Vettel ‘not always faster than Raikkonen’ – Allison

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Ferrari designed James Allison says Sebastian Vettel admitted he couldn’t always keep pace with Kimi Raikkonen this year, despite comfortably out-scoring his team mate.

Tweets and pictures

Comment of the day

Pastor Maldonado’s claim the stewards were loss tough on other drivers than him found favour with some readers:

I think Maldonado’s penalties were fair, but I do believe some drivers got off easy, some very easy, so in a way I agree with his statement although I’d keep my mouth shut. Acknowledge your mistakes and refrain from commenting other people.

Do you think some drivers were let off lightly? See all the penalties issued this year here:

There’s still time to join in this weekend’s Caption Competition:

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Siddharth and David N!

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

Norbert Haug, who ran Mercedes’ motor racing operations during its successful spell with McLaren in the nineties, stepped down from his position three years ago today:

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.

57 comments on “Vettel ‘not always faster than Raikkonen’ – Allison”

  1. We could have four yellow cars next year then. This year they were all black or grey, next year yellow!

    1. they always wait for the “pantone color of the year” thing tu choose their pallette :D

  2. Kimi might be quicker in some portions of some tracks, but that’s the same that happened to Webber compared to Seb: he was faster (or at least more competitive) in comparision on certian tracks and corners, but what does it matter if over a whole lap, over a whole season, Vettel scores nearly double the points Kimi scored?

    The fact of the matter is that Kimi is struggling compared to his collegues. He doesn’t seem to be in the same level anymore.

    About COTD: maybe the others are getting it a bit easier, but if you make the same mistakes for 3 years, you can’t really expect the stewards to give you the same penalty as if it was your first time. There’s a long way between “it was a rare mistake” from “not this guy again”.

    1. I thought that was why penalty points were introduced: to punish repeat offenders, whilst keeping individual punishments consistent and separate to a driver’s reputation. Obviously theyset the points limit too high, and still forgot the cconsistency bit, but the intention was a good one. @fer-no65

    2. @fer-no65 Actually, speaking of Silverstone specifically Kimi was faster than Vettel there over the whole lap both in qualy and race, and not only Vettel but he’s never been beaten there on pure speed by a team-mate in qualy(in 2013 Kimi had a Kers issue and despite that was only few thousandths behind Grosjean. in 2014 both Ferraris times(last and 2nd to last) were not representative because of the circumstances). It’s just a good track for him. Conversely Vettel was also slower than Webber there more often than not. So it’s a special case

      However as Allison who’s been with Kimi at Lotus and believes in him, I also think that he hasn’t forgotten how to drive over one winter between 2013 and 2014, same as Vettel, who had a bad year in 2014 too but now he’s back to his best. He only needs to find his sweet spot which is narrower than many drivers’. And it’s easier for him to do with Vettel as team-mate. Because Alonso and Kimi have diametrically opposite driving styles whilst Vettel’s style is close to Kimi’s. He has very limited time to do it though(until mid-2016 probably) or he’ll have no choice but to retire

      1. (@montreal95)
        Wow the ‘2014 was just a bad year’ myth seems to be pretty persistent doesn’t it.

        It’s not just coincidence that the one year Vettel had a competitive teammate he was crushed – he’s never proven himself in a genuinely competitive situation and it showed. Even Webbo was beating him in 2010 until his shoulder injury (and was rubbish after the switch to Pirellis from then on).

        I love Kimi, but he’s been hopeless since he did his back in – Ferrari kept him to make Vettel look good, and because they know he will always bring a garunteed fan base. If they’d have got the likes of Bottas or RoGro in the second seat, they know full well it would’ve finished off Vettel’s reputation altogether. They have a status quo, and good luck to them – but this whole ‘the one year Vettel has had a decent teammate was his ‘off’ year’ really needs to be put to bed.

    3. Same was said about MSC.. Still has all his magic in high speed corners… And he did… But also seriusly lacked Pirelli-Skills.

      Kimi I think is the same issue, ultimate old way driver… Driving these new age cars.

      His magic is in throttle control, steering inputs, optimisation of every corner.

      But with tires behaving differently every lap, throttle and brakes mostly lacking feel, all his magic goes off and then he is a lost semiaverage old driver.

      When Ferrari car gets more dialed in, Kimi should be faster.. but Vettel should be even faster, since they have similar style. I hope Kimi learns new tricks.

  3. It would be strange if he was always faster, wouldn’t it?

  4. There are times when all drivers aren’t as quick as another driver. Even Webber was on occasions faster than Vettel.

  5. Barrichello was faster than Michael at times as well. It doesn’t really say too much.

    1. Yep, it looked as if they had switched helmets at Silverstone 2003. That was probably a better drive from Rubens than anything Kimi has done since 2008.

      Raikkonen will be 11-13 years past his prime in 2016. If Ferrari is as good as Mercedes I fully expect him to be a #2 driver right from the get go.

      1. it is such a shame, Kimi was so Mega quick around the 2002-2005 era, and then it faded a bit, like he never got better. he then took a sabbatical from the sport before returning to drive some good races for Lotus, but those results were usually a result of the tyre degradation and his car being better at looking after tyres (or him being too slow to overwear the tyres). the last 2 seasons are a disaster for Raikonnen, his fans were expecting a close fight with Alonso (it wasn’t), and they were expecting a close fight with Vettel this year (again it wasn’t). Now Raikonnen is likely to stay a number 2 driver until the end of his f1 career. he hasn’t got much options beyond F1 where he is likely to succeed – so he will likely stay in f1 as a number 2 —- ie he was terrible in Rallying – jumping too far into the deep end too soon – look at Robert Kubicas trek to compare how bad Kimi was in rallying, Kubica has done the hard work and has now won 14 WRC stages in a privateer car, while Kimi lucked into 1 stage win in a better manufacturer car in the same time. Nascar the other sport Kimi tried, is too competitive, just look at how Juan Montoya went there having left F1, and he was more commited mentally then Raikonnen would ever be to anything.

  6. Yes, Kimi was faster a couple of times, mostly under race conditions (Melbourne, Sakhir, Silverstone in the dry), even on one lap sometimes his combined best time was better on Saturdays (Melbourne, Silverstone, Abu Dhabi). Most of the times, his race pace was about the same as Seb’s as well.

    What let Raikkonen down this year was less his pace, in contrast with 2014, and more his individual mistakes and bad luck which very much resembled that of 2008 at times (e. g. his late season streak of driver errors).

  7. I’m a Kimi fan, but… this is a very strange and unnecessary statement. In this days Vettel is much better than Kimi.

    1. He was not talking in general, he just brought up examples when Kimi was quicker. Everybody knows Vettel is doing a better job on most weekends.

  8. Looking at Massa’s comment- “But I’m sure that an experienced guy would have problems in these cars.”

    Just ask Martin Brundle.
    https://youtu.be/MEiyQ8aQGWc?t=3m35s

    1. What I’ve never understood is how anyone can seriously claim driving a 650kg mid-engined car with 900hp going through the rear wheels producing up to 5G lateral in fast bends is easy.

      1. But for me I never thought they were ‘ridiculously’ easy, nor necessarily easy, but I think in terms of the amount of conservation they have to do during the races. The titch more concentration they would need by simply speeding the cars up, especially after 2 hours of relative sprint vs marathon. The racecraft they would need with closer cars that we don’t get to see with DRS and dirty air. The tracks are more forgiving which adds to the perception of ‘ease’. No I don’t think driving these cars is necessarily easy, but it appears so for these drivers of such expertise and practice, and one doesn’t really get the sense the drivers are taxed in driving or racecraft as much as they could and have been in the past.

  9. “They say it is now ridiculously easy to drive a Formula One car. But I’m sure that an experienced guy would have problems in these cars.”

    Massa is having problems in those cars and some would say he is “experienced” so.. accurate!

    1. and he drove the V10, V8 and now this ones, he must know. He even drove cars with automatic gearboxes and traction control. So yes, i think he knows what he’s talking about.

  10. Oh, and that Watkins Glen article mentions qualifying tyres being present as far back as 1978 – I’m trying to find its first appearance for long now. I know it was banned at the end of 1991, but I still don’t know when it came to the fore for the first time.

    I’m in the same boat with the ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ tyres. I know tyre history until about the mid-1980s back, when Goodyear and possibly others first began to bring at least two different compounds to the tracks from an A, B, C, D allocation, but I don’t know exactly when this practice began to take hold.

  11. For what it’s worth, Gene Haas has stated a few times that the cars won’t be yellow. His company colours are red and white so I’d expect white cars with red or vice versa and isn’t LOLtus-Renault switching back to their 2010 livery of yellow and black?

    Plus Force India will be Johnny Walker blue so I wonder what Sauber will do.

    1. Force India will be Johnny Walker blue

      I believe JW’s corporate colour is black (with white, gold, or yellow print).
      JW blue is just one of their blends – the most expensive that is!

      1. JW blue is just one of their blends – the most expensive that is!

        yes, that is why that would be the main theme of the car

  12. That’s a pretty bizarre headline to take away from an interview in which Allison praised Vettel to the sky as a miracle worker who out performed his car this season.

    1. But it draws more comments and page views…

  13. “We don’t have as good a car as the Mercedes, that’s obvious, and yet we’ve won three races,” Allison told the BBC. “Sebastian has won all three.

    “And the reason that he has won those three and put it on the podium as much as he has is that we ask him to sort of work miracles to put his car in a competitive position, because the car is not yet good enough to be the winning car.

    “And he delivers those miracles sort of lap after lap, race after race, weekend after weekend.”

    1. Fikri Harish (@)
      13th December 2015, 3:32

      Alonso too has been practically doing the same thing since mid-2010.

      As a Ferrari fan, it’s really sad to see that they’d be nowhere if they don’t have one of their drivers doing pretty much all the hard work.
      Admittedly, if this is bad enough to make a Ferrari fan like me sad, I’m kinda surprised we don’t see news of McLaren fans committing mass suicides.

      1. Doing my best to refrain…

      2. Right Alonso did great against teams wi

  14. I think there’s 2 different meaning on “hard to drive” for F1 cars:
    1. Old F1 cars is harder to drive safely, while modern F1 cars is much more easier with all the aids and safety.

    2. On the other hands, modern F1 cars is harder to extract the maximum performance, especially with all the buttons on the steering wheel and cars developed with specific driver style in mind.

    I believe what Massa said is the second one, and he’s right. For a comparison, look at Martin Brundle promo on SkyF1 that he tested W05. He can get into 90% performance easily, but he won’t be near Hamilton or Rosberg pace even with few months training behind the wheel. This is where drivers like Hamilton, Alonso, and Vettel worth all the money because they can consistently extract the maximum out of a car (which again, harder to do on modern F1 cars).

    1. Fikri Harish (@)
      13th December 2015, 3:37

      Modern F1 cars also aren’t as physically strenuous to drive but their ridiculously twitchy nature means that you have to be really good to drive them fast and don’t crash.

      To sum up, the barrier of entry is lower than ever but the skill ceiling is still as high as it has always been. Probably higher.

      1. @fihar – current cars are certainly different to drive from the previous generations, I have played both F1 2014 and 2013 and there is a rather big difference. 2014’s style of driving is very frustrating for me personally because you have to precise (not too fast or not too slow) rather than trying to get the corner as quick as possible.

        @Kingshark has a lot of right. Current gaps between team-mates are very small indeed. I get this argument about 80/90s. But in the V8 era the gaps were clearly wider as well so it is much than that. No one will say the drivers were less professional than current ones. That make me think it is pretty easy to extract performance from the car and the small mistakes are not punished as they once were. Same conclusion – the cars not challenging enough.

        1. @michal2009b, is the gap really that much larger? The statistics page here suggests that the performance gaps between teammates hasn’t varied significantly from the final few years of the V8 formula and now, so I’m not sure what the basis for your assertion is.

      2. Modern F1 cars also aren’t as physically strenuous to drive

        I see this claim repeatedly, but I believe it’s misguided. A modern F1 car produces a lot more G-force, especially laterally in a fast bend; that alone takes a huge amount of fitness and strength to deal with. OK, power steering means arm strength is no longer an issue, but that’s far from the only physical effort needed.

        1. @raceprouk – I do believe the author of this comment have had 2014-generation cars in mind saying this. All the cars until 2013 were clearly more physical to drive than them.

          1. OK, so maybe it’s not 5G lateral anymore, but 4.8G’s still not exactly a walk in the park.

    2. 2. On the other hands, modern F1 cars is harder to extract the maximum performance, especially with all the buttons on the steering wheel and cars developed with specific driver style in mind.

      But for some reason, the qualifying gaps between the teammates are much closer today than they were 30 years ago. This suggests that today, a lot more drivers can come close to extracting the maximum from their cars.

      1. @kingshark I know this may be a controversial comment, but I think the reason for this is that modern F1 drivers are just generally better than those of yesteryear. Especially those from more than 20 years ago. There was a time when drivers like Senna were exceptional for the fact that they had been driving racing cars and karts from an extremely young age. These days it’s not only the norm, but it’s practically the minimum standard for entry. That’s why we have young people like Verstappen able to do what they do at an age where the average driver from 30 years ago might only just be starting to graduate from karts.

        F1 drivers these days live motor racing. From basically being toddlers, their entire lives revolve around refining themselves as racing drivers. Driving in one part of it, but there’s also physical training, simulator time, mental training regimes designed to focus the driver’s brain.

        I’m not suggesting that everyone on the grid is of the same level as Senna, but I think that every driver on the grid is pretty much as good as they could possibly be, and that hasn’t really been the case until fairly recently. The standard of ability across the grid is at the highest level it has ever been.

        1. @mazdachris I don’t think its controversial because I think you summed it up nicely. Old days F1 drivers could be gentlemen driver or people who do it for fun because they have the money to do so. Nowadays, you need to be a true athlete, because the competition is that close. Even if we make fun of the like of Maldonado or Merhi because how often they crashing or how slow they are, the truth is they most likely far better driver than we ever hope to become.

        2. I think that’s a fair comment. In those days the kids had far less exposure to motorsports and the training required, especially in the days where mechanics became drivers almost on a whim (and most racing drivers were in their 30s, not 20s). Senna et al started as kids in karts, which brought them ahead of the drivers in the 60s, and today kids start the fundamentals earlier and deeper, letting their brains develop the skills in a way that older drivers never could.

        3. @mazdachris
          I don’t think that is a controversial comment at all, and it perfectly mirrors my opinion.

          Apart from Senna, no other driver from the 1980’s began go-karting at the age of four. This is why Senna’s speed seemed so exceptional back then. I doubt he is any faster than the top drivers today (who began karting at a similar age).

          Prost didn’t even start racing until the age of 15, he was regularly 1 second slower than his teammate in qualifying, and yet he was still better than all his peers bar Senna, and is widely regarded as the best of his generation. There’s no way someone like Prost could fly today.

          Apart from Senna, none of the other drivers could live with the drivers of today.

    3. @sonicslv

      He can get into 90% performance easily, but he won’t be near Hamilton or Rosberg pace even with few months training behind the wheel.

      What you are describing there is what has happened since the dawn of motorsport. It isn’t governed by safety, or what era the drivers raced, its basically governed by how close to the limit a driver can take their race car. If you go over the limit you’re going off/crash, if you’re a split second under the limit, you’re going to be off the pace. The guys like Senna, Schumacher, Mansell, were all nutters because they literally flirted with that limit.

      1. Except today drivers have to stay well within the limit to preserve tire life.

        We only get flat out in quali for one lap, and even then sometimes tires go off by the end.

        Hard to see drivers shine when they have to drive to a delta.

  15. No link to this excellent write up about the greatest, albeit only, Canadian F1 team ever?

    Obviously, I’m biased!

  16. So in 2017 cars will be faster, so we get a different number on the bottom of the screen. The drivers will be just driving and putting in a little extra sweat.

    However overtaking will be more difficult. The stupidity never ends.

  17. I always remember Haug and Brawn when people say McLaren is a lost cause. You don’t really hear much about Merc’s years in the wilderness with that pair and a 7-time WDC, do you?

    1. Right… Except for last 20 years Brawn had more titles with more teams than anyone else… Save maybe Newey?

      Mercedes AMG also seem to deliver best engines for about 10 years now?

      Honda hasnt done a competitive engine in 22 years?

      Right. McLaren is a “privateer” team with Williams like potential. When they are doing their 100% they could be around third place.

      Results of last years were perticularly devastating. Kinda like Williams not so long ago.

    2. McLaren will be fine. Sometimes a team needs a shakeup. Unlike Williams, McLaren has a lot of money and stability. Each bad year since 2012 can be attributed to specific causes, unlike the Williams struggles, or even Lotus. The lack of pace is not a mystery. I had higher hopes for this year, obviously, with all the hype, but the end result was to be expected after testing, let alone Melbourne. It actually made the race exciting for me, sitting in the grandstands during a race of high attrition. It made it fun thinking that even though Button was last, he might still get a point if just one more car fails or crashes! lol. Alas they didn’t. Anyway, there’s no realistic reason to expect McLaren never to return to form. One of the reasons I love McLaren is that they are the ‘almost’ team. They can fight for wins, generally, but have to fight hard to be overall winners, which is rare and a big achievement when they do, so the thrill of achievement is there and it’s also a realistic hope. That makes them exciting to follow, because you know they have a shot at race and championship wins (except for 13, 14 and 15), unlike Force India, Sauber or, sadly, Williams, where the best you can hope for generally is a podium.

  18. Kimi was faster than Sebastien when it was time to head to the bar.

  19. I’m sure Massa meant to say “inexperienced guy” !

  20. Massa says cars are difficult to drive now. Sainz and others have also said this. Do you think it will stop people who have never been in an F1 car insisting the opposite is the case? No, because in the olden days driving seemed to be more physically exhausting (forget fitness levels then and now..), and don’t factor in the increased mental workload that comes with managing the more complex cars which exists today as that is not obvious.

  21. It is very interesting all these comments defending current rules and creating negativity about planned-for-2017 regulations are coming from Mercedes and Williams’ people. I think it says an awful lot.

  22. I don’t understand this:
    1) Toto’s warning, at least in public, was directed at both drivers,
    2) Hamilton is the one with the longer existing contract (and thus harder to get rid off if next season things go bad)

    So why is he only one trying to contradict Toto?

  23. Mercedes ‘too far’ ahead to be caught, warns Ricciardo (Motorsport)

    I believe this type of thinking is incorrect. Mercedes can be caught. F1 has a fuel consumption limits, which means that for a while it was easy to make gains in power and stay within those limits, which is the stage the teams are now. Mercedes happened to make better choices than the others, so their engines were more efficient, hence got more power out of the fuel than their competitors did. The important point is the power gains were made by efficiency, not by fuel consumption. Then comes the technology limitation barrier, where no one knows how to extract any more power out of the fuel. The closer you get to that barrier, the more it costs to gain efficiency, and the closer to the barrier you get the less power gains you get for your money, so eventually everyone is stuck at more or less at the same engine efficiency, so they are all at more or less the same amount of power out of the fuel.
    The problem with engine efficiency is anything above average costs more, and the more above average you want to be, the more it costs.
    While Mercedes are currently running away from everyone, this is because they are above average in terms of efficiency, while those behind are closer to average. So it is easier and cheaper for those behind Mercedes to increase their efficiency to catch Mercedes, than it is for Mercedes to stay ahead.
    Mercedes are also closer to the technology limitation barrier than those behind them, so for a given amount of money and tokens, the teams behind can make greater percentage power gains that gets them closer to Mercedes than Mercedes can to stay ahead. Meaning that over time there will be a convergence of power outputs from these engines until eventually the difference between them will be insignificant.

Comments are closed.