In the SA Tech Talk episode on F1TV there was an interview with Jan Monchaux from Sauber and they said they don't use the Ferrari rear suspension.PlatinumZealot wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 19:27Something else got me thinking.
Sauber has made their own rear gearbox, but are the suspension components theirs or Ferraris? Hard to believe a Sauber suspension is more advanced than a Mercedes one? Just pondering how much weight must be put to suspension as the root cause.
It's not about how easy it is, it's about how much it will cost, in a budget cap. Once they copy they kind of set themselves behind a bit since they need to start learning the new concept and develop it going forward while they already spent all of the money on the existing.
how long would be feasible to continue with this package before they consider copying another solution.dialtone wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:16It's not about how easy it is, it's about how much it will cost, in a budget cap. Once they copy they kind of set themselves behind a bit since they need to start learning the new concept and develop it going forward while they already spent all of the money on the existing.
Obviously if their concept is just bad, copying is the better way, at least to avoid the sunk cost fallacy, but probably they don't know yet and still believe in what they've done.
Oh FFS get the idea of copying other people's work out of your head. Aston Martin tried that the other year and look how well it worked out for them. It's not enough to simply copy, you must also understand wtf it's doing and behaving as well.NicoS wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:24how long would be feasible to continue with this package before they consider copying another solution.dialtone wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:16It's not about how easy it is, it's about how much it will cost, in a budget cap. Once they copy they kind of set themselves behind a bit since they need to start learning the new concept and develop it going forward while they already spent all of the money on the existing.
Obviously if their concept is just bad, copying is the better way, at least to avoid the sunk cost fallacy, but probably they don't know yet and still believe in what they've done.
Do you think mid season would be a good time to re-focus on a new approach?
They don't need to repackage the innards given they've got the tightest innards already; they can simply design bodywork around the existing innards.algebraist wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 21:21Oh FFS get the idea of copying other people's work out of your head. Aston Martin tried that the other year and look how well it worked out for them. It's not enough to simply copy, you must also understand wtf it's doing and behaving as well.NicoS wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:24how long would be feasible to continue with this package before they consider copying another solution.dialtone wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:16
It's not about how easy it is, it's about how much it will cost, in a budget cap. Once they copy they kind of set themselves behind a bit since they need to start learning the new concept and develop it going forward while they already spent all of the money on the existing.
Obviously if their concept is just bad, copying is the better way, at least to avoid the sunk cost fallacy, but probably they don't know yet and still believe in what they've done.
Do you think mid season would be a good time to re-focus on a new approach?
You're also talking about repackaging the entire innards of the car as well. It's a totally impractical idea especially in these years of cost capping and cutting. Whether you like it or not, this is what they're running this year and likely next. Once they sort out the floor / suspension issue, the rest will follow.
In Barcelona they ran an early revision of the w13 that was most likely finalized last year, maybe even before the season was over. What they ran in Bahrain was a later revision, most likely finished as late as possible.
But it would still be an unoptimized package because they'll have an unnecessarily high CoG.mkay wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 21:51They don't need to repackage the innards given they've got the tightest innards already; they can simply design bodywork around the existing innards.algebraist wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 21:21Oh FFS get the idea of copying other people's work out of your head. Aston Martin tried that the other year and look how well it worked out for them. It's not enough to simply copy, you must also understand wtf it's doing and behaving as well.
You're also talking about repackaging the entire innards of the car as well. It's a totally impractical idea especially in these years of cost capping and cutting. Whether you like it or not, this is what they're running this year and likely next. Once they sort out the floor / suspension issue, the rest will follow.
As long as Mercedes believes their concept has more potential than others and think they can solve the issues they will continue developing. There comes a time Mercedes will acknowledge this season is lost, but as long as they feel they will reap the benefits next year there is no incentive to think of other concepts.NicoS wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:24how long would be feasible to continue with this package before they consider copying another solution.dialtone wrote: β29 Mar 2022, 20:16It's not about how easy it is, it's about how much it will cost, in a budget cap. Once they copy they kind of set themselves behind a bit since they need to start learning the new concept and develop it going forward while they already spent all of the money on the existing.
Obviously if their concept is just bad, copying is the better way, at least to avoid the sunk cost fallacy, but probably they don't know yet and still believe in what they've done.
Do you think mid season would be a good time to re-focus on a new approach?
