Is Alonso this fast or Räikkönen that slow?

[SectorOne]

No, that is xactly the point, as Gitanes wrote, a great driver will perform regardless of car, not just waiting for the perfect setup.

But that´s a different thing. As you wrote in the quote above you are talking about greatness.
Which is not the same thing as speed. "Is Alonso this fast or Räikkönen that slow?"

[xpensive]

Yes, the initial question remains, but the discussion has gone in the direction of how Kimi needs a perfect setup to perform.

So, in a perfect car, would he leave Alonso behind?

[turbof1]

Yes, the initial question remains, but the discussion has gone in the direction of how Kimi needs a perfect setup to perform.

So, in a perfect car, would he leave Alonso behind?

To answer that question, you need to be more specific:
-A car perfectly adapted to Kimi's needs? In that case Kimi would be slightly better then Alonso, since Alonso will have to drive with a car not set up for his needs.
-Or a car perfectly adapted for the highest theoritical performance? In that case Alonso wins.

Yes there's a difference between the 2. Adapting a car to a driver is always compromising on peak car performance.

[xpensive]

Wow, this thread is awesome, now we got a mod joining, I would thing that the second alternative is what I was considering.

Reminds me about the myth of Ronnie and Emerson going around Silverstone blindfolded in their Lotus 72s...guess who won?

[SectorOne]

So, in a perfect car, would he leave Alonso behind?

Assuming perfect car for both? Yes i think he would be faster on raw pace.
Kimi genuinely is one of the fastest drivers F1 has had, his only problem is he needs perfection to properly express himself.
So there´s no question about who is miles better then the other in the real world.

Alonso is by far the best driver of this generation, there´s just no question about it.

[turbof1]

So, in a perfect car, would he leave Alonso behind?

Assuming perfect car for both? Yes i think he would be faster on raw pace.
Kimi genuinely is one of the fastest drivers F1 has had, his only problem is he needs perfection to properly express himself.
So there´s no question about who is miles better then the other in the real world.

Alonso is by far the best driver of this generation, there´s just no question about it.

So he meant a car perfect in the sence of theoritical performance, so not optimally set up for what the driver needs/wants. I think Alonso would have the edge, being the more adaptable driver. So as you said too basicilly.

In the case of both having a car perfectly adapted the driver, I feel it could go either way. Back during the times of championship winning Renault, the period I feel that Alonso was the most attuned with his car, he was mighty fast. How that compares to Kimi is difficult to say. Kimi was the most attuned with his 2005 mclaren, and he did huge feats with it at times, but I also feel that he was much more motivated during that time. I don't know if it's the truth or not, but nowadays sometimes I look at Kimi during qualy and I don't see much spirit behind it.

I don't know, I'm speaking from a gut feeling, but I think the current Kimi would in normal circumstances always have to bow for Alonso, even if they both have car perfectly adapted to their specific needs.

[basti313]

Yes, the initial question remains, but the discussion has gone in the direction of how Kimi needs a perfect setup to perform.

So, in a perfect car, would he leave Alonso behind?

To answer that question, you need to be more specific:
-A car perfectly adapted to Kimi's needs? In that case Kimi would be slightly better then Alonso, since Alonso will have to drive with a car not set up for his needs.
-Or a car perfectly adapted for the highest theoritical performance? In that case Alonso wins.

Yes there's a difference between the 2. Adapting a car to a driver is always compromising on peak car performance.

For me the situation is the same for all the top drivers: EVERYONE can only perform perfect in a car that suits his needs and EVERYONE has different needs.
-Schumacher: His Beneton was so peaky and had such a loose rear end, that other drivers could not drive it. But he was incredibly fast. On the other hand he was beaten by Rosberg in an understeery Merc.
-Hamilton: Mighty on Alonso with the well balanced car and the loose rear end now. Had his problems with the planted rear end of the 2011 McLaren and was not much better than Button.
-Vettel: Mighty with the planted rear end and the EBD, but beaten with the loose rear end now.
-Raikkonen: Destroyed Massa in the well balanced F2007. Seeing no land with the loose end now.
-Alonso: Incredibly fast in peaky cars. Once the car is too planted he gets problems...2007 with Ham and once Ferrari got the EBD working better in late 2012 he could not use it like Massa in the qualifying.

So I think "Adapting a car to a driver is always compromising on peak car performance." is wrong or is not really possible. The car performance is given by the basic design and how good you adapt this design to the rules. Maybe Ferrari did what they could in 2012 to suit Alonso by using a different design philosophy than Redbull. This was nearly a good idea, but the qualifying performance and, thus the performance in clean air of the Bull was too mighty.

[mcalex]

Kimi was't slow in McLaren MP4-17D ( a two year old car basically ) and lost to Schumi by only 2 points despite having 3 non finishes compared to only 1 by Schumi
And remember how in 2009 he often drove quicker lap times in that "s....y" Ferrari compared to what simulations told ...

I think Kimi's problem is coming from a very well balanced Lotus ( and he had trouble with that car also when they started to experiment with LWD car ) to a very nervous Ferrari which has no front end grip and the worst power delivery of all engines

[Miguel]

I believe that, yes, Alonso is this fast. But I also think that Räikkönen isn't that slow. He's had indeed his share of bad luck but, unlike Massa, he seems to fare better than Alonso in race pace. Yes, he's only finished ahead of Alonso once, but save Canada he hasn't been miles off in pace after the first stint.

However, the qualifying gap seems much bigger than expected.

[turbof1]

So I think "Adapting a car to a driver is always compromising on peak car performance." is wrong or is not really possible. The car performance is given by the basic design and how good you adapt this design to the rules. Maybe Ferrari did what they could in 2012 to suit Alonso by using a different design philosophy than Redbull. This was nearly a good idea, but the qualifying performance and, thus the performance in clean air of the Bull was too mighty.

Small example: say ferrari can find half second by lowering the car a milimetre. The half seconds factors in occasional floor stalling and instability, meaning despite those issues the car still is theoritically half a second faster.

But when the driver gets to drive it, he finds the stalling hard to predict. He doesn't have the confidence and looses a second a lap. So what will the team do? Raise the height, sacrifice half a second of peak performance in order to make the driver do 1 second better.

This a simple, but very relative example. Another, this time perhaps a real example: rumors are Ferrari is putting in extra ballast in the car of Kimi in order to improve his steering feel. Up to 18kg! Sacrificing car performance to make the driver perform better.

[MOWOG]

rumors are Ferrari is putting in extra ballast in the car of Kimi in order to improve his steering feel.

I think they would get excellent results if they moved his seat back further. Maybe as far back as Helsinki!

I think Alonso has little sympathy for Kimi's plight. He was quick to point out to the press after the race that he finish 45 seconds ahead of his teammate. Take THAT, Kimi!

[SectorOne]

Another issue that can show up is that if you start catering for Kimi, with specific suspension stuff and all that, it could hurt Alonso´s performance.

It´s a huge benefit to a team if they all can go one direction with the car and setup instead of spearing off in two different directions or having to compromize one of the drivers.

Even for things like if one driver had no practice due to whatever, they can more easily take the other cars setup, do some minor tweaks and be in somewhat good shape.

[basti313]

Small example: say ferrari can find half second by lowering the car a milimetre. The half seconds factors in occasional floor stalling and instability, meaning despite those issues the car still is theoritically half a second faster.

A rather extreme example...floor stalling is completely undriveable. But I get what you mean. I only doubt that this is really something that matters when we are talking about the top F1 drivers.

This a simple, but very relative example. Another, this time perhaps a real example: rumors are Ferrari is putting in extra ballast in the car of Kimi in order to improve his steering feel. Up to 18kg! Sacrificing car performance to make the driver perform better.

This sounds crazy. Shifting weight to get some more grip on the front? Would 18kg even make a big difference?

Another issue that can show up is that if you start catering for Kimi, with specific suspension stuff and all that, it could hurt Alonso´s performance.

Yes, this is a simple calculation if the 18kg are right (what I do not believe) and taking into account, that we have a 0.2sec pace difference at the moment...taking really 18kg ballast from Kimi's car and shifting the overall weight balance towards Kimi's needs...we would have to talk about "Is Räikkönen this fast or Alonso that slow?".

[turbof1]

Small example: say ferrari can find half second by lowering the car a milimetre. The half seconds factors in occasional floor stalling and instability, meaning despite those issues the car still is theoritically half a second faster.

A rather extreme example...floor stalling is completely undriveable. But I get what you mean. I only doubt that this is really something that matters when we are talking about the top F1 drivers.

This a simple, but very relative example. Another, this time perhaps a real example: rumors are Ferrari is putting in extra ballast in the car of Kimi in order to improve his steering feel. Up to 18kg! Sacrificing car performance to make the driver perform better.

This sounds crazy. Shifting weight to get some more grip on the front? Would 18kg even make a big difference?

I don't know. It gets further complicated by the fixed weight distribution. It could fix a bit of imbalance, but in my eyes it's one of the numerous pieces to solve the Kimi Problem. I want to stress on it (I'm not sure if you realised yourself, but to be sure: ) that they added the weight, not shifted it. Meaning that in the case of Kimi the car is at the very least 18kg overweight. Of course if the rumors are true; 18kg is fairly a lot and could have been excegerated since that would implicate a lap loss of around 0.6-0.7s (although we should assume the weight is placed very low down, lowering the CoG and recovering a bit of time through that).

The floor stalling is an example from 1994, the year after active suspension. Lots of drivers had that issue, and I believe teams did raise a few races in the floor by a couple of mm's. Before the FIA made those significant safety measures.

[zeph]

I don't know, but I find assumptions about Raikkonen's narrow operating window a bit of a stretch. The dude can drive. To me it seems much more likely that this year's Ferrari is a poor design, and Alonso is simply used to driving shite cars by now.