Kind of feel the same, i especially don't really get the numerous "Now Hamilton has a car that means he can show what he can do" comments; why does he need a car with such a huge advantage to "show what he can do"? Alonso's been showing what he can do in whatever hunk of junk comes rolling out of the Ferrari factory, and is still considered one of if not the best driver on the grid. After so many years of people trying to undermine the "value" of a WDC and trying to put extra emphasis on the quality of the car i don't see why it should suddenly be any different this year, when there's an even bigger gap. Seems pretty obvious to me the interior of the cars is what needs to be more strictly regulated, the Aero like front, rear wings and side pods can be copied as soon as any car rolls out with an innovation, where as something like an engine which has frozen development was always going to cause one team to have a constant advantage throughout the whole season. Also i'd like to see some effort made at the rear of the cars to reduce the turbulent air the car behind has to drive through, as the reduced downforce spreads the field out in a couple of laps. When people are already writing the season off at this early stage and are 99% sure who's going to win, something is obviously wrong, in how many other sports does that happen?
The smaller teams (Sauber, FI, Marrusia & Caterham) have reported the "F1 Strategy group" to the European Commission. This comes after the budget cap and more fairer distribution of prize money plans were turned down by the big 5 + Williams who make up the strategy group. This is the same group who have influence on the latest rules such as double points etc etc. Is the F1 Strategy group basically the new FOTA but with power?
Hamilton is now suffering the same problems Vettel suffered. Hamilton is driving brilliantly at the moment, but all he has to do is drive better than Rosberg and victory is his. The end of last season and the start of this one are almost identical. Vettel put in some simply stunning drives in that run of victories, but because Webber stuttered and no other car could get close he didn't get the plaudits he deserved. I have no idea who is saying "Now Hamilton has a car that means he can show what he can do", because its quite the opposite. If you have a dominant car all you can do is not fail. As I mentioned before, the best drive of your life would go completely unnoticed, only the safety car in Bahrain allowed Hamilton to show his metal, his other victories have been, well boring? Is F1 destined to become WRC, Mercedes as Citroen?
How can anyone say that? Hamilton has been dragging McLaren car along during the last few years. Most people would admit that he was outperforming the car.
i don't get what your response is to? I'm just saying that people seem to be trying to make out Hamilton coasting to easy victories is somehow more of a spectacle than Vettel doing the same, when any driver could do it with a weaker team mate and the best car by miles.
Not in 2008, 2010 and 2011 where he had WDC challenging cars and fluffed it at various points when he should have shut it down while the chances were there. 2010 was probably his biggest fluff with Italy and Singapore while being too eager with overtaking even though he was leading the WDC. Yes in 2007, 2009 at the end, and 2012 where he did perform very well and maybe one of the best on the grid. 2013 was good but not great, he had various brain fades like in Italy and Brazil which almost cost Mercedes 2nd in the WCC and was failing to keep up with Rosberg at times even at the end of the season before the chassis problems. Alonso in order with Ferrari IMO: 2012, 2011, 2010, 2013 Vettel with Red Bull IMO: 2013, 2011, 2009, 2010, 2012
And you are completely forgetting the crap that McLaren was doing to spoil races for their drivers. Crappy pit stops, Stupid mistake with the gearbox thing and several other crappy things. And it seems to be a trademark now for McLaren...start on a high and go downhill quickly. I really like them but they are a big disappointment.
The thing I pick out from that, aren't the engine manufacturers supposed to give all the teams the same engine?
Probably more software than mechanical as Lotus didn't get the last "update" RBR/Toro Rosso did in Bahrain and Lotus had to wait until China. Same could apply here, but yeah engines have to be "identical" in make but not how they run.
In terms of design, the engines are homologated, so they should be the same, but in practice they aren't. In the Bahrain test, Lotus found they were nearly 30hp down on power compared to the Red Bull. It's the same for reliability: Lotus and Caterham have had to use older parts and even an engine block that had survived a testing rig fire.
Homologation does not mean that the Renault power unit has to be identical to the Mercedes power unit. The process consists of ensuring that the sample power unit lodged with the FIA meets the specifications of the technical rules. Once approved then each power unit manufacturer has to supply, to their teams, power units which are identical to the approved sample. Renault can not supply Red Bull with a power unit which is different from the homologated version or different from any power units supplied to their other customers.
I didn't mean the 3 engines had to be the same, I meant the engine for Red Bull & Caterham or Mercedes & Williams etc had to be the same The ECU part can be written with the users discretion (I believe Red Bull did their own), but the physical parts had to be the same for all Renault engines etc. The article made it sound like the 'reliability' fixes weren't going to all teams, and those teams had no choice in the matter.
