Organic will give you a more detailed answer than I can.
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Things like..
I agree with you but there's some shift sometimes :organic wrote: ↑09 Jul 2023, 22:45Things like..
Putting too much energy into the tyres eg Haas, or being gentle on the tyres eg RB
Having a slippery car eg Williams
Having good low speed performance eg Aston martin
Having poor handling behaviour in certain corner types eg McLaren in slow corners
Many of the above characteristics have carried over multiple seasons, some even from before 2022 into the current era. McLaren have had this strange handling characteristic according to Lando for years - maybe something to do with their wind tunnel not being able to simulate yaw. Williams is another, being slippery for many years now.
Mercedes have always been fast at Barcelona. Doesn't seem to matter how they design their car but it always runs well there. And they don't tend to have a car that likes Monaco, regardless of the car philosophy. That likely comes down to a combination of car characteristics that derives from broad decisions made early in the design process - in previous era that might be something like wheelbase
How difficult is it to change a 'Car characteristics' or it's impossible?Spoutnik wrote: ↑09 Jul 2023, 22:58I agree with you but there's some shift sometimes :organic wrote: ↑09 Jul 2023, 22:45Things like..
Putting too much energy into the tyres eg Haas, or being gentle on the tyres eg RB
Having a slippery car eg Williams
Having good low speed performance eg Aston martin
Having poor handling behaviour in certain corner types eg McLaren in slow corners
Many of the above characteristics have carried over multiple seasons, some even from before 2022 into the current era. McLaren have had this strange handling characteristic according to Lando for years - maybe something to do with their wind tunnel not being able to simulate yaw. Williams is another, being slippery for many years now.
Mercedes have always been fast at Barcelona. Doesn't seem to matter how they design their car but it always runs well there. And they don't tend to have a car that likes Monaco, regardless of the car philosophy. That likely comes down to a combination of car characteristics that derives from broad decisions made early in the design process - in previous era that might be something like wheelbase
- RB went from being draggy, low top speed (Vettel years/high rake RB16B) to being a rocket ship in straight line while even having little less downforce than the Ferrari in 2022
- AM/RP/Force India went from being the fastest car in strzight line to being what it is today (a car supposed to win at Singapore)
- McLaren had a design from 2020/2021 which allowed them to master high speed track : Spa, Sochi, Monza but since 2022 the car is better on "karting track" (before the update)
I think sometimes it's also due to the driver really... Massa turned into prime Schumacher at Istanbul Park and it didnt mean the Ferrari were particularly good at this track...
I think for the example your are giving Hamilton was never particularly spectular around Monaco
It's not impossible, but each team has its own design philosophy and tools they developed to design the car. As long as the team sticks to these tools, you'll have a certain result in terms of car characteristics. That applies to tire analysis, windtunnel, CFD and all other simulation tools. Also a reason why personnel switching teams is a good thing. This way you get a new approach and other philosophies into your design department. You can change your approach, but it takes year to get it done.
I don't think it works like that way. I think you have design failings (car weaknesses) that then drive your setup. Example Williams lack DF so the fastest way around the track is to set it up with as little wing as possible.Tzk wrote: ↑10 Jul 2023, 06:50It's not impossible, but each team has its own design philosophy and tools they developed to design the car. As long as the team sticks to these tools, you'll have a certain result in terms of car characteristics. That applies to tire analysis, windtunnel, CFD and all other simulation tools. Also a reason why personnel switching teams is a good thing. This way you get a new approach and other philosophies into your design department. You can change your approach, but it takes year to get it done.
Williams for example went for a low drag, low downforce approach in the past, which made them slow overall but impossible to overtake on the straights. At least unless you were way faster.
Same for the other teams. You design your suspension geometry in a certain way, you end up with a car which is (or isn't) gentle on the tires. Mercs for example seems to work them harder while RB is able to sometimes run a softer set just fine.
Farnborough wrote: ↑10 Jul 2023, 09:12Clearly there's performance difference which we can all observe, the team must be working on analysing why their design is in front or behind other's performance for variation in track attributes.
The AM downwash/waterslide arrangements do look more likely to generate drag figures at sub optimum in comparison to RB type to my view. Seem to have good separation of longitudinal airflow but at more drag cost.
The AM appears, through their flow vis image, to be pulling up airflow from outside flank of side pod and rolling that over into the trough on topside, as comparison to RB which seems intently focused on letting the top surface of the side pod bleed downward into the undercut channel as it progresses away from front inlet area.
The AM performance at season beginning I feel took them by surprise in it's ultimate performance, they all said they had good numbers but until they ran it against opposition they were right to treat with caution.
This in itself gives something of a pause in data and how the update route is defined, until they really knew exactly where they were positioned in regard to level against competitors, then throwing speculative design changes at it (to give continuity in update) would seem invalid to me. Establishing many aspect of this new chassis in real competition needs to be accomplished in driving true improvements from that new baseline. It takes time, which I believe we are seeing now as that understanding can't really be short circuited. It may be (in contrast to statements about updates previously) just the reality if now finding a refining direction that doesn't give inconclusive results, which could either be leading into more significant iteration or, given budget cap etc, leading to desirable core chassis changes list for 24 season in evolving their concept. They are effectively out of step with all the other team right from that mid season change in 22 in evolution of concept development time.
Compare to other they had very few upgrades and that is one worrying point.Mansell89 wrote: ↑10 Jul 2023, 13:53There has been some very big progress from McLaren which probably exacerbates or exaggerates the AM “dip”, but I think it’s reasonable to say they haven’t made a big step forward from what was an excellent starting point.
I do however think they will go very nicely in Budapest as that looks on paper a track to suit better.
They don’t communicate that much but Krack said that they will have three races with upgradespeewon wrote: ↑10 Jul 2023, 15:17Its worrying the amount of talk coming out of AM is still about track suitability and pre season expectations. Yeah they made a huge leap from 7th to 2nd but they're already back down to 5th. The tyre deg advantage over Ferrari and Merc is seemingly gone. They're not good in quali. And their car suits much fewer tracks than the other teams. When Mclaren and Merc were down, they were very confident and clear about the direction in which they wanted to go. No one from AM has given any indication as to where they want to/should go.
Well, I do not think it can or will be a good thing.Jambier wrote: ↑10 Jul 2023, 15:27They don’t communicate that much but Krack said that they will have three races with upgradespeewon wrote: ↑10 Jul 2023, 15:17Its worrying the amount of talk coming out of AM is still about track suitability and pre season expectations. Yeah they made a huge leap from 7th to 2nd but they're already back down to 5th. The tyre deg advantage over Ferrari and Merc is seemingly gone. They're not good in quali. And their car suits much fewer tracks than the other teams. When Mclaren and Merc were down, they were very confident and clear about the direction in which they wanted to go. No one from AM has given any indication as to where they want to/should go.
But now as Mercedes and RBR they are focusing on 2024
By the way I’m not sure that this is the right thing to do, it seems with those new regs that in season dev is as important as during the winter
I’m wondering if planning évolution until almost the last race is a good thing, it might be. And continuing the year after on that basis
those car characteristics do tend to carry between years, especially particular outlier tracks for a car's performance