2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.
Locked
User avatar
GPR-A duplicate2
64
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 09:00

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

3jawchuck wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:Found it, but now I´m not sure he said what I initially thought, I can´t understand some words....


timecode 1:25: "they have more downforce ############### we can" :?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1CYBL6Aupg
"They had more downforce than us this weekend"
Correct. That's exactly what I heard too.

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

Ok, thanks for the clarification

But the message is the same, in Monaco all teams use all the DF they can

But even if they could use more DF, they didn´t, and my reasoning is with more DF (more grip) it´s easier to reach the operating window of tires when track conditions are cold, let alone when it´s still damp at some parts, so maybe Mercedes was afraid they could have had problems with S or SS tires, while RBR with more DF had an edge in this regard

User avatar
FoxHound
55
Joined: 23 Aug 2012, 16:50

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

Andres125sx wrote:Where did I say x is better than y?
Here...
Andres125sx wrote:Lewis also said his tires reached the cliff in last lap, so only 2 more laps and victory would have been for RBR
Andres125sx wrote: At any other track, Ric would have fly pass him.
This sort of ignoramus maximus, F1technical can do without. The facts are that Riccardo fell further behind Hamilton in the final 4 laps of the race, meaning Ricciardo's tyres were beyond even Hamilton's cliff phase tyres.
7.2 seconds off of Hamilton at the flag and 6 seconds ahead Checo, instead of 2 seconds behind Ham and 10 seconds ahead of Checo 6 laps previously.

And then by association...the following.
Andres125sx wrote:Hamilton said after the race Mercedes cannot use as much DF as RBR. Fact.
It's not a fact when what he said is not what you understood, entender Senor Andres?(Edit...I see you understand now)
He said they had more DF, which is entirely possible given DF configurations differ even on the same car between team mates. But, to extend this to the length you have is blatant fallacy.
Andres125sx wrote:it´s DF wich made a difference between Mercedes who was forced to use US, while RBR could use SS
So Force India in turn have more DF than Red Bull forcing Red Bull to use SS instead of Softs? This is the logic you are using and it fails scrutiny every single time, which is exactly why I pulled you up on it.
You are making massive statements on misunderstanding quotes and and backing them up using pseudoscience.
JET set

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

Andres125sx wrote: I´ve only said that statement from Lewis made me think, and that might be the reason Mercedes chose US tires, they might be afraid with that cold and wet conditions they could have problems to put harder tires on its operating window, so they decided to go with US even if that meant Hamilton was forced to drive extremely carefully to make them last 47 laps
You have this backwards, if Mercedes was worried about turning on the tires in the cold and wet, they would not have fitted the ultra. The softer the tire the higher the operating temperature.
197 104 103 7

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

FoxHound wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:Where did I say x is better than y?
Here...
Andres125sx wrote:Lewis also said his tires reached the cliff in last lap, so only 2 more laps and victory would have been for RBR
Andres125sx wrote: At any other track, Ric would have fly pass him.
Sorry but that´s not true, you´re assuming same conditions for both or you think I´m doing that, when I´m not.

Better is an extremely relative term and I never tried to say what´s better. Better to do fastest lap? Better to last longer?

I said Ric would have fly pass him for the simple reason they did 47 laps on US and SS tires. Neither of them are supposed to last that long, but obviously a harder compound has an edge, so at any other track Ric could have waited till Lewis tires were done and then attack, but not in Monaco where Lewis was able to drive as slow as he want to nurse his tires and Ricciardo still couldn´t pass him

Since Lewis was so slow, Ricciardo tried to pass, but it was Monaco and he only managed to destroy his tires, but I never said any of those strategies are better than the other. Ricciardo was faster before destroying his tires but Lewis won, what´s better? I do prefer winning but that´d be an embarrasingly basic analysis of each strategy as there was other factors wich turned to be a lot more important (where are the wheels?)
FoxHound wrote:But, to extend this to the length you have is blatant fallacy.
Andres125sx wrote:it´s DF wich made a difference between Mercedes who was forced to use US, while RBR could use SS
So Force India in turn have more DF than Red Bull forcing Red Bull to use SS instead of Softs? This is the logic you are using and it fails scrutiny every single time, which is exactly why I pulled you up on it.
You are making massive statements on misunderstanding quotes and and backing them up using pseudoscience.
If you quote me, please do not manipulate what I said
Andres125sx wrote:... so I´d say it´s the other way around, it´s DF wich made a difference
I´m far from making massive statements, I´m expressing my opinion and reasoning trying to understand the reason some teams used US tires, some SS, and some S for same stint and same track conditions

Moreover, if I´d be evil-minded I could even say you intentionally removed some part of my post wich show I´m only giving my opinion to make it look like I´m doing massive statements, and then accuse me of falacy, ignoramus maximus and all that insults you´ve just posted... #-o

But I´m not evil-minded so I´d say you simply misunderstood me. That´d be pretty normal considering I´m discussing about technical things I don´t fully understand on a language I don´t master :)
FoxHound wrote:So Force India in turn have more DF than Red Bull forcing Red Bull to use SS instead of Softs? This is the logic you are using and it fails scrutiny every single time, which is exactly why I pulled you up on it.
Did I say that?

As stated, I´m only trying to understand the reason they used each tire. Each car has different characteristics, DF is only one of the parameters affecting tire temperature managment, obviously there are many others like suspensions or that thing moving the wheel, but since I heard Lewis stating they had less DF than RBR, I considered that could be one of the parameters wich made them go for US tires. Is this reasoning flawed? Fair question

But I never said that´s the case, or at least that was never my intention, I´m only trying to figure it out

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

dans79 wrote:
Andres125sx wrote: I´ve only said that statement from Lewis made me think, and that might be the reason Mercedes chose US tires, they might be afraid with that cold and wet conditions they could have problems to put harder tires on its operating window, so they decided to go with US even if that meant Hamilton was forced to drive extremely carefully to make them last 47 laps
You have this backwards, if Mercedes was worried about turning on the tires in the cold and wet, they would not have fitted the ultra. The softer the tire the higher the operating temperature.
Really? Didn´t know, thanks. But the softer compounds warm up faster, don´t they?

Maybe my memory sucks, but I think I´ve always seen F1 teams using softest available compound with these conditions (cold and damp) as harder compounds on slippery surfaces with little grip can´t reach the operating window and suffer massive graining

Maybe the operating window is lower on harder compounds but if they don´t have enough grip they can´t increase the temperature enough to reach it?

User avatar
FoxHound
55
Joined: 23 Aug 2012, 16:50

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

Andres125sx wrote:
FoxHound wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:Where did I say x is better than y?
Here...
Andres125sx wrote:Lewis also said his tires reached the cliff in last lap, so only 2 more laps and victory would have been for RBR
Andres125sx wrote: At any other track, Ric would have fly pass him.
Sorry but that´s not true, you´re assuming same conditions for both or you think I´m doing that, when I´m not.

Better is an extremely relative term and I never tried to say what´s better. Better to do fastest lap? Better to last longer?

I said Ric would have fly pass him for the simple reason they did 47 laps on US and SS tires. Neither of them are supposed to last that long, but obviously a harder compound has an edge, so at any other track Ric could have waited till Lewis tires were done and then attack, but not in Monaco where Lewis was able to drive as slow as he want to nurse his tires and Ricciardo still couldn´t pass him

Since Lewis was so slow, Ricciardo tried to pass, but it was Monaco and he only managed to destroy his tires, but I never said any of those strategies are better than the other. Ricciardo was faster before destroying his tires but Lewis won, what´s better? I do prefer winning but that´d be an embarrasingly basic analysis of each strategy as there was other factors wich turned to be a lot more important (where are the wheels?)
So what's it gonna be? You are the one stating things that have no foundation.
Now you backtrack, but still don't face the reality of mea culpa. I'll say it one more time, you cannot make any assessment on performance when tyre life was the deciding factor.
And on reflection, Ultra Soft tyres went as far as Soft and Super Soft tyres. Take that in, reflect on it, appreciate it.

Ricciardo would at any other track have lost time to Hamilton on US tyres.

It was not at any other track. It was Monaco. Track position is king.

Mercedes tried a different strategy due to Ricciardo likely having the lead if Red Bull did not screw his pitstop. Being on US tyres, he would have a chance of gaining track position at the expense of tyre life. Track position is king.

As it turns out, Mercedes led after Ricciardo's pitstop. Meaning Hamilton could merely coax his car home without risking his lead by pushing the tyres to the cliff phase. Track position is king.

My advice here is simple, leave the grand statements unwritten unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
JET set

User avatar
SR71
5
Joined: 27 Jan 2016, 21:23

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

FoxHound wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:
FoxHound wrote: Here...
Sorry but that´s not true, you´re assuming same conditions for both or you think I´m doing that, when I´m not.

Better is an extremely relative term and I never tried to say what´s better. Better to do fastest lap? Better to last longer?

I said Ric would have fly pass him for the simple reason they did 47 laps on US and SS tires. Neither of them are supposed to last that long, but obviously a harder compound has an edge, so at any other track Ric could have waited till Lewis tires were done and then attack, but not in Monaco where Lewis was able to drive as slow as he want to nurse his tires and Ricciardo still couldn´t pass him

Since Lewis was so slow, Ricciardo tried to pass, but it was Monaco and he only managed to destroy his tires, but I never said any of those strategies are better than the other. Ricciardo was faster before destroying his tires but Lewis won, what´s better? I do prefer winning but that´d be an embarrasingly basic analysis of each strategy as there was other factors wich turned to be a lot more important (where are the wheels?)
So what's it gonna be? You are the one stating things that have no foundation.
Now you backtrack, but still don't face the reality of mea culpa. I'll say it one more time, you cannot make any assessment on performance when tyre life was the deciding factor.
And on reflection, Ultra Soft tyres went as far as Soft and Super Soft tyres. Take that in, reflect on it, appreciate it.

Ricciardo would at any other track have lost time to Hamilton on US tyres.

It was not at any other track. It was Monaco. Track position is king.

Mercedes tried a different strategy due to Ricciardo likely having the lead if Red Bull did not screw his pitstop. Being on US tyres, he would have a chance of gaining track position at the expense of tyre life. Track position is king.

As it turns out, Mercedes led after Ricciardo's pitstop. Meaning Hamilton could merely coax his car home without risking his lead by pushing the tyres to the cliff phase. Track position is king.

My advice here is simple, leave the grand statements unwritten unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Nicely summarized. +1

User avatar
iotar__
7
Joined: 28 Sep 2012, 12:31

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

I now know where "tyre switching" idea came from: TV pundits explaining Hamilton being slower on quicker tyres than D.R. - the unthinkable event! It has no evidence in lap times, Ricciardo dropped out of DRS range permanently on lap 53, ~20 laps after pitstops. http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... 0Ricciardo
p[

How about simpler and broad explanation Red Bull + tyres (SS) worked better in the conditions of the early stage of the final stint (grip, wet track, temperature, engine impact(?)) and Mercedes + tyres (US) in the later. Later stage was more normal - that's why Vettel closed on Perez. Further elements: Merc quicker usually on options, no reference point for US - other cars.

Rosberg on top of undriveable car and team orders got 2x2=4 s slower pitstops than Vettel, and thus "fantastic championship comeback " continues that started with crashing in Barcelona and preventing Rosberg's win (+7 points). As Toto Wolff said " relief" at Mercedes.

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

FoxHound wrote: My advice here is simple, leave the grand statements unwritten unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
This again? What grand statements?

OMG I´m stubborn, but looks like I´m not the only one or the most stubborn around here....

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

FoxHound wrote: And on reflection, Ultra Soft tyres went as far as Soft and Super Soft tyres. Take that in, reflect on it, appreciate it.
Correction, US tyres in clean air and extremely nursed went as far as SS tires in dirty air and driven aggresively, and S tires on clean air and attack mode

There´s a bit of a difference I think

mcdenife
1
Joined: 05 Nov 2004, 13:21
Location: Timbuck2

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

iotar__ wrote: ::
::
Rosberg on top of undriveable car and team orders got 2x2=4 s slower pitstops than Vettel, and thus "fantastic championship comeback " continues that started with crashing in Barcelona and preventing Rosberg's win (+7 points). As Toto Wolff said " relief" at Mercedes.
Can anyone else decipher this or is it just me?
Long experience has taught me this about the status of mankind with regards to matters requiring thought. The less people know and understand about them, the more positively they attempt to argue concerning them; while on the other hand, to know and understand a multitude of things renders men cautious in passing judgement upon anything new. - Galileo..

The noblest of dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.

User avatar
TAG
20
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 16:18
Location: in a good place

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

From a Pirelli article explaining the unusually long life of the US and the W.
Prior to the race Hamilton had declared the ultra-soft tyre to be nothing more than "a super-soft with purple paint". Taking Hamilton's remarks on board, Hembery said: "I'm sure he is happy about it now.
Having a hard time now finding the original source, but it was basically Pirelli saying that due to the wet testing they had last year they were able to push the W toward a direction they were shooting for, making the difference between it and the I much less severe and another similar comment about the introduction of the US being a race tire not just a qualy tire hence it's ability to last.
माकडाच्या हाती कोलीत

Just_a_fan
591
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

mcdenife wrote:
iotar__ wrote: ::
::
Rosberg on top of undriveable car and team orders got 2x2=4 s slower pitstops than Vettel, and thus "fantastic championship comeback " continues that started with crashing in Barcelona and preventing Rosberg's win (+7 points). As Toto Wolff said " relief" at Mercedes.
Can anyone else decipher this or is it just me?
I would suggest you ignore his rants; they're usually some form conspiracy hypothesis. In this case, it's all evidence that Mercedes are favouring Hamilton against Rosberg. Or something.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

Jolle
132
Joined: 29 Jan 2014, 22:58
Location: Dordrecht

Re: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix - Monte Carlo, Thu 26 – Sun 29 May

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
mcdenife wrote:
iotar__ wrote: ::
::
Rosberg on top of undriveable car and team orders got 2x2=4 s slower pitstops than Vettel, and thus "fantastic championship comeback " continues that started with crashing in Barcelona and preventing Rosberg's win (+7 points). As Toto Wolff said " relief" at Mercedes.
Can anyone else decipher this or is it just me?
I would suggest you ignore his rants; they're usually some form conspiracy hypothesis. In this case, it's all evidence that Mercedes are favouring Hamilton against Rosberg. Or something.
Of course they are favoring Hamilton, marketing wise it's best to have him then Rosberg as a WC. They're not paying him 30mln a year to become second. Plus Rosberg would want a rise in pay if he becomes WC.

But, what I think they meant was that Hamilton finally had a fairly problem free race and he's in a good place again.
Plus they're cleaver enough not to sabotage Nico (although the breaking down at the last race in '14 could raise some suspicion)

Locked