2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[organic]

Good point. I was harsh on Ferrari's situation

[F1Krof]

I guess but switching to a RB philosophy at the end of year 1 also doesn't have much promise. You will be a year behind RB's development and have to tackle problems that they already have. All Merc and Ferrari can do is hope that their concepts will develop well and offer more performance down the line, unless they really hit a wall and have to abandon it (like the w13's original floor concept but luckily they could ditch that early)

I by no means think "switching to a RB car" is a solution for them. They'll be a year behind as you say. I think it's the nature of F1 whereby a year 1 screw up may take years to remedy. Ferrari is probably a bit different. We know they had the performance from the beginning on a traditional circuit. The W13 never showed that pace at a traditional circuit. It only looked promising at high altitude but there are not enough of those circuits to be worth it.

Caveats apply since we don't really know if this is an extremely elaborate sandbagging scheme of course...

I don't believe anybody's sandbagging. Especially Mercs since there is no reason behind it. With cost cap system, whatever it is that some team has and does not want to show is almost impossible to copy and effectively use on their own cars in short to mid-term.

Just look at how open Mike Elliot was, like there are no big secrets out there. If we at this forum can come to pretty close conclusions based on our observations of images and gossip, then I would assume teams can have a pretty darn good idea of each other's strengths and weaknesses very easily.

The limiting factor here is: GETTING IT RIGHT FROM THE GET GO. If you don't, then you're always most certainly going to play catch-up.

Mercs got it right in 2014. They got it right in 2017, and then they got it right in 2019. This time around, they haven't got it right for whatever reason. My personal opinion is that Merc lost a lot of experienced senior staff, they were bleeding good quality staff especially in the last couple of years. They would need to refresh the team with top quality expertise both on engine side, aero, mechanics and material's side if they are to mount a successful campaign for 2026.

As for this season and the ones to follow, I don't want to sound doom and gloom, but I think it's a wrap. They'll be lucky to hold 3rd place in my opinion.

[atanatizante]

I've heard that their rear axel instability was primarily due to a lack of correlation between the diffuser expansion at lower ride heights when using the hard tyres in the range. They were trying to compensate for the lack of grip on those tyres by lowering the car in order to generate more downforce. It seems that the rectangular diffuser shape has this limitation in flow expansion on these particular tyres and could be changed for rounded upper corner edges like other teams are doing ...

On another note and a little bit off-topic, Pat Symons was Thursday speaking at F1TV about the new fuel proposal for 2026 onwards. He was saying that this fuel must have 3 targets: 1. to be net zero-carbon; 2. be obtained from sustainable sources and 3. to change the fuel flow rate from 100kg/h to an energy flow rate type of measurement at that should be of 33MJ/kg. This means that`ll start a race among those 5 petrochemical companies that make the lowest-density fuel formulation of all in order that the fuel weighs less... Why he chose the 33MJ/kg figure? Coz the heat value (energy or calorific value is a measure of a fuel's energy density, and is expressed in energy (joules) per specified amount e.g. kg) of DME - dimethyl ether (CH3OCH3) which is a synthetic fuel (with net-zero footprint) that could be obtained from CO2 (it`s what Porshe is doing at that factory in Chile) has some 29-30MJ/kg calorific value and is substantially higher and more likely to be obtained from other types of so-called net-zero fuels such as methanol (20MJ/kg) or ethanol (27MJ/kg) but unfortunately considerably lower than petrol (44MJ/kg) which means in return we would have less powerful ICE ...

[ringo]

You may also want a denser fuel.
If have the same amount of energy in less volume, there is an advantage. Less pumping, more air, generally less mass and smaller fuel tank.

As for rear axle stability, I think that's a very good insight. Much better stuff to discuss than sidepods for sure lol.
The suspension is very underestimated in the formula.
It was reportes that the rB19 is riding 10mm lower than everyone else without breaking the floor. So clearly their advantage is coming from the floor and the suspension's response is facilitating that.

[Juzh]

which means in return we would have less powerful ICE ...

I believe this is by design, they want less powerful ICE and compensate with batteries and kers. In my opinion this is not necessary, they should keep ICE output somewhere in the ballpark of 2023-2025 figures and just increase electrical output. Modern cars are SLOW on the straights, too slow.

[pursue_one's]

AMuS reports that apparently the ground clearance of the RB19 is at least 10 millimetres below everyone else. Toto Wolff says their floor would break if they would do the same. Also Mercedes engineers claim to have noticed that the AMR23 drives at a lower ride height too, and despite that, gets over the bumps well. It is also strong on corner exit. The comparison with Aston Martin is interesting for Mercedes because they supply Aston Martin with the engine, gearbox and rear suspension.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... rain-2023/

[AR3-GP]

AMuS reports that apparently the ground clearance of the RB19 is at least 10 millimetres below everyone else. Toto Wolff says their floor would break if they would do the same. Also Mercedes engineers claim to have noticed that the AMR23 drives at a lower ride height too, and despite that, gets over the bumps well. It is also strong on corner exit. The comparison with Aston Martin is interesting for Mercedes because they supply Aston Martin with the engine, gearbox and rear suspension.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... rain-2023/

AMR doing a better job with bought parts? I didn't think that was possible?

[chrisc90]

AMuS reports that apparently the ground clearance of the RB19 is at least 10 millimetres below everyone else. Toto Wolff says their floor would break if they would do the same. Also Mercedes engineers claim to have noticed that the AMR23 drives at a lower ride height too, and despite that, gets over the bumps well. It is also strong on corner exit. The comparison with Aston Martin is interesting for Mercedes because they supply Aston Martin with the engine, gearbox and rear suspension.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... rain-2023/

AMR doing a better job with bought parts? I didn't think that was possible?

Just imagine!

How often has a customer finished ahead of the works team?

[F1Krof]

AMuS reports that apparently the ground clearance of the RB19 is at least 10 millimetres below everyone else. Toto Wolff says their floor would break if they would do the same. Also Mercedes engineers claim to have noticed that the AMR23 drives at a lower ride height too, and despite that, gets over the bumps well. It is also strong on corner exit. The comparison with Aston Martin is interesting for Mercedes because they supply Aston Martin with the engine, gearbox and rear suspension.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... rain-2023/

AMR doing a better job with bought parts? I didn't think that was possible?

Just imagine!

How often has a customer finished ahead of the works team?

Red Bull 2nd vs Renault 8th - 2009
Red Bull 1st vs Renault 5th - 2010
Red Bull 1st vs Renault 5th - 2011
Red Bull 1st vs Lotus Renault 4th - 2012
Red Bull 1st vs Lotus Renault 4th - 2013
... do I need to go further with RBR?

Also:

McLaren 2nd vs Mercedes 4th - 2010
McLarren 2nd vs Mercedes 4th - 2011
McLarren 3rd vs Mercedes 5th - 2012

Pretty often if you'd ask me.

[Venturiation]

You may also want a denser fuel.
If have the same amount of energy in less volume, there is an advantage. Less pumping, more air, generally less mass and smaller fuel tank.

As for rear axle stability, I think that's a very good insight. Much better stuff to discuss than sidepods for sure lol.
The suspension is very underestimated in the formula.
It was reportes that the rB19 is riding 10mm lower than everyone else without breaking the floor. So clearly their advantage is coming from the floor and the suspension's response is facilitating that.

AM23 is able to do that while using Mercedes rear suspension so it must be something else

[AR3-GP]

You may also want a denser fuel.
If have the same amount of energy in less volume, there is an advantage. Less pumping, more air, generally less mass and smaller fuel tank.

As for rear axle stability, I think that's a very good insight. Much better stuff to discuss than sidepods for sure lol.
The suspension is very underestimated in the formula.
It was reportes that the rB19 is riding 10mm lower than everyone else without breaking the floor. So clearly their advantage is coming from the floor and the suspension's response is facilitating that.

AM23 is able to do that while using Mercedes rear suspension so it must be something else

Imo, Mercedes is being a little bit theatrical. How do you imagine they measured 10mm? With their eyes? Toto also called their traction "breathtaking"

Peak political theater.

[Venturiation]

You may also want a denser fuel.
If have the same amount of energy in less volume, there is an advantage. Less pumping, more air, generally less mass and smaller fuel tank.

As for rear axle stability, I think that's a very good insight. Much better stuff to discuss than sidepods for sure lol.
The suspension is very underestimated in the formula.
It was reportes that the rB19 is riding 10mm lower than everyone else without breaking the floor. So clearly their advantage is coming from the floor and the suspension's response is facilitating that.

AM23 is able to do that while using Mercedes rear suspension so it must be something else

Imo, Mercedes is being a little bit theatrical. How do you imagine they measured 10mm? With their eyes? Toto also called their traction "breathtaking"

Peak political theater.

They have photographs of each car and engineers analysing them so it could be true
But I don’t think Mercedes would keep their car higher if it was possible to go lower

[ringo]

You may also want a denser fuel.
If have the same amount of energy in less volume, there is an advantage. Less pumping, more air, generally less mass and smaller fuel tank.

As for rear axle stability, I think that's a very good insight. Much better stuff to discuss than sidepods for sure lol.
The suspension is very underestimated in the formula.
It was reportes that the rB19 is riding 10mm lower than everyone else without breaking the floor. So clearly their advantage is coming from the floor and the suspension's response is facilitating that.

AM23 is able to do that while using Mercedes rear suspension so it must be something else

I don't think AM23 is doing the same. I feel that car is overrated so far. Just a hunch.
But it would be interesting if they were doing more with the suspension. Would they be free to modify the suspension?
I am sure they are. The geartrain, hydraulics and pick up points may be the bulk of what's shared. The rest could be all AMR.

[atanatizante]

You may also want a denser fuel.
If have the same amount of energy in less volume, there is an advantage. Less pumping, more air, generally less mass and smaller fuel tank.

As for rear axle stability, I think that's a very good insight. Much better stuff to discuss than sidepods for sure lol.
The suspension is very underestimated in the formula.
It was reportes that the rB19 is riding 10mm lower than everyone else without breaking the floor. So clearly their advantage is coming from the floor and the suspension's response is facilitating that.

AM23 is able to do that while using Mercedes rear suspension so it must be something else

I don't think AM23 is doing the same. I feel that car is overrated so far. Just a hunch.
But it would be interesting if they were doing more with the suspension. Would they be free to modify the suspension?
I am sure they are. The geartrain, hydraulics and pick up points may be the bulk of what's shared. The rest could be all AMR.

Both W14 and AMR23 cars have a pushrod suspension although the latter has a different geometry setting. RB19 has a pull road suspension so it seems that the underfloor must be the likely real reason ...

[mechanoit]

AMuS reports that apparently the ground clearance of the RB19 is at least 10 millimetres below everyone else. Toto Wolff says their floor would break if they would do the same. Also Mercedes engineers claim to have noticed that the AMR23 drives at a lower ride height too, and despite that, gets over the bumps well. It is also strong on corner exit. The comparison with Aston Martin is interesting for Mercedes because they supply Aston Martin with the engine, gearbox and rear suspension.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... rain-2023/

I made a lengthy post in the general aerodynamics topic that could be related to this. First I have to say I am unsure how true this rumour is. There doesn’t seem to be a direct quote from Wolff or any Mercedes engineers, just AMuS reporting of it supposedly.

If we assume that Mercedes did say this and further assume it is true, then I see some potential link to my earlier post in the general aerodynamics topic. I noted there that Red Bull could one and/or two potential ways to achieve this. One is to bleed off any excess downforce produced after a certain point as ride height compresses with increased car speed and corresponding increase in downforce. Such a bleed off or aerodynamic “vent” or “relief valve” (not literal relief valve) could stop the ride height compressing further which can result in the floor entering choke or stall zone that sets off porpoising. Such an aerodynamic “vent” could even be as simple as having a tuned floor edge together with other associated upstream control surfaces, that allow some small losses under the floor at the desired speed which counteracts further downforce from building up. The second way, and which could even be used in combination with the first way, is they’ve found a way to get some type of inertia damping or equivalent effect even though hydraulic and mechanical devices have been banned.

The Red Bull doesn’t run stiff, and in fact seems notably softer sprung relative to other cars. This is quite obvious to see when it rides the kerbs and hits bumps on the track. It seems to absorb vertical accelerations almost entirely within its suspension. Yet it can run low, maximising the high downforce zone for the venturi floor and not stall the floor even when it hits bumps on the track and the ride compresses. I still struggle to understand how they are doing it. I am leaning towards them simply designing a floor that isn’t too aggressive in how the venturi constricts and opens up again, so their peak downforce isn’t very high but the operating zone is much wider. Tuning the floor seems to be key. Not enough of an aggressive venturi, and downforce produced is too low. Too aggressive, and downforce produced is too high for the fast straights and fast corners. Almost seems like they need a specific floor for each type of track. Of course all of this is just guess work but I find it intriguing.