It depends on the track, how the car behaves with those extra kilos and the added tyre degration. Engineers often say something between 0.033s to 0.133s per kg each lap. On average 0.067 seconds per lap. When referring to the lower figure as a base, you could be looking at 0.3s-0.6s.
Certainly a interesting number to come out with. I mean 1 second would probably swap the gap they are behind to being infront by the same amount.VacuousFlamboyant wrote: ↑03 Oct 2022, 14:57It depends on the track, how the car behaves with those extra kilos and the added tyre degration. Engineers often say something between 0.033s to 0.133s per kg each lap. On average 0.067 seconds per lap. When referring to the lower figure as a base, you could be looking at 0.3s-0.6s.
Hamilton keeps saying the car is roughtly 1s slower than what it could be, though that seems a bit of a stretch. Altough, you never know.
However, a lack of updates wouldn't automatically mean they are dropping the concept next year. With the cost cap, you have to decide when to switch your limited resources between seasons. Also, some updates might be performance enhancing but invisible to the external observer, e.g. a lighter chassis. Merc has said that they are 10kg overweight and haven't been able to reduce it this year because of the cost cap. That could well be a key us of funds going forward as a 10kg drop in mass is a benefit right across the performance envelope.chrisc90 wrote: ↑03 Oct 2022, 20:22
Does anyone know if there are any more planned updates coming for the W13? At this stage in the season, if they are still bringing updates - it probably means they still believe in the concept - as it would be pointless spending good money on updating a concept they dont have any interesting is carrying over to the following year.
So at the end of a race, a car that's used 80kg of fuel would be 5.36-seconds/lap faster than at the beginning of the race (80kg x 0.067 seconds per lap). Feels like a plausible number, though maybe a little high?VacuousFlamboyant wrote: ↑03 Oct 2022, 14:57It depends on the track, how the car behaves with those extra kilos and the added tyre degration. Engineers often say something between 0.033s to 0.133s per kg each lap. On average 0.067 seconds per lap. When referring to the lower figure as a base, you could be looking at 0.3s-0.6s.
Hamilton keeps saying the car is roughtly 1s slower than what it could be, though that seems a bit of a stretch. Altough, you never know.
Yes, approximately. If someone were to go into the data the actual number should be a bit lower. The engineer I talked to in the paddock was very kind the share this kind of knowledge. The amount of rubber you have left carries more weight the more you progress in the race (pun intendedArcanum wrote: ↑04 Oct 2022, 00:48So at the end of a race, a car that's used 80kg of fuel would be 5.36-seconds/lap faster than at the beginning of the race (80kg x 0.067 seconds per lap). Feels like a plausible number, though maybe a little high?VacuousFlamboyant wrote: ↑03 Oct 2022, 14:57It depends on the track, how the car behaves with those extra kilos and the added tyre degration. Engineers often say something between 0.033s to 0.133s per kg each lap. On average 0.067 seconds per lap. When referring to the lower figure as a base, you could be looking at 0.3s-0.6s.
Hamilton keeps saying the car is roughtly 1s slower than what it could be, though that seems a bit of a stretch. Altough, you never know.
[obviously normalising for tyre compound, tyre wear, energy state, driving style, etc.]
). It means, the lighter the car, the more it can benefit from a weight reduction, until you hit a ceilling that has to do with mechanical grip, etc. There are outliers. Nevertheless, it's used as a rule of thumb.
Top link looks to have two pivot points?SmallSoldier wrote: ↑05 Oct 2022, 17:02W13’s Rear Multilink Suspension and Gearbox:
https://i.imgur.com/4Z2ZDLK.jpg
Via: @n_mode_log
It's the connection point for the wheel tethers.Stu wrote: ↑05 Oct 2022, 21:25Top link looks to have two pivot points?SmallSoldier wrote: ↑05 Oct 2022, 17:02W13’s Rear Multilink Suspension and Gearbox:
https://i.imgur.com/4Z2ZDLK.jpg
Via: @n_mode_log
Or is the upper join between the two pivots the ARB?
The Goblin wing hasn't reared it's ugly head yet. But it's coming.
Mercedes will launch a final upgrade in Austin.chrisc90 wrote: ↑03 Oct 2022, 20:22Certainly a interesting number to come out with. I mean 1 second would probably swap the gap they are behind to being infront by the same amount.VacuousFlamboyant wrote: ↑03 Oct 2022, 14:57It depends on the track, how the car behaves with those extra kilos and the added tyre degration. Engineers often say something between 0.033s to 0.133s per kg each lap. On average 0.067 seconds per lap. When referring to the lower figure as a base, you could be looking at 0.3s-0.6s.
Hamilton keeps saying the car is roughtly 1s slower than what it could be, though that seems a bit of a stretch. Altough, you never know.
It could be some correlation issues with the simulator - but id imagine they would have ironed that out by now. It would be interesting to know where this 1 second is being lost in the races that have gone by as that's a monstrous amount of time to be losing.
If they see 1 second potential in the W13 - they will have no issue with carrying the concept over onto the W14 - and now is around the area where they need to be making decisions on next year according to Toto - due to the longer lead time of some parts.
Does anyone know if there are any more planned updates coming for the W13? At this stage in the season, if they are still bringing updates - it probably means they still believe in the concept - as it would be pointless spending good money on updating a concept they dont have any interesting is carrying over to the following year.
"You look at how we developed the car, and I can point to one moment in time last year where we did something where I think we made a mistake," Elliott explained.
"What you’re seeing in terms of performance and the way it swings from race to race as a consequence of that, and that’s a mistake we’ve known about for a while, and something we’ve been correcting and that’s why our performance has gradually got better.
"But it’s not something we can fully correct for a little while yet, and we will do over the winter."
Elliott did elaborate however on how Mercedes' aerodynamicist exploited a loophole in F1's new technical regulations to whip up their zero-sidepod concept.
"With a loophole, you go through the winter and you look at it and think ‘has anybody else spotted it, is someone else going to turn up with it?’," Elliot said.
"While it looks visually very different, as always with these things, it’s about opening up small aerodynamic advantages.
"Without going and running a development on the concept we’ve got, and running a development on a different concept, it’s hard to know what it will be worth at the end.
"But it wasn’t a huge game-changer, in the learning we’ve found this year, it’s less about the shape of the car, it’s more about the way we approach the development of the car, that’s where the difference lies.
"When you look at the sidepod, people say ‘it looks very different, that must work completely different to the rest of the cars’, and it doesn’t, it’s just a slightly different solution.
"Aerodynamically I don’t think it’s a massive departure from the other cars, it’s just something that adds a little bit of performance for us."
"You look at how we developed the car, and I can point to one moment in time last year where we did something where I think we made a mistake," Elliott explained.
"What you’re seeing in terms of performance and the way it swings from race to race as a consequence of that, and that’s a mistake we’ve known about for a while, and something we’ve been correcting and that’s why our performance has gradually got better.
"But it’s not something we can fully correct for a little while yet, and we will do over the winter."
so why hasn't the zero sidepod concept worked ?Elliott did elaborate however on how Mercedes' aerodynamicist exploited a loophole in F1's new technical regulations to whip up their zero-sidepod concept.
"With a loophole, you go through the winter and you look at it and think ‘has anybody else spotted it, is someone else going to turn up with it?’," Elliot said.
"While it looks visually very different, as always with these things, it’s about opening up small aerodynamic advantages.
"Without going and running a development on the concept we’ve got, and running a development on a different concept, it’s hard to know what it will be worth at the end.
