Mercedes GP W02

[xpensive]

Someone suggested on this thread a few weeks ago that MGP could be reasonably competitive on Spa and Monza, due to their obvious power-advantage, which they indeed were. However, on a street-circuit like S'pore they should be nowehere.

[raymondu999]

Let's keep the banter to constructive criticism, X

[MIKEY_!]

Short wheelbase is all they have going for them here. The car lacks DF and slow speed grip (still i think). The higher temps will cause the tires problems and cooling issues (if they still aren't resolved - not sure if they ever were completely) and the stronger engine will be less useful. Sad but true. Hoping to be surprised however.

[raymondu999]

As it has been repeatedly said over and over again, time and time again, your wheelbase is of negligible effect to lap time/handling!

[MIKEY_!]

Maybe not lap time (on GP circuits) and not on this car (cause the fuel tank is higher) but a shorter wheel base has its benefits. In this circumstance the variation is also very small between longest and shortest so its not as obvious.

[raymondu999]

Yes it does have an effect. However I did say negligible. It's very small; not enough to make any impact on lap time or the "feel" of a car

[xpensive]

Let's keep the banter to constructive criticism, X

Which is the very point here, the W02 ia a powerful but ill-handling car, which makes it a competitive proposal at Shanghai, Spa, and Monza, but less so in Monaco and S'pore, if you don't believe me check this years results on those tracks.

[MIKEY_!]

And i agree. I just took your unusually shouty post the wrong way.

[munudeges]

I expect a similar pattern for the next few races as we've seen all this year for the W02. It will be reasonably fast in qualifying, flattering to deceive, and then fall away badly in the race relative to the competition. Especially where straight line performance is not a massive overriding factor, as the next few races aren't.

[yener]

The shortwheelbase itselfs maybe doesnt make very big differences but all the other thing around it have a high impact on the car.

Short wheelbase made it necesarry to use a high fuel tank which made the "cog" move.
Center of Gravity. And like RB told us, it means that they will never be able to get the grip or temperatures on tires.

[yener]

Everybody is so overwhelmed by the last race in Monza. I must admit it was wonderfull to see Michael defending his position. But that's all what happened.
They werent able to win or fight anybody!

He did finish 5th but if Mark Webber didn't finish he would not be able to end 5th.
If you look at the fastest lap times the WO2 misses at least 1 FULL second compared to the top teams.

A FULL SECOND.
Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 52 1:26.187
Michael Schumacher Mercedes 46 1:27.402

Ofcourse this is just the fastest lap; But the difference here in Itally: 1,215s

[Morteza]

Well, is that 1.215s all because of their short wheelbase? I don't think so. How they get their design wrong two years in a row and always coming up with excuses really bothers me. They have Bob Bell now as their technical director. Who was responsible for W01 and W02? Will W03 be any better?

[yener]

Well, is that 1.215s all because of their short wheelbase? I don't think so.

Me neither. Think they lose 0,3-0,4 seconds a lap.

Ok now it might sound crazy but i've got another one...

RBR and McLaren both use a low nose and a high rear. High rear i mean the distance between the asfalt and floor. The low nose and the shapes produce more downforce then a higher one.
The rear is standing up a little so it will catch more air and more air trough the rear wing means more downforce right?
The reason why they are so high on the rear could be this one: When driving on straight the car will be pushed downwards and when in a corner (less speed) the rear will get higher again. So what if the rear wheels also respond to this in terms of geometry?
Could the angle of the rear tires change so much?

I will post pictures very soon and try to explain better.

[raymondu999]

When you put the car through a high rake (meaning low at the front; high at the rear as you say) the diffuser can produce more downforce. That's the main reason why they do it; rather than the rear wing.I think the difference in terms of how much of the rear wing is in clean air is rather negligible to be honest.

They would probably spring the cars up so that the rake stays at all speeds; that way they can enjoy the extra downforce provided by the rake in fast corners. I'm not sure what you're on about in terms of the rear tyres though; do you mean in terms of the camber values changing as you increase speed in a straight line?

[dren]

Well, is that 1.215s all because of their short wheelbase? I don't think so.

Me neither. Think they lose 0,3-0,4 seconds a lap.

Ok now it might sound crazy but i've got another one...

RBR and McLaren both use a low nose and a high rear. High rear i mean the distance between the asfalt and floor. The low nose and the shapes produce more downforce then a higher one.
The rear is standing up a little so it will catch more air and more air trough the rear wing means more downforce right?
The reason why they are so high on the rear could be this one: When driving on straight the car will be pushed downwards and when in a corner (less speed) the rear will get higher again. So what if the rear wheels also respond to this in terms of geometry?
Could the angle of the rear tires change so much?

I will post pictures very soon and try to explain better.

The blown exhaust on the Red Bull makes a fluid barrier along the diffuser edges. The rake makes the diffuser exit larger. This all aids in creating more DF with the diffuser. They also get the added benefit of having the front wing closer to the ground. The very tight rear end allows for more air to pass over the top of the diffuser as well. The car produces a lot of downforce.