2014 F1 season prediction

No prob, glad you enjoyed it, was a good bit of fun. :)

As for Vauxhall F1 Team, we may be going for a radical approach again with a completely new line-up (gotta get itright sometime).

Meanwhile,

Sauber F1 - Ferrari season preview
Well, this is one of the more difficult teams to predict fortunes for: On one hand, they have great infrastructure and capabilities; on the other, they are short of cash to use them. I can see Sauber as one of the teams that might get it wrong this year. Someone recently spoke about some teams being ready for 2014 while others will be comparatively totally unprepared. I have been wondering which teams fall into which group, though everyone is positive at this time of year.

You don't have to be Adrian Newey to figure out that Red Bull will be in the former group. As for those who don't have a clue, Lotus spring to mind. But maybe Sauber are another one; for if they didn't have a clue how to make a 2013 car (for much of the season), how much more might they struggle to nail these new tougher regs down. Generally, I find it easier to envisage Sauber struggling than being a great success - especially with the fairly uninspiring drier line-up.

On that front, Adrian Sutil is a decent choice, and I like him, but there are better drivers out there. At least he has wet weather skills, though sadly this will not be put to use as F1 doesn't run in the wet anymore. :mad: He doesn't seem like someone who will inspire and lead the team through hard times, given that he moaned about Force India last year. In that light, he can count himself fortunate to still have a drive.

Esteban Gutierrez struggled most of the time last year. It was a little unfair a he himself said he wasn't ready for F1 just yet. He was shoehorned in by the team to please the sponsors. I remember my second ever copy of Autosport; it wa the 1998 season review edition. In it, Martin Brundle ranked all 23 (including Jos) drivers (and he did it in his usual style - basically whoever won or was at the front got the highest places while those further back got lower places, seemingly without much thought that some drivers had much worse cars - though he did rank Takagi 12th!) Anyway, he said for Esteban Tuero "someone did this kid a great dis-service"... by putting him in an F1 car too early.

That's how I felt about Gutierrez. So perhaps it is very fair that he now gets a second chance. I for one, think he could mildly surprise and be quite a lot closer to Sutil than expected. I predict 0.4sec, but am hoping for 0.3, which it needs to be really if he is to progress.

Interestingly, sifting well between the lines shows that Esteban actually often showed very good pace compared to Hulkenberg last year, which implies a talent there, though it may also raise some questions about Hulkenberg. For example, when Nico scored that great 3rd place in qualifying at Monza, Gutierrez was about 0.5sec IIRC in Q1, yet started 17th from where he was in traffic, making it difficult to progress.

On the surface, all we saw was crashes (though he did so much less than some) and Q1 knockouts. But under that, there is enough to say he deserves another go. He should be a stronger this year, and certainly display more consistency, though if the car isn't good, outwardly results may not change. There were also two top 10 qualifying appearances, along with several points near-misses in the races - and don't forget, he has a fastest lap!

We also don't know how reliable Sauber wil be. They could even end up 9th in the WCC if they don't capitalise on enough opportunities.




Toro Rosso - Renault
The switch to Renault power could be an inspired choice for the Red Bull Jr team. Though the talk is of Mercedes having a power advantage, it could all turn out to be much more about driveability, fuel consumption, and reliability. We have not hear so much about these factors. It could possibly turn out that despite lacking pure grunt to Mercedes, Renault could actually be the best, or even dominant(?) overall engine in 2014.

I do not though, think that this guarantees that Toro Rosso are going to make a huge step. They do seem a lot more independent from the senior team than some might think, for in 2012, Ricciardo qualified, on average for all 20 2012 races, about +1.3sec behind Vettel.

In 2013, despite Ricciardo having more experience, the gap was probably a little larger to Vettel, more like 1.6 sec (I'm not totally sure). So it might not necessarily be that Toro Rosso are still effectively running a Red Bull clone, as I don't feel the junior drivers are really that much slower.

The gap opened out between Toro Rosso and Red Bull in 2013, so there's no reason for it not to a little again in 2014. Sadly, I don't see any reason to expect a huge leap, and therefore expect the same old to some extent, which is a shame since it makes it harder to get behind the team, though I do like them.

Jean-Eric Vergne is a driver under great pressure. Sebastien Buemi and Jaime Alguersuari know that Helmut Marko wants to see performance after 3 years - not just sufficient performance, but something remarkable and special. Vergne is now in year 3. And boy has that gone quickly. Simply put, he must deliver.

The good news is that he can do it. He really wowed with his Canada performance last year, having been abject there in 2012. He qualified 7th and finished 6th in the dry, and he did destroy Ricciardo on that occasion. I honestly thought it would be he who got the Red Bull drive, and I felt he showed more than Ricciardo, in that there was an extra spark.

So it was most disappointing to see his bad reaction when he failed to get the drive at Red Bull. He scored no more points, and hardly outqualified Ricciardo again, and actually ended up with less points than in 2012. This is a great concern, and JEV really needs to re-invent himself this winter. He really has to have a season like in my Grand Prix 2 one, scoring 4 top 6 finishes and banking lots of points. The pressure is totally on - if he does merely a good job, nothing better, he WILL be out at the end of the year, and who would take him on them? Time to mean business JEV.

As for Daniil Kvyat (I have spelt his name right I think), I don't know enough about him, but he seems handy, though I expect inconsistency with hopefully some promising performances, which he has to have really as this programme is brutal. I am not necessarily against his signing over Antonio Felix da Costa, since what the team is looking for is not someone who's necessarily ready, but someone who simply has raw talent and potential. This is actually fine with me, and I wish Kvyat the best (I like Russian drivers for some reason).



Ohgreat,myspacebar'sdiedonmeagain...

Grand Prix 2 Season Conclusions

And here finally is the qualifying and race performances I predicted for the drivers and entered into the game, which resulted in the season I had.

Qualifying
1.Hamilton
2.Vettel +0.08
3.Rosberg +0.10
4.Ricciardo +0.38
5.Alonso +0.60
6.Raikkonen +0.76
7.Button +1.10
8.Magnussen +1.32
9.Grosjean +1.67
10.Hulkenberg +1.74
11.Perez +1.85
12.Maldonado +1.90
13.Bottas +2.15
14.Massa +2.20
15.Sutil +2.33
16.Vergne +2.37
17.Gutierrez +2.74
18.Kvyat +2.78
19.Kobayashi +4.12
20.van der Garde +4.12
21.Bianchi +4.58
22.Chilton +5.06

Race
1.Vettel
2.Rosberg +0.10
3.Hamilton +0.10
4.Alonso +0.58
5.Ricciardo +0.63
6.Raikkonen +0.63
7.Button +1.17
8.Magnussen +1.54
9.Grosjean +1.67
10.Hulkenberg +1.74
11.Perez +2.02
12.Maldonado +2.04
13.Vergne +2.18
14.Bottas +2.27
15.Massa +2.35
16.Sutil +2.44
17.Kvyat +2.78
18.Gutierrez +2.82
Caterham and Marussia same as qual


I tried to be as realistic as possible and tried not to judge too much by the previous season (as Jens rightly pointed out is a common problem to which I'm no exception), and tried to keep feelings and desires for a close field out of it.

I made Ferrari 6 to 7 tenths off, which is not close. So it was great to see even with these 'realistic' figures, it all turned out very close between the top teams. The figures reveal my overall predictions for pace this year (though I may have modified them slightly now).


Limitations of the game
1.Pit stops have to be the old fashioned way, with refuelling.
2.No DRS, KERS, Pirelli or anything
3.Qualifying has to be a single 20min session as that best simulates what F1 has. The cars are on rails here and any longer in the session would result in no-one ever being out of position slightly, as doe happen in real life.
4.Has to be 16 races - dropped Singapore, Russia and Abu Dhabi
5.Has to be 26 cars, so I add HRT and Scorpion.
6.You can modify AI mistake rates for each track. But this does not discriminate between drivers and treats all equally. This means that Sebastian Vettel is as likely to mess up as Pastor Maldonado, which is not realistic.
7.I didn't prepare the season well and actually had China and Bahrain the wrong way round. Several races had the wrong number of laps. Some drivers used wrong helmets, Kvyat used Webber's for example and Kobayashi didn't have this.
8.I'm sure I'll notice more.



The season did help me get an idea of how things could finish, and I can use it as a base guide. Things went badly for Vettel this season while much went right for Ricciardo. It could easily have gone the other way though.

I did also put in realistic probabilities for retirements. There were no crazy races with 6 finishers or anything. On average there were about 6-7 retirements per race, which I think is realistic and not too much.


Review of the season, and maybe some lessons to learn
Red Bull
Vettel was the quickest driver, certainly in race trim. over the season. Both drivers suffered 3 mechanical retirements. But Vettel crashed out early at Austria and Spa, and also made big mistakes in Australia, finishing 5th when he should have won, and Monza. We cannot count on that many in real life. Even so, he finished a full 49pts down.

Ricciardo hit the ground running with 4 podiums, 2 poles and 2 wins in the opening 4 races, including pole on his debut at Melbourne. It was a Frentzen-99 like season in which things went his way, at least early on. He crashed out of Monaco on lap 2 having taken the lead from Hamilton off the line. Suffered mechanical failures in Austria, Belgium and USA while leading which ended his title hopes.

However, after the first 4 races (all podiums), Ricciardo only scored 3 more podiums, all 2nds, and didn't add to his early win tally.

Both drivers scored 3 poles each, and surprisingly outqualified each other 8-8! Vettel had 5 retirements (unrealistic I think), Ricciardo 4.


Mercedes
A real season of what if. Neither driver qualified lower than 5th, except for Rosberg 18th in Japan, in what was the best qualifying car due to the power advantage. It looked so good when Hamilton won the opening race, but another win in Malaysia was ruined by a backmarker in turn 2, causing Lewis to violently swipe into Vettel, ending Hamilton's race. Bizarrely, backmarkers also caused Hamilton to crash in both Bahrain, where he was challenging for a win (though prob would have been 2nd) and Monaco where he would have won. He did score two 3rds and a 4th between this though. He was then very unfortunate to suffer an engine blowout while fairly dominating Austria. The same thing happened in USA while leading. There was also running out of fuel at the last corner at Spa, having led the race by 100sec! All a case of what if.

It was the same for Rosberg, with more mechanical unreliability putting him out in Australia, Malaysia and 3 others, while also costing him a possible win in Austria. He crashed out of Japan and damaged his wing in Bahrain, much delaying him. Eventualy finishing just 55pts down, also what if.

Hamilton outqualified Rosberg 10-6. Hamilton scored 6 poles and 3 wins, Rosberg 3 poles and 2 wins. Hamilton retired 5 times, Rosberg 6.


Ferrari
A lack of pace meant the first half the season didn't look good for Ferrari, as their drivers struggled to make the podium. Their pace was again not great, as shown by a single pole all season for Alonso in Hungary. Amazingly they kept plugging away picking up the big points when Red Bull and Mercedes faltered, and ended up taking both titles by stealth. Tellingly, Alonso only suffered 1 retirement all year, 3 laps from the end in Canada. He made no race ending errors either. Raikkonen also retired just twice. It seems that reliability really is the key, as on pace Ferrari were mostly nowhere. Interesting.

I can't not mention the intra-team rivalry. I made Raikkonen slower than Alonso in qualifying but closer in the race. It was a great surprise then that it was in qualifying after 14 rounds that the Finn headed the Spaniard 10-4 (Alonso took the final two)! While it was in the races that Alonso took the spoils, with 3 wins and 10 podiums to Raikkonen's 2 wins and 4 total podiums.

Raikkonen outqualified Alonso 10-6. Alonso retired once, Raikkonen twice.


Lotus
Oh dear. Even though I anticipated Lotus taking a sizeable stepback, shown by me giving them only marginally better pace than Force India, the way this season turned out (only 7th in the WCC) was worse than that. Usually qualifying between 8th-13th, Grosjean only started in the top 10 7 times, peaking with 7th on the grid at Silverstone.

Surprisingly, Maldonado had the upper hand early on, starting 8th at Malaysia and China and 7th in Canada, outqualifying RoGro 4-3 in the first 7 races. But from then on, he only started ahead once, at Spa. And that was because Grosjean had an unrepresentative qualifying, in 17th, though Maldonado was a team season-highest 6th on the grid.

Grosjean also asserted himself more in races despite having more retirements. But for both, points were only in the lower end of the top 10, Grosjean's best being 6th in Malaysia, 7th in Monaco and 8th in Brazil. Maldonado did grab a good 6th in Canada and bagged that podium at Spa when everyone ran out of fuel. Despite that, Grosjean did eventually finish ahead on points (but only because of the double rule).

I had thought I was too harsh on Lotus, and resolved to upgrade them. Since then however, I have decided that this could be their real performance...

Grosjean outqualified Maldonado 11-5. Grosjean retired from 4 races, Maldonado 3.


McLaren
It was at least a definite improvement on 2013. Button qualified in the top 6 five times, including a great 3rd on the grid at Canada. He had the curious pattern of coming either 4th 6th or 7th in every race he finished; that was until he spoilt it by losing time in the US, coming 8th, when he could well have repeated the pattern. Still, it beat 2013. A black mark though for throwing away 2nd at Sepang in the closing stages.

I really don't know what to expect from Kevin Magnussen. How ready is he after only doing FRenault 3.5? He did not have a season of driving in practice like Bottas? I may have made him too strong, only 0.2 off Jenson in quali, and been taken in too much by the Hamilton talk maybe.

Magnussen started a sensational 6th on his debut in melbourne, and went even better by leading the first lap of the season. He never qualified that high again, but started 7th on no less than 9 occasions! He grabbed two good 4th places mid season follwing finishing 6th ahead of Button at Bahrain, a 5th in the USA and his day of days at Spa to win, following the crazy last lap fuel crisis. What's more, with scoring in the finale while Jenson retired, this all meant he actually scored more points than his team-mate. This is unlikely, especially as I created a fairly big gap between the drivers in race pace, but it goes to show what picking up the right results on the right days while your team-mate wasn't able to, plus the effect of the double points rule, can do.

Button and Magnuseen outqualified each other 8-8. Button retired 4 times, Magnussen 3.

Interesting thoughts about midfield teams. To me one of the main questions is if any of the "standard" midfield teams can impress with reg changes and do what Lotus did in 2012 - break clear of the midfield and become a remote front-runner.

If we are trying to predict the WCC positions of midfield teams, it is interesting to see that at least during the last 5 years (2009, since the last major reg overhaul) their positions have not fluctuated much. So something must change massively for any of them to dramatically change their fortunes now.

Force India - 6th, 7th, 6th, 7th, 9th.
Looking at their design team, I haven't heard about major changes (in the way for instance Lotus has collapsed), but they seem to have a solid and consistent base. Based on predictions most likely to pull above their and threaten top teams combined with the rumoured Mercedes engine advantage.

In my book Hülkenberg is certainly most likely to put in some inspiring results from the midfield, much like he did in 2012 and 2013 as long as the car is decent enough. But are these results just going to be „good upper midfield results“ like in early 2013 (i.e di Resta was fourth in Bahrain) or they can hit the ground running with new regs? As said, based on evidence so far, the design team doesn't give a notably different vibe compared to previous seasons. And after all, in the end all-around "package" counts, not so much if your engine has ~20hp more. In 1994 Ligier had Renault factory engines, yet were nowhere except at Hockenheim.

Sauber – 7th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 6th
They started the 2009-13 era as a BMW Sauber factory entry. They had a challenging transition to becoming a pure privateer coupled with financial issues, but their WCC positions haven't changed much. Their worst was 8th in 2010, when they had appalling reliability in early 2010 after switching to Ferrari engines and thus lost valuable points.

Like Lotus, the team seems to have some inherent engineering quality in the team despite loss of key people and financial struggles. I think their car can run pretty well occasionally, but I haven't seen any changes in the team that could possibly propel them to the very top though they did surprise in 2012, but were let down by both team operations (i.e strategy), pure unluck and driver inconsistency. This could hurt them again, even if the car is very fast.

Williams – 9th, 8th, 9th, 6th, 7th
Recent years have seen a gradual decline compared to where they started this era. Though the 8th in 2012 doesn't fully reflect their car, because as we remember it was very fast.

The new era is about to begin with mild optimism. New Mercedes engines. A change? In the past Williams has switched to Toyota (2007), Cosworth (2010) and Renault (2012) engines without a notable change in fortunes. Williams is a team, which is somewhat hard to predict considering their fluctuations during the last few years. They can be nowhere (2011, 2013) or have a pretty decent car (2012). However, it looks like regardless of this they are still going to be somewhere in the midfield – the question is whether in „lower“ or „upper“ midfield.

STR – 8th, 9th, 8th, 9th, 10th
Toro Rosso is a team that regardless of form fluctuations has always been in certain positions in WCC. In 2011 they had a pretty decent car, we remember Alguersuari getting a fair few 7th places in late 2011. In 2013 Ricciardo was qualifying into top 10 a lot, the hiring of chief designer James Key probably helped.

Yet regardless of whether the car is lower midfield or a strong midfielder, to me it is hard to see a significant change in WCC position fortunes. They are still a small brother of RBR and is likely to stay there. In addition to that I lost a lot of belief in Vergne during 2013 and even though he can impress at times (in the wet), he doesn't do it consistently. Kvyat could have some serious potential, but he is only 19 years old. When Vettel joined F1 and STR at the age of 19, he was actually getting outraced by Liuzzi for a portion of the year. I guess if STR is going to have a strong season, it is more likely to be in 2015, when Kvyat is already fully up to speed.

This has been the quality of these teams during the 2009-2013 regulation phase, consistently in places from 6th to 9th in WCC. The question is – what's gonna change? If anything at all?

If we compared them to previous breakthroughs, then before 2012 Lotus showed a lot of potential. They got two podiums in early 2011 and dropped backwards only after it became clear they had a flawed car design concept, which was difficult to develop. And they were getting podiums in 2010 as well.
Red Bull breakthrough in 2009 - they showed potential in 2008, when the Red Bull clone in Toro Rosso colours won a race at Monza.
Brawn/Honda - even if they didn't show much beforehand - had a huge budget before 2009 and a few inspiring signings in the personnel (i.e Brawn).

These current midfield teams have been "status quo" for five consecutive years already. None of them has a huge budget or a significant change in ownership and all leave an impression it could be the same ol' story in the new 2014 V6T regulation era as well. Only to be potentially joined by Lotus in midfield battles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveaki13

Gutierrez- Didn't rate him the first two thirds of 2013, but late season he picked up and I hope he can build on that. I would like to see him do well.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Esteban Gutierrez struggled most of the time last year. It was a little unfair a he himself said he wasn't ready for F1 just yet. He was shoehorned in by the team to please the sponsors. I remember my second ever copy of Autosport; it wa the 1998 season review edition. In it, Martin Brundle ranked all 23 (including Jos) drivers (and he did it in his usual style - basically whoever won or was at the front got the highest places while those further back got lower places, seemingly without much thought that some drivers had much worse cars - though he did rank Takagi 12th!) Anyway, he said for Esteban Tuero "someone did this kid a great dis-service"... by putting him in an F1 car too early.

---

I wanted to make one comment about Gutiérrez.

I have to say that he didn't impress me, not at all. Several people consider him to have "improved" late in the year, but in my mind it was very much down to the improvement in car. While Gutiérrez got a few Q3 slots, Hülkenberg was qualifying into top 6 on several occasions. And the point-score tells us: Hülkenberg - 51, Gutiérrez - 6. As we remember, most of Sauber's points were scored at the end of the year, when the car was good, so Esteban was beaten thoroughly in the latter stage of the year. In my book about as badly as Rosberg beat Nakajima in 2009 or Kubica Petrov in 2010.

However, I think Gutiérrez can improve in 2014 and if we are looking for a potential "surprise" in team-mate battles, it could be the Sauber one. However, I don't think Gutiérrez is a very good driver in the making and if Sutil struggles against him, it will be more about the German not performing at his best.

Rjbetty, it is interesting you mentioned Tuero and Takagi. Just recently I watched 1998 Australian GP qualifying results. Rookie drivers - Toranosuke Takagi in the Tyrrell-Ford 13th and Esteban Tuero in the Minardi-Ford 17th, both ahead of several big teams with famous drivers. Just mindblowing! I guess if there were Internet forums back in the day, both drivers would have been considered as future WDC-s based on that single session, which was their first ever Formula One race weekend! But as we remember, the reality turned out to be rather different...

Also, in the next few GP-s another (almost) rookie Alexander Wurz finished 4th on multiple occasions - also creating a basis or hype for him to be considered a future champion. So the 1998 era didn't only start with new regulations and new team 'order', but also some driver performances were out of ordinary compared to how we view these drivers from historical point of view. So maybe some drivers can perform "out of ordinary" in early 2014 as well, either due to a very good car or other reason? And hence create unrealistic expectations.

Imagine early 2014. For some reason Sauber has a rocketship off the line. Gutiérrez finishes on the podium, while Sutil still adapts and struggles. Internet forums go mad "omg Esteban on podium, where did that come from, he is a superstar!!" :p Only for half a year to pass, things to get back to normal and hype to die down.

Oh, just remembering - that's how Petrov started 2011...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Grand Prix 2 Season Conclusions

And here finally is the qualifying and race performances I predicted for the drivers and entered into the game, which resulted in the season I had.

Qualifying
1.Hamilton
2.Vettel +0.08
3.Rosberg +0.10
4.Ricciardo +0.38
5.Alonso +0.60
6.Raikkonen +0.76
7.Button +1.10
8.Magnussen +1.32
9.Grosjean +1.67
10.Hulkenberg +1.74
11.Perez +1.85
12.Maldonado +1.90
13.Bottas +2.15
14.Massa +2.20
15.Sutil +2.33
16.Vergne +2.37
17.Gutierrez +2.74
18.Kvyat +2.78
19.Kobayashi +4.12
20.van der Garde +4.12
21.Bianchi +4.58
22.Chilton +5.06

---

When I first looked at this data, 2007 sprung to my mind. Two or three teams above others and behind them a very tight midfield with Renault (here McLaren) slightly above the rest.

Regarding qualifying predictions - I think over a full season both Magnussen and Kvyat can perhaps even match/beat their team-mates, who are not known as quali specialists. But both Button and Vergne are likely to perform better in the race than in quali relative to their team-mates. However, it is still hard to rate particularly Magnussen and it is easy to get carried away with the hype - after all before him McLaren rated Pérez highly, or Jackie Stewart rated Kevin's dad Jan highly!

Alonso v Räikkönen is interesting. The quali speed of both drivers has been questioned. It will be interesting to see, how it pans out in reality. Also for years Ferrari has been designing cars, which are stronger in race trim than over a lap. Regardless of all the new regulations, I don't see evidence for this to change. So it could be an adequate view that over a full year Ferrari qualifies behind both Mercedes and Red Bull on average and has to make their way back on Sundays.

Bottas v Massa is also interesting, because for years Massa's forte has been quali rather than race. If Bottas can show well against Massa particularly on single-lap pace, it will reflect well on him.

Maldonado is an odd one. He was very and very fast in 2012 in qualifying. Also in late 2011 against Barrichello. But not so much in 2013. However, Grosjean has proved himself to be good over a single lap, compared to Räikkönen at least. On average Grosjean seems favourite, but not by a big margin and I think when we approach single race weekends, you never know, what is going to happen, because these drivers can be unpredictable.:)

Thank you for your interesting thoughts steveaki and jens.

Yeah I kinda agree about Gutierrez but I do like him. I remember the insider consensus around 2011 or so was that Gutierrez was good, but not quite as much as Perez. He does have potential to be a good but not great F1 driver, good enough to keep a place in F1.

There have been a lot of examples of drivers looking rather unconvincing in their first season, only to go on to be markedly stronger the next one. I can't think of any examples though...!

Just before I came on here, I was very encouraged to read this

http://www.planetf1.com/driver/18227/91 ... ting-mode-

The difference in his attitude compared to 12 months ago is marked. Last year, he seemed nervous, unprepared and unsure of himself - he said himself he didn't feel ready for F1 and It was indeed a difficult slog for him. But now, he is much more confident. His honest comments last year cause me to believe this isn't just swagger now and he is in a much better place this time round. Though he is no future WDC, if he is prepared, I think he can give Sutil something to think about in qualifying, and may impress here. His "reeeeeace peaace" (Coulthard) may still need a little work though. I predict that over the season, he will be 0.3sec behind Sutil, which would be quite good.

Kvyat and Magnussen are really hard to judge. With Kevin, I understand he hadn't actually driven the car that much, had a season of preparation? Therefore, it may be hard to see how he can be totally on Button's pace. If he has little experience of driving the car before the season, it will surely still take time to really get up to speed, which would result in an increased gap to Button. If he had done loads of testing, then I believe he can match and beat Jenson in quali. Whatever happens, I expect Jenson to pull ahead in races as that's his forte.

I don't know how good Kvyat is and how ready he is. Da Costa seemed more ready, but Toro Rosso have seemed to prefer someone who they felt had more raw potential even though the actual performance they are ready to deliver may be less for now. Vergne is still a good driver and is now in his 3rd year, so I don't know if Kvyat can match him for pace in his first season. I also don't know if Kvyat will be better in races or qualifying. Vergne has to get his act together and not be like Heidfeld in 2003 regarding Ricciardo when Kimi was doing well at McLaren. I have absolutely no doubt that a failure to shine, not just be sufficient, will result in Vergne's sacking at the end of the year. If that's the case, I can't see how he would continue in F1, so he simply must pull out all the stops and deal with the Ricciardo issues.

As for Maldonado, I gave him a gap behind Grosjean as I feel that he will be demotivated by the car probably not being a world beater, and the big step up he was hoping, especially if Williams improve when he's now gone. If he drives like 2012 then I say he would be close with Romain, but as it is, I can't see him giving his absolute best fighting for 10th-14th places if that's how it turns out. This will be more the case with Eric Bouiller gone. I feel Bouiller is underrated by fans, and if there was any chance of someone being able to nurture Maldonado, he would have been the one to do it. I don't think Gerard Lopez is the guy to invest a lot in him, meaning Maldonado will be rather on his own and be more likely to self-destruct than succeed.


Williams - Mercedes season preview
Well that was a bit of a shocker last year wasn't it? Few teams have fluctuated as much as Williams in recent years. But happily, it looks like that wherever they are in 2014, it should be a better season this time round. Bottas is more experienced and in Massa they have someone who may not be the best or at his best, but in absolute terms can still perform at a reasonable level - the worst case scenario being about the same level as Sutil I think.

I gave Bottas only slightly more performance in races compared to Massa in the game, as I noticed that though Valtteri outqualified Maldonado 12-7 last year, Pastor was generally equal or a bit better in races (and Pastor is himself more of a qualifying specialist). My early impression is that Bottas is a qualifying specialist. Consider he should really have started 5th at Austin last year, and his eventual 8th place would actually be a drop down (even though it was an incredible result). So even though the gap I gave from Massa in races isn't too much, it was still a little more than in qualifying.

Based on historical examples, I feel Felipe will take more of a steady backseat role while Bottas puts in the headline performances, rather than Massa being rejuvenated and doing brilliantly. Especially since that despite his experience, Massa is the newcomer settling in and getting used to things.

Good news as Pat Symonds has joined. He recently said that the new Williams is a definite improvement aerodynamically over the 2013 car. So it's looking pretty good. Also factor in that at least one team is expected to drop back (Lotus) and one or two others could struggle, and suddenly there is a good chance that Williams could really be in the hunt for 6th in the WCC. Actually, if the car is really that decent, the drivers should be good enough that they may give fellow Mercedes engined team Force India a good run for their money. But I am more cautious than this, though Williams may be one to spring a mild surprise again this year, even if they don't quite reach 2012 levels.

I wondered if the differences we have seen in the cars designs thus far would have much of an impact on the performances of the cars and thus predictions.

We seem to have such a difference in styles and appearances. So far no two have been the same. However as Jens mentioned earlier the last time we have such differences between cars was 2009 and yet from 1st - 20th was probably the smallest time gap in F1 history.

I suppose more of the difference this year will be the engines. Afterall the engine makers may have quite different approaches to the Turbo's.

I think the two things combined may actually make the time gaps extend this season. We will see I suppose.

Yah, I'm sure the time gaps will increase over the season.

But I keep forgetting that the blown diffuser stuff is basically gone. This seemed to be the main culprit in ruining the 2011 and 2013 seasons, creating big gaps between the haves and have-nots. It's no co-incidence that 2012 was the closest season ever (top 15 within 1 sec on average over the season!) - that was the year the blown diffuser was banned, though it's effects were able to be replicated causing the team who mastered it to open out a big gap, and others to fall behind as they struggled to understand the concept (Williams).

But with it gone again, this should in theory cause gaps to close, but it depends on everything else. Maybe the start of the season could actually be very close, but I am certain, as people are saying, that there will be a development war like never seen. Though happily, it seems there may not be able to be huge differences (or any difference) between works and customer engines, the integration of those engines with the works' chassis will certainly open out a gap for the top teams as the season unfolds.

Also, exhaust blowing was known to be a cornerstone of Sebastian Vettel's success and performance in recent years. How will he now do without it? Maybe this could bring Ricciardo closer as it did Webber. But then again, Seb will now be stronger than in 2012, and I am thinking that while one door has now been closed, another 10 windows might open!

Consider that Mark Hughes in particular explained that it wasn't that the exhaust blowing just happened to fall into Seb's way of driving; but it was Vettel who diligently applied himself and learned and adapted his driving to the exhaust blowing. This could mean that whatever new challenges are ahead, Vettel will simply just master these new ones better than anyone else instead, and this would replace the advantage he had (worked for) through exhaust blowing.

It was Peter Sauber who said a few years ago that Vettel was brighter more than even Alonso, in the way he can apply himself to things. He seems to actually be the best out there. A few other people have recently said these new rules will suit Sebastian to the ground. Could be ominous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

As for Maldonado, I gave him a gap behind Grosjean as I feel that he will be demotivated by the car probably not being a world beater, and the big step up he was hoping, especially if Williams improve when he's now gone. If he drives like 2012 then I say he would be close with Romain, but as it is, I can't see him giving his absolute best fighting for 10th-14th places if that's how it turns out. This will be more the case with Eric Bouiller gone. I feel Bouiller is underrated by fans, and if there was any chance of someone being able to nurture Maldonado, he would have been the one to do it. I don't think Gerard Lopez is the guy to invest a lot in him, meaning Maldonado will be rather on his own and be more likely to self-destruct than succeed.

---

The problem I see here is that you analyze the battle only from Maldonado aspect.

But let's take another look. Maldonado has already been used to driving crap cars (2011, 2013). Grosjean became very consistent and impressive in late 2013 in a fast car, but it is yet to be seen, how does he react if the car is rubbish. Because the Lotus of 2012-13 have been good. Perhaps Grosjean could be a bit like Button, who sort of disappears, when the car is not to his liking/good? After all, Grosjean was struggling pretty much in early 2013 too, when there was something about the car he wasn't comfortable about. Also Boullier has left, who was a bit of a mentor to Grosjean, so it is yet to be seen, how does it affect him.

Remember, how clearly Button beat Barrichello in Honda in 2006, everyone thought Barrichello was past his prime. Yet in the first half of 2007 in a rubbish car Barrichello suddenly had an upper hand.

Now I have to say I have not seen enough of Maldonado or Grosjean to draw certain conclusions, how comfortable would each driver feel in certain cars. But these have been things I have been pondering about.

Maldonado demotivated in a bad car? How about Grosjean, who got used to a regular-podium car in late 2013 only to drive a dog of a car around the tracks the very next year? When it comes to motivation, I don't see Grosjean having an 'advantage' so-to-speak in this battle. Motivation is a very interesting aspect to analyze about a driver. Usually unmotivation arises, when a person feels that he can't keep going in the same way and needs a change for the future. And if the car is rubbish and team finances still not sorted out, then sure enough - BOTH drivers would at least feel unmotivated at Lotus and would be looking for a new team.

Heck, now that I think about it, Maldonado could possibly have even more motivation. After all, he would still be new to the team and would firstly have to learn about the team and hope that perhaps things work out even if it is bad right now. After all, everything new (also a new team) is at least a little bit exciting, because it is a new experience. However, Grosjean has seen much better days at Lotus and it would be pretty devastating for him. Not so much for Maldo, who has seen it all at the lower midfield. Williams beating Lotus could hurt him - or spur him to fight more aggressively against them to prove his decision to leave was right.

Of course a young up-and-coming youngster would feel motivated in a bad car too, because he is still a nobody with a lot to prove - he has a different perspective. But I feel neither Maldonado nor Grosjean are now in such stage in their careers, where they have anything to prove in the middle or back-end of the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steveaki13

I wondered if the differences we have seen in the cars designs thus far would have much of an impact on the performances of the cars and thus predictions.

We seem to have such a difference in styles and appearances. So far no two have been the same. However as Jens mentioned earlier the last time we have such differences between cars was 2009 and yet from 1st - 20th was probably the smallest time gap in F1 history.

I suppose more of the difference this year will be the engines. Afterall the engine makers may have quite different approaches to the Turbo's.

I think the two things combined may actually make the time gaps extend this season. We will see I suppose.

---

Having touched this matter before, I have reached a conclusion that the difference in "time gaps" is related to depth of teams themselves, not regulation changes. Let's recall 1992, 1996, 2002, 2011. Of course almost every year there are at least some rule changes, but before those seasons there wasn't really anything radical. Yet we saw a team or a handful of teams finding new avenues in car development, which enabled to pull them very clear of the rest of the field, resulting in big gaps.

So what kind of effect does the rule change have? I have concluded that while the depth of the engineering of a team will always be the main factor, it can influence particularly the first half of the season and highlight, who has been better prepared for the season. Because inherently rules can suit some teams better than others. But the advantage is short-lived, because all teams are professional enough to fight back - just for some it may take more time to cut through the initial difficulties.

Let's take 1994. Williams was perhaps the most complete team in engineering depth at the time, but they weren't very comfortable to start the season, because for the team rule changes were most radical. Because their car was most innovative in 1993, so for them the changes of abandoning all the high-tech stuff had deepest influence. Of course they still came back, improved and won WCC in the end. Of course the car was never bad, otherwise Senna couldn't have taken pole positions. But it didn't have the dominant edge of 1993, where they could lap 2s per lap faster than anybody else.

I think McLaren-Mercedes was always going to be a top team based on how they were coming along in late 1990s regardless of rule changes. However, what the 1998 changes gave for them was an opportunity to be not only "one of the top teams", but be well above in the initial phase of the season, lapping everyone in Australia. Also helped by Bridgestone a lot, who adapted very well to grooved tyres. However, the gaps closed. Other companies are competent too and once they develop through the initial challenges, they will be up there. Ferrari was competing with McLaren late in the season.

So what could 2014 give? For half a season someone could have an advantage, who for some reason has had a better preparation platform for new regulations. Based on rumours it could be Mercedes. Renault and Ferrari are of course competent enough and based on evidence so far Renault turbo could have some important strengths. But it could take just a little time, before they can maximize on their strengths and potential properly. Just like we saw in 1994 and 1998. So for half a year Mercedes-powered teams could enjoy a relative advantage.

Just a guess. It could be the other way around. Fuel-saving is so important that the fuel efficient Renault has an advantage for half a year before others catch up. Or there is something about chassis development that some teams could find easier to deal with early in the season. We'll find out.

Great post Jens, I'd just like to add that with the regulations changing from 8 to 5 engines and gearboxes having to last 6 races(without penalty), as well as all the new elements affecting the power output, reliability is going to be a huge issue. Lauda, and Allison touched on this subject in the following link.
http://www.wheels24.co.za/FormulaOne/La ... y-20140126
I think we are going to be in for a very interesting season, at least I hope.

The most important thing about the Sauber is that none of the stickers on the car and neither of the drivers are Russian. It looks like that deal has died a quiet death. I think Sauber will be racing against bankruptcy this season, if they also manage to race some midfield teams we should consider that a special bonus.

As for Grosjean vs Maldonaldo, the French/Swiss will crush the Venezuelan. Grosjean has improved his approach to racing with the help of a sports psychotherapist and has shown keenness to learn from his mistakes and improve. He has done so. Maldonaldo on the other hand is never at fault, the problem is always with the other driver/his team/stewards etc. There is no willingness to accept that he is less than perfect and therefore no ability to improve.

As for Maldonaldo's ability to drive poor cars, he showed what he is capable of last year being outdriven by a rookie. Grosjean will have to plumb some depths to fall that low.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

The most important thing about the Sauber is that none of the stickers on the car and neither of the drivers are Russian. It looks like that deal has died a quiet death. I think Sauber will be racing against bankruptcy this season, if they also manage to race some midfield teams we should consider that a special bonus.

---

Sirotkin is a named test driver so I think there is still some Russian influence in the team.

Sauber would be up sh1t creek without the Mexicans though, almost all their larger sponsors are from there. Expect to see Medion and VDGs sponsors on the car at some point though.

I think the point about regs and reliability could well have a big influence. Turbo's were of course notoriously unreliable back in the days, but in reality these days it won't be quite as much of an issue.

I mean I remember Martin Brundle saying when he drove for Tyrell he would start 18th-22nd behind every Turbo Car and by half distance in some races was in the top 6 as the Turbo's all blew.

If that were the case this season and with only 5 engines, the last 3 races of the season would see only 1 or 2 cars running without penalties. :laugh:

But as I say, these days it shouldn't be the same. That said, with more unreliability than the last few seasons, low fuel levels and a chaotic order perhaps in the first races we could see a few races with a low number of finishers.

All in all I am really looking forward to this season. Well until Seb wins in Oz by lapping the field. ;)

Going to quickly get my short predictions in just before the green line goes on for the start of testing.

Mercedes
A close season between Red Bull and Mercedes, but the Silver Arrows edge both championships, with Hamilton taking his second crown… just. Hamilton and Rosberg are close all year but Rosberg gets the bad luck of the team, allowing Hamilton to be #1 in the run up to the finale.

Red Bull
As said before, very close all year between the Red Bulls and Mercedes, but Vettel's car finally gets the bad luck with the car that MW had the past few seasons, which allow Mercedes to get the edge. Ricciardo has good performances and is closer to Vettel at points than expected, but consistency/experience means Vettel still has a clear advantage over him over the season.

Ferrari
A fast car and not far off the top two, but let down by being a little down in horsepower, which in a very close season, is enough to see them in third. Alonso wins in Monaco, and spurred on by inter-team rivalry, outscores the Finn over the season. The two have some very close encounters where body work comes off, with a slanging match over the radio and post-race ensuing.

McLaren
A better car than last year, which isn't hard, but just down on the pace over the top three. They'll return to the podium this year, but not quite enough to return to the top step. Button and Magnussen quality near each other all season, with Button having the more points in the first half, but Magnussen putting in better weekend performances in the second half. They finish close together with Button just ahead, but paddock is impressed with Magnussen and hope he can build on a solid (not spectacular) first season.

Force India
Hulkenberg finally makes the right move as Sauber languish towards the back, and Lotus' troubles continue (more on that later). Although the top four are a clear top four, Force India finish in 5th thanks to a couple of podiums due to reliability and generally good drives from Perez and Hulkenberg who both shine and mix it with the McLarens at time at particular circuits. While Perez gets his mojo back at times, Hulkenberg shines brightest, and everyone is still bemused when he still doesn't get snapped up by the big four.

Williams
Williams return to the points on a more regular basis than last year (again... not hard) thanks to a consistent but not spectacular car. Massa and Bottas are close all year alternating most weekends. Massa gets a podium at some point thanks to a crazy race, and the little Brazilian couldn't look any happier.

Toro Rosso
Another season of the same for STR as they show promise at times but mostly go out slap bang in the middle of Q2, except for the odd race where they show no pace, and Kyvat goes out in Q1, then the races where they seemingly pull it out of the bag, and Kyvat squeezes into Q3. Kyvat outscores Vergne despite being up and down all year.

Lotus
Money, money, money... or lack of it dogs the Lotus boys all year. The car is unreliable and a pig to drive, and they're always playing catch up, with a B-spec car talked about but never quite emerging. Maldonado has a horror of a year running into other cars, and looks a picture of frustration and uninterest all season. Grosjean easily performs better, but struggles with the car, and his late-2013 form is forgotten, causing frustration to settle in a couple of times.

Sauber
The car struggles from Day 1, and despite topping a test session, it's a bluff and the car is slow and down on power. Sutil outperforms Guttierez all season, and picks up a few points, but a disaster of a season. Sirotkin is talked about mid-season replacing Sutil but never quite happens as the team struggle with money.

Marussia
Marussia scores two points!! A chaotic race with a large number of retirees, allow Bianchi to take a 9th place early in the season. Chilton is nowhere. The car is better than the Caterham but still off the rest of the field, but Bianchi gets something out of the car and looks impressive in the races.

Caterham
Caterham finish last again and the talk of a takeover emerges around mid-season. Kobayashi outperforms Ericsson who has a couple of good drives in his debut season, but being at the back with the Marussias, it doesn't impress as everyone's eyes are on Bianchi.

Interesting thoughts everyone, and great review minardi! But are you sure you're a rookie and not a previous user under another name? ;)

Caterham - Renault Season Preview
Well, it's now year 5 of the 5 year plan, and though obviously wins aren't going to happen, or even being IN the midfield, the team MUST at least be within reasonable distance (maximum 1.0 sec) from the established teams this time, in order to be close enough to take advantage and get stuck in with them at least some of the time.

The bosses have been saying it's been pretty much all about 2014 for some time, even to the point of compromising their previous two(!) seasons. So with all that preparation, they simply must deliver, and at minimum beat Marussia. Failure to do even that could spell the end.

I am a bit sceptical, having been certain the team would open their points account in 2012, but quietly am hugely hopeful. If the best case scenario comes true, I don't see it that Caterham will be like 8th in the championship (still 10th whatever happens), but I do see they could mix it with Saubers, Toro Rossos, even a struggling Lotus or two, and Kobayashi could make several Q2 appearances.

I am being cautious though as I don't want to be disappointed, and will predict Kobayashi averaging about 1.0-1.5 sec behind the nearest older team car (Gutierrez or Kvyat).

In any case, I fear wherever Caterham or Marussia start the season, they will be hugely outdeveloped over the season like never before, and the gap to the front will grow to a gulf. But maybe the gap to the back established teams may not grow so much, but it seems early season, where unreliability and unpredictability is expected to be greatest, is the time when the backmarkers must capitalise.

Whether Kobayashi is the driver to do that remains to be seen. This is a guy, who the simple fact is, did scrape a single 3rd place in what was a race winning car in 2012. I still don't quite understand the hype around this guy (he's good, but maybe about 15 drivers or so are better I'd say) and why so many people seem to think he should be fast-tracked into a Ferrari AHEAD OF NICO HULKENBERG?! Really?

And we don't know how rusty he is. I don't know how professional he is. Whatever the truth was in 2012, we know he is not BETTER than Perez, the best case scenario is equal, but the truth was Sergio had at least an edge on him in every department except overtaking (and perception with fans!) - and this isn't taking account that Perez was only in his 2nd year and was further back on his development curve. I could be wrong and be missing something, but for the moment I cannot see it.

Even so, he is still a good driver. But will he be able to return and perform to his same level like Sutil did, or more like Verstappen in 2003? Hopefully, he will use his experience and apply himself well, because if not, I would say even a sophomore van der Garde would have been a better choice (as my Grand Prix 2 season showed, even though I made them equal). I hope to see some giant killing performances, but having scraped one podium to Checo's 3 in a car that should have won races - and spent much of the season being invisible, I hope he's the driver to make the best use of any rare opportunities for Caterham.

I don't know how good Marcus Ericsson is, but his record pre-GP2 looks good. A few think he underperformed in GP2, in which case he may do pretty well. Shouldn't do too badly in any case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Interesting thoughts everyone, and great review minardi! But are you sure you're a rookie and not a previous user under another name? ;)

---

Cheers! Haha I'm 100% sure. Been reading these boards on/off for ages, but actually got round to joining and throwing my two cents in.

I was reading an article on Autosport.com, written by Gary Anderson.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112329

Suddenly I remembered something from this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

But there are people who know what they're talking about, and I think it's maybe learning which people's opinions to give more weight to and who's to take with a pinch of salt.

Gary Anderson seems to be a very smart guy. He was the one who, having watched the 2013 cars testing, called out the Red Bull as having "10% more downforce". He also insisted to watch out for Mercedes when I didn't have much hopes for them.

---

And to bring out the first pre-season impression, Gary said the following:

If you had to pick one team to be in charge of based on where it is so far, which would it be?

Red Bull. The car only did three laps, but that's about reliability and functionality and it will improve. But the RB10 looks a very logical, well-designed car.

So, rjbetty, what is your verdict? Does Gary once again know, what he is talking about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Whether Kobayashi is the driver to do that remains to be seen. This is a guy, who the simple fact is, did scrape a single 3rd place in what was a race winning car in 2012. I still don't quite understand the hype around this guy (he's good, but maybe about 15 drivers or so are better I'd say) and why so many people seem to think he should be fast-tracked into a Ferrari AHEAD OF NICO HULKENBERG?! Really?

---

I've read your posts on Kobayashi filled with vitriol and its clear to me why you don't rate him, you manage to dismiss the way in which he outqualified Perez pretty comprehensively, are unable to understand how Perez being on a desperate alternate tyre strategy due to failure to qualify well reaped rewards nor see how Kobayashi was plain unlucky to miss out on many good points finishes often due to Grosjean. I'm sure you're aware as you appear to follow Sauber closely that Kobayashi often had his tyre strategy requests turned down by the team in favour of Perez, after all the Swiss had his sponsors to please and the team wanted to split strategies to reduce risk.

Time to take a step back and tone down your dislike isn't it?

Nor do I see the 'hype' you mention. He's a very good midfield driver able to execute strategies very well and IMO deserves a seat in F1. Whether Caterham is the appropriate springboard is another matter, he will be expected to beat Eriksson so that achievement will be taken for granted, yet will find it difficult to score points like every Caterham driver before him. Impressing better teams is very unlikely.

Kobayashi had some hype around him two or three years ago, and certainly after his debut at Toyota. But it has died down by now. Currently he is viewed as merely an adequate midfield driver, who would be a competent addition to the grid.

And in comparison to Hülkenberg, times have changed. I have to say in my view Kobayashi had a more impressive season than Hülkenberg back in 2010. But Kobayashi has sort of plateaud since then, while Nico H. has very much improved. I don't think "people" would take Koba over Hulk any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

There have been a lot of examples of drivers looking rather unconvincing in their first season, only to go on to be markedly stronger the next one. I can't think of any examples though...!

---

Nick Heidfeld, 2000-2001. :)

Amazing what an unexpectedly good car can do for your confidence.

Possibly Eddie Irvine 1994-1995 too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Whether Kobayashi is the driver to do that remains to be seen. This is a guy, who the simple fact is, did scrape a single 3rd place in what was a race winning car in 2012. I still don't quite understand the hype around this guy (he's good, but maybe about 15 drivers or so are better I'd say) and why so many people seem to think he should be fast-tracked into a Ferrari AHEAD OF NICO HULKENBERG?! Really?

---

I've read your posts on Kobayashi filled with vitriol and its clear to me why you don't rate him, you manage to dismiss the way in which he outqualified Perez pretty comprehensively, are unable to understand how Perez being on a desperate alternate tyre strategy due to failure to qualify well reaped rewards nor see how Kobayashi was plain unlucky to miss out on many good points finishes often due to Grosjean. I'm sure you're aware as you appear to follow Sauber closely that Kobayashi often had his tyre strategy requests turned down by the team in favour of Perez, after all the Swiss had his sponsors to please and the team wanted to split strategies to reduce risk.

Time to take a step back and tone down your dislike isn't it?

Nor do I see the 'hype' you mention. He's a very good midfield driver able to execute strategies very well and IMO deserves a seat in F1. Whether Caterham is the appropriate springboard is another matter, he will be expected to beat Eriksson so that achievement will be taken for granted, yet will find it difficult to score points like every Caterham driver before him. Impressing better teams is very unlikely.

---

It's not really dislike and vitriol! I do actually like him and I say this and that he's good. I'm sorry that it's come across that way and I guess that's my fault. And I would say if there is one driver I could be wrong about, it's him.

this post is to clarify that the tone wasn't really meant the way it came across, and that I don't think he sucks. It's not that I'm trying to pull him down! It's that I feel things are a bit out of balance so I am using counter-arguments to try to show the other side too.

In 2012, he was pretty evenly matched with his team-mate in qualifying, and got the highest grid slot (2nd at Spa), but then Perez was denied pole at Silverstone. Kobayashi did outqualify Perez in 2011, but to be fair it was the 21yr old Mexican's first season, and my understanding is it normally takes a few seasons to really learn how to do well in F1. It wouldn't be right for me to say Ralf Schumacher was better than Jenson Button because he outqualified him by 0.504sec in his first season and just leave it at that.

I should have said that Kobayashi did suffer from misfortune especially in 2012, but then so also did Sergio: What could Perez have done at Barcelona having been Grosjeaned? At Silverstone, he was on course to finish ahead of his team-mate before being Maldonadoed - what could he have done if he had started from pole? Perez was also robbed of 6th in Melbourne on the last lap, having started last. But I have wondered that if Sergio made the tyre strategy work so well, couldn't Kamui have done it at least once?

I only say these things because I feel things are out of balance. It's like when Bobby Rahal said about Montoya "I think... he is the kind of driver you only get once every two generations" or something like that. Montoya was very good, but for goodness sake that was a bit much I think. I think this sort of thing is unfair on drivers who have earned the right to be regarded well, that someone should just be fast-tracked ahead of better drivers simply because he's exciting and spectacular (those are great things btw).

I feel the same when a lot of people say Chandhok is better than Bruno Senna. The facts say otherwise I'm afraid i.e. 7-3 qualifying to Bruno. I like Karun's personality too, but for me, it contributes nothing to his actual driving ability. It comes down to me feeling it's not very fair I guess.

To make it plain, I currently rate these 2014 drivers ahead. But I feel Kamui is already pretty equal with some and has more scope to improve, so can move up, overtaking Sutil and Massa. Though this doesn't include where Bianchi, Vergne and Magnussen may end up, if they improve.

In (sort of) no particular order:
1.Vettel
2.Alonso
3.Hamilton
4.Raikkonen
5.Rosberg
6.Hulkenberg
7.Button
8.Grosjean
9.Ricciardo
10.Bottas
11.Sutil
12.Perez
13.Massa
14.Kobayashi

I just get frustrated in particular that there is a feeling he should get a Ferrari drive ahead of Hulkenberg, as to me that seems very unfair; when he's regarded as top material when I haven't seen evidence of that, just of him being around where I've put him, just one amongst other very good drivers who in the right circumstances are capable of great things. I'll say again I think he will overhaul Massa and Sutil at some point.

The tyre strategies being turned down in favour of Perez is news to me though. Now that is something to think about. If Kobayashi can shine at Caterham and show what he's capable of, I'll be happy to make some revisions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

Kobayashi had some hype around him two or three years ago, and certainly after his debut at Toyota. But it has died down by now. Currently he is viewed as merely an adequate midfield driver, who would be a competent addition to the grid.

And in comparison to Hülkenberg, times have changed. I have to say in my view Kobayashi had a more impressive season than Hülkenberg back in 2010. But Kobayashi has sort of plateaud since then, while Nico H. has very much improved. I don't think "people" would take Koba over Hulk any more.

---

Now this is a very good point actually. The Brazilian GP 2009 was actually the first race I watched in exactly 2 years(!) and I saw what this guy did, getting Jenson upset when he was doing nothing wrong - just racing! I remember feeling it was pretty harsh when John Howett said his actual pace was a bit disappointing, or something like that. He came a good 10th when lots of good drivers finished. I didn't watch Abu Dhabi but to see he came 6th ahead of Trulli in his second race, now that was impressive.

I remember at the time noticing Kobayashi scored more points in an unreliable Sauber than Hulkenberg did in the Williams in 2010. He also matched Pedro de la Rosa (more of a qualifier than a racer) for pace.

Maybe that's the sort of driver who should get a better drive.




So why did he seem to fade? Because I think early 2011 was again very impressive? Does anybody have more about the true story of Kobayashi's 2012? Because the way I saw it, it was a season with high points. The only problem was, almost every driver had highs too, and it just seemed that Kamui was a bit lost and invisible a bit too much amongst other's high points. But there is room to revise this perception. Let's see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

In 2012, he was pretty evenly matched with his team-mate in qualifying, and got the highest grid slot (2nd at Spa), but then Perez was denied pole at Silverstone.

---

Its extraordinary comments like this that I do not understand.

You claim Perez was denied pole at Silverstone. How so? He was fastest at one point during Q2. That doesn't make pole I'm afraid although I do agree that both Sauber drivers were looking at very good qualifying positions if the team had made the right call. But denied pole, really? I was under the mistaken impression that you had to make it to Q3 first to stand any chance of getting pole. Perez didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Kobayashi did outqualify Perez in 2011, but to be fair it was the 21yr old Mexican's first season,

---

And through most of 2012 too. You fail to mention that Perez had to try odd tyre strategies because he had failed to qualify adequately and had to make the most out of being out of position in a quick car at the back of the grid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

But I have wondered that if Sergio made the tyre strategy work so well, couldn't Kamui have done it at least once?

---

You realise that Kamui's tyre calls were often overruled right?

Also lets flip that around. At Suzuka Kamui qualified well, raced well and finished well. That is a good old fashioned race weekend performance. Name a single time Perez managed the same? He never managed to string a good quali and race together did he.

Anyway it seems you have a problem with the way he is described by other posters rather than the guy himself, I wouldn't get bothered by that so much...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

So why did he seem to fade? Because I think early 2011 was again very impressive? Does anybody have more about the true story of Kobayashi's 2012? Because the way I saw it, it was a season with high points. The only problem was, almost every driver had highs too, and it just seemed that Kamui was a bit lost and invisible a bit too much amongst other's high points. But there is room to revise this perception. Let's see.

---

Kobayashi had several good chances over 2012, qualifying third in China and second in Spa. Problem was that in the first race he had to start on an oil patch from an earlier race, had wheelspin and dropped back while at Spa the entire right side of his car was damaged thanks to the huge accident started by Grosjean. In Sepang he complained through FP3 and quali that something was broken at the back of his car, his team disagreed until they found a broken suspension component. Although that was fixed for the race his setup was then completely off and a tyre change call he made during the race was overruled. Again without those issues how would he have done on a day when the Sauber did have the pace to win? Who knows?

He actually did extremely well in his consistent way over 2012, almost matching his teammate Perez who had scored almost all of his points in just four or five races. Kobayashi just had consistent but low end points finishes through the season. Had he been luckier in China or Spa (or both) he would have looked a lot better and caught the eye more. Then he finished the season with his performance at Suzuka, a difficult track to perform well on. Unfortunately though with his lack of sponsorship he wasn't going to survive on merely matching his sponsor-laden teammate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

So why did he seem to fade? Because I think early 2011 was again very impressive? Does anybody have more about the true story of Kobayashi's 2012? Because the way I saw it, it was a season with high points. The only problem was, almost every driver had highs too, and it just seemed that Kamui was a bit lost and invisible a bit too much amongst other's high points. But there is room to revise this perception. Let's see.

---

Kobayashi had several good chances over 2012, qualifying third in China and second in Spa. Problem was that in the first race he had to start on an oil patch from an earlier race, had wheelspin and dropped back while at Spa the entire right side of his car was damaged thanks to the huge accident started by Grosjean. In Sepang he complained through FP3 and quali that something was broken at the back of his car, his team disagreed until they found a broken suspension component. Although that was fixed for the race his setup was then completely off and a tyre change call he made during the race was overruled. Again without those issues how would he have done on a day when the Sauber did have the pace to win? Who knows?

He actually did extremely well in his consistent way over 2012, almost matching his teammate Perez who had scored almost all of his points in just four or five races. Kobayashi just had consistent but low end points finishes through the season. Had he been luckier in China or Spa (or both) he would have looked a lot better and caught the eye more. Then he finished the season with his performance at Suzuka, a difficult track to perform well on. Unfortunately though with his lack of sponsorship he wasn't going to survive on merely matching his sponsor-laden teammate.

---

Ok. Hopefully if he is capable of better than 2012 may have appeared, he can have a chance to show it. I also have concerns about what at the time I saw was a slightly Fisi-esque shrinking back when his team-mate appeared to be doing strongly. I hope this is wrong, but it's an impression I got. Koba is on the back foot having missed out on a season, but I am hoping to see a hard-trying plucky attitude like Kovalainen in 2010-11. I don't really follow Sauber that closely but I do take a real interest in Caterham so I'll keep an eye out. We'll see.

As for Perez, well he didn't manage to replicate any of his podium drives at last year, and in 2012, no I don't think he put a whole weekend together but I would have liked to see what he could have done in Spain. His Melbourne race was pretty good I thought.


Some more thoughts for the season
As Jens said, I had only considered the Lotus position for Maldonado. I had expressed faith in Grosjean being able to overcome wht now seems like inevitable disappointment as his hopes for a soon win may be put off for at least the time being. But this was when Eric Bouiller was still there. Now he's gone, that changes the situation, and now it's that much harder to see Grosjean being strong. But even so, he has still shown more evidence than Maldonado of coming through hard times. His start to last year wasn't easy at all.

With recent developments and now that two days of testing have gone, Lotus appear to be very much in an awkward place. As the form book of last year, and even the last 5 years, has been thrown out, I am wondering if the Enstone team could even suffer a season as bad as 2001 (as Benetton), due to their lack of preparation. I don't see that they've been getting ready for 2014 for 2-3 years like the top teams. They may actually be woefully underprepared. Throw in what's looking like a troublesome Renault engine, and the ingredients are there for a very difficult season indeed. Hopefully, there is still enough talent in the team despite the loss of staff, though in 2001 (another season with a bad engine) the staff seemed pretty good too.

I am thinking maybe it would be easier to summarise teams according to engines for now:

Renault
1.Red Bull - Well, I'm sure Renault will sort their issues, but it will take some doing to emerge as the best overall engine to have. Especially as they seem to struggle with energy recovery systems. There could be several failures on this side through the season, that even if not race-ending, will affect performance a lot. With the reporting that ERS will give a much bigger boost for 33sec per lap, the loss of this is estimated to now cost 1 whole second per lap! Whatever shape Renault are in though, we are sure that Red Bull will beat the the Renault teams hands down.

2.Lotus - Ok, I'm still going to put these guys ahead of Toro Rosso even though it could be a return to 2001, believing that over the season, the team can outdevelop Toro Rosso.

3.Toro Rosso - Jean-Eric Vergne has been saying the team has improved, but I don't know if this is just talk. I don't know how they will compare to Red Bull, but looking at the chassis shows there may be more independence from Red Bull than maybe expected. So being the Jr team is no guarantee of success.

4.Caterham - As much as the new rules give a chance to reset the field and give teams a chance to move up (or nearer), it can also go the wrong way, with Caterham maybe getting the concept wrong and being further than ever. It's a roll of the dice. Hopefully it will be the former, in which case it will be great to see Kobayashi being able to pluckily mix it with other teams at least some of the time - hopefully he's raring to go. Whatever happens, even if a point comes, or several points, I don't realistically see either Caterham or Marussia moving out of their 10th & 11th places this season.



Mercedes
1.Mercedes - Well I think the consensus is that the best Mercedes team will be Mercedes. With Seb and Red Bull starting to complain and be unhappy (now the shoe's on the other foot and they're the ones struggling), perhaps, just perhaps...

(ok,keysaren'teorkingagain,I'llcomebacklater)

1. Alonso
2. Who gives a sh!t

Mercedes (cont'd)
As I was saying, Perhaps, just perhaps this could be Mercedes' year. The natural inclination might be then to install Lewis as the title favourite. However, Nico surprised most of us last year. He seems the type of driver who can find more when a car is good - and the 2014 Mercedes might be very good. Though I see Hamilton as the more gifted, a studious and diligent, and consistent approach may win the day, and thus it could be Nico in no.1? Especially if Lewis messes up a few races as he is prone to do under pressure.

McLaren-Mercedes
The opinions after some testing seems to be that McLaren might actually have a very good car. This shouldn't be a huge surprise, as apart from 2013, all their recent cars have been right up there. Can they beat Mercedes, the works team? Well since Mercedes creation as BAR in 1999, the team have only beaten McLaren 3 times, in 2004, 2009 and 2013. What did those years have in common? That's right, McLaren messed up badly. It's still hard to know what a complete rookie like Magnussen without 10,000s miles of testing can do straight away against Button. Unlike last year, when McLaren set one quick time with a weird race-illegal setup, this time they have topped the times in both wet and dry, which although times are 'meaningless', does hold quite some promise.

Force-India
Hard to draw any conclusions from testing, but they seem in comparably strong and solid shape - the least reliable of the Mercedes cars perhaps.

Williams
Pat Symonds promised that the aero has taken a step up on the 2014 car. Early signs show that just possibly, Williams could be set for a good but not great season. They might actually be better than Force India, in which case 5th in the WCC may be very attainable indeed. What price a podium or two for Bottas somewhere?

Sauber-Ferrari
Hmmm, miles off the pace so far, but the Ferrari seems like a fairly reliable unit, though rumour is the ERS stuff isn't really cutting edge maybe. I get a (not very well founded) impression that Sauber are running a 'basic' team and car this year due to cost, so do expect early 2013 form at best really.

Lotus - Renault
Not looking in good shape, but hopefully for them they have enough depth for decent development to maybe become around 5th best team later in the season. As I said, with their terrible preparation they could start off like Benetton 2001 as even the last established team.

Toro Rosso
Oh dear, like someone said, by day 3 they have managed to get within 6sec off McLaren's pace. We don't know what kind of weight or anything they're carrying, but at least they're managing some running. One of the less reliable teams it seems.

Marussia
I was happy to see what I thought was a very attractive looking Marussia. I like the 2014 paint job using their familiar colours, but like the nose even more. This reminds me of 2012 when they had a nice nose when everyone went stepped. That year, they were very respectable. Also, they seem to have ok (comparing to others) reliability, hopefully meaning some well earned points at last.

Caterham - Renault
Not many laps at all eh? Hard to tell where they stand. Someone pointed out that it's interesting that the top teams are running vaguely similar noses. No idea if Caterham's will work...


Prediction
Red Bull will struggle. Horner, Newey and especially Marko will wail and cry - then the rules will be changed to suit them again like they were with the tyres in 2013, and we'll be back to 2013 in the second half of the season. YAY!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Prediction
Red Bull will struggle. Horner, Newey and especially Marko will wail and cry - then the rules will be changed to suit them again like they were with the tyres in 2013, and we'll be back to 2013 in the second half of the season. YAY!

---

Doesn't seem far-fetched though I forgot to predict politics in my predictions. Maybe next time.:D So far I have been pondering about the option of RBR struggling to keep up with Mercedes/Ferrari for half or even 2/3rds of the season before coming on-song for Asian rounds.

The hardest part has been to guess the state of game between engines. I guess perhaps at worst RBR can have a Ferrari-2005 kind of season, where the championship-winning team is so far behind largely because one important component has failed them badly. As I mentioned earlier, 2005 season was hard to predict and especially the complete struggle of Ferrari.

It would be a surprise if Renault gets it so wrong, considering they have won many championships and should be competent enough to build at least a decent-enough engine, even if not quite on par with others. Then again, Bridgestone was also supposed to be very competent before 2005, having won lots of titles, yet they were ill-prepared for the single-tyre rule.

This shows, how fine the margins in F1 can be and you can't mess up badly even in one area, because you'll automatically have a significant handicap.

Based on testing so far it seems Williams is relatively well off and can compete for regular points. Right now they seem like fourth force behind Mercedes-McLaren-Ferrari group. However, obviously based on the moment as we do not know, how can the Renault-powered teams perform, and how well can, say, Force India develop over a season. But a stronger season for Williams seems on the cards.

What are the rules in regards to engine development now? Are the specs frozen immediately or can they actually develop them now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjbetty

Mercedes (cont'd)
Williams
Pat Symonds promised that the aero has taken a step up on the 2014 car. Early signs show that just possibly, Williams could be set for a good but not great season. They might actually be better than Force India, in which case 5th in the WCC may be very attainable indeed. What price a podium or two for Bottas somewhere?

---

One more thought about Williams again. At the moment they look good, at least fourth best based on Jerez or even at stretch you could say they seem a match to Ferrari for third. They seem set to have a better season (can't be that difficult to better last year's 5 points), but how much better?

If I am trying to recall past years, the impression I get is that Williams has always looked better at winter tests than in the racing reason. And when I compare Force India and Williams, I think I'd still back Force India to finish the season above Williams even if they start out worse. 2011 and 2012 were good examples of Force India having a very good in-season development pace, where they ended strongly after a disappointing start.

Could Williams finish 6th though? It is a possibility, but very much dependent on how bad or good the Renault engines exactly are, which is very hard to tell at this point and on which the fate of Lotus and STR will depend on. Sauber hasn't made a strong impression so far, but during the season they may challenge Williams too.

---

Rjbetty. I find it pretty interesting that you compare Lotus' potential 2014 to Benetton's 2001. As we remember, Benetton came back pretty strong late in the 2001 season with Fisichella even grabbing a podium at Spa. Also a large reason for Benetton's struggle back then was the engine. The design team was competent enough (led by Mike Gascoyne at the time), but the new 111-degree engine was down on power. As it was, Renault never got this engine work well enough and ditched it after 2003. Since returning to a more conventional engine Renault developed into a championship-winning team.

By the way, I remember back in 2003 there were claims that Renault could possibly have the best chassis on the grid, only let down by the engine. So indeed, the chassis engineering quality has always been there at Enstone (the base of Lotus/Renault/Benetton). This was also the case in 2009, when they were let down by having to mess with KERS packaging - once again a component outside Enstone's facilities. In 2007 were perhaps hurt by Michelin's departure to which it was hard to adapt to.

Despite all those financial troubles I think the Enstone engineering factory is the best asset of the Lotus' team. It has seen all kinds of days - ownership changes, personnel/technical director changes, but one thing has always remained - inherent chassis engineering quality. I am impressed. It looks like the base has a good culture/athmosphere/aura, which keeps the performance up.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

If I am trying to recall past years, the impression I get is that Williams has always looked better at winter tests than in the racing reason. And when I compare Force India and Williams, I think I'd still back Force India to finish the season above Williams even if they start out worse. 2011 and 2012 were good examples of Force India having a very good in-season development pace, where they ended strongly after a disappointing start.

---

Oh yeah I agree that's true. IIRC Williams looked very impressive in 2011 pre-season testing...

As for Force India, I guess you could count 2009 too as a good development year. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

Despite all those financial troubles I think the Enstone engineering factory is the best asset of the Lotus' team. It has seen all kinds of days - ownership changes, personnel/technical director changes, but one thing has always remained - inherent chassis engineering quality. I am impressed. It looks like the base has a good culture/athmosphere/aura, which keeps the performance up.:)

---

I hope so, as I like the team. But I'm concerned they may have just lost too much important staff. But even so, I'm believing that even though their technical depth is much reduced, it could till be enough to see them do better later on in the year, and still have a basically sound chassis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS

What are the rules in regards to engine development now? Are the specs frozen immediately or can they actually develop them now?

---

They are homologated at the end of February up until which they can do whatever they want. After February they can carry on developing the engines but are limited to what components they work on. They are given a total number of points they can spend on parts of the engine, the total number of points drops substantially each year to hit zero in 2016 or 2017 or so.

I think its futile guessing relative performance at this point when many of the teams are still running some 2013 spec aero components and are testing with reduced revs and varying levels of ERS (if at all). Bahrain might tell us more but we will only know at the first race as usual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

They are homologated at the end of February up until which they can do whatever they want. After February they can carry on developing the engines but are limited to what components they work on. They are given a total number of points they can spend on parts of the engine, the total number of points drops substantially each year to hit zero in 2016 or 2017 or so.

---

That was an interesting change in the new version of the regs that came out in December. These new engine development regs are not completely clear but as I understand it, what is homologated on 28 Feb is what they are stuck with for the rest of the year (except for reliability improvements approved by the FIA in consultation with the other suppliers - as has been the case in recent years).

Then the points budget comes in when it comes to submitting a modified engine to use in subsequent years.

Each component or design area of the engine has a points value - from 3 points for something really important like the combustion chamber geometry, down to 1 point for something simpler like the inlet trumpets or oil pump. The total engine design comes to 66 points.

For 2015 they are allowed to modify 32 points worth of components. Then for 2016-2018 it's 25, 20 and 15 points respectively.

In addition there is an increasing list of components that can't be modified at all. For 2015, only some major things like significant crankcase and crankshaft dimensions must remain unchanged from 2014. They have a fairly free hand to spend their points on changing whatever other components they choose. From 2015 on, additional components are frozen each year.

From the 2018 season, there is almost a complete engine freeze, but there are still some electrical items that can be changed each year after that (up to 2020 which is as far as the rules go).

This all looks potentially very expensive. All the manufacturers still have 4 years of costly engine development ahead of them.

I wonder if we can predict that Red Bull will have reliability issues this year.

I mean I have seen plenty of people jumping for joy that Red Bull are struggling and even heard them saying on the radio that Red Bulls domination is crumbling.

I think its a bit early to be predicting that. However it will certainly give them a headache moving onto Bahrain. I assume the first day or two will be spent making sure they are on top of their problems while others get a head start on development.

It maybe we see Red Bull fall from domination, but I would say that if there is one team who have the people to get the car back on track then it is Red Bull.

Word from the Red Bull bunker is that Adrian Newey has hastily drawn up a heavily revised car for the Bahrain test, although the design guru stresses that the aerodynamic package is a 'strictly interim solution'.

http://www.welt.de/multimedia/archiv...n__315816p.jpg

Should this, frankly ingenious, solution fail to deliver, too, Christian Horner has promised to grant him 'full creative authority and rumour has it that this fallback option has already been secretly tested by members of Red Bull's junior drivers program.

http://popeyethewelder.com/wp-conten...Sail-Buggy.jpg

Experts however doubt that even Red Bulls budget will cater for Newey's wish to use exotic materials like pixy dust and the mildly radioactive Unobtanium.

I´m afraid that Red Bull will be at it once moore, perhaps beside the first competition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mia 01

I´m afraid that Red Bull will be at it once moore, perhaps beside the first competition.

---

As I stated even prior to Jerez, I have a sneaky suspicion this will not be Red Bulls or Vettels year this time . The catastrophic testing failure at Jerez will also have set them back massively and so I do not expect them to be at the sharp end of the results especially in the opening race.... If they are, the rest of the grid would probably be as well concentrating on their 2015 car instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zico

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mia 01

I´m afraid that Red Bull will be at it once moore, perhaps beside the first competition.

---

As I stated even prior to Jerez, I have a sneaky suspicion this will not be Red Bulls or Vettels year this time . The catastrophic testing failure at Jerez will also have set them back massively and so I do not expect them to be at the sharp end of the results especially in the opening race.... If they are, the rest of the grid would probably be as well concentrating on their 2015 car instead.

---

With the catastrophic failure called 'a Renault engine' they won't go anywhere before Silverstone, even if Newey manages to whip up a new car.

[quote=dj_bytedisaster]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zico

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by "Mia 01":2m9lbwxh

I´m afraid that Red Bull will be at it once moore, perhaps beside the first competition.

---

As I stated even prior to Jerez, I have a sneaky suspicion this will not be Red Bulls or Vettels year this time . The catastrophic testing failure at Jerez will also have set them back massively and so I do not expect them to be at the sharp end of the results especially in the opening race.... If they are, the rest of the grid would probably be as well concentrating on their 2015 car instead.

---

With the catastrophic failure called 'a Renault engine' they won't go anywhere before Silverstone, even if Newey manages to whip up a new car.[/quote:2m9lbwxh]

Yep, agreed. Adrian Newey is a genius but I very much doubt even he is that good to be able to turn things around before the opener.