Mercedes W13

[Hoffman900]

I'm sure Binotto wouldn't be saying it if he thought it would change their design. He is saying this because they banned the SF71H mirror design for a similar reason.

Both Adrian Newey and Steve Nichols have joked about Ferrari shooting their own foot before in this regard.

Great. I'm glad they had a joke.

I think the answer is we’re both not sure.

I’ll sit back and watch all this unfold with a bag of popcorn.

[AeroDynamic]

[PlatinumZealot]

That black patch at the base of the side pod is just too suspiscious!

Could be an optically transparent window for a tyre temperature sensor...

[dans79]

The crash structure has to be there, and the Mirror has to be mounted some place. If anything this is just a bunch of salt from known characters, because they didn't think of it first!

[AeroDynamic]

I can't find the car comparison thread but this is the mercedes pitched against the Ferrari on the complete opposite end of the spectrum of aero concept.

[Shrieker]

Why did they run such a different sidepod in Barcelona, if this one was to be the final design ?

[Emag]

Why did they run such a different sidepod in Barcelona, if this one was to be the final design ?

Internally, it's the same car, at least that's what they are saying.

But it could be a number of reasons.

Perhaps they didn't have the parts of this spec ready for Barcelona (suggesting this being a very late stage in development). Or, they simply didn't want to show that concept so early to the competition.

Only Mercedes knows I guess.

[Vanja #66]

So to me it reads like a grey area. If it fits within the box, they can do what they want?

Furthermore, how is encasing the crash side pod and doing some aero encasing (let’s be real, aero inside the side pods matter as well) vs. just exposing it?

Yeah, seems like a clever interpretation and arguably legal. For now at least. However, I'm not sure how hurtful it would be if Mercedes ends up having to reattach the sidepod and wing, since their gap is very short (Y-axis) and therefore closing it wouldn't hurt their general concept too much.

If the SIS is within outer sidepod surface, then the rules are different. I have no idea how exactly or if there are any rules for internal bodywork.

[Shakeman]

Why did they run such a different sidepod in Barcelona, if this one was to be the final design ?

In case this side pod/mirror wing gets banned they have a fall back?

It's also a datum from a point earlier in development and they can compare what the new design gives them.

They have two sets of data to correlate with their sim data.

There's plenty of reasons why this can be a useful exercise.

[Just_a_fan]

By perfecting the tight internal packaging concept merc is free to use whatever side pod shape size that falls in between these 2 extremes and beyond. Should their nosidepod side pods fail to deliver they have the flexibility to go wide undercut physically rather easily. On the other hand, if the former prove to work well, no other non merc team have easy means to copy

This.

Doing what they did gives them a lot of options when the sidepods are essentially just body work.

Maybe. Different engine cover shapes will be available to any team. They could build them straight down to the floor like this W13, it just requires lots of new panels.

Look at the exposed internals of the W13 and the F1-75. Ferrari can't just put some different panels on and mimic the Mercedes style of sidepod. They would also have to carry out a wholesale change in their radiator design and cooling philosophy. Other teams will not be as extreme a change as Ferrari, but even Red Bull will need to change radiator designs to go down a W13-style route.

Conversely, Mercedes can just bolt on some Ferrari or RedBull style sidepods with no internal changes other than maybe a few bits of CF to carry the panels. Dead easy for them to change philosophy.

[oT v1]

Absolutely love the different approaches and different looks to the cars! Best bit of a rule change and more pure to the engineers’ visions. Can’t wait for the first qualy!!!

[Just_a_fan]

'There is a significant aero purpose in the mirrors'

Andrew Benson

BBC Sport’s chief F1 writer

Red Bull are not the only team with concerns about the Mercedes upgrade and in particular the integration of the side-impact structure and mirror mount.

Ferrari team principal Mattia Binotto said: "Looking at the Mercedes car, no doubt it is a great car. That should not be a surprise to us. The concept is quite different to ours, quite interesting with the cooling layout, and the side-pods look quite interesting.

"On the mirrors, it was surprising. We were not expecting that. We always said the mirror should have no aero purpose and the way they treated their car, there is a significant aero purpose in the mirrors.

"The risk in the future is all teams will start designing mirrors that look like space ships. In the spirit of what we intend to do for the future, it is something we need to discuss.”

Every single car on the grid uses the mirrors and / or their supports for direct aero purposes.


Unless the FIA mandate a simple mirror such as this with a simple attachment in a specified location on the car, the teams are going to use them for some aero purpose or other.

[Just_a_fan]

This and clearly they all push it. If you look at the Ferrari, their’s conditions the air into the side pods. Teams need to be careful asking for a ruling on something that may cause a change that effects them as well.

I'm sure Binotto wouldn't be saying it if he thought it would change their design. He is saying this because they banned the SF71H mirror design for a similar reason.

Both Adrian Newey and Steve Nichols have joked about Ferrari shooting their own foot before in this regard.

I remember the great double diffuser debacle. Ferrari were in the FIA court arguing that the holes that fed the diffuser was illegal. The barrister for the other side said something like "but it uses the same legal loop hole as the one you used on previous cars to win world championships. If this is illegal then weren't those cars also illegal?", "Yes" replied Ferrari.

[Just_a_fan]

As Binotto said...I fear this is not a design the FIA will like.

The FIA will have seen this design and been asked about it by the team too. There must be a fairly high degree of certainty that it is legal.

Of course, there is also the cryptic bit from the FIA t'other week where they said that they'd seen all of the designs and thought some of them were sailing close to the wind. I guess we know at least one of those designs now. Be interested to see if Red Bull's updates also cause consternation amongst other teams.

[FWandE]

Is it possible that Mercedes will run different body work at different tracks? Low drag Bahrain style on tracks with long straights, Barcelona style on twistier circuits?