2013 Testing - Barcelona 2: 28 Feb - 3 Mar

[Ferraripilot]

Merc can make over 2 sec in a year. Because they already proved they did. Also Sauber engineer en Aldo Costa confirmed that they have made up 2 sec. Thats possible because:

1. This car is designed by Aldo Costa, not Loic Bigois.
2.This is the first car designed with the help off Costa,Bell, Willis (Elliot)
3. This car is designed after the team revamped the Aero department. (Bye bye Bigois, Bye Bye 50% model)
4. This has no heritage of the W01,02 or 03. It looks the same but Ross Brawn and other Merc people have said this is a completely new car under the hood. So the fundament of the car bare little or no resemblance with the W01,02 or W03.
5. This car has been in development since the Mugello test, so 18 months of development has gone in this car.
6. The rules haven't changed so other teams can't make the same leap as Merc did, the law of diminishing returns (Christian Horner). Plus McLaren decision to build a totally new car confirms this statement they couldn't improve last years car simply because of the stagnation of the rules.

So please stop saying its impossible, because they times show they have improved over 2 sec. Plus the team has confirmed that is over 2 seconds faster. But Aldo also confirmed Lewis Hamiltons claim, that they need to improve on Aero. But the question is, is improving 2 seconds enough. We will know that after the race on Sunday.

Great post. Spot on, especially mentioning Horner's diminishing returns statement. All too true and relevant for this topic especially. No one has a ddd, edb, or any other clever device except perhaps Merc with their clever suspension but We cannot be sure how valuable it is yet.

[Nando]

Lets look at McLaren then:
2009 - 2 wins
2010 - 5 wins
2011 - 6 wins
2012 - 7 wins

See what I mean about consistent progression?
Again - I'm not saying you cannot improve or get worse - I'm saying that drastic changes won't happen overnight (or in this case, over a few months).

Now you are actively trying to hide the fact that Mclaren went from ok-ish to building a very dominant car.

Basically what you are saying is drastic changes won´t happen overnight so if they build the quickest car on the grid, "mysterious forces" will come into affect so that at the end of the season, looking at it as a whole it´s only a minor improvement from the year before.

They built a car that was a much faster machine then the Red Bull. (even when the Red Bull was sorted out)

[Mika1]

Merc can make over 2 sec in a year. Because they already proved they did. Also Sauber engineer en Aldo Costa confirmed that they have made up 2 sec. Thats possible because:

1. This car is designed by Aldo Costa, not Loic Bigois.
2.This is the first car designed with the help off Costa,Bell, Willis (Elliot)
3. This car is designed after the team revamped the Aero department. (Bye bye Bigois, Bye Bye 50% model)
4. This has no heritage of the W01,02 or 03. It looks the same but Ross Brawn and other Merc people have said this is a completely new car under the hood. So the fundament of the car bare little or no resemblance with the W01,02 or W03.
5. This car has been in development since the Mugello test, so 18 months of development has gone in this car.
6. The rules haven't changed so other teams can't make the same leap as Merc did, the law of diminishing returns (Christian Horner). Plus McLaren decision to build a totally new car confirms this statement they couldn't improve last years car simply because of the stagnation of the rules.

So please stop saying its impossible, because they times show they have improved over 2 sec. Plus the team has confirmed that is over 2 seconds faster. But Aldo also confirmed Lewis Hamiltons claim, that they need to improve on Aero. But the question is, is improving 2 seconds enough. We will know that after the race on Sunday.

=D> Good post.

[kilcoo316]

Merc can make over 2 sec in a year. Because they already proved they did.

So please stop saying its impossible, because they times show they have improved over 2 sec.

I guess you are ignoring the different tyres?


They did 22.9s in last years testing, they got down to a 20.1 in this years testing. 1.8 sec minus the tyreDelta (which Pirelli estimate at ~0.6-0.8 sec).

Its a net 1 - 1.2 second difference in their absolute times* over 12 months. Which is in line with reasonable expectations.

*=/= relative pace as the others are improving too. I would estimate the general pace of improvement in F1 to be in around ~0.1 sec/month [given consistent regs - but with all the chopping and changing in the regulations most winters its hard to verify that].


I'll maintain that Merc won't be at the very sharp end at the start of the year (obviously barring freak weather etc), but may progress to get there by the latter stages of the season.

[kilcoo316]

Now you are actively trying to hide the fact that Mclaren went from ok-ish to building a very dominant car.

??? How?

I'm showing clear progression across the seasons. They didn't go from 2 wins in 2009 to dominating in 2010 did they?

They won 6 races in 2011 - so they had a handy baseline to start from heading into 2012.

This is not complicated.

Basically what you are saying is drastic changes won´t happen overnight so if they build the quickest car on the grid, "mysterious forces" will come into affect so that at the end of the season, looking at it as a whole it´s only a minor improvement from the year before.

They built a car that was a much faster machine then the Red Bull. (even when the Red Bull was sorted out)

Whatever.

If you wanna stick your head in the sand, fine, wait till Australia. Then you might realise "sh!t, maybe he knew what he was talking about".

[bonjon1979]

Merc can make over 2 sec in a year. Because they already proved they did.

So please stop saying its impossible, because they times show they have improved over 2 sec.

I guess you are ignoring the different tyres?


They did 22.9s in last years testing, they got down to a 20.1 in this years testing. 1.8 sec minus the tyreDelta (which Pirelli estimate at ~0.6-0.8 sec).

Its a net 1 - 1.2 second difference in their absolute times* over 12 months. Which is in line with reasonable expectations.

*=/= relative pace as the others are improving too. I would estimate the general pace of improvement in F1 to be in around ~0.1 sec/month [given consistent regs - but with all the chopping and changing in the regulations most winters its hard to verify that].


I'll maintain that Merc won't be at the very sharp end at the start of the year (obviously barring freak weather etc), but may progress to get there by the latter stages of the season.

I think you're forgetting that they can't use drs all the way around in qualifying any more which negates any loss from the tyres.

[Phil]

They did 22.9s in last years testing, they got down to a 20.1 in this years testing. 1.8 sec minus the tyreDelta (which Pirelli estimate at ~0.6-0.8 sec).

Its a net 1 - 1.2 second difference in their absolute times* over 12 months. Which is in line with reasonable expectations.

*=/= relative pace as the others are improving too. I would estimate the general pace of improvement in F1 to be in around ~0.1 sec/month [given consistent regs - but with all the chopping and changing in the regulations most winters its hard to verify that].

Kilcoo316, aren't you jumping to a few conclusions here?
I don't doubt that under normal conditions perhaps an improvement of ~0.1sec/month is realistic. I would say that this only applies under normal conditions (i.e. car upgrades are an evolution like over a season) but doesn't necessarely apply when there is a fundemental flaw within the car's design.

By the same reasoning, a fundemental flaw can very well cost you 2 seconds of performance - on the other hand, correcting that, could gain you 2 seconds using the same logic. I'm not saying that Mercedes had a fundemental flaw that cost them that exact amount, but it's clear to see that they did have a major tyre deg issue and that the car had stagnated mid season. IMO I wouldn't bet against them that they have indeed corrected fundemental flaws that cost them dearly the last couple of seasons.

Its easier to gain exponentially on a bad car than it is to gain on a good car that is already running very efficient. I do not believe this applies to the Mercedes at all, hence why your metric doesn't entirely add up in this case.

[beelsebob]

They did 22.9s in last years testing, they got down to a 20.1 in this years testing. 1.8 sec minus the tyreDelta (which Pirelli estimate at ~0.6-0.8 sec).

You suck at subtraction.

Its a net 1 - 1.2 second difference in their absolute times* over 12 months. Which is in line with reasonable expectations.

No, it's a net 2-2.2 second difference in their absolute times over 12 months.

[raymondu999]

a fundemental flaw can very well cost you 2 seconds of performance - on the other hand, correcting that, could gain you 2 seconds using the same logic.

The MP4-24 comes to mind (wrong static weight distribution, lack of outwash endplates). They changed those two items and it qualified top 3 in Nurburgring.

[Vasconia]

About the possible 2 seconds of improvement in Mercedes, its rather difficult to achieve such a great change but not impossible, the room for improvement was huge in race pace, and if the tyre degradation has been solved they can do it, but the common sense says that other teams have improved too, so presumably they should be at least half a second behind.

Other thing is that if the new updates expected for Melbourne are very, very good the gap could be smaller, but its impossible to know it.

Anyway, I am sure that Costa will show his skills and the new car is a much batter balanced one and an easy one to be understood, which helps a lot

[Vasconia]

a fundemental flaw can very well cost you 2 seconds of performance - on the other hand, correcting that, could gain you 2 seconds using the same logic.

The MP4-24 comes to mind (wrong static weight distribution, lack of outwash endplates). They changed those two items and it qualified top 3 in Nurburgring.

But Mclaren is an unique team doing this, they can have a shitty car and in two weeks make an incredible improvement, the only similar case I have seen in the last seasons was last years Ferrari, but they needed Mugello for this, Mclaren achieved this improvement only with factory/simulation work.

[bonjon1979]

a fundemental flaw can very well cost you 2 seconds of performance - on the other hand, correcting that, could gain you 2 seconds using the same logic.

The MP4-24 comes to mind (wrong static weight distribution, lack of outwash endplates). They changed those two items and it qualified top 3 in Nurburgring.

But Mclaren is an unique team doing this, they can have a shitty car and in two weeks make an incredible improvement, the only similar case I have seen in the last seasons was last years Ferrari, but they needed Mugello for this, Mclaren achieved this improvement only with factory/simulation work.

Just because they have a track, doesn't mean they're allowed to use it. Ferrari weren't doing any on track tests to improve their car.

[beelsebob]

a fundemental flaw can very well cost you 2 seconds of performance - on the other hand, correcting that, could gain you 2 seconds using the same logic.

The MP4-24 comes to mind (wrong static weight distribution, lack of outwash endplates). They changed those two items and it qualified top 3 in Nurburgring.

But Mclaren is an unique team doing this, they can have a shitty car and in two weeks make an incredible improvement, the only similar case I have seen in the last seasons was last years Ferrari, but they needed Mugello for this, Mclaren achieved this improvement only with factory/simulation work.

The only reason McLaren ever got the reputation for rapidly improving cars was the MP4-24. The reason they got it was because they took an enormous risk on how to improve it, and it happened to deliver ~1-2 second a lap gains in time. The same is entirely possible at other teams if they find the reason that their car has been a dog.

[turbof1]

2009 was also very different, with the new regs only just have been put into place. In such a situation you can very quickly turn a very weak car around. You absolutely cannot do the same now; the knowledge has been fully developed and the cars have been fully matured. A fundamental mistake is not going to be made; if you happen to be with a 1 second deficit you will not be able to turn that around. There is very little scope of development.

[Nando]

But Mclaren is an unique team doing this, they can have a shitty car and in two weeks make an incredible improvement, the only similar case I have seen in the last seasons was last years Ferrari, but they needed Mugello for this, Mclaren achieved this improvement only with factory/simulation work.

Just because they have a track, doesn't mean they're allowed to use it. Ferrari weren't doing any on track tests to improve their car.

I think you might be confusing Mugello with Fiorano.