2019 performance speculation

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
SmallSoldier
83
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2019 2:54 am

Re: 2019 performance speculation

Post by SmallSoldier » Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:52 am

GPR -A wrote:
Bill wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:27 am
Gpr -a don't fall for wolf propaganda when the chips are down he will always vote for his self interest which he did with new front wing .Rbr and Ferrari vehemently opposed the rules but unfortunately were outvoted. The rules from 2014 to 2018 when relative stable even though they was a change in 2017 it was about size , take what they already have and make it big.changing the front wing it's a whole new game Ferrari don't know how the gonna get themselves out of this hole their updates don't seem to work.Rbr ?the future look grim
You know, hindsight is a wonderful thing. It gives the abilities to manufacture thoughts to suit an agenda. I did not near anyone saying rules were bad, at the conclusion of first Winter Test where the entire world was convinced that Mercedes got it wrong and Ferrari's front wing is the right philosophy. Newey said, they can easily replicate that and the rest of the flow would be just fine. A few races past the season, suddenly, the rules are bad and favored Mercedes!

People often forget that, the out wash front wings were first implemented by Mercedes and then other teams followed it. It was inherent to their car's working philosophy and that being taken away for 2019, Mercedes should have cried foul. But they didn't. Mattia Binnotto mentioned that, when they first put their 2019 spec in Wind tunnel, they lost 1.5 seconds. In an interview, James Allison said, when they first put their 2019 spec, they lost 2.5 seconds! Red Bull claimed that, by December, they had recovered all the lost down force!!!

That tells you, who got affected the most.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14156 ... 2019-rules
"We predicted an impact of 1.5s per lap when we [first tested] in the windtunnel and it's what we got," said Binotto.
https://africa.espn.com/f1/story/_/id/2 ... rrari-year
Regulation changes to the front wing over the winter had initially left Mercedes flustered. The team's aerodynamic concept was based on its ability to load up the tips of the front wing and manipulate air downstream with devices around the front wing endplates, but the simplified regulations for 2019 stripped the team of one its key strengths.

"When we first put these new regulations on, which have much less geometrical freedom [for the front wing], it haemorrhaged downforce off our car because one of our key features was totally broken," Mercedes technical director James Allison told Sky Sports earlier this year. "When I say haemorrhaged, I mean 2.5 seconds gone! It was a big deal.
No individual can be discredited and branded in to a single bucket. That applies to Toto Wolff too. If you are a die hard fan of another team which is struggling, then Toto Wolff appears to you as a demon. For those who just enjoy whatever is happening, he appears to be a great leader and a sane man with measured talk.
Pretty nicely said.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

subcritical71
69
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Florida

Re: 2019 performance speculation

Post by subcritical71 » Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:36 pm

Bill wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:27 am
Gpr -a don't fall for wolf propaganda when the chips are down he will always vote for his self interest which he did with new front wing .Rbr and Ferrari vehemently opposed the rules but unfortunately were outvoted. The rules from 2014 to 2018 when relative stable even though they was a change in 2017 it was about size , take what they already have and make it big.changing the front wing it's a whole new game Ferrari don't know how the gonna get themselves out of this hole their updates don't seem to work.Rbr ?the future look grim
You do know Ferrari have a veto right for rules changes, right? If they were against it the rule would not have been approved.

Bill
4
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2018 9:28 am

Re: 2019 performance speculation

Post by Bill » Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:07 pm

The veto is not a free pass Ferrari will have to prove that the regulations change adversely affect them. I don't have a problem with rules change per say but changing rules when things are getting a little interesting.last year some teams where's saying Mercedes aero philosophy have reached its peak they were finding it difficult to find those extra tenth u can understand why the will vote for change. Ferrari looks like they were bought they sold themselves to the highest bidder which is disgusting

GPR -A
90
User avatar
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:08 pm

Re: 2019 performance speculation

Post by GPR -A » Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:18 pm

Bill wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:07 pm
The veto is not a free pass Ferrari will have to prove that the regulations change adversely affect them. I don't have a problem with rules change per say but changing rules when things are getting a little interesting.last year some teams where's saying Mercedes aero philosophy have reached its peak they were finding it difficult to find those extra tenth u can understand why the will vote for change. Ferrari looks like they were bought they sold themselves to the highest bidder which is disgusting
Well, not sure why would anyone think Mercedes' aero philosophy reached it's peak. At the time of 2019 rule discussions were being worked out and coming close to finalizing, Mercedes had adopted a different philosophy starting 2017, which they were still learning in 2018. In fact, Ferrari followed Mercedes with a longer wheel base in 2018! Why would Ferrari follow a "diminishing returns" philosophy?

Singapore, which was the bogey circuit for Mercedes, where Red Bull and Ferrari excelled, fell in Mercedes' kitty in 2018 with developments they bolted that brought life to their slow corner performance. How would that philosophy could have reached it's peak, if it was allowing the car to scale newer heights?