The changes are too big to be able to change between practice sessions. There's a new front suspension...sidepod and floor structure has changed.
The changes are too big to be able to change between practice sessions. There's a new front suspension...sidepod and floor structure has changed.
This is the game changer that alone will half the gap to RB imo.Farnborough wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:13
Quite a decent direct comparison in side by side illustration here, of front suspension geometry shift.
The front suspension is entirely different and uses different pick up points. That isn't something they can change at the track. And if the suspension isn't changed, then there's little point in changing other stuff as it's all designed to work together.214270 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:33Last yr HAM was testing well into the second practice session, only converging on setup in P3 (and often changing setup again for quali). I guess maybe I’m alone in thinking the focus should be on testing, I’ve been out of the loop for a bit but are they confident the correlation issue is in the rearview?Just_a_fan wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:27There are some many detail changes that it's not practical to rebuild a car from one design to the other in the time available between sessions.
Mercedes already had poor tyre warmup last year without any of RB's front suspension so it's possible that the cause of this isn't related to the front suspension.AA_2019 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 14:04This is the game changer that alone will half the gap to RB imo.Farnborough wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:13
Quite a decent direct comparison in side by side illustration here, of front suspension geometry shift.
Downside will be poorer tyre and brake warm-up for qualy and on lap 1 of the race on front limited circuits.
Usually it means you are more prone to front locking, and it probably feels odd to the drivers as the car doesn't dive when they hit the brakes. Might be ok with lewis as he usually runs a more aggressive rear biasTheRacingElf wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:20But if there are so many benefits to an anti-dive setup, why doesn't everybody use it as default?
Can somebody explain the drawbacks (there have to be surely) of this geometry?
I'd love to see some sources or evidence to support what you're saying since I have absolutely no idea what you're basing your predictions off of. It's very disingenuous to saying something like "half the gap to RB" then add "imo" at the end as if a gap can every be an opinionated thing.AA_2019 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 14:04This is the game changer that alone will half the gap to RB imo.Farnborough wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:13
Quite a decent direct comparison in side by side illustration here, of front suspension geometry shift.
Downside will be poorer tyre and brake warm-up for qualy and on lap 1 of the race on front limited circuits.
I agree. It's a very different philosophy for the sidepod to the previous design. It seems heavily inspired by RB/AMR/Ferrari. Some downwash from RB and the channel from AMR/Ferrari/Alpine.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 14:59Fabrega
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fw-bSVUXsAM ... ame=medium
Its a different design than any other indeed, but clearly inspired by existing solutions
Also, it's not just de shape of the sidepod, it's also the equipment on the inside that may have required a change. I've seen a picture which showed some changes in the cooling layout.
Then on top of that you have to consider that they won't have any real world experience with how to set up the car, so they'll likely want to split setup directions between the two cars to see how the car reacts to various choices. They can cover far more ground with two cars than one.
Why do you think they kept the vents on top of the sidepod? For example Aston and a few others like Alpine have moved them away higher up to the engine cover, maybe to keep flow energy high or reduce separation (I'm a noob obviously so no idea). Is it a conscious choice or leftovers they cannot change yet?Vanja #66 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 14:59Fabrega
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fw-bSVUXsAM ... ame=medium
Its a different design than any other indeed, but clearly inspired by existing solutions
Nice Rhetoric.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑25 May 2023, 13:29Very interesting shaping of the undercut and floor junction, a double outwash kick. Well, the second one is hardly a kick, but it does push outwards. Could even extend fully to diffuser width, thus feeding the mouse hole with undercut air. This confirms it's a step where they completely turn away from zeropod/slimpod philosophy.
https://i.ibb.co/xMyc4mP/Mercedes-Forme ... erstag.jpg