Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Difference between using it and not using it is just getting 0.5 MJ somewhere, and as we saw braking on the straight got 2 MJ or more for Lando. I can easily see someone use overtake mode to get an advantage and then "park the car in middle of road" harvesting in a slow corner to get 0.5 MJ back.
You don't see the problem here? If you don't break the detection point gap (1 second?) as fast as possible, the driver that you passed will simply get in front again with overtake mode on the next lap. Parking anywhere to harvest energy makes you even more vulnerable. That's why I called it the "net zero" pass. You're net position change will be zero. Once you use overtake mode, you lose the means to break away because you are in energy deficit. It's a trap.
Difference between using it and not using it is just getting 0.5 MJ somewhere, and as we saw braking on the straight got 2 MJ or more for Lando. I can easily see someone use overtake mode to get an advantage and then "park the car in middle of road" harvesting in a slow corner to get 0.5 MJ back.
You don't see the problem here? If you don't break the detection point gap (1 second?) as fast as possible, the driver that you passed will simply get in front again with overtake mode on the next lap. Parking anywhere to harvest energy makes you even more vulnerable. That's why I called it the "net zero" pass. You're net position change will be zero. Once you use overtake mode, you lose the means to break away because you are in energy deficit. It's a trap.
I was curious how it can persist for laps, I don't think it can because these cars exhaust their battery more than twice per lap.
If you are a faster car, this might be enough to edge you ahead. Not sure what is your point, overtake mode is not a slam dunk free overtake? I think that is a positive.
12500 - Audi
12100 - Mercedes (excluding Mclaren)
11650- Ferrari
11300 - RBPT
9900 - Honda (likely not the real thing)
Ferrari's start looked the best of the bunch (to my eye, at least) which makes sense given the murmurs about turbo lag, the start procedure, and that Ferrari had flagged concerns about those things a year ago - concerns which went unheeded by the other teams - and based on that, built their engine to better accommodate the current start procedure.
I'm a bit biased, but IMO, there is absolutely no way the start procedure should be changed now - a year later, immediately before the start of the season - after teams ignored these legitimate concerns when they were first raised 12 months ago.
Clearly it is possible to make compromises in PU design to better accommodate the current start procedure, so if teams ignored (or did not fully appreciate/understand) those concerns when they were first raised and then proceeded to build a PU that does not handle the current starts well, tough stuff; that's a development issue (or mistake, even) and very much not something that should be patched via a change to the start procedure immediately before the start of the season. It would be wildly unfair to Ferrari (and any other manufacturer that designed their PU with the current start procedure in mind).
12500 - Audi
12100 - Mercedes (excluding Mclaren)
11650- Ferrari
11300 - RBPT
9900 - Honda (likely not the real thing)
Ferrari's start looked the best of the bunch (to my eye, at least) which makes sense given the murmurs about turbo lag, the start procedure, and that Ferrari had flagged concerns about those things a year ago - concerns which went unheeded by the other teams - and based on that, built their engine to better accommodate the current start procedure.
I'm a bit biased, but IMO, there is absolutely no way the start procedure should be changed now - a year later, immediately before the start of the season - after teams ignored these legitimate concerns when they were first raised 12 months ago.
Clearly it is possible to make compromises in PU design to better accommodate the current start procedure, so if teams ignored (or did not fully appreciate/understand) those concerns when they were first raised and then proceeded to build a PU that does not handle the current starts well, tough stuff; that's a development issue (or mistake, even) and very much not something that should be patched via a change to the start procedure immediately before the start of the season. It would be wildly unfair to Ferrari (and any other manufacturer that designed their PU with the current start procedure in mind).
12500 - Audi
12100 - Mercedes (excluding Mclaren)
11650- Ferrari
11300 - RBPT
9900 - Honda (likely not the real thing)
Ferrari's start looked the best of the bunch (to my eye, at least) which makes sense given the murmurs about turbo lag, the start procedure, and that Ferrari had flagged concerns about those things a year ago - concerns which went unheeded by the other teams - and based on that, built their engine to better accommodate the current start procedure.
I'm a bit biased, but IMO, there is absolutely no way the start procedure should be changed now - a year later, immediately before the start of the season - after teams ignored these legitimate concerns when they were first raised 12 months ago.
Clearly it is possible to make compromises in PU design to better accommodate the current start procedure, so if teams ignored (or did not fully appreciate/understand) those concerns when they were first raised and then proceeded to build a PU that does not handle the current starts well, tough stuff; that's a development issue (or mistake, even) and very much not something that should be patched via a change to the start procedure immediately before the start of the season. It would be wildly unfair to Ferrari (and any other manufacturer that designed their PU with the current start procedure in mind).
Yeah, Ferrari look amazing.
Smh…
The notion that the video you linked disproves the things mentioned in my post (which have been reported by THE RACE), seems myopic.
Have you read the reporting from THE RACE on this topic? Are you aware of how turbo lag impacts the current launch procedure? Have you watched all the practice starts across the 3 days of testing? Can you comment on any of those elements of this topic?
Ferrari's start looked the best of the bunch (to my eye, at least) which makes sense given the murmurs about turbo lag, the start procedure, and that Ferrari had flagged concerns about those things a year ago - concerns which went unheeded by the other teams - and based on that, built their engine to better accommodate the current start procedure.
I'm a bit biased, but IMO, there is absolutely no way the start procedure should be changed now - a year later, immediately before the start of the season - after teams ignored these legitimate concerns when they were first raised 12 months ago.
Clearly it is possible to make compromises in PU design to better accommodate the current start procedure, so if teams ignored (or did not fully appreciate/understand) those concerns when they were first raised and then proceeded to build a PU that does not handle the current starts well, tough stuff; that's a development issue (or mistake, even) and very much not something that should be patched via a change to the start procedure immediately before the start of the season. It would be wildly unfair to Ferrari (and any other manufacturer that designed their PU with the current start procedure in mind).
Yeah, Ferrari look amazing.
Smh…
The notion that the video you linked disproves the things mentioned in my post (which have been reported by THE RACE), seems myopic.
Have you read the reporting from THE RACE on this topic? Are you aware of how turbo lag impacts the current launch procedure? Have you watched all the practice starts across the 3 days of testing? Can you comment on any of those elements of this topic?
A vapid response.
Nothing vapid about it, that’s the Ferrari starting procedure. It’s just inconvenient for you that it was revving for 22 seconds before starting, kind of goes against the narrative you guys are trying to frame.
Whatever advantage, if any at all, is clearly marginal. They have the same laughably long starting procedure as everyone else. In the end it’s a safety concern so it won’t matter what Ferrari think.
Btw, the procedure in the video from yelistener is cut short at the beginning, so you really don’t know how long it was revving for.
Interesting to see McLaren's ultra-short gearing. They are basically 15 kph behind Ferrari on the main straight with the same rev number in 8th. And Ferrari's 8th is kind of middle of the pack in terms of ratio, same as the factory Mercedes gearbox.
Aren’t gear ratios something that teams change from track to track? Or is this one of those things that changed years ago and I never paid attention to it. Maybe McLaren are running the test with Australia gear ratios to save costs?
Aren’t gear ratios something that teams change from track to track? Or is this one of those things that changed years ago and I never paid attention to it. Maybe McLaren are running the test with Australia gear ratios to save costs?
I knew that gear ratios are locked and you have the chance to change them once in a season; but I don't know if the rule is the same or changed with this amazing new regulation set.
Aren’t gear ratios something that teams change from track to track? Or is this one of those things that changed years ago and I never paid attention to it. Maybe McLaren are running the test with Australia gear ratios to save costs?
I knew that gear ratios are locked and you have the chance to change them once in a season; but I don't know if the rule is the same or changed with this amazing new regulation set.
It's one set of gear ratios for each team for an entire season since 2015.
In 2014, in the first year of the "turbo-hybrid era", they were allowed to change the ratios once during the season (same as this year).
Apparently it will be one set of ratios from next season, but in the first season of th regulation set, they allow the teams one gear ratios change. Same as 2014 and, IIRC, 2022.
And the gears in this test might or might not be the ones in Australia. They might change them for baharain-two as well. Only in Q in Australia do they become "fixed", I think.
Dunning asked: Do you know, Kruger? Kruger said: Yes.
Interesting to see McLaren's ultra-short gearing. They are basically 15 kph behind Ferrari on the main straight with the same rev number in 8th. And Ferrari's 8th is kind of middle of the pack in terms of ratio, same as the factory Mercedes gearbox.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBIlhMpXAAA ... =4096x4096
so what can we say to they Audi? Barely using 8th gear.
not enough power? too long gearing?
on the MGUK-side I think Audi could eb really good; on the other hand the ICE with sub 16:1 compression ratio? ; P
Will the turn up the Power this week?
Interesting to see McLaren's ultra-short gearing. They are basically 15 kph behind Ferrari on the main straight with the same rev number in 8th. And Ferrari's 8th is kind of middle of the pack in terms of ratio, same as the factory Mercedes gearbox.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBIlhMpXAAA ... =4096x4096
so what can we say to they Audi? Barely using 8th gear.
not enough power? too long gearing?
on the MGUK-side I think Audi could eb really good; on the other hand the ICE with sub 16:1 compression ratio? ; P
Will the turn up the Power this week?
They have by far the longest 8th gear, so I don't think it's a turning down the power thing. Their 7th is basically like McLaren's 8th.
Interesting to see McLaren's ultra-short gearing. They are basically 15 kph behind Ferrari on the main straight with the same rev number in 8th. And Ferrari's 8th is kind of middle of the pack in terms of ratio, same as the factory Mercedes gearbox.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBIlhMpXAAA ... =4096x4096
so what can we say to they Audi? Barely using 8th gear.
not enough power? too long gearing?
on the MGUK-side I think Audi could eb really good; on the other hand the ICE with sub 16:1 compression ratio? ; P
Will the turn up the Power this week?
They have by far the longest 8th gear, so I don't think it's a turning down the power thing. Their 7th is basically like McLaren's 8th.
can we deduct something from this? I mean how is Audi calculating? I try to compare BOR and HUL. really weird for me what they do.
