Mercedes W14 Speculation Thread

[RedNEO]

Based on reliability, and based on the Alonso butt dyno being surprised how well a very used Mercedes PU ran at the Abu Dhabi test last year, implying the Renault has high power degradation over its lifetime. and that's even considering that the AM was a very draggy car.

This plus the only way we can get some kind of idea about performance in same aero configuration is Monza since nobody else is wanting to use the Renault and in that weekend Alpine decked out Ocon with a brand new PU plus new everything and it was interesting to see him finish out the top ten even beat by NDV in the Williams on his debut who finished in 8th.

I think it was not about engine but it was about tracks Renault car like or not like. Renault was good some aero level and tracks and not good at some others.

But Monza IS about engine

[etusch]

If car not makes difference there, how known teams are still in front there ? Of course monza is like other tracks. Engine vs chassis ratio can change but never turns zero. if it were as you claimed, teams using best engine would lock up first 4 first 6 or first 8. According to you Renault are last 2.
I remember old times mclaren was liking monza more than ferrari because of kerbs of monza. Then they changed kerbs.

[RedNEO]

If car not makes difference there, how known teams are still in front there ? Of course monza is like other tracks. Engine vs chassis ratio can change but never turns zero. if it were as you claimed, teams using best engine would lock up first 4 first 6 or first 8. According to you Renault are last 2.
I remember old times mclaren was liking monza more than ferrari because of kerbs of monza. Then they changed kerbs.

I didn’t claim Alpine is “zero” I just said Williams beat it with a rookie at Monza which is about straights.

[Ozan]

if Merc really wants to keep the zeropod-inlet design, why don't they combine it with this Tyrell design?

[zeroday]

https://i.ibb.co/PT8PwZ4/dsfdsf.jpg

if Merc really wants to keep the zeropod-inlet design, why don't they combine it with this Tyrell design?

The zero-pod concept was never the problem. It was their incorrect belief they could run the car as low as possible, resulting in other parts being heavily dependent on that belief.

[chrisc90]

https://i.ibb.co/PT8PwZ4/dsfdsf.jpg

if Merc really wants to keep the zeropod-inlet design, why don't they combine it with this Tyrell design?

The zero-pod concept was never the problem. It was their incorrect belief they could run the car as low as possible, resulting in other parts being heavily dependent on that belief.

It was still a problem though wasn’t it because it was draggy.

When the air density was lower at places like Mexico and Brazil - the car was much better. Put it back to lower normal levels and the problems come back

[AR3-GP]

I think the only simple observation was that the W13 was not the best car, far from it.

The details are complex. Lack of floor performance means they were running bigger wings. There have been some suggestions that lack of management of the front tire wake as well as lack of management to the rear tire means the sidepod is not as effective at minimizing drag as solutions of RB/Ferrari, but you have to remember that Mercedes assumed they'd have so much floor performance that the downside to the sidepod design (worse management of air to the rear tire), would be compensated for by running an even smaller rear wing because the floor had so much downforce.

The floor didn't have downforce. So now they had the penalty of the "no-pod", AND a huge rear wing. Mercedes are counting on having so much floor downforce that they can compensate for the additional rear tire drag by just running a small rear wing. The front wing needs to be big for aero balance reasons and Mercedes had a massive front wing at the start of the year. It shows their projections of floor downforce in simulation was not realized in the real world.

[etusch]

I think the only simple observation was that the W13 was not the best car, far from it.

The details are complex. Lack of floor performance means they were running bigger wings. There have been some suggestions that lack of management of the front tire wake as well as lack of management to the rear tire means the sidepod is not as effective at minimizing drag as solutions of RB/Ferrari, but you have to remember that Mercedes assumed they'd have so much floor performance that the downside to the sidepod design (worse management of air to the rear tire), would be compensated for by running an even smaller rear wing because the floor had so much downforce.

The floor didn't have downforce. So now they had the penalty of the "no-pod", AND a huge rear wing. Mercedes are counting on having so much floor downforce that they can compensate for the additional rear tire drag by just running a small rear wing. The front wing needs to be big for aero balance reasons and Mercedes had a massive front wing at the start of the year. It shows their projections of floor downforce in simulation was not realized in the real world.

In some race ( I think first races) they were too slow at straight and wolf said they will cut top of rear wing.
Redbull said they planned 3 different df level and wings before the season. I think every team did same because of budget cap. maybe 4 instead of 3.
Merc's first good race were spain with bigger wings. Maybe they decided to have bigger wings then. If so they spent more money to redesign their wings. At the end there is more unexpected budget penalty for them.

[chrisc90]

If the W13 struggled with floor downforce, then surely the raised profiles underneath will only mean less downforce given the higher height to the track?

Even more odd that rear wings weren’t skimmed down once the spa td039 come in and they ‘realised we can’t run the car on the deck’

So for Merc they should have been experimenting with a floor which produces more downforce allowing to trim the rear wing right out. But I don’t think I remember them doing that?

[AR3-GP]

If the W13 struggled with floor downforce, then surely the raised profiles underneath will only mean less downforce given the higher height to the track?

Even more odd that rear wings weren’t skimmed down once the spa td039 come in and they ‘realised we can’t run the car on the deck’

So for Merc they should have been experimenting with a floor which produces more downforce allowing to trim the rear wing right out. But I don’t think I remember them doing that?

I'm not an aerodynamicist so I can't tell you why their floor didn't work, other than a general presumption that it probably just wasn't a good design. They did make changes to the floor, and probably improved it, but closing the gap to the leaders is not the work of a minute. The entire car was built around the launch spec floor. They had quite a lot of unravelling and backwards steps to make.

The budget is capped. Maybe they ran out of money. If there was no budget cap we would have seen more floors and more rear wings. I can only assume that the budget cap is the reason we didn't but it's the same for all teams.

[Ben31]

[AR3-GP]

If I've done my math correcting using the weight limit of 796kg for 2023 (798 for 2022), then Mercedes must have been running somewhere around 805kg last season which was probably in between Ferrari and Red Bull, with Red Bull being on the heavier side, Ferrari lighter.

That would have been much lighter than I presumed as I assumed Mercedeas was something like 10-15kg overweight last year.

[Vanja #66]

Merc kept bringing upgrades and dropped weight all season, 12kg less than W13 seems possible only v W13 in Bahrain... If RB and Ferrari only managed -3kg from chassis alone, where can other 9kg come from. Lighter tyres?

[chrisc90]

Merc kept bringing upgrades and dropped weight all season, 12kg less than W13 seems possible only v W13 in Bahrain... If RB and Ferrari only managed -3kg from chassis alone, where can other 9kg come from. Lighter tyres?

Agree, 12kg when compared to other teams seems a LOT of weight to lose. Maybe the drivers got told to go on a mega diet over the winter break.

[K1Plus]

At least this weight reduction could bring a few tenths (0.2-0.3) in slow speed corners right? Mechanical design is integral to weight, no?