:cornut: Thanks ScottinBend, they did get it right as the 1903 Springfield was the most popular American WWII Military sniper rifle. There were others. Jason
So MB got to do development on their test but the rest of the teams aren't allow to on their test? I think the the FIAs new fav is MB, sorry Ferrari. What may level the field is that a new tire design that is to be used after the test is what they will be running. MB won't have a chance to try it before a race.
That whole thing was a farce, was not a tire test, if it had been the tires would be better, we certainly know MB's fortunes have been better since the...."tire test" though....
Here's a good rundown on the situation BBC Sport - Formula 1: Tyre problem has existed all year - Gary Anderson Now, following this is an article that was published BEFORE the tests, and after Spain. I'm quoting only parts of it. I find it interesting for context. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/sports/autoracing/pirelli-tires-wear-quickly-sparking-f1-controversy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Here's a interesting pic (from auto-motor-und-sport.de) that supposedly shows Red Bull were swapping their front tires side to side. I assume the R on the bar code label is the Pirelli designation indicating it's a right side tire and the white L and arrow were put on by RB.
Regarding Mercedes' "advantages" after the tests. My views. Yours may vary I think it's too early to really tell if they gained an advantage or not, and I'm going to use numbers and results to demonstrate my point. Attached are the results so far for Nico and Lewis this season. Please take a second to view them. So far, before the tests, they had 3 pole positions out of 5 races, and two podiums. That's not a bad result for a car that was considered to have poor race pace, but be great in qualifying. Monaco was always predicted to be a Mercedes victory. For evidence I present this article, written on May 21, 2013 2013 Monaco GP preview: Mercedes' best chance for a win? - F1 Fanatic Now that article was written after the tests, but BEFORE anyone knew about them. We learned about the test on the 26th. See the following article for evidence of that. Mercedes in secret Pirelli Formula 1 tyre test row - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com So Monaco's result, after the test, was predicted for Mercedes based on how well they qualified in races PRIOR to the tests. It's impossible to say that the test affected the results at Monaco, since they were predicted to win regardless. Now, since Monaco, since the knowledge of the tests became public, we've had two races. In Canada (Hamilton's favorite venue), they each finished one spot behind their starting position, and in Britain they did extraordinarily well, despite an exploding tire, and gaining first place due to a Red Bull retirement. Now next race and for the future, tyres are going to be a totally new construction, that as you can see in the articles I listed above in this thread, are predicted to be better for Mercedes. Remember though that the prediction of Kevlar tires being better for Mercedes was made BEFORE the tests and is not news. What I'm trying to say here is that I feel any advantage Mercedes might have gotten from the tests is difficult to quantify. They haven't been completely running away with every race, and in fact if it weren't for Sebastian Vettel's failure this weekend, they would not have won. Any advantage that they may gain from the switch to Kevlar was predicted before the tests, and is unrelated to the tests. Mostly, I think the chief advantage they got was from Lewis learning how to use unfamiliar brakes better. Other than that, it's not a clear picture, since we really have only 2 post test races (I don't count Monaco for reasons I cited above) to compare to the previous 5, where honestly they did pretty well overall, Spain not withstanding.
For those who missed it, in Montreal Kimi Raikkonen passed Schumacher's record for consecutive points finishes. He may not have scored many points in the last few races but did score points. He's up to 25 consecutive.
Here is an interesting take on the tire problem..... ANALYSIS: Setup tricks that led to F1 tire failures - Racer.com
Really? The FIA bad swapping sides for the tires, issue a minimum pressure, and camber angle. If Pirelli had put out a decent tire to start with the teams would have to play games with them. It will make for a real mix up at the race.
That's what was said after Monaco, then after Canada, now your saying it again? How many more race wins will it take for you to be convinced? Come on just say your an MB fan, your proud of it, and stand up for what they have done. I always said I was a Schumi fan from before he won his first championship. I have been Vettel fan since he won his first race. I have never backed down no matter what happened.
That's fair, I'll try to answer as best I can. It's not a matter of opinion, it's numbers. If it were a football game we'd look at the scores and determine the winner. This is really no different. The record shows Mercedes had 3 pole positions in 5 races, and two podiums. Three races have happened since the tests, and the numbers show that they've had similar performance overall as they did before. Mercedes had one really bad race out of 5 before the tests. They had two retirements on Nico's car for not tire related reasons (electrical failure and suspension failure). In Malaysia, remember the team orders that kept Nico behind Lewis? Nico could go faster on the same tires and would have if he was allowed. Yes Lewis was struggling, but Nico wasn't. Same car, same tires. In Bahrain, Hamilton qualified 4th, was penalized for a gearbox change to 9th, and finished 5th. That happened before the tests. Here the car had the capability to gain 4 places in a race. Yes, in that same race the other car fell back from pole to 9th, but if one car does well and the other doesn't then that's not necessarily the fault of the car. Massa had a similar fall down the field as Nico. Spain was terrible for Mercedes (despite starting P1 and P2). That said, it's not unusual for a team to have a bad race every so often. One race does not a trend make. It's worth considering of course, but it's not a trend. In Monaco (which again, they were predicted to win BEFORE the tests) Vettel mentioned that driving behind the Mercs was like driving behind busses. He was right, the Mercs weren't fast and they drove to conserve their tires but since something like 70% of pole-sitters takes the win at Monaco, it was just dumb math that allowed Nico to win. We've only had two races to see how Mercedes does on an even footing since the tests. Canada had more than average pit stops and Mercedes lost places from where they started. Silverstone was punctuated by two safety car rounds, and tire explosions - the first of which happened to a Mercedes. Two races does not a trend make. It might be the start of a trend, sure. Again, it's numbers. They really aren't doing any better than they did before the tests - at least not clearly and decisively. Silverstone was a little anomalous. With the two safety cars, Hamilton was able to close gaps that he might otherwise have struggled with. I think his advancement from the back of the grid to 4th was due as much to that as to anything else. That said, Silverstone is the strongest argument so far of the assertion that they got a strong benefit from the tests. But now we're getting the Kevlar tires, which as I noted a few pages back have ALWAYS been thought to favor Mercedes (and hurt Red Bull), so that's going to further muddy the waters regarding exactly how much they benefitted from the tests. I'm not saying they didn't benefit, they probably did. I'm saying that it's hard to quantify how much they benefited based on the race results we have so far. If they take the constructors and driver's championships in the next couple of races, then yeah I'll be right there with you. And for the record, I'm a die-hard McLaren fan. This has been a brutal, brutal season for me :cryin:
Three races, Monaco, Canada, Silverstone. Two wins (Monaco predicted BEFORE the tests), one due to a Red Bull gearbox failure (Silverstone), one third place, which was a one spot loss from qualifications. Compared to five prior races, with two third place finishes and three pole positions, one front row lockout. Nothing definitive. Again, look at the attached chart.
Three, I stand corrected, but you do not get to throw out Monaco. Everyone from the announcers to the drivers and teams completely expected MB to fade because of tire degradation, you could over hear their surprise on the radio when they didn't.. Advantage gained.