Mercedes W13

[KiLLu12258]

i mean that means nothing right and i would be surprised if he say something different. The alarming thing is that it looks like they have still no real idea were the problems come from and also with every new track new problems appear, and same can happen if they fix the porpoising as example.

[atanatizante]

Both HAM and RUS run the Jeddah RW with a Gourney flap in qualy and were 10 to 12 km/h down compared to RB18 and some 5-6km/h to F1-75 ...

Also note the ride height in RUS` case, at least ...

[GrizzleBoy]

Soooo, given Leclerc just smashed the field with a car with violent porpoising, maybe fixing the porpoising isn't the silver bullet at all.

[cooken]

Soooo, given Leclerc just smashed the field with a car with violent porpoising, maybe fixing the porpoising isn't the silver bullet at all.

No. The crux will be at what ride height and thus level of downforce you get that porpoising. Merc can't get as low as the Ferrari before it gets too bad.

[CaribouBread]

"So is curing the bouncing the miraculous unlocking of a second within the car? No, for sure not. But there are many other little improvements that we can make on weight and a few others where we can optimise." ~Toto

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... n/9747173/

[pursue_one's]

According to AMuS, Mercedes’ engineers packed instruments into the car to measure how processes trigger the bouncing.

"We just have to try to find a level of the bouncing as hardcore as we can go, without rattling our brains out of our skulls, and that's what we try to do," Hamilton said.

"[Russell] and I have slightly different cars because we're trying all different things. I've got something in my car that makes the car a little bit heavier(.

"Hopefully it will enable the team to gain more information from the race tomorrow. I hope from that we can start making some progress."

https://www.planetf1.com/news/lewis-ham ... ful-viper/

[ringo]

I notice the ferrari only bounces over 300kph. which is not coincidence. They have a full understanding of it. Mercedes clearly dont.
I do wonder.. is it possible to have very stiff sprung mass, but more compliant control arm joints?

[Zynerji]

I notice the ferrari only bounces over 300kph. which is not coincidence. They have a full understanding of it. Mercedes clearly dont.
I do wonder.. is it possible to have very stiff sprung mass, but more compliant control arm joints?

I mean, packers and progressive bump stops seem the simple fix?

[ringo]

Yeah. I am thinking having the very stiff ride to keep the car low for optimum ground effect. But have more compliance to cater to kerb riding. A kind of compromise.

[Zynerji]

Yeah. I am thinking having the very stiff ride to keep the car low for optimum ground effect. But have more compliance to cater to kerb riding. A kind of compromise.

The logical kinematics, to me, say that this could be solved with a progressive Belleville washer stack in place of packers, or somehow harnessing the roll-bar (not used in heave) as a helper spring at high loads (preload on ARB would help maybe? Or add a stop-twist lug in the center of the bar that can only move a certain amount before binding in heave).

I would speculate that if those options cannot solve it, the real issue would be the rear tyre sidewalls are collapsing under the load, and I'm not sure how Pirelli could solve that outside of adding run-flat sidewalls to the new 18in tyres.

[vorticism]

Since Ferrari also still porpoise it could be about peak downforce levels. Ferrari this season have had higher corners speeds, lower top speeds. As such combine that with the existence of spec tires. RB may be operating within their downforce limit, while Merc and Ferrari are exceeding it.

[dialtone]

Since Ferrari also still porpoise it could be about peak downforce levels. Ferrari this season have had higher corners speeds, lower top speeds. As such combine that with the existence of spec tires. RB may be operating within their downforce limit, while Merc and Ferrari are exceeding it.

For the record this isn't the case for today's quali. Ferrari would have had top speed in the back straight if it wasn't for the bouncing. RedBull added downforce, although not as much as Ferrari has given its S3, and the F1-75 engine did the rest. Even considering Max's first attempt times, Ferrari was 0.018 ahead after S2 and only paid 0.004s in S2 alone due to porpoising and having to limit top speed.

[LM10]

Since Ferrari also still porpoise it could be about peak downforce levels. Ferrari this season have had higher corners speeds, lower top speeds. As such combine that with the existence of spec tires. RB may be operating within their downforce limit, while Merc and Ferrari are exceeding it.

For the record this isn't the case for today's quali. Ferrari would have had top speed in the back straight if it wasn't for the bouncing. RedBull added downforce, although not as much as Ferrari has given its S3, and the F1-75 engine did the rest. Even considering Max's first attempt times, Ferrari was 0.018 ahead after S2 and only paid 0.004s in S2 alone due to porpoising and having to limit top speed.

This sounds like any performance difference in certain corners or a section of a track is explained by how much downforce a team chooses to put on the car. Like suggesting that because RedBull was slower in S3 it means they did not went for a setup with as much downforce as Ferrari. However, come cars have characteristics like for example inherently more downforce / better balance / more mechanical grip / better traction etc. which at some point can’t be overcome by choosing a wider RW or such in case of other cars.

[erikejw]

With the slim sidepods I assume they had to move component further back or to the front meaning there'd be less weight near the turning central point(axel of rotation).

That'd make the car more lazy and unresponsive to direction changes and would be harder to handle all in all.

I have not heard anyone mentioning that.

We have also heard that it seems to be problems they can't solve during the season but have to work around.
That could possibly hint to that they cannot move large components around.

Are my assumptions correct?
Is this a part of Mercedes struggles?

[dialtone]

With the slim sidepods I assume they had to move component further back or to the front meaning there'd be less weight near the turning central point(axel of rotation).

That'd make the car more lazy and unresponsive to direction changes and would be harder to handle all in all.

I have not heard anyone mentioning that.

We have also heard that it seems to be problems they can't solve during the season but have to work around.
That could possibly hint to that they cannot move large components around.

Are my assumptions correct?
Is this a part of Mercedes struggles?

According to Piola in this video, the new W13 has a shorter gearbox and the engine sits a little bit more rearward in the car compared to McLaren as well as compared to every other non-Merc team.