2019 Bahrain Grand Prix - Sakhir, March 29 - 31

[Sieper]

Yes, it worked. Max somehow got in front of Bottas (was never shown during the race, I have yet to see Any footage) or did he undercut him? But Bottas DRSed right passed. DRS especially for a syronger car was a force to reckon with here.

[mzso]

You guys pretend that Hamilton is some legend because he won a few championships in a dominant car, mostly against a single opponent (who defeated him one of the times) and a fumbling Vettel. (Same BS, but even more extremely was with Schumacher in his time. Even though he hardly shown any driver performance in this century. Looks like Vettel fell out of fashion despite his four wins)

The question is how you came to the conclusion about Russel or Norris . I think waiting a bit wouldn't hurt.

I may have gone overboard with these two. I see no reason why the others couldn't compete with him as equals. Well, Vettel did though not as much recently.

[Maritimer]

Hamilton is the only driver in history to win at least one pole position in every season he's raced, that should indicate how fast he is. He hasn't always had the best car on the grid but he always finds a way to be the fastest man out there. No way half the grid would be beating him in the other car, not even close.

[Sierra117]

Come kids, it's time! Ham-Bash Season 471 has begun! *popcorn*

[LM10]

Hamilton is an excellent driver. He showed it once again in Bahrain. But he is not even close to being under as much pressure as Vettel has been for the last couple of years. I'm even sure that he has never been under such pressure in his Mercedes times. He and his team don't need to prove anything. They know they've been the clearly best overall team in the last years, but most importantly Hamilton knows that.

On the other hand, Vettel, besides finally needing to prove that he is capable of winning, has been in a working environment which generally seemed to have been a bite more tense in the first place anyway. Italian fans and media can show strong emotions in both directions, we know that.
On top of all that, Vettel now has got an amazing talent as a team mate. Leclerc has zero pressure because Ferrari already made clear that he is the future and is not in a rush. That was clever and I, in contrary to some people, think that it was a key move from Ferrari rather than publicly throwing Leclerc into cold water.

Whatever, enough off topic.

[Sparky]

I disagree. DRS worked great in this race. I like it. Faster cars are not stuck.

Though the question was not if it worked, the question i tried to ask is how does it make sense cars get DRS to make up for a lost of downforce, while they already passed the car?
Essentialy what u are saying is as long as faster cars are not stuck, DRS did well?
I don't agree on this, and while this circuit might not be the best example, but we all (should) know it's not always the fastest car that wins. Unless we want to take the tire strategy element out of the race, a driver should be able to defend his position and he should not be compromised by a band-aid DRS giving any attacker an unfair advantage. DRS should imo be balanced as in just give the attacker an equal chance to overtake aswell as the defender equal chance to defend. With last weekends DRS once any car overtook another (late enough on the main straight that is), the action itself was often initialized yet just not completed, triggering the other DRS activation.
Now the DRS more powerfull as ever made it so no contender could recover from this overtake, as the other car had another advantage. Just a free boost, while the purpose was to give another chance for an overtake.
Though, if i'm overlooking something, i'm happy to hear.

[zeph]

It's ridiculous that the press is buying into the Ferrai cylinder failure misdirection.

The engineer clearly told Leclerc during the race "we have no H recovery" I heard it live, and anyone can hear it here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tujK_qFRQFk

With all the sensors and monitoring teams run now days, their is now way they could not tell the difference between a misfiring cylinder, and an MGU-H failure.

With that being said Leclerc and his engineer both stayed remarkably calm.

EDIT:
Also who speaks Italian and can translate the end of the audio?

Mark Hughes offers the following explanation in his habitually concise race report:

Ferrari was unwilling to divulge details but acknowledged Leclerc was a cylinder down. “We had reduced combustion from one cylinder,” said Mattia Binotto. “But the engine was still able to run and we will certainly be using it on Friday in China.” Leclerc was advised by radio that he no longer had ERS-h recovery but this is thought just to be a consequence of the cylinder problem rather than a failure of the ersH. If, as claimed, there was no mechanical damage to the engine, it suggests perhaps a spark plug or injector failure.

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/repo ... rix-report

[djos]

If Kimi is the Iceman, Vettel is provng himself to be the Icecream: melts under pressure

Vettel has a long history of not being able to race his way to the front without making silly mistakes, so I wasnt surprised to see him spin.

[ajprice]

Hamilton is the only driver in history to win at least one pole position in every season he's raced, that should indicate how fast he is. He hasn't always had the best car on the grid but he always finds a way to be the fastest man out there. No way half the grid would be beating him in the other car, not even close.

Hamilton is a fast driver, and I'm saying this as a fan: Getting that statistic is a bit easier when you're in a fast McLaren in your first year and get on the podium in your first race. Alonso started in a Minardi, Raikkonen in a Sauber, Button & Rosberg in Williams (midfield at the time), Vettel in a Toro Rosso (not counting the one race for BMW in USA 2007, standing in for Kubica). Those cars were midfield or backmarkers. Hamilton has had some years in a not so fast car, but he's never had to race a dog of an F1 car where scoring a point would be great and a podium would be a dream.

It would be interesting to see how far up the grid he could drag a Williams or Racing Point this year though...

[Sulman]

I'm saying this as not a fan of Hamilton: He's a very good driver, probably the best in the field. Has been for a long time.

He didn't have the best car in 2008 (although it was very good) and Nico Rosberg (remember Nico at Williams? He was very, very fast) is no slouch; Hamilton pretty aggressively took it to him loads of times over '14-15, and like all great drivers Hamilton has an infuriating knack for being where he needs to be in races.

He drove in Bahrain as fast as the car would go; no more or less, and it proved to be enough to be there when it counted.

Vettel I really like but he does have these poor weekends.

[dfegan358]

Vettel is prone to mistakes, and off weekends and I don’t think anyone can says he’s at the elite level of Hamilton.

I still think he’s a very fast driver on his day. He needs to get to grips with this years SF90 very soon if he wants to win a WDC with Ferrari.

Leclerc is gonna push him to his Limit this year. Will be interesting to see if Leclerc s pace is as strong consistently over next 4-5 races.

I suspect Vettel will come out on top over the season. It would certainly create some discomfort and tension at Maranello if Leclerc is the main challenger later in the year.

[Godius]

I disagree. DRS worked great in this race. I like it. Faster cars are not stuck.

Though the question was not if it worked, the question i tried to ask is how does it make sense cars get DRS to make up for a lost of downforce, while they already passed the car?
Essentialy what u are saying is as long as faster cars are not stuck, DRS did well?
I don't agree on this, and while this circuit might not be the best example, but we all (should) know it's not always the fastest car that wins. Unless we want to take the tire strategy element out of the race, a driver should be able to defend his position and he should not be compromised by a band-aid DRS giving any attacker an unfair advantage. DRS should imo be balanced as in just give the attacker an equal chance to overtake aswell as the defender equal chance to defend. With last weekends DRS once any car overtook another (late enough on the main straight that is), the action itself was often initialized yet just not completed, triggering the other DRS activation.
Now the DRS more powerfull as ever made it so no contender could recover from this overtake, as the other car had another advantage. Just a free boost, while the purpose was to give another chance for an overtake.
Though, if i'm overlooking something, i'm happy to hear.

I agree with what you stated and there is an other side effect of the second drs zone.

Due to the higher closings speed in the second drs zone, the defending driver without drs will always cover the inside of the corner. This can result in a dangerous situation like the Sainz / Verstappen collision.

Sainz arrived into the braking area in front of Verstappen but Sainz had to brake earlier than Verstappen to make the corner. Sainz then really thought that the job was done and didn’t realise or anticipate that Verstappen could brake later due to arriving into the corner at a lower speed.

[SmallSoldier]

I disagree. DRS worked great in this race. I like it. Faster cars are not stuck.

Though the question was not if it worked, the question i tried to ask is how does it make sense cars get DRS to make up for a lost of downforce, while they already passed the car?
Essentialy what u are saying is as long as faster cars are not stuck, DRS did well?
I don't agree on this, and while this circuit might not be the best example, but we all (should) know it's not always the fastest car that wins. Unless we want to take the tire strategy element out of the race, a driver should be able to defend his position and he should not be compromised by a band-aid DRS giving any attacker an unfair advantage. DRS should imo be balanced as in just give the attacker an equal chance to overtake aswell as the defender equal chance to defend. With last weekends DRS once any car overtook another (late enough on the main straight that is), the action itself was often initialized yet just not completed, triggering the other DRS activation.
Now the DRS more powerfull as ever made it so no contender could recover from this overtake, as the other car had another advantage. Just a free boost, while the purpose was to give another chance for an overtake.
Though, if i'm overlooking something, i'm happy to hear.

I agree with what you stated and there is an other side effect of the second drs zone.

Due to the higher closings speed in the second drs zone, the defending driver without drs will always cover the inside of the corner. This can result in a dangerous situation like the Sainz / Verstappen collision.

Sainz arrived into the braking area in front of Verstappen but Sainz had to brake earlier than Verstappen to make the corner. Sainz then really thought that the job was done and didn’t realise or anticipate that Verstappen could brake later due to arriving into the corner at a lower speed.

The DRS is needed because of 2 fundamental problems with F1, one of them they are trying to fix... The other might not be an easy one to deal with, but both are based on the the effect of “Draft”...

For cars that have similar characteristics (horsepower, traction), the only way for the following car to make a pass is to use the draft, which is nothing more than a DRS in concept... You use the car in front to reduce the drag of the following car... The following car therefore requires “less power” to maintain the same speed as the leading the car and use the excess power to make a pass when it comes out of the draft.

1.- Following Closely: Since the F1 cars can’t follow closely due to how their aero works, they aren’t close enough to make use of such draft and make an overtake... Without DRS we wouldn’t have much passing (or any at all) in F1 today (unless of course the following car would have a huge performance differential, which is something we don’t want either)... The new regulations are trying to address this.

2.- Speed of the cars: For the draft to work, the following car would need to be behind the leading car for a “long period of time”... Unluckily, the current F1 cars are so fast / powerful, that the straights in the current circuits wouldn’t be long enough in a considerable amount of tracks for the draft to be successful (think Melbourne for example, where even with DRS, the following car can’t make the move because the straights aren’t long enough)... I don’t think that any of us really want an “slower” Formula 1... Part of the DNA of F1 is to have the fastest cars to go around a circuit... This part without a change to the tracks or reducing the power of the cars won’t be easy to achieve.

So, if what we want is to have more “on-track action” in F1, I’m afraid DRS will be around for a while.

In regards to the 2 DRS zones, the activation point for both is the same (if I’m not wrong, Melbourne is the same is in this regards, with the first 2 DRS zones are activated at the same location before the last turn... The idea is to allow the following car to use the first DRS zone to “get close” and the second one to make the move.

In regards to your comment about defending... If the leading car is passed on the first DRS zone and even though the car that made the pass have a “boost” on the second DRS zone... If the car that was passed can hang to the car in front, he would have the opportunity to take his position back in the next lap... That’s ok and in my opinion, there isn’t a problem with it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ringo]

Indeed. should be replaced with Alonso with Immediate effect.

Its not as simple as that . Alonso's speed comes with a team devouring political cancer. I think he sucks the air out of a team. He is his own worst enemy. Vettel can be replaced with Riciardo, Perez, Ocon or Hulkenberg. Not as good as Alonso but they wont implode the team and demotivate Charles.

I won't agree with you. Alonso is a very good driver and he is the one who can beat Hamilton using Ferrari machinery.

I don't think Riciardo,Perez or Ocon or Hulkenber will not challenge or support lecrec and they are not consistent.

I am not new to F1(watching from 1999). can you name any one who can beat Hamilton? nope. The only option is Alonso and ferrari should replace Vettel with Alonso in 2020 to get championship else they have to wait till indefinitely.

The driver's capability will come out when they are driving under performing car or in difficult situation. I don't think Lecrec can to handle pressure or with underperforming car.

If you put Alonso beside to him then we can analyse him(lecrec) how he is driving.

His abilities to win is not the issue here. I agree with what you are saying regarding his abilities.
It's his stifling personality that engulfs a team is the problem. He will play politics around young leclerc.

Alonso is the Tantalus of Formula 1.

Has the talent and skill, but when he goes into a team the car turns to a dog. When he leaves the team, the car turns to a winner.
When he joins a team and get a winning car... he gets a once in every 25 years prodigy as a teammate. He's cursed!

[Sieper]

Hamilton is the only driver in history to win at least one pole position in every season he's raced, that should indicate how fast he is. He hasn't always had the best car on the grid but he always finds a way to be the fastest man out there. No way half the grid would be beating him in the other car, not even close.

It also indicates he always was in a pole capable car. Ofcourse half the grid would not beat him, he is one of the all time great and rightfully so.