How it has all changed !

Not that many years ago we knew that rain during a race meant that there will be very little overtaking and that pit work and strategy were crucial. Today it is exactly the other way around.

The modern F1 car relies mostly on aerodynamic grip to get around the racetrack. To optimise the aerodynamic grip the car is set up to get the best compromise between drag (caused by the size and angle of the wings) and power available. Because they expect most races to be dry, a lot of this compromise is built into the basic design of the chassis and changes for wet races are limited.

In the past aerodynamics were relatively primitive as most teams relied on the mechanical grip they were getting from the very wide and sticky slick tyres that were allowed. A wet race meant considerably less mechanical grip on the wet tyres but virtually no grip if you were caught out on the track in very heavy rain on slicks. Getting drivers in for the right tyres at the right time inevitably determined the outcome of the race as lap times could almost double if you were out in slicks in a downpour, and few drivers could make that up on the track.

We saw more overtaking in the rain at the European Grand Prix than we did all year so far. It made the race exciting, as positions changed on the track rather than having to wait for the outcome of the pit stops.

So why has it totally changed around? I can only guess. In the past the wide slicks allowed you to force the defending car to brake late into a corner. Then you could tuck in behind and build exit speed while he was trying to cope with the disadvantage of entering the corner too tight (because he was forced to take a narrow inside line). Today that strategy does not work on a dry circuit as the turbulence from the car in front will mess your aerodynamic grip up so that you are unlikely to exit as fast as he does (let alone faster). And, if you are not faster out of a corner it is almost impossible to get to the next one first.

Sure, there were other ways of overtaking but today, none of those work either.

Today’s tyres also seem to be more sensitive to dirt (tyre dust and marbles) on the track. If you combine that with the fact that each corner also has it’s optimum aerodynamic line there just does not seem a way around any more – unless you have a huge horsepower advantage.

But on a wet track it is different. Speeds are a lot lower than the aerodynamic design expects and the rain washes most, if not all, of the slippery dust off the track which means that the grip is OK everywhere.

If the aerodynamics do not feature as much, the turbulence from the car in front has a lot less effect and it is possible to set it up so that you can overtake. The only problem is visibility, which is almost non existent. I am sure that most drivers rely on memory rather than sight.

We also saw teams, like Benetton that do not do that well in a dry race, suddenly do a lot better. This is again because of the horsepower to drag compromise. Teams who do not have powerful engines can not afford the drag that comes from an optimum aerodynamic shape. They are therefore forced to design a lower drag (and downforce) car and rely on the good old-fashioned mechanical grip. On a wet track that combination is wonderful, as mechanical grip is about the only grip you will get, and it is almost impossible to use all the power anyway.

The race started dry which was good as we have seen far too much wet start carnage in the past. Schumacher started surprisingly well and beat Coulthard to the first corner but Hakkinen pulled off one of the best starts of his career to get in front of both of them.

As soon as it started to rain it was obvious that the Ferrari was faster in the wet. Schumacher got ahead of Hakkinen and although Hakkinen looked fast at times during the race, Michael was never really threatened.

Coulthard had a problem. I do not know what it was but he was definitely not in the same car as Hakkinen. I suspect that whatever was wrong could also account for the positions that he lost at the start, although he did admit that he was slow to react then !

Fisichella did very well to finish in 5^th place although he was a lap down (but he was in good company – everyone with the exception of Hakkinen were a lap down), and I was impressed with de la Rosa in 6^th.

I enjoyed the race enormously. I had forgotten what it is like to see cars actually overtake on the track.

Ferrari

They may win races but they are still marginally slower than McLaren. The Ferrari seems more difficult to set up for a circuit and although it frequently qualifies well it is still at a disadvantage on medium to high-speed tracks.

The Ferrari has more mechanical grip than the McLaren, which gives it the edge in the rain and should also make it faster on the tight, slow circuits.

Michael Schumacher

Fastest of the Ferrari drivers and arguably the fastest driver this season. He is leading in the Drivers Championship and has a very real chance to win it this year.

Michael is always fast in the wet and Nurburgring was no exception. He overtook Hakkinen early in the race and from then on controlled the race from the front.

Barrichello

Still not in the same league as Michael Schumacher. Barrichello has a chronic problem setting his car up for races and although he can qualify in a strong position he struggles to convert that to a great race result.

Barrichello was obviously faster than Coulthard and, in my opinion looked as if he could be faster than Hakkinen, but yet again he failed to take advantage of it. I realise that overtaking in zero visibility is difficult but he never even looked as if he was trying.

McLaren

McLaren are still the fastest cars on the circuit. The margin to Ferrari may be small but with a clear track ahead they are consistently faster.

They do rely heavily on aerodynamic downforce, which is a handicap in the rain, and will probably also affect their performance on slow tracks like Monaco.

Hakkinen

In my opinion the best qualifier. Mika is the only driver that has the ability and the car to threaten Michael Schumacher’s lead.

Hakkinen was obviously struggling with the roadholding of his car and he did well to stay as close to Schumacher as he did. He started unbelievably well but as soon as the track was wet he did not have the pace to stay ahead of Schumacher.

Hakkinen complained of overtaking back markers again. Maybe this is something that McLaren drivers do as Coulthard was always complaining about back markers last year.

Coulthard

Coulthard may not be quite as fast as Hakkinen but he has improved dramatically since last season. Now he appears to get on with the job, and he does it very well.

Coulthard qualified in pole, but lost the first place at the start when both Hakkinen and Schumacher overtook him. I am sure that there was something wrong with his car (and he claimed that he had a "mechanical" problem) because he was way off the pace of the two leaders. He did admit though that he was slow to react at the start !

Williams

Except for the fact that they did not blow an engine, Williams can not be very happy with the European Grand Prix. Both cars had a chance to finish in the points and both were taken out of contention in accidents.

Ralf Schumacher

A very fast and competent driver. At the moment his car is still not fast enough to be in contention for a regular position on the podium but I expect to see him in the points unless his car breaks down.

It was rather silly to get involved in the Verstappen/Irvine accident, as he was not that close. He assumed that the cars would not slide across the track in front of him, and guess what? They did, or certainly Irvine did, taking Ralf out of the race. Had Ralf hung back to just make sure, he may have finished in the points.

Button

Mature and very capable. He seems a little harder on the car and may have to learn to conserve his equipment but he is fast enough to finish in the points if he lasts full race distance.

He struggled on bravely to the end of the race despite the fact that he was sitting in a pool of water that was coming in through a damaged nose cone. Before that he was looking pretty good. I predict that he will be pushing Ralf before the end of the season.

Jordan

I expected Jordan to do well in the rain but they managed two laps with both cars. Trulli, admittedly crashed, but an engine blow on the second lap? Not even BAR was that bad last season.

Frentzen

He is fast enough to finish on the podium if his equipment only gave him half a chance.

Trulli

Trulli may not be as fast as Frentzen, but it is difficult to judge in the current season, as the Jordan is so unreliable that one never knows why they are off the pace.

Benetton

Benetton are obviously far down on power and have had to design a car with very little downforce and lots of mechanical grip. They are only going to do well if it rains or on the two/three slow circuits of the season.

Fisichella

A very fast driver that could easily challenge for the championship in the right car.

He drove a great race. It is a pity that the Benetton is not capable of showing his considerable talent on normal dry tracks.

Wurz

Another mediocre drive from a driver that showed some brilliance in the past.

BAR

The BAR still has a long way to go before it is competitive. They may have a chassis that comes out of one of the world’s best known stables and Honda are sure to supply a great engine in the fullness of time. But it is not going to be this season.

Their performance, but more importantly, their improvement so far this season has not been impressive.

It appears that Villeneuve was right. It is not the motor but the chassis that is not fast under any circumstances.

Villeneuve

Fast and flamboyant. If he wants to win another championship before he retires he better get going now.

Rumour has it that Villeneuve is being courted by Williams for next year. They could do worse, but it does not make sense to me as they already have three drivers for two cars next year.

But if it is true, Villeneuve, grab it! I really want to see you race again.

Zonta

He appears slower than Villeneuve but that could be because he does not have Villeneuve’s ability to carry the car home on sheer willpower.

Until he spun off he was doing very well.

Sauber

I am disappointed in this team. They are using last year’s Ferrari motor and that should be powerful enough to finish in the points at almost every race meeting. I do not know what it is, but they just did not get it right.

They have a reasonable amount of mechanical grip and should do well on slower and wet circuits.

Salo

Mika Salo seems fast enough but is being held back by his car. And on the one race where he could have done well he goes and loses it! That’s racing I suppose.

Diniz

He finished in 7^th place. Maybe not bad but if Sauber are not fast on a dry track and not fast on a wet track when are they going to race?

Jaguar

Reliability does not appear to be that much of an issue any more. Now they have to focus on speed – the Jag is slow!

I expected to see them further back as I was under the impression that Jaguar had ample horses and could therefore afford a high downforce chassis. Their performance in the wet contradicted that and I now suspect that they did not improve on last year’s engine power and were forced to compromise aerodynamic grip.

Irvine

I suspect that Irvine is not one of the faster drivers, but how do we know? So far this year a brilliant performance would have gone unnoticed in the Jaguar.

He was doing pretty much OK until he left his tail behind. If he did not have that get-together with Verstappen he may even have finished in the points.

Herbert

He is getting rather pedestrian.

Prost

This is a car that has little speed on a fast, dry track and not a lot more on a wet, slow track.

They should go back to the drawing board or maybe the dictionary and look up "race" and "car". It is a starting point.

Alesi

One of the most experienced drivers, Alesi must be considering retirement and if the Prost does not improve I would not be surprised if he does it now.

Alesi is very fast in the wet but not even that specialised skill could make a difference to the Prost.

Heidfeld

He seems very fast and could easily challenge for the championship in another car in another season.

Disqualification from the race saved him the embarrassment of doing poorly in front of his countrymen.

Arrows

Like Williams, Arrows should know how to build a fast car but, unlike Williams, they did not do it this season. They seem to be very fast in unofficial practice events so maybe there is still some hope.

Like Benetton, because they are using the same old engine, they were forced to design a mechanical grip car and it showed at Nurburgring. They were in the points!

Verstappen

It is very hard to judge a driver that does not have a competitive car. In past seasons Verstappen had his fair share of accidents and it is encouraging to see that he is consistent !

de la Rosa

I think he is quite capable and he has managed to do some very fast laps on the off season. With a decent car he could do well or if it rains he could do well in his current car.

Earning points makes a big difference to a team. They get concessions the moment they have scored points and it also affects other important factors like pit position in the following season. Being the driver that scores that first point will make him a hero with the team.

Minardi

The Fondmetal motor has the least power of all so one must assume that Minardi have heaps of mechanical grip and would do well in the rain. There is of course a limit to how little power one needs in the wet.

Gene

Another fast driver that is unable to show his potential. He may be lucky and get offered a drive with a faster team.

It is a pity that the water got to Gene’s accelerator electronics (and I am assuming that) because I believe he could have done very well.

Mazzacane