F1 2016 pre-season testing

[Stargazer]

Russian motorsport

... takes information everywhere, sometimes of very questionable quality. So beware.

[FLuidd]

Finally some good footage from pre-test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAKxkd7tcBs

Ferrari seems kinda twitchy, no?

PS. On slightly unrelated note, I don't get why people are paying attention to such a slight differences in engine sounds (like Mercedes vs Ferrari), I mean let's put it into proper perspective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOyFlh9uCYQ

That is twitching is called oversteer.

There is little you can learn from this 6 minute video , it might come from tyre degradation , low tyre temperature or something else.

[Stargazer]

Russian motorsport apparently did their own calculations on how the timesheets could supposedly look like if each driver had the ultrasofts on their best short runs.

• Team Driver Time
  Force India NH 1:22.510
  Mercedes NR 1:22.567
  Ferrari SV 1:22.810
  Toro Rosso MV 1:23.093
  Red Bull DR 1:23.525
  Sauber* ME 1:24.037
  Renault KM 1:24.063
  Haas EG 1:24.324
  Williams VB 1:24.448
  Manor PW 1:24.725
  McLaren FA 1:24.882

http://ru.motorsport.com/f1/news/analiz ... 75899/?s=1

That article, if translated to English, says:

But we should warn you: we don't know how much fuel was in each car when it posted the best lap. Each 10 kg of fuel "costs" around 0.3 sec per lap, so reality could we a little bit different.

The part in bold is the most funny one. Otherwise they just calculated ultrasoft time based on expected difference in tyre times. And used best lap for each driver. So it's a pure crap.

[dot235]

There is little you can learn from this 6 minute video , it might come from tyre degradation , low tyre temperature or something else.

It is probably the best video there is to date from 2016 pre-test.

The part in bold is the most funny one. Otherwise they just calculated ultrasoft time based on expected difference in tyre times. And used best lap for each driver. So it's a pure crap.

It's testing, not qualifying.
But we still look at the sheets, right?
So nothing wrong with correcting the offset caused by different tyres.

[Stargazer]

It's testing, not qualifying.
But we still look at the sheets, right?
So nothing wrong with correcting the offset caused by different tyres. Or is there? I don't think so.

Absolutely agree. It's the best crap we have at the moment.

[TheScrutineer]

Some interesting observations from Days 3 and 4 at Barcelona...

http://dmanf1.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/ba ... and-4.html

[flickerf1]

Peter Windsor's analysis on who impressed most in the first test:

https://www.formula1.com/content/fom-we ... test_.html

Apologizes if this has been posted already.

[Vasconia]

Russian motorsport apparently did their own calculations on how the timesheets could supposedly look like if each driver had the ultrasofts on their best short runs.

• Team Driver Time
  Force India NH 1:22.510
  Mercedes NR 1:22.567
  Ferrari SV 1:22.810
  Toro Rosso MV 1:23.093
  Red Bull DR 1:23.525
  Sauber* ME 1:24.037
  Renault KM 1:24.063
  Haas EG 1:24.324
  Williams VB 1:24.448
  Manor PW 1:24.725
  McLaren FA 1:24.882

http://ru.motorsport.com/f1/news/analiz ... 75899/?s=1

Force India the fastest? its pure crap but its pre-season crap so Its funny to read it.

[Vasconia]

Some interesting observations from Days 3 and 4 at Barcelona...

http://dmanf1.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/ba ... and-4.html

Nothing new really just obvious things that we have seen. Until Mercedes shows their true speed we will not know how good is the new Ferrari.

[Leendert82]

Russian motorsport apparently did their own calculations on how the timesheets could supposedly look like if each driver had the ultrasofts on their best short runs.

• Team Driver Time
  Force India NH 1:22.510
  Mercedes NR 1:22.567
  Ferrari SV 1:22.810
  Toro Rosso MV 1:23.093
  Red Bull DR 1:23.525
  Sauber* ME 1:24.037
  Renault KM 1:24.063
  Haas EG 1:24.324
  Williams VB 1:24.448
  Manor PW 1:24.725
  McLaren FA 1:24.882

http://ru.motorsport.com/f1/news/analiz ... 75899/?s=1

Most likely they havent calculated fuel load correctly.

Force India the fastest? its pure crap but its pre-season crap so Its funny to read it.

[Thunder]

https://twitter.com/McLarenF1/status/704236197648982016

[gandharva]

Great analysis of Barcelona I Long-run data!

https://f1metrics.wordpress.com/2016/02 ... 2016-cars/

[dot235]

Force India the fastest?

In the Barcelona pretest they were the fastest. This shouldn't be news.
Hulk did 1:23.1 on supersofts and Vettel did 1:22.8 on ultrasofts.

Delta between SS and US is 0.6-0.8s.

alright no one knows fuel loads we never know the fuel loads during any kind of practice so get it over with already.

[Juzh]

Force India the fastest?

In the Barcelona pretest they were the fastest. This shouldn't be news.
Hulk did 1:23.1 on supersofts and Vettel did 1:22.8 on ultrasofts.

Delta between SS and US is 0.6-0.8s.

Both ric and vet improved exactly 0.8s. 0.6s estimate seems on the low side.

[GoranF1]

Finally some good footage from pre-test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAKxkd7tcBs

Ferrari seems kinda twitchy, no?

PS. On slightly unrelated note, I don't get why people are paying attention to such a slight differences in engine sounds (like Mercedes vs Ferrari), I mean let's put it into proper perspective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOyFlh9uCYQ

That is twitching is called oversteer.

There is little you can learn from this 6 minute video , it might come from tyre degradation , low tyre temperature or something else.

At least from the aerodinamic point of view the Mclaren looks quite good....looks good in S3, quite responsive to direction change.