Sergio Perez, Sauber, Shanghai, 2012

Double DRS too expensive to develop – Sauber

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Sergio Perez, Sauber, Shanghai, 2012In the round-up: Sauber say they won’t be developing their own version of Mercedes’ Double DRS because of the cost.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

No double DRS for Sauber (Sky)

“Sauber say they are unlikely to introduce a Mercedes-style double DRS due to the cost involved in developing the concept.”

Webber queries McLaren duo’s Mugello absence (The Telegraph)

“It was an absolute no-brainer for [Sebastian and I] to be here. There was never any consideration that the race drivers wouldn’t come to this test.”

Mugello Test – Day Three: “It has enabled us to test new development ideas” (Mercedes)

Nico Rosberg: “There is still a lot of work to do of course, and we do need to improve our car in fast corners, but overall I am pleased with the progress that we have made here this week.??”

Ferrari unveil major car redesign on final day of Mugello test (BBC)

Gary Anderson: “The new Ferrari design is definitely an improvement. There is no exhaust interference, and while they’re struggling with the car it is better to get rid of that for now and go in search of the bigger gains they need.”

First sight: Ferrari Revised Mugello Exhaust (Scarbs F1)

“Now the ‘Acer’ ducts are brought more inwards and the exhaust exits over the top of the duct, periscope style. This suggests the exhaust is not being aimed at the floor at all, simply along the centre of the top bodywork towards the beam wing and the winglet mounted atop it. This would be less effective at creating downforce, but would be less sensitive to throttle position and have less of an effect on the rear tyre temperatures.”

Alonso: Spain step forward must count (Autosport)

“This year it is not any more important what position you choose [for the exhausts], or how you manage the position. We saw in Australia one of the quickest cars had the lateral exhausts like McLaren, we saw in China two Red Bulls with different [exhaust] positions and we saw in Bahrain, Red Bull with the lateral ones, but the quickest car was Lotus with the straight ones. So we cannot lose even five minutes on this. There are bigger areas of the car where we need to improve and we try to do it.”

Silverstone ends exclusivity deal, seeks partners (Reuters)

“The owners want to lease their 760-acre estate in central England for 150 years, in a deal that could be worth up to 250 million pounds ($405.10 million), to secure funding for development.”

What?s wrong with Vitaly Petrov? (Viva F1)

“Petrov should be applauded for his bravery in making this statement. Not hailed a coward.”

Scottish lottery millionaires support 15-year-old?s bid to achieve F1 glory (Scotsman)

“A young racing driver has been helped on the road to Formula One by Europe?s biggest-ever lottery winners. Chris and Colin Weir are sponsoring 15-year-old Gregor Ramsay in his first season racing in the European and Italian Formula Three European Abarth season.”

F1 team Sauber shifts into “carbon neutral” status (Business Green)

“The Swiss team said that it has signed a deal with UK offset company Carbon Neutral Investments (CNI), which supports a range of emission reduction projects around the world, including wind farms in India, waste heat recovery projects in China, and hydro-electric stations in Brazil.”

Comment of the day

JamieFranklinF1 on Vitaly Petrov’s criticism of Mugello:

I can understand where he?s coming from, but at a time when Monaco and Montreal are still on the calendar, it?s a little bit ridiculous.

I personally think that if the drivers like it, then it should be on the calendar. Obviously, that isn?t how it works, and it?s a shame that the ??pinnacle? of motorsport doesn?t have the greatest race tracks on their calendar. Replacing Valencia and/or Abu Dhabi with race tracks like this would surely hail much praise from most, if not all Formula 1 fans.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Jack Sargeant, Martin Stanley, three4three, skodarap and vickyy!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Ten years ago today new F1 team Toyota announced they would give a test to Cristiano da Matta, who was on his way to victory in that year’s Champ Car championship.

Da Matta was promoted to the team for 2003 but dropped halfway through 2004. He later returned to Champ Car but called time on his single-seater career after suffering serious injuries when his car struck a deer while testing at Road America in 2006.

Image ?? Sauber F1 Team

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 44 comments on “Double DRS too expensive to develop – Sauber”

    1. How manY tenths of a second can you get in double drs??????

      1. It’s variable and hard to say.

        In quali when they can use it any time, I would guess it gains 2 tenths a lap, slightly more or less depending on how often it’s safe to use DRS at each track. If it was giving 5tenths or above, it would be rushed onto Mclaren and RedBull but that hasn’t happened.

      2. Guess it also depends on the track. As it only shows up in qualifying, I guess it’s fair to say that few of the teams might actually consider developing such system.

        Though, as Scarbs said in The Flying Lap last week, teams might not develop the exact same system from Mercedes but might have a look at how to exploit the DRS-activated duct. Maybe they will find other ways to benefit from it, not just a double DRS.

        1. Yes, I was intrigued by that. He was speculating that – although they couldn’t stall the front wing – they might use a DRS-activated stream of air somewhere at the rear of the car. I’m no aerodynamicist so I can only guess where, and what effect it would have. Stalled monkey seat? Blown coke bottle? (I guess that’ll sound exactly like blowing across the top of a coke bottle)

          Anyway, I hope the teams go to town on this, and DRS gets banned because it’s not being used as intended…(remember the adjustable front wings?)

    2. Glad to see that Scottish lad is getting some funding, he’s signied up with the Ferrari so it could well be a worthwhile investment for the charitable millionaire.

    3. I think by the way everything is so close this year we might have a potential of four or five teams fighting for the championship.

    4. Cristiano da Matta, what a guy. Met him at Silverstone a couple of times, he had all the time in the world to chat and explain to you what the track was like. I remember him just explaining how greasy it was through bridge, how the car slided around. Really nice guy.

    5. By the time the real truth on whether Mercedes has advantage over their rivals with this Double DRS system it will be too late for copycats to copycat. I don’t believe that the advantage is there yet, enough so to justify others to invest in their own version. Infact after four races we don’t really know who is king yet. When Mercedes begins to have consistant results and the others start to feel that pressure, then the handwriting will be seen by everyone.

      1. I agree. The first couple of races were spent with various teams complaining about it despite Mercedes inability to stick it anywhere near pole.

        1. They probably figured that it was only a matter of time before Mercedes got all their ducks lined up in a row and capitalised on the system. The FWFD might only offer a few tenths of a second here and there in qualifying, but the difference between Mercedes and everyone else is that Mercedes already have the system in place. Whatever gain it offers them is inconsequential; the fact that they gain from it at all was enough to motivate Red Bull and Lotus to protest, no doubt hoping the FIA would ban it or release details of how the system works so that they could get their on versions working sooner.

          1. The way it seems at the moment, Mercedes cannot capitalize on the system at all. I don’t see them gaining much on tracks like Catalunya or Singapore where most of the lap is low speed. Monaco also has very little scope for effective DRS usage. A lot of teams took quite a few races to get the F-duct system working in the first place. The FWFD is too complicated to get right over a few races.

            The question will be whether Mercedes continue to develop the system or they focus their energies elsewhere, like Ferrari who seem to be working on exhaust solutions. Are the “few tenths” given by the FWFD more than the potential from other modifications like front wing design or exhaust solutions. I think probably not.

          2. or maybe “before Mercedes got all their ducts lined up….”

    6. Under budget caps, Sauber saying that the DRS is too expensive is actually them saying it’s not an efficient use of their money, ie they could gain more tenths by investing money elsewhere on the car.

      Bigger teams with more “optimised” cars have more to gain from the gadget than smaller teams who still have plenty of work to do on their cars. Just like we saw with early KERS/F-duct

      1. there is no budget cap.

        and the RRA cannot be enforced after FOTA split. so teams are free to spend whatever they want.

    7. Just had dinner in Scarperia with the very well known reporters. Their opinion from talking to the teams is that double drs is unlikely to be copied by many, if at all.

      Mclaren have in effect spent 24 hours of track time refining the correlation between their simulated and the car. They believe this will give them the edge in this seasons developmental race.

      Seeing as the cars develop over a season by between 3-5 seconds a lap on like for like basis, double drs is not perceived to be such a game changer, though it will give Mercedes qualifying advantages.

      1. @aj13 Development isn’t as rapid as that – a very good development curve for a top team would generally see about 3s a lap at most. This year will see them gain about 2.5s at maximum. Developmental gains decrease almost exponentially the longer a set of regulations stay.

        1. @pm You obviously know better than Christian Horner who was telling us this week that after the off throttle blowing ban the best development teams could make gains of up to 5 seconds this year.

          And I thought PM was so knowledgable because he was a Newey love child. Clearly not.

          1. @aj13 – Uh, why are you addressing me when I haven’t said anything about the gains OTBD offered?

    8. Test tarmac is currently being laid at CotA, but here is the latest shot of construction on the main straight.

      1. Matt (@agentmulder)
        4th May 2012, 1:58

        Dat hill…

        1. @agentmulder – I believe the apex of the first corner is about forty-five metres above the start/finish line (and if you think that’s impressive, the drop on the other side is about fifty metres; what’s more, the second corner was originally a kink, but has been reprofiled to become a sweeper). Compare that to Eau Rouge, where it’s forty-two metres from the bottom to the top (though the gradient might be steeper than the approach to the first turn in Austin). The land for the Circuit of the Americas was deliberately chosen because of the changes in elevation. The section of circuit modelled on Silverstone was deliberately designed to follow the least-efficent path across the hills so that the track would have elevation all through it.

          This, I think, is the real problem with the modern generation of circuits. Governments decide they want a Grand Prix, but nobody explains to them what makes for a really good circuit, and so they set aside any old section of land. The circuit in Shanghai is built on reclaimed swampland, and only has about six metres of elevation – but imagine what it would be like if the start/finish line was forty-five metres higher than Turns 7 and 8, which are opposite the paddock.

          Someone needs to explain to these governments that if they want a Grand Prix, they need to set aside a good piece of land. And following the critical reception to Austin from fans, Bernie Ecclestone (proving he’s not entirely evil) promised to try and get the regulations dictating circuit design loosened, and to bring people like Tilke into the design process sooner to consult on the best pieces of land to build on.

          1. I agree with you @prisoner-monkeys. It would be great if new countries that get an F1 also get a tour of Spa, pointing out how the track uses the terrain (and that allows Bernie to point out how much better they can do on the other facilities …), and maybe then go to Abu Dhabi to show them the facilities – then explain how the flat terrrain, despite the pitlane and turn 2 being elevated with the choice of layout makes for a much less interesting track. Tilke could do this, and explain how with the right parameters and especially the right choice of terrain he could make a great track for them.

            Of course China is interesting now that it is getting older and the swamp means some parts start to sink a bit, giving bumps and depressions, as Brundle commented :) Made me think of streets in the Netherlands where my German wife is always annoyed that the pavements get uneven so quickly, and then usually remain so.

            1. ilke could do this, and explain how with the right parameters and especially the right choice of terrain he could make a great track for them.

              When the critical reception to the Austin design was so positive, Bernie Ecclestone promised to get the regulations relating to circuit design relaxed and to bring Tilke into the design process sooner. Based on the India and New Jersey layouts, Bernie seems to have lived up to his promise.

              China is interesting now that it is getting older and the swamp means some parts start to sink a bit, giving bumps and depressions, as Brundle commented

              And it helps that the circuit has produced three exciting races in three years. I think Shanghai will be remembered as one of the more under-rated of Tilke’s circuits. There was a time when it was lumped in with Abu Dhabi and Valencia, but I think the circuit has risen above its criticisms. It might not be a phenomenal circuit, but nor is it dire.

    9. I couldn’t agree with the COTD more. The business side of F1 means various new circuits in the Middle East, Asia and other parts of the world will stay on the calendar, but classic tracks like Mugello truly embody the history and heart of the sport.

      Also, Sauber should be applauded for going carbon neutral. Although buying offsets is taking the easy route, hopefully they can follow in the pioneering footsteps of Williams and McLaren in pushing for a greener future.

      1. Pushingfor a greener future

        Another reason to race a mugello.


        1. Who would pay for it?

          1. I wasn’t serious.
            That’s why I put the smiley face at the bottom.

          2. A little unrelated, but if a stand at Silvertsone sold “Bern-E-Ecclescakes” this summer (manufactured in Bern, Switzerland) would that be allowed? These things really would sell I believe. Perhaps the revenue stream could fund a Mugello race?

      2. Plus @Adam-tate Sauber just admitted they can’t financially afford to explore DRS so that’s even more impressive.

      3. Sauber should be applauded for going carbon neutral.

        hear hear

    10. Petrov…… Coward.

      1. @matt2208 – Did you even read the link Keith posted? This is what Petrov said in full:

        “I have very good memories of Mugello as this is where I won in F3000, so coming back is good. I’m not sure the track is right for today’s F1 cars – you get very close to the walls and it’s maybe a bit small for the cars now, but it’s still a good challenge putting together a quick lap.”

        On a certain level, he is right. This was a test session, so he teams do a lot more running than they usually do. Schumacher completed 166 laps ona single day. But a tiny mistake from the driver will put the car into the wall and cost the team dearly – Fernando Alonso grazed the wall yesterday morning, and it cost Ferrari two hours of track time. The teams shouldn’t be penalised for that.

        So can you really blame Petrov for thinking the choice of Mugello is inappropriate?

        1. A nice track in the green, but its not the right place for F1, sadly, he might well be right in saying so. At least good to hear he is not afraid to say so.

          1. I think Mugello was always better-suited to MotoGP than to Formula 1.

            1. I agree with that. No matter what one’s opinion about Petrov’s statement is, the track has a nice layout, but literally no overtaking opportunities.

              If it wasn’t for the drivers praising the fast sweepers, people would vote the race down anyway, because apart from the main straight, you have no room to get even close to an opponent. The constant array of fast chicanes penalizes understeer when you’re in the dirty air of an opponent, and the narrow track doesn’t really help with the problem either.

        2. Well said @prisoner-monkeys and @bascb, thanks.

      2. Must have taken a lot of guts to post that one Anti-RBR. We can’t all be as brave as you, hunched over your computer, willing others on to death like the worst of the WWI generals.

    11. Wow, a lot of people having their birthday today. So happy birthday, have a party and enjoy it to Jack Sargeant (keep up the nice work on @AnF1Blog_com!), Martin Stanley, @three4three, @skodarap and @vickyy

    12. I don’t like the COTD. The teams don’t test untested and brand new parts at Monaco.

      1. Didn’t he say it was inappropriate for F1 in general, not just testing?

    13. Let me wish a very happy birthday to @three4three, @skodarap, @vickyy, Jack Sargeant and Martin Stanley – and many more great years of F1 to see!

    14. Webber’s comment about McLaren is probably spot on, but in a way perhaps it’s quite a good thing that Hamilton and Button will be driving a car they are familiar with come Barcelona. This quote from Button from the same Telegraph article was quite interesting:

      “For the test drivers to put some miles on parts and try some very extreme things, then I think it’s good, but it’s not necessary for us to be there.”

      I guess it depends what these ‘extreme things’ are, but I guess in some ways I’m not sure how the drivers would benefit (do these top drivers really need more mileage as Webber says?). Allowing the test drivers to drive also helps them with their simulator work.

    15. I don’t think it was a matter of understanding. Scarbs figured out how it works during testing. If he can do that, an engineer at a time should also be able to do so. The main problem is implementing in a car completely not build for it; all cars are very tightly packed internally. It even took Mercedes to use 2 smaller tubes an they build the car from the start with the ducting in mind! That is why teams were protesting: it would be basicilly come down to repacking the internals of their cars, which is not far off building a complete new car.

    16. I don’t understand the fuss created by fans regarding Petrov’s comments. Recently, I read a few people bashing Webber for commenting too much! Give me a break. On one side, people complain that drivers a getting robotic who only utter P.R. friendly words and when some drivers speak what they feel is right, people go about bashing him.

      Why can’t Petrov have the right to comment?

      People are comparing Mugello with Monaco and Montreal? Please watch these mentioned circuits 10 times before you comment. Just because Petrov mentioned that the walls are too close, that means you compare Mugello with Monaco or Montreal? Applause!

      Petrov has said very rightly. Mugello is not suited for F1 cars. Like PM mentioned, it was never a Formula 1 circuit.

    Comments are closed.