Considering this was published in Nature I'm sure its true.
Oh...
This is pure click-bait. Without the bit about Ferrari's 'lack of downforce', the article reads like an Excel spreadsheet.
More like Ferrari modified the 2015 car to have 2016 levels of downforce to see how next year's tires differ from the current compounds. Not a bad strategy, but a very unconventional way to conduct a validations test. Probably this data get's fed into their simulators.Big Mangalhit wrote:Ferrari with that huge wing and skirts failed to produce any more DF?? Jeez they are looking good this year. I know it means nothing for next year but PR wise...
Wow, wait. So they are implementing a cliff into these tires? So does that mean that they are again designed to just fail(grip wise, not structurally). Artificially making a better show, im not sure this is what we wantJuzh wrote:Posting this here as well.
Some new info on the 2017 tire testing so far:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 78262.html
While Mercedes struggled with bad weather and rain during the 2017 tyre tests in Barcelona, Red Bull's Pierre Gasly enjoyed far smoother running in Abu Dhabi at temperatures of up to 38°C - with good results.
According to Red Bull's team principal Christian Horner there are a number of promising and one perfect compound among the batch of Pirelli's 2017 testing tyres, "Even during multiple fast laps in succession, this compound did not overheat and degraded in a very predictable, controlled manner despite the track conditions. Lap times were surprisingly consistent."
A contact patch 25 percent larger works wonders here. An employee of Pirelli revealed that the company is making progress on implementing a 'cliff' into the tyres. Using two layers of rubber this year has not produced such a pronounced loss of grip from one lap to the other that forces a driver to pit.
Red Bull's RB11 mule car provided Pirelli with the most relevant data. According to sources within Red Bull, the mule car has approximately 10 to 12 percentage points more downforce than the current RB12. Mercedes' mule car is reported to have 3 to 5 percent more downforce than the W07 whereas Ferrari failed to make any downforce gains when modifying their 2015 car altogether. The side-skirts do not work and there is no spare capacity at the Scuderia to modify the mule further.
Ferrari's current F1 drivers are the most active, however, with Sebastian Vettel racking up 1,100 km and Kimi Räikkönnen putting in 520 km. Red Bull's Daniel Ricciardo and Max Verstappen will only step foot into the mule cars and try out the wider Pirelli rubber at the last test in Abu Dhabi. Among the other current F1 drivers, Nico Rosberg tested for 220 km in Barcelona with weather conditions interfering.
At the very top of the table of test and junior drivers is Pascal Wehrlein (current F1 driver, but tests for Mercedes) with 2,700 km followed by Pierre Gasly (1,600 km), Sebastien Buemi (1,200) km, and Esteban Gutierrez (500 km).
I'm ok with a grip cliff as long as the tires can be raced on flat out for their designed duration.Drica wrote: Wow, wait. So they are implementing a cliff into these tires? So does that mean that they are again designed to just fail(grip wise, not structurally). Artificially making a better show, im not sure this is what we want
And then fuel saving kicks indjos wrote:I'm ok with a grip cliff as long as the tires can be raced on flat out for their designed duration.Drica wrote: Wow, wait. So they are implementing a cliff into these tires? So does that mean that they are again designed to just fail(grip wise, not structurally). Artificially making a better show, im not sure this is what we want
I don't think that had been much of an issue this year, maybe in year one of the hybrid formula but a lot less so now.Drica wrote:And then fuel saving kicks indjos wrote:I'm ok with a grip cliff as long as the tires can be raced on flat out for their designed duration.Drica wrote: Wow, wait. So they are implementing a cliff into these tires? So does that mean that they are again designed to just fail(grip wise, not structurally). Artificially making a better show, im not sure this is what we want
Which means you've used up more fuel trough the corner itself.Nickel wrote: Tires that can be pushed might actually save a bit of fuel as you're coming out of the corner faster and you didn't slow down as much in the first place.
Juzh wrote:Which means you've used up more fuel trough the corner itself.Nickel wrote: Tires that can be pushed might actually save a bit of fuel as you're coming out of the corner faster and you didn't slow down as much in the first place.
And after the corner as well, as you'd be faster on 10,500 rpm, at which point you can run the maximum 100kg/h, against exiting the corner at a lower rpm and hence also lower fuel flow.Juzh wrote:Which means you've used up more fuel trough the corner itself.Nickel wrote: Tires that can be pushed might actually save a bit of fuel as you're coming out of the corner faster and you didn't slow down as much in the first place.
Only if you'd stay at the same speed as if you did not have the extra grip (you'd leverage that extra speed for lift and coast). If not, you'd be earlier on the throttle, longer on the throttle and longer in the higher, more fuel consuming range of rpm.Manoah2u wrote:but wouldn't the lesser loss of speed also signify you dont 'need' to regain that speed lost, which costs more fuel in comparison, or am i way off here?