2015 Testing Comparative Performance Speculation Thread

[dans79]

7. RB has always been renowned for their excellent chassis - they did not forget how to build a car from 2013 to 2014. RB chassis beat Williams F1

Actually you are wrong on two counts.

1) Prior to Newey Joining the team, they had some really crappy cars, namely the RB1 & RB2. The first few cars completely designed by Newey for RBR where mediocre at best, RB3, RB4.
2) Despite the god like praise some people give him, Newey has designed several mediocre cars, and has a history of not being able to adapt to rule changes very well.

RBR didn't really get good, till the engine rule changes handed them an engine that was more fuel efficient and more tunable than others on the grid.

[turbof1]

1. Mercedes PU elevated Mercedes from P2 in 2013 to P1 in 2014.
2. Mercedes PU elevated Williams from P9 in 2013 to P3 in 2014 5 pnts in 2013 Vs 320 pnts in 2014, only 85 behind RB
3. FI 77 pnts in 2013, 2014 = 155 pnts
4. Mercedes PU occupies positions 1,3,5&6 in constructors championship.
5. the only "other" teams to mix with Merc powered teams are "works teams" Ferrari and RB
6. Renault and Ferrari powered "customer" teams were whipped by Merc powered customer teams.
7. RB has always been renowned for their excellent chassis - they did not forget how to build a car from 2013 to 2014. RB chassis beat "detuned" Merc powered Williams F1 ( McLaren confirmed that customer engines are not in the same state of tune as the works engine)
8. Merc engine in Williams was not in the same state of tune as "works" engine PETRONAS developed specifically for the Merc engine, Williams used Petro Braz.

1. Mercedes elevated itself from P5 in 2012 to P2 in 2013, indicating they were making the way to the top before the new regulations and continued that line. Infact in 2013, Mercedes often was slightly faster in qualifying, indicating they didn't have a bad chassis or bad aero before 2014
2., 3. and 4. are reasonable points. However, it is unfair to put all the progress Williams made down to the PU. In 2012, Williams had quite a good car. In 2013, they made an atrociously bad car. Part of the jump Williams made in 2014 will be down to the PU, but a big part will also be down to better aero and chassis. As others are getting at, having the best PU is an advantage you have, but not a guarantee by any means. Mclaren is a good example of that.
7. I'm sorry to say, but detuning the PU is a rubbish opinion. Mclaren only pointed out they got the absolute minimum of data to use the the PU (because they switched this year to Honda), but that's not detuning, that's simply not telling how to fully use the PU. Mclaren also did not use the Petronas fuel which was specifically designed for the engine, which was their own choice. However, concluding out of this that Williams ran a detuned engine is rubbish. If that was truly the case, Williams could have went to the FIA, because such practices went against the rules (sadly, this year it will not). Again, Williams sticking to the Petro Bras fuel is a choice they made on their own. They never even complained about that, so it's also doubtful it would have been a big performance differentiator, and contrary to mclaren, Williams did express satisfaction as far as cooperation with Mercedes goes.

I'll be moving this side discussion to a topic of its own tommorrow; this doesn't really belong in a test thread.

[giantfan10]

1. Mercedes PU elevated Mercedes from P2 in 2013 to P1 in 2014.
2. Mercedes PU elevated Williams from P9 in 2013 to P3 in 2014 5 pnts in 2013 Vs 320 pnts in 2014, only 85 behind RB
3. FI 77 pnts in 2013, 2014 = 155 pnts
4. Mercedes PU occupies positions 1,3,5&6 in constructors championship.
5. the only "other" teams to mix with Merc powered teams are "works teams" Ferrari and RB
6. Renault and Ferrari powered "customer" teams were whipped by Merc powered customer teams.
7. RB has always been renowned for their excellent chassis - they did not forget how to build a car from 2013 to 2014. RB chassis beat "detuned" Merc powered Williams F1 ( McLaren confirmed that customer engines are not in the same state of tune as the works engine)
8. Merc engine in Williams was not in the same state of tune as "works" engine PETRONAS developed specifically for the Merc engine, Williams used Petro Braz.

1. Mercedes elevated itself from P5 in 2012 to P2 in 2013, indicating they were making the way to the top before the new regulations and continued that line. Infact in 2013, Mercedes often was slightly faster in qualifying, indicating they didn't have a bad chassis or bad aero before 2014
2., 3. and 4. are reasonable points. However, it is unfair to put all the progress Williams made down to the PU. In 2012, Williams had quite a good car. In 2013, they made an atrociously bad car. Part of the jump Williams made in 2014 will be down to the PU, but a big part will also be down to better aero and chassis. As others are getting at, having the best PU is an advantage you have, but not a guarantee by any means. Mclaren is a good example of that.
7. I'm sorry to say, but detuning the PU is a rubbish opinion. Mclaren only pointed out they got the absolute minimum of data to use the the PU (because they switched this year to Honda), but that's not detuning, that's simply not telling how to fully use the PU. Mclaren also did not use the Petronas fuel which was specifically designed for the engine, which was their own choice. However, concluding out of this that Williams ran a detuned engine is rubbish. If that was truly the case, Williams could have went to the FIA, because such practices went against the rules (sadly, this year it will not). Again, Williams sticking to the Petro Bras fuel is a choice they made on their own. They never even complained about that, so it's also doubtful it would have been a big performance differentiator, and contrary to mclaren, Williams did express satisfaction as far as cooperation with Mercedes goes.

I'll be moving this side discussion to a topic of its own tommorrow; this doesn't really belong in a test thread.

drag this one along to the other topic too : )
mercedes had a PU packaged for their car with optimal cooling and so on
what is not being mentioned is that there is a teired system when it comes to the mercedes pu.... the most expensive being the pu and gear box integration and whatever else comes with that .Mclaren oped for just the PU with no gearbox... i'm willing to bet other teams got the pu with no ERS and or cooling or whatever the case may be .
as far as williams goes... the head honcho at mercedes is a shareholder for the williams outfit and his wife who is vastly underqualified to be in formula 1 is a test driver for williams....you think williams got any preferential treatment in the mercedes pu situation?
(i could care less that his wife is female and a test driver)

[djos]

Also worth noting is the fact that Williams do use the Petronas fuel and oil, not Petrobras despite their sponsorship of Williams.

[Spoutnik]

Well sectorOne
No need to get aggressive because I don't share the same fascination with Merc's godliness.
I'm sure I am entitled to my opinion and to debate points where I might have an alternate view?
I am willing to see how the season pans out, either way some will feel their comments were justified and some will be disappointed.
Fortunately I'm not a blinkered Merc follower so my odds are 4:1 in favour of not being disappointed.

You don´t even adress the obvious logical fallacies that disprove your theory.
You´re not here to discuss what made the Merc good, that is something you have already made up.

Again. If it was 100% the engine that made Mercedes sucess, why isn´t Force India, Williams, Mclaren occupying the top 3 slots below Mercedes in the WCC standings?

You´ll realize if you try to answer this question you will automatically venture into chassis and aero thereby disproving your own theory.

Here´s your own statement just incase you forgot it.

but what I know Merc Dominance was only down to their PU advantage.

So please...answer my question.

1. Mercedes PU elevated Mercedes from P2 in 2013 to P1 in 2014.
2. Mercedes PU elevated Williams from P9 in 2013 to P3 in 2014 5 pnts in 2013 Vs 320 pnts in 2014, only 85 behind RB
3. FI 77 pnts in 2013, 2014 = 155 pnts
4. Mercedes PU occupies positions 1,3,5&6 in constructors championship.
5. the only "other" teams to mix with Merc powered teams are "works teams" Ferrari and RB
6. Renault and Ferrari powered "customer" teams were whipped by Merc powered customer teams.
7. RB has always been renowned for their excellent chassis - they did not forget how to build a car from 2013 to 2014. RB chassis beat "detuned" Merc powered Williams F1 ( McLaren confirmed that customer engines are not in the same state of tune as the works engine)
8. Merc engine in Williams was not in the same state of tune as "works" engine PETRONAS developed specifically for the Merc engine, Williams used Petro Braz.

5. "Work team" ? Biggest team !
7. Idk if it was fake but Abiteboul (our French Renault F1 director) say about the RB10 chassis :

"On le dit très sensible aux réglages, mal équilibré, d’une exploitation délicate des pneus. Bon, il est vrai qu’avec plus de puissance, on peut mettre plus d’appuis et qu’avec plus d’appuis, le châssis gagne en stabilité et en tenue des pneus."

(Translation) : The chassis is very sensible to settings/setup, unbalanced, difficult exploitation of the tyres. But, that's real : with more power you can put more downforce, and with more downforce the chassis is more stable, and the tyre degradation is improve on long run.
And I think the Williams chassis of this year match with the Red Bull chassis (take a look at the "chassis' race), the weakness of Williams was the downforce (visible under the rain of Suzuka).

[Coefficient]

They haven't even tickled this [Mercedes] car yet. At the last test or in Melbourne qualifying they will do a lap time that will utterly demoralise the opposition. I could be wrong but I doubt it.

But looking at the condition of the right rear tyre on The W06 it seems to have taken quite a bit of punishment - does not suggest too much "sandbagging"?
So maybe you should seriously consider that you will be wrong.

The tyre wear is just fine, they are keeping their powder dry.

[dren]

Guys, it's not about a PU, or a chassis, or aero, it's about the entire package as a whole, which the Mercedes was utterly dominate last season. It's why Red Bulls were so good, they had an overall great package. It's the reason why the McLaren and Ferrari look better this year, too.

[Sevach]

drag this one along to the other topic too : )
mercedes had a PU packaged for their car with optimal cooling and so on
what is not being mentioned is that there is a teired system when it comes to the mercedes pu.... the most expensive being the pu and gear box integration and whatever else comes with that .Mclaren oped for just the PU with no gearbox... i'm willing to bet other teams got the pu with no ERS and or cooling or whatever the case may be .
as far as williams goes... the head honcho at mercedes is a shareholder for the williams outfit and his wife who is vastly underqualified to be in formula 1 is a test driver for williams....you think williams got any preferential treatment in the mercedes pu situation?
(i could care less that his wife is female and a test driver)

I few misconceptions here.

1-Every power unity must be exactly the same(of a given maker) including ERS, no such thing as a "home made" recovery system anymore.
2-Gearboxes you have the option to buy or make your own, both Mclaren and Williams chose to make their own, Force India (aka the worst Mercedes client) had Mercedes gearboxes.
3-Cooling is responsability of the teams, obviously Mercedes offers guidance on what they need in terms of heat dispersal, but ultimately the teams choose how they do it (again the "favorite" Williams team had a very different layout to the factory Mercedes team, still does i hear).

Mercedes advantage was that they had a lot more time to plan the car around the engine and cooling systems and mold it to their requirements.

[Phil]

I am not going to argue about the total package of the Mercedes was perfect (engine, chassis, aero and drivers) but I think everybody will agree with the 'fact' that their engine.. or power unit I have to say, contributed a lot in their dominance....

I find myself on this side of the argument as well. The PU was a significant factor last year and crucial to the championship. IMO to the point that all Mercedes engined teams had the advantage of not having to run any compromized set-up. If you are lacking significant engine power, like both Renault and Ferrari did, you start to compromize where you can. This also includes aerodynamics. I am pretty certain RedBull was running significantly less downforce (relative to Merc) to decrease their disadvantage in straight line speed.

The more equal the PU become, the more the focus will shift back to aero superiority and downforce. Mercedes had the best PU, so they could run higher downforce settings which helped them with tyre wear and cornering, but due to more power, still faster on the straights too. Dont underestimate the advantage having a better PU holds.

[Juzh]

When you as Red Bull get outqualified by Toro Rosso around a circuit you got way bigger issues then simply not having an engine as good as Mercedes. Because the Renault engine was the common denominator so what happened there?

Ehhh sector, sector.. Are we really back to toro rosso again? We've been over this. A car designed to be quick on 2 tracks on the calendar, while utterly bad on all others. Russia was just pure quali setup, then got rekt in the race by everyone. Stop with this TR nonsense.

[Juzh]

1-Every power unity must be exactly the same(of a given maker) including ERS, no such thing as a "home made" recovery system anymore.

Hardware wise. Software is a free for all.

[Juzh]

RBR didn't really get good, till the engine rule changes handed them an engine that was more fuel efficient and more tunable than others on the grid.

That's all I'm saying.

[Chene_Mostert]

RBR didn't really get good, till the engine rule changes handed them an engine that was more fuel efficient and more tunable than others on the grid.

That's all I'm saying.

so, saying less than nothing then?

[Sevach]

1-Every power unity must be exactly the same(of a given maker) including ERS, no such thing as a "home made" recovery system anymore.

Hardware wise. Software is a free for all.

Kinda... one of the Mclaren complaints was that they had to run with the Mercedes programming, so in theory you are correct, in the real world...

[Juzh]

RBR didn't really get good, till the engine rule changes handed them an engine that was more fuel efficient and more tunable than others on the grid.

That's all I'm saying.

so, saying less than nothing then?

We've had this discussion before. I ain't starting it again. I've said everything there is to say already. He's the one bringing it up again and again.