Mercedes W17

[PlatinumZealot]

Closing front wing fully 0.4 seconds later means you load the rear of the car more than the front and thus can put more rear brake bias and harvest just that bit more energy than your rivals.

[maygun]

With fixed wing, if the car becomes quicker, I wonder what the next "theory" of the armchair aero experts would be: https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/myst ... d-f1-2026/

[johnnycesup]

Yeah, the whole "loophhole" idea was a bit crazy to me.

Still we found a couple of things out:

- The system is hydraulic (a pneumatic system would make very little sense)

- The "low pressure" position is the straight line mode

- Mercedes were probably told to fix it before Suzuka

[Farnborough]

With fixed wing, if the car becomes quicker, I wonder what the next "theory" of the armchair aero experts would be: https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/myst ... d-f1-2026/

Is there a theory ?

They've got a defined time to close it, without exception or tolerance outside that. Clearly the rules state that for a reason, and they were in breech of a hard limit.

That will always generate conjecture in this sport. We can't see what it did in reality, but suspicion will always come towards such a clear breech.

[SiLo]

I wonder if closing the wing in this fashion (if it's not just broken). Helps with the balance shift of the car under braking. If you close the wing AND brake at the same time, maybe the shift in balance is unsettling the car, and closing the wing in this manner maintains a more stable aero and braking platform for the drivers.

[GSBellew]

Would requiring hydraulic pressure to force the wing closed not leave them open to it failing in the straight mode, which is if I am not mistaken forbidden and any failure must see the wing default to cornering mode ?

[mzso]

Yeah, the whole "loophhole" idea was a bit crazy to me.

Still we found a couple of things out:

- The system is hydraulic (a pneumatic system would make very little sense)

- The "low pressure" position is the straight line mode

- Mercedes were probably told to fix it before Suzuka

Still, it's illegal. And they should be disqualified. If the fuel flow an engine accidentally goes above the limit, even for a moment it's an automatic disqualification. Not penalizing it will just lead to more of these accidentally-on-purpose "miscalculations".

[matteosc]

Yeah, the whole "loophhole" idea was a bit crazy to me.

Still we found a couple of things out:

- The system is hydraulic (a pneumatic system would make very little sense)

- The "low pressure" position is the straight line mode

- Mercedes were probably told to fix it before Suzuka

Still, it's illegal. And they should be disqualified. If the fuel flow an engine accidentally goes above the limit, even for a moment it's an automatic disqualification. Not penalizing it will just lead to more of these accidentally-on-purpose "miscalculations".

I agree, because if the car is underweight because of a miscalculation you still get disqualified. The reason why they did not is that they did not gain an advantage. It may be true, but if in Japan they end up having the same behaviour, that would be something extremely suspicious.

To be clear: I think this is nothing and the reasons why they are so fast are others (engine and most importantly software, probably from Formula E experience).

[FNTC]

Agree that DQ should have been done if the wing takes more than 400ms to close. Doesn't matter if its by design or due to a problem. The regulation is there for a reason. If you have a fuel leak and finish the race with less than the required fuel amount, you will get a DQ. Etc.

[Gridlock]

FWIW according to Merc via The Ted on Sky, "this was an error, a mistake, not by design"

[AR3-GP]

Yeah, the whole "loophhole" idea was a bit crazy to me.

Still we found a couple of things out:

- The system is hydraulic (a pneumatic system would make very little sense)

- The "low pressure" position is the straight line mode

- Mercedes were probably told to fix it before Suzuka

It's pneumatic. Otherwise it would be odd to have a label which says "no gas pressure"? but then this can also be a case of the semantics of german engineers who learn english.

[Lasssept]

[maygun]

With fixed wing, if the car becomes quicker, I wonder what the next "theory" of the armchair aero experts would be: https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/myst ... d-f1-2026/

Is there a theory ?

They've got a defined time to close it, without exception or tolerance outside that. Clearly the rules state that for a reason, and they were in breech of a hard limit.

That will always generate conjecture in this sport. We can't see what it did in reality, but suspicion will always come towards such a clear breech.

The theory was that they were using this mechanism as an advantage, with very sure, opinionated arguments.

[AR3-GP]

With fixed wing, if the car becomes quicker, I wonder what the next "theory" of the armchair aero experts would be: https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/myst ... d-f1-2026/

You're citing an article from a longtime Mercedes sympathizer, Mark Hughes. Same guy that jumps to Mercedes defense every time they are under regulatory pressure. Last time he wrote a rubbish article claiming that the compression ratio reg changed backfired on rival teams and that they would vote against the compression ratio regulations changes that they requested.

 Mercedes' F1 rivals might now vote down their own engine proposal | BY MARK HUGHES

Guess what didn't happen.

Nothing excuses being non-conformant and winning 2 GPs. Mark Hughes should focus on that aspect, winning with an illegal car, and less on running PR service for Mercedes.

[bonjon1979]

Yeh, it's not intentional for the plank to be worn too thin, or for their to be a tenth of a mm more slot gap in the rear wing. If you don't conform to the regulations then you should be disqualified.