Charles Leclerc won the Bahrain Grand Prix, leading it from start to finish. Though Verstappen was his closest challenger, a late technical retirement allowed Sainz to make it a brilliant 1-2 finish for Ferrari. Lewis Hamilton joins the podium in third place.
Three stopper this race... New tyres looked good or too early to call?
Meh.. not sure. Hardest tyres in the set (C1/C2/C3) vs 2-3-4 last year... and there was an extra stop. So far looks a little worse than last year, but It's the first race, let's wait to see if the teams get a good balance on downforce/drag setup.
It seems the drivers can push these tyres more, but i heard there is a steep cliff.
Apparently more resistant to flat-spotting but also their size takes a toll on steering hydraulics.
I think you can see that in Hamilton's times, he dropped off very quickly once the tyres were clearly done running so close to Sainz for a while.
Yeah I think the pump would have been designed to take that E10. Now I wonder if their fuel has another additive that could cause that.
Grapefruit juice?
Ok, just kidding
Alberto Antonini, former Head of Ferrari's press office, reveals what Ferrari thinks has happened (from what they could see) to the RedBulls.
"Il doppio guasto delle RB18 (anche il testacoda di Perez non è un semplice errore di guida) in Ferrari lo hanno spiegato con il Fattore K-1. Cioè la funzione (da non confondere con una mappatura) che permette di utilizzare la massima potenza combinata del motore termico e del motogeneratore collegato alla trasmissione, ovvero lo MGU-K. Si usa in partenza, una volta raggiunti i 100 orari; e poi, in gara, nei momenti in cui serve potenza per difendersi o per attaccare. In altre parole, i colleghi di Binotto sono convinti di aver spaccato le ossa all’avversario, che dovendo chiedere troppo alla sua povera unit (scusate) ex Honda, ha finito col cuocere le batterie." Alberto Antonini https://www.formulapassion.it/opinioni/ ... 09558.html
This is the translation:
"The double failure of the RB18s (even Perez's spin is not a simple driving error) is explained in Ferrari with the K-1 factor. That is, the function (not to be confused with a PU mapping) that allows you to use the maximum combined power of the ICE and the motogenerator connected to the transmission, i.e. the MGU-K. It is used at the start (of a race), once the 100 Km/h have been reached; and then, in the race, when you need power to defend yourself or to attack. In other words, Binotto's colleagues are convinced that they broke the bones of the opponent, who having to ask too much of its poor (in the sense of mistreated) former Honda unit, ended up cooking the batteries"
This is to be taken with a big pinch of salt.
Just some food for thought
Sounds about right
AKA Hamilton Pressure on Perez. And Max Pressuring himself on Leclerc.
Alberto Antonini, former Head of Ferrari's press office, reveals what Ferrari thinks has happened (from what they could see) to the RedBulls.
"Il doppio guasto delle RB18 (anche il testacoda di Perez non è un semplice errore di guida) in Ferrari lo hanno spiegato con il Fattore K-1. Cioè la funzione (da non confondere con una mappatura) che permette di utilizzare la massima potenza combinata del motore termico e del motogeneratore collegato alla trasmissione, ovvero lo MGU-K. Si usa in partenza, una volta raggiunti i 100 orari; e poi, in gara, nei momenti in cui serve potenza per difendersi o per attaccare. In altre parole, i colleghi di Binotto sono convinti di aver spaccato le ossa all’avversario, che dovendo chiedere troppo alla sua povera unit (scusate) ex Honda, ha finito col cuocere le batterie." Alberto Antonini https://www.formulapassion.it/opinioni/ ... 09558.html
This is the translation:
"The double failure of the RB18s (even Perez's spin is not a simple driving error) is explained in Ferrari with the K-1 factor. That is, the function (not to be confused with a PU mapping) that allows you to use the maximum combined power of the ICE and the motogenerator connected to the transmission, i.e. the MGU-K. It is used at the start (of a race), once the 100 Km/h have been reached; and then, in the race, when you need power to defend yourself or to attack. In other words, Binotto's colleagues are convinced that they broke the bones of the opponent, who having to ask too much of its poor (in the sense of mistreated) former Honda unit, ended up cooking the batteries"
This is to be taken with a big pinch of salt.
Just some food for thought
Sounds about right
AKA Hamilton Pressure on Perez. And Max Pressuring himself on Leclerc.
Will soon find out as won't they need to be replaced?
Some think RedBull have a MUGK that that might be interfering with other electronics. It could be high frequency wave reflectance on the power lines? Could mean honda is controlling the MGUK this a higher frequency of control.
I think they just ran out of fuel. They gambled the ability to run their engine as hard as they wanted with less energy recovery to keep up each lap, and fueled more to get it there, but they didn't fuel enough. I saw this from telemetry, very little ERS, so it's really not a surprise that Ferrari engineers would think the same.
Translation: Red Bull's problems during the Bahrain GP were not caused by the fuel pump, sources around the team and FIA motorsport federation confirm.
Some think RedBull have a MUGK that that might be interfering with other electronics. It could be high frequency wave reflectance on the power lines? Could mean honda is controlling the MGUK this a higher frequency of control.
Too many wild speculations without any credible line of thinking that help get a good view of the problem Red Bull faced. The only thing I haven't heard yet is someone saying Red Bull was adding Jack Daniel's. Hope to see some clear ideas of where the problems emanated from.
Pretty interesting quali lap comparison between Lec and Ham
Summary: the Ferrari has excellent traction and stability meaning the kerbs are a place it can find time. The Mercedes is not as stable thanks to its floor issues and top speed is hampered by the parachute wings they were forced to run to gain back some of the downforce lost from the floor issues.
If Mercedes can get the car skimming the track like the best of them, they'll be as quick as the Ferrari. The question is: how big an "if" is that?
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
Pretty interesting quali lap comparison between Lec and Ham
Summary: the Ferrari has excellent traction and stability meaning the kerbs are a place it can find time. The Mercedes is not as stable thanks to its floor issues and top speed is hampered by the parachute wings they were forced to run to gain back some of the downforce lost from the floor issues.
If Mercedes can get the car skimming the track like the best of them, they'll be as quick as the Ferrari. The question is: how big an "if" is that?
Be interesting to see how they try to develop their concept. I reckon the PU will be a factor this year. As I mentioned in another post just now, Its hard to see how all the customer teams got their design so wrong to allow them to be lapped.
Out of interest, how did the merc wings compare to the others around it?
Pretty interesting quali lap comparison between Lec and Ham
Summary: the Ferrari has excellent traction and stability meaning the kerbs are a place it can find time. The Mercedes is not as stable thanks to its floor issues and top speed is hampered by the parachute wings they were forced to run to gain back some of the downforce lost from the floor issues.
If Mercedes can get the car skimming the track like the best of them, they'll be as quick as the Ferrari. The question is: how big an "if" is that?
Or if you look at things from a less generous perspective, Mercedes is running their car closer to the edge of porpoising and still lacking performance.
