Autosport.com wrote:There will be plenty of people out there who will disagree with this analysis of the competitive order based on pre-season testing. And I hope I am wrong.
To make any sense out of these two pre-season tests is pretty difficult. But over the days a trend emerges, and that trend points to Mercedes having once again done an exceptional job.
You would have to tick all the boxes: performance, reliability and tyre degradation all look to be under control with the W09. The only little fly in the ointment might just be that Mercedes won't be as good as others when push comes to shove using softer tyres for qualifying.
Mercedes has bucketloads of data on the medium and probably the soft tyres, but less than other teams on the super, ultra and hypersoft versions. We can but hope.
I'm not going to get into what actual fuel loads different teams were running, because I would only be guessing. Suffice to say that normally the smaller teams would go for a glory run more often than the bigger teams. Fuel weight is a fairly straight delta to the lap time, so they can just apply that to know where they really stand.
I'm using the following differences in pace between compounds, based on what we've seen from the lap times rather than simply using Pirelli's averages:
Medium to soft - 0.2s
Soft to supersoft - 0.4s
Supersoft to ultrasoft - 0.6s
Ultrasoft to hypersoft - 0.8s
Add to that a fuel effect of 0.05s per lap for the fuel load reduction on the run that the time was set on and we can create an adjusted ranking. Unless stated, these were set on day four of the final test.
Pirelli reckons that the medium to soft tyre delta should be 0.8 seconds. But if you use that the Mercedes isn't just ahead - it's miles ahead. And I don't agree, anyway.
Adjusted performance
1 Mercedes 1m16.075s
2 Red Bull 1m16.527s
3 Haas 1m16.560s (day 3)
4 Ferrari 1m16.921s
5 Williams 1m17.089s
6 Renault 1m17.092s (day 2)
7 McLaren 1m17.584s
8 Toro Rosso 1m18.163s (day 3)
9 Force India 1m18.617s
10 Sauber 1m18.844s
1 Mercedes 1m16.075s - 1040 laps
The main problem with Mercedes - for everybody else - is that the dominant team of this era of F1 had a small problem last year. That led to head scratching, and with the expertise in Brackley and Brixworth that's probably the worst thing that could have happened to the rest.
Mercedes has put together a package that you could argue was a development of last year's car, and that was the right thing to do. Mercedes knew the speed was in there, it was just about unlocking it on more occasions.
So its challenge was to identify why this happened and rectify the problem. From what we have seen so far, the car is definitely quick. But we will have to wait until we hit a few other tracks to see if any of those 'diva' characteristics carry over.
On the track, the car looks good. Not perfect, but it gives the drivers confidence, which is a major asset when they need to go and find lap time.
2 Red Bull 1m16.527s - 783 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 0.40%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 0.59%
Red Bull has done a good job, but not quite good enough. A bit of that will still be in the Renault versus Mercedes power unit performance, but that's what Red bull has got to work with.
The car looks pretty good on the track and Red Bull has two very hungry drivers ready for success, but if they don't start the season with a win or two their enthusiasm may drop fairly quickly. You can be best of the rest for only so long.
Over the test days, the reliability wasn't perfect and if Red Bull is going to challenge for either of the championships, reliability needs to be rock solid. There will be enough outside factors that mean Red Bull won't finish all the races, but self-inflicted issues need to be a thing of the past from both Red Bull and Renault.
3 Haas 1m16.560s - 694 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 2.85%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 0.640%
If this is real progress then I am impressed. When Haas revealed its car, it all looked a bit tame to me but taking something that you understand and making it better could just be the right thing for this relatively small team.
Haas really needs to concentrate of consistency and keeping up with development, as this is where the team mainly fell down last year. We won't know if it has got on top of that until we are well into the season.
If Haas can also either fix Romain Grosjean's brakes or get him to brake a couple of meters earlier then more progress will be made. I am pretty impressed with what Kevin Magnussen is bringing to the team, and Grosjean will be driven on by that.
4 Ferrari 1m16.921s - 929 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 0.07%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.11%
This time last year, I was praising Ferrari for its aggressive approach to the new regulations. And on the circuit, the car looked really good. It didn't matter which tyre it was on, the balance seemed to be there.
This year, from what I have seen of the car at the first pre-season test, Ferrari doesn't seem to have moved on that much.
On the track, the car looks pretty good but it looks on the limit. Try to push that little bit more and it just slides wide. Even so, it's pretty well balanced, but just not the grip level of the Mercedes.
If this performance deficit is real then there will be dark clouds over Maranello and it won't be long before the chopping block is out.
5 Williams 1m17.089s - 819 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 2.00%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.33%
I'm probably as surprised as anyone to see Williams here, but it has changed its car's aerodynamics and probably mechanical design philosophy dramatically. The car is a mix of Ferrari and Mercedes concepts and it does look like Williams got a reasonable handle on how to make it work late in testing.
It would be good to see Williams back in contention. After all, it has a long and impressive pedigree. However, that means nothing: it is tomorrow that counts and I think the team has realised that by bringing in Paddy Lowe from Mercedes and Dirk de Beer From Ferrari.
Williams has two relatively inexperienced drivers, but that can also be a positive when you are trying to build a team, The old hardened professional driver can sometimes be a pain in the arse because they know everything about how their previous team worked instead of just driving the wheels off what they now have.
6 Renault 1m17.092s - 795 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 1.64%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.34%
Renault has been building the team back to what is required to challenge for race wins, but at some point you need to say 'OK, we are there now, how are we doing?'. I believe this is the year to ask that question.
The big challenge for Renault is to be ahead of McLaren, and over this test it has just about made it. Red Bull is a team that has been operating a high level for quite a few years, so it should still be out of touch this year. That said, it won't stop Renault trying. But I think it will be reasonably happy as long as it can consistently make progress as the season unfolds.
Renault had quite a few reliability problems that must be got on top of. This happened last year as well, costing quite a few points, so the team knows the importance of getting to the chequered flag.
Nico Hulkenberg and Carlos Sainz Jr are going to push each other hard and are both capable of success if they have the tools at their disposal.
7 McLaren 1m17.584s - 599 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 1.85%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 1.98%
The car certainly looks good, both on the circuit and up close. The detail is pretty good, but that doesn't always turn into lap time.
The change to Renault engines should only be positive. Yes, it is not the best engine in the pitlane but at least it puts McLaren in the position where others are using it, so the performance of the chassis can genuinely be measured.
But that's where it ends. The reliability has been abysmal and the main problem is every time it is something new. McLaren has had an electrical problem, a hydraulic leak, an engine oil leak and turbo problems - and those are just the ones we know about.
This is a team that has a huge facility and commitment behind it, and it should be on top of all that stuff. McLaren has as much equipment at its disposal as anyone else, yet smaller teams are able to get better reliability out of their cars.
All that said, it's better to have these problems in pre-season testing than at the first few races. I'm pretty sure there will be lots of McLaren personnel in Melbourne with their fingers crossed.
8 Toro Rosso 1m18.163s - 822 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 2.94%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 2.74%
Toro Rosso was probably the surprise of the test, of at least the Honda part of that equation. The team and Honda seem to be at home with each other and that can only be positive.
Initially, the car seemed to have a front-end problem, then as testing progressed, that seemed to go away. But I noticed later in the test there were comments about the front end giving up.
Doing the mileage it has achieved will have given the team and Honda bucketloads of data to trawl through - so I'm sure somewhere in there is the solution.
It has inexperienced drivers, similar to Williams, which will put the team in a questionable position. But all Toro Rosso can do is keep its head down, work closely with Honda and build for the future.
9 Force India 1m18.617s - 711 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 1.60%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 3.34%
Fourth in the constructors' championship for the last two seasons was a great result, but you are only as good as what you can do tomorrow. This year, it is going to be tough to maintain that championship position and, in reality, Force India could do a better job on pace relative to the top teams and still finish seventh.
This, on face value, is quite a dramatic drop off in performance relative to the frontrunners. But the team is adamant it came to these tests with the 2018 mechanical platform in place to make sure it understood and could get on top of the required set-up.
Force India intends to introduce a major aerodynamic package for Melbourne, and looking at the times from the test it needs to be major.
Force India needs to find a second and a half at least if it is to stand any chance of hanging in there in fourth place. A second and a half is a lifetime in F1.
On the circuit the car looks OK, it just doesn't have the grip of the frontrunners. A lot hinges on how much downforce it can add for Australia.
10 Sauber 1m18.844 - 786 laps
Deficit to front over last four races of 2017: 3.56%
Deficit to front in testing 2018: 3.64%
Looking at the percentage deficit to Mercedes in 2017, at the test Sauber has more or less stood still. But if you look at the car, it is completely different. I suppose that just says you can make it look different but it does not always improve the performance.
I'm pretty sure that Ferrari with its 'technical relationship' will get involved. It won't stand back and allow the Alfa Romeo branding that is now on the Sauber to be tarnished.
On the circuit, the car just looks like it hasn't got the grip. And the drivers visited the kitty litter too often.
Conclusion
Hopefully all of these times and assumptions are going to go out of the window when we get to Melbourne, the grid will be one of the closest we have ever seen and we won't know who is going to win until the cars come around the final corner to take the chequered flag. But I won't hold my breath.
Overall, from 2017 the midfield is a bit more mixed up and probably a bit closer to the front bunch. But from the front to the back the deficit is much the same. Nobody said it is easy, and whether you are at the front or the back you just have to keep your head down and get on with it.
The outcome from this test is not really what any of us wanted. Closer racing is all we ask for - so please let someone come up with a strategy to achieve that sometime in the near future.
Max is driving today(Tuesday)