Fil, James Allen is back at his usual oversimplified best, and the whole thing reads like a slow news week for F1.
That 'teams are willing to divulge about each other publicly'? The general pecking order of potential peak power is no great reading shock. The peak power figures far from define engine performance anywhere other than in a straight line. There are many complications to this mentioned throughout the thread.
The inference that lap times scales linearly with peak power alone is total BS and a gross oversimplification. It the notion were somewhere near definitively true, it certainly wouldn't hold constant across all race tracks.
Renault going four laps longer than Mercedes on a 'full tank' (whatever that means) of fuel... nice news snippet in the 2010 context, but think about it - there isn't a single reliable source that could verify that anywhere on the grid. If JA cited a comparison between Renault and Ferrari, maybe, and there'd be significant contractual ramifications for the constructor involved afterwards. If it can be proven - involving logging how much fuel cars took on exactly (not impossible) and having an intricate understanding of mapping strategies throughout (very impossible) we're talking about a 7-10kg difference over a race distance (before normalising for work output - higher for the Mercedes, assumed) - you'd also need to approximate differences in Cd between the two leading, non-KERS cars used in that analysis (which not only is slightly tweaked race-to-race with various upgrades and track-special customisations, but I'll put money on a tangible difference here), which could well account for that error alone (let alone other contributing factors).
Cosworth has quoted a figure and said nothing for test conditions let alone the size of the horses involved. That they're coming from a higher base shouldn't come as a surprise, as they're re-engineering from a 20kRPM engine. I'm with you though - I really do hope they do well - it'd be great for F1. But could JA lay the obvious on any thicker? 'The Cosworth makes more power but at a cost of using more fuel' - genius JA, we didn't see that one coming! If it read 'the Cosworth makes more power at significantly less fuel, which ingenious English engineers have achieved by delivering each engine with a working flux capacitor... keep an eye on the Williams when it hits 88 miles an hour... 1.21 gigawatt KERS etc'... this would be news.
The only things that are clear are what we already knew: if Button was driving a Honda powered car and Vettel had a Mercedes lump, the WDC would likely look different. Feel sorry for the Toyota engineers that not only just got told to move on, but put out a very decent car that with a better engine and minus a mobile chicane for a driver, would have done extremely well. Two excellent drivers - Alonso and Raikkonen - got less car than their abilities.
ISLAMATRON... back to your usual self, eh? I'll play. Sometimes I read James Allen's articles to critique an opinion and take part in a discussion about it. And sometimes, should I find the substance lacking, I'll even print his stuff out, simply because I'm in a rush and can't afford a short drive to the shops for another roll of bog paper. Satisfied?
donskar wrote:...one must wonder about Sauber's competitiveness next year. Why is Sauber reported to be going to Ferrari engines next year?
Possibly they've got mutual interests? Marketability? A whole host of reasons why any new constructor would request Ferrari power. It'd be interested to see if that decision flies... when other new teams signed up, they were effectively allowed any engine they wanted as long as it was a Cosworth...
donskar wrote:...why is Sauber risking the complexity of changing engines at a late point in the car's development?
Likely because BMW isn't continuing as an engine supplier and isn't intent on selling the IP... though it's F1, and stranger things have happened...
