Rosberg lucky not to retire as Hamilton did – Wolff

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2014In the round-up: Mercedes executive director Toto Wolff says Nico Rosberg was lucky he was able to finish the Canadian Grand Prix after his team mate Lewis Hamilton retired.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Wolff: Luck was the difference (Sky)

“They had exactly the same problem and I think, at the end of the day, that Nico was just a bit luckier.”

Lewis Hamilton vows to hunt down Nico Rosberg but admits he’ll need better fortune to recover from second DNF this season (The Independent)

“There was nothing I could do about our issues. We were managing the loss of power, but as soon as I finally made the jump on Nico in the second pit stop, my brakes failed.”

The secrets to Mercedes’ 2014 F1 success (The Way it Is)

“Cowell confirmed Niki Lauda’s recent declarations that the Mercedes W05 F1 car is more efficient than a Toyota Prius hybrid road car. ‘Absolutely, by a long way,’ Cowell said.”

Montreal gets sweet deal to keep GP until 2024 (The Gazette)

“The $17 million annual staging fee that will keep the Canadian Grand Prix here till 2024 is cheaper – by far – to what is being paid by most other host countries on the 19-race calendar.”

Rosberg wants corner-cutting rethink (Autosport)

“I went straight, and didn’t get an advantage. I did initially, but I slowed down in turn one and two as is the norm to do.”

Williams driver Felipe Massa Perez penalty not enough – Massa (BBC)

“It was dangerous and we could have had a very serious accident, so for me the penalty is not enough.”

Ferrari F14 T – Montreal engine cover (Formula One)

“In an effort to improve the efficiency of their overall package, Ferrari tested a much tighter-fitting engine cover in Montreal.”

Adrian Newey’s Red Bull move will be celebrated by F1 rivals

“I just feel, to be perfectly honest, the current regulations are very restrictive, which is a shame. It’s difficult to find new areas to explore as they are so tight, more engine orientated. They need more of a fundamental rethink in my opinion.”

2014 Canadian GP report (MotorSport)

“Typically the diameter has been reduced by around a centimetre and the thickness is usually around 3mm less than the maximum allowable 28mm. Six-pot calipers have been replaced by four-pots at Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren and Sauber.”

Mattiacci: “React and continue with developments” (Ferrari)

“Another major target is to speed up our reaction time, which is something our competitors seem to manage to do.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

In my view Perez was responsible for the crash with Massa but Brian disagrees:

Whilst Perez does make an adjustment to the left at a crucial point, it was not an unreasonable adjustment to make in and of itself, and it only became a problem when combined with Massa deciding to attempt his overtake so ridiculously close to Perez’s car. Massa undoubtedly did this so as to keep as close to the racing line going around turn 1, but ultimately he was too close resulting in the collision.

The leniency of the punishment also tells me that the stewards acknowledge that any blame in this fairly major accident (27G) was very evenly spread out and they’ve decided to shade it on the side of Perez. A 5-grid punishment is hardly a punishment at all. I could be wrong but they haven’t even dished out any penalty points either. And they were giving those out like smarties earlier in the season.
Brian (@Bealzbob)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

No F1 Fanatic birthdays today

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Happy birthday to Dave Walker who turns 73 today. The Australian driver’s racing career was badly affected by two road accidents which left him with broken limbs.

Prior to that he’d made his F1 debut in Lotus’s difficult turbine-engined car in 1971. The following year he endured a point-less season in the team’s conventional V8-engined 72, which suffered a string of technical failures, leaving him with an unenviable score of zero while team mate Emerson Fittipaldi scooped the championship.

Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

Advert | Go Ad-free

109 comments on Rosberg lucky not to retire as Hamilton did – Wolff

  1. andae23 (@andae23) said on 10th June 2014, 6:52

    “I just feel, to be perfectly honest, the current regulations are very restrictive, which is a shame. It’s difficult to find new areas to explore as they are so tight, more engine orientated. They need more of a fundamental rethink in my opinion.”

    F1 rule makers should take a look at LMP1 for inspiration.

    • Bullfrog (@bullfrog) said on 10th June 2014, 8:38

      Yes, but the Le Mans regulations have performance balancing – if F1 had that, Mercedes would’ve already had their fuel flow and ride height meddled with, to bring them back to the rest of the field.

      For me, that would be too artificial. OK, I know we have DRS, comedy tyres and rules that help the cars further down the grid (by getting those Force India death-traps up at the front…) but F1 should reward the best as well.

      • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 10th June 2014, 16:48

        Le Mans rules don’t have performance balancing. They have an equivalency formula, which is different. The reason it’s there is to balance the inherent strengths and weaknesses between different technologies. So where the fuel consumption differs between diesel and petrol, they adjust the maximum fuel tank size so that the stints are roughly the same length. Likewise, choosing from the various ERS options will mean different options being available on the engine front. The idea is that no matter what route you take, technologically, you’ll end up with broadly similar performance. But this is, crucially, mandated before the season and before the teams start designing their machines, so they can make their decisions in full knowledge of the rules beforehand.

        What it isn’t, is a system designed to make all of the cars the same speed, as you see in the likes of BTCC with ballast and boost adjustments every other week. So as we see Toyota have chosen the options they feel have the best potential, and as a result have a reasonable power advantage over Audi, they won’t be pegged back by the ACO, on the basis that Audi had the option to go down that route too and chose not to.

        The reason you have the equivalency formula is simply because it’s not good for the sport to build rules where one technological route will naturally have a big advantage. We saw that when Audi first started using Diesel cars and enjoyed much longer stints between fuel stops and a significant torque advantage over petrol powered cars. Which stopped manufacturers who didn’t want to build diesel engines from competing. Once the equivalency formula was put in place and started working, all of a sudden you had Porsche, Toyota, and Nissan all joining up, with a clutch of other manufacturers wanting to join the party. It was a great example of an organising body looking at why things aren’t working so well, and taking logical, sensible action to address the issues. It’s something the FIA desperately need to look at and learn from, because it’s central to why car manufacturers are all gearing up to go sportscar racing, while F1 is in financial and political meltdown.

        It’s not perfect – the LMP2 class isn’t too healthy right now. But I fully expect the ACO to be able to take similarly logical steps to address the problems there too.

        Ultimately it creates a situation where constructors have the freedom to build a car according to their own technological ethos, and know that with the right amount of development and investment, they can compete at the highest level. By contrast in F1 the cars are so heavily mandated that there is very little difference between the different cars. It’s building a race car by numbers, and relying on a Newey-spec genius to be able to find the very tiny areas in which you can find advantages. It’s certainly not an environment where creativity is allowed to flourish, and so the creative types are quite rightly getting a bit sick of it.

    • Keith Campbell (@keithedin) said on 10th June 2014, 9:04

      @andae23 Adrian Newey is hardly an impartial authority on what would be best for the sport though. He’s an aerodynamicist, so ofc he would like more freedom to play with the cars’ aerodynamics, and he doesn’t have to consider how it might affect the other teams or the sport as a whole. He might not even care what makes the racing better, as long as he can compete and win. And also, he probably feels frustrated at the moment since despite having a very good chassis his team cannot compete (reliability aside) with Mercedes due to the power unit – which is an area he has little influence over.

      • Robbie (@robbie) said on 10th June 2014, 13:24

        @keithedin I tend to disagree. AN is a huge icon of F1 and is a great authority to listen to. He needs to be challenged in order to enjoy what he does. I remember reading years ago that he was considering leaving F1, have won some titles, in favour of yacht design, for the new challenge. There is simply not enough room in F1 for innovation for his liking. And he’s been there done that so what better authority to know. I think you are wrong to assume it is all about him. I think he believes in something better for F1, and I certainly don’t think he is just frustrated at the moment. I think his frustration has been building over the last handful of years as he went through having EBD curtailed, and has known what the new chapter they are in now would bring. Ie. as he put it much more PU oriented.

        AN experienced a time in F1 of bottomless pockets for him to go all out with, and he has been extremely successful with his designs. Now with the talk being of bringing costs down etc etc…a whole new era with much less freedom, he’s not having any fun. He’s proved his worth, now he likely feels there’s little reward anymore and little his ilk can do within the regs to really explore their talents and potential.

  2. Luca Nuvolari (@nuvolari71) said on 10th June 2014, 7:21

    I am with Perez this time, 100%
    In a bigger picture, I reckon it’s a racing accident, but looking at Massa’s insisting so much on his non-fault, I feel like expressing myself:
    1) Massa had a huge amount of space on his left
    2) If you want to overtake, you have to leave the racing line, not the guy in front
    3) Perez had all the rights to defend himself, if he felt so, closing to the left, which he probably did, very little
    4) When you brake from 300+, you focus on the corner to come as a priority.
    As a side note, not relevant, but making a point on Massa’s poor focus:
    He caught the group of Vet, Ric and Per, with a car which was at that moment more than 1.5 secs per lap faster. Once he reached them, he just waited, instead of trying hard a pass. People like Ham, Vet, Alo would have made the passes much earlier, without waiting so long. Yes, it was DRS following another DRS but he surely had the fastest car at that point and he made continuous small mistakes. If he was a true champion, he’d blame himself for not having taken the multiple chances he had in the previous laps and he would not waste so much time and air asking for a bigger penalty to others. Quite petty stuff and he lost quite a chunk of my respect.
    Just my opinion

    • Steve Freegard (@smfreegard) said on 10th June 2014, 9:35

      Exactly – I agree with you 100%

      He should have been on the podium and could have potentially won the race. Instead he made a raft of mistakes and ends up crashing into Perez. For a driver of his experience that is very poor.

    • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 10th June 2014, 13:30

      1) Perez had space on his right, and considering the left hand corner ahead, moving left is stupid.
      2) He was off the racing line
      3) He is allowed to make one defending move, and not in the braking zone – there’s an overhead overlay of multiple frames that show Perez taking an unusual and unexpected line
      4) Alternatively, not crashing should probably come as a priority

  3. squaregoldfish (@squaregoldfish) said on 10th June 2014, 8:20

    Another advantage of the quieter engines: we can actually hear when the cars have lock-ups. We don’t get it every time for some reason (probably microphone placement), but it’s good to hear it when we can.

  4. Eric Morman (@lethalnz) said on 10th June 2014, 8:23

    i truly feel for Williams they are doing a great job but are screwing to may things up,
    they haven’t been in this situating for a long time and it is adding up to lots of mistakes,
    so many missed opportunities it is not funny anymore,
    yes i to believe Mass could have been on the podium alongside Riccardo,
    he was too close when he tried to make the pass on Perez,
    it could have been even more exciting than what it was “Just if” such a shame.

  5. GeeMac (@geemac) said on 10th June 2014, 8:35

    That interview with Any Cowell is great, the key is this paragraph:

    “The key thing for me is how our people have reacted to that situation. It’s the whole team, not just the power unit development group. It’s integrating everything into the car and the whole team reacted very much in a positive way. The question was, what are we going to do? They weren’t going to sit there in denial and ignore it. They weren’t going to point fingers at each other. We were going to work out what we were going to do.”

    Mercedes have the best car at the moment because they seems to have done the best preparation for the new rules. They thought everything through and worked out the best compromises all round. They deserve credit for this. The “pointing fingers” quip is a good one too and I think is directed at red Bull who have been keen to blame everything on Renault rather than trying to work with them to remedy problems which seem to have arisen because they did not work closely enough with their colleagues in Viry when the RB10 was first laid out.

  6. Oana Cambrea (@cutteroz) said on 10th June 2014, 9:47

    In regard to the Massa-Perez accident, I can only only agree with a friend of mine who said that it was avoidable had there been Vettel, Alonso or Raikkonen, for example, in Massa’s place. This shows exactly that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=sDnnfizWCm4#t=86

    I view it as racing incident because Massa could have avoided it and Perez should’ve kept his line.

  7. frood19 (@frood19) said on 10th June 2014, 9:50

    I wonder if that statement about the Mercedes efficiency is true. I think for the engine, it probably is true (i read even the old V10s were incredibly fuel efficient just by being well engineered), but not for the car. Assuming fuel weighs about 0.75kg per litre, then 100kg is about 133l, or ~30 gallons (UK). The race is typically about 190 miles long so that’s ~6.4mpg – not exactly Prius-like.

    A formula one car is just not an efficient shape (too much drag) and also they are driven like racing cars (using full throttle everywhere, not like (most) road drivers). it would be interesting (to some people…) to see what kind of distance an f1 team could get in the Eco-marathon – they current record is something like 12,000mpg!

    • Mads (@mads) said on 10th June 2014, 16:58

      @frood19
      6mpg for an engine with 700’ish HP at racing speeds is incredible though.
      On Top Gear they tested a prius at full speed to 17mpg. Which is less then three times better, while producing a less then 1/6th of the power. (110hp for that generation prius)
      So in that respect, the F1 car is a lot more efficient at making power. Even with all the drag.

  8. Ben (@scuderia29) said on 10th June 2014, 10:04

    nice to finally see how button made it to 4th, because ive been confused ever since i saw the result lol

  9. Strontium (@strontium) said on 10th June 2014, 11:55

    As much as I think it was half and half here, I am fed up with Massa’s constant “they need to punish him more” reaction for the next 2 weeks, every time something happens. He does seem to lash out a lot against people to the FIA. It was the same with Kobayashi’s crash, and with Hamilton a few years ago. As much as I agree that sometimes the other driver is at fault, his reaction really irritates me, and he seems to forget that he isn’t faultless either.

  10. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall) said on 10th June 2014, 12:55

    If they had more gravel traps this wouldn’t be a problem.

  11. Of course the current F1 cars are more efficient than the prius. The V10’s were more efficient than the prius. The problem here is to be able to produce a car that will last 200.000 miles in every weather condition and that is affordable. F1 engines use exotic materials that are beyond peoples wallet, their rate of efficiency grew alot with the direct injection that said their efficiency was already 20% higher than normal cars but you don’t need 800bhp to run in the road.

  12. Timbit said on 10th June 2014, 23:07

    My overall take on the Massa/Perez incident is – was Perez aware of how close Massa was, or how eager Massa might have been to pass? Also, was it reasonable for Perez to move over at that point of time?

    I agree that Massa move to the right. I agree that in the end Massa was close to Perez. However I feel that Perez’s move to the left is largely undisputed. The accident occurred due to Perez moving left, and Massa moving right.

    If one were to consider what would have happened if Perez stuck to the same line as Vettel in front of him, would there have been contact at all? My initial feeling is that there would be reduced risk of contact, but hard to say whether the risk would be removed at all.

    In the end, it doesn’t matter why Perez was moving over to the left, whether it be to have a look at Vettel, to defend against Massa, to get out of Vettel’s air and cool the brakes and engine a bit, or any other reason. It doesn’t even matter if they were in a braking zone or not. I don’t think it is unreasonable for Perez to defend his line, nor is it unreasonable for Perez to try and see if he can overtake Vettel. What I find unreasonable is that Perez moved over to the left, against the direction of the circuit and racing line, at a point where he was so close to another driver.

    Which brings me to my original questions. Did Perez know how close Massa was? Did Perez know that Massa was eager to try and pass him? In addition, did the team let Perez know that Massa was quick and likely to challenge? Did they let Perez know that Massa was gaining on him? Conversely, did Williams let Massa know that Perez had potential brake issues?

    It seems like Perez had no idea that Massa was so close, either because Massa got a better run out of the final corner or because the team a failed to let him know, and moved over either to defend into T1 or to have a look at Vettel. All in all I feel that the move to the left was ill-timed if it was either of the above.

    People need to keep in mind that these car are going in excess of 300km/h at that part of the circuit, and drivers cannot predict the actions of others. It is fair to say now that Massa should have left more room, but Massa was not aware that Perez would move slightly to the left. For me it feels like Massa’s decision move to the right happened a bit before, if not at the same time as Perez decided to move to the left. It is entirely possible that both actions happened at the same time and did not influence each other. If both drivers stayed true to the cure of the circuit, there would be no contact between them. For whatever reasons, Perez moved to the left (relative to the circuit), and Massa moved to the right (again, relative to the circuit).

    All up, racing incident for me. I am more interested to know why Perez was veering off the racing line, and if he knew how close Massa was at the time. In hindsight, it perhaps would have been a better move to move to the inside off of the S/F kink right after the start line, rather than stick to the racing line and move left.

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.