2013 Formula One Spanish Grand Prix

[Hampus Andersson]

Not so much because of the pressure from Red Bull and Mercedes but because they just prove their product is faulty.
They never had 4 stops in mind when designing tires for a better show.
2-3 was the goal so now with the 4 stop they have to change the tires regardless of what RBR and Merc says.

Besides, you honestly think Lotus and Ferrari would be quiet if the tide was turned and Ferrari knew they had the best car but can´t use it in races?

All hell would break loose, you know it, i know it.
Monte would move in and occupy Paul´s ass and live there until the problem was solved.

Right now the tires penalize good cars and allows two cars to simply dominate races.
I´m pretty sure they don´t want to flip the switch to Red Bull and Mercedes completely by building better tires but instead equalize it.

 

[Metalfreaky]

Not so much because of the pressure from Red Bull and Mercedes but because they just prove their product is faulty.

Easy to say when they only can test with a 2011 (?) spec car and have no other tests regarding tires. They are pretty much blind when developping the tires.

Besides, you honestly think Lotus and Ferrari would be quiet if the tide was turned and Ferrari knew they had the best car but can´t use it in races?

I don't know. Probably not, but that doesn't mean RedBull and MGP is right blaming the tires.

Right now the tires penalize good cars and allows two cars to simply dominate races.

Please define "good car" How can MGP and RB call their car good when they are not really competetive in the race. Their cars are good on one single lap, but they should know that points are given after the race and not after quali.
How can RB say they drive to the limit of the tires? Alonso has the same tires, so shouldn't RB be as fast as Ferrari by that logic if their car isn't the problem.
A good car is a car that can handle all different variables given to it and be competetive (and additionaly is reliable). Or simple: A good car is winning races, because that is what counts. That has always been the case in F1. A car that can only handle situation X and fails to deliver under situation Y,Z is quite simple not a good car.
At the moment RB and Mercedes haven't got a good car. Or at least not as good as Ferrari and Lotus.

 

[Scott Webber]

http://www.facebook.com/scott.webber.16/posts/525188847545056?ref=notif&notif_t=like

 

[Kartik Sri Harsha]

I agree with you on the delamination part and that races are not the most enjoyable to watch so far this year. But do you seriously think Mercedes and RedBull would open their mouths about the tires if they wouldn't struggle? Their main priorty at the moment is to win races.
When they Horner says that drivers and fans don't like to drive/watch such races he might be right, but he actually doesn't give a crap about that at the moment.
I don't see "lots of teams" struggeling compared to the beginning 2012.

Pirelli can pretty much nothing else do than to change the tires, because the "trash-talk" of Mercedes and RB is dominating the media and Pirelli's image is getting hurt, although they just did what teams/FIA told them to do. They all met sometime at the end of last season and disscussed all together (that includes RB and MGP btw) how the tires should change for next year. Pirelli just did that and now they are presented as the black sheep.
In my opinion that is pretty much as sad as drivers are not able to fight.

Lots of Teams struggled last year to get them up to right temp. The Tires are pretty stable and gave Good racing between Teams. As Hampus said its not that RBR was Vocal the tires them selves are crap. The Pirelli simulations are clearly not matching to what happening on track. The Tires must allow Drivers to attack and Defend but not to drive for a Certain lap time like they are behind a Safety car
Also Every Top team Priority to win the races if it was not then they shouldn't be in F1

 

[Metalfreaky]

The Tires must allow Drivers to attack and Defend but not to drive for a Certain lap time like they are behind a Safety car

They don't have to do anything of what you stated. I don't remember such a paraphraph in the rules.

Also Every Top team Priority to win the races if it was not then they shouldn't be in F1

And they should achive that buy building a car that fits to the circumstances. insteat of waiting until the circumstances fit to them.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Easy to say when they only can test with a 2011 (?) spec car and have no other tests regarding tires. They are pretty much blind when developping the tires.

2012 tires were great, they just went conservative, they shouldn´t have tried to fix something that never was broken.

I don't know. Probably not, but that doesn't mean RedBull and MGP is right blaming the tires.

I think they are. they have the two fastest cars on the grid bar none, yet they can´t use their excellent cars in the race because the tires are made of playdough.

Please define "good car" How can MGP and RB call their car good when they are not really competetive in the race.

Because the tires are designed to be absolute ****. this is why you see cars that are over a lap seconds slower then those cars can beat them in the race.

Make the tires even more crap and we might possibly see Marussia start to win races.
Would that make Marussia having the best car? Of course not.

Their cars are good on one single lap, but they should know that points are given after the race and not after quali.

And you honestly don´t think that after X amount of years they haven´t figured out that by now?
As has been said, previous Pirelli´s are different. Pirelli knows this and they even changed the compound to be geared a little bit more towards 2012 spec but it´s still not enough.

These tires penalize the fastest cars. It´s very simple.

How can RB say they drive to the limit of the tires? Alonso has the same tires, so shouldn't RB be as fast as Ferrari by that logic if their car isn't the problem.

How can you not believe them? If they never drove to the limit of the tires they would not have to stop more then once.

It´s not the car that has a problem, the car obviously works great. It´s the tires.

A good car is a car that can handle all different variables given to it and be competetive (and additionaly is reliable). Or simple: A good car is winning races, because that is what counts. That has always been the case in F1. A car that can only handle situation X and fails to deliver under situation Y,Z is quite simple not a good car.
At the moment RB and Mercedes haven't got a good car. Or at least not as good as Ferrari and Lotus.

No what has really been in F1 is that when you build a genuinely good car, you can win races with it.

With 2013 tires it´s the better the car the worse it is.

If you made even more extreme tires Sauber would start to win races. Do they have a better car?
...no.

 

[Metalfreaky]

2012 tires were great, they just went conservative, they shouldn´t have tried to fix something that never was broken.

As I said they were discussing it with the teams. If the teams said 2012 tires were fine they would not have changed them

Obviously we have a fundamentally diffrent view and what is a good or the best car. For me it's the car that is over one season the most competetive.
For you it's obviously not. Maybe the Merc was the best car since 2010. It's just the tires that couldn't handle its immense performance in the races....

And you honestly don´t think that after X amount of years they haven´t figured out that by now?

Merc obviously hasn't.

These tires penalize the fastest cars. It´s very simple.

Yup, it is simple. It's just that RB and Merc don't have the fastest car in a race. It doesn't matter a single bit how good they are in qualifing as the quali is completly irrelevant for the championship.

It´s not the car that has a problem, the car obviously works great. It´s the tires.

As far as I remember the tires are mounted to the car, so they are actually part of it.
,

No what has really been in F1 is that when you build a genuinely good car, you can win races with it.

Again "good car". What is a good car? Isn't the best car the car that wins the most races, the car that is the most constant over one season? At least for me it is.

With 2013 tires it´s the better the car the worse it is.

Now that makes perfect sense. Sounds almost like the ending of aTop Gear episode...

 

[Hampus Andersson]

For you it's obviously not. Maybe the Merc was the best car since 2010. It's just the tires that couldn't handle its immense performance in the races....

In 2010 we had Bridgestone´s that lasted. Best car won. Same in 2011, 2012.
Bit iffy tires but never penalized the best cars. Never.

This year though it´s completely different.

Merc obviously hasn't.

So you think there´s two big red buttons in the factory, one says good for race the other says good for Quali.
And they just pushed the wrong button every year....No i´m pretty sure they know points are awarded on Sundays.

Yup, it is simple. It's just that RB and Merc don't have the fastest car in a race. It doesn't matter a single bit how good they are in qualifing as the quali is completly irrelevant for the championship.

They do have the fastest cars everywhere. the problem is when you are given tires that penalizes the best cars on the grid.

Again. If we introduced tires that lasted 1 lap you would see Sauber winning.
By your logic that´s the best car. Best car for driving on **** tires yes but far from the best designed car with the best aerodynamics.

As far as I remember the tires are mounted to the car, so they are actually part of it.

Mercedes builds cars, not tires. That´s Pirelli´s job.

Maybe the air that interacts with the car is also part of the car..
,

Again "good car". What is a good car? Isn't the best car the car that wins the most races, the car that is the most constant over one season? At least for me it is.

Not when you have tires penalizing the best cars.

Now that makes perfect sense. Sounds almost like the ending of aTop Gear episode...

It´s the truth. Newey, Vettel, Mercedes and even Boullier has confirmed it.
Maybe you should go work at Red Bull, you seem to be better informed then them.

If it was the other way around Ferrari would go crazy and Lotus too, and rightfully so.
But because they drew the longest straw they simply try to run with it as long as they possibly can.
This is their shot at winning the title so obviously they will do whatever they can to keep the shitty tires.

We developed the 2013 tyres on the basis of careful simulations that were, however, not sufficient, taking into account the improved speed of cars (up to 3 seconds per lap). - Pirelli

They have built too shitty tires, they even confess it themselves.

 

[Metalfreaky]

So you think there´s two big red buttons in the factory, one says good for race the other says good for Quali.

No I think they build a car that has a quite shitty race pace....again. Like in 2010. Like in 2011. Like in 2012.
They obviously can't find a proper solution to their problem.

By your logic that´s the best car. Best car for driving on ****
tires yes but far from the best designed car with the best aerodynamics.

People tend to forget, that a car has also a mechanical part. Maybe it's just that Lotus and Ferrari have a better car in that aspect.

That´s Pirelli´s job.

And the team's job is it to build a car that fits to the circumstances. That has been the case every year. In 2011 Ferrari failed build/develop a car that could heat up the prime tyre. This year especially Merc has failed build a car that can handle the current generation of tires. I see no diffrence there.

 

[cruyff]

+1 to Hampus. And also,

As I said they were discussing it with the teams. If the teams said 2012 tires were fine they would not have changed them.

Really? Do you honestly think that after the 2012 season (of all seasons) the teams would be unanimous about how the tyres should be? Suppose that they weren't and suppose that Pirreli went in Ferrari's direction instead of RB's... (bear in mind this is an example)

Final thought, I'm pretty sure that Mercedes knows exactly when the points are awarded, thus the only reason their car fell apart in the race is the fact that they could not help it. They have chosen a different path, that of pure speed, which I believe is better and nicer for the sport. I don't want to offend your favourite team, Metalfreaky (judging by your photo), but Ferrari have been recently taking a more conservative, take-it-easy approach. You don't have to be an expert to see that. That's why they won.

But it's the same for everyone, I'll give you that. Alonso did win fairly.

 

[ENDR]

You keep saying that the tires penalize the best cars.
Would you call a driver, that can pull off incredibly fast laptimes, but crashes in every other race, THE BEST on the grid? Probably not, because what's the point of being ultra-fast if you can't translate that into points. In some conditions being constantly a bit slower ends up being overall faster.

The way I see it: the BEST car is the one best prepared for the conditions and rules in the season. This year one of the parameters deciding of the winner is "crappy tires". Some of the teams apparently did their homework and designed a car with that in mind, others made "fast" cars that go through the tires a bit too quickly. And so far it looks like the first approach is the faster one.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

No I think they build a car that has a quite shitty race pace....again. Like in 2010. Like in 2011. Like in 2012.
They obviously can't find a proper solution to their problem.

Obviously they can and have, they have improved their car the most out of anyone on the grid in all areas.

Little did they know that Pirelli had other plans in mind... Maybe they should have run last years car.
Probably could have won a few races with their subpar W03.

People tend to forget, that a car has also a mechanical part. Maybe it's just that Lotus and Ferrari have a better car in that aspect.

When i read this sort of thing i genuinely wonder.
Just by looking at this race, not just watching the race but the weekend, checking sector times it´s very hard to say that Lotus and Ferrari has better mechanical grip then the Mercedes and Red Bull.

The very reason Mercedes is widely tipped to lock out the front row and possibly win at Monaco (by guys like Alonso among others) is because they have such great mechanical grip.

This comment said so much more then just the text you wrote there.

And the team's job is it to build a car that fits to the circumstances. That has been the case every year. In 2011 Ferrari failed build/develop a car that could heat up the prime tyre. This year especially Merc has failed build a car that can handle the current generation of tires. I see no diffrence there.

Ferrari lacked downforce and has been since 2009.
The reason they have even stayed relevant in title hunts is thanks to Alonso and the mishaps of other teams like Red Bull´s new exhaust concept, Mclaren´s reliability etc.

Red Bull also breaks your mold because they have always had respectable tire wear, always been able to just coast and run the pace of the guys behind.
The RB9 is not a new car, it´s an evolution. The only thing that really has changed is tires.

You keep saying that the tires penalize the best cars.
Would you call a driver, that can pull off incredibly fast laptimes, but crashes in every other race, THE BEST on the grid? Probably not, because what's the point of being ultra-fast if you can't translate that into points. In some conditions being constantly a bit slower ends up being overall faster.

Bad one.. How about this. If Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and Kimi tries to do their best, the car breaks down.
Are they not the best? Should they go slower? Or is it the cars fault?
Obviously the car is at fault.

The way I see it: the BEST car is the one best prepared for the conditions and rules in the season. This year one of the parameters deciding of the winner is "crappy tires". Some of the teams apparently did their homework and designed a car with that in mind, others made "fast" cars that go through the tires a bit too quickly. And so far it looks like the first approach is the faster one.

It´s not crappy tires like 2011 and 2012. This is the very reason RBR and Mercedes is so persistent.
Hell even Boullier agrees.
This is what people don´t seem to understand. They are NOT like previous Pirelli´s..
It´s a completely different tire from previous Pirelli´s, not just rubber but the whole construction of the tire is vastly different.

Pirelli messed and they have confessed that they have and this is the very reason they are modifying the tires.
They don´t want a tire tailored for Red Bull, none of us want, what we need is like last couple of years a tire that has a short life that enables 2-3 stops.

Not a tire that handicaps the fastest cars automatically. It´s wrong on so many levels it´s crazy.

 

[Metalfreaky]

Obviously they can and have, they have improved their car the most out of anyone on the grid in all areas.

Except the part when it comes down to tyre wear. Funny how they always "forget" that part.

Little did they know that Pirelli had other plans in mind... Maybe they should have run last years car.
Probably could have won a few races with their subpar W03.

Even I read during last season that Pirelli is aming to create a softer compound but a stronger construction/sidewall. How can such a fundamental information be unknow to Merc?

Just by looking at this race, not just watching the race but the weekend, checking sector times it´s very hard to say that Lotus and Ferrari has better mechanical grip then the Mercedes and Red Bull.

Who said anything about mechanical grip except you? I said the mechanical part of the car. The way the suspension treats the tires and keeps them in their window in combination with the setup for example.
It's not about pure grip and downforce, it never was. It's about getting them all together to work as a package.....like every year!

This is what people don´t seem to understand. They are NOT like previous Pirelli´s..

Who said the tires are the same as last year? I said the task for the teams is exactly the same as every year:
They all have the same amount of time, they all had the same amount of information, they all had the same amount of testing time, they all tried to solve the problem, they all had their own solutions and like every year some solutions work better than others.

They don´t want a tire tailored for Red Bull, none of us want, what we need is like last couple of years a tire that has a short life that enables 2-3 stops.

And what if those new tires suit RB and Merc perfectly? Do Ferrari and Lotus have the right to get the tires they want?
I have no problem if tires change between the seasons but it is impossible to change a tyre during the season and not favour some teams.

I think this discussion (at least from my side) makes no sense to continiue because we seem to have fundamentally diffrent views on what is a good car and how teams should develop a car.

 

[ENDR]

Bad one.. How about this. If Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso and Kimi tries to do their best, the car breaks down.
Are they not the best? Should they go slower? Or is it the cars fault?
Obviously the car is at fault.

Sure, that is a case of a fast driver failed by his hardware, but it's not exactly applicable to the situation we have with the tires - they don't suddenly start disintegrating on a random car without any reason.
What if that driver's car breaks down because he's just pushing it too much, while his partner, using the exact same hardware (in this example: a car, in the wider context: the tires), can win a race? It's not the car's fault anymore.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Even I read during last season that Pirelli is aming to create a softer compound but a stronger construction/sidewall. How can such a fundamental information be unknow to Merc?

You just raised the bar here, i´m genuinely impressed by your questions..

And what if those new tires suit RB and Merc perfectly? Do Ferrari and Lotus have the right to get the tires they want?

They are not building a tire for Red Bull and Mercedes.
They are building a better tire because of 4 stops and several delaminations.

Hopefully this time the people who actually has built the best car can also enjoy the fruits of the labor.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

they don't suddenly start disintegrating on a random car without any reason.

It´s about as close to that as you can get. Except it´s on a set of cars rather then random.

What if that driver's car breaks down because he's just pushing it too much, while his partner, using the exact same hardware (in this example: a car, in the wider context: the tires), can win a race? It's not the car's fault anymore.

Who´s partner has been struggling while his partner has won the race?

The biggest diff would be Massa in China but it was hardly struggling, had some graining on second stint but was good to go.

 

[ENDR]

I was using a metaphor
Teammates = two teams, same car = same tires. One driver (team) is fast, but pushes his car (tires) too much, while his teammate (other team) can do better using the exact same hardware.

It's like in the 60s - you could drive on the absolute limit and risk blowing up your engine (which was pretty common back then), or be a bit more gentle and actually reach the finish line. With the reliability of today's engines (which might change next year ) the tires are now the limiting factor.

 

[cruyff]

Who said the tires are the same as last year? I said the task for the teams is exactly the same as every year:
They all have the same amount of time, they all had the same amount of information, they all had the same amount of testing time, they all tried to solve the problem, they all had their own solutions and like every year some solutions work better than others.

I never said it was unfair competition, I don't like Ferrari or Fernando but they won by vitrue all right.
I'm saying the tires are not good not because I like RB and Lotus but because I like the F1 spirit.
F1's at the top of motosport, if the cars race conservatively there, we're all lost, not just Ferrari.

Besides, didn't you think that the most awesome moments are usually the battles between drivers?
I love strategy, but if we keep going where we're going you're not going to see lots (except if you consider freaking Hamilton in possibly the fastest car being passed by a Williams 'a battle').

 

[Jack Acid]

• Listen to/Download the podcast here

Spanish GP results
After qualifying of the Spanish Grand Prix, history would tell us that the winner would be Nico Rosberg, Lewis Hamilton or Sebastian Vettel. After all, never in Catalunya's 23-year history had a driver won from outside the top three in dry conditions. Fernando Alonso ended that streak as he took his second career victory and his first there with Ferrari. The pace of Alonso left little debate and his leapfrog of Vettel coming out of the pits on lap 11 would be the last of the defending champion's relevancy for challenging for the victory.

Meanwhile, Kimi Raikkonen's phenomenal season continued as he scored his third-straight podium, placing him just four points behind championship leader Vettel. Kimi's duel with Seb at end of lap 32 was something to behold, climaxing when he was finally able to overtake the German coming out of turn 2 on lap 33. Kimi was so good on his tires that he was the only top driver to only stop 3 times.

The results of Ferrari and Lotus (even factoring Romain Grojean's unfortunate early exit) is nothing short of incredible based on the fact both teams were without their technical directors. Ferrari's Pat Fry had to miss the race due to a case of appendicitis, meanwhile Lotus had just brought in Nick Chester to replace James Allison, who is rumored to be returning to Ferrari.

To get such results without these key people is a testament to the depth and expertise of both constructors.

Biggest Winners

Ferrari - It's not enough to say that the Maranello team simply won the race, but in fact, dominated it in a fashion we haven't seen from them in some time. There were times where one might have to rub their eyes and wonder if they were watching Ferrari or Red Bull. Alonso's lead only extended as the race went on and he was able to pit and resume in first place on his last pit stop, much like we have seen with Sebastian Vettel so many times in recent memory. Felipe Massa even overcame a 3-spot grid penalty to secure the final podium spot, which lent to the notion that Ferrari truly is prepared to compete with Red Bull. It has been a brilliant return to form for Massa; he continues to help his own cause in the idea of extending his time with Ferrari.

Esteban Gutierrez - While his race at Bahrain may have ended in equally dramatic and disappointing fashion, the Mexican rookie overcame his 19th grid start to finish an impressive 11th. Even though he barely missed out on his first F1 points, he and Sauber must be thrilled with his performance, which also offset the pit troubles of teammate Nico Hulkenburg. Thanks to an unsafe release, Nico was barely able to improve his starting position and finished a sub-par 15th.

Kimi Räikkönen - Not only did he secure his third straight podium finish, but each of those results have been for 2nd place. Combined with his season-opening win at Australia, Kimi has deprived Vettel of any breathing room whatsoever in terms of championship points. Kimi's return to F1 last year showed he still had what it took to drive a Formula One car, but through five rounds, it's hard to imagine a time he has ever looked as strong, at least since his 2007 drivers title run.

Honorable Mention:

• Jenson Button. What was a disastrous qualifying session and early going ended up being a sign of hope for McLaren. Jenson gained the second most positions of any driver on the day (6). Still, it's clear the teams problems will not be solved anytime soon. It's looking more and more like they will have to hit the reset button in the winter and hope for better skies in 2014.
• Paul di Resta. The young Scot continues to build on the strongest season of his early career, finishing 7th after starting 10th. His teammate Adrian Sutil's poor luck continued with another snag in the pit, leaving his race flat-lined at P13.

Biggest Losers


Spanish GP Driver Productivity
Mercedes - For the second race in a row we were impressed by Nico Rosberg's pole position start. And also for the second race in a row, we were less than surprised to see it squandered thanks to poor tire performance. It's been an embarrassing few weeks for the Silver Arrow, who continue to dazzle in qualifying and then fade away come race day. Hamitlon secured the Mercedes front row in P2, yet finished out of the points in 12th. This was, however, not before Hamilton was lapped by race leader Alonso on lap 57. Ross Brawn could be facing some very intense in-season heat if things can't get straightened out right away. The driver's certainly seem baffled by the issue and that is never a good thing.

Romain Grojean - It's hard not to feel bad for Grojean, who has exponentially grown in the way of avoiding contact and incidents thus far, but always runs into the worst luck when he qualifies well. A suspension failure on lap 8 brought a guillotine end to his fantastic P6 start. His absence of points left Lotus to drop to third in the constructor's race behind Ferrari.

Williams - The maligned outfit just applied their largest update package of the year and the end result was the car was -- worse. Notably worse. Maldonado was quoted as saying the team would have a "Plan B" if the updates didn't help; safe to assume those Plan B boxes are already opened and emptied for help at Monaco. For what it's worth, Pastor Maldonado (last year's Catalunya race winner) was able to hassle Hamilton for a meager stint. Williams season is hanging by a thread. Force India, Sauber and Toro Rosso are lightyears ahead.


Biggest Surprise

Ferrari's eye-popping pace. Much like we have seen with Red Bull so often before, Ferrari exercised utter dominant pace throughout the entire race. The irony what their approach to their tires: burn them off fast and race hard. Look for a shift in team's strategies moving forward thanks to Ferrari's bold experiment.

Not So Surprising...

Mercedes fall from their qualifying start. They predictably went from qualifying wonders to race day no names. On the plus side, the overall pace of the car is superior to 2012. But unfortunately, the tire woes only seem to worsen with every race. This issie has been going on since the start of 2012 and one has to wonder when Toto Wolff may begin to lose his patience with Brawn's leadership. This could be the beginning of the end of the Brawn/Mercedes marriage.

What to Look for in Round 6

• First the obvious - that is the over/under for race incidents at Monaco?
• Recent history suggests a Red Bull winner; Seb won it in 2011, but Mark Webber won it last year and 2010.
• Will teams decide to get aggressive with the tires and assume more stops? Maybe not. Monaco is not the best benchmark for anything except low speed performance and of course, the mettle of the drivers themselves.
• Will McLaren and Williams be able to make strides?

2013 F1 Driver Power Rankings after Round 05

2013 F1 Driver Power Rankings (Round 5)

 

[Samuel Fuller]

F1 is as more about the car being designed to be the fastest over the race within the limitations of the rules and the tyre specification than it is about being the fastest driver. Its a team sport. All the teams knew the tyre specification. Some teams designed there car better than others. Just because youre car is fastest over one lap does not make it the best car.