I don't know... The Merc pits were suggesting brakes were an issue for quite some time, so with the way those things were glowing and their history of brake failures, there's not a whole lot of hindsight there.
They'll need to get their brakes sorted for Canada.. Also, if the Ferrari's are bringing a more powerful engine to Canada, then Merc will have to answer with upgrades of their own. Right now, the Mercs have the edge, just! but, like others have mentioned, they only need a bit more downforce and wee bit more power to be on Par with the Mercs.. Hopefully this'll be sooner rather than later in the season and we can see a great fight to the end! For some reason, I think McLaren will come good too, up the power, get more reliable and add a few more aero bits and that car isn't that far off! Renault need to sort their **** out, if they do, can see RB being in the mix, not for race wins but certainly troubling the likes of Williams..
I will stick my neck out about Mclaren and say they are on their way up, back of the grid in Oz... then all of a sudden Alonso is holding up Raikkonen in Bahrain! RB are going downhill IMO. Ricciardo using the best of his abilities to haul around that **** box.
Fingers crossed for McHonda. Is there any possibility that Red Bull could switch to Honda for 2016? That is on the assumption that Honda get a pu that is reasonably powerful and reliable.
They all do it, it's a bit of extra tarmac to use to get the inside line. Giving the closing speeds it is in a sense safe as the car exiting the pit lane will already have to be in the firing line (and out from behind the wall) before the cars on the main straight start to move across, therefore they wouldn't go for that bit of tarmac Although surely it gets to the stage where it's four wheels off the track, but that's a whole different argument! please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Re: Räikkönen's strategy The salient point – already made by Smithers – is that all else being equal, he could have completed the race in less time. For his strategy to work, it was important to run in clean air for as long as possible and to run at optimal pace for the tyres. Getting Rosberg at the start was a bonus but scrapping to retain the position would have burned the Options in both senses of the word, requiring an even longer middle stint. After being repassed by Rosberg but without further threat from behind, he immediately allowed a gap for clean air, thus preserving long term flexibility. Essentially, all else is rarely equal; there are practical considerations which need to be worked out 'on-the-fly' which can often be the deciding factor. Stopping sooner on both occasions could have hit trouble with interfering traffic. I understand this was why both stints were slightly extended. Ferrari got it right (apart from Vettel's poor showing) but Hamilton was fortunate his brake problems didn't occur a couple of laps sooner. This presents a tantalising prospect for the next few races as Mercedes' advantage ebbs, especially at Canada – a circuit which makes huge demands upon brakes and tyres…
Just seen BLS' post, responding to dhel. Last things first, the pit exit forms part of the track and as such, does not contravene track limits. At the point where the pit lane emerges, the broken line defines the limit for cars already on track, and the solid line extending from the pit must not be crossed by those exiting the pits but may be crossed by those already on track, so long as they do not also cross the broken line (with all four wheels). Back to dhel's original point, when Hamilton came into view, he was far enough ahead for Rosberg to see clearly and to judge as being out of range. All three drivers are trying to brake at the latest possible moment and there was no way Rosberg was close enough to pass Hamilton. Therefore, with regard to Hamilton, Rosberg's manoeuvre was safe.
Interesting... laps 50, 54 and 55 show that Hamilton had some life in his tyres too.. If, buts and maybes.. errr.. But looking at the above graph, does tend to confirm that but for the brakes issues that started at the end of lap 56, Hamilton would have comfortably stayed ahead of Kimi regardless of them pitting the Ferrari driver earlier..
Isn't it obvious that Hamilton has only been pushing hard when he needed too? It seems as though he does the slower stints when there is no reason to push harder – the result? Save Tyres, Save Engine and keep brakes in working temperature too!
I think Hamilton is only doing just enough to stay ahead, there's plenty more if he needs it. Lewis has grown up and understands fully what he needs to do.
What do you think about Red Bull new accusation that Mercedes is actively helping Ferrari? Does that make sense or those guys going crazy? 231 9 0 0 please log in to view this image Dr Helmut Marko has accused Mercedes of actively helping Ferrari to catch the reigning world champions in 2015. According to Mercedes team chairman Niki Lauda, it is no surprise that Ferrari is much more competitive this year. “If you look at how much we won last year,” said the F1 legend, “it was clear that it would not always be like that.” Red Bull official Marko, however, smells a rat. “It is difficult to prove, but I am sure that Mercedes helped Ferrari,” he told the German magazine Sport Bild. “And we all know why.” Austrian Marko reportedly senses a political motive, and not just Mercedes’ desire to halt suggestions it is damaging F1 by dominating so easily. He might also be referring to the engine rules, with Ferrari having now joined Mercedes in backing the current turbo V6 era, even beyond 2017. Sport Bild suggests Mercedes may even have slowed its own development programme over the winter, and recommended that Ferrari sign up its hybrid specialist Wolf Zimmermann. “We expected an improvement,” said Sauber engineer Giampaolo Dall’Ara, referring to Ferrari’s 2015 engine, “but such great progress in such a short space of time is difficult to explain.” (GMM)
