Guess the testing ranking.

This surely is an exercise is code breaking and with the power of computing being what it is it would be fun to set up a rig to test an engine reaction to as many codes as there are possibilities, with the engine not being broken in the process. If nothing else an intellectual challenge. I can see the multiple issues this can create, never that simple, every thing works together, it is not one tweak. With the objective to find the hidden manual only, the customer teams could work together on it. The enigma. Otherwise, and more simply, provide the source code.

 

Very interesting. Real PU info starts about 24 mins in.
I did think it was interesting that the podcast didn't say that they looked at the telemetry data and could prove they had more power!!!!

To be fair there are always limits in engines that can't be exceeded but others that will reduce the life of the PU. So they can only be used a few times to enable the PU to last the required races.

While the rules do state PU and software parity I don't think there is any rule to say customer teams have the same information regarding operating modes.

I do think that PU parity should cover all aspects (including fuel, lubs and modes) so it's a fairer fight.

 

It would be interesting but pu manufacturers won't allow it as it would damage their reputation.
I believe the 'software' has to be provided to FIA and it all runs on McLaren hardware, so it's a known system, not bespoke to each team.
So thinking back to Ron and his statements that the 'only way to win is as a Manufacturer team' not a customer team!!!! He was Mercs manufacturer team and then went to a customer plus they know the ECU systems!!!
I do think he was effectively saying that manufacturers withhold power modes from customers without being quite so up front about it.

I don't think it is necessarily just software i.e. if you add a sensor to a Merc that the others don't have, maybe an extra temp sensor for a radiator, could be anything. Then in the code say select mode 72 would give all PU 98% power but if extra sensor has a reading above 20Deg C then give 100% power. Obviously that is an over simplification but trying to work out what thousands of lines of code do even for the ECU experts would take months and is so complex it's almost impossible as teams would just change code every race.
Remember back when they banned traction control then a year or 2 later allowed it as they couldn't police it!!!!!

Lets face it F1 teams have some of the most skillful engineers on the planet. They are paid to extract the most performance they can.

Think about VW and the 'diesel scandal'. In reality the engineers created software to allow the cars to pass the mandatory test. There was actually nothing in the rules to say the cars had to perform the same while being driven on roads. The engineers just found a cheap solution to meet the legal requirements. It was only the politicians who wrote the rules that were annoyed as they assumed that if the cars passed the lab tests they would perform the same on the road!!!!! They should have specified that use on road should be within 5% of the lab results etc....

Anyway it's all about the best engineers working within the rules or bending not breaking them. I don't like that customer teams don't get same performance but that's life.

 

Really ?

Not doubting you just never seen that before .

also like and agree with your last sentence .

 

Apologies if this has been seen before .

Go to 40 seconds , explains Vettels cause of crash .

 

Loved the discussions these past two weeks all- thanks

Amazingly what we haven’t done for once is post our speculative pecking orders.

Anyone dare to post, with an estimated time/performance gap?

QUALI:

Ferrari
Mercedes (+0.150)
Red Bull (+0.400)
Renault (+0.900)
McLaren (+1.1s)
Alfa (+1.2s)
Haas (+1.3s)
Toro Rosso (+1.4s)
Racing Point (+1.7s)P
Williams (+3s)

RACE:
Ferrari
Mercedes (+0.00)- neck and neck
Red Bull (+0.200)
Renault (+0.700)
McLaren (+0.850)
Haas (+1.00s)
Toro Rosso (+1.1s)
Alfa (+1.2s)
Racing Point (+1.4s)
Williams (+2s)

Testing to me suggested the midfield teams were better than previously. Ferociously compact. The Renault PU is supposedly achieving what it set out to do and therefore I am (perhaps foolishly) sticking my neck out to say Renault and McLaren will benefit. However, they lack a quali mode so we are led to believe and therefore they might get overhauled in quali from time to time from the Ferrari powered teams. Red Bull have a great package again but are still bedding in with Honda and will be clear 3rd on out and out pace, but a huge strategical threat on race pace as they won’t get shaken off easily.

The Renault PU has been a decent race day PU and this is where we should see the fruits of their gains, with Renault works team achieving their aim of reducing the gap to Red Bull, but not enough to beat them outright regularly. McLaren will be on their tail but again, they will be in a development race from there.

I don’t buy the hype of Alfa and Haas but I do think the latter will have the better race car. Some commentators felt they looked a dark horse on long runs. Toro Rosso will give them some headaches as the Honda will be better in race trim and their Red Bull parts will mean they have a great race car.

Racing Point are behind on development and could surprise us yet again when their upgrades arrive, but with a tighter packed PU performance their Merc engine won’t be enough to mask the chassis. Likewise at Williams, who will be developing from week to week initially.

Closer grouped teams, but for now familiar faces at the front.

I’d love it be even closer but we will soon find out in two weeks.

 

It's just my interpretation of stuff I did come from an engine test and development environment (not F1 but gas turbine and jets) and have seen manufacturers trying to stretch rules!!!!! Plus badly written specs limiting working envelope which isn't what was intended or required!

 

What's Horner like face to face ?

 

I'll give it a go TopClass, need a short break from work.

QUALI:

Mercedes - I don't believe they remotely showed their hand in testing
Ferrari (+0.150) - With new management maybe they are sandbagging a little less than normal
Red Bull (+0.200) - they badgered Renault for Party mode so much I can't imagine Honda don't have one! Plus TR so much faster!!!!!
Renault (+0.300) - I think they have made big strides, I even think they kept back stuff late last year due to RB departure
Toro Rosso (+0.8s) - same pu as RB and aero influence from Adrian!
Alfa (+1.1s) - Ferrari power plus ferrari plan b aero
McLaren (+1.2s) - big improvement but take time to get back towards front.
Haas (+1.3s) - think they are falling behind a little
Racing Point (+1.5s) - money seems to have not helped yet, wonder if more money led to more options and split resources
Williams (+2s) - not enough testing - too big a delay in parts- maybe once back in Europe they will improve

RACE:
Mercedes
Red Bull
Ferrari
Renault
McLaren
Haas
Toro Rosso
Alfa
Racing Point
Williams

 

The podcast are due to have Matthew Carter back on again soon I believe, although I think by now he's somewhat used up his juiciest gossip from his days at Renault. He has got a new job within F1 though (helping get sponsors for teams), so perhaps he'll remain interesting!

I can't say I've analysed the race runs sufficiently to suggest any kind of ranking. But here's Autosports:

1. Ferrari
2. Merc
3. Red Bull
4. Haas
5. Renault
6. Alfa
7. Toro Rosso
8. Racing Point
9. Mclaren
10. Williams

Haas and Mclaren are the surprises in that ranking for me. Would be very impressive if Haas are genuinely fourth quickest, although they probably were at Melbourne last year? Autosport's analysis says the Haas looks super easy to drive (like the Ferrari), and they've been very slow in the speed traps. So either they've been running a tonne of downforce (more appropriate for Melbourne), or the engine has been turned down. So whilst by testing times there's very little between them and Renault, it looks like Haas have been hiding more pace.

If Mclaren have been pumping in quick laps in testing yet go out in Q1, that's going to be a massive failure. From the comments I've seen, Mclaren might have one lap pace, but no race pace. Apparently the rear is very unstable on long runs.

 

I thought Horner said the Honda engine was perfect in the Red Bull and it was running smooth like butter... he even denied as fake news that there was massive vibration. And Max also confirmed that the engine was perfect and doing everything he wanted it to do...
....so why is this now? Doesnt sound like "Smooth like Butter" to me. What do you think?

While there were no major issues in Spain, Honda's technical director, Toyoharu Tanabe, has admitted to being concerned at the packaging being a little too aggressive and as a consequence the units will be revised in time for the season opener in Australia.

"We don't have a serious problem with the current installation, but we found some issues because of the tight packaging," he said, according to Motorsport.com. "The shape was a little bit too aggressive, so we need to make it a little bit different.

 

All are probably truthful but remember that Australia will be much hotter. So running in Spain this time of year all cooling is adequate but higher than they expected and maybe marginal for Aus!!!
There is also what they didn't say, as in no one from Honda or Red Bull has said that they ran at 100% power, they just said it ran perfectly. So that could mean we are aware of a vibration limiting us, to say 95% power and as long as we stay under 95% we are fine. The pre season test limits for max power were set at 95% and it ran perfectly within that limitation!!!

Red Bull and Honda are just only telling part of the story, in my opinion!!!

 

So who is telling the truth???

Priestly broke the news
Mark Priestly - engine Vibrations stopping Red Bull running full power
Source of rumours
Research was conducted this morning as GPToday.net called Marc Priestley to ask what exactly he heard and who the source is. The story Marc told in his video comes from a former Red Bull Racing team member who left at the end of last year, so he is no longer with the team and is also not in Barcelona.
A well established technical source in the paddock told GPToday.net: "The problem is not so much the engine but the complete rear. That is not yet in balance and therefore it doesn't run as they want at Red Bull Racing.
Red Bull Racing told us in a comment that it is 'not in the position to react to this information'.

Dr Marko denies it
Dr Helmut Marko has added his denial to speculation Red Bull is struggling with excessive vibration from the 2019 Honda power unit.
Actually, team official Marko insists the Japanese manufacturer has done a "great job" over the winter, and claims Red Bull is behind Ferrari but ahead of Mercedes.
'Honda has incredible resources'
"Everything they (Honda) told us has happened. We have had zero engine problems so far," he told Auto Bild.

Horner denies it
Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has firmly denied claims the team has experienced vibration problems with its Honda power units.
Responding to reports vibration problems have preventing the team from running their engines at full power, Horner told RaceFans: “There’s absolutely no vibration issue that we encountered at all in any of the running. So I’m not quite sure where that’s come from.”

 

So Mark's info came from a Red Bull team member who left at the end of last year. So surely he can't know how the 2019 PU as fitted in testing is performing unless his old mates are telling him? I do watch Marks youtube channel and enjoy his insight.

Dr Marko "Everything they (Honda) told us has happened. We have had zero engine problems so far, - translation - they told us not to run at certain revs and as long as we don't everything is great

Horner “There’s absolutely no vibration issue that we encountered at all in any of the running. " - translation - because we have been told not to go above certain revs or power output and we didn't we have not encountered any vibrations!!!!

I am not saying any of them are lying, I just think they chose their words very carefully.

I don't have any sources of info and I am a bit pedantic about statements made to the press. So it's probably just me reading things into statements. that said

McLaren had major vibration issues with the Honda PU initially. I think RB and TR are using a different gearbox to McL so if there are still vibrations then Honda have had 3-4 years to resolve the issues!!!!!

Ultimately TR were doing fast times in testing, in fact they were posting faster times than RB. I would be very surprised if the Honda PU still had vibration issues as RB would have seen the data from the first 6 months of TR using the PU and ploughed resources into solving it.

It's all very interesting, can't wait to see what the first few races bring. I do hope we have 3 or more teams battling for wins.

 

I guess we'll find out in 2 weeks, either it'll go bang or it won't

 

But didn't it take Honda more than a year with McLaren and they still couldn't get the problem solved? I don't believe that all of a sudden it's as "smooth as butter" though...lol

Honda to revise packaging
NEWS STORY
04/03/2019
I am still wondering though, if the below statement is anything to do with it.

While there were no major issues in Spain, Honda's technical director, Toyoharu Tanabe, has admitted to being concerned at the packaging being a little too aggressive and as a consequence the units will be revised in time for the season opener in Australia.

"We don't have a serious problem with the current installation, but we found some issues because of the tight packaging," he said, according to Motorsport.com. "The shape was a little bit too aggressive, so we need to make it a little bit different.

"It's not a big concern," he added.

While some changes were made over the course of the test, Tanabe says that a more permanent fix will be introduced before Melbourne.

"So far, it's not serious," he insisted. "It means we can be ready for the first race, with the items we have issues here."

 

And what is you take on the assumption that Mercedes manufactured two different cars for 2019? Was this a plan to use different horses for courses? I am sure it didnt come about as a response to Ferrari radical front wing or the out of the box speed. They didnt build with those drastic changes overnight or in one testing week. What are your thoughts?

 

Merc are an interesting one. I wonder if they had the opposite problem to Williams. In that did they beat their internal timescales and the car used in the second test was actually the one they had intended to be ready for Aus? It's almost like they are about 4 weeks ahead of schedule. For the aero engineers they must be so happy/overloaded with the data from both packages. It's great to have all the fluid dynamics and scale aero wind tunnel data but real on track back to back on 2 very different packages must be invaluable to align their data models with the real track.
The interesting bit will be to see what they bring to Aus.

I have been reading that Lewis is not happy with the new tyres. Pirelli are suggesting that C2 to C4, I think, are the same as the thin tread ones in 2018!! So it appears that Lewis is actually suggesting that the Merc, once again has tyre issues. I think there were reports during testing Merc were graining their tyres more than others.

 

Just watched Marc Priestley latest youtube video and he answered one of my questions
I asked about PU manufacturers PU modes and if they could withhold 'special codes'. He suggested that the rules say that all modes must be available to customer teams! The cynic in me wonders if available and known about are the same thing
I also asked about development potential and he suggested that teams don't really know the potential but they all hope they can get faster....

 

Yes, but I think that was with the Spec B car (the first one) but it seems as though they got over that problem with the second one. I believe though, that they will use both cars depending on the race track demands. then...is it possible for Lewis and Bottas to go out in two different cars for FP1...just to test the waters? lol

And about the codes.... I believe that they give the codes to customer teams, but I dont know if they are told how to efficiently utilise them in a short time frame.