Mercedes W14

[Holm86]

Toto says yes, the sidepods are the first iteration and it is already planned to have revised them after a few races.
For me, that means that it was noticed too late that the revised concept simply doesn't have the potential that Mercedes had hoped for for a long time.
Even if Toto downplays the influence of the sidepods, the interview sounds very much like a farewell to their current sidepod concept.

https://www.motorsport-total.com/formel ... n-23021511

I think others than mercedes will have revisions on their sidepods when we start testing or racing, doesn't mean the zeropods will be completely gone, just different in some areas

[NtsParadize]

[Henk_v]

To my knowledge makes more sense the rear end cannon in the case of the AMR23 (and Alfa and almost all the rest but Ferrari) because they want to push the flow to the ramps and direct it over the diffuser and the beam wing.

But in the case of W14 I would expect them to leave the stream go free over the cover engine down. I don’t get where they mainly intend to bring the air to feed the diffuser in an orderly manner.

Am I entirely wrong?

All teams bar Ferrari and Haas chose more centerline cooling, so it makes sense they need taller engine covers. While they are there, they simply extend the bodywork and make the wide outlet in a low pressure zone under the rear wing. It's not a bad design at all in that regard, I just prefer what Ferrari and Haas do. In my view, maximising rear wing performance is key to keep the drag down.

You are confusing centerline cooling and cannon exits. They are not the same.

[AR3-GP]

If the W13 was "zero pods", I would call the W14 "slim pods"

[Stu]

about rear suspension, don't know if it's true

Mayb the w12 suspension trick is back

It cannot be, hydraulically linked suspension is specifically banned.

[Stu]

about rear suspension, don't know if it's true

Mayb the w12 suspension trick is back

redbull had it in 2022 so if merc manages to get it it's good

As the W12 hydraulically linked suspension is specifically banned under the current regulations I would make two points

1) RedBull did not have it in 2022 (a purely mechanical system)
2) As it is banned, if Mercedes/AMG do bring it they will be DSQ’d.

.

[chrisc90]

If the W13 was "zero pods", I would call the W14 "slim pods"

https://i.postimg.cc/WzSqdQ6W/image.png
https://i.postimg.cc/xTtL8b6f/image.png

I know those are renders and likely to be very different to the launch or race spec cars, but its interesting to note the floor in the centre thats cut away compared to the last years floor

[AR3-GP]

If the W13 was "zero pods", I would call the W14 "slim pods"

https://i.postimg.cc/WzSqdQ6W/image.png
https://i.postimg.cc/xTtL8b6f/image.png

I know those are renders and likely to be very different to the launch or race spec cars, but its interesting to note the floor in the centre thats cut away compared to the last years floor

I would completely disregard the floor treatment. The fake floors on most of the car renders are just outdated or abandoned aero schemes. The engineering group has to give some morsels to marketing, but not too much.

[zibby43]

Toto says yes, the sidepods are the first iteration and it is already planned to have revised them after a few races.
For me, that means that it was noticed too late that the revised concept simply doesn't have the potential that Mercedes had hoped for for a long time.
Even if Toto downplays the influence of the sidepods, the interview sounds very much like a farewell to their current sidepod concept.

https://www.motorsport-total.com/formel ... n-23021511

there seems to be a massive disconnect between forum members here and team personnel in terms of linking side pod inlet design with significant performance implications, generally.

The latter believe it’s trivial. Here, it’s focused on more than critical areas such as the FW, floor, underfloor, diffuser, etc.

I find that interesting.

[AR3-GP]

Toto says yes, the sidepods are the first iteration and it is already planned to have revised them after a few races.
For me, that means that it was noticed too late that the revised concept simply doesn't have the potential that Mercedes had hoped for for a long time.
Even if Toto downplays the influence of the sidepods, the interview sounds very much like a farewell to their current sidepod concept.

https://www.motorsport-total.com/formel ... n-23021511

there seems to be a massive disconnect between forum members here and team personnel in terms of linking side pod inlet design with significant performance implications, generally.

The latter believe it’s trivial. Here, it’s focused on more than critical areas such as the FW, floor, underfloor, diffuser, etc.

I find that interesting.

Why are they revising it if it's trivial and/or otherwise un-noteworthy. Of course it's important.

This would be the 4th iteration of the Mercedes sidepod that we will see after the revisions

W13 A-spec
W13 B-spec
W14 Launch Spec
W14 revisions.

Why does this supposedly "trivial" part keep getting revised? There have now been more sidepods than front wings...Why are they wasting development resource on this trivial, inconsequential side pod?

Anyone downplaying the sidepods only needs to look at the development of the Mercedes sidepod. Why are they fussing with it, if doesn't matter?

Have you looked at the upgrades on many of the other cars in the last year? Sidepods seem quite important. Don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise. Of course they are going to downplay it because being wrong embarrasses them. Everyone keeps trying to pretend Mercedes "didn't get it wrong", despite them having nothing to suggest they got anything right last year.

[Mchamilton]

I'm expecting the rear wing to change for Bahrain, the wing they ran today looks like they're max down force at all costs spec they had last year, which was supposed to be a bandaid for their missing floor performance.
Its hella chunky compared to say the Ferrari wing

[Andi76]

about rear suspension, don't know if it's true

Mayb the w12 suspension trick is back

It cannot be, hydraulically linked suspension is specifically banned.

In Germany Andreas Schmidt reported that the W14 uses Red Bulls Trick from last year to lower the rear at high speeds. We all remember Red Bulls superior Topspeed in 2022. Andreas Schmidt from AMuS says that was because Red Bull used a trick to lower their rear at high speeds. Probably a collapsing rear suspension, something Newey started to use at McLaren in 1998 already. The word is that Mercedes found out how to it and copied it.

[NoDivergence]

Toto says yes, the sidepods are the first iteration and it is already planned to have revised them after a few races.
For me, that means that it was noticed too late that the revised concept simply doesn't have the potential that Mercedes had hoped for for a long time.
Even if Toto downplays the influence of the sidepods, the interview sounds very much like a farewell to their current sidepod concept.

https://www.motorsport-total.com/formel ... n-23021511

there seems to be a massive disconnect between forum members here and team personnel in terms of linking side pod inlet design with significant performance implications, generally.

The latter believe it’s trivial. Here, it’s focused on more than critical areas such as the FW, floor, underfloor, diffuser, etc.

I find that interesting.

Why are they revising it if it's trivial and/or otherwise un-noteworthy. Of course it's important.

This would be the 4th iteration of the Mercedes sidepod that we will see after the revisions

W13 A-spec
W13 B-spec
W14 Launch Spec
W14 revisions.

Why does this supposedly "trivial" part keep getting revised? There have now been more sidepods than front wings...Why are they wasting development resource on this trivial, inconsequential side pod?

Anyone downplaying the sidepods only needs to look at the development of the Mercedes sidepod. Why are they fussing with it, if doesn't matter?

Have you looked at the upgrades on many of the other cars in the last year? Sidepods seem quite important. Don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise. Of course they are going to downplay it because being wrong embarrasses them. Everyone keeps trying to pretend Mercedes "didn't get it wrong", despite them having nothing to suggest they got anything right last year.

Refinement is not the same as concept. I expect every single piece of bodywork on the car to be updated at some point in the season.

A sidepod does not have the pitch and yaw sensitivity, nor the structural considerations of a front wing.

[zioture]

[AR3-GP]

there seems to be a massive disconnect between forum members here and team personnel in terms of linking side pod inlet design with significant performance implications, generally.

The latter believe it’s trivial. Here, it’s focused on more than critical areas such as the FW, floor, underfloor, diffuser, etc.

I find that interesting.

Why are they revising it if it's trivial and/or otherwise un-noteworthy. Of course it's important.

This would be the 4th iteration of the Mercedes sidepod that we will see after the revisions

W13 A-spec
W13 B-spec
W14 Launch Spec
W14 revisions.

Why does this supposedly "trivial" part keep getting revised? There have now been more sidepods than front wings...Why are they wasting development resource on this trivial, inconsequential side pod?

Anyone downplaying the sidepods only needs to look at the development of the Mercedes sidepod. Why are they fussing with it, if doesn't matter?

Have you looked at the upgrades on many of the other cars in the last year? Sidepods seem quite important. Don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise. Of course they are going to downplay it because being wrong embarrasses them. Everyone keeps trying to pretend Mercedes "didn't get it wrong", despite them having nothing to suggest they got anything right last year.

Refinement is not the same as concept. I expect every single piece of bodywork on the car to be updated at some point in the season.

A sidepod does not have the pitch and yaw sensitivity, nor the structural considerations of a front wing.

I don’t know what question you are answering.

Whether you want to call it a change or call it a "refinement". It's all the same because this supposedly "trivial" and "inconsequential" feature of the car will now have seen 4 different iterations in the span of 1 year which cost considerable time for aerodynamicist and the WindTunnel.

but it's not important

Sometimes you need to go with what the eyes are showing you, not what the mouths are saying. You don't waste budget changing things that don't matter in a budget cap era.