2022 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Stu]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/63383726

Hamilton says trying to take this year's Mercedes to the limit is "like creeping up behind a horse".

"You're trying to get as close as possible," he says. "What's the breaking point before it kicks you in the face? And you know it's going to hurt when it hits your face.

"That's one of the best ways I can say what it's like when you're trying to lean on the car and it's snapping and unrecoverable. And this car, it's random."

To be fair, at the speeds they are travelling at, that is symptomatic of all F1 cars. If the drivers are within a few percent of maximum, it only takes something small and unforeseen to make the cars unpredictable (such as we saw with Bottas this weekend and with the lap-time variability of Hamilton when being chased down). Once they become unpredictable, it makes the drivers more circumspect and reactive - which itself leads to a greater influence of the unpredictable.

[MadMax]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/63383726

Hamilton says trying to take this year's Mercedes to the limit is "like creeping up behind a horse".

"You're trying to get as close as possible," he says. "What's the breaking point before it kicks you in the face? And you know it's going to hurt when it hits your face.

"That's one of the best ways I can say what it's like when you're trying to lean on the car and it's snapping and unrecoverable. And this car, it's random."

To be fair, at the speeds they are travelling at, that is symptomatic of all F1 cars. If the drivers are within a few percent of maximum, it only takes something small and unforeseen to make the cars unpredictable (such as we saw with Bottas this weekend and with the lap-time variability of Hamilton when being chased down). Once they become unpredictable, it makes the drivers more circumspect and reactive - which itself leads to a greater influence of the unpredictable.

This issue is that it's unpredictable. Often, a recalcitrant car can be tamed by, e.g. introducing understeer. That makes it slower and the driver then has to hustle the car which means the driver can make errors. But the W13 appears to just randomly bite even when otherwise apparently running sweetly. That is presumably because the underlying aero is not properly stable and on occasions will just "stall" (using that word as a placeholder for a better one) at the slightest provocation e.g. taking a bump slightly differently. That means the driver never really has a chance because at some point, if pushing on, the thing will behave differently this lap to last lap. As Hamilton says, it's random.

Compare with the RB18 this year (or the W12 last year) which is consistent and can be pushed with confidence. "Planted" as people sometimes say.

Interesting bit in the article about the team dynamics and Hamilton's relationship with Russell. Hamilton is apparently not that bothered by their relative positions because they aren't fighting for anything. If they were 1 and 2 in the title hunt, the gloves would be off!

[214270]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/63383726

Hamilton says trying to take this year's Mercedes to the limit is "like creeping up behind a horse".

"You're trying to get as close as possible," he says. "What's the breaking point before it kicks you in the face? And you know it's going to hurt when it hits your face.

"That's one of the best ways I can say what it's like when you're trying to lean on the car and it's snapping and unrecoverable. And this car, it's random."

To be fair, at the speeds they are travelling at, that is symptomatic of all F1 cars. If the drivers are within a few percent of maximum, it only takes something small and unforeseen to make the cars unpredictable (such as we saw with Bottas this weekend and with the lap-time variability of Hamilton when being chased down). Once they become unpredictable, it makes the drivers more circumspect and reactive - which itself leads to a greater influence of the unpredictable.

HAM
41 - 1:40.232
42 - 1:40.123
43 - 1:40.309
44 - 1:40.845
45 - 1:39.830
46 - 1:40.386
47 - 1:40.595
48 - 1:40.372

VER threw a 1:39.776 around lap 43, HAM responded with his own quick lap. A slower build lap, a fast lap and then back to a normal pace given his deg.

[mendis]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

[morefirejules08]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

[AR3-GP]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

It was exciting at first to contemplate GR as a WDC in the making, but it does seem that the amusingly named "experiments" are to blame. I have seen nothing to suggest GR threatens LH at the current time. GR will have to level up if he wants to stay relevant. I think GR is closer in level to Ocon than people are comfortable admitting, but I am keeping an open mind as past results don't always predict future performances.

[Bill_Kar]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

It was exciting at first to contemplate GR as a WDC in the making, but it does seem that the amusingly named "experiments" are to blame. I have seen nothing to suggest GR threatens LH at the current time. GR will have to level up if he wants to stay relevant. I think GR is closer in level to Ocon than people are comfortable admitting, but I am keeping an open mind as past results don't always predict future performances.

Yeah, apart from anti-Hamilton trolls, it's pretty adamant that LH has an extra gear over GR. Especially if you account for misfortunes/mistakes.

But they had different objectives. LH doesn't care if he fights for the championship, so he threw half a season experimenting, threw a couple of races just to get the win, when he could just sit back and take a regular podium or decent points (Spa, Zandvoort, Singapore, and yeah 2 of them were mistakes from LH). He can do that of course, because he is a 7x WC.

GR, on the other hand, is on his first season in a top-level team, he needs the results. He needs the "only Top 5 finishes", "Mr Consistency". For next year though, he must work on his Sunday pace.

[PlatinumZealot]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

You mean when his car was science lab on wheels?

[Big Tea]

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

It was exciting at first to contemplate GR as a WDC in the making, but it does seem that the amusingly named "experiments" are to blame. I have seen nothing to suggest GR threatens LH at the current time. GR will have to level up if he wants to stay relevant. I think GR is closer in level to Ocon than people are comfortable admitting, but I am keeping an open mind as past results don't always predict future performances.

Yeah, apart from anti-Hamilton trolls, it's pretty adamant that LH has an extra gear over GR. Especially if you account for misfortunes/mistakes.

But they had different objectives. LH doesn't care if he fights for the championship, so he threw half a season experimenting, threw a couple of races just to get the win, when he could just sit back and take a regular podium or decent points (Spa, Zandvoort, Singapore, and yeah 2 of them were mistakes from LH). He can do that of course, because he is a 7x WC.

GR, on the other hand, is on his first season in a top-level team, he needs the results. He needs the "only Top 5 finishes", "Mr Consistency". For next year though, he must work on his Sunday pace.

Experience only comes with, Ermm, experience. There is no substitute for it

[mendis]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

I had responded to this same kind of post a while back with links to articles. To be fair to George, both drivers did experimenting through the first half and it was not just Lewis.

[morefirejules08]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

I had responded to this same kind of post a while back with links to articles. To be fair to George, both drivers did experimenting through the first half and it was not just Lewis.

I don’t recall George carrying extra equipment and TBH, I’m not prepared to trawl though pages and pages of this thread to look for posts on the subject.

[MadMax]

With the kind of history Lewis has, it's difficult to believe what he says. In the first part of this year, he struggled when the car was genuinely bad. His record in second half shows the car has improved. The lap times he managed in USGP doesn't come with an unpredictable car. It doesn't have leading pace, but it's consistent. It's not like he wasn't pushing in the last race, yet it was holding up well. Besides, no driver thinks the car is perfect. It's rare when they admit it, like a UFO in the sky.

In the first part of the year Hamilton was doing a lot of on track R&D so I’m not sure his results can be a reliable indicator of his performance level.

I had responded to this same kind of post a while back with links to articles. To be fair to George, both drivers did experimenting through the first half and it was not just Lewis.

Hamilton was racing with extra sensor and the like which added mass to an already over-mass car. He was also running the outlier set up trials where Russell wasn't. The team have stated publicly that Hamilton was doing more of the heavy lifting in the early season testing and trials. Not sure why some people feel the need to contradict that. Since those trial ended, Hamilton has outperformed Russell when both have had incident-free weekends.

[smith100s]

I think there has also been good fortune and misfortune with safety cars this year. Team themselves have been far from perfect in some strategy calls. I do think Hamilton has played the team game helping to develop on track this year.

[atanatizante]

How reliable is HAM`s comment in Ted Kravitz's official interview before the Mexico race saying that Honda now has almost 100% deployment over the entire lap compared to Merc and other manufacturers which have only 70 to 80%?

Another question is regarding how the F1 teams can figure out how much deployment the PU from another manufacturer has over an entire lap. I mean which are the methods to determine that fact ...

[Juzh]

How reliable is HAM`s comment in Ted Kravitz's official interview before the Mexico race saying that Honda now has almost 100% deployment over the entire lap compared to Merc and other manufacturers which have only 70 to 80%?

Another question is regarding how the F1 teams can figure out how much deployment the PU from another manufacturer has over an entire lap. I mean which are the methods to determine that fact ...

Even the fans nowadays have access to serious amount of telemetry data (mainly trough fastf1 library) from where various analysis can be made. Clipping is actually one of the easiest variables to spot as you can see either a decline in speed or holding constant speed at some level. Red bull's acceleration traces have a very obvious deviation from all other PUs as they don't behave in such a way, aka they're deploying almost all the time (qualifying obviously). Now imagine what kind of analysis teams might be able to do with all the tools at their disposal.