Fernando Alonso, Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari, Monte-Carlo, 2014

Raikkonen ‘slower than Alonso at the moment’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Fernando Alonso, Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari, Monte-Carlo, 2014In the round-up: Ferrari technical director James Allison says Kimi Raikkonen is not on Fernando Alonso’s pace yet.


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

Raikkonen is just too slow, say his Ferrari team (The Telegraph)

Allison: “He’s just going a little slower than Fernando at the moment, but that gap is closing as the year progresses.”

Alonso: Ferrari updates inconsistent (Autosport)

“Some of [the upgrades] worked fine, some of them didn’t work, so we’ll just try to make the most of the new parts in Canada, try to have a good Friday and move a little bit closer to the podium.”

Haas Reveals His Team Will Join F1 In 2016 (Forbes)

Gene Haas: “The plan is absolutely to launch in 2016 and we are fully committed to that. I don’t think there is any doubt about that whatsoever.”

Red Bull & Renault: Geheimtest auf dem Rollband? (Motorsport Total)

One of the Red Bull teams are believed to have performed a test on a rolling road ahead of the Australian Grand Prix.

Mercedes warn F1 rivals they plan to rule the sport for years and years and years (The Mirror)

“Asked ahead of this weekend’s Canadian Grand Prix if he was already planning for an era of Mercedes domination, [executive director Toto] Wolff said: ‘Yes, definitely. That has to be the target and you can influence it if you do the job right.'”

Bird: Merc W05 can go quicker (Sky)

Former Mercedes tester Sam Bird: “I think that they have such a buffer at the moment that they are not showing their full potential. If it comes to it and people do start to get slightly closer, then you will see that they can comfortably find some more speed if they need to.”

Canadian Grand Prix Betting: Back Hamilton to gain Rosberg revenge (Unibet)

My Canadian Grand Prix preview for Unibet.


Comment of the day

A question from @Osvaldas31:

I wonder, with oversteery cars this year, how many of them will kiss the Wall of Champions?

Boy, it should be a good racing weekend.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Ratboy and Davef1!

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

On this day in F1

Sixty years ago today Roy Salvadori won the non-championship Curtis Trophy meeting at Snetterton, driving a Maserati 250F.

Image © Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

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

  • 91 comments on “Raikkonen ‘slower than Alonso at the moment’”

    1. I’m really looking forward to this weekend in special. Not because it’s Canada, because the battle between Rosberg and Hamilton it’s finally unfolding, and I want to see at what stage can Rosberg be a challenge to Hamilton in this track. It should be a thriller, I think.

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        5th June 2014, 0:35

        Circuit Gilles Villeneuve is Lewis’s stomping ground, and whilst I rate Rosberg very very highly, I’m not totally sure he can challenge Hamilton around here.

        I’d say there’s a chance Rosberg could win, but there’s a much bigger chance Lewis will take it.

        This track almost always makes for exciting racing, so even if there’s no battle up front, there’ll still be loads of action down the field.

        1. I think we can take it as an endorsement for Rosberg if he manages to push Hamilton all weekend, and not end up half a lap down the road (or in the wall?). Unless Hamilton overdrives it and ends up in the wall himself @tomphercheese21

          1. eh, sorry for the typo there @tophercheese21

        2. To be fair, Lewis has had some pretty stupid races here too. Trying to run a red light into the back of Raikkonen… That move on Jenson…. So I don’t think Rosberg will in any way be going into this thinking it’s a Lewis stomping ground.

          1. Those were both fairly exceptional events. As he could have won both those races with a bit more caution, that probably highlights how good he is round here.

            1. Those were both fairly exceptional events.

              Was it exceptional? Or is the tendency of doing stupid mistakes every now and then one of his his biggest weaknesses? I fully expect Hamilton to be faster than Ros, but I´d also say his chance of putting it into the wall is 3times higher than Rosbergs.

          2. That “move” on Button? Button messed up a corner and was therefore in the proces of being overtaken when he put Hamilton in the wall.

            It’s odd that Button received no penalty for that incident (“i didn’t see him” never was a valid excuse), but to suggest that Hamilton was to blame is simply ridiculous.

      2. I just hope Renault makes that PU work at 100%. I want Red Bull to get in the mix so badly!

        1. The Blade Runner (@)
          5th June 2014, 9:21

          That would be great.

        2. @jcost even when it’s at 100%, it’s just not as efficient at its energy recovery as the Merc system, meaning they’re going to struggle to keep the performance up on the long straights – there aren’t even that many slow corners for harvesting.

          They should be comfortably clear of Ferrari though, unless they somehow make their updates ‘work’ for a change.

    2. If I am not mistaken Kimi was pulling away from Nando before his puncture so I’m not sure what Jallison is on about.

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        5th June 2014, 0:36

        I think Allison means in general over the course of the season so far. Not just at Monaco.

        1. Allison interview was made before Monaco GP http://en.espnf1.com/ferrari/motorsport/story/159553.html I don’t know why every F1 site is publishing it 2 weeks later.

          1. @eeroo Thanks very much for posting this. I always try to only use recent news in the round-ups and it had completely passed me by that these were old quotes. If I’d realised they were I wouldn’t have put them in the round-up at all. I’ll redouble my efforts not to get caught out that way again.

      2. Well he actually wasn’t. They were not next to each other on the track.

      3. Kimi was pulling away from Alonso because Alonso was trying to save tyres and wasn’t pushing. Don’t believe me? The gap 5 laps from the safety car was 6.2. When the safety car came out it was 2.8. That shows that both Alonso and Ricciardo were saving tyres whereas Kimi was pushing earlier in the race.

      4. Fact is, if you look at the race chart, he actually wasn’t. Near the end of their first stint, Alonso got closer.

      5. This is from an interview that was done 2 weeks ago in Autosport. Guess the Daily Telegraph thought they’d finally pick it up and stir the pot a bit.

    3. I wasn’t at all surprised to read Haas’ announcement that he will wait until 2016 to put his cars on the grid. Much more surprising would have been if he had said they would be ready to go next season. Given his background and resources, I’m cautiously optimistic that a truly viable team will show up for testing in about a year and a half. I’m also hoping that he will make an effort to engage us potential fans with a proper web site and meaningful updates on their progress. The US F1 debacle still stings a bit.

      1. I’m actually happy they’re waiting for ’16. It shows they want to do things right, like a proper newcomer. Kudos to the team.

      2. Also , I read that he is going to base the power train development possibly in the UK and aero in the US . So, I am genuinely hoping he does things sensibly and takes the fight to the midfield .

        1. Really, the sensible option would be the other way around – all the bright minds are here in the UK (with a few in Italy). The power plant development will be bought in, so that can be anywhere.

          1. “All the bright minds are here in the UK…”? Wow, really? And I suppose we don’t have any here in the States, correct? Go ahead and Google MIT, Cal Tech, and Stanford for a start. Also look up Windshear Wind Tunnel while you are at it. Then look here: http://www.thepaddockmagazine.com/articles/starting-grid/formula-1-teams-back-to-use-windshear-s-wind-tunnel
            Then ask why Haas would base his aero in the US.

      3. Agreed, it is by far the most sensible decision. These new generation of cars are so complex that even the biggest teams are just starting to get to grips with them, if they had aimed to get on the grid for 2015 it could have been another MasterCard Lola-esque disaster. Haas is making all the right noises, he has built a strong NASCAR squad and he seems to be under no illusions as to what it takes to make it in F1. I’m starting to think that he might have a chance of getting this right.

      4. I think Haas is doing the right thing. There’s no need to rush he can take time to build sustainable foundations. Maybe he should wait for mid 2015 to have a look at how Renault and Ferrari progressed and how good Honda is before signing a Power Unit supply contract, as of today, smart money in on Mercedes…

        1. Which smart money might that be?

          Ok. Smarter money is on Ferrari…

          1. @baron Why is the ‘Smarter’ money on the Ferrari? It’s clearly the worst engine of the three on the grid at the moment..!

            1. ‘At the moment’

              You’d better call Gene and ask him, but an alliance with Ferrari makes better sense for a team who would have their chassis at least designed in the same country would it not? Ferrari also have a strong market in America and generations of racing history. Outside of Italy, the racing home of Ferrari is the USA. Some of the very best racing Ferraris in history have been N.A.R.T.’s

              Phone Gene – ask him.

      5. EXactly, trying to get ready for this year already would have surely meant that they would be more likely to end up struggling like HRT did in their first year (or at best like Caterham did in its first year).
        This way there is enough time to get everything well thought out and get into the season well prepared.

    4. Zain Siddiqui (@powerslidepowerslide)
      5th June 2014, 2:28

      I’d say that’s a fair comment from James Allison. Kimi is by far my favorite driver on the grid, but he’s getting outclassed a bit right now. I don’t think the difference between Kimi and Fernando is as big as the points table might suggest, as Kimi’s luck has been undeniably bad so far. I think Kimi can eventually compete with Fernando, if he really pushes himself to do it.

      1. @powerslidepowerslide I do think that Kimi and Seb are sharing the same little battle with getting to grips with these new regs. I don’t think drivers like Kimi and Seb forget how to be quick, I think its a case of settling down and understanding how to get the most out of the new package and adapting to it. Both these drivers are good and it will only be a matter of time til they are competitive.
        In Kimi’s case, I only hope that Ferrari give him the opportunity to come to speed, I’m slowly getting the feeling that they’re starting to put pressure on him and if he still is a bit slow that they may turf him at some point.

      2. The Ferrari is built around Fred , it will take some time to get the car “just so” for the Kimster and im sure that will come around mid-late season
        Its all good for Kimi
        At least he’s getting paid !!!

      3. Kimi’s struggle to me seems more noticeable – I don’t know if that is due to the relative strengths of the intra-team competition or not, but when Räikkönen has been behind I have found it to be a far more pronounced gap.

      4. I think kimi has been slower but also has had lots of bad luck. Monaco was good showing from kimi but what can you do when lapped car crashes into you…

        I think alonso has been faster, no doubt about it. Alonso is supposed to be one of the best drivers in f1 so it would be just off if someone could just come to the team alonso has been in for years and be better.

    5. I don’t think he is significantly slower or that he has lost his sheen. I mean , he is a world champion .He needs the car to behave his way and needs to get used to the car . I don’t know how James can say that when he was all praise for Kimi a couple of weekends before . Especially after Monaco, where he was running in 3rd . Also, Fernando is used to playing with these soapboxes for sometime now ,so, if Ferrari expected Kimi to come in and straight away beat Alonso , then they are as flawed as ever.

      1. If Kimi can come back to the sport after 2 years and be absolutely on the ball , it isn’t flawed to think that he could switch teams and be on it from day 1.

        Sounds like a bunch of excuses made for constantly underperforming teammates of Fernando

        1. @todfod but he wasn’t entirely ‘on the ball’ during his first year at Lotus – yes, he was pretty sharpish, but was totally unprepared for the Pirelli tyres, whereas most had experience of their less agressive ’11 form.

      2. Meh. He’s had some bad luck and it’s a new(ish) team, but Fernando’s just better than Kimi.

    6. I love how the title says “he’s just too slow” but then Allison says he’s just a “little slower than FA”…wow talk about massive difference in context.

      1. @magillagorilla To be clear, you’re referring to The Telegraph’s headline there.

        1. To be clear, you could choosed a correct headline.

          1. I’m not sure what you mean. The headline on this round-up is entirely fair, and the headline applied to The Telegraph article is the one which was there at the time I linked to it.

            1. Fat Elephant
              6th June 2014, 0:09

              Actually, @keithcollantine, you should either print the verbatim headline or acknowledge that youve intentionally misled your readers. You’re a known Kimi-basher.

              The verbatim headline reads:

              “Kimi Raikkonen’s problems are not due to bad luck, he is just driving too slowly, say his Ferrari team”

              while you claim:

              “Raikkonen is just too slow, say his Ferrari team (The Telegraph)”

              The difference isn’t even subtle!. To say he’s “just too slow” implies absolute deficiency in a fundamental quality: natural speed.

              Which is why the Telegraph makes clear that the problem is just that he’s “driving too slowly” – not that he lacks natural speed.

              For shame.

            2. Of course I haven’t invented a headline and attributed it to The Telegraph – what would be the point of that? The one I used is from their F1 index page.

              There’s a lesson here about not jumping to conclusions and assuming there is a malicious intention behind everything you fail to understand.

        2. @keithcollantine if it was an issue with you I’d probably have sent you a message and not done so in public so obviously I’m referring to something else that isn’t in your power. Don’t worry

      2. @magillagorilla It’s a bit like the Mirror’s headline “Mercedes warn F1 rivals they plan to rule the sport for years and years and years”.

        Wolff was asked if he was planning for a period of Mercedes domination and answered “Yes definitely, that has to be the target”. I’m not sure what alternative answer could be given to that question “No, we’re planning to be rubbish next year and then maybe a bit better again in 2016”?

        I think it’s fair to say that Ferrari and Red Bull and McLaren are also planning “to rule the sport for years and years and years” in much the same way.

        1. @jerseyf1 Sometimes I think newspapers have an article written prior to obtaining quotes. Then they are just trying to get the quotes to support their articles.

          1. @dragoll @jerseyf1 more like they explicitly cherry pick quotes in order to sensationalise and drive controversy.

      3. yeah I picked on that too. Typical sensationalist article title.

    7. I don’t think that Merc will dominate for that long – I’m not even sure if they will stay that dominant for the rest of the season – they will win it, but imo there will be others challenging for the race wins later this year. RBR is right up there and just needs horsepowers. Ferrari has a few flaws in their engine but the car also has a good basis and Allison’s is steering them in the right direction.

      1. But they wont get the horsepower because of engine homologation. Renault may make software updates, but so can mercedes. Im hoping red bull switches to honda for next year, it couldnt possibly turn out worse then thr renault

        1. @kpcart: I’m not so sure. The teams are allowed to make modifications for reliability, and that may enable them to use more of the existing potential. If they have been running at 90% but more reliable parts (or better software) enable them to run at 100%, that’s where the power comes from. Mercedes are already running closer to 100%, although they still may not have shown all they can do.

          And I’m afraid that Red Bull won’t be able to switch to Honda for next year as McLaren have an exclusive deal for 2015. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the Renault PU is better than the Honda next year: they seem to be getting on top of their problems, they will have had a full season running their PUs, and there will be some development allowed before next year. On the other hand if Honda are serious about it they certainly have the potential to do a great job.

        2. @kpcart “Im hoping red bull switches to honda for next year, it couldnt possibly turn out worse then thr renault”

          Really, you don’t think it could turn out worse? It definitely could. I’m certain Red Bull will stick with Renault for next year which is the only sensible thing they can do in their position – much better to have a decent engine with a further year’s development and testing than go back to square one again. McLaren can afford the risk of a move to Honda because they had become only a customer Mercedes team and they need to take risk to find a big step performance somewhere, unlike Red Bull.

          And Engine Homologation is very limited and certainly won’t stop Renault from having a lot more power in Canada than in Australia.

          1. From what I have read, it is the actual turbo that is giving the advantage to Mercedes, mainly the positioning of it and getting cooler air – giving up to 100 more hp then Renault – this that cant be modified by Renault to match Mercedes unfortunantly. sure Renault will have 15hp more then in Australia because of software tweaks, but then so will Mercedes. Honda is developing their engine now and don’t need to worry about homologation, they would have inside knowledge from the paddock about Mercedes design – mainly from McLaren and I think will build a better engine then Renault atleast. Engine homologation is the devil – it only works when there is parity. Renault will keep using PR speak, saying they are closer to running at full power each race, but realistically they will probably improve by something like 5-10% over the whole year, but so will Mercedes and Ferrari.

            1. Renault had the same opportunity to nail their PU as Mercedes did. All teams knew the direction F1 was going about 3 years ago. They all knew at the same time at what point the engine component of the PUs would be homologated. Renault seems to have failed to realize the scope of the task, and rather elected to assume they’d have the new PU handled while still being able to concentrate on last year’s Championships. RBR has nobody to blame but themselves so I wish @kpcart you would get off the bandwagon that RBR/Renault have somehow been locked out from improving and are so hard done by, when they themselves have known the parameters all along, and they also don’t seem to share the same complaints that you do.

    8. These are old comments from Allison, made before Kimi “bemoaned” his bad luck. The article seems to suggest that Allison was responding to Raikkonen’s comments about his luck, which isn’t the case.

      And the Allison quote has been manipulated a bit. He said, “He’s just going a little slower than Fernando at the moment”. Not, “Raikkonen is just too slow”.

      Yes, I’m a Kimi fan, but I reckon there’s a little bias going on in this reporting.

    9. I really love the kind of rumours that “motorsport total” mention in their article. It would help explain how RBR made the huge step up in reliability.

      1. According to Scarbs, it was Toro Rosso and it happened in the preseason. (Not sure how he knows.)

        1. Myself, Scarbs and Kiril were talking about this article via Twitter yesterday.. We all got an email from Red Bull soon after confirming that it wasn’t them conducting the test which only left STR. They’ve responded with a no comment….

          Anyways I wrote about it yesterday, it’s not a problem as Appendix 8 – 5.2 covers this sort of test as long as no aero testing was done is tandem. Here’s the article: http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/tech-rebuttal-red-bullstr-secret-test.html

          1. Thanks for the clarification! (I left the comment below before I saw this one.)

          2. Thanks @somersf1 for adding this clarity in there! I saw Craigs tweet about that earlier today also mentioning the RBR denial. Great to know how serious and minute the teams apparently follow what you guys are talking about actually!

            I would be pretty sure that they did not even try and do any aero work on top of testing the engine inside the car, because that would just be such an obvious infringement on the rules.

            1. Yea, plenty of the teams follow our social media activities, this is the first time (in a while) I’ve had one of them contact me to put their point across without me having to contact them.

              I see no reason why STR would have ‘cheated’ they’ve simply operated within the rules to makes strides on their PU installation and/or coding the ERS for better functionality IMO. I’m 99% confident that Merc had been doing this style of test for some time too anyway and would be thoroughly disappointed if Ferrari hadn’t…

      2. Oh, I went back and checked Scarbs’ Twitter — RBR says they did no such test, and Toro Rosso has no comment. I guess that’s a clue! ;-)

      3. Huge stup up in reliability? Vettel had huge problems in qualifying and couldn’t run a full lap in Australia. Ricciardo ran well.

        That’s not too dissimilar from the last test at Bahrain, where both Ricciardo and Vettel had 2 troubled days but also 2 largely trouble-free days. So running 50% of the time without issues translates well to having a car that runs to the finish and one that can’t complete a single lap.
        Mind you, they were still running patch solutions in the second Bahrain test, the final solutions to the perceived problems weren’t in place by that time.

      4. Well it explains how Renault miraculously turned up in Oz with a far more reliable PU. 5 days extra running to sort issues out. And if anyone objects, Red Bull have made sure it’s the junior team that will take any hit. Took the front and rear wings off to lessen any aero claims. I wonder if there was any informal agreement amongst the teams not to do this for cost cutting reasons. Would be interesting to know. But they’ve blown the door wide open for McLaren Honda to do this to their hearts content. And why not allow Ferrari run non aero PU laps around Fiorano? If the rules can be pared down to spending huge amounts of money to do everything short of putting a car on a track, then just put the car on a track. It makes suggestions to cut all testing next year laughable.

        1. As Matt mentions, there is nothing illegal about testing your engine in the car (unless you also do aero work on it off course) to do a stress test of your equipment on a dyno-like device like they apparently did.

          1. Personally I think within the current regulation construct there is the possibility to do ‘in-loop’ testing with a driver performing the roles usually undertaken by machinery on an engine dynamometer. Humans inevitably do something different to a computer model when reacting to a scenario and so this data is the critical difference between the models initially used to create the ERS maps and those now being used. Imagine creating a spreadsheet (like I am right at this moment) with thousands of IF variables and that’s where having driver data can make the difference. Developing the software to deal with energy flows is a critical performance element that goes unseen and is one of the reasons for Mercedes being ahead of the game. It all goes back to a lack of understanding in how people believe energy is used by these new PUs: http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-3333-second-misnomer.html

        2. Well it explains how Renault miraculously turned up in Oz with a far more reliable PU. 5 days extra running to sort issues out.

          As I said above, they didn’t. With a preliminary package they ran well on 2 out of 4 days of the last Bahrain test. And in Australia with the final package they ran well with 1 of the 2 cars. That is in line with the last Bahrain test.

          Took the front and rear wings off to lessen any aero claims.

          No, they did that because it is required to comply with this kind of testing.

          But they’ve blown the door wide open for McLaren Honda to do this to their hearts content.

          They haven’t, as this was always a possibility.

          And why not allow Ferrari run non aero PU laps around Fiorano?

          Because that is not allowed.

    10. Ha! a new testgate to fill stories!

      1. Yeah… I thought the same thing but haven´t seen much comments about it. Now, if it were Ferrari… Double standards.. *sighs*

        1. Oh, right, because “Red Bull teams” are so beloved by all and are never criticized for anything they do.

        2. @karter22 You forgot the furore over Mercedes’ secret test last year very quickly.

          I always find these “you only ever complain about team X, you never complain about team Y” type comments very disingenuous. Nothing is ever offered to back them up, so they always strike me as a request for special treatment for one team disguised as a plea for equal treatment for all teams.

          1. @keithcollantine I’d also like to point out that Ferrari did conduct a private test as well last year and not much fuss was made about it. And it shouldn’t have as they kept in line with the testing regulations.
            Now with what is known about this new test by STR, I have no reason to believe it is otherwise.

            So @karter22: no, it would be the same with Ferrari.

          2. @keithcollantine
            No I have not forgoten it. The thing is that Ferrari did comply with all the limitations. Merc did not and should have been penalized a lot stronger for it. In this case I suppose the “redbull team” (still not sure which one it was) must`ve used the current season car which should also be heavily penalized if in deed they did use it and basically my main gripe, whine, whatever you want to call it is that this is definitely braking the rules. Ferrari used a 2 year old car and not that season´s car (totally different) and yet everybody wanted to burn them at the stake for it and that is why it irritates me a bit when things like this happen and nobody says anything when in fact it should be made into a big deal! They just don´t because it´s that team.

            1. @karter22
              This kind of testing is permitted provided front and rear wing are taken off (among a few other factors). You have any evidence they were in violation?

              Can you please, first, study the rules and then come back before stating that “this is definitely breaking the rules”?

            2. MattDS
              I appreciate you taking the time to reply. Do you have any proof that they did in fact take off those parts that you mention or are you just speculating?? You make it sound like you were right there the day it took place. Do you have an evidence that proves they were not in violation?

              Life has taught me that almost everything done in secrecy cannot be good. At least in Ferrari´s case, it was well documented that they used an older car.

            3. @karter22: I’m sorry but now you’re turning it upside down. There is no burden of proof on me here. You are the one literally saying that “if indeed they used the current season’s car […] this is definitely breaking the rules”.
              This is factually incorrect as you can do testing with the current season’s car. That is what I pointed out.

              I raised Ferrari’s private test of last year to point out that “if it were Ferrari” (as you mentioned in your initial post), it would be no problem in case of a legal test.

              For the rest we’re talking about a rumor of a test happening. We don’t know squat about the conditions, whether or not other teams were informed, whether or not the FIA was informed, or whether or not conditions were met for the test to be legal.

              Just admit you jumped the gun already, talking about “if it were Ferrari” and how “this is definitely illegal”, and let’s wait and see if there was any wrong-doing.

              I believe someone at Ferrari already reacted and came out to say how this kind of testing (with front & rear wing taken off) is nothing unusual.

            4. Ok… I will admit I do not know all the rules by heart so ok on the testing with the current car, I get the point now, but it seems that you didn´t get my point with y first comment… What I meany is that if it where Ferrari, we would see a lot of negative comments, etc.

              Anyways, I don´t really care if they did test, I was just annoyed at the fact that nobody had mentioned it before.

    11. I believe now Ferrari are not very happy with Kimi’s performance. He and Massa were very similar in performance while they were team mates.
      I won’t say it was the wrong decision signing him, so far it doesn’t look like the right one.
      Alonso now seems to have been doing an extraordinary job as the car appears to have been a difficult one to drive over the seasons.

      1. By that yardstick, you imply that Massa didn’t lose much, if any form after his crash nearly five years ago.

        I’m neither agreeing nor disagreeing with this proposition, but the implications would be rather positive towards Alonso, Grosjean, and Bottas.

      2. Massa was in top form back then, he was beating Schumacher too don’t forget at the end of Schumachers days in Ferrari. Alonso is probably just that bit better though then both Massa and Kimi, hence Kimi cant quite be as fast as Alonso.

        1. he was beating Schumacher too don’t forget at the end of Schumachers’ days in Ferrari

          He only occasionally beat Schumacher, it wasn’t a particularly regular occurrence.

    12. Wow! The guy who has been last four seasons in the team (Alonso) and has had time to build team around him is probably one tenth of the second faster than the guy who has been just six races in the team (Kimi). Maybe that understeery car suits just little better to Fernando than Kimi. Without his bad luck Kimi would be much higher in the championship.

      1. zoom (@zoomracing)
        5th June 2014, 15:31

        Both drivers are not comfortable with the car, confirmed by James Allison. Is just a matter of one driver that can drive anything and another one that need the car to be in a specific way to shine, plus their own talent in many other areas.

        1. Well. I’d like see Alonso shine in oversteery car.

          1. He has already… only podium finish so far in the season with a dog of a car…

    13. Amazing video of the Formula E test at Donnington:


    Comments are closed.