Mercedes GP MGP W01

[marcush.]

I agree to an extend here and I too do not understand WHY it was impossible to rectify that problem with 747 h giving a plausible explanation with the molded in
ballast in the front of the tub biting them and avoiding a correction.
This is of course a severe mistake on its own right but there you go.
I do not see tehm making excuses ,they try to explain and simply stop short of saying we were bloody idiots on one or two items with our car.
If theyx REALLY wer lacking front aero can you possibly explain why they would not simply add a RBR6 front wing wich is now in service for quite a while ..You would not seriously claim they cannot find downforce, would you?
The contrary is true:They opted to stop all development on the front wing simply because the car would not respond to it ..reasons given above.
Damn they were stuck with all "NORMAL" development because of their fixed car layout wish was tooo wrong to be corrected.
So they chose to redirect their developement into other areas,but of course if you find downforce in the middle of the car it still will not help front grip.
so simply put their upgrades would evaporate into little steps forward as they would inevitably tend to develop towards understeer.

[BreezyRacer]

I have to say that it cracks me up to see all you Mercedes enthusiasts thinking that this team is about winning races. This team is about making money. That is why you see crappy implementations of technology invented/pioneered by other teams and NO innovation from Mercedes. Wake up and smell the coffee.

[aral]

I agree to an extend here and I too do not understand WHY it was impossible to rectify that problem with 747 h giving a plausible explanation with the molded in
ballast in the front of the tub biting them and avoiding a correction.
This is of course a severe mistake on its own right but there you go.
I do not see tehm making excuses ,they try to explain and simply stop short of saying we were bloody idiots on one or two items with our car.
If theyx REALLY wer lacking front aero can you possibly explain why they would not simply add a RBR6 front wing wich is now in service for quite a while ..You would not seriously claim they cannot find downforce, would you?
The contrary is true:They opted to stop all development on the front wing simply because the car would not respond to it ..reasons given above.
Damn they were stuck with all "NORMAL" development because of their fixed car layout wish was tooo wrong to be corrected.
So they chose to redirect their developement into other areas,but of course if you find downforce in the middle of the car it still will not help front grip.
so simply put their upgrades would evaporate into little steps forward as they would inevitably tend to develop towards understeer.

I doubt very much, that ANY designer would run with "moulded-in" ballast. As far as I am aware, the whole benefit of ballast (other than to bring up to min weight) is to have it movable so as to change the weight distribution as required for different circuits.

[marcush.]

c´mon breezy..how do you steer your effort to be 1% slower than the very best in an attempt to make money?
I see from where you are coming with this ,and I think that you are right to a degree ..Ross must feel soo good having secured that deal.
But don´t forget he´s still a stakeholder in this and that guy is motorsports inside out and will not be happy to play in the second division.

ballast placement can be tricky especially when we are talking about 30 or 40 kilos .. thats even with tungsten a volume you have to place somewhere as low as possible...
I agree in your claim ..but is it possible that this was normal best practise until 2009 ?Would they have all the 50 something kilos moveabale ? I very much doubt this .But of course we do not know.

[747heavy]

let me clarify something here.

I said " unless they have moulded xxx amount of ballast into their tub, I can´t see why the cannot change the weight distribution".

I don´t know, if they have indeed done it, it would surprise we without end, if the did, because you would need to be dead sure you are right to do that.
I still don´t buy the weight distribution as the whole culprit for their problems.
I understand and accept that they got that wong for one reason or the other, but would think it is correctable to an extend.
A chassis stiffness poblem, if true, is a much bigger issue in my opinion, and would technically explain, at least to me, why the have the problems they have, and why they can´t do much about it, because the tub design is homologated.
So what Renault is suffering with their frozen engine, and making a big dance about it, MGP suffers with there "frozen" tub/chassis design.

That they have more then one problem, shows in other areas, strategy and the inability to make there EBD last the distance. So they have a bit of a way to go, before we can consider them a top team.
But let´s not forget, that "every dog has it´s day" and that Jordan at one point was challenging for a WDC, but nobody would say, that Jordan is or was a "top team".

MGP is surely not at the forefront of technology in F1 at the moment, but they are not HRT/Minardi either. I think the current position is reflecting the state of the affairs quite correctly.
Can they improve from here for next year? - I´m sure they can, but on the same tokken the can go more backwards as well. Time will tell.
Let´s not forget that teams like Ferrari and McLaren (1995 anyone) also had less then stellar years in the past, but came back on won again, so it´s possible to do.
I´m sure Mercedes has the 1995 year with McLaren in the back of there mind, if they would have pulled out of F1 by the end of 1995, sure they would have saved a lot of money, but would also have enjoyed a lot less success and PR.
Let´s see how it pans out, it´s far from cut and dry IMHO, so let not dance on there grave before they are actually dead.

[marcush.]

747h sorry for my "interpretation" quote .Of course we do not know ..and if i was not mixing metal powder into resins at one time in my career to add weight into components(!) I would not have thought a single moment this was tehy were doing ...

for sure 5 kilo of Ballast at the wrong end of the car will never explain their lack of speed.

Also it is most suspect to me how they fail to come up with raceworthy upgrades
BUT their reliability is almost undented (save two rear wheels losses ..)nevertheless.so maybe they are acting a lot more conservative in taking risks and feel they have to communicate each and everything wheras others seem to be happy to look somewhere else when their floor is coaking a bit..who knows...

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I have to say that it cracks me up to see all you Mercedes enthusiasts thinking that this team is about winning races. This team is about making money. That is why you see crappy implementations of technology invented/pioneered by other teams and NO innovation from Mercedes. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Er blade roll bar?

[BreezyRacer]

I have to say that it cracks me up to see all you Mercedes enthusiasts thinking that this team is about winning races. This team is about making money. That is why you see crappy implementations of technology invented/pioneered by other teams and NO innovation from Mercedes. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Er blade roll bar?

Yes, that was quite the game changer, eh? The only value that exercise has is that the car looks different than all the rest. Pure aesthetics to convince fans they are doing some unique engineering. See everyone else copy it next year .. NOT!

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Oh so it has to be gamechanging innovation?
Double diffuser then.

[BreezyRacer]

Oh so it has to be gamechanging innovation?
Double diffuser then.

I'll give you that, for sure. Without that, which was last year BTW, and with rules help from the FIA, this team would not have sold to Mercedes.

[747heavy]

there is little invention these days in F1 anyway - "game changing" or not.
The current rules, don´t really promote inventions.
I would not be too surprised, if other teams copy the MGP roll hoop design.
It´s not stupid, as long as you don´t have an F-duct, so their "invention" came back to hunt them.
The underlying thought is not stupid, but it´s not unique either, look at the Audi roll hoop design for LeMans.
I think this year the F-duct stands out as the most performance critical/benefical "invention" as was the DDD last year.
The other things like EBD, pull rod suspension and/or flexi wings we have seen before. These things come and go, like most things in racing. There is a bit of fashion sense in F1 and motorracing as well.
Monkey see - monkey do

[aral]

The other things like EBD, pull rod suspension and/or flexi wings we have seen before.

I hadn't realised that the EBD had been seen before. When was it previously used? And by whom?

[timbo]

The other things like EBD, pull rod suspension and/or flexi wings we have seen before.

I hadn't realised that the EBD had been seen before. When was it previously used? And by whom?

It was pretty widespread technology in F1.

[747heavy]

The other things like EBD, pull rod suspension and/or flexi wings we have seen before.

I hadn't realised that the EBD had been seen before. When was it previously used? And by whom?

for a quick recoup this is worth a read.

http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2010/06/2 ... diffusers/

it was used during the 1980´s with the turbo cars, and lately in the McLaren MP-15

not a F1 car but a study of an Gr.6 sports car in the late 1970`s looking into the technology as well.



Picture 2: KIN-project: Group 6 sportscar.
1* Wing car profile
2* Special radiator
3* Exhaust pipe
4* Venturi

[timbo]

not a F1 car but a study of an Gr.6 sports car in the mid 1970`s looking into the technology as well.

Wow, P34 type front arrangement?
Can you add any more info on this one?