Mercedes W14

[Stu]

…

Apparently not:

9.5
Homologated Gearbox and Component Classification
The design of the Cassette, Driveline Components (with the exception of the gear ratios, for

…

If a team uses a Gearbox Case with an Integrated Cassette, the Gearbox Case may be
modified before the start of each new season provided that:
a. The layout of the Driveline Components, Gear-Change components and Auxiliary
Components is unchanged, except for a translation, as a group, in X.
b. The part of the case considered as Cassette remains unchanged, except for a translation
in X.
Approval of the modification must be granted by the FIA.
The Gearbox, as defined in Article 9.1.1, is classified as TRC.

Well screw me then. I was convinced.

I'll shut up.

In the last part of the reg they differentiate between the Integrated Cassette and gearbox case. All teams have moved away from the ‘classic’ gearbox and use the cassette system; the “gearbox case” becomes, more correctly, a rear chassis structure and the gearbox is isolated from the suspension and aero loads.
Still expensive to gain from a complete revision is suspension methodology mid-season though, unless you have inbuilt redundancy in the structure…

[organic]

The much discussed cockpit position of the Mercedes has finally been commented on..

Hamilton went into a little more detail about the problems plaguing him: "On the W14 we weren't able to fully resolve the problems at the rear and I personally find it difficult to adapt due to the very forward driving position."

@Blackout and others vindicated

[dfegan358]

Is the forward driving position something that can be modified to Hamiltons liking with the modified package coming?

[organic]

Is the forward driving position something that can be modified to Hamiltons liking with the modified package coming?

I think changing it would require a different chassis

[F1Krof]

[GrizzleBoy]

The W13s upper floor beneath the sidepod entrance never made sense to me with all its bumps and curves in the way of th le flor front of the floor to the diffuser.

The W14 does nothing to take away that confusion. I can understand that there's no undercut, but I don't understand the many many bumps on the floor that would impede clean flow from front to rear of the upper floor surface.

Is it all just compromises for stiffness and lower sis location? If so I can't see where it's worth it.

[Holm86]

Apparently not:

Well screw me then. I was convinced.

I'll shut up.

In the last part of the reg they differentiate between the Integrated Cassette and gearbox case. All teams have moved away from the ‘classic’ gearbox and use the cassette system; the “gearbox case” becomes, more correctly, a rear chassis structure and the gearbox is isolated from the suspension and aero loads.
Still expensive to gain from a complete revision is suspension methodology mid-season though, unless you have inbuilt redundancy in the structure…

Yes, but the way I read the regulations the casette has been homologated all the way up till 2025, but the gearbox casing can be changed, but ONLY between seasons, not mid-season

If a team uses a Gearbox Case with an Integrated Cassette, the Gearbox Case may be
modified before the start of each new season provided that:
a. The layout of the Driveline Components, Gear-Change components and Auxiliary
Components is unchanged, except for a translation, as a group, in X.
b. The part of the case considered as Cassette remains unchanged, except for a
translation in X.

So as I see it, they're stuck with pull-rod for the entire season, even if they have room in the budget to develop new suspension pickups on the gearbox casing.

[ValeVida46]

So as I see it, they're stuck with pull-rod for the entire season, even if they have room in the budget to develop new suspension pickups on the gearbox casing.

Seems counterproductive to have these regs if they're stifling a teams ability to iron out inefficiencies.
Particularly when the budget cap is present.

[mendis]

So as I see it, they're stuck with pull-rod for the entire season, even if they have room in the budget to develop new suspension pickups on the gearbox casing.

Seems counterproductive to have these regs if they're stifling a teams ability to iron out inefficiencies.
Particularly when the budget cap is present.

These regulations reward efficiencies in design thinking. Any team that wants to go with trial & error methods of the yore for building a car, is bound to feel the pain of the regulations.

[paulo_f1]

The W13s upper floor beneath the sidepod entrance never made sense to me with all its bumps and curves in the way of th le flor front of the floor to the diffuser.

The W14 does nothing to take away that confusion. I can understand that there's no undercut, but I don't understand the many many bumps on the floor that would impede clean flow from front to rear of the upper floor surface.

Is it all just compromises for stiffness and lower sis location? If so I can't see where it's worth it.

Those shapes are driven by the tunnels and actual underbody floor shape. They are way more important than airflow over the top, as long as you can seal the floor and keep the downforce consistent at different ride heights.

[PlatinumZealot]

The much discussed cockpit position of the Mercedes has finally been commented on..

Hamilton went into a little more detail about the problems plaguing him: "On the W14 we weren't able to fully resolve the problems at the rear and I personally find it difficult to adapt due to the very forward driving position."

@Blackout and others vindicated

This doesn't really say much other than the radiators are forcing the back of the driver seat to come forward. The halo and pedal box positions are very likely still at the limits.

[ValeVida46]

These regulations reward efficiencies in design thinking. Any team that wants to go with trial & error methods of the yore for building a car, is bound to feel the pain of the regulations.

I'm not sure I follow.

Literally ever team uses trail and error. If they were perfect there would be no need for testing or practice sessions...yet we see testing and practice sessions.
Anyway, off topic now

[Farnborough]

So as I see it, they're stuck with pull-rod for the entire season, even if they have room in the budget to develop new suspension pickups on the gearbox casing.

Seems counterproductive to have these regs if they're stifling a teams ability to iron out inefficiencies.
Particularly when the budget cap is present.

These regulations reward efficiencies in design thinking. Any team that wants to go with trial & error methods of the yore for building a car, is bound to feel the pain of the regulations.

Definitely agree strongly, set off in the wrong direction through gestation of concept and all the clever people in the whole team are then applied in that direction.
Recovery then takes some very strong decisions to accommodate.
They seem to have significantly improved some mechanical aspects with this car though.

[Sevach]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... weit-vorn/

After all the talk about cockpit position, Hamilton is complaining about... cockpit positioning, too far forward for him.

[AR3-GP]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... weit-vorn/

After all the talk about cockpit position, Hamilton is complaining about... cockpit positioning, too far forward for him.

If Merc think it's better for performance, and the other, more long term driver can drive it, where is the incentive to change?