There is no "lucky" in "Marlboro".zac510 wrote: ↑01 Oct 2017, 19:10They already have a deal with Marlboro: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13163 ... lboro-deal
There is no "lucky" in "Marlboro".zac510 wrote: ↑01 Oct 2017, 19:10They already have a deal with Marlboro: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13163 ... lboro-deal
So this is interesting in light of the recent race. Running contrary to many people's expectations:
RB had the biggest room to improve their chasis which had a very clean design at the start of the season, so I am not surprised if they had the best one right now.f1316 wrote: ↑02 Oct 2017, 09:11
All of which is basically to say that, yes, I think the notion Ferrari would be out developed by Mercedes was wide of the mark. Granted, Red Bull have made by far the biggest step during the course of the season but I think a large part of that was underperforming vs expectations at the start of the season, giving them more headroom when fundamental issues fixed.
Which given your comments, aggressive development that gets its head chopped off doesn't stay aggressive for long. Rise, lather, repeat.
Motorsport -An "angry" Sergio Marchionne says changes are being made to the Formula 1 team to combat the "ugly" reliability problems that marred its Malaysian Grand Prix.
Sebastian Vettel had to start last at Sepang after engine problems affected his Saturday, while Kimi Raikkonen was unable to take up his second place on the grid due to similar issues.
Ferrari identified the failure of a component relating to the engine's air intake system as the problem on both cars. president Marchionne said that was the consequence of a "young team" in the engine department, and that action was being taken.
"Yesterday both Ferraris could have won the race," he said at an event in Rovereto in Italy on Monday. "That's a fact. It could have also been the same at Singapore, that's another fact.
"It's also a fact that we've got some issues with our power units because we have a young team, but also because the quality of the components is not at the right level for a race car.
"We are intervening and we are working on it. It's almost fortunate we haven't had that problem until the Malaysian GP.
"Now we're working on the quality department and making some organisational changes. Having this kind of problem during the race make us angry.
"That's not a big problem if this kind of issue appears in our factory, but it's really ugly when you're in second place on the grid and you can't start the race."
Aren't I correct in thinking though that some of Mercs PUs have only doe 2 races so still have life left in them...f1316 wrote: ↑02 Oct 2017, 09:11So this is interesting in light of the recent race. Running contrary to many people's expectations:
- Ferrari's updates are not only rapid and consistent but seem to be working as intended
- conversely Mercedes have now put a package on the car that not only doesn't work as expected but they don't seem to understand - evidenced by the fact that one of their cars continued to run it
On the flip side, it's currently Ferrari that are getting the lion's share of reliability issues at the moment; that said, I'd suggest that this is a likely the result of very aggressive and ambitious targets for components in order to minimise time on the final set, allowing for very aggressive usage in final GPs. It didn't work but suspect it wasn't design flaws but just overreaching.
And one of the glimmers of hope amongst the current results (along with general strong pace) is that they now have a clear run to the finish with no likely reliability issues (gearbox from Stroll crash not withstanding but hopefully not an issue with the inner/outer shell design), having fitted new turbo for Seb and Kimi getting a new raft in Suzuka.
Mercedes, on the other hand, will have to tread carefully, given they went aggressive and introduced their final PU in Spa. Whilst they may gain in oil usage, they will have to be careful with performance modes - something they can I'll-afford if their chassis continues to have its moments of 'diva-ishness'.
All of which is basically to say that, yes, I think the notion Ferrari would be out developed by Mercedes was wide of the mark. Granted, Red Bull have made by far the biggest step during the course of the season but I think a large part of that was underperforming vs expectations at the start of the season, giving them more headroom when fundamental issues fixed.
According to some sources, the gearbox was examined in Maranello and deemed in a good healthy state and is on its way to Japan. There should be a press release soonadrianjordan wrote: ↑03 Oct 2017, 09:19... with no likely reliability issues (gearbox from Stroll crash not withstanding but hopefully not an issue ...
Typical Ferrari-esque overraction.TAG wrote: ↑02 Oct 2017, 20:25This is making it sound as if there are some young heads rolling in Maranello as a consequence of this weekend.
Which given your comments, aggressive development that gets its head chopped off doesn't stay aggressive for long. Rise, lather, repeat.
Motorsport -An "angry" Sergio Marchionne says changes are being made to the Formula 1 team to combat the "ugly" reliability problems that marred its Malaysian Grand Prix.
Sebastian Vettel had to start last at Sepang after engine problems affected his Saturday, while Kimi Raikkonen was unable to take up his second place on the grid due to similar issues.
Ferrari identified the failure of a component relating to the engine's air intake system as the problem on both cars. president Marchionne said that was the consequence of a "young team" in the engine department, and that action was being taken.
"Yesterday both Ferraris could have won the race," he said at an event in Rovereto in Italy on Monday. "That's a fact. It could have also been the same at Singapore, that's another fact.
"It's also a fact that we've got some issues with our power units because we have a young team, but also because the quality of the components is not at the right level for a race car.
"We are intervening and we are working on it. It's almost fortunate we haven't had that problem until the Malaysian GP.
"Now we're working on the quality department and making some organisational changes. Having this kind of problem during the race make us angry.
"That's not a big problem if this kind of issue appears in our factory, but it's really ugly when you're in second place on the grid and you can't start the race."
I don't specifically know which PU was used at each race, but suspect they'd have needed spec 4 at Spa, Monza and Sepang. Singapore would have been an old unit but very surprised if it was in Malaysia (might go towards explaining lack of pace bar quali, I guess).adrianjordan wrote: ↑03 Oct 2017, 09:19Aren't I correct in thinking though that some of Mercs PUs have only doe 2 races so still have life left in them...f1316 wrote: ↑02 Oct 2017, 09:11So this is interesting in light of the recent race. Running contrary to many people's expectations:
- Ferrari's updates are not only rapid and consistent but seem to be working as intended
- conversely Mercedes have now put a package on the car that not only doesn't work as expected but they don't seem to understand - evidenced by the fact that one of their cars continued to run it
On the flip side, it's currently Ferrari that are getting the lion's share of reliability issues at the moment; that said, I'd suggest that this is a likely the result of very aggressive and ambitious targets for components in order to minimise time on the final set, allowing for very aggressive usage in final GPs. It didn't work but suspect it wasn't design flaws but just overreaching.
And one of the glimmers of hope amongst the current results (along with general strong pace) is that they now have a clear run to the finish with no likely reliability issues (gearbox from Stroll crash not withstanding but hopefully not an issue with the inner/outer shell design), having fitted new turbo for Seb and Kimi getting a new raft in Suzuka.
Mercedes, on the other hand, will have to tread carefully, given they went aggressive and introduced their final PU in Spa. Whilst they may gain in oil usage, they will have to be careful with performance modes - something they can I'll-afford if their chassis continues to have its moments of 'diva-ishness'.
All of which is basically to say that, yes, I think the notion Ferrari would be out developed by Mercedes was wide of the mark. Granted, Red Bull have made by far the biggest step during the course of the season but I think a large part of that was underperforming vs expectations at the start of the season, giving them more headroom when fundamental issues fixed.
one would be ablidged to say having the FIA on your side "all the way" should be enough but even then......