Technical Analysis Chinese Grand Prix!

By role
September 30 2004

As in every race Renault F1 Technical Department has analysed the Chinese Grand Prix in full detail looking at ways to imporve the R24 and also on the performance of each driver and car combination during the race.

Overall results in China last weekend were disappointing, but Fernando’s fourth place finish was an extremely impressive drive in a tricky car.

The first observations after the race in China last Sunday were simple – “the car wasn’t quick enough” commented Managing Director Flavio Briatore. An initial reading of the statistics backs this up: in terms of pure pace, the R24 was not a real threat to the winners last Sunday, and Fernando was only tenth fastest when it came to the table of fastest laps. However, as Michelin’s F1 technical boss Pascal Vasselon said on Saturday evening, the tyre manufacturers adopted differing approaches. Softer Bridgestones meant runners such as Sauber were ahead of the Renaults on the grid, and in the table of fastest laps, but behind Fernando on the road. Consistency rather than single-lap performance was the key.

Pat Symonds said on Sunday that Fernando “did not put a foot wrong” in the Chinese Grand Prix, and the numbers back him up. The table below shows the average lap-times for the top four finishers during their race stints:
AVERAGE LAP-TIMES DURING STINTS
Stint 1 Stint 2 Stint 3 Stint 4
BAR 94.7 94.1 93.5 94.6
BUT 94.7 94.3 94.5
RAI 94.8 94.2 93.4 94.0
ALO 95.4 95.1 95.0



Fernando’s consistency is clearly demonstrated here, with his second and third stints almost identical in their speed. Equally, following his pit-stops, the Spaniard’s next laps differed by just seven thousandths of a second. He was a model of consistency throughout. Equally, as mentioned above, the strength of the R24 on Sunday was this speed on long runs. Fernando’s longest stint lasted 23 laps, and his average lap-time was 1:35.136 over this stint – just behind Ralf Schumacher’s nineteen lap average of 1:35.080, and fifth fastest overall. However, just as the table above shows, so the longest run figures demonstrate that the R24 lacked basic speed on Sunday: the third fastest car had an average of 1:34.472, a full half second a lap quicker than the Renault.

In the number 7 Renault, Jacques Villeneuve had a more difficult race. Re-acclimatising to race conditions was a difficult task and by his own admission, he struggled in the early part of the race:
AVERAGE LAP-TIMES DURING STINTS
Stint 1 Stint 2 Stint 3
VIL 96.7 95.9 96.1



The comparisons of his average lap-times for his first two stints, though, reinforce the observation that he was learning about the R24 as the race progressed. Between the first and second stints, his average lap times improved by 0.8s – and Fernando’s lap times show that there was another 0.8s to find in the car. Perhaps the third stint could have provided this increase in pace but unfortunately Jacques found himself stuck behind Webber’s Jaguar and unable to follow closely enough in the quick corners to overtake. However, his aggression remained: his final race lap, in clear air after losing time while Barrichello lapped him, was his fastest, giving a tantalising glimpse of what might have been. Equally, Jacques’ management of new tyres improved as the race advanced – his first lap on new tyres after his second stop was 0.328s quicker than that after his first visit to the pits. The learning curve was steep, but all the evidence shows that the Canadian continued climbing it as the laps wound down. And also that Suzuka will be another story entirely…

The final observations worth making concern the eventual race winner. It was Raikkonen, not Barrichello, who had the most competitive long run of the whole race, with an average of 1:34.137 compared to the Brazilian’s 1:34.216. This stint was also longer than Barrichello’s, 20 laps compared to the 17 Ferrari completed. The 20 laps – at the end of the race – were the length of an average 2 stop stint… Had the Finn chosen the two-stop route, he would certainly have beaten Button’s BAR – his average race lap was 1:34.1 compared to the Briton’s 1:34.5. And perhaps, just perhaps, on Michelin tyres better suited to consistency than single lap performance, he could have snatched the race win?