2015 Singapore Grand Prix - 18-20 September

[iotar__]

Yes. But now comes the crazy thing: Ric lost 4 tenth on Vet in the first sector when they were racing in the middle of each stint. That would mean, that the RedBull is an incredible beast except for the engine (two straights in the first sector).
This performance will make it hard to find an engine for next year...

- isolated sector time on one track - not an indication of chassis, I thought they weren't quick enough compared to Ferrari today for those claims
- Merc showed it's not all about the engine in Singapore, wasn't both Merc engine and chassis considered better than Ferrari's, so how would you draw Red Bull chassis conclusions from cross-reference with Ferrari and Merc in all the races including high-downforce Monaco and Hungary?

- Button and Hulkenberg are from the school of always blaming someone else, I think they are coached to do that, these bad acting outrage radio messages and "I don't know why I was penalised" fake surprise. One drove into back of the car (not for the first time) and other turned into the other car for no reason as a way of overtaking when he had plenty of space, that's not aggressive that's just dumb. He can question that they gave it on the spot and not after the race, that's Force India special FIA treatment .
- Verstappen is one of those "pure" racers that won't move for a team-mate but will whine for a team-mate to move over while covered by team's special treatment, welcome to the short memory club. Toro Rosso management pretends to be a management and not predetermined hype by any means factory workers.

[basti313]

Yes. But now comes the crazy thing: Ric lost 4 tenth on Vet in the first sector when they were racing in the middle of each stint. That would mean, that the RedBull is an incredible beast except for the engine (two straights in the first sector).
This performance will make it hard to find an engine for next year...

- isolated sector time on one track - not an indication of chassis, I thought they weren't quick enough compared to Ferrari today for those claims

If we take the full season into account it is quite easy to make that claim.

- Merc showed it's not all about the engine in Singapore, wasn't both Merc engine and chassis considered better than Ferrari's, so how would you draw Red Bull chassis conclusions from cross-reference with Ferrari and Merc in all the races including high-downforce Monaco and Hungary?

I know you do not believe in what RedBull says by default, but let us pretend they say the truth: They claimed, that they loose 1sec on the main straight in Hungary due to the engine. That means the RedBull would be the fastest car there with quite some margin with a good engine.

And the Merc being the best chassis...that is an assumption that is as hard as judging the Redbull. When you have an engine that wins a second on the straight in Hungary it is quite easy to be faster than others.

[Phil]

Sure? If I remember it correctly Kvyat gapped him quite well even with his brake problems...on the other hand the pace of Rosberg in the last stint was not too bad.

Both Mercedes were on prime, Kvyat on options in the 2nd stint where Hamilton had good pace.

[Jordan44]

Sure? If I remember it correctly Kvyat gapped him quite well even with his brake problems...on the other hand the pace of Rosberg in the last stint was not too bad.

Both Mercedes were on prime, Kvyat on options in the 2nd stint where Hamilton had good pace.

Yep, and Hamilton said he wasn't pushing either, he was conserving the tyres and maintaining a gap to Raikonnen.

It was quite a way into the first stint before Lewis found something, I remember there was just one lap he went a second faster and then his pace was great from there on.

[f1316]

I have no problem with team orders; what I really dislike though are team orders that are so flimsy that the team then lauds the driver for ignoring them!

If the team isn't sure the order is right it shouldn't give it; if the driver doesn't follow the order he should face severe consequences - otherwise future orders hold no value. It doesn't matter to me who's right in this instance (although why they couldn't have done a red bull in Monaco switchback if Sainz couldn't get past is beyond me) but in a team sport the players have to follow the manager's orders or it's anarchy.

[MercedesAMGSpy]

Rosberg was very concerned after the race and we all know why. If Vettel is really starting become a threat (and why not after this disastrous weekend), he knows which driver will receive full support for the championship. Then it will be over with the equal policy. Mercedes is not McLaren.

Mercedes still don't know why they are off the pace and that is very, very worrying. It's one thing to be 1.5sec off the pace, but not knowing the cause is even worse. They are blind and just pray the same won't happen in Japan, what a situation to be in after such a dominant season until this point.

I still cannot understand it, yes Singapore is a special track, special circumstances, but there is a difference between a close battle and being miles off the pace. Hamilton and Rosberg were just midfielders and needed different strategies and hope for the better to have a chance today. Disaster. And we don't know what will happen in Japan yet....

[PlatinumZealot]

I have no problem with team orders; what I really dislike though are team orders that are so flimsy that the team then lauds the driver for ignoring them!

If the team isn't sure the order is right it shouldn't give it; if the driver doesn't follow the order he should face severe consequences - otherwise future orders hold no value. It doesn't matter to me who's right in this instance (although why they couldn't have done a red bull in Monaco switchback if Sainz couldn't get past is beyond me) but in a team sport the players have to follow the manager's orders or it's anarchy.

Well, it was really delayed Radio messages. The team withdrew the demands after they Realise Carlos was not that much faster.

[djos]

Fantastic driving from Seb and Dan, pretty amazing how good the rb11 is when RedBull are able to bolt on all their aero parts for max downforce.

Little wonder that Mercedes don't want RedBull running their PU.

[wickedz50]

Fantastic driving from Seb and Dan, pretty amazing how good the rb11 is when RedBull are able to bolt on all their aero parts for max downforce.

Little wonder that Mercedes don't want RedBull running their PU.

Completely agree with you. I am wondering if Ferrari will give the RB team engines for 2016 just like Merc. Just for thoughts if RB get a competitive engine for 2016 who will be Dan's team mate who can drive the skin out of the car for max results? does the forum agree that Max Ver should be brought into the team for 2016 to pair Dan? Its likely Dan will be get an offer to drive for Ferrari in 2017 so there can be a void in the RB team.
If the changed Tyre pressure regulation is the true cause for Merc poor performance ( Suzuka will confirm) then this season championship will go down to the wire. For me I believe that Merc knows the reason for the backdrop but they are not making it public.

[djos]

The two TR lads are doing an amazing job but I also think Kyvatt is performing very well so far this year.

[Phil]

Sure you can. With only ~46% of the lap spent at full-throttle - second-lowest of the season - it's nearly impossible for PU performance to mask setup deficiencies. Combine that with a revised circuit layout and Ferrari's anomalous improvement* since last year, and you end up with a Mercedes deficit that looks really weird.

Excellent numbers Ben. One question though; Didn't the track layout change for Singapore slightly? If we ignore Mercedes baffling performance, perhaps that could explain the rather unusual large jump we saw from the Ferrari and RedBull?

That. Or the answer is much simpler: That PU is a bigger differentiator than most people are ready to believe, but it's effectively neutralized on this track, as the Honda and Renault is far too close (or ahead) given its engine disadvantage. It's no coincidence it was so close here last year too.

Then Monaco would be even less of a differentiator since it has even less straights.

It still does not explain how you go from usually being 6-8 tenths ahead to 1,4 seconds off the pace.
the engine theory does not cut it.

Ben posted the numbers.

Code: Select all

Monaco 2014        2015

Merc: 1:15.989    1:15.098 (-0.891)
RB:   1:16.384    1:16.041 (-0.343) <---- Ben, small error 2014! You took Ham's time, not Riccs.
Fer:  1:16.686    1:15.849 (-0.837)
Will: 1:18.082    1:17.278 (-0.804)

Singap 2014        2015

Merc: 1:45.681    1:45.300 (-0.381)
RB:   1:45.854    1:44.428 (-1.426)
Fer:  1:45.907    1:43.885 (-2.022)
Will: 1:46.000    1:45.676 (-0.324)

Monaco was a larger difference between Mercedes and their next competitor compared to Singapore. Maybe Singapore just doesn't suit the Mercedes that well, but it was masked last year due to the bigger difference between cars and PU. This year, it has been generally closer and adding to that, Mercedes stuffed up either set-up that exaggerated the difference. That's my guess anyway.

It's really a pitty Hamilton had his DNF. I thought he drove rather well in that second stint and he was clearly the quicker of both Mercs. It would have been nice to see if he could have challenged Kimi, though if the race had progressed the same, the safety car would have messed up the offset between tires (it did for Rosberg, as they pitted him on primes for his last stint instead of options).

As I said, I think Japan will be back to business as usual. They're advantage has been too big on regular race tracks to just disappear.

[FW17]

Maybe the smog sapped the PETRONAS power

[SiLo]

After the second safety car (and hamilton retiring) the race at the front got a lot more boring. The prospect of Hamilton being close to the front three, and managing tyres well, then being on the faster tyre for the last stint would have been nice to watch. Although the pace from Vettel at the end of his stint was ridiculous, so may have come to nothing.

I still find this track incredibly boring. It looks difficult to drive, but not in a technical way, it just seems you either know the secret (a la Vettel) or you dont.

[iotar__]

Monaco was a larger difference between Mercedes and their next competitor compared to Singapore. Maybe Singapore just doesn't suit the Mercedes that well, but it was masked last year due to the bigger difference between cars and PU. This year, it has been generally closer and adding to that, Mercedes stuffed up either set-up that exaggerated the difference. That's my guess anyway.

So how much is the engine worth here? Using earlier RB vs Ferrari chassis-engine to make a point, it's not that simple but if Horner can why not:
- 0,5 s of difference in Q (let's say drivers are comparable)
- so how much of it is the engine and how much of it is Red Bull's chassis being better + - ?
- let me think hard and correct me, if Red Bull's chassis is 0,3 s quicker here (standard F1 difference - SF1D - aka half-Alonso) engine difference would be 0,8 s?

Isn't it too much for Singapore? It has top speed but it's a stop and go all downforce (and now tyres) track. Now Mercedes' chassis is supposedly better than Ferrari's and engine is close enough but slightly quicker over one lap. Mercedes ending up 1,4 behind is not compatible with '14 engine masking the difference, same for big RB's chassis advantage over Ferrari.

[WaikeCU]

I thought Vettel was actually sandbagging after the first safety car period. He didn't pull a gap to Ricciardo. Ricciardo was actually matching Vettel's pace, but then suddenly Vettel went 3 seconds faster than Ricciardo on a single lap. So that means Vettel was just managing everything.