2024 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Cs98]

“The problem is that the gap is so big that you end up with three-tier racing. That is not healthy for F1.

“They [the FIA] have a power output so they can see what every power unit is producing. They have the facts. They could quite easily come up with a way of some form of equalisation.”

What Allison said pales in comparison to this plain-as-day call for rules to be changed in order to specifically peg back the dominant car.

Horner is making no comment on the dominant car at all?!

He is voicing concerns about the dominant engine and how much power the Renault lacks compared to it. Horner would have been more than happy to lease customer Mercedes-Benz engines for 2016.

The calls are not unusual, even in 2023, Renault were making the same calls again. Horner was again in favour of Renault's proposal:

I think that would be fascinating for everybody to see, and I think that if there is a deficit under homologation, then it’s something that we should be sensible about - otherwise, you’re locked in for two years. I wouldn’t be averse to a sensible discussion.

https://news.yahoo.com/fia-wants-equali ... 04397.html

I'm arguing against calling for rules changes to penalize the fastest team for doing the best job.

That's not what Allison was doing with his recent comments, unlike Horner back in 2015.

Horner was referring only to engines! Nothing about constructor performance whatsoever.

Red Bull-Mercedes would have been more than happy to compete with Mercedes-Mercedes in the 2016 Formula One World Championship. Instead the supply was allocated to Manor-Mercedes who went bankrupt...

honestly by publicly flogging renault, begging around for new engines and then come crawling back to them by hiding behind the aston martin badge RB created their own poison pill. no wonder merc refused to budge on their supply.

We all know why Merc didn't supply them, and it had nothing to do with them publicly flogging Renault (who were utterly useless, and have proven to be so for over a decade now).

[zibby43]

I'm talking about the article. If they want to improve ride for 2026 when the rules are being completely overhauled anyways that's different.

Strict oscillation metrics seem the best way to do it, 2026 cars will be the same suspension rules with lower profile tyres (16" plan abandoned, just smaller diameter instead) so I don't see how they can ride better.

Someone help me understand what James Allison is saying https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-w ... /10587033/

I can only see "we can't get this right, how RedBull, Ferrari and McLaren have managed, so please make changes to chassis rules for 2026, so that we can be back in the game" said in a more tech-winded, beating-around-the-bush, manner.

Allison is calling for regulations to be less ride height sensitive in 2026 but I doubt rule makers will listen, as ride height is obviously key to venturi tunnel ground effects.

Did you also see where the drivers are all saying dirty air is worse?

The FIA raised the floor edges in 2023 which made the regulation package less effective unfortunately, but it is what it is.

I assume the 2026 regulation package will drop the floor edges back down to the reference plane.

Think Horner has changed his tune since this gem?

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/chris ... 5/5009515/

Keep setting them up on a tee for me. This is fun.

[venkyhere]

Did you see where both George Russell and Max Verstappen said that the cars are too low and their spines are being destroyed by bumps? These ground effect cars derive performance from being as low to the ground and as stiffly sprung as possible. Did you also see where the drivers are all saying dirty air is worse?

Allison is basically saying you can achieve closer racing by other means, not just ground effect regs that aren't proving to be the greatest thing since sliced bread (for a variety of reasons).

Ferrari and McLaren have got it so right that they'll each finish 250+ points (minimum) behind RB in the WDC and WCC.

Did you see 2022 season ? How close the fight was for P1 for the first half of the season ? And how cars were able to follow very close ? Just because one team did a good job 'developing' the car from a 'first time right' concept , and others are lagging behind, doesn't make the regulation a failure. The fact that the wake is again dirty now, is because teams have found clever ways to exploit loopholes in the rules and make their cars faster, fallout being following closely is not as easy as 2022.
Allisons rant is classic sour grapes.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/wolff ... /10588118/

Horner in 2015:

“Mercedes have done a super job,” said Horner back then. “They have a good car, a fantastic engine and they have two very good drivers.

“The problem is that the gap is so big that you end up with three-tier racing. That is not healthy for F1.

“They [the FIA] have a power output so they can see what every power unit is producing. They have the facts. They could quite easily come up with a way of some form of equalisation.”

What Allison said pales in comparison to this plain-as-day call for rules to be changed in order to specifically peg back the dominant car.

Wasn’t the last time Horner did it. Man, people have short memories I guess lol.

Yes, Horner did the crybaby thing in 2015. That's what TPs do. Didn't expect an engineer to cry in the same fashion, is all. Plus, all this 'rules are wrong' narrative is coming (as it did, in 2015) because "one team" is far ahead of others. If we take a step back, the new regulations along with the cost cap has really helped out the midfield and bottom portions of the grid immensely.

[Quantum]

Yes, Horner did the crybaby thing in 2015. That's what TPs do. Didn't expect an engineer to cry in the same fashion, is all. Plus, all this 'rules are wrong' narrative is coming (as it did, in 2015) because "one team" is far ahead of others. If we take a step back, the new regulations along with the cost cap has really helped out the midfield and bottom portions of the grid immensely.

Newey has done so multiple times. Allison has some catching up to do.

https://www.motorsportweek.com/2016/01/30/11169/
Adrian Newey: Dominance of engines ‘unhealthy’ for Formula 1. 2016

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/G ... Newey.aspx
Designer Adrian Newey Says Red Bull May Quit Formula 1 If It Can't Find Engine Supplier (Already having an Engine supplier) - 2015

https://www.racefans.net/2016/01/05/for ... ers-newey/
Force equal engine supplies from manufacturers – Newey - 2016

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/newey ... 2/5052472/
Newey warns F1 of 'grave danger' over engine performance rules - 2014

https://news.sky.com/story/mercedes-and ... y-10335165
Mercedes And Ferrari "Control" F1, Says Newey -2015

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/ ... ormula-one
Red Bull designer Adrian Newey mocks new F1 engine rules -2014


It should be noted that the bottom and the midfield are still the bottom and the midfield. With the exception of Aston Martin who went through a big recruitment drive and investment. The budget cap just enforces a budget, Sauber Haas Williams RB Alpine make up half the grid and still less than 20% of total points scored.

[Fakepivot]

Yes, Horner did the crybaby thing in 2015. That's what TPs do. Didn't expect an engineer to cry in the same fashion, is all. Plus, all this 'rules are wrong' narrative is coming (as it did, in 2015) because "one team" is far ahead of others. If we take a step back, the new regulations along with the cost cap has really helped out the midfield and bottom portions of the grid immensely.

Newey has done so multiple times. Allison has some catching up to do.

https://www.motorsportweek.com/2016/01/30/11169/
Adrian Newey: Dominance of engines ‘unhealthy’ for Formula 1. 2016

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/G ... Newey.aspx
Designer Adrian Newey Says Red Bull May Quit Formula 1 If It Can't Find Engine Supplier (Already having an Engine supplier) - 2015

https://www.racefans.net/2016/01/05/for ... ers-newey/
Force equal engine supplies from manufacturers – Newey - 2016

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/newey ... 2/5052472/
Newey warns F1 of 'grave danger' over engine performance rules - 2014

https://news.sky.com/story/mercedes-and ... y-10335165
Mercedes And Ferrari "Control" F1, Says Newey -2015

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/ ... ormula-one
Red Bull designer Adrian Newey mocks new F1 engine rules -2014


It should be noted that the bottom and the midfield are still the bottom and the midfield. With the exception of Aston Martin who went through a big recruitment drive and investment. The budget cap just enforces a budget, Sauber Haas Williams RB Alpine make up half the grid and still less than 20% of total points scored.

aero dynamics is for people who can't build engine is true then

[venkyhere]

Yes, Horner did the crybaby thing in 2015. That's what TPs do. Didn't expect an engineer to cry in the same fashion, is all. Plus, all this 'rules are wrong' narrative is coming (as it did, in 2015) because "one team" is far ahead of others. If we take a step back, the new regulations along with the cost cap has really helped out the midfield and bottom portions of the grid immensely.

Newey has done so multiple times. Allison has some catching up to do.

https://www.motorsportweek.com/2016/01/30/11169/
Adrian Newey: Dominance of engines ‘unhealthy’ for Formula 1. 2016

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/G ... Newey.aspx
Designer Adrian Newey Says Red Bull May Quit Formula 1 If It Can't Find Engine Supplier (Already having an Engine supplier) - 2015

https://www.racefans.net/2016/01/05/for ... ers-newey/
Force equal engine supplies from manufacturers – Newey - 2016

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/newey ... 2/5052472/
Newey warns F1 of 'grave danger' over engine performance rules - 2014

https://news.sky.com/story/mercedes-and ... y-10335165
Mercedes And Ferrari "Control" F1, Says Newey -2015

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/ ... ormula-one
Red Bull designer Adrian Newey mocks new F1 engine rules -2014

So ?
Newey's rant was equally bad. However, atleast he was (still is) part of a 'customer team' who had the (however silly) excuse to blame the supplier and cry for equalizer rule changes, simply because he actually couldn't do anything (paying the price for bad decision making whilst fixing their engine supplier). In this case, is the aerodynamic package coming to the Mercedes team from outside ? No. It's their own.

It should be noted that the bottom and the midfield are still the bottom and the midfield. With the exception of Aston Martin who went through a big recruitment drive and investment. The budget cap just enforces a budget, Sauber Haas Williams RB Alpine make up half the grid and still less than 20% of total points scored.

Of course, but the gaps are smaller. The bottom 5 teams are close to each other, P19 and P20 cars are not finishing 30 seconds behind P11 and P12. In the non-cost-cap era, top teams could get away by 'throwing money at the problem' whilst the bottom teams didn't have money to throw at the problem anyway. The cost-cap era forces 'first time right' a lot and that's the only reason the big boys like Ferrari/Mercedes/McLaren are behind RedBull. Not because they dont know how to tackle the problem. The freedom to experiment like Thomas Alva Edison, is gone.

[Quantum]

So ?
Newey's rant was equally bad.

>>>

Didn't expect an engineer to cry in the same fashion, is all.

It's nothing new, which is why it shouldn't be surprising

However, atleast he was (still is) part of a 'customer team' who had the (however silly) excuse to blame the supplier and cry for equalizer rule changes, simply because he actually couldn't do anything (paying the price for bad decision making whilst fixing their engine supplier). In this case, is the aerodynamic package coming to the Mercedes team from outside ? No. It's their own.

I don't see why a decision to outsource a component of the car is somehow better because it allows finger pointing exercises. As you say, it's a silly excuse.
However, they're not equally comparable. Engines didn't have budget caps.

Of course, but the gaps are smaller. The bottom 5 teams are close to each other, P19 and P20 cars are not finishing 30 seconds behind P11 and P12. In the non-cost-cap era, top teams could get away by 'throwing money at the problem' whilst the bottom teams didn't have money to throw at the problem anyway. The cost-cap era forces 'first time right' a lot and that's the only reason the big boys like Ferrari/Mercedes/McLaren are behind RedBull. Not because they dont know how to tackle the problem. The freedom to experiment like Thomas Alva Edison, is gone.

When was there a time bottom 5 weren't close to each other and why?
There are some outliers like Marussia or Minardi but in general the gaps have largely remained the same.
Your explanation reads as though the cap was introduced to close the bottom 5 up with the downside encumbrance of "first time right" to excuse unheralded domination.
I don't believe that was the reason for the budget cap introduction.

[Quantum]

aero dynamics is for people who can't build engine is true then

Enzo wasn't far off

[Vanja #66]

aero dynamics is for people who can't build engine is true then

2014-2021 kind of proved it's the opposite

[Quantum]

aero dynamics is for people who can't build engine is true then

2014-2021 kind of proved it's the opposite

Ferrari could build engines though

[cplchanb]

aero dynamics is for people who can't build engine is true then

2014-2021 kind of proved it's the opposite

Ferrari could build engines though

just not within the rules lol

[Sevach]

So ?
Newey's rant was equally bad. However, atleast he was (still is) part of a 'customer team' who had the (however silly) excuse to blame the supplier and cry for equalizer rule changes, simply because he actually couldn't do anything (paying the price for bad decision making whilst fixing their engine supplier). In this case, is the aerodynamic package coming to the Mercedes team from outside ? No. It's their own.

This is a funny aspect, Newey was a chassis/aero guy pissed that something outside of his control and design was the weak link in the package.
Makes sense.

Alysson is an aero guy complaining about aero.


Anyhow...
https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary ... ula-1-era/

[Jdn1327]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/data ... /10588670/

The deficit in the high speed is worse than the w13 and w14...but faster everywhere else. Don't know if this is just usual Mercedes rhetoric...

[CaribouBread]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/merce ... /10589045/
Mercedes has captured two senior Ferrari staff members, including its former chief designer Simone Resta, as part of a bid to strengthen its Formula 1 operation, Autosport has learned.

Resta has been signed as strategic development director and will work directly with technical director James Allison to push forward with car-related projects.

Also joining Mercedes is Enrico Sampo, who is joining as head of performance software applications.

[K1Plus]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/data ... /10588670/

The deficit in the high speed is worse than the w13 and w14...but faster everywhere else. Don't know if this is just usual Mercedes rhetoric...

Something something ________________ floor.

I think the mechanicals and the chassis this year are great, considering it being great in slow speed and straight line speed, and very good in medium. It loses a lot in high speed and the rear end nervousness is still somewhat there