2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[AR3-GP]

In an alternate timeline F1 wasn't gaslit into oil-petrol hybrids and the AMG One ended up with a NA ≥10 cylinder engine while weighing a few hundred kilos less.

Merc still makes a V12 for the Mercedes-maybach. There was an engine they could have used if they were interested in this. They are not.

[Just_a_fan]

Speaking of ProjectOne.

Good timing

I have wondered why it's painted in Petronas colors...

Marketing, obviously. Unlike other sideline projects, it has a fairly traditional approach to aero - unlike side projects by another team of course.

[vorticism]

Merc still makes a V12 for the Mercedes-maybach. There was an engine they could have used if they were interested in this. They are not.

Too heavy, too large, not a motorsport engine. Pagani use a Merc road car V12 but that's a different sort of vehicle. I'm saying, since the goal was to drop in an F1 engine: an NA formula could have provided something interesting. AMG One is probably the first road car in recent history to use an actual F1 engine tuned for road regs; partly due to improved manufacturing available today. So, hypothetically an NA 8+ cyl dropped in with mild hybrid, like a GMA T.50 except +5k on the red end of the tachometer.

And since I'm on hypotheticals, BMW never left, they built their this, and it became the next M halo car not a 3 tonne SUV.

[mendis]

And I am glad you support actionable sanction against cheating, just concerned that there may be a heavy bias in your suggestions of unsubstantiated wrongdoing.

Did FIA term 'cost cap breach' as 'cheating'? Opinion and facts should be differentiated.

The cost cap is a rule, violation of rules in sport is cheating. Whatever political spin RB or the FIA put on things to keep the big $$ happy is irrelevant.

That's your definition, by assuming there was an intent to cheat, which FIA denied. Read the reports. Official reports doesn't mention any of that, intact they are contrary to it.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/cost- ... 0in%202021.

The FIA said there was “no accusation or evidence” that Red Bull had “sought at any time to act in bad faith, dishonestly or in a fraudulent manner, nor has it wilfully concealed any information from the Cost Cap Administration.”

[denyall]

Did FIA term 'cost cap breach' as 'cheating'? Opinion and facts should be differentiated.

The cost cap is a rule, violation of rules in sport is cheating. Whatever political spin RB or the FIA put on things to keep the big $$ happy is irrelevant.

That's your definition, by assuming there was an intent to cheat, which FIA denied. Read the reports. Official reports doesn't mention any of that, intact they are contrary to it.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/cost- ... 0in%202021.

The FIA said there was “no accusation or evidence” that Red Bull had “sought at any time to act in bad faith, dishonestly or in a fraudulent manner, nor has it wilfully concealed any information from the Cost Cap Administration.”

As I said, whatever fluff the FIA and RB put out to make themselves feel better and keep sponsors happy is irrelevant. If you spend more than was allowed it's cheating, otherwise why give a penalty at all. If it truly doesn't matter then no punishment would be needed. Obviously the other nine teams and the FIA do think it matters.

Further, the definition of cheating: "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." No where do we find reference to intent or fault, but we do find reference to fairness.

It is perfectly fair to call budget overspend cheating, because that is what it is.

[ispano6]

Mercedes AMG openly acknowledged their Formula E involvement greatly contributed to their battery and recovery for the hybrid power units. It was possibly the only team benefitting from involvement in both series (Renault may have benefited from Nissan as well). Honda did pass hybrid knowledge from F1 to SuperGT, though it doesn't appear to have the other way around. Unfortunately only a spec series or energy store can ensure equality but that also takes away from the spirit of innovation and technological advances.

The issue of course here is that smaller teams can't afford a HUGE finance arm Toto is trumpeting about, and that the costs associated to run it must also be huge since beancounters seem to be well paid. Costs that normally would go towards the F1 team have simply been diverted and playing field really isn't leveled anymore than previous eras.

Another case in point is the fact that Allison and Elliott being interchangeable, where Allison having stepped back last season and not being a part of payroll but being everpresent at races was telling. Since both are on the payroll this season I imagine some people had to be moved away from being involved in F1.

[PlatinumZealot]

Mercedes AMG openly acknowledged their Formula E involvement greatly contributed to their battery and recovery for the hybrid power units. It was possibly the only team benefitting from involvement in both series (Renault may have benefited from Nissan as well). Honda did pass hybrid knowledge from F1 to SuperGT, though it doesn't appear to have the other way around. Unfortunately only a spec series or energy store can ensure equality but that also takes away from the spirit of innovation and technological advances.

The issue of course here is that smaller teams can't afford a HUGE finance arm Toto is trumpeting about, and that the costs associated to run it must also be huge since beancounters seem to be well paid. Costs that normally would go towards the F1 team have simply been diverted and playing field really isn't leveled anymore than previous eras.

Another case in point is the fact that Allison and Elliott being interchangeable, where Allison having stepped back last season and not being a part of payroll but being everpresent at races was telling. Since both are on the payroll this season I imagine some people had to be moved away from being involved in F1.

I don't see 49 people as a huge finance arm.

And how do you know who is on the Mercedes Payroll?

Just know that Mercedes is safely beneath the budget cap unlike certain teams...

[Stu]

The cost cap is a rule, violation of rules in sport is cheating. Whatever political spin RB or the FIA put on things to keep the big $$ happy is irrelevant.

That's your definition, by assuming there was an intent to cheat, which FIA denied. Read the reports. Official reports doesn't mention any of that, intact they are contrary to it.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/cost- ... 0in%202021.

The FIA said there was “no accusation or evidence” that Red Bull had “sought at any time to act in bad faith, dishonestly or in a fraudulent manner, nor has it wilfully concealed any information from the Cost Cap Administration.”

As I said, whatever fluff the FIA and RB put out to make themselves feel better and keep sponsors happy is irrelevant. If you spend more than was allowed it's cheating, otherwise why give a penalty at all. If it truly doesn't matter then no punishment would be needed. Obviously the other nine teams and the FIA do think it matters.

Further, the definition of cheating: "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." No where do we find reference to intent or fault, but we do find reference to fairness.

It is perfectly fair to call budget overspend cheating, because that is what it is.

You are just repeating your interpretation here, your disagreement seems to be with the FIA on how they defined the breach.

[mendis]

The cost cap is a rule, violation of rules in sport is cheating. Whatever political spin RB or the FIA put on things to keep the big $$ happy is irrelevant.

That's your definition, by assuming there was an intent to cheat, which FIA denied. Read the reports. Official reports doesn't mention any of that, intact they are contrary to it.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/cost- ... 0in%202021.

The FIA said there was “no accusation or evidence” that Red Bull had “sought at any time to act in bad faith, dishonestly or in a fraudulent manner, nor has it wilfully concealed any information from the Cost Cap Administration.”

As I said, whatever fluff the FIA and RB put out to make themselves feel better and keep sponsors happy is irrelevant. If you spend more than was allowed it's cheating, otherwise why give a penalty at all. If it truly doesn't matter then no punishment would be needed. Obviously the other nine teams and the FIA do think it matters.

Further, the definition of cheating: "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." No where do we find reference to intent or fault, but we do find reference to fairness.

It is perfectly fair to call budget overspend cheating, because that is what it is.

Feelings are not facts.

[Puffpirat]

Mercedes AMG openly acknowledged their Formula E involvement greatly contributed to their battery and recovery for the hybrid power units. It was possibly the only team benefitting from involvement in both series (Renault may have benefited from Nissan as well). Honda did pass hybrid knowledge from F1 to SuperGT, though it doesn't appear to have the other way around. Unfortunately only a spec series or energy store can ensure equality but that also takes away from the spirit of innovation and technological advances.

The issue of course here is that smaller teams can't afford a HUGE finance arm Toto is trumpeting about, and that the costs associated to run it must also be huge since beancounters seem to be well paid. Costs that normally would go towards the F1 team have simply been diverted and playing field really isn't leveled anymore than previous eras.

Another case in point is the fact that Allison and Elliott being interchangeable, where Allison having stepped back last season and not being a part of payroll but being everpresent at races was telling. Since both are on the payroll this season I imagine some people had to be moved away from being involved in F1.

If a finance team is sending you on a conspiracy spiral, wait till you find out that Red Bull has a whole second team on the grid where Helmet Marko just yesterday said their own ideas and developments aren’t helpful and they should follow the main team. By your calculations that must then be 300mil going into the Red Bull development no? Strange because I don’t see those posts in the Red Bull team thread…

[Just_a_fan]

That's your definition, by assuming there was an intent to cheat, which FIA denied. Read the reports. Official reports doesn't mention any of that, intact they are contrary to it.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/cost- ... 0in%202021.

As I said, whatever fluff the FIA and RB put out to make themselves feel better and keep sponsors happy is irrelevant. If you spend more than was allowed it's cheating, otherwise why give a penalty at all. If it truly doesn't matter then no punishment would be needed. Obviously the other nine teams and the FIA do think it matters.

Further, the definition of cheating: "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." No where do we find reference to intent or fault, but we do find reference to fairness.

It is perfectly fair to call budget overspend cheating, because that is what it is.

Feelings are not facts.

If a driver drivers across a chicane in order to save several seconds, is that cheating? The rules say you shouldn't do it. The stewards may punish you with a penalty. But nowhere in the FIA documents will it say " the driver cheated". It will use phrases such as "gained an advantage".

By your position, such a driver isn't cheating by his actions.

[mendis]

As I said, whatever fluff the FIA and RB put out to make themselves feel better and keep sponsors happy is irrelevant. If you spend more than was allowed it's cheating, otherwise why give a penalty at all. If it truly doesn't matter then no punishment would be needed. Obviously the other nine teams and the FIA do think it matters.

Further, the definition of cheating: "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." No where do we find reference to intent or fault, but we do find reference to fairness.

It is perfectly fair to call budget overspend cheating, because that is what it is.

Feelings are not facts.

If a driver drivers across a chicane in order to save several seconds, is that cheating? The rules say you shouldn't do it. The stewards may punish you with a penalty. But nowhere in the FIA documents will it say " the driver cheated". It will use phrases such as "gained an advantage".

By your position, such a driver isn't cheating by his actions.

Apples Vs Oranges.

[KeiKo403]

If a finance team is sending you on a conspiracy spiral, wait till you find out that Red Bull has a whole second team on the grid where Helmet Marko just yesterday said their own ideas and developments aren’t helpful and they should follow the main team. By your calculations that must then be 300mil going into the Red Bull development no? Strange because I don’t see those posts in the Red Bull team thread…

I picked up on this too and wondered what the chances were of a shared pool of engineers from RBT working for RBR and AT (if the team moves some/most/all of its base to England). Or staff are employed at one or the other teams and then zero gardening leave for flipping between either team?

I’m not trying to start something with that and the FIA would surely put something in to stop such a situation but if the rules allow it (or rather, they don’t prevent it) then kudos to them if they do it.

Either way it’s off topic for the Merc thread.
What I will say is I really hope Merc don’t end up going over the budget cap if they’ve got c.50 finance staff, that would be rather embarrassing.

[ValeVida46]

If a driver drivers across a chicane in order to save several seconds, is that cheating? The rules say you shouldn't do it. The stewards may punish you with a penalty. But nowhere in the FIA documents will it say " the driver cheated". It will use phrases such as "gained an advantage".

By your position, such a driver isn't cheating by his actions.

A good point. Artificial labels don't overcome the overt act.
There's 2 things about the episode that stands out to me. Wolff, Zak Brown and Binotto all accused RB of cheating with Horner threatening legal action for “hugely defamatory, fictitious claims”. That action never came, for the reason that everything(receipts) would be turned over to court and be made public.

The second is that the FIA handled this behind closed doors with RB, no evidence being presented publicly.
The only evidence we have are statements of denial from RB, and then from the FIA that wrongdoing was found with a figure attached, and a response from Red Bull in acceptance of the punishment. Why is there no transparency? Was the damage to the sport that grave that the FIA limited blowback by concealing the details?

If a finance team is sending you on a conspiracy spiral, wait till you find out that Red Bull has a whole second team on the grid where Helmet Marko just yesterday said their own ideas and developments aren’t helpful and they should follow the main team. By your calculations that must then be 300mil going into the Red Bull development no? Strange because I don’t see those posts in the Red Bull team thread…

Can you imagine this scenario for Mercedes? The fallout on this thread would need years of decontamination

[Stu]

…

I don't see 49 people as a huge finance arm.

And how do you know who is on the Mercedes Payroll?

Just know that Mercedes is safely beneath the budget cap unlike certain teams...

Hope, surely??