chrisc90 wrote: ↑27 Mar 2022, 23:17
Do you think they could look at brining back side pods? But I guess they would be massively behind on that aswell if they did choose to.
They already have the Barcelona sidepods, so it would just be a matter of reworking the rear section of those sidepods to the fashionable "quasi-tub-pod" like Alpine or Red Bull. (Alpine managed to move towards the "quasi-tub-pod" by only changing one panel of the bodywork.) Assuming that is even something they would wish to consider...
Given the original rumour was that the "micro-pods" would bring 1s/lap improvement compared to Barcelona-spec, perhaps Mercedes are still convinced that the "micro-pods" concept is the best (at least for them)?
On the Barcelona-spec Mercedes, it seems the engine cover is one-piece rearwards from the seam in the "A" in PETRONAS back to a seam just around where the stars pattern starts, so they could redesign the sidepods between those two seams if they wish? [And only need two new moulds, left-hand and right-hand versions of that one panel, with respect to the budget cap. Of course the wind tunnel parts for the design (CNC aluminium?) would absorb further expenses...]
Barcelona-spec:
https://www.mercedesamgf1.com/en/news/2 ... _4252.jpeg
Edit - On the other hand, Russell seems to think the main loss of laptime is just from needing to run a higher ride height, and that the car will be very fast if it can run low.
George Russell:
It’s exactly the same as we’ve seen since day one. The only way to run is to raise the car very high. And obviously, with this ground effect car, we lose all of the downforce.
We know that if we can get the car on the ground, there’s a huge chunk of laptime there but we can’t achieve that at the moment. It’s all well and good saying that, but we can’t physically achieve that right now. So we need to have a rethink.
https://the-race.com/formula-1/we-need- ... explained/
Latios wrote: ↑26 Mar 2022, 20:41
The Mercedes-Benz porpoising issue is very serious. I guess it's due to the very small sidepod. The airflow outside the small sidepod can reach the upper surface of the diffuser more smoothly, and the flow can pull the airflow inside the diffuser more effectively, so Mercedes can choose lower ground clearance (than traditional sidepods). When the ground clearance is small, the porpoising is more likely to happen. Once Mercedes-Benz solves the problem of porpoisinging, its performance may increase greatly. However, it seems that the Mercedes-Benz engine does not have an advantage this season too, maybe due to E10 fuel?
Bravo to Latios for the theory on why the Mercedes' designers may prefer smaller ground clearance and thus more susceptibility to porpoising.
If Latios' theory has merit, then the Mercedes' designers forgetting their potentially excellent but unworkable sidepod design and adopting instead a conventional sidepod design like Red Bull, Alpine or HAAS may be the way to go...?
