FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[vlad]

Well, it looks to me like the others are starting to have DNFs, not him. And yes, I expect him to take the title this year. McLaren and Ferrari will give their best, but, Vettel takes it.

[acosmichippo]

I don't see this affecting RBR that much. Isn't it agreed that their biggest advantage is on high-speed corners? If so, EBD has no effect there since they're on the throttle. So this should really only affect their stability whilst breaking/coasting, correct? If so, I would think the difference would be similar for all teams.

[bud]

I don't see this affecting RBR that much. Isn't it agreed that their biggest advantage is on high-speed corners? If so, EBD has no effect there since they're on the throttle. So this should really only affect their stability whilst breaking/coasting, correct? If so, I would think the difference would be similar for all teams.

Yes and no. I wouldn't say all high speed corners are full throttle, even half throttle i think the EBD would still come into play. I guess people think Redbull will be hit the hardest because they introduced it first.

[spankyham]

Well, it looks to me like the others are starting to have DNFs, not him. And yes, I expect him to take the title this year. McLaren and Ferrari will give their best, but, Vettel takes it.

Vettel is in the best position to win his 2nd WDC, but that doesn't guarantee anything. As Bud rightly points out, 2 or 3 pieces of plain bad luck over the next few races could change everything. He has a with a huge performance advantage over every other car. Honestly, I think if Nando, Lewis, Kubica (healthy) or Rosberg were to swap places with Seb from the start of the year, they would have at least the same advantage he now enjoys. There's nothing in that against Seb, he has done everything expected of a lead driver with the hands-down fastest car.

I think we're just discussing semantics here... so yes the rule (wording) wasn't changed, it's the interpretation of it that has. Effectively the same thing. The issue I have is that it's being done mid season. There's a whole hell of a lot of gray area in that rule about what constitutes moveable aero device so why not just handle it the same way as the f-duct? This is capricious and being done to suit an agenda, not for the sake of stopping a breach/loophole/ in the rules.

Every other team would have shown up to the next race with the same Ferrari gurney flap, it's just how the sport works. I see your point about the playing field, but this issue didn't begin this year, there was overrun being used heavily last year as well, and there was no clarification of its use or ban of it like there was with the f-duct. This enforcement is simply someone's agenda.

Couldn't agree with you more on the fact that it is the interpretation and, I'd add, the timing, that is variable in the FiA's behavior. I'd also agree that the FiA actions seem more agenda driven than being an impartial adjudicator. I completely agree and also have issue that it has been left to mid-season for them to act.

You're right that overruns were being used last year, but, remember the FiA changed rules last year to prevent this. The front of the diffuser used to be openable, but, the FiA changed that to set a distance that it could not be opened. Unfortunately, the measurement left a small, but exploitable window. Clearly against the spirit of the law and Charlie Whiting said in the Friday press conference before the Barcelona GP that the FiA was aware and had thought about the overrun exploit at the start of the season. So, the point of why the heck they have just let it go until this late into the season is the question and a logical answer is it suited their agenda. I agree with your point that things should not be determined mid-season. If the FiA were not running to an agenda, perhaps they would have acted before Australia. And, had they made the playing field level from day one (when they were aware of this) we might have had another close contest season with 5 or 6 drivers possibly taking the lead in the WDC after Valencia.

I don't see this affecting RBR that much. Isn't it agreed that their biggest advantage is on high-speed corners? If so, EBD has no effect there since they're on the throttle. So this should really only affect their stability whilst breaking/coasting, correct? If so, I would think the difference would be similar for all teams.

RB has no advantage when they don't use the overrun. Notice they can be caught and passed late in races (China/Canada) and they were also caught in Monaco. They can only use the overrun for a few laps. It is used by Seb in Q3 and the first 2 laps of a race to pull out a lead and ensure that he is far enough ahead so that the following drivers cannot use DRS. The overrun does damage the engine, but limiting its use keeps the damage manageable. Why do you think he can find nearly a second for his one run in every Q3 when every other driver only finds a tenth or so? Taking the overrun away from RB won't suddenly make them slower than anyone, but it would level the playing field. You can also tell that it will have a big effect on RB because Newey, Horner and RB are actively on the hustings complaining about the ban and making excuses for keeping the overrun.

[Fizzy]

RB has no advantage when they don't use the overrun. Notice they can be caught and passed late in races (China/Canada) and they were also caught in Monaco. They can only use the overrun for a few laps. It is used by Seb in Q3 and the first 2 laps of a race to pull out a lead and ensure that he is far enough ahead so that the following drivers cannot use DRS. The overrun does damage the engine, but limiting its use keeps the damage manageable. Why do you think he can find nearly a second for his one run in every Q3 when every other driver only finds a tenth or so? Taking the overrun away from RB won't suddenly make them slower than anyone, but it would level the playing field. You can also tell that it will have a big effect on RB because Newey, Horner and RB are actively on the hustings complaining about the ban and making excuses for keeping the overrun.

Thanks Spankyham - it's starting to make sense (a bit) based on that.

I was rubbing my head trying to work out why anyone could cite mis-use of petrol as a justification for this change, when petrol is a limited commodity and is managed as such during the race.

Even so, if it is likely only the qualifying (and probably just Q3) that petrol is being "wasted" it's still seems just an excuse for a rule change.

[acosmichippo]

Interesting, I'll have to keep that in mind.

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

...RB has no advantage when they don't use the overrun. Notice they can be caught and passed late in races (China/Canada) and they were also caught in Monaco....

Vettel only was ever caught by a driver on fresher tyres. The rubber, IMHO, was what made the difference, not the loss of the overrun. We've seen in Turkey and Monaco, it makes no difference whether the corner is low speed or high, the RB7's exit speeds are unmatched in clean air. All the Pirelli klag makes overtaking under braking nigh onto impossible, and if the RB7 gets off the corners fast enough, a pursuing driver can't utilise his greater top speed to overtake. Horner wants Vettel running in clean air as much as possible because the Newey chassis don't work nearly so well in traffic. So if Vettel is in the "run away and hide" mode, he tends to leave him out until his tyres are worn to the chords rather than pitting for rubber and potentially putting him back in traffic. I'm sure they've done statistical analyses weighing their lack of BHP and trap speed that indicate this stratigery gives them their surest chance. They lost the lead in China specifically because their data presumed the tarmac would "rubber in" better than it did, and Vettel's tyres went away sooner than expected when it didn't.

[bud]

Vettel only was ever caught by a driver on fresher tyres. The rubber, IMHO, was what made the difference, not the loss of the overrun.

In the case of Canada, Vettel pitted two laps later than Button, so his tyres were fresher.

[Bladesman]

Vettel only was ever caught by a driver on fresher tyres. The rubber, IMHO, was what made the difference, not the loss of the overrun.

In the case of Canada, Vettel pitted two laps later than Button, so his tyres were fresher.

Yep the McLarens had good race pace once again.

The Red Bulls are perhaps just too harsh on the new tyres but that is good because if they were not then the championship would be over.

[acosmichippo]

Pretty sure Lewis's and Seb's tires were similar in Spain too.

[spankyham]

Vettel only was ever caught by a driver on fresher tyres. The rubber, IMHO, was what made the difference, not the loss of the overrun.

From the first race, the overrun made the difference.
First 3 laps of Aust GP (all drivers on full fuel loads and same tyres) Vettel built a 3.5 second lead. Thereafter Hamilton steadily reduced his lead. By the first pit stop it was down to 1.5 seconds.
Fast forward to the last dry race, Monaco. Look at the first stint of the lead cars, again when they were on full fuel and same tyres. Vettel is fastest of the first 5 laps (Monaco has short distance laps). For the next 9 laps until the first pit stop, Vettel is only fastest once, Button is fastest 3 times and Alonso is fastest 5 times.

You know it is vitally important to Red Bull to keep the overrun because of how hard Newey and Horner are trying to make excuses for keeping it.

The overrun (already deemed by the FiA to be cheating the rules) is making the difference. It amazes me that the FiA refuses to take this cheat away from RB.

The Red Bulls are perhaps just too harsh on the new tyres but that is good because if they were not then the championship would be over.

Given the RB7 has the best aero package, they will be best on their tyres.

[bud]

They would be taking this "cheat" away from Ferrari too Spanky, RedBull just do it better.

[spankyham]

They would be taking this "cheat" away from Ferrari too Spanky, RedBull just do it better.

You're right, unfortunately Ferrari, and most of the other teams have been forced (by the FiA's failure to act) to do their best to copy the "cheat" - and at a time when they are supposed to be finding ways of saving rather than wasting.

[vlad]

Here's what Vettel have to say:

We won't be hit hardest by exhaust clampdown - Vettel


Red Bull have worked hard on perfecting the blown diffuser over the last two years.

Sebastian Vettel does not think the proposed ban on off-throttle blown diffusers will hit Red Bull's performance harder than its rivals.

All the teams in Formula One use exhaust gases to improve the performance of their diffusers and increase downforce. This year the top teams have been developing ever more complex systems so that the exhausts continue to pump gases over the diffuser even when the driver is off the throttle.

It is believed Red Bull, McLaren, Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault have taken this concept the furthest by introducing so-called 'hot blowing' diffusers. In these cases, fuel continues to be dumped through the engine while the ignition is retarded so that it explodes in the exhaust rather than the combustion chamber. This practice continues to feed the diffuser with hot gases when the driver is off the throttle, while also creating a very distinct and noisy sound.

Red Bull first introduced this practice last year with the help of its engine supplier Renault, which revealed earlier this year that its engines use 10% more fuel as a result. The FIA is keen to clamp down on the practice which it believes is not only wasteful, but also contravenes rules relating to the driver influencing the car's aerodynamics.

Red Bull has made clear that it is not entirely happy with the ruling, with Adrian Newey saying in Canada: "I agree with rule changes in the middle of a championship for good reasons, like safety, but this is not the case. It's absurd."

But despite his team's vocal objections, Vettel does not believe a ban will hurt his championship campaign.

"If it is happening then I think it will hit everyone," he told ESPNF1 in an exclusive interview. "I think if you look at the concept of our car then we are not bad off if it [the ban] happens. I think there are other people that will lose more, for instance the Renault or Mercedes teams which are completely relying on that technique.

"Surely it will hit everyone as we all rely on it in terms of performance. It does make us quicker, and if you ban it it will slow us down. But I think, compared to others, we won't be at a disadvantage."

The proposed ban will allow for 10% of the current level of blowing to continue off-throttle, which will reduce the amount of downforce the cars have on corner entry. But Vettel said the change will not have a massive effect on the way a driver approaches the corner.

"It will change, obviously, how much speed you are bringing into the corners and round the corners - anything in the off-throttle mode," he said. "I think we were all very used to driving the cars like they were last year [before the introduction of off-throttle blown diffusers] and you have to adapt quickly anyway in a race, things change.

"Grip levels change with the tyres, so it's not that much of a loss overall. Surely it will slow us down - it will slow everyone down - but it's not as if you will have to change your driving from black to white."

[What's Burning?]

We'll just have to see wont we? I mean at this point it will hit everyone it's simply a matter of where the chips fall. Most manuracturer would be able to give us a good estimate of how many tenths they'll lose from it but they're really have no better than a guess as to where the others would be.

Thinking through this merely from a logical perspective though, it would stand to reason that the cars with the most gains from the EBD would lose the most, but what does it matter to RBR if they lose 4 tenths when they're a second up? If McLaren and Ferrari lose 2 tenths they're still far behind. It's all a guess... but one this is sure, mechanical grip will play a bigger role and that's going to benefit Ferrari most.