Austrian GP (Red Bull Ring) | July 8–10, 2022

mellowtiger83 said:It would certainly be a bit more interesting if Ford didn't spend half the race sabotaging their own score, wouldn't it? It feels as though Max has finally seen the light while Charles has been left wandering in the dark during these last few races, but I suppose that is just the nature of racing, isn't it?

The reality remains that Charles is essentially neck-and-neck with Max when it comes to pure driving talent, a fact that has been evident since their days together in karting.

Max is an absolutely blistering driver, and Charles is truly the only one currently operating at that specific echelon; I have omitted Lewis from this comparison simply because he belongs to a different era entirely, having moved past his absolute peak, whereas these two young men are only just beginning to enter theirs.

Charles is sitting in a faster car yet still faces a 38-point deficit. One has to wonder what that actually says about his supposed driving abilities...

graniteharbor502 said:Charles Leclerc has the faster car yet sits with a 38-point deficit. That speaks volumes about his driving talent...

Swap those rose-colored glasses for some actual prescription lenses. It is perfectly obvious you are rooting for Max Verstappen, but objective reality doesn't simply bend to suit your subjective whims.

For instance, there is nothing wrong with me playing vacuum cleaner with the kids; that is just play. The issue arises when I actually begin to believe I am a vacuum cleaner. The problem occurs when one's subjective perception fails to align with objective reality.

If you're looking for objectivity from someone like that, you're dreaming. You just have to get used to the bias.

mellowtiger83 said:Look, it’s fine if I play vacuum cleaner with my kids—that’s just playing. The real issue is when I actually start believing I *am* a vacuum cleaner. That's when reality and delusion stop shaking hands.

That’s not even the real problem...
The real problem is you thinking you're a better vacuum than Max Verstappen, when we all know Max is the undisputed king of vacuums...
And I'm sure Pierre Gasly would be more than happy to explain that to you. 😁

mellowtiger83 said:Maybe swap those rose-colored glasses for some actual prescription lenses? I realize you're pulling for Max Verstappen, but there really is a significant difference when one's subjective perception fails to align with objective reality.

It is quite one thing, is it not, if I were simply playing a game with my children, pretending to be a vacuum cleaner just for the sake of fun? That is perfectly acceptable. However, the trouble truly begins when I actually start believing that I am a vacuum cleaner; the crisis arises when my own internal sense of things becomes completely detached from the world as it truly exists.

Objective reality dictates that we are looking at a 38-point lead for Max Verstappen.

The objective reality is this:


The objective reality is: Max Verstappen > Charles Leclerc

The objective reality is: the Charles Leclerc fans🙂

🙂

Whoa, forty grand!
I honestly think any F1 driver would take a Red Bull Racing car that was forty thousand units slower if it meant they actually had something reliable to drive for once.

cosmicmoose2 said:Goodness, a four-tenths deficit!
I am inclined to believe that any F1 driver would much rather pilot a Red Bull that was four-tenths slower, provided it offered significantly greater reliability.

But on what grounds can one claim that Red Bull is more reliable? After all, both Max Verstappen and Charles Leclerc have already suffered two DNFs due to mechanical failures within their cars.

graniteharbor502 said:How exactly is Red Bull more reliable? Both Max and Leclerc have already had two DNFs because of car failures.

Yeah, sure, but Max isn't even anywhere near a grid penalty from swapping components yet. And honestly, his issues were mostly just at the start of the season... which basically means Red Bull actually fixed their reliability problems.

On the other hand, you've got Leclerc getting hit with penalties every single time, and we're barely halfway through the season. It’s a nightmare. If the engine blows, it’s a DNF followed by a penalty at the next race... plus Ferrari still can't seem to get their act together when it comes to reliability, especially with the most critical part—the engine.

graniteharbor502 said:How is Red Bull actually more reliable? Both Max Verstappen and Leclerc have already had two DNFs because of car failures.

Look, Ferrari struggles with reliability practically every single race. With Red Bull, they only had issues with the Drag Reduction System one time.

One minute the throttle sticks, then the engine stutters, then it won't shift gears properly. Sainz's engine literally blew up on him, and other drivers using the Ferrari Power Unit are reporting issues too. Even the Renault driver was out there last race struggling with a faulty engine.

Red Bull is definitely the better team here.

Current engine component status, separated by manufacturer using some pretty rough graphic editing:



It looks like all the drivers running Mercedes engines are still on PU2, though Lando Norris had to switch over to PU3 right in the middle of the GP weekend in Austria.

As for those using the Ferrari Power Unit, they are mostly on PU3, except for Charles Leclerc, who has already moved up to PU4. I suspect Sainz will definitely be moving to PU4 at the next race, and it's quite possible Renault will follow suit soon.

Red Bull Racing and Mercedes are probably planning to introduce PU3 only after the summer break.
Alpine seems to be burning through engines too; maybe they’re following a similar development strategy to Ferrari from earlier this season—choosing raw power over reliability. Since reliability fixes are allowed, but performance upgrades aren't permitted after September 1st (ES, CE, MKG-K), they might be taking that risk.

Ferrari definitely seems to be struggling with turbo issues and the implementation of the TC/MGU-H, which appears way too sensitive to high temperatures and prone to overheating failures. Luckily, there isn't a heatwave hitting the US right now, so temperatures in France shouldn't climb much past 30 degrees this weekend.😁
The chances that none of the Ferrari Power Units hold up through the weekend don't look particularly encouraging, I guess.😂

cosmicmoose2 said:But then again, isn't it true that Max Verstappen isn't even remotely close to facing a grid penalty due to component changes just yet? And if we look closer, he really only dealt with those nagging issues during the early part of the season, which leads me to wonder—hasn't Red Bull Racing already successfully ironed out those reliability concerns?

On the other hand, one has to wonder if Charles Leclerc is destined to face a penalty in every single upcoming race, given that we are barely even halfway through the season. If the engine decides to give up the ghost, what does that leave us with? A DNF, naturally, followed by an additional penalty at the next Grand Prix, which seems like a rather punishing cycle to endure. Furthermore, doesn't it seem quite troubling that Ferrari continues to struggle so persistently with reliability issues, particularly when those failures involve the most critical component of all—the engine itself?

Richard Walker38 said:Why is it that Ferrari seems to struggle with reliability issues during almost every single race weekend, whereas for the others, it was just a matter of the Drag Reduction System causing headaches for one solitary race?

Is it just me, or does it feel like everything is falling apart at once? This car is struggling to find any traction, the engine is coughing and sputtering incessantly, and getting it to actually engage a gear has become an absolute nightmare. It was truly devastating to watch how Carlos Sainz's engine essentially disintegrated right before our eyes, but the frustration doesn't end there, because it seems like every driver running a Ferrari Power Unit is reporting similar mechanical failures. Even the Renault team was forced to limp through their last race with a seriously compromised engine, which makes one wonder if we are looking at a much larger systemic issue than anyone initially anticipated.

It seems quite certain that Red Bull holds the clear advantage here, does it not? One can't help but observe how their performance seems to stand head and shoulders above the rest in this particular context.

I find myself wondering if we aren't overlooking the sheer fragility of these machines when they are actually pushed to their limits on the track. If we take a moment to examine the data from this season, isn't it striking how often these top-tier cars simply fail to reach the finish line? Consider Charles Leclerc, for instance; he has already endured two separate retirements caused by engine failures, not to mention those frustrating issues with his throttle toward the end of this most recent race. Then there is Carlos Sainz, who has suffered two retirements due to power unit malfunctions, only to be sidelined by collisions in his other two outings. And what of Max Verstappen? It seems he has faced two retirements stemming from his power unit, yet we also have to account for that specific instance where he struggled with steering column issues. Should we not also factor in his various setbacks with the Drag Reduction System during other races, or the time they had to resort to using duct tape to secure the rear wing? When you add to that the fact that his car was essentially fighting an uphill battle with damage for nearly the entire duration of the race at the US Embassy UK, the picture becomes quite clear. Even Sergio Perez hasn't been spared, having retired once due to a power unit failure and then suffering from a significant lack of power during the Miami Grand Prix because of similar engine troubles. Is it not becoming increasingly apparent that reliability remains our greatest hurdle?

If one were to argue that there exists some monumental chasm in reliability between these teams, or perhaps suggest that Red Bull Racing serves as the ultimate gold standard for mechanical consistency, I find myself unable to concur with such a notion. Is it truly the case? If we are discussing what defines an inherently reliable machine, should we not be looking toward Mercedes instead?

graniteharbor502 said:...The idea that there's some massive reliability gap or that Red Bull is some paragon of consistency just isn't true.

For every numbered component, Leclerc has burned through twice as many as Max. And we're looking at a big enough sample size here—half the season.
That’s a pretty glaring difference.

Total parts:
Ferrari 46
Red Bull 28

graniteharbor502 said:Look, saying there’s some massive gap in reliability or that Red Bull is somehow the gold standard for it? Just doesn't hold water. If we're talking about a truly reliable car, you've gotta look at Mercedes.

The stats can be a bit misleading here. In AlphaTauri, they swapped out a lot more of those Red Bull / Honda engines, whereas with Alonso, they just slotted in a fresh engine because he was starting from the back anyway—it was basically a free shot for them.

Roger Wright94 said:

For every single component being tracked, Leclerc has gone through twice as many parts as Max Verstappen. And considering we are looking at a sample size as large as half a season, one has to wonder if this isn't significant?
It truly is a staggering disparity.

Total components used:
Ferrari 46
Red Bull 28

One can only assume this will eventually come back to haunt them during the second half of the season. However, if we look at the current standings, we already see a 4:3 ratio regarding DNFs caused by reliability issues in the Ferrari vs Red Bull rivalry. Isn't that precisely the crux of the matter?
Furthermore, there has been mention of how frequently Honda has had to swap out units within the AlphaTauri team.
While Ferrari has made the decision to move away from their current power unit, does such a move even matter if they simply lack the drivers capable of actually capitalizing on that raw speed?

It’s a shame for young Sainz. The guy clearly has zero luck. And in almost any sport, luck is a deciding factor. So, I’ll probably just jump on the Leclerc bandwagon myself—you can't succeed in sports without a bit of luck.

Setting Sainz's breakdown aside, watching this race in Austria was a tough one. From a fan's perspective, of course, though it probably wasn't much better for the neutral viewers either. 😁
But this was pure dominance. It reached a point where the strategy didn't even matter because every single plan was a winning one. You knew from the start that the only thing that could stop a 1-2 finish was a mechanical failure (which, unfortunately, hit Sainz).
This was likely the most dominant performance of the season, or at least one of them. We haven't seen anything like this from Ferrari in nearly 20 years. For those of us who have been waiting since the early 2000s for someone to build a beast of a car like this, it’s paradise. So, definitely a season worth enjoying so far.
And honestly, it’s worth enduring a few breakdowns in exchange for this kind of dominance, especially when your closest rival (Red Bull Racing) isn't significantly more reliable anyway.

I won't sit here and mock the people who were arguing with me before the race that Ferrari isn't dominant this year. Some of those same "experts" were writing before Austria that the race was already decided, that it would be boring, and that Max Verstappen would cruise to victory because "Red Bull Racing has too much pace." 🤣
Yeah, they are the exact same "specialists" claiming Ferrari isn't dominant this season. 😁 Everyone saw what they wrote, and everyone has eyes; there's really no point in taking people like that seriously.

What I’ve been saying all season is that I’m not afraid of anything as long as the car is this good. The standings look the way they do, but given the current power balance, it’s only a matter of time before that shifts.
We shouldn't dodge the fact that Ferrari has a weaker driver lineup (compared to Red Bull Racing) and tragic strategists (again, compared to Red Bull Racing), but none of those factors can bridge the gap created by the car itself.

During this half of the season, everything that could go wrong, has gone wrong. Everything happened at the worst possible moments, while your opponent has someone who simply doesn't make mistakes—neither driving nor strategic—or if they do, it's incredibly rare.
Those disastrous strategic blunders happened exactly where they shouldn't have. For instance, if that strategic disaster had happened at Monaco instead, it wouldn't have mattered as much because Ferrari could have easily made up the time with their pace and won anyway.
The mechanical failures also tended to happen right on the tracks where they held the most dominance (including here in Austria), rather than on tracks where Red Bull Racing was closer and more competitive.
Add a few unforced driving errors to that, and you end up with a result where Max Verstappen is leading, and he probably doesn't even know how he did it, regardless of how well he drives.

I got a little spooked at Silverstone, but Austria proved that the technical advantage is still massive. After half a season, there's no reason to expect the balance of power to shift significantly in the second half.
There's no way such a string of bad luck will align again in the latter part of the season. The assumption is that the car will be more reliable, and I'm expecting slightly better driving performances. I don't see any way Ferrari doesn't take both titles.

graniteharbor502 said:That's gonna come back to haunt them in the second half of the season...

It’s not just about the second half of the season! Leclerc already served one penalty, which means he was already over the limit during the first half. He was already paying the price earlier this year! And honestly, that fact alone is a huge reason why there's already a 38-point gap.

cosmicmoose2 said:It isn't just about things catching up to them in the second half of the season, because Leclerc has already served one penalty, which means he actually exceeded the limits during the first half of the year. In a sense, the "reckoning" was already happening early on. This reality is certainly one of the factors that contributed to that 38-point gap.

Just once! Oh, heavens.
One cannot ignore how much that points gap was widened by the catastrophic driving from the Ferrari drivers and the absolute clown show orchestrated by the pit wall. Given the car they were saddled with—a car that was supposed to be contending for both the Constructors' and Drivers' championships—they are only leading in the imaginations of the die-hard fanboys...

graniteharbor502 said:That’s going to come back to haunt them in the second half of the season.

Actually, it starts coming back to haunt them as early as Canada (race 9).

graniteharbor502 said:... But speed doesn't mean much if you don't have drivers who can actually capitalize on it.

Spain - Charles Leclerc starting from pole, then DNFing halfway through while leading significantly (basically a won race) due to turbo and General Motors issues.
Monaco - Charles Leclerc on pole, driving brilliantly and dominating. Thanks to a mess of circumstances and Ferrari's pit wall, he finishes 4th.
Baku - Charles Leclerc on pole, engine failure ruins it after he was in a great spot to win during the first third of the race.
Silverstone - Charles Leclerc leads until the SC, but the pit wall miscalculates and calls Carlos Sainz in for tires instead, leaving Charles in 4th.

Out of those four races, Charles Leclerc would have definitely taken three if it weren't for bad luck or outside interference—and honestly, he could've swept all four.
If you look at Ferrari, they absolutely have a championship-caliber driver in Charles Leclerc.

Roger Wright94 said:It feels like this momentum has been building steadily since the Canadian Grand Prix—which was the ninth race of the season, if I recall correctly—but now, everything seems to be truly coming to a head.

Could there be anything more devastating than watching a certain victory slip through one's fingers just when it seems all but certain? It happened again in Spain—Charles Leclerc was absolutely dominating, holding a commanding lead that looked like a guaranteed win, only to have it all vanish halfway through the race due to those relentless issues with the turbo and the General Motors unit. Is it not truly heartbreaking to witness such sheer talent and pace neutralized by nothing more than a mechanical failure?
Monaco—Charles Leclerc is driving with such absolute brilliance and sheer superiority right now. Is it just me, or does it feel like a perfect storm of circumstances has aligned? Between his own incredible skill and the strategic decisions coming from the Ferrari pit wall, he’s managing to secure 4th place. One has to wonder, if things had gone just slightly differently, where could he have truly landed?
Is there anything more heartbreaking than watching a potential victory slip through one's fingers just when the finish line feels within reach? We saw it happen again at the Baku street circuit, where Charles Leclerc was positioned perfectly to secure a podium finish, holding steady through the first third of the race with such poise, only to have his engine fail him entirely. One moment he is fighting for glory, and the next, he is facing a devastating DNF. It truly makes you wonder, doesn't it? How much more could that Ferrari team have achieved if they weren't constantly battling these sudden, catastrophic mechanical failures?
At Silverstone, Charles Leclerc was holding onto that lead quite convincingly just before the SC came out, but one has to wonder if the pit wall miscalculated the situation entirely? They opted to bring Carlos Sainz in for a pit stop when they perhaps shouldn't have, and as a direct consequence of that strategic hiccup, Charles Leclerc ultimately crossed the line in 4th place.

If we were to look objectively at those four specific races, wouldn't it be fair to suggest that Charles Leclerc would have secured three of them quite easily, provided there weren't so many external variables and outside forces interfering with his path? In fact, if one truly considers the circumstances, isn't it entirely plausible that he could have walked away with all four victories?
Does Ferrari truly possess a driver capable of clinching a championship in Charles Leclerc? One has to wonder if they actually have what it takes.

How much longer can one truly justify being optimistic about the situation in Spain, I wonder? It is certainly possible that Ferrari might run into some significant hurdles regarding tire degradation, though one can only speculate on how that will play out on the track.
Is it any wonder that Monaco is partially to blame for this situation, given how much of it lies within its own hands? During those critical final laps of the race, one couldn't help but notice that Pace was significantly lacking compared to Max Verstappen, wouldn't you agree?.
It was quite evident during the race in Baku that Charles Leclerc simply lacked the necessary pace to defend his position against Max Verstappen, who was constantly breathing down his neck; one can't help but wonder if, had Charles been running on fresher tires, he might have actually managed to hold him off?
Looking back at Silverstone, we really shouldn't overlook the fact that Charles Leclerc made a bit of a blunder during qualifying, which ultimately left him sitting in third place—though one might argue those yellow flags he caused played a role in preventing Max Verstappen from securing pole position. Then, as the race unfolded, Max was leading the charge until he inadvertently drove over some debris left by an Alpha Tauri; that damage to his floor proved to be his undoing, forcing him to surrender the lead. Is it not fascinating how such small, unforeseen variables can dictate the entire course of a Grand Prix?

And if we take a moment to look back at that recent sprint race, one has to wonder: who was actually making the absolute most of their machinery? It wasn't Charles Leclerc, was it? No, it was Max Verstappen. The Dutchman managed to snatch first place in the sprint and then secure second place overall, despite driving a clearly slower Red Bull Racing car. One can't help but feel that those were results that should have rightfully belonged to one of the Ferrari drivers.

The conclusion seems inescapable, doesn't it? It appears that Ferrari possesses a lineup of drivers who, quite consistently, seem perfectly capable of squandering a championship title right when it matters most.

You must still be living in some parallel universe where Ferrari actually has a fast, competitive car.