2016 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal, Fri 10 – Sun 12 Jun

[FoxHound]

There's also the possibility of slipstreams.

Anyway:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ckp_bqGWkAApnkS.jpg:large

Definitely.

We can see the 6kph difference between both Ferrari's. The smorgasbord of possibilities here are dizzying....
From higher/lower DF, to higher/lower engine setting, time of day, temp, wind direction, fuel load, tyre life, lap objectives(Ie top speed, tyre longevity, lap time), slipstream and if they braked to go through the final corner or continued straight on to the pits(braking later).

[Andres125sx]

There's also the possibility of slipstreams.

Anyway:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ckp_bqGWkAApnkS.jpg:large

Definitely.

We can see the 6kph difference between both Ferrari's. The smorgasbord of possibilities here are dizzying....
From higher/lower DF, to higher/lower engine setting, time of day, temp, wind direction, fuel load, tyre life, lap objectives(Ie top speed, tyre longevity, lap time), slipstream and if they braked to go through the final corner or continued straight on to the pits(braking later).

Agree, I don´t understand how people keep looking at speed traps like if they would mean something.

Haryanto 4th, Hamilton out of top 10. What does people think this means?

Speed traps are not only irrelevant about car pace, they´re also irrelevant to analyse PU perfomance. Take Hamilton and Rosberg as an example, don´t know what´s Lewis top speed, but since he´s out of top ten he´s at least 12kmh slower than Nico. Does that mean his PU is weaker than Rosberg´s one? Obviously not

Speed traps are irrelevant in F1, at least if you don´t know all that data you mentioned, and no outsider have any of these data, so trying to get some conclusion from speed traps is absurd IMHO

[dans79]

He doesn't need to chill! What you cherry-picked from that article isn't even relevant, as it's not comparing Apples to Apples.

[Johnlub]

He doesn't need to chill! What you cherry-picked from that article isn't even relevant, as it's not comparing Apples to Apples.

Yes he does, as I never mentioned the last 9 laps of his FP2. This particular passage compares HAMs soft run to ROS soft run. So it does compare apples to apples. Please enlighten me in a pm why this is completely irrelevant.

[drunkf1fan]

Chill...

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 29200.html

http://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-o ... ormation-7

Just check the actual numbers, he doesn't at any stage have that kind of average. Hamilton literally dominates everyone at Canada, he's pretty much unbeatable here and his fastest lap times absolutely killed Rosberg's. If I read Rosberg was perceived as faster from what I saw in both training sessions I'd look up the lap times, freely available every race weekend from the above link, to check something so odd rather than post information that looks patently false.

There is a single 9 lap stint Rosberg did, I listed the lap times, the average isn't close to 1:17.6 unless you exclude all the non 1:17.xxx laps. The average of those 3 laps happens to be 1:17.598, the exact average they listed. I've in all my years watching F1 never seen a reporter list an average stint speed by taking the 1/3 of the laps, the fastest laps and excluding the rest.

[Nuvolari]

I calculated some avg lap times from the Ultra Soft stints from yesterday:

Code: Select all

Driver Average time (s)	Stint length
HAM	78.538	13
RAI	78.642	7
VET	78.751	16
ROS	79.034	19
MAS	79.348	9
BOT	79.486	13
RIC	79.743	12
BUT	79.761	7
SAI	80.048	14
ALO	80.163	13
HUL	80.178	15
PER	80.389	16
GRO	80.507	22
MAG	80.546	16
NAS	81.216	13
ERI	81.666	16
HAR	82.455	19

Looks to me that Williams are faster than Red Bull? If so, it will be bit of a come down from the hype.

Also, Hamilton is faster over the stint but his tyres were also degrading faster than Rosberg.

[drunkf1fan]

Williams are another team who tend to look better in FP2 than others. They have good fuel efficiency which is a boon at fuel limited tracks. But they often move back when it comes to race pace and qualifying compared to their Friday showing.

It's being suggested RBR are taking it pretty easy so far, it could be the Renault updates brought more power but reduced overall efficiency which could hurt them here, help them in qualifying but hurt in race pace. Could just be that they wanted to run the engines in lower power to see how they do before turning the wick up.

[Johnlub]

Chill...

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 29200.html

http://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-o ... ormation-7

Just check the actual numbers, he doesn't at any stage have that kind of average. Hamilton literally dominates everyone at Canada, he's pretty much unbeatable here and his fastest lap times absolutely killed Rosberg's. If I read Rosberg was perceived as faster from what I saw in both training sessions I'd look up the lap times, freely available every race weekend from the above link, to check something so odd rather than post information that looks patently false.

There is a single 9 lap stint Rosberg did, I listed the lap times, the average isn't close to 1:17.6 unless you exclude all the non 1:17.xxx laps. The average of those 3 laps happens to be 1:17.598, the exact average they listed. I've in all my years watching F1 never seen a reporter list an average stint speed by taking the 1/3 of the laps, the fastest laps and excluding the rest.

I guess they have excluded the cool down laps and use that listed average time to show the average speed on a specific set of tires with the needed amount of fuel. AMUS often does so. I never spoke about the overall fastest time. I do get your point, still I think that the scenario I described above is being shown by their extrapolation.

[dans79]

All it is is useless contrived data.

The only thing either of the drivers was actually doing was testing their setup. Both of them mixing in purple and green sectors at random.

Honestly, some of the journalism nowadays is disgraceful!

[drunkf1fan]

All it is is useless contrived data.

The only thing either of the drivers was actually doing was testing their setup. Both of them mixing in purple and green sectors at random.

Honestly, some of the journalism nowadays is disgraceful!

I hesitated when using the word reporter, these days reporters/journalists are barely that. Most news sites are just reposting information sent out, most reviews are just putting some extra words around a press release, in sports you pick some numbers and throw them together then throw in a claim. Journalism isn't so much dead as niche and not where you expect it. Most 'news' sites have no clue what a journalist is now.

I guess they have excluded the cool down laps and use that listed average time to show the average speed on a specific set of tires with the needed amount of fuel. AMUS often does so. I never spoke about the overall fastest time. I do get your point, still I think that the scenario I described above is being shown by their extrapolation.

The problem is that they claimed he was half a second faster over a 9 lap stint... and he wasn't. Ultimately you have one lap qualifying pace or consistent race pace, as Dan said that last run was likely just comparing certain sections and tweaking things for themselves with times not being important. Hamilton was faster in the long run and single lap pace, Rosberg wasn't even half a second faster in that 9 lap 'stint' and the numbers had no relevance but the article was entirely misleading about what number they were using. If someone says 9 laps, you expect that to be a race run(potentially opening stint on qualifying tires hence being short). It's incredibly bad writing, useless information and maybe even purposefully misleading.

[Juzh]

Williams are another team who tend to look better in FP2 than others. They have good fuel efficiency which is a boon at fuel limited tracks. But they often move back when it comes to race pace and qualifying compared to their Friday showing.

Lol. Williams is literally the exact opposite of what you've said.

[Nuvolari]

Williams are another team who tend to look better in FP2 than others. They have good fuel efficiency which is a boon at fuel limited tracks. But they often move back when it comes to race pace and qualifying compared to their Friday showing.

Lol. Williams is literally the exact opposite of what you've said.

Exactly right!

I suspect Red Bull will have some stiff competition from Williams in the race.

[GoranF1]

Mclaren is doing 1.15.0-1.15.1 laps whit 318km/h....

[godlameroso]

Welp, if it ain't rainin now, it won't rain at all.

[godlameroso]

Best time of 1:14.7?!