doubt the new regs are going to change much at all.

I do expect Lotus to be an improvement and challenge mercedes and maybe a the top 3.

but the first day despite being the fasted time ever in testing doesn't show much considering the car was close to being the fastest when they last tested .

Quote :

Ted Kravitz on Twitter: "Just spoke to A Newey, post box slot is primarily for cooling: driver and other parts. He denies it gives RB8 any aero benefit. Newey also says might be exhaust controversy if someone races in Oz with a different interpretation and that he wants to stay at Red Bull.."

.

Ferrari found a way to make their car even more ugly!!! Putting the number there... wow!

Quote from J@tko :

Ted Kravitz on Twitter: "Just spoke to A Newey, post box slot is primarily for cooling: driver and other parts. He denies it gives RB8 any aero benefit. Newey also says might be exhaust controversy if someone races in Oz with a different interpretation and that he wants to stay at Red Bull.." .

Just like the Brabham fan was for engine cooling.

Quote from CSF :

Ferrari found a way to make their car even more ugly!!! Putting the number there... wow!

I honestly think it's a great use for that spot, it makes the number easily visible from the front.

Alguersuari on Torro Rosso:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/ ... as-his-say-on-toro-rosso/

I do agree with TR cutting loose both drivers as they're basically the endgame of the Red Bull young drivers programme and they'd both proved they're solid if unspectacular drivers, but my god, TR didn't have to be so dickish about it.

Quote from pik_d :

I honestly think it's a great use for that spot, it makes the number easily visible from the front.

seconded

Random lap, no info on tyre condition or fuel but McLaren's rear end looks shittteee http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNODkBb6_Ok

One oversteer moment doesn't mean anything. Out of the final turn he was on the power reasonably early, even more so given the speed of sound versus light.

Doesn't look like one moment to me, looks like three. The rear is stepping out on the exit of all three corners we can see.

Of course, I am aware it doesn't mean anything (testing is testing), but it does follow the same pattern from last year, and to a lesser extent 2009. I can almost guarantee you won't see that behaviour from the Bulls

If you have a quick turn in the rear will always look a lil loose.

Looks like classic Hamilton setup to me, with a bit of eager loud pedal in the middle part.

Quote from sinbad :

Looks like classic Hamilton setup to me, with a bit of eager loud pedal in the middle part.

except it wasn't Hamilton

He didn't suggest it was.

Complete waste of time trying to draw any meaningful conclusions from today, or probably the whole week.

Except, perhaps, are Lotus the new Jordan? Eddie used to run his cars underweight for dazzling preseason sponsor friendly test times.

Well.. the top 2 teams were not running their cars for the first time. That probably has a lot of bearing on the first day of the first test. I'd expect it to change tomorrow.

Didn't Sauber do something similar recently with their weight in testing? Or were they just running lowest possible fuel runs?

We won't know anything until the second or third race, so there's not much point debating anything other than which car is the ugliest (the Ferrari obviously).

Also, are there any decent pictures showing what kind of rake each team is running? I imagine they would all copy Red Bull in that area.

Last year Barrichello was fastest on testing Day 1.

That is all.

It's funny how finnish media is already going crazy about Raikkonen having the fastest time on the _FIRST_TEST_ day

Ferrari's exhaust looks.... well, Ferrari-ish.

Quote from Rappa Z :

Last year Barrichello was fastest on testing Day 1.

That is all.

Times mean nothing, but visual observations can reveal alot.

As usual the RedBull is handling beautifully, from that one clip of the McLaren they appear to have some setup work to do. Lotus looked good, but probably lacks all out pace of RBR... echoes of last year

Quote from Intrepid :

Times mean nothing, but visual observations can reveal alot.

As usual the RedBull is handling beautifully, from that one clip of the McLaren they appear to have some setup work to do. Lotus looked good, but probably lacks all out pace of RBR... echoes of last year

Given the tyres are supposed to be different now, I'd imagine any 'setup trouble' with be teething problems with new tyres.

Quote from Intrepid :

Times mean nothing, but visual observations can reveal alot.

As usual the RedBull is handling beautifully, from that one clip of the McLaren they appear to have some setup work to do. Lotus looked good, but probably lacks all out pace of RBR... echoes of last year

If you really think you can determine anything meaningful from a little clip and the timesheets from the first day of testing then you're really deluding yourself.

Quote from amp88 :

If you really think you can determine anything meaningful from a little clip and the timesheets from the first day of testing then you're really deluding yourself.

Didn't say timesheets are indicative of performance. Visual observations, over the years, have been pretty good. Only really followed testing since 2008 and every year observers have been pretty accurate. 2008 it was traction issues for McLaren (true), 2009 the MP4-24 was a disaster (true) and the Brawn and RedBull were quick (true). 2010/2011 RBR a level above and McLaren fast but lacking balance (true).

The McLaren (and I've seen another clip but can't find it) didn't look brilliant. doesn't mean it isn't fast, but it doesn't look brilliant. The RBR, as observers have already mentioned, looks absolutely planted.

I wouldn't bet my house on anything, but the pattern only follows recent years which shouldn't be a surprise. It's what we should expect. RBR are fully lit and everyone else will be playing catch up... again.

Quote from Intrepid :

Didn't say timesheets are indicative of performance. Visual observations, over the years, have been pretty good. Only really followed testing since 2008 and every year observers have been pretty accurate. 2008 it was traction issues for McLaren (true), 2009 the MP4-24 was a disaster (true) and the Brawn and RedBull were quick (true). 2010/2011 RBR a level above and McLaren fast but lacking balance (true).

How about the predictions of Renault being truly amongst the front-runners last year with their exhaust system? The buzz was that the technology was going to catapult them up the grid (notice how I say the technology to rule out the Kubica factor). Didn't really happen, did it?

One of the problems with the observation method (and it's why I mentioned the timesheets) is that you can easily watch an easy-to-drive but slow car and think it's really fast and on rails. The only really logical conclusions to draw from pre-season testing are done by the teams. They have a lot more information to draw on than we have. Do you really think they are looking at the rear end of a McLaren sliding a few times on a cold first winter test and trying to divine great meaning from it?

Quote from Intrepid :

I wouldn't bet my house on anything, but the pattern only follows recent years which shouldn't be a surprise. It's what we should expect. RBR are fully lit and everyone else will be playing catch up... again.

Which you could easily have predicted with practically the same degree of accuracy at the end of last season. How early were Red Bull able to direct their development to the 2012 car last year? How many times (aside from significant technical regulation changes (such as 2008-2009)) in the last 10 years has a team which finished outside the top 3 in the constructors standings been able to win at least 2 races in the following year?