Wintertests Barcelona 2018

[Jozef]

Melbourne is ook uitgerekend een circuit dat de Mercedes misschien niet zo goed ligt. Dus zelfs als ze daar niet winnen, vallen daar weinig conclusies aan te verbinden denk ik. Andersom, als ze daar wel winnen, dan denk ik dat Ferrari en Red Bull zich achter de oren kunnen krabben.

[Tuesday]

Melbourne is ook uitgerekend een circuit dat de Mercedes misschien niet zo goed ligt. Dus zelfs als ze daar niet winnen, vallen daar weinig conclusies aan te verbinden denk ik. Andersom, als ze daar wel winnen, dan denk ik dat Ferrari en Red Bull zich achter de oren kunnen krabben.

Melbourne is idd een apart circuit, maar dat het Mercedes niet ligt zou ik niet zeggen. Volgens mij hebben ze er 4 jaar op rij op pole gestaan.

[Jozef]

In kwalificatie zijn en blijven ze dominanter dan in de race. Dat het ze niet ligt is ook pas zo sinds de lange wielbasis die ze vorig jaar introduceerden, dus mijn uitspraak doelde niet op de jaren 2014-16.

[Tuesday]

In kwalificatie zijn en blijven ze dominanter dan in de race. Dat het ze niet ligt is ook pas zo sinds de lange wielbasis die ze vorig jaar introduceerden, dus mijn uitspraak doelde niet op de jaren 2014-16.

toch waren er genoeg circuits waar ze het in kwalificatie moeilijker hadden dan in Australië. Misschien geen typisch Mercedes circuit, maar ook niet 1 van hun minderen volgens mij.

[max1102]

@Wings,

Ik geloof dat Helmut Marko in een interview zei Red Bull Technology al samenwerkt met Honda, Verstappen heeft vorig jaar ook een bezoek aan de Honda fabriek gebracht.


Verder lees ik over de verhouding aan de top van alles, vooral dat de Ferrari motor veel brandstof zou verbruiken en ze dus moesten sparen, maar Vettel gaf na zijn race-sim aan dat er nog 'plenty of fuel' in de auto zat aan het einde van de race-sim.

[FolkertE]

Bron: Autosport Plus.

Ik post even het hele artikel, je hebt autosport plus account nodig.


Eight days, well seven really once you factor in the Wednesday washout (snowout?) at the first test, have gone by in a flash. The preparation is over and now teams are loading up to head to Australia and the first race of the year.

Of the 7978 laps officially logged, the ones during the second test are the key ones and have set the key storylines for the early races of the season.

Autosport has been there throughout, and a combination of following the race runs, qualifying sims and run programmes of the 10 teams, talking to drivers and key paddock figures and trackside observation has provided a picture of where the running so far points for the start of the season.

This is what we have learned.



Ferrari's record is an illusion...
Yes, Ferrari blitzed the unofficial lap record at Barcelona with both cars. Yes, Kimi Raikkonen said it could have gone faster. And yes, no other team got within half a second. But it does not have the fastest car.

Sebastian Vettel's 1m17.182s was 1.2s faster than the previous fastest lap of the Spanish circuit set by Felipe Massa (also in a Ferrari) in 2008. Raikkonen followed that up with a time 0.039s slower, reinforcing the Scuderia's pace on the hypersoft tyres.

But while Ferrari was doing this, Mercedes wasn't even trying. The German manufacturer's best time on day three, when Vettel set his time, was 2.1s slower, and it was 1.6s slower on day four, as it focused on race simulations and other long runs.

Vettel sounded cautious after his best day: "We still need to work on the performance and the feeling. It's the wrong conclusion to look at the time sheet - there's more to it than a good lap.

"Today the track was quite fast [and] we ran a little bit different programme to others."



...Mercedes is the team to beat
Mercedes opted for evolution rather than revolution, and the result was a car that is seemingly an improvement in every aspect over its predecessor. As we've become used to in testing, it racked up the miles without any major problems, and despite no attention-grabbing headline lap time it looks to be the fastest overall package by a healthy margin.

Glance at the video Mercedes released with technical director James Allison comparing this year's W09 to last year's car, and you can see what evolution really means. At a glance, the cars are similar, but the 2018 version just looks that bit more refined, with improved sidepod packaging among the details that become obvious.

And the drivers seem to like it too, with Hamilton declaring it to be a significant step forward. Watching the car on track, it turns in well (something last year's car didn't always do in testing), while in the chicane Hamilton was able to attack on the brakes and rotate the rear on entry with precision.

In a word: ominous.



Red Bull's threat is real
The Red Bull RB14 looks beautiful on track, certainly in the fast and medium speed corners. But it perhaps isn't the step ahead of the Mercedes chassis that the first half of testing suggested. Add to that the limitations of the Renault engine package, which is being run conservatively for reliability reasons, and you have a combination that's not too far off - but still decisively behind. Based on the race simulations, it could be nip and tuck with Ferrari even though other indicators suggest Ferrari is ahead.

But Red Bull is the team Mercedes needs to watch out for. The concern is that the Renault engine is still 40-50bhp down and that, if pushed, it may jeopardise reliability. There's a major ERS package upgrade on the horizon, including the long-delayed new MGU-K that was due to be introduced at the start of last season, but worryingly it's on the distant horizon with no clear schedule.

Red Bull might still be close enough to give Mercedes a headache on Sundays, and given Ferrari's battles to get on top of its car it heads to Melbourne as the team that Mercedes will be most concerned about.



Haas the dark horse amid midfield mess
Renault has been impressing throughout the test but a bad final day, in which gearbox gremlins limited its running significantly, makes its position tricky to judge. That only makes a murky midfield picture more difficult to decipher.

Force India's big update package that is planned for Melbourne will be expected to keep last year's fourth-best team firmly the mix, while Toro Rosso has now revised its expectations and thinks it would be "crazy" not to target points on its debut with Honda engines. Then throw in the confusion of Williams's decision not to perform qualifying simulations while also not completing full race runs.

Almost every team outside the big three has an unknown variable heading to Melbourne, whether it's reliability, untested updates or a lack of representative running. Haas is the exception, and a third season of F1's newest team starting strongly looks like a decent bet.

Applying the laptime delta between each Pirelli compound throws up a bizarre order that has Haas on top and while clearly that is not the case, its testing pace should not be completely dismissed.

Haas has been quietly impressive in testing. It ended the test fifth-best on supersoft tyres and more encouragingly its long-run pace looked a match for Force India. If you're looking for a midfielder to back, the American team might well be it.



Standing restarts could cause problems
Romain Grosjean has a reputation for complaining, but it would be wrong for a director of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association not to be outspoken on things he disagrees with: and he clearly disagrees with the idea of standing restarts.

Grosjean revealed he thought the FIA was just experimenting with the procedure as it roped in teams to carry out practice runs at the end of the morning and afternoon sessions through this week of testing.

But it's a fact that F1 races this year may feature standing starts after red-flag periods, with the cars being led by a safety car before forming up on the grid.

Though drivers will have the option to fit new tyres in the pitlane while preparing for the restart, they may not have fresh rubber left in their allocation - for instance if the restart comes very late in the race - and that would leave some contending with poor grip.

Grosjean suffered from exactly that while performing a practice run of the restart procedure on old rubber in testing on Wednesday, saying it was so bad "I didn't go above fourth gear" and claiming he would usually reach eighth by Turn 1.

"To me it could be carnage," he said. "You could lose the car in a straight line."



Leclerc's brilliance can't hide Sauber's struggles
Charles Leclerc is one of Formula 1's most exciting rookies in some time, but even his clear talent hasn't been enough to tame a tricky Sauber this week.

The rookie was angered by the spin that contributed to almost five hours of lost running on the final test day before his debut, beaching his C37 into the Turn 12 gravel and making light contact with the tyre wall.

The reigning Formula 2 champion said it was an "error that has cost me quite a lot" and admitted he felt a bit angry with himself afterwards. "It's a bit stupid from my side to do it so early in the day," was his verdict.

It was the third time this week a Sauber caused a red flag by ending up in the gravel. Leclerc had already done it in the same spot on Wednesday, while team-mate Marcus Ericsson also dropped it on Thursday. The drivers have spoken positively about the new Alfa Romeo-badged, Ferrari-assisted package, but when both are chucking it off it suggests a machine that at the very least is proving tricky to handle.



McLaren's last minute validation
With six minutes remaining of pre-season testing, Fernando Alonso leaped to the top of the timesheets with a time of 1m16.720s. There was an audible gasp when that happened, only for the fairytale of a late stunner to be snatched away when it became clear Alonso had cut out the chicane while getting past Charles Leclerc's Sauber.

But even so, Alonso's 1m17.784s lap set earlier on that run confirmed what was suspected - that the judgement McLaren had built a dog was incorrect. Its pace is certainly good enough to be there for best-of-the-rest, a step behind the big three, subject to the improvement delivered by what is expected to be a big upgrade package in Melbourne.

But McLaren was only half-vindicated. The pace was OK, but what wasn't acceptable was the reliability. With 599 laps completed, 58% of the tally racked up by Mercedes, and myriad problems including oil and hydraulic leaks, turbo problems and burning to the engine cover around the exhaust the reliability was not good enough. But McLaren did at least complete one full race simulation.



Tyre unknowns could spice up opening races
"I am sure there are some details we don't know," said Pirelli boss Mario Isola at the end of the test. The tyre supplier has found collecting meaningful data as tricky as the teams at Barcelona, where it also had a lot to learn about new products.

In addition to bringing a new pink-walled softest tyre (the hypersoft), Pirelli has also revised almost all its other compounds. The only one that isn't new is the medium, which is last year's soft tyre.

Unsurprisingly last week's bad weather wasn't conducive for evaluating the changes in the specifications, so learning about five tyre compounds - the hard can be dismissed as it is a back-up tyre - would have to be mostly completed in these four days.

No wonder several teams and drivers are predicting a few surprises at the start of the season, and maybe not just in Melbourne. Isola said we will not "really know" the compounds until mid-season.

Still, we also learned there was some benefit to last week's bad weather - the wet running on Friday has led Pirelli to revise its wet-tyre choice for the Spanish Grand Prix. The data collected on the softer version of the wet tyre has made it change its mind on bringing the harder compound to the May race.



Williams has work to do - but there is hope
The Williams looked skittish and tricky to drive throughout most of testing, with corner-entry instability the main problem. That, combined with challenges getting the tyres switched on made life tricky for Williams.

But progress was made during the final afternoon of running, reflected in the hints of pace shown by Sergey Sirotkin. This gives some hope that a car that's a dramatic shift from its predecessor and that technical supremo Paddy Lowe believes represents a step change for Williams is being understood.

Still, given the team spent a lot of testing working to get on top of its troubles, that means it's a little behind in terms of the race simulation work others were able to crack on with. Even so, the Williams completed a healthy, if unremarkable, number of laps during testing and crucially Sirotkin was able to get a good amount of running in on the final day to make up for his losses elsewhere in testing.

For much of testing, things looked very difficult for Williams, but the late step suggests the car is being understood and made to work.



The halo is now invisible
The halo cockpit head protection system is still the cumbersome halfway house that it always was, but an interesting thing happened during the second test. When first watching trackside for an extended period of time, it didn't register. It shows how quickly something new - even something as grating as this - can become normal.

That doesn't mean it's without its problems. As well as the difficulties of recognising the driver shrouded within, for the shorter drivers in particular a lot of care needs to taken not to stand on the intricate aero detailing in front of the sidepods when getting out!

So for those predicting the end of days thanks to the halo being grafted onto grand prix cars, it's not going to be as bad as you think. Spend a few hours watching the television coverage and it soon will just become part of the furniture.

That doesn't make it any less of an inelegant solution and F1 must work to find a better way to do this, but it does at least mean that it is possible to watch 2018 grand prix cars without being distracted by the halo.

[FolkertE]

Gary Anderson ranks the teams after F1 testing:

Our ex-F1 designer has ploughed through the data from the second test at Barcelona and picks out a few worrying trends that even he hopes aren't true by the time the racing starts
By Gary Anderson Published on Saturday March 10th 2018 RSS feed
There will be plenty of people out there who will disagree with this analysis of the competitive order based on pre-season testing. And I hope I am wrong.


To make any sense out of these two pre-season tests is pretty difficult. But over the days a trend emerges, and that trend points to Mercedes having once again done an exceptional job.

You would have to tick all the boxes: performance, reliability and tyre degradation all look to be under control with the W09. The only little fly in the ointment might just be that Mercedes won't be as good as others when push comes to shove using softer tyres for qualifying.

Mercedes has bucketloads of data on the medium and probably the soft tyres, but less than other teams on the super, ultra and hypersoft versions. We can but hope.

I'm not going to get into what actual fuel loads different teams were running, because I would only be guessing. Suffice to say that normally the smaller teams would go for a glory run more often than the bigger teams. Fuel weight is a fairly straight delta to the lap time, so they can just apply that to know where they really stand.

I'm using the following differences in pace between compounds, based on what we've seen from the lap times rather than simply using Pirelli's averages:

Medium to soft - 0.2s

Soft to supersoft - 0.4s

Supersoft to ultrasoft - 0.6s

Ultrasoft to hypersoft - 0.8s

Add to that a fuel effect of 0.05s per lap for the fuel load reduction on the run that the time was set on and we can create an adjusted ranking. Unless stated, these were set on day four of the final test.

Pirelli reckons that the medium to soft tyre delta should be 0.8 seconds. But if you use that the Mercedes isn't just ahead - it's miles ahead. And I don't agree, anyway.

Adjusted performance
1 Mercedes 1m16.075s
2 Red Bull 1m16.527s
3 Haas 1m16.560s (day 3)
4 Ferrari 1m16.921s
5 Williams 1m17.089s
6 Renault 1m17.092s (day 2)
7 McLaren 1m17.584s
8 Toro Rosso 1m18.163s (day 3)
9 Force India 1m18.617s
10 Sauber 1m18.844s



1 Mercedes 1m16.075s - 1040 laps
The main problem with Mercedes - for everybody else - is that the dominant team of this era of F1 had a small problem last year. That led to head scratching, and with the expertise in Brackley and Brixworth that's probably the worst thing that could have happened to the rest.

Mercedes has put together a package that you could argue was a development of last year's car, and that was the right thing to do. Mercedes knew the speed was in there, it was just about unlocking it on more occasions.

So its challenge was to identify why this happened and rectify the problem. From what we have seen so far, the car is definitely quick. But we will have to wait until we hit a few other tracks to see if any of those 'diva' characteristics carry over.

On the track, the car looks good. Not perfect, but it gives the drivers confidence, which is a major asset when they need to go and find lap time.



2 Red Bull 1m16.527s - 783 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 0.40%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 0.59%
Red Bull has done a good job, but not quite good enough. A bit of that will still be in the Renault versus Mercedes power unit performance, but that's what Red bull has got to work with.

The car looks pretty good on the track and Red Bull has two very hungry drivers ready for success, but if they don't start the season with a win or two their enthusiasm may drop fairly quickly. You can be best of the rest for only so long.

Over the test days, the reliability wasn't perfect and if Red Bull is going to challenge for either of the championships, reliability needs to be rock solid. There will be enough outside factors that mean Red Bull won't finish all the races, but self-inflicted issues need to be a thing of the past from both Red Bull and Renault.



3 Haas 1m16.560s - 694 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 2.85%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 0.640%
If this is real progress then I am impressed. When Haas revealed its car, it all looked a bit tame to me but taking something that you understand and making it better could just be the right thing for this relatively small team.

Haas really needs to concentrate of consistency and keeping up with development, as this is where the team mainly fell down last year. We won't know if it has got on top of that until we are well into the season.

If Haas can also either fix Romain Grosjean's brakes or get him to brake a couple of meters earlier then more progress will be made. I am pretty impressed with what Kevin Magnussen is bringing to the team, and Grosjean will be driven on by that.



4 Ferrari 1m16.921s - 929 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 0.07%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.11%
This time last year, I was praising Ferrari for its aggressive approach to the new regulations. And on the circuit, the car looked really good. It didn't matter which tyre it was on, the balance seemed to be there.

This year, from what I have seen of the car at the first pre-season test, Ferrari doesn't seem to have moved on that much.

On the track, the car looks pretty good but it looks on the limit. Try to push that little bit more and it just slides wide. Even so, it's pretty well balanced, but just not the grip level of the Mercedes.

If this performance deficit is real then there will be dark clouds over Maranello and it won't be long before the chopping block is out.



5 Williams 1m17.089s - 819 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 2.00%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.33%
I'm probably as surprised as anyone to see Williams here, but it has changed its car's aerodynamics and probably mechanical design philosophy dramatically. The car is a mix of Ferrari and Mercedes concepts and it does look like Williams got a reasonable handle on how to make it work late in testing.

It would be good to see Williams back in contention. After all, it has a long and impressive pedigree. However, that means nothing: it is tomorrow that counts and I think the team has realised that by bringing in Paddy Lowe from Mercedes and Dirk de Beer From Ferrari.

Williams has two relatively inexperienced drivers, but that can also be a positive when you are trying to build a team, The old hardened professional driver can sometimes be a pain in the arse because they know everything about how their previous team worked instead of just driving the wheels off what they now have.



6 Renault 1m17.092s - 795 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 1.64%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.34%
Renault has been building the team back to what is required to challenge for race wins, but at some point you need to say 'OK, we are there now, how are we doing?'. I believe this is the year to ask that question.

The big challenge for Renault is to be ahead of McLaren, and over this test it has just about made it. Red Bull is a team that has been operating a high level for quite a few years, so it should still be out of touch this year. That said, it won't stop Renault trying. But I think it will be reasonably happy as long as it can consistently make progress as the season unfolds.

Renault had quite a few reliability problems that must be got on top of. This happened last year as well, costing quite a few points, so the team knows the importance of getting to the chequered flag.

Nico Hulkenberg and Carlos Sainz Jr are going to push each other hard and are both capable of success if they have the tools at their disposal.



7 McLaren 1m17.584s - 599 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 1.85%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.98%
The car certainly looks good, both on the circuit and up close. The detail is pretty good, but that doesn't always turn into lap time.

The change to Renault engines should only be positive. Yes, it is not the best engine in the pitlane but at least it puts McLaren in the position where others are using it, so the performance of the chassis can genuinely be measured.

But that's where it ends. The reliability has been abysmal and the main problem is every time it is something new. McLaren has had an electrical problem, a hydraulic leak, an engine oil leak and turbo problems - and those are just the ones we know about.

This is a team that has a huge facility and commitment behind it, and it should be on top of all that stuff. McLaren has as much equipment at its disposal as anyone else, yet smaller teams are able to get better reliability out of their cars.

All that said, it's better to have these problems in pre-season testing than at the first few races. I'm pretty sure there will be lots of McLaren personnel in Melbourne with their fingers crossed.



8 Toro Rosso 1m18.163s - 822 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 2.94%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 2.74%
Toro Rosso was probably the surprise of the test, of at least the Honda part of that equation. The team and Honda seem to be at home with each other and that can only be positive.

Initially, the car seemed to have a front-end problem, then as testing progressed, that seemed to go away. But I noticed later in the test there were comments about the front end giving up.

Doing the mileage it has achieved will have given the team and Honda bucketloads of data to trawl through - so I'm sure somewhere in there is the solution.

It has inexperienced drivers, similar to Williams, which will put the team in a questionable position. But all Toro Rosso can do is keep its head down, work closely with Honda and build for the future.



9 Force India 1m18.617s - 711 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 1.60%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 3.34%
Fourth in the constructors' championship for the last two seasons was a great result, but you are only as good as what you can do tomorrow. This year, it is going to be tough to maintain that championship position and, in reality, Force India could do a better job on pace relative to the top teams and still finish seventh.

This, on face value, is quite a dramatic drop off in performance relative to the frontrunners. But the team is adamant it came to these tests with the 2018 mechanical platform in place to make sure it understood and could get on top of the required set-up.

Force India intends to introduce a major aerodynamic package for Melbourne, and looking at the times from the test it needs to be major.

Force India needs to find a second and a half at least if it is to stand any chance of hanging in there in fourth place. A second and a half is a lifetime in F1.

On the circuit the car looks OK, it just doesn't have the grip of the frontrunners. A lot hinges on how much downforce it can add for Australia.



10 Sauber 1m18.844 - 786 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 3.56%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 3.64%
Looking at the percentage deficit to Mercedes in 2017, at the test Sauber has more or less stood still. But if you look at the car, it is completely different. I suppose that just says you can make it look different but it does not always improve the performance.

I'm pretty sure that Ferrari with its 'technical relationship' will get involved. It won't stand back and allow the Alfa Romeo branding that is now on the Sauber to be tarnished.

On the circuit, the car just looks like it hasn't got the grip. And the drivers visited the kitty litter too often.

Conclusion
Hopefully all of these times and assumptions are going to go out of the window when we get to Melbourne, the grid will be one of the closest we have ever seen and we won't know who is going to win until the cars come around the final corner to take the chequered flag. But I won't hold my breath.

Overall, from 2017 the midfield is a bit more mixed up and probably a bit closer to the front bunch. But from the front to the back the deficit is much the same. Nobody said it is easy, and whether you are at the front or the back you just have to keep your head down and get on with it.

The outcome from this test is not really what any of us wanted. Closer racing is all we ask for - so please let someone come up with a strategy to achieve that sometime in the near future.

[Tuesday]

Gary Anderson ranks the teams after F1 testing:

als er iemand bekend staat om zn lulkoek, dan is het Gary Anderson wel. Als je uitkomt op een lijstje met Haas voor Ferrari dan moet je jezelf toch wel het 1 en ander af gaan vragen. Als die doorgerekende tijd van Haas idd klopt, dan heeft Ferrari blijkbaar op motorengebied enorm veel winst geboekt en heeft Ferrari zelf absoluut niet het achterste van zn tong laten zien.

[FolkertE]

Gary Anderson ranks the teams after F1 testing:

als er iemand bekend staat om zn lulkoek, dan is het Gary Anderson wel. Als je uitkomt op een lijstje met Haas voor Ferrari dan moet je jezelf toch wel het 1 en ander af gaan vragen. Als die doorgerekende tijd van Haas idd klopt, dan heeft Ferrari blijkbaar op motorengebied enorm veel winst geboekt en heeft Ferrari zelf absoluut niet het achterste van zn tong laten zien.

Dat valt volgens mij ook wel mee.
Natuurlijk is Haas boven Ferrari niet realistisch, maar dat geeft hij zelf ook wel aan. Haas is een grote onbekende, maar menig expert hebben Haas wel redelijk hoog staan. Sky zet ze mogelijk op een 5de plek.

[JS JTD]

Melbourne is ook uitgerekend een circuit dat de Mercedes misschien niet zo goed ligt. Dus zelfs als ze daar niet winnen, vallen daar weinig conclusies aan te verbinden denk ik. Andersom, als ze daar wel winnen, dan denk ik dat Ferrari en Red Bull zich achter de oren kunnen krabben.

Krijgen we in Melbourne voor de derde maal de bekende kreet "I can't pass this guy" te horen? 😄

[FolkertE]

Melbourne is ook uitgerekend een circuit dat de Mercedes misschien niet zo goed ligt. Dus zelfs als ze daar niet winnen, vallen daar weinig conclusies aan te verbinden denk ik. Andersom, als ze daar wel winnen, dan denk ik dat Ferrari en Red Bull zich achter de oren kunnen krabben.

Krijgen we in Melbourne voor de derde maal de bekende kreet "I can't pass this guy" te horen? 😄

Of misschien word het dit jaar wel: That guy just passed me...

[Wings]

Is jullie opgevallen dat Haas het goed doet?

[FolkertE]

Is jullie opgevallen dat Haas het goed doet?

Vandaar dat Anderson Haas op een 3de plek heeft gezet en ze als "Dark Horse" hebben bestempeld.

[Wings]

Zou zomaar kunnen Folkert. Ik heb het nog niet gelezen. Straks eens even doen.

@Wings,

Ik geloof dat Helmut Marko in een interview zei Red Bull Technology al samenwerkt met Honda, Verstappen heeft vorig jaar ook een bezoek aan de Honda fabriek gebracht.

Dat laatste wist ik dan wel weer, dat eerste heb ik mij zelf bedacht. Alleen is de Red Bull smaller dan de Toro Rosso. Of de Honda-motor dat prettig vindt, waag ik te betwijfelen. Dat gezegd hebbende het volgende: is het toegestaan dat Red Bull een Honda-motor in bezit krijgt en test in de fabriek? Ik kan mij voorstellen dat Red Bull de motor maar al te graag monteert en op de proef stelt. Mag dit zomaar? Dan heb ik het niet over contractuele afspraken met Renault maar reglementair. 

Verder lees ik over de verhouding aan de top van alles, vooral dat de Ferrari motor veel brandstof zou verbruiken en ze dus moesten sparen, maar Vettel gaf na zijn race-sim aan dat er nog 'plenty of fuel' in de auto zat aan het einde van de race-sim.

Werd er specifiek naar gevraagd? Zou raar zijn als Seb er zelf mee aankwam.

[max1102]

Zou zomaar kunnen Folkert. Ik heb het nog niet gelezen. Straks eens even doen.

@Wings,

Ik geloof dat Helmut Marko in een interview zei Red Bull Technology al samenwerkt met Honda, Verstappen heeft vorig jaar ook een bezoek aan de Honda fabriek gebracht.

Dat laatste wist ik dan wel weer, dat eerste heb ik mij zelf bedacht. Alleen is de Red Bull smaller dan de Toro Rosso. Of de Honda-motor dat prettig vindt, waag ik te betwijfelen. Dat gezegd hebbende het volgende: is het toegestaan dat Red Bull een Honda-motor in bezit krijgt en test in de fabriek? Ik kan mij voorstellen dat Red Bull de motor maar al te graag monteert en op de proef stelt. Mag dit zomaar? Dan heb ik het niet over contractuele afspraken met Renault maar reglementair. 

Verder lees ik over de verhouding aan de top van alles, vooral dat de Ferrari motor veel brandstof zou verbruiken en ze dus moesten sparen, maar Vettel gaf na zijn race-sim aan dat er nog 'plenty of fuel' in de auto zat aan het einde van de race-sim.

Werd er specifiek naar gevraagd? Zou raar zijn als Seb er zelf mee aankwam.

Dat gaf hij aan bij een interview met Ted Kravitz van SKY

"Vettel mentioned he had plenty of fuel left over after his race sim, which could easily explain the lack of pace relative to Mercedes if they only added enough to do the race sim."

Wat Honda en RBR betreft, ik weet niet of Red Bull Racing een Honda motor in bezit mag hebben maar Red Bull Technogoly is natuurlijk een andere afdeling van Red Bull, Dus mogelijk werken die samen om de Honda motor de verbeteren, niet alleen op PK/betrouwbaarheid maar misschien ook warmte afvoer.