Mercedes AMG F1 W04 (pre-launch speculation)

[Coefficient]

Last year the gearbox failed more then once at both teams using the Mercedes GB.

What is the other team using the merc gearbox? *****McLAREN


Mclaren design and manufacture their own Gear Box just like all the other teams. There is no Mercedes Gear Box in F1 other than the one on the Mercedes F1 car.

[wesley123]

So what you're saying is...
2010: no where
2011: close to the front, but development couldn't keep up
2012: at the front, but development couldn't keep up.

That sounds like year on year incremental improvement to me, which is exactly what I'd expect to see from a professionally run team working on a very hard problem. I honestly don't get why people spend so much time laying into this one team.

Aside... why isn't this is in the team thread?

How can you call that improvement? Yes they improved every year on the first few races, and after that felt back further and further. Great that your car was a race winner in the first 6 races, if after that scoring points is already too hard than you still have nothing at all. Not to mention the fact that an huge update package helped nothing.

They have to keep consistent over the year and develop at a much better pace, which after 4 season they still cannot do.

P.S. can a mod move this discussion to the team thread?

[Mika1]

So what you're saying is...
2010: no where
2011: close to the front, but development couldn't keep up
2012: at the front, but development couldn't keep up.

That sounds like year on year incremental improvement to me, which is exactly what I'd expect to see from a professionally run team working on a very hard problem. I honestly don't get why people spend so much time laying into this one team.

Aside... why isn't this is in the team thread?

How can you call that improvement? Yes they improved every year on the first few races, and after that felt back further and further. Great that your car was a race winner in the first 6 races, if after that scoring points is already too hard than you still have nothing at all. Not to mention the fact that an huge update package helped nothing.

They have to keep consistent over the year and develop at a much better pace, which after 4 season they still cannot do.

P.S. can a mod move this discussion to the team thread?

It is an improvement, and we know why their development pace was nowhere mid season. They had to focus on the 60% model and had to wait for Mike Elliot.

[wesley123]

It is an improvement, and we know why their development pace was nowhere mid season. They had to focus on the 60% model and had to wait for Mike Elliot.

And what was their excuse the year before? and the year before that?

This team did only improve in the first few races and after that felt back enormous. Then the team is always ready to have a few excuses why it didnt go well this year. They are always having excuses, for everything. And so is it with the windtunnel model/upgrade. It was a planned upgrade for crying out loud, any decent team would make sure they have another windtunnel to fall back to. And also waiting for Elliot? Is that even serious? so the team just were picking their noses the whole year? That is just ridiculous, and certainly if you want to be a top team.

I wonder what excuses they will have next year.

[jav]

With respect - year over year improvement seems more than a stretch... seems plain wrong to me.

2010 = 214 constructor points
2011 = 165 pts.
2012 = 142 pts.

How exactly are we measuring year over year improvement?

That the car "feels" better, or that the drivers state its better could be viewd as an "improvement" but, if each improved car is sumarily less competitive or less reliable- relative to the field (as the results show) , this is hardly reason to beleive the car or team are on a path to success.

[Mika1]

With respect - year over year improvement seems more than a stretch... seems plain wrong to me.

2010 = 214 constructor points
2011 = 165 pts.
2012 = 142 pts.

How exactly are we measuring year over year improvement?

That the car "feels" better, or that the drivers state its better could be viewd as an "improvement" but, if each improved car is sumarily less competitive or less reliable- relative to the field (as the results show) , this is hardly reason to beleive the car or team are on a path to success.

How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

And also waiting for Elliot? Is that even serious? so the team just were picking their noses the whole year? That is just ridiculous, and certainly if you want to be a top team.

Dead serious, staff changes have influence on the results, top team or not.

By the halfway point of 2012, Rosberg lay sixth in the championshp, only 34 points behind Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel.

But the squad's form suffered during the second half of the year, Rosberg eventually trailing world champion Vettel by 189 points and Michael Schumacher's sixth place in Brazil its only points finish from the final six grands prix.

Team principal Brawn said that the departure of head of aerodynamics Loic Bigois, coupled with a change in windtunnel philosophy while the team experimented with Coanda exhausts and double DRS, also played a major influence.

Brawn said: "We made a decision to change the structure of the aero group. We had to wait for [new aero chief] Mike Elliot to join us because we had a notice period he had to fulfil at Lotus.

"We concluded the situation with Loic and there was a gap that we didn't fill very well."

"On top of that we were doing the transition from 50 per cent to 60 per cent models in the windtunnel, and there were a lot of other things in the aero group as well. It did have an impact."

[wesley123]

With respect - year over year improvement seems more than a stretch... seems plain wrong to me.

2010 = 214 constructor points
2011 = 165 pts.
2012 = 142 pts.

How exactly are we measuring year over year improvement?

That the car "feels" better, or that the drivers state its better could be viewd as an "improvement" but, if each improved car is sumarily less competitive or less reliable- relative to the field (as the results show) , this is hardly reason to beleive the car or team are on a path to success.

How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

Yeah like I said, it is always the same, they start the season well and after that they fall back and have a few excuses because of that.

And great that they won a race, the rest of the season was crap. Do I have to remind you this also happened in 2011?

[wesley123]

And also waiting for Elliot? Is that even serious? so the team just were picking their noses the whole year? That is just ridiculous, and certainly if you want to be a top team.

Dead serious, staff changes have influence on the results, top team or not.

Yeah they influence the results, but they dont cause you to go from third fastest to 6th-7th fastest. that's quite a big leap backwards you know. That they felt back because of staff changes okay, but from front row to 12th is a bit of a large step backwards, waay too much. You cannot justify that in any way because of 'staff changes'

By the halfway point of 2012, Rosberg lay sixth in the championshp, only 34 points behind Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel.

But the squad's form suffered during the second half of the year, Rosberg eventually trailing world champion Vettel by 189 points and Michael Schumacher's sixth place in Brazil its only points finish from the final six grands prix.

Team principal Brawn said that the departure of head of aerodynamics Loic Bigois, coupled with a change in windtunnel philosophy while the team experimented with Coanda exhausts and double DRS, also played a major influence.

Brawn said: "We made a decision to change the structure of the aero group. We had to wait for [new aero chief] Mike Elliot to join us because we had a notice period he had to fulfil at Lotus.

"We concluded the situation with Loic and there was a gap that we didn't fill very well."

"On top of that we were doing the transition from 50 per cent to 60 per cent models in the windtunnel, and there were a lot of other things in the aero group as well. It did have an impact."

He always has some sort of excuse ready to tell us all why they felt back, and then the next year the same happens again.

[jav]

...How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

2012 was a strange year by any standard. I agree MGP had some shining moments but I also believe thier good results, like the lottery that was races 1-7, was as much a factor of luck as it was true progress. The season points, to my way of thinking, are a much more reliable measure of how they stack up to their peers. Sadly, those facts paint a less optomistic picture than many would like .

[beelsebob]

...How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

2012 was a strange year by any standard. I'll agree MGP had some shining moments but I also believe thier good results, like the lottery that was races 1-7, was as much a factor of luck as it was true progress.

I completely disagree that races 1-7 were a lottery. Us not being able to see the pattern from a small sample size, is not the same as there being no pattern. When you look back on the season, those races fit into roughly the same pattern as the rest of the season – McLaren strong at high speed tracks, red bull strong at traction circuits, Lotus strong at Hot tracks.

[Mika1]

...How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

2012 was a strange year by any standard. I agree MGP had some shining moments but I also believe thier good results, like the lottery that was races 1-7, was as much a factor of luck as it was true progress. The season points, to my way of thinking, are a much more reliable measure of how they stack up to their peers. Sadly, those facts paint a less optomistic picture than many would like .

The season points are a less reliable measure, because Mercedes switched their focus and didn't develop the W03 anymore. They used the last few races as testing sessions. I can't see how that is reliable.

[wesley123]

...How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

2012 was a strange year by any standard. I agree MGP had some shining moments but I also believe thier good results, like the lottery that was races 1-7, was as much a factor of luck as it was true progress. The season points, to my way of thinking, are a much more reliable measure of how they stack up to their peers. Sadly, those facts paint a less optomistic picture than many would like .

The season points are a less reliable measure, because Mercedes switched their focus and didn't develop the W03 anymore. They used the last few races as testing sessions. I can't see how that is reliable.

It is reliable because it shows how good they started and how crap they were after Monaco, also didnt they do the same with the w02 and W01?

[jav]

...How hard can it be to notice an improvement during 2012 with a front row lock out in China, a race win and a pole in Monaco? After the first half of the season they focused on the 60% model and had to deal with some employee shifts.

2012 was a strange year by any standard. I agree MGP had some shining moments but I also believe thier good results, like the lottery that was races 1-7, was as much a factor of luck as it was true progress. The season points, to my way of thinking, are a much more reliable measure of how they stack up to their peers. Sadly, those facts paint a less optomistic picture than many would like .

The season points are a less reliable measure, because Mercedes switched their focus and didn't develop the W03 anymore. They used the last few races as testing sessions. I can't see how that is reliable.

3 seasons of points, nearly 60 races, is less relaible than a few moments in the sun?

My freind, many of us have followed MGP religeously and optomistically since the beginning. Some realized sooner than others, that the hype and explanations amounted to self preservation and excuses. To suggest this team had "year over year improvements" is pure foley no set of the facts support. The results to date show a declining trend for any reasonable observer to see.

You can chose to ignore 3 years of waning results and cherry pick those moments that suit your beliefs, as many of us have, but some of us know what's down that road. Could it change? Absolutely. One year will be the turn around year... It may even BE this year. BUT - to suggest this team has orchestrated or engineered year over year improvements such that a step forward is assured seems illogical at best..

[Mika1]

Mercedes AMG had their reasons that influenced the results, believe them or not. I am getting tired of this negative approach.

[wesley123]

Mercedes AMG had their reasons that influenced the results, believe them or not. I am getting tired of this negative approach.

You do notice that it is only happening to Merc?