122 replies to this topic

[Mercstar]

PG Tعch  ‏ @SmilexTech 22h22 hours ago

More

MERCEDES 2018: it will be 'long wheelbase' and 'low' rake, again. Thanks @motorlat for the english translation #TechF1 #F12018

https://motorlat.com...-low-rake-again

 

So Mercedes will stick with their long wheelbase, low rake philosophy for the W09. I've always been one for evolution rather than revolution, with the strong showing of the W08 around Abu Dhabi, a track experts labelled a Ferrari track, it was hardly a case of reaching the end of the devopment cycle with their current philosophy, so sound decision to stick with it. 

 

The article also mentions a suspension upgrade late in the season (Brazil/Abu Dhabi) which boosted performance in low speed corners (e.g S3 in Abu Dhabi). 

[ArrowsLivery]

No another diva??? What are they smoking over there? The car must be short wheelbase!

[Ben1445]

To be honest I just want them to make a dog of a car and struggle to make podiums. 

[SonGoku]

I am fine with an evolution, I still think about McLaren 2012-2013, what an awful revolution change that was. 

 

 

I guess they take the good with the bad (diva behaviour), but they must be over the moon to have a driver like Lewis, because BOT was completely lost when the car wasn't on rails.

[Jordan44]

No another diva??? What are they smoking over there? The car must be short wheelbase!

 

I've believed all season long that their 'diva' traits were mechanical and nothing to do with the aero philosophy. The mentioned front end suspension changes seem to support that. The suspension ban hit them hard.

 

There are quite a few on here that seem to have it drilled in their head that the low rake car cannot be successful, which is ludicrous to say sitting in your armchair when world-class engineers clearly don't see it that way.

Edited by Jordan44, 22 December 2017 - 19:52.

[RECKLESS]

How credible is the source?

[Mercstar]

I've believed all season long that their 'diva' traits were mechanical and nothing to do with the aero philosophy. The mentioned front end suspension changes seem to support that. The suspension ban hit them hard.

 

There are quite a few on here that seem to have it drilled in their head that the low rake car cannot be successful, which is ludicrous to say sitting in your armchair when world-class engineers clearly don't see it that way.

 

Yeah, its not like the low rake philosophy actually landed them both Championships this yr.

 

If their performance had tailed off towards the end of the season, then those calling for a change may have a point, as it happens they probably had their most dominant race of the season in AD. 

[sabjit]

Why do Merc need a revolutionary design? They won both championships and out developed the competition this year. Plus with Lewis at the wheel you only need to be there or there abouts.

[RECKLESS]

Plus with Lewis at the wheel you only need to be there or there abouts.

Let's not get airheaded.

Lewis has 1 wdc when it's been thereabouts/equal to best car. 3 wdc with thee best car.

[Jordan44]

Let's not get airheaded.

Lewis has 1 wdc when it's been thereabouts/equal to best car. 3 wdc with thee best car.

 

Which one are you considering to be thereabouts/equal to the best car? As I'd say 2008 definitely wasn't the best car and 2017 was only 'thereabouts' the best car.

Edited by Jordan44, 22 December 2017 - 20:44.

[Mercstar]

Let's not get airheaded.

Lewis has 1 wdc when it's been thereabouts/equal to best car. 3 wdc with thee best car.

 

When the same thing is said about Fernando, its taken as gospel. 

 

If Bottas was the lead driver, Merc would most likely have lost out on both Championships this yr, I would've thought after this year, its clear to see the difference a top tier driver can make when cars are equal.

Edited by Mercstar, 22 December 2017 - 21:04.

[SonGoku]

This season couldn't make it more obvious how important a special driver is behind the wheel and Lewis is definitely one.

[Timstr11]

With the 3-race engine rule next year it's good to know that Bottas poled and won the 2017 Abu Dhabi race with an engine that did its 6th race. Impressive.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

No another diva??? What are they smoking over there? The car must be short wheelbase!

Why must it be?

They have far more information than we do.

I think the late Suspension ban last year hurt the W08.

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 23 December 2017 - 10:28.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

With the 3-race engine rule next year it's good to know that Bottas poled and won the 2017 Abu Dhabi race with an engine that did its 6th race. Impressive.

But didn’t they make Lewis run the same power setup?

[Timstr11]

But didn’t they make Lewis run the same power setup?

 

Why would they? 

 

I think this just demonstrates that the power difference between a fresh engine and a high mileage engine is not game changing.

The aero deficit in dirty air was the game changer.

[as65p]

"diva" is only a word. Used in the first half of the season and meaning no more than they had not yet found a way to exploit the potential of the car on all tracks under all conditions. By the 2nd half of the year, the results prove beyond doubt that the car was fast(est) and reliable on all tracks, so anything but a "diva".

 

Sure, Toto Wolff must love how he managed to plant the idea of his team struggling in many peoples heads. He's trying for four years to convince the world how hard they have it, but the factual results (of both drivers) tell a different story.

[Mercstar]

"diva" is only a word. Used in the first half of the season and meaning no more than they had not yet found a way to exploit the potential of the car on all tracks under all conditions. By the 2nd half of the year, the results prove beyond doubt that the car was fast(est) and reliable on all tracks, so anything but a "diva".

 

Sure, Toto Wolff must love how he managed to plant the idea of his team struggling in many peoples heads. He's trying for four years to convince the world how hard they have it, but the factual results (of both drivers) tell a different story.

 

Really? Singapore, Malaysia, Mexico?

[as65p]

Really? Singapore, Malaysia, Mexico?

 

Really.

 

Q: P5 P6 / R: P1 P3

Q: P1 P5 / R: P2 P5

Q: P3 P4 / R: P2 P9*

 

Those are not results of a diva. It merely shows in those races Mercedes actually had competition.

[P123]

I don't think there is any need to get hung up over 'diva', or whatever Wolff says. As we could see with our own eyes, there were times when Merc struggled to get the most out of their car, mainly due to the tyres. I do think they improved on it, but it didn't go away entirely, as demonstrated in Malaysia and to a lesser extent Mexico. Red Bull seemed to struggle a bit in that regard too. The Ferrari had the most stable platform of performance through the year, with their two most sluggish races coming after them being on the receiving end of technical clarifications- oil burn, and floor flex.

[Jordan44]

Really.

 

Q: P5 P6 / R: P1 P3

Q: P1 P5 / R: P2 P5

Q: P3 P4 / R: P2 P9*

 

Those are not results of a diva. It merely shows in those races Mercedes actually had competition.

 

Those could be the results of a diva. You are like a politician giving stats without context which paint a different picture

 

Singapore - Got fortunate in the race with the weather and crash-gate

Malaysia - Vettel was not in the same fight, would have most likely been faster looking at the info we have.

Mexico - Again, Vettel was out and most likely would have finished ahead of the Mercedes

Edited by Jordan44, 23 December 2017 - 14:53.

[as65p]

I don't think there is any need to get hung up over 'diva', or whatever Wolff says. As we could see with our own eyes, there were times when Merc struggled to get the most out of their car, mainly due to the tyres. I do think they improved on it, but it didn't go away entirely, as demonstrated in Malaysia and to a lesser extent Mexico. Red Bull seemed to struggle a bit in that regard too. The Ferrari had the most stable platform of performance through the year, with their two most sluggish races coming after them being on the receiving end of technical clarifications- oil burn, and floor flex.

I know that's almost everyones party-line, but again, it's not showing in the results. Those 3 "worst" races were cited as proof of Mercedes struggles, yet their top score on the day was P1, P2, P2. And that's with the better driver being punted off in the third race. What I draw from this is, they weren't dominant in those races, yet with a bit better luck capable of winning them all.

 

So that was the worst MGP showed in the 2nd half. And yet we're led to believe Ferrari had "the more stable platform"? I don't see it.

[P123]

I know that's almost everyones party-line, but again, it's not showing in the results. Those 3 "worst" races were cited as proof of Mercedes struggles, yet their top score on the day was P1, P2, P2. And that's with the better driver being punted off in the third race. What I draw from this is, they weren't dominant in those races, yet with a bit better luck capable of winning them all.
 
So that was the worst MGP showed in the 2nd half. And yet we're led to believe Ferrari had "the more stable platform"? I don't see it.

I'm talking about outright performance. If you are just looking at finishing positions then that won't tell the story of Ferrari's variety of ways of screwing it up. Even with Mexico as an example, the No.1 Ferrari driver also removed themselves from the fight, leaving the way clear for both teams No.2s to finish on the podium.

[Mercstar]

Really.

 

Q: P5 P6 / R: P1 P3

Q: P1 P5 / R: P2 P5

Q: P3 P4 / R: P2 P9*

 

Those are not results of a diva. It merely shows in those races Mercedes actually had competition.

 

In Singapore they got extremely lucky, performance was still lacking to RB and Ferrari. Same in Malaysia, Kimi and Seb being out of contention played a huge part in Lewis finishing P2. And in Mexico, again Vettel was out of contention.  

[Mercstar]

I know that's almost everyones party-line, but again, it's not showing in the results. Those 3 "worst" races were cited as proof of Mercedes struggles, yet their top score on the day was P1, P2, P2. And that's with the better driver being punted off in the third race. What I draw from this is, they weren't dominant in those races, yet with a bit better luck capable of winning them all.

 

So that was the worst MGP showed in the 2nd half. And yet we're led to believe Ferrari had "the more stable platform"? I don't see it.

 

Results without context are meaningless, especially when trying to appraise relative performance. 

[SCUDmissile]

Man Toto Wolff must be some kind of wizard, making so many people believe this diva rubbish.

The car won 12 races 😂

[ExEd]

Man Toto Wolff must be some kind of wizard, making so many people believe this diva rubbish.

The car won 12 races

 

That Ferrari then must have been a rocket good at the first half of the season ...i guess

Edited by ExEd, 23 December 2017 - 19:13.

[sopa]

Man Toto Wolff must be some kind of wizard, making so many people believe this diva rubbish.

The car won 12 races

 

#NotbadforaDiva

 

But people can overexaggerate massively some things.

 

Like Senna in 1994 claimed Williams was a horrible car to drive. Yet he took 3 poles in it and they won the WCC (without Senna).

 

If you consider a top car to be seriously flawed, then I wonder, how can we call the rest of the field?

[ExEd]

When the same thing is said about Fernando, its taken as gospel. 

 

If Bottas was the lead driver, Merc would most likely have lost out on both Championships this yr, I would've thought after this year, its clear to see the difference a top tier driver can make when cars are equal.

 

Don't you try to convince them ,any losing side would act like this. 

Truth is,if you swap the drivers and cars,Lewis would have still won the title for Ferrari. 

Imho the last one was the best of them 4 Lewis' titles.

[jjcale]

But didn’t they make Lewis run the same power setup?

 

This is a very important question .... can anyone give a definitive answer?

[jjcale]

Man Toto Wolff must be some kind of wizard, making so many people believe this diva rubbish.

The car won 12 races

 

Merc had the clear best car at every stage last season ... but after 2014 - 2016 many of LH's fans a) saw a normally competitive season as some kind of struggle; and b) were all too happy to talk down the car/team in order to talk up LH. 

 

But as the modern philosopher Shawn Carter memorably put it: Men lie, women lie, numbers don't ... (he also added - take that, Samuel Clemens!).

Edited by jjcale, 23 December 2017 - 19:39.

[as65p]

That Ferrari then must have been a rocket good at the first half of the season ...i guess

 

You mean when it won 3 races while the Mercedes won 6?

[as65p]

Merc had the clear best car at every stage last season ... but after 2014 - 2016 many of LH's fans a) saw a normally competitive season as some kind of struggle; and b) were all too happy to talk down the car/team in order to talk up LH. 

 

  This, especially a), and then of course subsequently b) was practically served on a plate, too tempting to resist.

[as65p]

I'm talking about outright performance. If you are just looking at finishing positions then that won't tell the story of Ferrari's variety of ways of screwing it up. Even with Mexico as an example, the No.1 Ferrari driver also removed themselves from the fight, leaving the way clear for both teams No.2s to finish on the podium.

 

True, and look which team won that "battle of the no.2's". Also, when the no.1's had their encounter at the 1st corner ruining both their race, the Mercedes was in front with therefore better chances to finish higher.

[P123]

Merc had the clear best car at every stage last season ... but after 2014 - 2016 many of LH's fans a) saw a normally competitive season as some kind of struggle; and b) were all too happy to talk down the car/team in order to talk up LH. 
 
But as the modern philosopher Shawn Carter memorably put it: Men lie, women lie, numbers don't ... (he also added - take that, Samuel Clemens!).

2016 should have taught you that numbers do lie... And a simple watching of 2017 would also have told you that Mercedes being the 'clear best car at every stage' is a fib that even pinnochio's nose couldn't live with.

Edited by P123, 24 December 2017 - 00:39.

[P123]

True, and look which team won that "battle of the no.2's". Also, when the no.1's had their encounter at the 1st corner ruining both their race, the Mercedes was in front with therefore better chances to finish higher.

It's not a great comparison of outright pace though. Kimi buggered his start and lost several positions, and Vettel first traded bodywork with Verstappen, which gave Hamilton a run on him, and then finished it off against Hamilton's rear tyre.

But err, on to 2018.. not much to discuss so far. New tyres again next season, so perhaps that will shake things up. Or Merc won't have the same wobbles on certain tracks as they did in 2017.

[jjcale]

2016 should have taught you that numbers do lie... And a simple watching of 2017 would also have told you that Mercedes being the 'clear best car at every stage' is a fib that even pinnochio's nose couldn't live with.

 

Not "every race" I didnt say or suggest that ... I said "every stage" i.e. the start,the middle and end of the season, If you looked at any decent sized group of consecutive races together, Merc was the best car.  

 

This is a simple fact ... I dont understand why you are choosing to flail against it...

 

Rather than attack a flat fact why not simply say that you believe Merc was not the best car, in your own subjective view, because there were some races (admittedly a minority) where it was not the best car....That's a defensible position for you to take    

[ToniF1]

Mercedes aimed for "90% car" with 2017 F1 design

 

 

"I set the objective to build a 90% car for 2017," said Owen.

"It might seem strange not to aim for 100%, but the problem you face in any new set of rules is that you can't be certain of the challenges you'll face along the way - how the rules evolve, whether the tyres behave differently from how you expected.

"There's a lot of unknowns there, so you aim for a car that can cover as many different circumstances as possible, and accept that it might not be the pinnacle of optimisation.

"We built a lot of adjustment into the car, the capability to react to things we saw.

"Unfortunately, most of the things we had to adapt to we hadn't seen coming. So we carried a lot of compromise through the year for things that didn't need to be changed and we struggled a bit with those that did."

 

Owen added that greater optimization of a car concept "tends to come in the second or third year of regulation stability", and that one late change the team faced on the eve of the season would have been far more problematic if it had happened the year before.

"What I mean [by a 90% car] is that it's quite spacious in places," he said. "The reason for that was to enable us to react during the design process and move things round.

"We didn't know where the aerodynamic development would take us, to some extent - what areas of the car we'd need to find more space on for aero performance, what areas were safe zones where you don't find any aero.

"If you can move things around in the car and not have to reinvent every part of it with every new development, it's quite wise.

"We did have a very late change to one aspect of the power unit, and because of our philosophy we could accommodate it reasonably well.

"If that had happened on our 2016 car, it would literally have been a case of tearing up the design and starting again.

"It was nice to have that little bit of breathing space, whereas for the next car we can afford to be a lot more aggressive."

 

 

 

https://www.motorspo...-design-990752/

Edited by ToniF1, 24 December 2017 - 08:58.

[wj_gibson]

Looking at how the second half of the year went, I very much expect Merc to be further ahead in ‘18 than in ‘17.

[Timstr11]

Chief Designer: "What I mean [by a 90% car] is that it's quite spacious in places..... The reason for that was to enable us to react during the design process and move things round." 

 

I suspect this is referring to the rather extreme length of 2017 car and I expect it will be shorter for 2018.

Edited by Timstr11, 24 December 2017 - 10:50.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

I suspect this is referring to the rather extreme length of 2017 car and I expect it will be shorter for 2018.

Wasn’t that down to allow for a bigger diffuser and more underbody aero...?

[Timstr11]

Wasn’t that down to allow for a bigger diffuser and more underbody aero...?

 

Diffuser size is regulated.

 

The redundant space on the 2017 car Owen is referring too is quite intriguing.

Apart from a longer floor, a longer car creates more volume. That's a given.

Hence my conclusion that his reference to extra space is about the long car.

 

So we carried a lot of compromise through the year for things that didn't need to be changed and we struggled a bit with those that did."

 

The above is also interesting.

Edited by Timstr11, 24 December 2017 - 12:21.

[jjcale]

So Merc are telling us that there is a lot of room to evolve the current design ..... that's reassuring. 

 

I expect the other teams can also find room to improve - even though Macca and Redbull had quite good cars by the end ... but generally I hope 2018 will be even more competitive with the Renault engined cars also coming to the front. 

[Mercstar]

Merc had the clear best car at every stage last season ... but after 2014 - 2016 many of LH's fans a) saw a normally competitive season as some kind of struggle; and b) were all too happy to talk down the car/team in order to talk up LH. 

 

But as the modern philosopher Shawn Carter memorably put it: Men lie, women lie, numbers don't ... (he also added - take that, Samuel Clemens!).

 

Going by your comments, your quite clearly bent on doing the exact opposite, just in case you have to give Lewis a bit of credit for his season, can't have that now can we. 

Edited by Mercstar, 24 December 2017 - 16:35.

[Jordan44]

Not "every race" I didnt say or suggest that ... I said "every stage" i.e. the start,the middle and end of the season, If you looked at any decent sized group of consecutive races together, Merc was the best car.  

 

This is a simple fact ... I dont understand why you are choosing to flail against it...

 

Rather than attack a flat fact why not simply say that you believe Merc was not the best car, in your own subjective view, because there were some races (admittedly a minority) where it was not the best car....That's a defensible position for you to take    

 

If I do that then I reach a different conclusion to you.

 

Ferrari appeared to have the upper hand in like 5 out of the first 7 races. They clearly came into the season with a better prepared car and I believe they has the better package at the 'start' of the season.

 

The middle part of the season was Merc territory with it's abundance of power tracks.

 

The end was rather evenly split, races like Mexico, Singapore and Malaysia were clearly Ferrari tracks, in between the tracks where Mercedes performed well.

Edited by Jordan44, 24 December 2017 - 15:27.

[jjcale]

Going by your comments, your quite clearly bent on doing the exact opposite, just in case you have to give Lewis a bit of credit for his season, can't have that now can we. 

 

Its possible for both things to be true - LH had a fantastic season and was the best driver; and Merc had the best car. 

 

I dont need to talk down the car to praise LH. In my view being the the best car is normally a sign of being the best driver. Merc can hire anyone they want - and indeed had the chance to do so again at the start of the season (eg they could have got FA and swapped around engineers and pit crew for the sake of "equality" as Macca did in 2010) .... knowing this, and then realising that they then did everything they could to make LH feel comfortable tells you all you need to know. 

[jjcale]

If I do that then I reach a different conclusion to you.

 

Ferrari appeared to have the upper hand in like 5 out of the first 7 races. They clearly came into the season with a better prepared car and I believe they has the better package at the 'start' of the season.

 

The middle part of the season was Merc territory with it's abundance of power tracks.

 

The end was rather evenly split, races like Mexico, Singapore and Malaysia were clearly Ferrari tracks, in between the tracks where Mercedes performed well.

 

That's a valid argument. 

 

But I dont blame the car for Merc having wasted winter testing .... They didnt do anything really major to the car all season, they just figured out how to set it up properly. Also the patchy early season form was also largely track related. They were great on some circuits and not so good on others. That variance calmed down a bit as the season wore on and they figured out the car more but it was still there even in the last part of the season.

 

In terms of overall design philosophy, Merc clearly took a calculated risk that they would focus on a car that would be superior at the majority of tracks and just try to their best at the other tracks. 

 

Anyway this thread is about next year.  Seems to me they have opted to keep with the same design philosophy probably expecting more competition from more teams - but probably they will be the only ones strong on the high speed circuits whilst the other teams will be fighting among themselves on the other tracks.

 

I think there is also an element of "protecting the show" in this decision making - no one, not even Merc, wants to see the dominance of 2014 - 2016 return - and this is one way to ensure an interesting season without Merc having to "unilaterally disarm".  

[jjcale]

It tells you after 3 yrs of a civil war, they wanted a break. 

 

That's not an unreasonable view... but still - that's a choice ... and it means they consider LH to be good enough to allow them to make that choice.  Put it this way, they would not have done that if say VB (or a driver of his calibre) was the one who was there in Dec 2016. I am sure they value winning more than team harmony.

[MastaKink]

Glad they aren't changing concept, always a bit risky.

 

Already sounding a bit too ominous for everyone else though, I'd rather a year like this one than the 14-16 variety but everyone else seems to be having rumours of issues on dyno's and with the less parts allowed next year I fear there will be quite a few freebies for Mercedes to squabble amongst themselves for throughout the year.

[PlayboyRacer]

Let's not get airheaded.

Lewis has 1 wdc when it's been thereabouts/equal to best car. 3 wdc with thee best car.

The man has won plenty of races and poles with a car thats not the best or fastest of the time.

If anyone can make up a small deficiency, its Lewis along with Fernando. Winning a World title in those circumstances is very difficult however.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 25 December 2017 - 00:28.