Flexi-wing four fastest at Hungaroring (Second practice interactive data)

Posted on | Author Keith Collantine

Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Hungaroring, 2010

At the end of the second practice session in Hungary it was the four cars running the much-discussed flexi-wings that headed the times.

Red Bull look like the team to beat and it remains to be seen whether Ferrari can get close enough to the RB6s to to threaten the near-monopoly on pole position they have enjoyed this year.

You need to upgrade your Flash Player

View interactive chart full screen

Tick/untick drivers? names to show their laps, click and drag to zoom

The rain heading for Hungary that was observed yesterday fell short of reaching the track, giving the teams three hours of dry running in which to acclimatise during today’s two sessions.

In second practice they continued running the medium tyre to begin with, before switching to the super-soft compound in the middle third of the session.

Sebastian Vettel managed the transition best. The gap between him and his team mate swelled from a tenth either way to half a second in Vettel’s favour once they put the super-softs on. And he would have been quicker too but for traffic at the end of his best lap – have a look at the ultimate lap times list below.

According to Bridgestone, the amount of degradation on the super-soft tyre will largely come down to how hot it gets. Track temperatures reached 38C in the second session and 40C in the first, but no-one ran the super-soft tyre then.

At the end of second practice Mark Webber ran a 14-lap stint on super-softs with no obvious degradation worries. The same was true for Nico H???lkenberg’s 19-lap run. Still, it’s worth keeping an eye on this should the track temperature climb into the forties tomorrow and on Sunday.

But the vagaries of the super-soft tyre left some drivers puzzled, including Adrian Sutil:

In general we didn’t get the best out of the car today. We are struggling a little on the softer tyre and neither Tonio nor myself could improve from the hard tyre. There doesn’t seem to be a peak with it, unlike the hard tyre that you know will peak and come in, but it’s much more difficult to understand where we are with the soft one.
Adrian Sutil

As expected, Ferrari were closer to Red Bull in the second practice session, though only they know how much fuel they had on board. In the tell-tale middle sector, Fernando Alonso was just over three-tenths slower than Vettel, much closer than he was this morning.

Red Bull aren’t running their F-duct this weekend and Ferrari ran some laps without their blown rear wing to see if the change was worth making (here’s Massa running without his blown rear wing).

Mercedes, meanwhile, are still struggling with their car. They experimented running without the Hockenheim-spec rear wing and floor, using the Silverstone versions instead, as they seem to have taken a wrong turn on car development.

McLaren are also in trouble and are bracing themselves for a bit of a kicking this weekend. Lewis Hamilton said the gaps between them and the Red Bulls on the sector charts was a realistic indication of their positions. They were nine tenths of a second slower in the middle sector and half a second down in the final sector.

The MP4-25 has tended to struggle on bumpy circuits this year – such as the new sections at Bahrain and Silverstone. As a result, instead of taking the fight to Red Bull and Ferrari they look more likely to be threatened by Renault. The R30s have a new front wing, rear wing and a floor upgrade this weekend.

Practice has thrown up few surprises so far with Red Bull and Ferrari looking set to do some significant damage to McLaren’s position in the championship. We’ll find out in final practice tomorrow morning whether any of the teams are able to make set-up changes that improve their position relative to their rivals.

Drivers’ best laps

Pos. Car Driver Car Best lap Gap Lap At time Laps
1 5 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 1’20.087 20 64 33
2 8 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1’20.584 0.497 23 66 34
3 6 Mark Webber Red Bull-Renault 1’20.597 0.510 19 62 36
4 7 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1’20.986 0.899 21 65 33
5 12 Vitaly Petrov Renault 1’21.195 1.108 14 49 33
6 2 Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 1’21.308 1.221 15 56 30
7 11 Robert Kubica Renault 1’21.375 1.288 24 66 37
8 10 Nico H???lkenberg Williams-Cosworth 1’21.623 1.536 21 56 41
9 1 Jenson Button McLaren-Mercedes 1’21.730 1.643 20 63 33
10 3 Michael Schumacher Mercedes 1’21.773 1.686 13 58 31
11 22 Pedro de la Rosa Sauber-Ferrari 1’21.809 1.722 21 57 38
12 9 Rubens Barrichello Williams-Cosworth 1’21.844 1.757 21 64 36
13 4 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 1’22.039 1.952 12 60 28
14 23 Kamui Kobayashi Sauber-Ferrari 1’22.212 2.125 21 55 37
15 17 Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso-Ferrari 1’22.469 2.382 9 29 43
16 14 Adrian Sutil Force India-Mercedes 1’22.507 2.420 7 20 22
17 16 Sebastien Buemi Toro Rosso-Ferrari 1’22.602 2.515 21 51 38
18 15 Vitantonio Liuzzi Force India-Mercedes 1’23.138 3.051 24 66 36
19 18 Jarno Trulli Lotus-Cosworth 1’24.553 4.466 22 66 37
20 24 Timo Glock Virgin-Cosworth 1’25.376 5.289 29 85 35
21 25 Lucas di Grassi Virgin-Cosworth 1’25.669 5.582 20 65 32
22 21 Bruno Senna HRT-Cosworth 1’26.745 6.658 21 65 33
23 20 Sakon Yamamoto HRT-Cosworth 1’26.798 6.711 23 68 32
24 19 Heikki Kovalainen Lotus-Cosworth 1’27.705 7.618 4 10 5

Drivers’ ultimate laps

Pos. Car Driver Car Ultimate lap Gap Deficit to best
1 5 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 1’19.878 0.209
2 8 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1’20.454 0.576 0.130
3 6 Mark Webber Red Bull-Renault 1’20.477 0.599 0.120
4 7 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1’20.984 1.106 0.002
5 12 Vitaly Petrov Renault 1’21.195 1.317 0.000
6 11 Robert Kubica Renault 1’21.255 1.377 0.120
7 2 Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 1’21.277 1.399 0.031
8 1 Jenson Button McLaren-Mercedes 1’21.556 1.678 0.174
9 10 Nico H???lkenberg Williams-Cosworth 1’21.602 1.724 0.021
10 4 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 1’21.645 1.767 0.394
11 3 Michael Schumacher Mercedes 1’21.712 1.834 0.061
12 9 Rubens Barrichello Williams-Cosworth 1’21.754 1.876 0.090
13 22 Pedro de la Rosa Sauber-Ferrari 1’21.809 1.931 0.000
14 23 Kamui Kobayashi Sauber-Ferrari 1’22.078 2.200 0.134
15 17 Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso-Ferrari 1’22.418 2.540 0.051
16 14 Adrian Sutil Force India-Mercedes 1’22.423 2.545 0.084
17 16 Sebastien Buemi Toro Rosso-Ferrari 1’22.587 2.709 0.015
18 15 Vitantonio Liuzzi Force India-Mercedes 1’22.914 3.036 0.224
19 18 Jarno Trulli Lotus-Cosworth 1’24.375 4.497 0.178
20 24 Timo Glock Virgin-Cosworth 1’25.355 5.477 0.021
21 25 Lucas di Grassi Virgin-Cosworth 1’25.633 5.755 0.036
22 21 Bruno Senna HRT-Cosworth 1’26.566 6.688 0.179
23 20 Sakon Yamamoto HRT-Cosworth 1’26.798 6.920 0.000
24 19 Heikki Kovalainen Lotus-Cosworth 1’27.644 7.766 0.061

2010 Hungarian Grand Prix

Browse all 2010 Hungarian Grand Prix articles

Image (C) Bridgestone/Ercole Colombo

51 comments on “Flexi-wing four fastest at Hungaroring (Second practice interactive data)”

  1. Marc Connell
    30th July 2010, 17:31

    You would think redbull would be in brawns position last year the amount of times you’ve seen there name first.

  2. Keith would it be an idea to cut off the laptimes that are more than 10 seconds slower or something? Maybe even less than that. Or maybe some percentage of the fastest lap in the selection or per driver.

    In this case all the useful times seem to be between 80 and 90 seconds, but when I include Rosberg in the selection it squeezes everything flat to include a 115s lap.

    1. Gives a good indication of his practise session though, does it not?

    2. I would like it to have that option as well, if it is possible to do something like that.

    3. Good idea. I’ll look into doing that for the next race.

      1. Yay! Finally.
        BTW, cool hot the ultimate laps show the teams pace so much more clearly.

      2. i cant see ferrari flexi wing system please show us some proof this morning on the fp1 f1 broadcasting made an comparison between several cars on the bumps and breaking point and it was visible that red bulls wing moved a lot on bumps and others including ferrari didnt i know that on fp1 they were using the old spec wing but even onboard on fp2 i didnt see that flexi from ferrari every wing flex red bull a lot and others not that mutch

        1. its just an excuse for ferrari superiority over mclaren the funny part is that Ferrari has been faster on the big majoraty of the gps this year but a lot worse than mclaren on race

          1. Not really dude, it’s only the last 4 or so GPs were Ferrari were on Mclaren’s pace and only really the last 2 that They were much faster than Mclaren. I haven’t got a picture for you, but the Ferrari wings are clearly flexing, I’m not sure if it’s quite as much as the Red Bull wings though.

            Both Red Bull and the Ferrari wings were inspected by stewards at one point I believe. Both were passed.

          2. i ve posted some links on some of my comments clearly showing red bull flexi endplates since 09 but ferraris pace over mclaren isnt because of this new wing which isnt much of an evolution and as far as i can see isnt more flexi than the rivals (all but redbull) like you ve said it goes back to bahrain australia malaysia china monaco silverstone and Germany 7 out of 10 on qually but dramas meant that mclaren finished better on race than Ferraris and red bulls the true champ leaders

  3. no way am i picking petrov ahead of kubica, hamilton and button.

    1. i personally think Kubica is holding back, Petrov just showed how good that car is.
      Kubica might split the top teams up a bit tomorrow in qualifying.
      what do you reckon f1yankee?

      1. I think you could be right!

      2. He’ll probably split the Ferrari drivers.
        Especially if Massa leaves a .5 second gap the way he did in Germany

    2. I can’t see Kubica doing any better than fifth, and he will have to fight both Button and Hamilton to get it.

      1. i think he can do it

  4. that dam wing is working a treat for RBRs that is giving them plenty of grip in the high speed corners its unbelievable,

    what seams to be the optimum speed that it starts to work at Keith?

    im guessing at something like 200ks would that be right?

    1. it all depends on how it’s used. it’s possible to use it to switch on or off other aero elements on the car. a vortex landing inside or outside a duct or fin makes all the difference.

    2. The FIA deflection test is only 50kgs applied to each wing end plate, an F1 wing will produce 70kgs on even the slowest corner at Hungaroring, and the force increase is relative to the speed.

      Craig Scarborough (ScarbsF1)

      1. ie: they are gaining a benefit at every corner this weekend.

        1. I just hope this is not going to be another mess with flexible wings. Will the fia actually change the tests to prove the wings don’t comply with the spirit of the rule.

          Instead, i would suggest to make it up to the teams to present evidence, the wings do not flex (as there is no flexing allowed for in the rule, just the test seems to be insufficient)

          1. if it passes the test, it passes the test. the test can be changed, but not this year.

          2. f1yankee, the FIA can – as they have in the past – revise the requirements race by race. They can fundimentaly alter tests as and when they wish and the teams must comply.

            As posted by Ilanin below,

            ‘rule 3.17.8 permits the FIA to set additional load/deviation tests for the express purpose of enforcing rule 3.15’

          3. looks like they saw this coming then. thanks for clarifying this

  5. Interesting that RBR and Ferrari have ditched the F-Duct and find it a hinderance here. McLaren are 6kph faster than their next rival in the speed trap, Alonso, so this may be a related effect. But it’s not good to have drag to give but be unable to turn it into balanced downforce. I’m sure the new car is much faster in the computer and in the windtunnel, but it’s clear that in practice the EBD has really unbalanced the car and exacerbated the issues with bumps, the old car’s main weakness.

  6. “The R30 has a new front wing”. Not really newsworthing seeing as they have had a new iteration at every race this year!

    McLaren are really struggling, possibly due to the bumpy nature of the track. They will do well to hold off Renault and Williams on Sunday.

    It should be another Red Bull front row lock out, but I do expect Ferrari to be a lot closer in the race.

    1. Not only that it’s bumpy but this track calls for a high downforce setup, which doesn’t suit the Maccas, as was the case in Monaco and to a lesser some extent, Valencia.

      The other issue is that top speed isn’t important here and might be a major reason why the gap from RB to Ferrari has widened since the last race.

  7. Do Ferrari really have flexi wing? It wasn’t as clear in the shots on tv, compared to RBR.

    1. All indications are that they do, but the amount of flex is supposedly less than RB’s

    2. i read somewhere (JA’s comparison pictures? or here yesterday) that RBR has the wing moving down about 24 mm and Ferrari about 10 mm.
      So even though Ferrari might have a big advantage over most cars, the RBR take this a lot further.

      Interesting, that Renault have their maybe 100th version of front wing, but still have no F-duct (Kubica complaind in Silverstone and Hockenheim) but also no flexi wing version of the front wing for them.

    3. Yes, but as mentioned it is not as much as the Redbull, here is the comparison I made of the F10 wing flex at Valencia:

      F10 Valencia

  8. I thought flexible aero part were illegal. Is it simply a case that they comply with the scrutineers’ test protocol and only start flexing under heavier load on track ?
    Shouldn’t the test change so that this absurd situation is avoided ?

    1. It seems RBR (and now Ferrari as well) have indeed found a way to do this and comply at scrutineering.

      As in the past with the flexi-rearwings the FIA might introduce a change of testing and additional measures. But for that to happen, i think someone would have to actually protest it. For now it seems nobody wants to do that, they’d rather find out how to do it themselves as well!

      1. BasCB, seems so, but given McLaren’s inability to deliver the EBD properly, it seems ambitious of them to want to develop the front flexi-wing too. They’re starting to get pasted by Ferrari and Red Bull, losing serious ground on what were thought to be good tracks for them is a bad sign.

    2. Flexible aero parts are illegal (rule 3.15). A series of scrutineering standards exist to enforce this rule (rules 3.17.1-7) with which Ferrari and Red Bull are in compliance (though their wings flex at higher loads). However, rule 3.17.8 permits the FIA to set additional load/deviation tests for the express purpose of enforcing rule 3.15. As to why they haven’t, I am as confused as anyone.

      1. Cheers for the clarification Ilanin, appreciated. Would it be cynical to think that it’s to make sure the others can catch up with McLaren in terms of Championship points and once they’ve done that the rules will be tightened?

      2. It bears emphasis that “passing” the load test is not the issue. The rule is no moving aero parts. The FIA is mandated to and should modify the test where there is plain evidence that the test is being gamed to make the test irrelevant.

        One reason the situation remains is that McLaren have not pressed the issue the way they did the flexi floor and the Ferrari separating-root front wing. Or the way Ferrari went after the Michelin front tires (same issue, pased the test, as applied formally, but in practice, not really)and thus snatched the title from Montoya.

        I suspect that in the team’s culture they think that” anything they can do we can do better,” and so they prefer to leave a technology in play. But I think this is a legacy of spy-gate—they want to be nice guys now. We know where the nice guys traditionally finish.

        1. There was also a rule about no movable aero part that McLaren flaunted and were cleared to do so by the FIA. So what?

      3. There’s another rule that states the front wing may not run lower than 85mm from the bottom of the car, which is usually the plank on the bottom. They’re certainly in violation of that rule.

        1. This concerns me, It’s a clear contradiction of the rules, and shouldn’t it be enforced as such? If the rules are bad, change them. But I don’t like the idea that people are picking and choosing which rules they like and dislike. It shouldn’t work like that.

  9. A shame i did not see any of the FP sessions today. I still have no good idea who’s fast.
    It seems Red Bull are in front again with at least Alonso very close, although Massa might be closer if they run a different fuel load (why’s Webber 0.5 seconds slower?).

    McLaren will be between 4th and 8th on the grid as the bumps are hurting them here. Interesting to see, Jenson is doing better than Lewis so far, does the friday in Germany make that big a difference, or is Jens more into this track/the updated car?
    For the rest, i would be suprised, if Petrov stays in front of Kubica, but you never know. Williams seem to be pretty solid here.
    Force India was comparing their EBD with the former configuration back to back, so they might improve tomorrow, but they are struggling on the tyres, as are Mercedes.

    1. Red Bull are clearly faster, on both ultimate and long run pace. There’s quite a gap the sole second best team, Ferrari.

      Webber did a poor lap on the option tyre and the switched his programme to long runs so I wouldn’t read too much into his gap to Vettel. They’re within a tenth of each other on ultimate pace.

      I wouldn’t be so sure about McLaren’s positions on the grid. The Renault looks faster and it will take all of Hamilton’s skills to have a chance to get ahead or split them.

  10. Looks like the Ferrari technicians have cracked RBR’s aerodynanimcs,so it all depends on the drivers now,although I would give more credence to Ferrari’s race reliability than RBR.
    It is so depressing for Mercedes GP and now Maclaren falling behind…I don’t know:(

  11. A thought on McLaren’s woes:

    In one of his very excellent articles, John Beamer noted that the difference between the Ferrari and the McLaren is that Ferrari had a basic worrking model with which they could build from; McLaren however had a downforce-producing machine.

    This may be why McLaren are struggling to get new stuff bolted on to work. To be honest they should ditch the EBD and go for developing the flexi-wings. Or protest them ;-)

    1. That’s almost a philosophical point, Icthyes.
      Whether it’s better to go for the ‘ultimate driving machine’ in the MaClaren manner or an adaptable, base model, ready to import whatever developments the season brings â la Ferrari. Hmmm.
      Last year the Braun was the ‘ultimate driving machine’ for the first half and then merely ‘wonderful’ after that. This season Ferrari started as the adaptable base model but may end up the victor in the long term.
      Perhaps the Red Bull advantage in the first half of this season (which has not translated into driver or constructor point advantages) will be whittled away during part two as other teams figure out the front flexi-wing or as the FIA investigate it, leaving the flexible team in front.

  12. Keith, excellent information in this article. JA says RBR are in different class here, but I am not buying it. Vettel, even though generally faster than Webber, is not 6 tenths faster. That Webber was on 14-lap stint (vs Vettel being on a 8- or 9-lap stint) would possibly explain the difference between them. Alonso was basically on-par with Webber, so I think Vettel is probably no more than a tenth and a half faster in absolute terms, over Alonso. And Alonso complained of over-steering after P2. So if Ferrari can improve the setup, I think it will be again really close in Q, and Ferrari might have the best car in the race.

  13. Younger Hamilton
    31st July 2010, 1:40

    You Know what speaking of blown diffusers and flexi wings and team development rates.McLaren actually had work in progress for a ride height system or i think it was a suspension system or wait maybe both combined but due to all of the rumours of RBR having a ride height system at the beginning of the season which the FIA clarified a new rule and banned them,McLaren then had to scrap all of that work in progress, imagine the tenths it would have given them.Maybe Rumours created in the paddock has costed the teams richly.

  14. It’s funny to see how people here seem to imply that the RB6 has only recently gained an advantage because of a more flexible wing, when according to some, they already had it in Shanghai. People are clutching at straws to explain why McLaren isn’t constantly running at the front by sheer pace. Truth is, the cars just have different strengths, hence the relative carperformance (if we overlook the driver obviously) on different circuits.

  15. There is no advantage in front flexy wing, because it flex down at high speed, exactly when you don´t want it to do so. (Rear wings loose frontal area, so there is different)

    The TV showed it flexing after the car going over the kerbs. If the flexibility is really sensible it would give an effect like a mass damper working in the opposite sense it ought to…

  16. Rupert Richardson
    1st August 2010, 10:13

    This business of “flexible” front wings: I’m sure this is way too simplistic, but is it JUST possible that Red Bull & Ferrari have nice stiff wings mated to a nice flexible chassis? You, know, multi-rate springs, so that as soon as the car is doing more than 30mph, it sinks to the bottom of VERY soft springs, than has very firm ones to control chassis attitude to the airflow? There are plenty of ways of (legally) skinning a cat…

    1. I’d like to think something simple as that wouldn’t be enough to fool the scrutineers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.