Possible Answer to Ferrari's Performance

[Snrub]

IMO Bridgestone have made a major discovery with the tires. Sounds corny and cliche? You've heard that kind of baseless speculation before? Hear me out:
1. Ferrari's abosolute pace is not really better than the other cars. We know that from qualifying/practice.
2. Only MS was able to approach his qualifying performance in the race. Why is that? All of the drivers doddle around to save their tires. Performance is similar at different levels of wear, the reason they don't set smoking, qualifying speed laps on low fuel is that they're still saving the tires. The cars are capable of going faster, they choose not to lap them faster so as to erk out overall race distance performance.

We all saw MS, he was pushing 10/10ths. That's why he was able to drive the car faster, he didn't have to conserve the tires. Also, normally when cars are stuck behind another car, they're held back a bit by dirty air. Witness even Sato's pass, he wasn't consistantly right on the gear box or Rubins behind JV. MS was able to drive closer to Alonso than other's behind slower cars because he could lean on the tires, whereas Alonso has no choice but to still drive more conservatively.

Thoughts?

[ensign14]

Temperature may have helped. Seemed to be a bit cooler. And maybe the rain in the morning washed away a lot of the laid down rubber - which would have been more Michelin than Bstone.

[Adam43]

Traditionally the Bridgestones have always reacted better to a clean track than the Michelins and, you are right, the temperature did help.

It is clear that the Ferrari/Bridgestone package has improved. They have learnt to use the tyres better and the tyres are better.

Generally we still have the same situation as before, I think. Michelin love the heat, Bridgestone the cool. The relative differences fluctuate, but the general trend remains.

[joe rossi]

The Brundle piece on tyres was interesting today, an informative article before ITV ruined it all later. He said that tyre wear was caused mainly by the tyre slipping and moving around if the car lacks grip aerodynamically. If the Ferrari has good grip (which it obviously does) then tyre wear, I assume, is less of an issue. Bearing in mind Rubens' shot tyres last race I guess it is a combination of lower temps, new tyre compound and a better set up with the new car, with all 3 elements combining into a stunning return to form.

[Sodemo]

I guess the fact that Ferrari tested for 3 days last week at a specially modified Monza track with extra chicanes might have something to do with their turnaround...

[Kirk]

One thing certain, MS was scary fast and would have run away and hid but for his slip up in qualifying. It'll be interesting to discover if was the green track and low temperature combination or a matter of Ferrari once again building a car capable of dominating the grid.

[Rossi # 46]

I dont expect to see ferrari dominating the grid. Keep in mind that ferrari have always been quick at Imola, and schumacher had a new engine today, and hence more revs.

I dont expect to see ferrari as quick at the next round.

[D.R.T.]

Agreed, today we saw a Ferrari, new motor, soft,soft Bridgestones on a very cool,cold day where track temps were very low , very motivated driver and of course a good strategy.

I dont think the pace shown today,last night can be a consistent pace for the Ferrari's. But all other 9 teams have to find something extra.

[Kicking-back]

Ferrari won't dominate - the McLaren is a quick car too - and they've more speed to come at Barcelona.

It should be a good three-team fight.

[ssilviu]

fastest lap:
Fernando Alonso - 1.23.133 (Michelin)
Narain Karthikayen - 1.24.094 (Bridgestone)
no more comment!

[Kicking-back]

Exactly - Bridgestone had a huge tyre advantage at Imola

[Dani Filth]

maybe . but look at Sauber . they were quite fast. despite Michelin . and BAR ..

[GTRMagic]

Did you see some of the slow motions shots of the tyres at Imola? The whole casing wobbles around on the rim... quite scary to see such massive deflection in the tyres...

Is that something unique to 2005? I dont recall seeing this to the same extent in other years

[bastinscully]

Didn`t Ferrari Have fresh engines as well? where as alonso`s Car had the engine of the last race.

[Marbot]

According to www.f1racing.net FA had an engine problem all weekend, it had to be "turned down",and didn't expect to win.

TGF was fast though,better tyres,new engine.KR would have been there at the end though,were it not for the driveshaft problem.

3 horse race now,Ferrari,Renault and Mclaren.With the odd unexpected result from the other teams.

Expect all the teams to go really well at Catalunya,with very little running done on the Friday.

Still unsure about the engine rule.If a car retires from Bahrain with an "hydraulic failure" why does it get a new "engine" at Imola?

[chunterer]

Yeah, i'd hazard a guess that the tyres were the decisive factor in the massive spedd advantage Schu displayed.

Bur doesn't M Brundle get ever so excited every time Schu' in a position to dominate a race?!! Blimey give me a break...

Give anyone of the top drivers that kind of performance advantage and they'd lap 2 secs a lap quicker too!!!

Good TV though and that's the key?!

I would say that unless Barca is mega hot, Schu will be in front until we get to the next hot and sticky race when the ichelins will be working better than Bridgestone again.

[Marbot]

It's a shame that so much of a cars performance seems to be dependant entirely on its tyres. I think iv'e said that many times before however.

[chunterer]

Yeah ii is a shame...2003 wasn't bad for entertainment though and we saw a similar pattern emerging...

But if a lot of the Ferrari's performance was also down to the car then the first 3 races were just a nice side show!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by chunterer

But if a lot of the Ferrari's performance was also down to the car then the first 3 races were just a nice side show!

"Ominous" i think was the word Martin Brundle used.

Or is that "Omenous"?

[dcp2685]

I agree with what was mentioned earlier. This is Imola and Ferrari are ALWAYS very fast at Imola and Monza. So to see Renault win at a generally strong track for Ferrari even with a detuned engine helps paint the picture especially going into a track where Renault has been quite good as of late.

I have my reserves whether Ferrari will be as strong at Spain and Europe. Monaco is always a roll of the dice.

I'm expecting to see more of the same with 2 Renault wins in the next three races.

[shiny side up!]

[QUOTE=Snrub]...Also, normally when cars are stuck behind another car, they're held back a bit by dirty air. Witness even Sato's pass, he wasn't consistantly right on the gear box or Rubins behind JV. MS was able to drive closer to Alonso than other's behind slower cars because he could lean on the tires, whereas Alonso has no choice but to still drive more conservatively...[QUOTE]

Although it certainly appears TGF's tires were in better shape than Alonso's at the end, I think a large part of the reason he could follow Alonso so close was the nature of the track and Alonso's defensive driving. Alonso was braking early on purpose, which made the gap back to TGF unusually small. Add to that the fact that aero is not incredibly inportant through the coreners you have to brake into (chicanes, Tosa, and Rivazza) and one can see how he was able to follow as tightly as he did. He wasn't able to duplicate it so much through Piratella, where aero is pretty crucial.

[Rennen]

We all know Ferrari had to bring their new car forward and have had to play catch up and we all knew their tyre supplier only held an edge in the wet.
I would stick me neck out and say that Ferrari are back and yes Bridgstone have improved their dry tyre to suit the new car. I dont think Imola was a fluke, even if they enjoyed an edge there.

[ralf fan]

The thing is Rubens was disappointed with retirement saying that the Ferrari are is very good with old tyres and he missed a possible good score.... that to me suggests that they seem to have got this wearing issue sorted...

[Snrub]

2 seconds a lap of race pace (which is monsterous difference!), but not in a pure qualify lap, says to me that factors such as a minor HP reduction for Alonso or Ferrari's past performances at Imola are not enough to justify the difference.

I wonder if we could see a repeat of 2002 to a certain degree? Recall that Williams were often faster in qualifying or at least close in qualifying. The difference was that the F2002 was a second a lap faster during the race. Renault and McLaren may win the poles, but 2 seconds a lap during the race will result in an obvious conclusion. Think of some of the most dominant cars in recent history, 92 & 93 Williams, F2002 & 2004, none of those cars were TWO seconds a lap faster!

[Dani Filth]

well . in those years . rarely somebody had to make up a 30 seconds deficit .