As Bas already said: the Bridgestone tires was something completely different than the tire theme today. Bridgestone was in a tire war and Ferrari was their team to achieve their goals. Just as a team selects a No.1 driver Bridgestone have chosen a No.1 team. Today the tire is standard for every team so there is absolutely no need for the manufacturer to prefer one team over others because it will not change the outcome for them but certainly for the team Heritage Payment: We constantly hear that drivers do not only get money for driving but also for their marketability and that Lewis f.e. is the best that happens to F1 for new audience and therefore deserves more money. But this can be said to a higher extend to Ferrari as Ferrari brings a lot of marketability to F1 with its tradition. So I do not see what is wrong with the "heritage payment" to keep Ferrari in the game.
Alot of the posters in this thread have (and continue to be) fairly vociferous in their convictions and accusations that Mercedes has been or is actively cheating - whether it's the front suspension, the oil burn, the party mode, the 'special' tires or a myriad of other things. Why the sudden shock and indignation when the shoe is on the other foot? (and "because Mercedes is cheating and Ferrari is not" is not a valid answer.) None of us have a really clear idea whats going on...other than being sure that every team is pushing the envelope, exploiting and grey areas, and bending the rules to the absolute maximum - all the while passively aggressively suggesting their opponents are the ones breaking the rules! This seems par for the course.
1. It was not only Mercedes that experienced blisters on the Pirelli tires during that test session in early 2018; several other teams had problems with that too. Pirelli made the change for safety reasons, not for Mercedes performance reasons, and gave the entire field 3 or 4 months notice that the thinner tread depth tires would be used in 3 specific races. 2. Part of the Bridgestone/Michelin tire war was when Ferrari complained to the FIA about the Michelin shoulder profile of the front tires that had been legal for over 1.5 years, when it seemed that Michelin had gained a performance advantage. The FIA (in the Max Mosley gong show era) arbitrarily ruled in favour of Ferrari's complaint, and without changing the tire specifications or regulations, decided that what had passed scrutineering for around 20 races was suddenly going to be illegal, because Ferrari complained. Michelin was forced to come up with revised front tires on 1 week's notice, and the teams had to race those revised tires without a single test. That revision took Williams and McLaren out of the title race. A complete farce that was an embarrassment to any pretense of fairness in F1... but then Mosley had no problem making arbitrary decisions on his own to manipulate the players to bend to his whims. Current FIA is infinitely more fair than Mosley FIA, which gives much credit to Jean Todt, who it can't be argued was the beneficiary of many of the capricious, partial decisions by Mosley. I have no problem with the heritage payment to Ferrari - I was just pointing out the irony of someone complaining that Mercedes gets extra budget money from the parent company, when Ferrari already gets extra money that no other teams get.
Ferrari has shown in Austria that one can get over the GP with these tires without having blisters. It might be true that all teams faced problems with the tires but it is also clear that some of them did more than others. So changing the tires takes away the advantage of Ferrari being easier on these tires than Mercedes. And as soon as it was clear what 4 races these new tires will be used Mercedes showed poor performance in Austria with them and Lewis openly demanded that Pirelli should bring the new ones to more races... And guess what: instead of pointing out that it is not a specific tire problem (as shown by Ferrari) Pirelli announced that they think about bringing the new ones to even more races than the 4. So I would say this is an advantage for Mercedes... And if Mercedes has problems with the tires, why are they not using the harder compounds instead? Nobody forces Mercedes to use the ultra-soft in the qualy and the race if they do not get along with them in the heat. Or they can drive shorter stints and do a two-stopper instead of a one-stopper to be on the safe side...But Mercedes does not want to change their car to adapt to the tires or use a slower compound, they demand Pirelli to change...I do not have a problem that Mercedes demands this, this is their good right to try, but why is Pirelli giving in?
FWIW, I was not complaining about Mercedes budget. It's a private company and they waste their money as they wish. My point was that Toto Wolff reached success quickly and still hasn't been defeated, so being challenged by another team must be hard to swallow for him, hence the cheating accusations, etc... BTW, when Ferrari dominated, they didn't push for the regulations they had designed previously, neither had the supposedly standard tyres modified to suit their car as Mercedes had in 2013. So maybe the pot is dirtier than the kettle. I'm not complaining: everything is fair in war, but credit when is due.
1)A few other teams did too. But more didn't. They had multiple months to fix their issues or just pit an extra time. Why punish others for having done their home work properly? 2) Michelin situation was so bad that you could see the wider tyre width your naked eye. They had a new legal tyre ready in days. What does that tell you? ''we're going to get caught eventually, best develop a legal tyre in the meantime''. I've no issues with Mercedes being richer than the rest.
I’ve been trying to read about what they’re doing and some theories say that the two battery system allows them to simultaneously harvest and deploy. The best analogy I can think of are the wind/brass instrument players who can hold a note for minutes by breathing in and blowing out at the same time. The MGU-K wouldn’t have much affect, but the MGU-H would certainly have some energy available while the ERS is deploying.
Yes that's my understanding of it, nice work by the F squad ..as the saying goes you have to keep building better mousetraps.
yep, another theory was that Ferrari were spinning the turbo alot faster (above the 100k to 120k rpm range) hence harvesting the two batteries quicker for deployment.
Gordon is a big time Mercedes and LH apologist/fanboy and resident Ferrari hater. He especially dislikes MSC, been down that road with him, so he loves to bring up anything he can use to denigrate his and Ferrari's utterly massive accomplishments in this sport. Gordon, if you're reading this, he was better than Senna As for heritage payments and special tires - Ferrari is not the only team to receive a bonus payment for being in the sport a long time. AFAIK even Red Bull receives special payments due to their success and that team isn't even 15 years old. As for tires, what's wrong with Bridgestone focusing on the Ferrari team back in the day? They were the premier team running them from 2001 on, all the rest were mediocre or back markers. Ferrari was up against the bulk of the field running Michelins who could share data with each other. The Michelin teams had a much bigger advantage. What is happening with Mercedes right now is a travesty to the sport. They have been outworked and outsmarted and they simply cannot stand it. The Ferrari engine/ERS has been proved legal time and again yet Mercedes continues to whine like a petulant child. They seem to think it's their birthright to have the best engine (after all, they did have more say in the architecture and get the rules for this engine formula much earlier than anyone else so they probably should). Just like Brit fans think it's LH's birthright to win every race and championship. They are incredibly spoiled and I hope Ferrari can serve up some humble pie for them this year. Brits like pie. Forza.
They also agreed to a massive rule change with tires for 2005 after they dominated 2004 that made them uncompetitive.
Ironically, I would say that LH's ability to take care of his tyres in Germany was critical to the win. Of course, he started on softs so that probably aligns with your point regarding harder compounds. By the time he switched to ultrasofts, the car was much lighter and he only had 20 lap left to run them.
As much as I dislike the Mercedes F1 team it would never change my take on Mercedes cars. I will continue to have a Mercedes for a daily. I am amazed at the lack of F1 stuff in the dealership. You can find it but you have to look.
I said earlier that the fact that Lewis was able to start on the harder tires helped him as he used the harder tires with more fuel load and the softer with less. So the current rules that the first 10 cars are bound to the ultras they use in Qualy did help him...together with DRS and a good Mercedes there was not much difficulty to overtake all the midfielders...And then when only Mercedes, Ferrari and RB were in front of him the circumstances where very lucky for him, Vettel crashing, Max with the wrong call on intermediates, Kimi with an too early stop and Bottas going out of the way... So yes: Lewis did everything right (apart from the pit entry story) but he was also very lucky, it was not all down to his driving...
Gamesmanship. Part of F1 for decades, Toto is expected by his handlers to attack the primary competition. Inbound ? Big Deal. .
Just a small point mate TifosiUSA, some Brits are Red through and through. I wish everybody working in the largely U.K. based F1 industry well but want the WCC and WDC back home in Italy where they belong. * *well almost everybody.
Yes, true, but that doesn't mean Toto isn't a **** It was on his resume and got him the job That wasn't an inbound, but an observation
Oh I know. I just get tired of the F1 press, completely controlled by the Brits and therefore extremely biased towards Hamilton. It's exasperating. Hell, the commentators yesterday were wondering if Vettel should get a penalty for the Bottas thing. LOL
