Ferrari Gained From Silverstone Off-Throttle EBD Ban, Mercedes Biggest Loser

[Sarinaide]

Well, clearly the reinstatement of the old OTEBD regs helped McLaren as did Hamilton being 'perfect' in Q3 and the Grand Prix.

Add to that Alonso not being as 'perfect' and you get a McLaren victory.

Alonso made an error where he let Vettel by.(which cost him some time)..and then Hamilton just mugged Alonso for the leadership of the race. Alonso certainly lost the win when Hamilton over-took him around the outside of Turn 2.

If the OTEBD levels were at Silverstone levels, i'm afraid Hamilton wouldn't have won this race.

1] Alonso repassed Vettel fair and square on track after the error so that was irrelevent.

2] The drive of the McLaren out of 1 and into 2 was so much greater, Hamilton effectively passed Alonso as soon as he hit the accelarator comming out of 1, Alonso was off throttle and battling to turn the Ferrari into 2 and 3 sweeping Left, some say better defence in that instance would have worked that said he was never in a position to defend that. Some suggested a Hamilton on Webber though the difference was Hamilton being inside well into 2 and both cars were on run in tyres/ up to temp tyres.

I think Ferrari kept the gap close on the basis of stability on straights and being good on the brakes, but into corners requiring throttle input into a turn the Ferrari was anything but good. Maybe the nature of Silverstone was also a one off for Ferrari, Straight, Brake, Straight, easy turn...etc.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

This has no context to the original thread but I'll reply anyway and maybe the mods can relocate it.

1] Alonso repassed Vettel fair and square on track after the error so that was irrelevent.

2] The drive of the McLaren out of 1 and into 2 was so much greater, Hamilton effectively passed Alonso as soon as he hit the accelarator comming out of 1, Alonso was off throttle and battling to turn the Ferrari into 2 and 3 sweeping Left, some say better defence in that instance would have worked that said he was never in a position to defend that. Some suggested a Hamilton on Webber though the difference was Hamilton being inside well into 2 and both cars were on run in tyres/ up to temp tyres.

I think Ferrari kept the gap close on the basis of stability on straights and being good on the brakes, but into corners requiring throttle input into a turn the Ferrari was anything but good. Maybe the nature of Silverstone was also a one off for Ferrari, Straight, Brake, Straight, easy turn...etc.

When you lose a race by four seconds and lose the lead of the race by coming out of the pit lane less than half a second down on where you need to be to be to defend then any error that costs you time is actualy very relevant.

What do you mean the Ferrari kept the gap close by stability on the straights? Was everyone else unstable on the straights?

What leads you to think that into corners requiring throttle input into a turn the Ferrari was anything but good? Its all well to say it but a statement like this should be accompanied with some reasoning.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

1] Alonso repassed Vettel fair and square on track after the error so that was irrelevent.

This isn't the correct thread but any error that costs you position interfere's with your race as it takes something out of your car and fuel when you try to re-take that position. It cost Alonso some time...and i'm sure he took something out of his tyres and fuel to get back in front of Vettel.

Main point was that Hamilton was 'perfect' in Q3 and the GP, Alonso was not 'perfect' or 'as perfect'...and Hamilton caught Alonso and passed him on the outside of a corner when Alonso had the lead. That was a 'special' over-taking move in anyone's book. Second main point was the lifting of the OTEBD ban obviously helped McLaren to put Lewis in that position. At 'Silverstone spec' levels, McLarens were hobbled in relation to Ferrari.

 

[Slyboogy]

Still think McLaren, Red Bull and Renault are the big gainers here, and the Ferrari teams the losers.

The best way to have handled this, was to either reduce it to 10% with no arguments, or let it be.

Quite frankly, I don't know which one would have been the better decision, but I quite liked the shake up on the grid at Silverstone, the only bad thing was that McLaren and Mercedes slipped back a little.

But the current rules, Red Bull will always have the advantage in qualifying....

So

 

[Sarinaide]

This isn't the correct thread but any error that costs you position interfere's with your race as it takes something out of your car and fuel when you try to re-take that position. It cost Alonso some time...and i'm sure he took something out of his tyres and fuel to get back in front of Vettel.

Main point was that Hamilton was 'perfect' in Q3 and the GP, Alonso was not 'perfect' or 'as perfect'...and Hamilton caught Alonso and passed him on the outside of a corner when Alonso had the lead. That was a 'special' over-taking move in anyone's book. Second main point was the lifting of the OTEBD ban obviously helped McLaren to put Lewis in that position. At 'Silverstone spec' levels, McLarens were hobbled in relation to Ferrari.

So they ban the F-duct for being driver controlled aerodynamic manipulation as well as adjustable wings, but when the EBD's give cars superior traction in corners and allow them to get on the gas earlier, that is not considered anti-spec racing..........In my estimation they must do away with rubbish like KERS, DRS, EBD's, F-Duct for good and go back to the former position.

Money caps is also something that has hurt Ferrari very badly and more so than any other team on the grid, Ferrari R&D used to be about spending the Dosh to clearly and definatively make a faster and more powered car, that is taken away, because we are going green.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Mark Hughes (BBC, Autosport) confirming what's been said in this thread...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/formula_one/14285593.stm

"At the Nurburging, the MP4-26 reverted to the sort of form it had displayed at Barcelona, Monaco and Montreal, when it was arguably the fastest Sunday car of all."

"From Germany, Formula 1 reverted back to pre-Silverstone regulations, the track temperatures were very cool and suddenly the McLaren was right back to where it had been before. It is not quite as black and white as that but that is the essential underlying picture."

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Nigel Roebuck (Motor Sport Magazine / website) also confirming...

http://www.motorsportmagazine.co.uk/2011/07/24/german-grand-prix-report-2/

"We were back to square one at the Nürburgring, in the sense that the FIA’s rules, regarding ‘off-throttle (hot or cold) blown diffusers’, reverted to what they had been at Valencia. Only at Silverstone, in other words, had they been different."

"Forgive me, I know all this is tedious, but unfortunately it makes a difference – in some cases, quite a profound one – to how Formula 1 cars perform. McLaren, merely thereabouts at the British Grand Prix, were much to the fore in Germany – so much so that, after qualifying, Hamilton was moved to describe his car as “fantastic”. It had been a very long time since Lewis expressed such delight in what he had been given to drive."

 

[Sarinaide]

Well again anyone watching the sport will realise that is the case.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Well again anyone watching the sport will realise that is the case.

But others disputed it. They disputed that Mercedes-Benz HPE weren't disadvantaged at Silverstone...and others disputed that the McLarens weren't either the fastest or co-fastest "race" or "Sunday" car at Barca-Monte Carlo-Montreal.

 

[Sarinaide]

Well the top pundits will all legitimately tell you that McLaren are the closest and in many areas better than the Red Bull, Ferrari were nowhere near being a finished car but in the last handful of races have had mods that seems to have brought them back.

I think any reasonable person will agree that;

1] Red Bull are the overall best package
2] McLaren are the second best car on the grid
3] Ferrari are the third best car, but the gap is closing.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

I'm a reasonable person but I can't agree with every point there because they're generalization only to do with Qualifying which, this year, doesn't correllate to races. Red Bull were the over-all package. But one has to separate Qualifying and the Race.

In race trim, the Ferrari has been the better "race car" than the RBR since coming back to Europe...and Mclaren had the better "race car" during Sunday at China, Spain, Monaco, Canada and Germany.

I think it's become a coin toss in the actual Grand Prix races recently with weather/temperature and circuit configuration coming into play...as well as how much "on form"/"happy" or "off form"/"unhappy" a driver is...as well as 'tyres' and tyre stop strategy as well as the tyre stops themselves.

Look at Nicolas Tombasiz' Q&A in Autosport today. Ferrari are out to win races and they have the car now. Had the temperature been warmer, Ferrari would have won the German Grand Prix. The differentiating factor was the temperature and a driver (Hamilton) who was 'perfect' and unwilling to settle for anything but Victory.

 

[Cookinflatsix]

Money caps is also something that has hurt Ferrari very badly and more so than any other team on the grid, Ferrari R&D used to be about spending the Dosh to clearly and definatively make a faster and more powered car, that is taken away, because we are going green.

do you mean Ferrari and Alonso are only competitive when they can spend more than others?
How much more than everyone else do you reckon Ferrari need to spend to compete again, 50%, 100%?

Maybe they should receive special extra assistance from the FIA as well to make them able to compete

hold on......

 

[Sarinaide]

I'm a reasonable person but I can't agree with every point there because they're generalization only to do with Qualifying which, this year, doesn't correllate to races. Red Bull were the over-all package. But one has to separate Qualifying and the Race.

In race trim, the Ferrari has been the better "race car" than the RBR since coming back to Europe...and Mclaren had the better "race car" during Sunday at China, Spain, Monaco, Canada and Germany.

I think it's become a coin toss in the actual Grand Prix races recently with weather/temperature and circuit configuration coming into play...as well as how much "on form"/"happy" or "off form"/"unhappy" a driver is...as well as 'tyres' and tyre stop strategy as well as the tyre stops themselves.

Look at Nicolas Tombasiz' Q&A in Autosport today. Ferrari are out to win races and they have the car now. Had the temperature been warmer, Ferrari would have won the German Grand Prix. The differentiating factor was the temperature and a driver (Hamilton) who was 'perfect' and unwilling to settle for anything but Victory.

Well DC and Brundle did kind of suggest where Ferrari are by saying that McLaren dominated Sector 1 and Red Bull dominated Sector 2, with that in mind it does suggest through results over the season, furthermore by saying that Ferrari fits somewhere inbetween.

I am still of the opinion that Ferrari are getting better and the car is right up there now, though that said Filipe Massa is really showing the actual potential of the Ferrari, I just think that sometimes it may be padded up more by the fact that Alonso by and large gets the most out of cars regardless, while Massa needs the car to help him. I don't want this to turn into any debate but to say that both drivers have the exact car with driver preference setups and the result gap is so wide.

Hungary, Spa and Monza are the tell tail whether Ferrari can take this championship to Abu Dhabi. (Best case scenario and if's and but's have to happen.)

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

...that said Filipe Massa is really showing the actual potential of the Ferrari, I just think that sometimes it may be padded up more by the fact that Alonso by and large gets the most out of cars regardless...

This is probably the wrong thread (for the last few posts between us) but the "actual potential" of any car is about 100 %. A driver is only a driver and if he's going 10-10ths, he's getting 100 percent of the car and is "perfect". So, one can say that Alonso's much more at 100 percent of the Ferrari and much closer to it than Massa. That's all one can say. One can also say that Massa's level has been less than Alonso's level most of the time...and that he has a tougher time when the tyres aren't hooked up to his liking in terms of proper operating temperature.

Clearly, the two Ferraris qualified better than the two McLarens at Nurburgring on average...but Hamilton put in a huge lap in Q3 (in relation to Button), took the lead immediately without wasting any time...and then passed Alonso very aggressively and decisively for the final lead. Hamilton put in a 'perfect' performance. Alonso didn't...and Massa was even less perfect.

On any given day, a driver will be 'perfect' and get to 100 percent of the car. Any driver input more than 100 percent of the car's capability or limit and the car will spin (i.e. it will be "driver error".)

 

[no-FIAt-please]

As it stands at the moment I'd say the car order stands at...

Qualifying:
Red Bull
Ferrari
McLaren

Race:
McLaren/Ferrari
Red Bull

The race speed between the McLaren and Ferrari is very hard to split seeing as the Ferrari was nearly matching the MP4-26 in the cold conditions which don't suit it. With the RB7 very close behind.

If I was pushed to say which car was the best overall package I would say the Ferrari.

 

[Sarinaide]

This is probably the wrong thread (for the last few posts between us) but the "actual potential" of any car is about 100 %. A driver is only a driver and if he's going 10-10ths, he's getting 100 percent of the car and is "perfect". So, one can say that Alonso's much more at 100 percent of the Ferrari and much closer to it than Massa. That's all one can say. One can also say that Massa's level has been less than Alonso's level most of the time...and that he has a tougher time when the tyres aren't hooked up to his liking in terms of proper operating temperature.

Clearly, the two Ferraris qualified better than the two McLarens at Nurburgring on average...but Hamilton put in a huge lap in Q3 (in relation to Button), took the lead immediately without wasting any time...and then passed Alonso very aggressively and decisively for the final lead. Hamilton put in a 'perfect' performance. Alonso didn't...and Massa was even less perfect.

On any given day, a driver will be 'perfect' and get to 100 percent of the car. Any driver input more than 100 percent of the car's capability or limit and the car will spin (i.e. it will be "driver error".)

I was trying to avert refering to skill factor but the commentators themselves say regularly, that is the difference between a elite/great driver and a good driver, the position will hardly be any different if Alonso was not a Ferrari driver and Massa was the de facto number 1 driver, simply because that Ferrari is incapable of giving the performance of the 2008 Ferrari that needs to compensate for Massa's lesser ability to get the most out of a car.

The distinction between Alonso and Massa is vast in comparison to Vettel and Webber, which only looks bad because while Webber gets 2-3, Vettel is regularly at 1, similarly with McLaren bar a few DNF's the distinction between Button and Hamilton is very small and Button could still very easily be ahead of Lewis but for faults not his own (20+ points off true reflection), that is Ferrari's other problem which goes with the EBD rules.....Alonso needs Massa to help carry weight and that is just not a given.

Lets pose the position here, Alonso to be in the position that Hamilton was on Sunday prior at Lap 40 and be a shoe in to win, he needs to drive a massive gap to the chasing cars, which on balance of performance the Ferrari is nigh on faster or slower than the RB or McLaren so that is never going to happen, the scenario needed is he needs Massa to be around to act as a plug and hold up other cars ala Barrichello/Irvine, that also doesn't seem forthcoming. The only race that I think Massa has shown more pace than Alonso and Ferrari ought to have released him, was at Montreal, other than that it has been pure slaughter.

 

[Quintessentially]

As it stands at the moment I'd say the car order stands at...

Qualifying:
Red Bull
Ferrari
McLaren

Race:
McLaren/Ferrari
Red Bull
The race speed between the McLaren and Ferrari is very hard to split seeing as the Ferrari was nearly matching the MP4-26 in the cold conditions which don't suit it. With the RB7 very close behind.

If I was pushed to say which car was the best overall package I would say the Ferrari.

The obvious difference between Ferrari and McLaren is how they wear the tyres, with Ferrari being more gentle. On the harder durable tyre where wear is less significant the McLaren is the faster car. I still believe Redbull have the best overall package. They may be losing a lot on the straights but both their drivers are not mitigating this issue well at all, especially in heavy braking zones into slow corners. This is where they should make their advantage count so not to be vulnerable on the ensuing straight. Vettel in particular is average to poor in this regard and he has missed his braking point on several occasions when not in the lead and the car in front of him is interferring with his driving and view.

 

[Sarinaide]

The obvious difference between Ferrari and McLaren is how they wear the tyres, with Ferrari being more gentle. On the harder durable tyre where wear is less significant the McLaren is the faster car. I still believe Redbull have the best overall package. They may be losing a lot on the straights but both their drivers are not mitigating this issue well at all, especially in heavy braking zones into slow corners. This is where they should make their advantage count so not to be vulnerable on the ensuing straight. Vettel in particular is average to poor in this regard and he has missed his braking point on several occasions when not in the lead and the car in front of him is interferring with his driving and view.

Redbulls cornering/traction superiority was evident at Spain out of the last corner, Vettel drove himself out of any DRS threat from McLaren dispite Hamilton driving right up at the end of the straight. Manaco similar situation out of the last corner, got well out of any threat from Alonso with DRS just having a better drive out.

 

[Quintessentially]

Redbulls cornering/traction superiority was evident at Spain out of the last corner, Vettel drove himself out of any DRS threat from McLaren dispite Hamilton driving right up at the end of the straight. Manaco similar situation out of the last corner, got well out of any threat from Alonso with DRS just having a better drive out.

I don't disagree with that statement and this is why I stated that the problem arises when he is not in the lead and there is a car in front interferring with his driving and sighting distance. He did a first class job in Spain but you couldn't say the same last weekend when the situation was reversed.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Ted Kravitz confirmed in the BBC Friday text that the OTEBD ban at the British Grand Prix cost McLaren 0.8 seconds. I don't know where he got that number from but it isn't far from Jonathan Neale's declaration of 0.7 seconds.

The Hungarian grid is further confirmation of how disadvantaged the Mercedes-Benz engined cars were at Silverstone in relation to particularly of the Ferrari/Ferrari-engined cars.

The McLarens are well up the grid as are Rosbeg and Sutil in Mercedes engined cars whilst both Ferraris are behind both McLarens and the Saubers couldn't make it as far up as Silverstone..

It's hard to say anything other than the FIA tried to favour Ferrari yet again!