2021 Pre-season testing. Bahrain 12-14 March

[Bandit1216]

My conspiracy theory is that if RBR would have taken Honda power in 2018 with STR, they would have challenged for WDC.

The way I remember if 2018 was a year of massive improvement with many PU swaps. Making up for what was impossible with the toxic circumstances (aka Alonso, Brown and Boullier) at McLaren...
So I don't think so.

Yes, well. One could also state redbull would have won a race or two in 19 and 20 with the Renault engine in the back. Renault also went better after the deforce. RB and MCLaren deforced their pu's and married something which was just about the same. Not much between them imo. It reminds me of that hit from Rupert Holmes. If you like pina colada.....

[El Scorchio]

There is no 'rule' preventing Williams from competing with Mercedes, but there is a reasonable basis in evidence that this is incredibly unlikely.

Beyond the issues of being under-funded, under-staffed, having a huge deficit of both intellectual and technical resources, and having a history of producing absolutely atrocious cars, they remain a non-works team. It is a fact that only Red Bull have out performed the works team, Renault, during this era of regulations.

Secondly Mercedes staff, funding, drivers and facilities haven't suddenly deteriorated. If there were an issue, they would be best placed to self-correct quicker than other teams, including Red Bull.

I am no Mercedes fan, I am not a Hamilton or Wolff fan. Read some of my responses in the 'Hamilton' threads for confirmation.

That said, I'm neither blind enough, nor stupid enough, to attach much weight to timesheets that suggest Alfa Romeo is faster than Mercedes, that Williams is as fast, that a rookie driver is close to 2 seconds quicker than Gasly, or that Aston is 3-6 seconds off the pace. One anomaly, fair enough. Several, and it becomes difficult to consider credible.

I will quite happily enjoy being wrong, but I don't think Mercedes have shown their cards yet.

reasonable basis ? Think about brawn gp. I think this is enough.
Were Ferrari or Redbull facilities suddenly deteriorated and then they lost dominance ?
Why a rookie can not beat experienced one. Didn't hamilton got same CC points with Alonso at his first season ?
What makes you think that it is so easy to find out what mercedes's issue. Maybe they will not able to find out their issue until new rules. If their experience and so long lasting dominance is your base, if how good they are as a team is your base, if they suddenly didn't forget how to design a good car, then what is your explanation of this situation. Why so good team made such a mistake ?

Brawn is a completely different situation. That's one team finding a clever loophole in new rules to catch everyone else by surprise. Nine other teams haven't caught Mercedes by surprise with a clever loophole that only they didn't think of. If everyone else is doing it then it would have been an obvious thing that they would also have spotted and done.

The most likely explanations are:

-They simply haven't found the right setup yet.
-They are hugely sandbagging.
-There are significant upgrades to come.
-There's an inherent mismatch between their car design philosophy and the new regs (which are only on the cards due to covid/the delay to 2022 and wouldn't have been planned for) which they can't yet resolve.

It's incredibly unlikely they've just had a mare out of nowhere and built a bad car when everyone else has managed just fine. There's either an issue handcuffing what they are able to do within the new regs, or they just haven't shown everyone the full potential/package yet or had time to dial it in.

[etusch]

Brawn is a completely different situation. That's one team finding a clever loophole in new rules to catch everyone else by surprise. Nine other teams haven't caught Mercedes by surprise with a clever loophole that only they didn't think of. If everyone else is doing it then it would have been an obvious thing that they would also have spotted and done.

The most likely explanations are:

-They simply haven't found the right setup yet.
-They are hugely sandbagging.
-There are significant upgrades to come.
-There's an inherent mismatch between their car design philosophy and the new regs (which are only on the cards due to covid/the delay to 2022 and wouldn't have been planned for) which they can't yet resolve.

It's incredibly unlikely they've just had a mare out of nowhere and built a bad car when everyone else has managed just fine. There's either an issue handcuffing what they are able to do within the new regs, or they just haven't shown everyone the full potential/package yet or had time to dial it in.

Brawn case is different but a good example and shows possibilities.
They couldn't right set up = that is a worse car compared to previous seasons
They are hugely sandbagging
What made you use the huge word is what I am talking about. It is huge sandbagging or it is a bad car.
There are significant upgrades to come = They stoped development of 2020 car so early and worked for this car, everyone else prepared good to this year and mercedes couldn't. So what this mean ?
There's an inherent mismatch between their car design philosophy and the new regs
Yes this can happen and mercedes can be beaten.

[El Scorchio]

Brawn is a completely different situation. That's one team finding a clever loophole in new rules to catch everyone else by surprise. Nine other teams haven't caught Mercedes by surprise with a clever loophole that only they didn't think of. If everyone else is doing it then it would have been an obvious thing that they would also have spotted and done.

The most likely explanations are:

-They simply haven't found the right setup yet.
-They are hugely sandbagging.
-There are significant upgrades to come.
-There's an inherent mismatch between their car design philosophy and the new regs (which are only on the cards due to covid/the delay to 2022 and wouldn't have been planned for) which they can't yet resolve.

It's incredibly unlikely they've just had a mare out of nowhere and built a bad car when everyone else has managed just fine. There's either an issue handcuffing what they are able to do within the new regs, or they just haven't shown everyone the full potential/package yet or had time to dial it in.

Brawn case is different but a good example and shows possibilities.
They couldn't right set up = that is a worse car compared to previous seasons
They are hugely sandbagging
What made you use the huge word is what I am talking about. It is huge sandbagging or it is a bad car.
There are significant upgrades to come = They stoped development of 2020 car so early and worked for this car, everyone else prepared good to this year and mercedes couldn't. So what this mean ?
There's an inherent mismatch between their car design philosophy and the new regs
Yes this can happen and mercedes can be beaten.

The set up not being optimised is zero indicator of it being a bad car. It's notably a different thing. OR knowing the conditions for testing were completely atypical of the season to come, they were working on setups for other more representative conditions which are at odds with Bahrain. It's also known to be a weak circuit for them.

Upgrades- it means they may have something good and didn't want to show it at all yet because it's not that hard to imitate. (edit- or they want to wait until everyone is locked into their token spend at the first race weekend) Time will tell. Again, the fact they apparently had extra time on this car lessens the chances that it's just 'bad'. When have they ever made a bad car under these regulations?

The mismatch is the likely thing. Again though, that's zero indication of a 'bad' car. They are totally handcuffed to their design principle of the last years and it could be that these unforeseen floor changes are exactly the thing that undoes their whole philosophy (in which case it worked, in the respect of levelling the playing field and the rulemakers finall found a way to neuter them) but it could be something that's just impossible for them to change within the current rules and timeframes.
It's also possible that they have reached the point of diminishing returns/end of the line with regard to developing this concept- again when the 2020 cars were designed, that was supposed to be the end of these regs. They may just have had nowhere else to go which is just down to the circumstances of the pandemic rather than poor plannign or execution.

At worst, they are the second best engineering team in the sport as proven over the last seven years. They will not have made a hideous mistake in design, with so few changes in car evolution from 2020 and all the previous seasons of these steady regs to fall back on. So therefore logically their design just isn't as easily compatible with the enforced changes, they had nowhere to go with development, or they haven't shown their true hand yet.

[basti313]

At worst, they are the second best engineering team in the sport as proven over the last seven years. They will not have made a hideous mistake in design, with so few changes in car evolution from 2020 and all the previous seasons of these steady regs to fall back on. So therefore logically their design just isn't as easily compatible with the enforced changes, they had nowhere to go with development, or they haven't shown their true hand yet.

There are four simple points why it has to do nothing with design:
- Merc never used low fuel loads in testing for the last...6 years. The car was full as usual. That it does not look as good as an empty Bull, McLaren, Torro is no miracle.
- They did not show the full aero package in testing for the last ....4 years. There is no reason to have all final parts on the car now.
- The cooling issues relate to a too tight bodywork, that was more targetted to cooler races. I think that is a wise approach, run the car a bit lower powered but learn more about relevant aero for Europe.
- It takes three weeks to copy the diffusor from McLaren. So even if they have a bit too less downforce at the rear end now, they will regain some until Imola.

The only reason why you could argue that the rear is not good is that Hamilton did some Vettel with loosing the rear under breaking. Their style is quite similar, so no losing rear end stability hurts. But as above...there is certainly something still to come in rear end aero.

[MKlaus]

The notion Red Bull will never, ever be able to build the best car "because they are not Mercedes" is also one without basis.

its been 7 years that they haven't built one. its mercedes who have. until redbull wins the championship, they won't get that credit. certainly not on the basis of winter testing. let them prove it and people would respect back and i hope they do. but until then, they will be regarded as the second best.

Well, those first 4 years at least, it was the engine mainly. Can't really blame redbull fo not winning 2014 with 70php, less can you? I partly agree on the last few years. But even then it was 20hp behind also.

best car on the grid, is a package. one can only speculate about measuring the performance of chassis and engine in isolation. mercedes had produced a supremely fast car that won 8 poles in 2013, but because of it's lacklustre kinematics, it was unable to look after the tyres and in the second half mercedes went with the compromise of sacrificing pace for tyre life. mercedes engine was class of the field in terms of outright power back then too. because of it's single lap pace, it can't be considered the class of the field. the package was poor.
a recent article about "the best car that mercedes built" on the-race.com, there were many details available on this. it shows, they already started building a good chassis and 2014 PU changes only strengthened their position "as a package". while there was a lot of credit given to the PU in those years, without a good chassis, they would have performed like mclaren, force india or williams did. to say red bull had better chassis, is a self satiating exercise. a package is what is needed to win championships.

[El Scorchio]

At worst, they are the second best engineering team in the sport as proven over the last seven years. They will not have made a hideous mistake in design, with so few changes in car evolution from 2020 and all the previous seasons of these steady regs to fall back on. So therefore logically their design just isn't as easily compatible with the enforced changes, they had nowhere to go with development, or they haven't shown their true hand yet.

There are four simple points why it has to do nothing with design:
- Merc never used low fuel loads in testing for the last...6 years. The car was full as usual. That it does not look as good as an empty Bull, McLaren, Torro is no miracle.
- They did not show the full aero package in testing for the last ....4 years. There is no reason to have all final parts on the car now.
- The cooling issues relate to a too tight bodywork, that was more targetted to cooler races. I think that is a wise approach, run the car a bit lower powered but learn more about relevant aero for Europe.
- It takes three weeks to copy the diffusor from McLaren. So even if they have a bit too less downforce at the rear end now, they will regain some until Imola.

The only reason why you could argue that the rear is not good is that Hamilton did some Vettel with loosing the rear under breaking. Their style is quite similar, so no losing rear end stability hurts. But as above...there is certainly something still to come in rear end aero.

Exactly. I'd be very surprised if there were a design 'error'. Only thing I can see is if they were just finding it incredibly difficult to marry the unchangeable fundamentals of their car to the new regs.

[SiLo]

I'll say it again, it really looked like they struggled to get the rear tyres to work properly, which was compounded by poor conditions initially and being on a rear limited track that they haven't always been fantastic on.

[Wouter]

I'll say it again, it really looked like they struggled to get the rear tyres to work properly, which was compounded by poor conditions initially and being on a rear limited track that they haven't always been fantastic on.

How do you explain the difference between Hamilton and Bottas? Bottas did not make as many steering movements as Lewis. Bottas was reasonably stable in the morning, but he also had more fuel in the car if I remember correctly.

[Sieper]

Bottas is never as adventurous as Lewis with searching for the limits. Probably they left the lower fuel, try out the limits, to Lewis.

I have seen him slipping and sliding, locking up etc. In FPs many more times. Not saying they have not identified an issue, Lewis was clearly not happy, but it might explain the difference between the 2.

[basti313]

I'll say it again, it really looked like they struggled to get the rear tyres to work properly, which was compounded by poor conditions initially and being on a rear limited track that they haven't always been fantastic on.

How do you explain the difference between Hamilton and Bottas? Bottas did not make as many steering movements as Lewis. Bottas was reasonably stable in the morning, but he also had more fuel in the car if I remember correctly.

Marc Surrer explained it with driving styles. Ham is breaking into the corner quite similar to Vettel. This is why he did 2020 Vettel spins/drifts. Usually this is a faster style but dangerous if the rear is not stable under breaking and this was obvious...but as said above, this was not the car we will see in two weeks.

[kfrantzios]

I know its only testing but...

[GoranF1]

How many laps does BAH has in a race?
I think there is a whole stint missing here, most likely last one.

[Just_a_fan]

I'll say it again, it really looked like they struggled to get the rear tyres to work properly, which was compounded by poor conditions initially and being on a rear limited track that they haven't always been fantastic on.

How do you explain the difference between Hamilton and Bottas? Bottas did not make as many steering movements as Lewis. Bottas was reasonably stable in the morning, but he also had more fuel in the car if I remember correctly.

They're quoted as saying it was better in high fuel situations but got less good as the weight dropped. So it's likely the two drivers were doing different work plans and the car was different in how it behaved.

Also, Hamilton said he wasn't keen on the steering - said it was too light / over assisted. Although I think that was just a general observation about the car.

[dans79]

Also, Hamilton said he wasn't keen on the steering - said it was too light / over assisted. Although I think that was just a general observation about the car.

Ate least that should be something that's easy to fix.

It might not even need to be fixed, as it could be one of the things the team has set up differently when they are running 2 cars.