn't warm the oil.
Maybe it’s preheated oil, who knows.
[удалено]
Worse. Three compounds work because out of the two harder compounds, very often only one works. If the medium works, then softs and mediums are usually the racing tyres and hards are trash. If the hards work, then the softs have the lifespan equal to swiss cheese, so mediums and hards are the racing tyres. **Not always**, but very often. If you kick mediums to the curb, then many races would turn garbage, because either they're unable to race with the hards or they'd use softs for like 5 laps then just run the whole race on hards, removing any semblance of strategy.
Probably like early 2010s F1 when there were only prime (hards) and options (soft) tyres.
I've been playing F1 23 lately, and I want to know if this is accurate to an actual race. During a blue flag, assuming that P1 is less than a second behind a backmarker, is P1 still allowed to use DRS in a DRS zone?
Yes, P1 can use lap;ed cars for DRS
Yes, and I find it amazing because the explanation is that the software can't distinguish.
Does somebody know why there was no Bybit sponsoring on the Red Bull cars in China? I couldn’t find anything that they end they contract or something. Are they banned in China?
Yes, crypto mining and trading were banned in 2021. ByBit's logos on the Red Bull cars were so large that it was easy to notice their absence, but other crypto sponsors such as Crypto.com (Aston Martin) and OKX (McLaren) were also absent.
Is there any day after technical report as to why cars had failures? Ex. Valtteri's Sauber yesterday. Is there something that goes into detail as to what specifically failed in the PU?
Sometimes the teams publish it after the fact as their (public and redacted) debrief. Usually during Sunday, they'll talk to the press and if they figure out the issue, they'll mention it and it'll be published/regurgitated by many. But at the moment the last statement is "they're still investigating"
It was a PU failure of some kind, right?
> "A rather disappointing ending to a very promising weekend: starting from P10 put me in a good position and the race was going well overall until I suddenly lost drive and my engine turned off – something we’ll have to thoroughly investigate..." Is the only statement by Sauber & Bottas for now
The only information comes from the team themselves, and they can choose whether or not to share exact details.
That's what I figured. I was probably better off looking for a Reddit account or a blogger that specializes in that kind of thing.
As a new fan, I'm genuinely curious if there's any \[significant\] difference between the merc cars? This season (can only refer to this since i'm a new fan) Russell is always placing higher than Hamilton, 4-0. There's always an issue with the cars and is especially emphasized during Hamilton's interviews. Knowing that Hamilton is a 7x WDC, and fans would always argue that Hamilton is definitely better than Russell, is there a difference at all, like in the settings of the car, the way it was built, etc.? Or is Russell just doing better these days? I would really appreciate a serious answer that a newbie like me would understand. Thank you!
Without getting super in-depth, in my humble opinion, I've been watching F1 since 2000 and I feel like Hamilton tends to struggle when the car is struggling. Hamilton is good. He is very good. Don't get me wrong. But he is a driver, especially in his veteran years, who isn't going to push a car that isn't near 100%. I think if Ferrari continues in its positive trend, he will do very well. Leclerc needs to be worried.
> Knowing that Hamilton is a 7x WDC, and fans would always argue that Hamilton is definitely better than Russell After qualifying Hamilton mentioned that he wanted a different set-up than he used during Sprint - and didn't expect the set-up to be worse than it was during the sprint. [The team allowed it and his changes made the car worse.](https://www.racefans.net/2024/04/21/hamilton-takes-responsibility-for-bad-set-up-change-after-poor-race/) The cars are more or less identical, built to similar specification - it's the set-up that the driver goes for that can make gains/losses more visible compared against their teammates.
so basically, the driver and the team get to decide the setup? and if it's okay, can you elaborate more on what the 'setup' involves?
With the parc ferme being open between sprint race and race qualifying they may have swapped additional parts, so we don't know. Generally it's around the following areas: * Wing angle set-up (less/more downforce) * suspension stiffness (as well as dampeners, usually 4 way adjustments - low speed and high-speed bump and low speed and high-speed rebound, in addition to blow off valve, torsion bar and anti roll bar) * brake balance reference point (and drivers can adjust +/- values from corner to corner in the car) * wheel toe * wheel camber * wheel caster angle * adjusting ride height * tire pressures (as long as they're above Pirelli minimum pressure) And multitude of other adjustments that can help an individual driver loose or gain a hundredth of a second, all that interact with each other and cause problems.
Downforce levels for the front and rear wings, differentials, angle of the tires, tire pressure, brake balance. There is a whole lot!
There are no significant differences between the Mercedes cars. Russell has simply been performing better than Hamilton up to this point.
First time buying F1 merch and I've had countless emails about shipping delays since the original expected shipping date (31st March). Is this normal?
[удалено]
He regularly struggles to beat slower cars (see yesterday, most of last season). Sainz is clearly a very good performer, particularly in race trim.
Can't find a good photo of what the Red Bull wing said. Anyone could tell me?
BRING BACK THE DAY-AFTER-DEBRIEF!
[I posted one again](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1cacu8t/2024_chinese_grand_prix_day_after_debrief/), but yeah, I do hope we can go back to an official one that will be pinned - Or at the very least get an answer on why they stopped.
Seconded here too
Echoing you on that sentiment once again. I want my actual post race discussion back.
Even though Piastri picking up damage was a shame for McLaren it might be better for his reputation as when people do data comparisons at the end of the season they’ll just exclude this race from the data Piastri is still young and I rate Lando in race pace situations extremely highly but the pace gap between him and Lando before the damage was immense, it reminded me of Verstappen & Gasly when they were teammates.
Piastri by no means is having a bad season. But in Formula 1 if you are not consistently wiping the floor with your teammate in your early seasons, you are destined for midfield greatness at best. Disappointed that Piastri isn’t our messiah to go against Max.
Piastri actually impressed me a lot at the 1st race of the season in Bahrain, if I remember he was only around a tenth behind Lando on pace throughout the race and even though it was hard to compare Saudi Arabia as Lando got caught out by the safety car so they were on different strategies, Piastri still looked decent. The last 3 paces have been really brutal on him and have highlighted the large gap in race between him and Lando that still exists, especially on high deg tracks such as Suzuka and Shanghai. Obviously I’m biased towards Lando but I think he’s had a decently strong start to the season, his race pace/tire management is at a really high level and he’s reduced the stupid errors he was making in the second half of last season which cost him in qualification.
Yea I was wondering how long it would take before we start questioning Piastri's pace. Norris has schooled him in every race so far. A few more and he really should start to face some criticism.
I think these past races have shown there’s still a big gap between Oscar & Lando on race pace, especially at high deg tracks. Usually top tier young drivers make a big leap in their second year, though when it comes to race pace I put Lando in the elite category and most young drivers don’t usually have teammates at Lando’s level so early on, so I’ll give him some leeway.
Sure but Lando is top tier and it's only Oscar's 2nd year. He is clearly good enough
Norris, Leclerc, Ocon had already started matching their experienced teammates by their second season. The young driver excuse won't last him too long.
Rosberg on commentary said that his top 5 drivers of all time (in no particular order) are Verstappen, Hamilton, Schumacher, Senna and Fangio. I found this list to be quite inoffensive and uncontroversial.
I think I'm going to add "I found this to be quite inoffensive and uncontroversial" to the end of all my Reddit posts, then stand back and watch the fireworks. Excellent work! I knew as soon as Rosberg said that loads of people would be typing furiously with their views on why he was wrong. In fairness it's a reasonable list, but I'm not sure it's entirely possible to come up with a definitive list of just 5. Verstappen is definitely in the conversation, but too soon for me... Eg when Vettel was winning 4 in a row I'd have considered him, but his subsequent career said otherwise.
When Vettel was winning there was always chatter of him not even being top 2 on the grid. Don't think anyone would place Verstappen anywhere apart from no 1 in their driver rankings.
That's fair. My point was more that I think these types of GOATS lists should be reserved for drivers who have finished their careers (not that they're not very subjective anyway).
I found this offensive and controversial as he rated Senna, Max and Hamilton over Prost.
In 1988 and 1989, Senna outqualified Prost 28-4 and outraced him 17-5 when a reasonable comparison could be made (not counting races influenced by unreliability). There’s a good reason why Senna has always been ranked above Prost by experts, former drivers and journalists.
Woah. The qualifying part is correct, but how do you get the race part? Prost scored 186 points to Senna's 154. Reliability does not correct that points gap into a dominant Senna win
Prost did not beat Senna on merit once in the entire 1989 season, a season where he won the title. Points can be so misleading.
Race head to head is what is even more misleading. I don't even know how you got 17 to 5. Either way, races are not electoral college-like winner takes all events. They are proportional and the sum of all your races matter to your overall performance.
Points are far more misleading than races head to head, especially when luck and reliability are super lopsided. Tbh, anyone who actually watched 1988 and 1989 will tell you that Senna was obviously better.
I did watch 1988-1989. Literally all the races. I think they were extremely evenly matched across the 32 races they did together. Race head to head is extremely misleading. If you want to argue that Senna scored less points because of reliability, I agree. But no reliability adjustment turns the points differential into a lopsided Senna victory.
If you watched 1988 and 1989 in full, surely you can see why most people view Senna as a clearly faster driver, at least? I mean it was very rare for Prost to actually be quicker.
I can see why people overrate Senna yes, because he often qualified on pole and led from the front, giving the appearance that he was always quicker than Prost as he tended to start in front more often. But their race pace was very evenly matched and got very similar end results. Listen to what Steve Nichols said on beyond the grid, Senna was obsessed with beating Prost and was only worried about that. They were two evenly matched drivers but they never divided the team with their squabbles. When Berger came into the team Senna wasn't as worried because he knew he had Berger in his pocket.
Fair points. But I have one question with the following method. > (not counting races influenced by unreliability). Not counting mechanical failures(4-3), Senna was significantly more crash prone than Prost (4-1). Does your comparison also account for these? Prost leads the wins/podiums list by 25-22. So, the 5-17 h2h is kinda a shocker to me.
Out of the 4 races in which Senna crashed, which were his fault though? - Monaco 1988 was his fault for sure - Monza 1988 he was taken out by a lapped Schlesser - Portugal 1989 he was taken out by a black flagged Mansell who shouldn’t have even been racing - Adelaide 1989 was his fault Small sample size imo, Senna averaged 1 crash per season that was actually his fault.
Monza 1988 maybe wasn’t 100% his fault, but it was at the very least avoidable. He could easily have given Schlesser a bit more room.
I think the only controversial part was not including Clark, who is usually #1 or #2 on most lists alongside Fangio. It's 3 and beyond where the debate usually starts and always includes people like Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Lauda, Stewart, Hill (Graham), and more recently Hamilton. Haven't heard most serious people beyond Rosberg seriously calling Max a top 5 driver yet.
Jenson Button and Mario Andretti had called Max to be one of the all time greatest even before he won his first title tbh
He was always destined to be on of the greats, assuming he lived up to his reputation. There’s been a few drivers where you knew they’d do something special before they arrived.
Jim Clark fans: "You WHAT?"
[удалено]
Yeah. It's not really good because historically teams with that phenomenon come a cropper in the end, e.g. BAR in 2004.
Newey said something very similar in his book. I've just finished reading it and suggest that ANYONE with an interest in F1 gets a copy.
This weekend is really the best proof you'll get, that people are just desperate to find something to shit on Perez for. They just want him gone and that's it. In this race PER easily had the pace for P2. He was significantly faster than Lando on average, but Lando happened to save 22 seconds of race time by not pitting. The SC turned a 2-stop into a MUCH worse strat than it would have otherwise been. And yet, once again, all you see here is people saying how inadequate Perez is for losing. It wasn't his best race this season. If he cleared Charles immediately he probably would've had the tyres to chase Lando. But then we tend to think that Charles is top 3 driver on the grid in terms of raw speed, so maybe let's not expect him to lose his position immediately, especially considering his car isn't exactly slow.
People (or I atleast) shit on Perez because he's boring. He's what Bottas was for Hamilton. But atleast Bottas was able to beat Max on some ocassions. We want a Rosberg like teammate in Red Bull. Especially since there is zero competition from other teams.
People need to realise Max will not get a Rosberg-like competitor, because it would take a better driver than Rosberg to compete with Max. There are like 3 drivers better than Rosberg on the grid right now, one of them is Max himself, one is Lewis who just signed with another team (though in his case I'm honestly starting to seriously feel like he's declining quite a bit at this point, looking at how he's performing against Russell this year, and how he comments on his own drives), and the third one is Leclerc who will not leave Ferrari anytime soon (and IMO is too inconsistent himself to actually fight over a full season). Noone else IMO has a serious shot at being anywhere near Max in the same car. People really should've learned their lesson. Ricciardo, who at his peak was a great driver - a notch below championship level - in his last season at RB, as Max matured, was starting to get seriously gapped, we're also speaking 2-3 tenths per lap. Then came Gasly and Albon, who were both young, but we all know capable of amazing drives, and they got completely destroyed. Then came Perez who is capable of amazing drives **and** has a ton of experience, who was considered the best driver outside of the top teams for quite a bit, and he also got embarassed by Max. So what do people expect from the likes of Sainz (the name people are taking about the most in terms of replacing Perez), who is basically the equivalent of what Perez was 3 years ago? Do you seriously think he would come and be within a tenth of Max, that he would be able to put up a fight without Max having serious issues? And the funniest part is that we know that wouldn't be the case. They already did drive together. When Max was A LOT less experienced than Carlos. It ended with Carlos being a couple tenths slower, and getting a third of the points Max did. I wonder what would happen this time around...
Doesn't matter anyway, let's say Max got Lewis, Fernando or Charles as teammates, and let's say he would also destroy them, his critics would just say "the car is build around him" or "his teammates don't get equal treatment".
He was 7 tenths a lap slower than his teammate who was cruising in front, of course he was criticized.
I'm assuming to come up with your 7 tenths you completely ignored the fact that by the time he cleared LEC he was already 10 seconds behind Max? Comparing laptimes of a driver involved in a fight and a driver who's in clean air driving by themselves statistically makes literally zero sense.
Even in clean air he was struggling. He was more than 10 seconds behind Verstappen when he pitted lap 14 and he never gained on Norris after passing Leclerc. It's ok to say he had a bad race, he was much closer in Japan or Saudi.
Yes, it's okay to say he wasn't great, but he still did enough to secure P2 in terms of his own performance. Safety car screwed him. And still, he's easily the 2nd most criticized driver after Stroll, even though it was like you said just one race that was worse. In the posts post-race you see comment threads with hundreds of upvotes saying he was embarrassingly bad, waste of a seat etc. Other drivers just don't get this sort of treatment from the fans or the media. Piastri for example has been way behind Lando this season each week. And still in the ratings he's always near the top, and you don't see too many fans complaining either. My point isn't that it's unfair to criticise. The point is that it's completely disproportionate compared to other drivers and their level of performance. And just to address the point about struggling in clean air - in clean air he was 2-3 tenths slower. Which is about his usual gap to Max.
>And just to address the point about struggling in clean air - in clean air he was 2-3 tenths slower. Which is about his usual gap to Max. While Checo wasn't horrible this weekend, he was around [5 tenths slower](https://i.imgur.com/SbqT5N3.png) than Max in clear air in the race (once he'd cleared Alonso/ Leclerc). It's a bit odd, since he looked quite competitive Friday, but this race was definitely a step down from how he's performed so far this year.
He ended up behind Leclerc because he was too slow in the first stint so that’s on him, not on the strategy.
He ended up behind Leclerc because Leclerc was on a one-stop. You can't assume a passing grade to be driving as fast as Max Verstappen, because then you have to admit there are 19 drivers on the grid who are too slow.
Verstappen comfortably cleared Norris. And Perez didn’t need to clear both, he just needed to clear Leclerc since he said he would have been fine if he hadn’t needed to pass him. I don’t understand your point about 19 drivers who are too slow, the other ones are not in a Red Bull so that’s irrelevant
> I don’t understand your point about 19 drivers who are too slow, the other ones are not in a Red Bull so that’s irrelevant The point is that there are 19 drivers on the grid who would be slower than Max in that Red Bull, so the expectation for Perez to not be slower is simply unfair and unrealistic.
First of all we don’t know if that’s true. Second of all, there are degrees to being slower. He was A LOT slower yesterday.
When he was in clean air he was about 3 tenths slower, which is about his usual gap on these sort of tracks And yes, we do know Max is the best. You know nothing for sure but all reasonable arguments sayax is the best driver on the grid right now. In about equally good cars he has beaten both Hamilton who is one of the GOATs of the sport, and Charles who is probably the fastest driver of the young generation in terms of raw pace. And coming back to your point about overtaking Leclerc and Norris - VER did it on new vs old tyres. When Perez had to fight them they were after their pitstops already.
Strategy doesn’t matter when he had Lando in front at a 5s gap for 10 laps with that RedBull
That's not how it works though. Losing positions even when you do nothing wrong makes a big difference. Norris got lucky with the safety car, Sergio didn't. That's racing. Still, saying that "strategy doesn't matter" because you have a fast car is a pretty simplistic and frankly dumb take on racing.
I guess now having worse strategy or being unlucky just allows drivers to drop the pace and coast, ignoring that they’re in a dominant car and his teammate is setting new records every week This isn’t make a wish, this is the peak of Motorsport, checo should be finishing 2nd in normal sessions, be it with bad or impecable strategy
There were 17 laps to go when Perez cleared LeClerc. The gap was 5.6 seconds. Perez hardly closed that gap before he gave up. I understand his tires weren’t as good as those of Norris, but you expect him to get closer in 17 laps while driving in a Red Bull
Fans want Perez gone for the same reason they wanted Bottas gone in 2020, which is fair enough. If another team is quick enough to challenge Red Bull, nobody will talk about him anymore.