In the round-up: Ferrari has an upgraded MGU-K for this weekend’s race.
Links
Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more from hundreds of sites across the web:
Ferrari uses another engine token for Austrian GP (Motorsport)
"It is understood that Ferrari has changed its MGU-K design to help improve its energy recovery, which could be very valuable around the Austrian track."
Wolff backs F1 performance-related team payments (Reuters)
"Asked whether he now wanted to get rid of such payments, the Briton told reporters: 'Yes. No bonus. Everyone’s in the same boat.' However, the 85-year-old added that 'Ferrari has been with us since F1 started, so they should get something for that'."
Button: Tyre pressure hike 'unbelievable' (Autosport)
"Button called the rise 'unbelievably high considering we didn't have any issues here last year. It's very high.'"
Lewis Hamilton says likely penalties make catching Nico Rosberg difficult (The Guardian)
"I will try to find a circuit where I feel like I can get furthest up and maybe a track where I can catch up and even challenge for a win."
More fun up front - exclusive Nico Hulkenberg Q&A (F1)
"Baku especially suited our car and its characteristics - and on top came the supersoft and especially the ultrasoft tyres - and this combination made us very competitive on these kinds of tracks."
Nico Rosberg not keen on Ferrari: 'Mercedes are just as legendary' (Sky)
"'Mercedes are just as legendary,' he told reporters ahead the Austrian GP."
Nico Rosberg: No need for another radio rule change (ESPN)
"That was the goal of these rules and also the fans were complaining that we were just puppets on the track, just doing what the engineers were telling us, that was the complaint from the fans and that's why they changed the rules and they are the way they are now."
Vettel: Marchionne knows how hard Ferrari pushes (Crash)
"Our president is very aware of what's going on, he's very much interested at what's going on inside the factory, what's good and what's bad, where the weaknesses and strengths are and I'd probably agree with him statements. "
'I'm also the real deal!' (F1i)
Daniel Ricciardo: "Danny (Kvyat) made a pretty slow start to the year for his standards and things weren’t quite gelling and I heard there was a high chance that there would be a change in Barcelona."
My Austrian Grand Prix preview for Eurosport.
Six Reasons Why Williams Are The Team To Back In The Austrian Grand Prix (Unibet)
"My Austrian Grand Prix preview for Unibet."
Got a tip for a link to feature in the next F1 Fanatic round-up? Send it in here:
Social media
Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:
Looks like I got pushed out again…. @robertwickens @MercedesAMGDTM where are you? 😂😂 #déjàvu pic.twitter.com/VR1ediG5Xj
— Pascal Wehrlein (@PWehrlein) June 30, 2016
Ferrari found pieces of metal in Vettels gearbox oil. Too risky to use in the race -> 5 place grid penalty.
AMuS: https://t.co/xkXXPFOBD3
— Tobi Grüner 🏁 (@tgruener) June 30, 2016
- Find more official F1 accounts to follow in the F1 Twitter Directory
Comment of the day
While some drivers have criticised the radio restrictions, quite a few others have supported them – and @Fer-no65 agrees:
Here you have three different drivers saying the same thing: it’s up to them and up to their teams to sort it out. Tough luck otherwise.
You either do your homework and study all the maps, menues and whatever, or the team works out a system where you don’t have to press a kazillion buttons to make things work the way they should.
F1 is all about engineering anyway, so I don’t see this being any more difficult than trying to design a wing or a diffuser. A good design, by definition, has to fulfil its function efficiently and that also includes being easy to operate and troubleshoot. As always, it’s a compromise. And with every compromise, there’s always the risk that something will fall outside of your sweet spot and you won’t have an easy ride.
@Fer-no65
From the forum
Happy birthday!
Happy birthday to Tom Moloney and Pj!
If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.
Tristan
1st July 2016, 0:33
Pffft, who’s Rosberg trying to kid? Mercedes just as legendary as Ferrari? Dropped out of the sport for nearly 50 years, came back and bought an already championship winning team. Their total time as a constructor could just about be counted on fingers and toes.
As legendary as Ferrari -_-
Optimaximal (@optimaximal)
1st July 2016, 0:45
Actually, they’ve been back the sport as an engine supplier since 1994 where they powered Sauber (although you could say it was ’93, given the Swiss team used Ilmor power for that season), before having a pretty successful works spell with McLaren.
Yes, it’s not Ferrari’s longetivity, but they’re pretty famous & successful across the entire motorsport spectrum, whereas Ferrari is pretty much ‘F1 and a bit of GT racing’.
Jay
1st July 2016, 4:55
Ferrari are synonymous with F1, it’s the first team people think of when you say F1, after than, people may say McLaren or Williams, then probably defunct teams such as Jordan and Minardi.
MG421982 (@)
1st July 2016, 8:03
What do you know and I don’t?!? Mercedes present in the entire motorsport spectrum, whereas Ferrari is pretty much ‘F1 and a bit of GT racing?!? Cannot be more wrong! OK, Mercedes is a lot more older than Ferrari, other than that they raced pretty much in the same champs and classes!!! Being just an engine supplier – as Mercedes did in the Group C for example – shouldn’t count too much. Running a full team and building your own car is a different thing. Plus, let’s not forget they didn’t even build the engines: in the McLaren years the engines were built in England by Ilmor. So, their real contribution is a lot smaller than it seems once you shed some light on all these aspects. Back to Ferrari, probably you missed the fact that they raced at Le Mans (which is part of an entire champ actually!!) in multiple classes until late 70s, they raced in Can-Am, the iconic Lancia Stratos had a Ferrari engine etc.
Seppo (@helava)
1st July 2016, 5:06
Sure, they bought out Brawn, but it was clear that the Brawn was sort of a one-and-done chassis, having taken advantage of a major loophole in the rules. Once that loophole was closed, they needed a few years to get back on their feet again both as the new Mercedes team, and to get a car in a position to win. I don’t see Mercedes as having bought a champion-caliber team out of the box – they engineered their current dominance legitimately.
That said, what BrawnGP did was absolutely phenomenal, and I don’t take anything from what they accomplished. They’re my favorite F1 team next to Senna-era McLaren/Honda.
petebaldwin (@)
1st July 2016, 9:05
“They engineered their current dominance legitimately” – through beneficial rule changes. Ferrari would be proud!
kpcart
1st July 2016, 14:36
the Brawn was Honda developed by the way, as the season went along, the others caught up. Ross Brawn bought in at the most luckiest time ever as a team owner, buying a championship winning car.
Jason Miller (@flatdarkmars)
1st July 2016, 0:47
“Mercedes are just as legendary [as Ferrari]” he says. Funny, you never see anyone who feels it necessary to proclaim that Ferrari are “just as legendary” as Mercedes.
GT Racer (@gt-racer)
1st July 2016, 1:24
I’ve been told something rather interesting recently regarding the high tyre pressures Pirelli have been mandating this year, That been that Pirelli are not doing it for safety reasons as they claim but that there actually doing it for the show.
The past year or 2 Pirelli have been more conservative with the construction & compound of its tyres to cope with the increased torque these power units put through the rear tyres & as such since 2014 we have seen a lot less tyre degredation & therefore pit stops compared to what we were seeing in 2011-2013.
The higher tyre pressures have made the operating windows narrower as well as an overall reduction in grip that gets the cars sliding around a little more both of which have created graining problems and/or increased tyre wear for some cars/drivers & the feeling is that this has mixed things up a bit.
Mercedes not having the advantage over Ferrari & Red Bull that was expected in a few races do far this year & Red Bull’s struggles at Baku a few weeks ago as well as Force India’s good raceday pace are examples of things towards the front been a bit affected by the tyres but its a bit more prevalent through the mid-field.
This would explain why Pirelli have been using what many teams/drivers have been calling ‘extreme’ high pressures at circuits where traditionally pressures would be much, much lower without any concern at all.
I have also been told that while there is a lot of appreciation for Pirelli having a regular dialog with team & drivers that there is also now an increasingly growing frustration that Pirelli have seemingly been completely ignoring a lot of the feedback & concerns which have been raised/discussed in those meetings (Especially relating to the high pressures which everyone outside of Pirelli feel are unreasonable & unnecessary) & thats overall some are starting to feel these meetings are purely for PR purposes (To silence previous criticisms) rather than to actually take note of let alone act on any of the things which come out of the discussions.
mog
1st July 2016, 1:58
Interesting context for Button’s comments, I read everything Button says (or is reported to say ;)) as likley to be a statesmans move. FFS Pirelli, let them race.
Alec Glen (@alec-glen)
1st July 2016, 11:43
Pirelli are in Bernie’s back pocket, explains everything.
BasCB (@bascb)
1st July 2016, 12:45
very interesting!
anon
1st July 2016, 20:30
@gt-racer, I would be a bit cynical about what the teams are saying, because there is a suggestion that there is a rather different reason for Pirelli specifying higher tyre pressures.
Basically, the FIA and Pirelli know that several teams (Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren, Renault and, more recently, Ferrari have all been accused) have been abusing loopholes in the procedures for measuring the tyre pressure to run the tyres below the minimum recommended pressure by Pirelli once the tyres are fitted to the car.
Pirelli themselves have said as much – the reason why they asked for a new tyre measurement procedure, where the tyres have the pressure measured whilst they are in the blankets at a fixed temperature, is because they “are 100 percent sure that only the blanket is heating the tyre”, showing that they know teams are using other means to effect the measurements on the grid.
To that end, it seems that Pirelli have counteracted that by pushing the tyre pressures up to compensate for the fact that the teams are overheating the tyres on the grid to falsify the tyre pressure readings. Button’s comments in that article say exactly that – that Pirelli are pushing the pressures up to compensate for the fact that the pressure on track is falling below what Pirelli wanted them to be.
They’ve said that they are prepared to drop the starting pressures if the new procedure is more reliable – they were prepared to drop them further if the teams were prepared to share the real time telemetry data on the tyre pressures, but the teams have refused to share that data in a way that suggests they have something to hide.
In those circumstances, it is very much in the interests of the team to try and shift as much of the blame onto Pirelli as possible. At the very least, it hides the fact that they are breaking the regulations – no team is going to want to say anything, either in public or in private, that effectively spells out that they are breaking the rules.
mog, in the case of Button, as I’ve noted above, he has a vested interest in making those sorts of comments – his team is one of the ones that has been accused of abusing the regulations on the tyre pressures, so his comments could also be seen as him trying to deflect attention away from the team.
x303 (@x303)
2nd July 2016, 9:33
“[…] but the teams have refused to share that data in a way that suggests they have something to hide.”
What’s that way that suggests so much? I know this is Formula 1 and the teams are probably hiding something, but I fail to see how “no, we don’t want to share pour data” suggests anything more than the initial refusal.
anon
2nd July 2016, 10:27
@x303, asides from refusing to share their data, the teams also rejected Pirelli’s suggestion to have a third party tyre pressure monitoring system fitted on the car, which would have allowed Pirelli to collect the data without having to go through the team (although I believe that Pirelli has now persuaded the FIA to change the regulations for 2017 to allow them to fit such a system).
Refusing to share the data could be for a number of reasons, but the fact that they are also refusing to allow any sort of independent monitoring has raised a few questions as to why the teams are so keen to prevent Pirelli from having any live tyre pressure monitoring data.
Jay Menon (@jaymenon10)
1st July 2016, 1:32
Ferrari have been pushing hard for the last 10 years, especially in the Alonso years, to no avail.
They must be pushing in the wrong the direction?
Alec Glen (@alec-glen)
1st July 2016, 11:44
Or pushing too hard putting the team under too much pressure…
SaraJ (@sjzelli)
1st July 2016, 3:44
More like “Ferrari not keen on Nico Rosberg”
Neil (@neilosjames)
1st July 2016, 5:48
“Ferrari has been with us since F1 started, so they should get something for that.”
They already get something for that. Most fans, most merchandise sales, the weird, intangible ‘pull’ on so many drivers and fans and a constant association with the F1 brand no other team truly gets.
That’s more than enough to say, ‘Hey guys, thanks for entering the championship 16 years before McLaren’. Saying it’s worth the absurd figure they receive today is insulting to both the sport and the other teams.
bosyber (@bosyber)
1st July 2016, 6:11
I absolutely agree with that @nealosjames; also, changing to a fairer, consistent and clear payment schedule only to then add a special case right away is ridiculously stupid. Only a matter of time for the next one to scheme for special deals.
bosyber (@bosyber)
1st July 2016, 6:13
@nealosjames, seems both ; and full stop mess up f1fanatic referring?
bosyber (@bosyber)
1st July 2016, 6:14
Sorry, I clearly need to wake up first @neilosjames
caci99
1st July 2016, 8:51
@neilosjames Good point. I myself am Ferrari fan largely because of their legendary status I guess, or my affinity with Italy, who knows :).
Anyway, it is not the first time where I have seen systems where the elder get some incentives for the loyalty to that system. But in this case, this is a competition environment where every bit counts, so I agree that Ferrari does take too much out of the cake, it needs to be reduced a lot. I also believe that fair distribution is the key to a lot of problems instead of meaningless restrictive rules year after year.
bosyber (@bosyber)
1st July 2016, 6:36
It is rare for me to agree with something he says, but “Christian Horner told reporters that it should be more a question of increasing payments to all than taking money away from any team.” is very true. Bernie already suggests that isn’t his plan though.
petebaldwin (@)
1st July 2016, 9:08
Paying more money? Bernie? Lol
Solo (@solo)
25th November 2016, 18:18
Horner says that because he thinks they should all get more money and doesn’t want his budget reduced. BUT actually giving everyone more money doesn’t solve anything if the current paying system continues.
Sauber for example has financial difficulties because it spends 150 million a year. It could spend 50 million and be fine with the money it has. So one wonders why then do they spend 150 million?
The answer is simple. They spend 150 million because Red Bull spends 400 million. And if they ever want to get up on the grid and not be back a few second permanently they have to spend at least an amount that gets closer to the big teams as much as they can.
So no the answer isn’t simply getting more money because if Sauber spend 300 million and Red Bull 900 million then nothing has been achieved by the teams getting more money. The difference will be the same and the financial difficulties for the smaller teams will be the same.
What is needed is that the smaller teams get closer to the big teams in terms of what they receive. That way the financial difference between small and big teams will decrease and allow smaller teams to be competitive easier without overspending themselves to keep their cars from being lapped 10 times in a race.
So Horner is WRONG. Getting more money solves nothing if the difference between the small and big teams in terms of revenue continues.
MacLeod (@macleod)
1st July 2016, 8:42
Nice piece for Eurosport Keith congrats!
Neel Jani (@neelv27)
1st July 2016, 10:38
Ferrari getting paid a sort of a loyalty incentive is a debatable point and both the arguments would hold some water to be honest however; I just have one question, doesn’t Ferrari need Formula 1 the same way as Formula 1 needs Ferrari?
BasCB (@bascb)
1st July 2016, 12:46
yes, both need each other @neelv27
Solo (@solo)
25th November 2016, 18:22
Not only that but Ferrari has also received big rewards for their constant presence in F1. A big reason their name has the status it has is the constant connection to F1 and that status helps them sell more cars and products each year.
Max Taylor
2nd July 2016, 3:55
Ferrari cosa nostra? Corrupt, whinging, never raced on a level playing field yet!