The clear winner of the F1 testing war

Evolution has beaten revolution in the 2018 Formula 1 pre-season season. So far, that is. The Mercedes W09 is not a dramatic change from its predecessor, but it is a clear step forward and shares one thing in column with its four ancestors in the V6 turbo hybrid era of grand prix racing - it has raised the bar. And it is seriously fast.

But with Mercedes there to be shot at, one thing appears to have changed. Ferrari has been aggressive with its car, switching to a higher-rake design and making changes to its aerodynamic concept.

The result is a car that might even struggle to be second-best. Red Bull, with its slim sidepods and, even with the limitation of its Renault engine package, emerges from testing reckoned by many to be the team best placed to take the fight to Mercedes.

All of this is at odds with what the headline laptimes suggest, with Sebastian Vettel setting the fastest overall time on the penultimate day of the second test with a best lap of 1m17.182s. That was set on hypersofts, and was a new unofficial lap record for this configuration of Barcelona's Catalunya circuit. But in identical fuel and tyre trim, there's no doubt the Mercedes will be well into the 1m16s bracket.

Looking at the fastest times set by each car over the course of the eight days of testing paints a misleading picture. This does not factor in fuel loads, which will have varied, and there are some dissenters from the majority that set their quickest times using the hypersoft. For reference, the average step from soft to super soft is 0.4 seconds, then a further 0.6s to ultrasoft, and then 0.7-0.8s to the hypersoft.

Raw pace

1 Ferrari 1m17.182s (hypersoft)
2 McLaren 1m17.784s (hypersoft)
3 Red Bull 1m18.047s (hypersoft)
4 Renault 1m18.092s (hypersoft)
5 Haas 1m18.360s (supersoft)
6 Toro Rosso 1m18.363s (hypersoft)
7 Mercedes 1m18.400s (ultrasoft)
8 Force India 1m18.967s (hypersoft)
9 Sauber 1m19.118s (hypersoft)
10 Williams 1m19.189s (soft)

While the tyre differences are easy to see (with the caveat that different cars will have different lap time gains from compound to compound), the fuel load is opaque. It's easy to overlook as a result, but with 0.3-0.4s penalty, dependent on the track, per 10kg of fuel it's very significant. The best Mercedes time was not set with anything like a qualifying fuel load.

Even if you adjust for the compound choice, the picture is very sketchy - although we can be confident that Fernando Alonso's McLaren time, set late on Friday with a qualifying simulation level of fuel, is a good reflection of that car's absolute pace.

But one area where these cars find it more difficult to mislead is on long-run times. Again, there are caveats here for long runs and race simulations, with conditions varying, the fact some teams might play some games with the fuel loads if they don't do live pitstops and roll the car into the garage, and variations in compounds and approaches.

There are also red flags, traffic and variable conditions to be taken into account. But looking at the race simulations completed during Thursday and Friday paints a very interesting picture.

There are compromises in this methodology - sometimes you do not get complete race stints, but it is possible to make adjustments to try to get a fair set of data without distorting the picture. Without the data-crunching capacities of the teams, and just the pace, tyres and other pieces of information, to do this puts Mercedes perhaps 0.4s clear.

Bearing in mind that race pace tends to close the gap, that tallies with the suspicion Mercedes has an even bigger advantage on single-lap pace and could nail that 1m16s lap very easily.

Surprisingly, it's actually Ferrari that comes out second best on this basis, one tenth faster than Red Bull. But there are problems with the fact that this is based on Max Verstappen's aborted race run on Thursday, which came to an end with a moment in the final chicane when he suffered a quarter spin after the right-rear completely gave up on entry. Troubles on Friday meant Daniel Ricciardo couldn't complete a representative run.

Red Bull's pace is also compromised by the fact the Renault power unit package is running in a conservative trim for reliability reasons. Reckoned to be 40-50bhp down already, there are planned upgrades to the ERS that Renault hopes to deploy later in the season, but it seems unlikely to be before June at the earliest - and possibly a lot later.

It's clear Ferrari has work to do if it is to close the gap to Mercedes - a gap that, unfortunately, might have grown a little since last season

Renault's position is that it will revisit the way it is running its engines based on what it has learned in testing, but it seems likely Red Bull will at least start the season still saddled with reliability concerns - and therefore an engine performance deficit as well. All in all, the performance gain from last season from the package stands at around 0.4s, with around three tenths of that the performance that could not be used at the end of last season because of the need to be conservative.

At Ferrari, the engine package looks strong, with the main concerns over the chassis. The switch to high rake has visibly caused some problems and the tea-try under the front of the monocoque can be heard scrapping along the ground in the final phases of Turns 3, 9 and 14. Improvements need to be made on the control of the mechanical platform, at the rear in particular, to make the most of this concept.

Add this to the changes to the approach with the front wing, and it's clear Ferrari has some work to do if it is to close the gap to Mercedes - a gap that, unfortunately, looks like it might have grown a little since last season.

The positive side of that is there is a lot more to come from the car once it is sorted out, so keep an eye on Ferrari's development rate through the campaign. This is what happens when one team opts for evolution and the other aims for revolution - and was exactly why Mercedes did not hurl itself down the high-rake path.

Further back, Haas and Force India look closely matched, but with the latter bringing an upgrade that is hoped to be worth half-a-second to the Australian Grand Prix, that could change dramatically. It underlines why Haas needs to make hay early in the year with a car that looks basic compared to some, but that clearly works.

McLaren's race run with Stoffel Vandoorne was compromised with problems getting a set of mediums up to temperature, with the 'alternate' medium produced by Pirelli's Turkish factory (currently, its Romanian factory is producing the regular tyres).

This places it two seconds off the pace, and four tenths faster than Renault. But Alonso's single lap pace and the hints from Renault suggest it should be closer to the pace than that. What it does show is that the midfield battle remains a fascinating one. Currently, you'd bet on McLaren to, in qualifying at least, be best of the rest in fourth place - especially with a major upgrade planned for Australia.

That package also needs to cure the rear-end stability issues going into slow corners. Force India and Haas are both dark horses - with Renault's pace suggesting that it will only be a few tenths behind McLaren. As always in this part of the field in testing, it's a messy picture.

What is genuinely worrying for McLaren is reliability. Even if it does have the pace to be best-of-the-rest, and it should do, it needs to run reliably. Cooling problems, extra cuts in the bodywork and multiple red flags are not promising. But the car did at least complete one race simulation in the hands of Vandoorne this week.

Further back, Toro Rosso and Sauber look to be 2.7s and three seconds down respectively. Williams, which looked very questionable on pace during its runs, didn't produce laptime data that fits into this kind of analysis. But it doesn't look great for the team.

As always in testing, much of the above could be proved wrong come Australia. But what you can be absolutely sure of is that you should not be betting against Mercedes. And despite the race run comparison, go for Red Bull to be its nearest challenger.

Even taking into account the fact that all of the above numbers are inevitably cloudy and that it won't be until the Australian Grand Prix in two weeks that we really see where everyone stands, that's an ominous sign.

On current evidence, Ferrari's record of five consecutive drivers'/constructors' championship titles is under serious threat of being equalled this year.