2018 Scuderia Toro Rosso F1 Team - Honda

[ME4ME]

I don't care much for Monaco. Instead I think it's the upcoming Bahrain Grand Prix that will be of great interest. It being the 2nd Grand Prix, teams will have fixed the most accute problems. Drivers be a bit more on it. The track is a permanent race-track and will be less green to start with and probably evolve less as well. I think we will get a much much better reading of relative competitiveness of the teams than we got in Melbourne.

Toro Rosso had a pretty poor weekend in Melbourne, so the 2nd Grand Prix could be better. Or not. We will see, but I for sure think it will be a better performance indicator.

[Ground Effect]

Well, based on what Gasly is saying, it sounds positive for the second half of the season for TR. I'm curious how they'll go at Monaco.

Yes it will be interesting. I expect redbulls will be best there. It would be very fun for us to see them as 4th team there

STR can't be 4th anywhere at the moment, except it's wishful thinking. The chassis is far from where it should and could be, lots of potential there. But if Monaco was this weekend, they'd struggle badly.

[etusch]

Well, based on what Gasly is saying, it sounds positive for the second half of the season for TR. I'm curious how they'll go at Monaco.

Yes it will be interesting. I expect redbulls will be best there. It would be very fun for us to see them as 4th team there

STR can't be 4th anywhere at the moment, except it's wishful thinking. The chassis is far from where it should and could be, lots of potential there. But if Monaco was this weekend, they'd struggle badly.

I said this because of Gasly's "We are good at low speed tacks" statement. Midpack times are very close in the same time. But you are right I don't realy expect this to happen. Just a what if...

[techman]

I said this because of Gasly's "We are good at low speed tacks" statement.

interestingly it was sector 3 toro rosso was losing the most and it was made up of slow speed corners. so yes gaslys statement is really bs. this car needs a big modfiication or do what haas is doing.

[makecry]

I said this because of Gasly's "We are good at low speed tacks" statement.

interestingly it was sector 3 toro rosso was losing the most and it was made up of slow speed corners. so yes gaslys statement is really bs. this car needs a big modfiication or do what haas is doing.

Car needs a much more efficient and powerful engine. A good power unit is vital in this formula.

[Revs84]

I said this because of Gasly's "We are good at low speed tacks" statement.

interestingly it was sector 3 toro rosso was losing the most and it was made up of slow speed corners. so yes gaslys statement is really bs. this car needs a big modfiication or do what haas is doing.

Car needs a much more efficient and powerful engine. A good power unit is vital in this formula.

I guess everyone other than Mercedes works team and engine customers can retire then. That would be really exciting to watch...

[techman]

Car needs a much more efficient and powerful engine. A good power unit is vital in this formula.

Ok its probably reason why williams is struggling that much nowadays with the best powerunit mercedes.its there new drivers and poor chassis thats the reason. chassis efficiency is more important to me. look at redbull chassis to the so called self proclaimed best chassis mclaren. over 1 second advantage. you cant beat a proper efficient chassis. Not to say engine efficiency is not important. but good drivers and efficient chassis make a big difference. if engine formula is key then sauber will be in front running the same spec ferrari. TR drivers will need time. just like all rookie coming into f1.

[Bisonas]

Car needs a much more efficient and powerful engine. A good power unit is vital in this formula.

Ok its probably reason why williams is struggling that much nowadays with the best powerunit mercedes.its there new drivers and poor chassis thats the reason. chassis efficiency is more important to me. look at redbull chassis to the so called self proclaimed best chassis mclaren. over 1 second advantage. you cant beat a proper efficient chassis. Not to say engine efficiency is not important. but good drivers and efficient chassis make a big difference. if engine formula is key then sauber will be in front running the same spec ferrari. TR drivers will need time. just like all rookie coming into f1.

Chassis is important also . Yes. But its needless to say that when there are 3-4 teams with huge budgets and resources, at some point those 3-4 teams will all have a somewhat efficient chassis, and good drivers. When that point is reached, it wont matter if one chassis is a little more efficient or not. Engine Power will dictated the result most of the times. And that is what we are seeing today.
If your chassis is there or thereabout, you need your engine to be there also or thereabout. You need both unfortunately.

[etusch]

Car needs a much more efficient and powerful engine. A good power unit is vital in this formula.

Ok its probably reason why williams is struggling that much nowadays with the best powerunit mercedes.its there new drivers and poor chassis thats the reason. chassis efficiency is more important to me. look at redbull chassis to the so called self proclaimed best chassis mclaren. over 1 second advantage. you cant beat a proper efficient chassis. Not to say engine efficiency is not important. but good drivers and efficient chassis make a big difference. if engine formula is key then sauber will be in front running the same spec ferrari. TR drivers will need time. just like all rookie coming into f1.

Chassis is important also . Yes. But its needless to say that when there are 3-4 teams with huge budgets and resources, at some point those 3-4 teams will all have a somewhat efficient chassis, and good drivers. When that point is reached, it wont matter if one chassis is a little more efficient or not. Engine Power will dictated the result most of the times. And that is what we are seeing today.
If your chassis is there or thereabout, you need your engine to be there also or thereabout. You need both unfortunately.

At the end you both telling truth. Both engine and chassis are important. İf you have issues with the chassis with good engine then chassis is more important for you, if you have good chassis with a relatively poor engine, engine is more important for you, if you think you have one of the best chassis but lack of engine power, but first part of your thinking is not true then, for you, 3 things important, chassis, engine, personel

[carisi2k]

I don't care much for Monaco. Instead I think it's the upcoming Bahrain Grand Prix that will be of great interest. It being the 2nd Grand Prix, teams will have fixed the most accute problems. Drivers be a bit more on it. The track is a permanent race-track and will be less green to start with and probably evolve less as well. I think we will get a much much better reading of relative competitiveness of the teams than we got in Melbourne.

Toro Rosso had a pretty poor weekend in Melbourne, so the 2nd Grand Prix could be better. Or not. We will see, but I for sure think it will be a better performance indicator.

Bahrain might be a permanent race track but doesn't get much action during the year. Expect it to evolve as much as Melbourne. Bahrain is a point and squirt circuit and so the most important things needed are lots of power, good acceleration and good brakes. It might actually hide the STR13's issues rather then highlight them.

[techman]

DRIVER PREVIEW

Brendon Hartley (Car 28):


"Bahrain is a track I have some nice memories from, it was where we clinched our first world title back in 2015 with Mark Webber and Timo Bernhard in the Porsche LMP1 team, so I'm really happy to go back there. I wouldn't say it's my strongest track on the calendar, but it's one that I know very well. We didn't score points in Melbourne, but there were plenty of positives from the weekend and I believe Bahrain should be a better track for us. My goal for this weekend stays the same: to score my first points in Formula 1."


Pierre Gasly (Car 10):


"What comes to my mind when I think about Bahrain is pole position in 2015, I was on pole in the GP2 race the second time we went there, it's a track I quite like and it's the first time I'm going to race there with a Formula 1 car this year. It's usually pretty hot there, but Formula 1 races during the night which will be something new to me, so we will see. It's not my favourite track but it's quite a cool one!"

[loner]

If your chassis is there or thereabout, you need your engine to be there also or thereabout. You need both unfortunately.

iam scratching my head trying to figure out how you reached this conclusion.. for example
Mclaren in Australia qualiy was 2.5 off Hamilton and after the SC Mercedes , Ferrari , RBR pulled about 8 seconds gap in the first 5 laps but we can't say renault has a turd of PU because we can see its very decent PU in the hands of RBR.
STR starting from a rational point of compromising to reach the point of having an advanced chassis later in the season.. and its nothing but a test bed for RBR for next season anyway.
RBR know that , Honda know that , STR know that.
testing showed reliability and good speed trap.

[techman]

If your chassis is there or thereabout, you need your engine to be there also or thereabout. You need both unfortunately

.

do you know that there is something called driver performance. i cant name any other driver other than lewis hamilton who shined in their rookie year. palmer, sritokin, new drivers come and takes time to adjust to high G and new tracks and race craft. so it a new ball game and it take at least 1 year for them to get there, and even so some like palmer will still struggle to keep pace with the pro experience drivers like hulk. TR drivers more time. if TR had sainz or even kyatt. they would have qualified and had better race pace compared to gasly and hartley.

[Ground Effect]

If your chassis is there or thereabout, you need your engine to be there also or thereabout. You need both unfortunately

.

do you know that there is something called driver performance. i cant name any other driver other than lewis hamilton who shined in their rookie year. palmer, sritokin, new drivers come and takes time to adjust to high G and new tracks and race craft. so it a new ball game and it take at least 1 year for them to get there, and even so some like palmer will still struggle to keep pace with the pro experience drivers like hulk. TR drivers more time. if TR had sainz or even kyatt. they would have qualified and had better race pace compared to gasly and hartley.

"Shined" is relative, of all the people you named, only Lewis was in a car capable of winning races, of course he did very well. But there are other rookies who have "shined" relative to their equipment. Max Verstappen, Carlos Sainz, Esteban Ocon. Jacques Villeneuve also did well in his rookie season, he also had a good car.

[Bisonas]

If your chassis is there or thereabout, you need your engine to be there also or thereabout. You need both unfortunately.

iam scratching my head trying to figure out how you reached this conclusion.. for example
Mclaren in Australia qualiy was 2.5 off Hamilton and after the SC Mercedes , Ferrari , RBR pulled about 8 seconds gap in the first 5 laps but we can't say renault has a turd of PU because we can see its very decent PU in the hands of RBR.
STR starting from a rational point of compromising to reach the point of having an advanced chassis later in the season.. and its nothing but a test bed for RBR for next season anyway.
RBR know that , Honda know that , STR know that.
testing showed reliability and good speed trap.

What i said, have nothing to do with Mclaren, TR or RB.
Engineers within Teams know very well how much advantage or deficit each engine has on another regarding power and efficiency. They have the tools and the data to estimate those numbers quite accurate. Not 100% accurate, but close enough in order to protest to FIA in a more official way. And trust me that their tools are not like your logic.

"Mclaren in Australia qualiy was 2.5 off Hamilton and after the SC Mercedes , Ferrari , RBR pulled about 8 seconds gap in the first 5 laps but we can't say renault has a turd of PU because we can see its very decent PU in the hands of RBR"

Which is a very simplistic logic, with conclusions based on what each of us want to believe.
Is Renault a decent PU compared to Mercedes and Ferrari ?? or RBR chassis its just that good atm ??
Is Mclaren so slow compared to RBR, or Alonso was managing Verstapen and his tires knowing he couldn't possibly do anything better even if he was making slightly better lap times after the restart. Its all about Perspective.

Now, That 0.3s parity on a theoretical Barcelona lap its a true number that was agreed. The methodology about it though its a problem.
What Horner is crying about its something that he is crying about for a year now.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12923 ... ine-parity

The problem is that If you are Mercedes, and you know you have 1s advantage for example (theoretical margin), what stops you from making it look like 0.3 advantage. Control the pace, preserve the engine, adjust the engine modes, make it look like its more close and not show the full advantage until you actually need to and if you ever need to.
So keep all the parity engine crying at bay, and take both championships with ease.
That's what Horner suggesting that Mercedes is doing atm. We don't know at what extend this may be true, but we can acknowledge that it is a possibility. And his tools, are better than ours. Politics are involved also of course.