Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why so large Mercedes difference to its client teams?


  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#1 AlexS

AlexS
  • Member

  • 6,301 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:10

For Ferrari and Renault engines we can just dismiss it as an engine/PU issue. But for Mclaren, Williams and Force India the 2 sec difference per lap in Bahrain can't be engine.

 

I also have much difficulty to accept it is mostly aero. So what can be? gearbox ? brake by wire? software optimisation?



Advertisement

#2 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 24,873 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:11

All of the above, they have a brilliant package coupled with the best engine.



#3 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 10,824 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:13

EurosAPJoergSarbach460.jpg

 

What do you think? =)



#4 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 23,879 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:20

They had a faster car last year than the McLaren, Force India and Williams.  The time gap has increased, but last season they were finishing comfortably ahead of their 2014 customers, with a few exceptions. 

 

Like all good cars, it's probably not just one thing that gives it the edge.  Aero, traction, power.... it all looks good for them.



#5 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,802 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:24

Funny, if it was Hamilton and Alonso in the W05 this season, the difference would have been attributed almost entirely to driver skill. In fact, the very fact that the other cars have the same engines would have been used to underline that very assertion. 



#6 Zoetrope

Zoetrope
  • Member

  • 1,408 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:30

Red Bull-Renault and Lotus-Renault in 2010-2013 were also vastly separated at times



#7 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 6,129 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:31

EurosAPJoergSarbach460.jpg

 

What do you think? =)

 

The difference is less than 900 Euro's?

 

Geez times are tough in F1 :|



#8 Radion

Radion
  • Member

  • 2,523 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:32

Funny, if it was Hamilton and Alonso in the W05 this season, the difference would have been attributed almost entirely to driver skill. In fact, the very fact that the other cars have the same engines would have been used to underline that very assertion. 

Don't think so. 

Yes, alonso's worth six thenths of a second, but not two. Hamilton of course's also worth lap time, but again, not two seconds.



#9 Wiggy

Wiggy
  • Member

  • 450 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:44

Because Mercedes would have designed and optimised the car and engine in tandem, with a close relationship between both departments.

The customer teams have to design their cars around an engine that has been designed by Mercedes for Mercedes, and all the quirks the works team have requested.

#10 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:20

I saw the Merc overlaid on the Ferrari a day or two ago, can't remember where now, showing how much more compact the rear bodywork is.  In fact the Merc has a little bulge each side which is only there to meet some daft regulation.

 

Plus, thinking about how Lewis put an easy 0.5s into Nico in Sepang and then Nico used his 'Dummies' Guide to Beating Hamilton' ( :D ) to catch up, I do think some of that is the driving, and how the drivers combine.

 

I think it gets into a kind of feed-forward loop, where the benefits multiply.  The more developed car does more testing miles, there's more driver input, more time to optimise everything, do your software for performance rather than reliability etc etc.

 

It's still hard to believe how big the gap is though.  And did Merc really keep the split turbo concept secret for so long?



#11 jimjimjeroo

jimjimjeroo
  • Member

  • 2,728 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:28

Low mounted turbo, and a 2014 blown diffuser effect

#12 jimjimjeroo

jimjimjeroo
  • Member

  • 2,728 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:29

http://paddocktalk.c...ory-247533.html

#13 Cyanide

Cyanide
  • Member

  • 5,299 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:36

Low mounted turbo, and a 2014 blown diffuser effect

 

2009 deja vu with Brawn (now Mercedes) at the top because of the same effect of that year? And Ferrari and McLaren nowhere?

 

This is comedy gold. 



#14 GSiebert

GSiebert
  • Member

  • 2,206 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:38

The drivers aren't bad either.



#15 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,713 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:54

Chassis capable dyno and 2 years of foreknowledge. (and cash)



#16 Alexandros

Alexandros
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:19

The car more suited to the tires.



#17 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,420 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:33

Mercedes is the works team so they'll know the optiumum packaging of the engine/gearbox/intercoolers etc and design the chassis and aerodynamics around that. They also have a head start if and when they want to re-package the design as they have first hand access.

 

The rest of the teams on the other hand designed their cars and THEN installed the engine etc so they're not as optimised as the works team.

 

That's my over simplistic take on the matter



#18 Goron3

Goron3
  • Member

  • 4,450 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:38

Basically, the answer is in what everyone else above has said.

 

Btw, everyone tends to say Newey is the king of rule changes, but I think Brawn should be considered up there too, and maybe even more so. He did a great job preparing the team for this shift in regulations.



#19 ReeVe

ReeVe
  • Member

  • 178 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:51

Basically, the answer is in what everyone else above has said.

 

Btw, everyone tends to say Newey is the king of rule changes, but I think Brawn should be considered up there too, and maybe even more so. He did a great job preparing the team for this shift in regulations.

 

I guess you can say Ross is the master of long lead times ... the 2009 Brawn I believe was developed across 2 separate aero teams (Honda-Super Aguri) using 2 separate wind tunnels over 2 years, the W05 if the rumors are true has been in some sort of development for 2-3 years too. So he's good at throwing a crapload of resources at something. and coming out on top. Which basically makes the fact LdM is still resisting the urge to grovel to Ross' door and get him back onboard at Maranello baffling considering modern Ferrari F1 was built on precisely that principle in the Ross/Todt/Scumi era



Advertisement

#20 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:59

Tyres and aero. Change to last year's cheese tyres and others will catchup. They can keep pushing because the tyres can take it. Mercedes was the one who wanted harder tyres for this season. The tyres and aero are the reason why Red Bull is so high even though they have a crappy power unit.

#21 purpleturtle

purpleturtle
  • Member

  • 323 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:06

Adrian Newey's explanation:

"I think when we talk about the power unit we talk about it by manufacturer. We should also include the fuel company of course. I think you'll find within an engine, depending on what fuel it uses there can be very significant differences. That can also create differences. We certainly can see that in our own GPS analysis between our rivals that some appear to have significantly more power than others, even though they have the same engine."



#22 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:42

With regard to Newey's comment.
Given that the current PU is made up of several components maybe the big difference is the way the teams package and integrate those components,
After all, Nerwey's design philosophy has repeatedly struggled to cope with 60 BHP of KERS energy, so I would imagine changing your design mind-set to handle 160BHP might not be the easiest of tasks.
With any series with a surplus of 'grunt over grip', even for only part of a lap, then some teams will manage to handle it better than others, same as with every other aspects of race car design.
Last year it was how you handled the tyres, this year its is engines, a few years ago it was all about cunning aero tricks.

The only difference this year is that a different team/manufacturer has risen to the top. OK, so some fans might not like it, 'coz their favourite has fallen down the order, but that is what F1 is meant to be about.

#23 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 21,814 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:47

All three factory engine teams(Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes) seem far ahead of the respective customer teams.

I don't think that's a coincidence.

#24 Bayside

Bayside
  • Member

  • 31 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:52

Petronas.



#25 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,991 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:58

Adrian Newey's explanation:

"I think when we talk about the power unit we talk about it by manufacturer. We should also include the fuel company of course. I think you'll find within an engine, depending on what fuel it uses there can be very significant differences. That can also create differences. We certainly can see that in our own GPS analysis between our rivals that some appear to have significantly more power than others, even though they have the same engine."

 

So basically Newey is accusing Merc of using Nos infused fuel?

 

To avoid engines from blowing up Merc must surely be super specific about what fuel is safe to use, and I doubt they would be economical with the truth about alternative potions, because that wouldn't be fair to the customer teams. 



#26 dreamer

dreamer
  • Member

  • 1,922 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:01

The same reason as to why Red Bull is faster than Lotus, Toro Roso, and Caterham and Ferrari is faster than Sauber and Marussia.... They have a better car compared to the one the other teams that use the same engine have....


Edited by dreamer, 08 April 2014 - 12:03.


#27 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:05

I think the main difference between the Mercedes works teams is:

 

-The difference between there overall aero concepts. Compared to last year, there has not been a big change in the order: Mercedes >McLaren >Force India > Williams.  The order has largely carried over to 2014. It's just where the teams are in terms of their understanding of what makes a car fast aero wise. 

 

-The entire cooling package on the W05 (with air-to-water for the intercooler) seems much more efficient. Certainly much smaller compared the Merc customer teams. The Merc customers will be able to make significant steps in that area throughout this year I think.


Edited by Timstr11, 08 April 2014 - 12:08.


#28 Grundle

Grundle
  • Member

  • 1,309 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:21

I love that its now Newey having to postulate why Mercedes are so fast, quite a change from the last 4 years. He must be hating it¡

#29 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,082 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:26

All three factory engine teams(Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes) seem far ahead of the respective customer teams.

I don't think that's a coincidence.

 

Especially in the first year of the regulations. As the customer teams begin to become more au fait with the powerunits and what they can do with them, over the next few years things should balance out more.



#30 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,082 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:27

The same reason as to why Red Bull is faster than Lotus, Toro Roso, and Caterham and Ferrari is faster than Sauber and Marussia.... They have a better car compared to the one the other teams that use the same engine have....

 

But do you think the Mercedes chassis is as good as the Red Bull? I think so, it's a beautifully packaged car, looks to have tons of downforce too.



#31 Bartonz20let

Bartonz20let
  • Member

  • 1,860 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:41

But do you think the Mercedes chassis is as good as the Red Bull? I think so, it's a beautifully packaged car, looks to have tons of downforce too.

 

I agree, people are saying 'ah but, the RBR is a better chassis' I'd like to know how they came to this conclusion because on Sundays perfoamance, the Merc looks incredible in all departments when running at full chat.



#32 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 11,162 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:43

I would not be surprised if RedBull and Mercedes aero are at least on par. Redbull might be even a tad better, but not by much.



#33 sheepgobba

sheepgobba
  • Member

  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:50

I agree, people are saying 'ah but, the RBR is a better chassis' I'd like to know how they came to this conclusion because on Sundays perfoamance, the Merc looks incredible in all departments when running at full chat.

 

Yeah I also agree. Watching the onboards of the Merc compared to other cars gives me the impression it's one of the easier cars to drive. It has something of the past Red Bulls about it.



#34 Briz

Briz
  • Member

  • 453 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:53

Understanding of the new complex engine, packaging, aero, chassis, drivers - there's no area where Mercedes GP is expected to be worse than any of the other 3 Mercedes teams, there's nothing surprising really. Interesting how it compares to the Red Bull if engines were similar in performance...



#35 Bartonz20let

Bartonz20let
  • Member

  • 1,860 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:01

Understanding of the new complex engine, packaging, aero, chassis, drivers - there's no area where Mercedes GP is expected to be worse than any of the other 3 Mercedes teams, there's nothing surprising really. Interesting how it compares to the Red Bull if engines were similar in performance...

 

From Sunday my money would be on the Merc, as sheepgobba said, it looks much easier to dive than the rest (how much of that is down to PU drivability is unknown I'll admit).



#36 Alexandros

Alexandros
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:05

Last year it was how you handled the tyres, this year its is engines, a few years ago it was all about cunning aero tricks.

 

You've adequately described what the press has focused on however the underlying issues were not always the same with what the press was saying. A small example is the focus on things like F-ducts and DDRS (Merc, then the passive on Lotus which didn't even make much of a difference)... too much was made out of stuff like that, but the press has to have something to report. Yet small changes in the tires were shifting the entire balance of the grid (both cars and drivers) upside down.

 

This year everyone thinks the major change is engines (and technically it is) but performance wise the real problem for most of the cars is the way they lack downforce and when this is combined with the reduction of mechanical grip (much harder tires), the cars are like driving on ice. The cars can't grip and you see their locking on corners and then the media is reporting problems with the brake-by-wire, when it would be the exact same thing whether the brake was mechanical: The light load on the tire is at cause and the grip levels resemble first-lap locks of prior years due to low grip (but this is constant throughout the GP, not one lap). The cars are visibly all over the place this year due to no grip / hard tires / less df. And the cars with excessive mech. grip or best aero will make the best of the situation.

 

Even things like "smooth power delivery" and "driveability" of the engines become much less relevant when you have better grip, because then the car won't break traction under acceleration. But if you are "on ice", it will. 


Edited by Alexandros, 08 April 2014 - 13:07.


#37 JKTRacing

JKTRacing
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:29

One of the main reasons Mercedes is so fast

 

 



#38 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 9,394 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:31

The "Home team" advantage is in the integration of the whole powertrain - Mercedes knew 2 years ago what the enging was going to be, how the parts would go together, how the electronics would control the whole whereas, customer teams have, in far less time, had to make Mercedes bits fit their cars and the design team's ethos.



#39 SR388

SR388
  • Member

  • 5,683 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:40

Better designers
Better drivers
Better resources
Better coffee
Better wind tunnel
Better simulator

Advertisement

#40 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,644 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:54

So basically Newey is accusing Merc of using Nos infused fuel?

I think Newey is trying to say that Mercedes is not aerodynamically better car than his creature.


Edited by Mauseri, 08 April 2014 - 13:54.


#41 DS27

DS27
  • Member

  • 4,681 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 14:01

I think Newey is trying to say that Mercedes is not aerodynamically better car than his creature.

 

 

I don't think many would disagree with him.



#42 Bartonz20let

Bartonz20let
  • Member

  • 1,860 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 14:40

You've adequately described what the press has focused on however the underlying issues were not always the same with what the press was saying. A small example is the focus on things like F-ducts and DDRS (Merc, then the passive on Lotus which didn't even make much of a difference)... too much was made out of stuff like that, but the press has to have something to report. Yet small changes in the tires were shifting the entire balance of the grid (both cars and drivers) upside down.

 

This year everyone thinks the major change is engines (and technically it is) but performance wise the real problem for most of the cars is the way they lack downforce and when this is combined with the reduction of mechanical grip (much harder tires), the cars are like driving on ice. The cars can't grip and you see their locking on corners and then the media is reporting problems with the brake-by-wire, when it would be the exact same thing whether the brake was mechanical: The light load on the tire is at cause and the grip levels resemble first-lap locks of prior years due to low grip (but this is constant throughout the GP, not one lap). The cars are visibly all over the place this year due to no grip / hard tires / less df. And the cars with excessive mech. grip or best aero will make the best of the situation.

 

Even things like "smooth power delivery" and "driveability" of the engines become much less relevant when you have better grip, because then the car won't break traction under acceleration. But if you are "on ice", it will. 

 

Mate, nobody's buying this 'its only the tires' baloney, it just doesn't wash.



#43 PedroBR

PedroBR
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 15:02


and then Nico used his 'Dummies' Guide to Beating Hamilton' ( :D ) to catch up,

 

:rotfl: :rotfl: :clap: :drunk: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:



#44 John Player

John Player
  • Member

  • 600 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 15:09

Mercedes AMG



#45 akshay380

akshay380
  • Member

  • 602 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 15:11

You've adequately described what the press has focused on however the underlying issues were not always the same with what the press was saying. A small example is the focus on things like F-ducts and DDRS (Merc, then the passive on Lotus which didn't even make much of a difference)... too much was made out of stuff like that, but the press has to have something to report. Yet small changes in the tires were shifting the entire balance of the grid (both cars and drivers) upside down.

 

This year everyone thinks the major change is engines (and technically it is) but performance wise the real problem for most of the cars is the way they lack downforce and when this is combined with the reduction of mechanical grip (much harder tires), the cars are like driving on ice. The cars can't grip and you see their locking on corners and then the media is reporting problems with the brake-by-wire, when it would be the exact same thing whether the brake was mechanical: The light load on the tire is at cause and the grip levels resemble first-lap locks of prior years due to low grip (but this is constant throughout the GP, not one lap). The cars are visibly all over the place this year due to no grip / hard tires / less df. And the cars with excessive mech. grip or best aero will make the best of the situation.

 

Even things like "smooth power delivery" and "driveability" of the engines become much less relevant when you have better grip, because then the car won't break traction under acceleration. But if you are "on ice", it will. 

 

We have had enough of this tire theory. Please start a new thread if you want to discuss it.



#46 Kobasmashi

Kobasmashi
  • Member

  • 734 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 15:11

Better coffee


This

#47 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,319 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 15:20

And in all honestly, you think that the engine given to the customer teams is exactly the same engine they have? You think Mercedes would give teams that could challenge them the best computer tuning settings and mappings? 



#48 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 08 April 2014 - 15:23

Basically, the answer is in what everyone else above has said.

 

Btw, everyone tends to say Newey is the king of rule changes, but I think Brawn should be considered up there too, and maybe even more so. He did a great job preparing the team for this shift in regulations.

 

Don't know where you got that, because it's the contrary. Newey cars are usually not at their best in the first season of a new rule set.



#49 kenkip

kenkip
  • Member

  • 506 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:58

Don't think so. 

Yes, alonso's worth six thenths of a second, but not two. Hamilton of course's also worth lap time, but again, not two seconds.

Can you do the rest of the drivers please?Intresting stuff



#50 demet06

demet06
  • Member

  • 126 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 19:14

One of the main reasons Mercedes is so fast

 

 

 

 

Yes I saw this at the weekend and the fact that Mercedes has had 2 years to develop the packaging of the car whereas the customer teams have had less time, 8 months in Williams case. I don't think packaging explains the 2.0-2.5 seconds faster lap times in the closing stages of Bahrain. There's something else on that Merc that's giving them that performance. It could be the fuel, I'm not sure if it was Lewis or Nico (I think Nico) gave reference to it after the race. He thanked Petronas (along with half of the rest of the world) for developing the fuel. Now I thought "rocket fuel" had been banned some years ago, when the fueling guys had to wear special suits and masks. Have these toxic brews made a stealthy return.

In terms of aero, Red Bull seem to have the best package again and if it had a Mercedes PU in the back it would certainly give the silver boys a run for their money.

One more thing about splitting the turbo and compressor to either end of the engine, is the MGU-H still in the vee of the engine, with a shaft on either end of it to the turbo and compressor? Still pretty neat engineering as those shafts are spinning up to 125k rpm.