Sebastian Vettel took pole position for the Hungarian Grand Prix with a lap time that was a massive four-tenths of a second faster than team-mate Mark Webber. The gap back to the next challenger – Fernando Alonso’s Ferrari – was an extraordinary eight-tenths of a second, which suggested that the race on Sunday was unlikely to be a very exciting contest as the Red Bulls are so far ahead of the rest that it is hard to imagine that there will be any real challenge to their dominance.
Alonso shared the second row of the grid with his Ferrari team-mate Felipe Massa, although the Brazilian was four-tenths down on the Spaniard.
Lewis Hamilton was fifth fastest, ahead of Nico Rosberg’s Mercedes and then the two Renaults with Vitaly Petrov out-qualifying his team-mate Robert Kubica for the first time. The gap between the pair was a tenth of a second.
The top 10 was completed by the Sauber of Pedro de la Rosa and Nico Hulkenberg’s Williams.
The question now is what will Red Bull do to throw it all away this time?
Vettel & Webber being too aggressive with each other off the start line, or Vettel again failing to get a decent start and going backwards?
The season theyve had both of those seem far more likely than the easy 1-2 finish their qualifying (and practice) performance would suggest.
Either way it seems like itll be the typical Hungarian race; if theres no rain itll be the perfect time to enjoy a Sunday afternoon nap.
What’s the SP on the flexi-wings of RB and Ferrari?
They exist and they are legal
@Joe
I think you need to qualify that with a ‘they’re legal for now’.
There ate 3 rules that are important here. One states what the rule is (that aero parts must be rigid) another defining what the current test is, and a third saying that the FIA can change the test if they suspect anyone of breaking the first rule.
Red Bull (and to a lesser extent Ferrari) are clearly breaking e first, while managing to still comply with the second. Hopefully they’ll apply the third to stop this. The whole thing is very similar to theMichelin tyres of a few years back that got wider at speed.
FYI, the relevant rules are:
3.15 Aerodynamic influence :
With the exception of the cover described in Article 6.5.2 (when used in the pit lane), the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
- must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
- must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).
- must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
3.17 Bodywork flexibility :
3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 10mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 800mm forward of the front wheel centre line and 795mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter 300mm long and 150mm wide. Teams must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.
3.17.8 In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.15 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of), moving whilst the car is in motion.
Not bad for a team with the “worst” motor in F1! I wonder how quick they might be with a Mercedes motor in the back ?
No – they exist and the FIA has not yet found a way of proving them illegal. The rule says no flexing (more or less) on the sprung part of the car. The test is putting 50kg on the ends and seeing if they flex. The question is – is a car legal if it passes test or should it be declared illegal if it can be proved by other means to be infringing the word of the rule. So far we have only the former situation – but maybe other proof will be found. It’s a similar situation to doping in cycling. The rule is no performance enhancing drugs. It is now clear that riders cheated for years while always managing to pass drug tests. However, we’ve seen a lot of bans recently for riders who have never failed a test but have been proven by other means to have infringed the rules. The rules are as written. The tests are only one way of ensuring conformity.
All Christian Horner says is that they pass the tests, but if they continue to take the p**s like this, with corner speeds 20kph higher than anyone else, I can see them being caught out by some other means
Webber was way fastest in Q2. What happened, Joe?
Unfortunately for Webber, his final fast lap was not his best … he made a couple of small mistakes in the second sector which cost him. Without these he would probably have been alot closer to Vettel, and maybe just past.
You’ll be happy with the result, Joe. I just loved Vettel’s sourpuss face on the podium and ‘don’t understand’ comments in the press conference. Wonder how RB will try to spin this one!!!
Also, surely the FIA should take MSC’s superlicence away for good – just a dirty driver and Ruben’s wheel was just a paperwidth away from the wall and a horrible accident.