Group Admins

  • Profile picture of Keith Collantine

Group Mods

  • Profile picture of damonsmedley
  • Profile picture of Bradley Downton

F1

Public Group active 9 hours, 49 minutes ago

F1 discussion

Vettel, Webber and reliability at Red Bull

This topic contains 65 replies, has 23 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Juzh Juzh 9 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 66 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #241629
    Profile photo of Michael
    Michael
    Participant

    @Jon Sandor In any argument, when you attack the other person you are just calling into question your own arguments.

    #241630
    Profile photo of BasCB
    BasCB
    Participant

    First of all, a great thanks for the work put in to create this extensive detail of issues Red Bull have had in the last years @mnmracer!

    Please guys @freelittlebirds, @jonsan, just cut the bickering. Its no fun, you won’t convince each other and its just the kind of thing that shuts down discussion on forums all over the internet.

    I think from the data provided, its safe to conclude that its still very much true that Adrian Newey looks for the boundaries of what can be made, and the whole team is pushing the limits too which causes a relatively high amount of technical issues (and team glitches). But it also makes the cars blindingly quick more often than not, or at least enough to win championships.
    Last year, I would say the McLaren was faster. But the team pushed their luck with pitstop issues and mechanical failures and Red Bull won. Ferrari was the more reliable of the 3 top teams lately, but not quite as fast.

    As for a difference between the teammates Vettel vs. Webber, I do feel that the issues come up slightly differently and have different effects, possibly a result of different driving styles as well as Webber being bigger. Overall I see no ground to conclude that Red Bull provide Webber with less of a car than they do Vettel (apart from THAT wing in Silverstone), although the car at its peak performance fits his driving style a bit better.
    And there certainly is a difference in who most in the team favor to win (Marko being the clearest here), but Mark telling the world about being a second driver is as much about pushing himself up as it is about his real feel. If not, he would not have been at the team for 6 season.

    #241631
    Profile photo of Michael
    Michael
    Participant

    @BasCB – You are right, my sincere apologies to the rest of the forum

    #241632
    Profile photo of Paul
    Paul
    Participant

    What these “facts” dont show is how bad some of the problems were for the driver.
    Saying “vettel gearbox trouble” “webber gearbox trouble” doesnt show how bad either problem was or what lap these problems started, and they certainly dont show whether a problem caused a driver to lose 1 place or 7 for instance.
    Vettels gearbox problems in Monza were clearly not as bad for him as Webbers were today.

    Also, Malaysia 2013….
    Malaysia: Vettel is given a team order not to challenge Webber half-way through the race.
    Malaysia: Vettel is given a team order not to overtake Webber after the final pit stops.

    Surely the order being the same means its one issue? Really does feel like your stacking the cards

    #241633
    Profile photo of David-A
    David-A
    Participant

    @briggerz -

    @mnmracer already pointed out what he issue cost the driver e.g. Vettel retiring from the lead in Britain, Webber dropping a place last year in India. Both drivers had non-critical issues in Italy, and if it’s updated for today, Webber losing a possible 4th-5th would be noted.

    #241634
    Profile photo of Paul
    Paul
    Participant

    He did on a few, but the vast majority he didnt.
    “Canada: Vettel has gearbox issues during the race.”
    “Brazil: Webber struggles with high engine temperatures in the race.”
    Thats just two, theres plenty more like that too.

    #241635
    Profile photo of David-A
    David-A
    Participant

    @briggerz – Neither of those really cost the driver any positions though (Vettel wasn’t getting near the top three in Canada 2010, Webber wasn’t going to win Brazil 2010).

    #241636
    Profile photo of Paul
    Paul
    Participant

    Which is why i said theyre not fully explained what the outcome was.

    #241637
    Profile photo of Jon Sandor
    Jon Sandor
    Member

    What these “facts” dont show is how bad some of the problems were for the driver.

    That’s frequently unknown and unknowable. And those are actual facts, not “facts”.

    “Vettels gearbox problems in Monza were clearly not as bad for him as Webbers were today.”

    But who ever said they were “as bad”? Where a problem causes a retirement, that is noted in the list. In cases less serious than a mechanical DNF there is no way or determining the relative “badness”. Was Vettels gearbox issue in Monza less serious, more serious, or equally serious than Webbers in the same race? The Red Bull engineers probably know the answer but there’s no way we can.

    #241638
    Profile photo of Jon Sandor
    Jon Sandor
    Member

    “Canada: Vettel has gearbox issues during the race.”
    “Brazil: Webber struggles with high engine temperatures in the race.”
    Thats just two, theres plenty more like that too.

    And what would you have written instead?

    #241639
    Profile photo of Malik
    Malik
    Participant

    Impressive..
    But could we have the same topic regarding Ferrari for comparison?
    Ferrari in being bullet-proof has always been overlooked… And that has contributed much to consistency of Fernando Alonso…

    #241640
    Profile photo of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    FYI, I’ll update the article one of these days to include Singapore :)

    What these “facts” don’t show is how bad some of the problems were for the driver.

    I found the problem with that becoming that it makes things look worse to one driver or another, based on their performance.

    A great example is the race in Monza: both Vettel and Webber had the exact same gearbox problems, yet if we’d quantify the effect on positions, it would seem Webber’s problems were worse: he lost out on a chance for 2nd place, while Vettel held 1st place.

    Does that mean that Webber’s issues were worse? No, they were exactly the same. But because Webber was not performing to the maximum of the car, he did not have the buffer to deal with it.

    #241641
    Profile photo of Jon Sandor
    Jon Sandor
    Member

    But could we have the same topic regarding Ferrari for comparison?

    No. For most problems less than a mechanical DNF the main source of information is the radio communication with the drivers. And the radio transmissions between Alonso and his engineer are virtually never released for some reason. So it would be impossible to do a similar list for Ferrari.

    #241642
    Profile photo of alexx_88
    alexx_88
    Participant

    The results are pretty interesting, but it also shows that while for 2009 and 2010 Vettel’s car had more problems than Webber’s (by 30% and 260%), starting from 2011 and all the way until now, that trend has reversed into a 20%, 25% and 50% advantage for Vettel.

    My opinion is that this goes to show how the balance of powers shifted within RB during these years. It’s natural that in a resource-limited game, such is F1, you are going to have to make decisions about which driver gets more of your attention, that meaning a car suited to its liking and a better team of mechanics. It’s not a secret who these drivers are in the other teams, namely Alonso and Hamilton, so I don’t see a problem in recognizing that, after 2010, the one for RB was Vettel.

    #241643
    Profile photo of sato113
    sato113
    Participant

    base this on points lost rather than how many times each have retired or suffered

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 66 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.