Grats Kimi. Superb drive to finish P1.
Shame for George who's race was put to bed by that safety car. But at least for him, he has a 4 point lead still.
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
He has FIA behind his back so no actually.
Best car, best driver. PR-dream.wunderkind wrote:Does Toto/Mercedes need Verstappen for 2028 and beyond?
While there surely is some truth to this point of view, it very likely is not the whole truth. Because by this logic Mercedes would have no reason to develop the chassis anymore as they’d not corner at higher speeds anyway.nitrotech wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 19:49It definitely is the case. I saw that from the testing itself. You need more battery power, compromise corner speeds (entry to mid) and then use the battery to shoot out of corners with great speeds. Build a good mechanical platform that allows great exit without too much wheel spin. Having high consistent downforce (which you cannot stall in straights) is now detriment to that approach as it causes drag. It's not that Mercedes cannot attack the corners and compete with Ferrari for being faster through corners, it's just not efficient anymore. Ferrari is killing it's tyres in trying to escape away from Mercedes after those shooting starts. That would be an achilles heel. I also heard on F1TV that the gearing ratio is also something that Mercedes has managed to keep in harmony with the power output. It's now locked for the year. So even if Ferrari comes up with some upgrades in PU, not sure how harmonious it would be with gearing ratios. That seems to be something affecting McLaren currently. So there are so many parameters that Mercedes has figured out better than others. It's interesting to see how the development race goes from hereon. So this great chassis great chassis thing is just nonsense.upsidedowntoast wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 19:34This might be a dumb question but could the difference in cornering speed be a sacrifice to end up with more battery for the straights? i.e. it's a decision made in tandem with developing their recharge strategy, kind of like how Ferrari sacrificed a larger turbo for better starts.
He never needed Verstappen per say. While it would make a great team there's no necessity. He can absolutely make Russell and Kimi multiple WC with this level of car advantage.
You can always develop the car to add downforce, but in this regulation, it has to come with near zero additional drag and maintain the current balance and tyre life management. Although China is a front limited circuit, when they go to more traditional circuits where rear deg comes in picture, it helps to have more downforce. Mercedes would probably has written off Monaco at this point.LM10 wrote: ↑15 Mar 2026, 12:20While there surely is some truth to this point of view, it very likely is not the whole truth. Because by this logic Mercedes would have no reason to develop the chassis anymore as they’d not corner at higher speeds anyway.nitrotech wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 19:49It definitely is the case. I saw that from the testing itself. You need more battery power, compromise corner speeds (entry to mid) and then use the battery to shoot out of corners with great speeds. Build a good mechanical platform that allows great exit without too much wheel spin. Having high consistent downforce (which you cannot stall in straights) is now detriment to that approach as it causes drag. It's not that Mercedes cannot attack the corners and compete with Ferrari for being faster through corners, it's just not efficient anymore. Ferrari is killing it's tyres in trying to escape away from Mercedes after those shooting starts. That would be an achilles heel. I also heard on F1TV that the gearing ratio is also something that Mercedes has managed to keep in harmony with the power output. It's now locked for the year. So even if Ferrari comes up with some upgrades in PU, not sure how harmonious it would be with gearing ratios. That seems to be something affecting McLaren currently. So there are so many parameters that Mercedes has figured out better than others. It's interesting to see how the development race goes from hereon. So this great chassis great chassis thing is just nonsense.upsidedowntoast wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 19:34This might be a dumb question but could the difference in cornering speed be a sacrifice to end up with more battery for the straights? i.e. it's a decision made in tandem with developing their recharge strategy, kind of like how Ferrari sacrificed a larger turbo for better starts.
No one knows. Little bit of column A little bit of column B I suppose. My theory is that they had a good idea of what the deployment strategy was going to look like as they were building their PU and that informed their aero design philosophy.Y-250.A wrote: ↑15 Mar 2026, 17:09a quick question guys , is the Mercedes really losing in slow corners to Ferrari due to mechanical grip ; or just a matter of battery deployment strategy ( as Ferrari deploy their battery more in the corner exits to compensate their deficit on the straights even that kills their tyres quickly ) ?
It seemed like everyone was happy for Ant, even other drivers.
