2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Alonsismo]

without RB
the title battle between Fernando and Lewis would have been one of the greatest of all time in terms of WDC battle.

[mwillems]

Would Ferrari's floor have also been illegal at the previous venues it raced at?

Why would it be? The obvious point here is that Merc's pace relative to RB and McL may have been a consequence of running the car illegally low to the ground, gaining performance from that instead of the upgrade.

How is it obvious? Ferrari's relative pace was slower for exactly the same thing.
Unless of course there is a cognitive bias in isolating Mercedes.

Was it exactly the same? Ferrari were running a slightly softer rear, is a suggestion I'd seen in Qualifying, I'd imagine there is a few different ways of setting the car up that could lead to the floor hitting the bumps excessively.

It seems to be just that at the sprint weekend the teams were not conservative enough on what they could get away with and the track was very punishing. I'd imagine that in the race cars were using many parts of the track that weren't explored under Free Practise, and on top of that, if you get an occurrence where the car bounces from one bump to another it is going to come down hard and wear the plank even further.

They were just too adventurous on the setup, though I think Merc would have been fast even running a stiffer rear or with a mil of more ride height.

[FittingMechanics]

“randomly” checked 4 out of the 20 cars! There’s your answer

Run a legal car and you will pass "random" checks. All his biggest competitors were checked, so no point crying about it.

Yes, I think the point that only 4 cars were checked is just wrong. They checked all top cars.

They checked VER, HAM, NOR and LEC. I guess they wanted to check the top positions.

Not sure why they skipped SAI in P4.

[ValeVida46]

Yes, teams are obsessing over milometers of ride height and run their cars so much on the limit because there's absolutely no performance to be gained from it. Makes sense.

A strawman argument if ever there was one.

The absolute clear point is that it didn't help Ferrari's pace relative to their rivals at all. If anything they fell behind.
But yea ok, I see...helps Mercedes doesn't help Ferrari. Makes sense.

[AMG.Tzan]

Puts the new floor into question. Was the pace from the upgrade or running an illegal car?

“randomly” checked 4 out of the 20 cars! There’s your answer

Run a legal car and you will pass "random" checks. All his biggest competitors were checked, so no point crying about it.

“run a legal car” said sarcastically the guy whose team were found 2M over the budget cap and received no penalty!


The car was perfectly legal! Skid block wear has nothing to do with the team! It usually gets worn out by stuff like kerbs and off track excursions! If it was worn out due to setup it would have caused issues already in the Sprint! When you’ve got 2 qualifying sessions and 2 races on a track so bumpy as COTA it’s only normal that some teams may have worn out skid blocks!

Skid blocks were supposed to be removed with the 2022 regulations as they bring nothing but weight to the cars! They were a fast measure introduced back in the middle of 1994 to prevent cars from stalling! There’s no such thing anymore…

Btw usually it’s only 1 car that’s taken for inspection! Red Bull has been the only team able to run its car so close to the ground yet they got inspected at a race that they weren’t dominant! Probably “randomly”

[Juzh]

Yes, teams are obsessing over milometers of ride height and run their cars so much on the limit because there's absolutely no performance to be gained from it. Makes sense.

A strawman argument if ever there was one.

The absolute clear point is that it didn't help Ferrari's pace relative to their rivals at all. If anything they fell behind.
But yea ok, I see...helps Mercedes doesn't help Ferrari. Makes sense.

Talking about straws hahaha. Why do you think it didnt help them? Because they were slower in the race than Ver, Nor and Ham? They were on pole and Sainz in the end finished 5 seconds behind norris and Leclerc on a 2 stop would fight for P3 and/or possibly even with hamilton (long shot though). They simply have a slower car and if anything running lower than possible helped them not be so much off the pace than what they were Qatar, where they finished 33s behind mclarens who had to come trough them and even russell who was last at some point. Your argument is flawed to the bone. Yes, running car as low as possible is essential in this regulation set and it unquestionably gives more performance. They played with fire and got burned, both merc and ferrari.

[chrisc90]

Juzh is right. Teams will chase the next mm of ride height.
We could flip your theory about it not helping Ferrari to the fact that Russell was nowhere either. Infact he finished behind Charles and sainz (before the DSQs), so what does that say about Mercedes?

Top and bottom - we will need for another race to evaluate what the upgrade was like Relative to others.
I’d have thought Russell would have made more places up given this ‘minimum 1 tenth’ theory that some are claiming

[ValeVida46]

Ground effect cars run lower to the ground generate more downforce, that much is obvious after two years with these regs. Ferrari's raw pace was as fast as anybody, and their race pace was faster than usual finishing only 15 seconds behind Max. We can not draw any positive conclusions about the real relative pace of competitors running illegal cars. The fact that Merc introduced an upgrade and ran the car illegally obfuscates what is what performance wise, hence why I said it puts the new floor into question. Soon enough we will know what is what.

I do believe there is a cognitive bias, though perhaps not the one you do.

Ferrari were slower relative their rivals. They used a floor that was legal in previous races. They were found to have worn the plank at this venue. Illegal floor?

No, the clear and indisputable bias is that the upgrade must have made it an illegal floor when it's abundantly clear that a fully legal floor at previous venues fell foul of the wear rate.
So why would it bring the new floor into question when a rivals previously legal floor is also among the Disqualified?
It wouldn't unless there was a bias.
And 15 seconds behind Max with max starting in 6th and literally cruising behind others in the first half of the race....
The level of bias is that there's even a rewriting of Narrative.

Hamilton was gapping Charles at over 0.5 a lap on the same compound. When last did that happen?

You are isolating one team and just randomly throwing around words to incite a reaction.

[Juzh]

The car was perfectly legal!

Skid blocks worn beyond allowed limits, therefore not legal come race end = DSQ.

As has been mention in race thread Ocon got DSQ when his accidently engine overfueled for a fraction of a second when he struck kerb hard.

Ricciardo was DSQ in singapore when his mgu-k briefly overrevved.

not difficult to understand. No one's stopping mercedes running the car 1 or 2 cm higher but then instead of fighting for wins they'd be 30s off the pace. Single practice session is no excuse.

Of course I dont expect you to understand any of this, but here we are.

[ValeVida46]

Talking about straws hahaha. Why do you think it didnt help them? Because they were slower in the race than Ver, Nor and Ham? They were on pole and Sainz in the end finished 5 seconds behind norris and Leclerc on a 2 stop would fight for P3 and/or possibly even with hamilton (long shot though). They simply have a slower car and if anything running lower than possible helped them not be so much off the pace than what they were Qatar, where they finished 33s behind mclarens who had to come trough them and even russell who was last at some point. Your argument is flawed to the bone. Yes, running car as low as possible is essential in this regulation set and it unquestionably gives more performance. They played with fire and got burned, both merc and ferrari.

Ahhaa so your strawman argument doesn't account for the same Ferrari finishing ahead of the macca at Singapore?
Or Monza? Or Zandvoort?
Instead we must believe that Mercedes update is the reason for illegality.
And Ferrari's previously legal floor is not intrinsically legal(utterly ridiculous).
Because (enter tiny sample size) to validate?

Not because it's a bumpy track with a low amount of practice time. No. Couldn't possible be that.

[AMG.Tzan]

The car was perfectly legal!

Skid blocks worn beyond allowed limits, therefore not legal come race end = DSQ.

As has been mention in race thread Ocon got DSQ when his accidently engine overfueled for a fraction of a second when he struck kerb hard.

Ricciardo was DSQ in singapore when his mgu-k briefly overrevved.

not difficult to understand. No one's stopping mercedes running the car 1 or 2 cm higher but then instead of fighting for wins they'd be 30s off the pace. Single practice session is no excuse.

Of course I dont expect you to understand any of this, but here we are.

So you're pretty much implying that Mercedes knew about it and intentionally went ahead with a setup that could get them DSQed...

The same way for example Red Bull knew exactly what they were doing by overspending 2M but hoped they could get away with it (which they did) by saying it was "catering costs"! They could easily have spent 2M less and end up 30s off the pace.

I too don't expect you to understand my points but there you go.

[ValeVida46]

They were just too adventurous on the setup, though I think Merc would have been fast even running a stiffer rear or with a mil of more ride height.

Agree.
It is highly likely it was very marginally off. The cars were all legal after the sprint race.
Set up doesn't need a big change to alleviate a wear issue that could have been out of legality by tiny fractions.
But of course the usual response from detractors is the floor is illegal...

[Juzh]

Talking about straws hahaha. Why do you think it didnt help them? Because they were slower in the race than Ver, Nor and Ham? They were on pole and Sainz in the end finished 5 seconds behind norris and Leclerc on a 2 stop would fight for P3 and/or possibly even with hamilton (long shot though). They simply have a slower car and if anything running lower than possible helped them not be so much off the pace than what they were Qatar, where they finished 33s behind mclarens who had to come trough them and even russell who was last at some point. Your argument is flawed to the bone. Yes, running car as low as possible is essential in this regulation set and it unquestionably gives more performance. They played with fire and got burned, both merc and ferrari.

Ahhaa so your strawman argument doesn't account for the same Ferrari finishing ahead of the macca at Singapore?
Or Monza? Or Zandvoort?
Instead we must believe that Mercedes update is the reason for illegality.
And Ferrari's previously legal floor is not intrinsically legal(utterly ridiculous).
Because (enter tiny sample size) to validate?

Not because it's a bumpy track with a low amount of practice time. No. Couldn't possible be that.

mclaren had an upgrade in singapore and has since left ferrari for dust. Interestingly ferrari only managed to close up by running their car in such a state they couldn't guarantee legality over a race distance.

Also, never did I say mercedes' own upgrade is the reason for illegality lol. Upgrade is probably perfectly legal if ran further off the ground and/or on a more stiffly sprung car. If however it is run too low to the ground then these problems can occur.

[Juzh]

The car was perfectly legal!

Skid blocks worn beyond allowed limits, therefore not legal come race end = DSQ.

As has been mention in race thread Ocon got DSQ when his accidently engine overfueled for a fraction of a second when he struck kerb hard.

Ricciardo was DSQ in singapore when his mgu-k briefly overrevved.

not difficult to understand. No one's stopping mercedes running the car 1 or 2 cm higher but then instead of fighting for wins they'd be 30s off the pace. Single practice session is no excuse.

Of course I dont expect you to understand any of this, but here we are.

So you're pretty much implying that Mercedes knew about it and intentionally went ahead with a setup that could get them DSQed...

The same way for example Red Bull knew exactly what they were doing by overspending 2M but hoped they could get away with it (which they did) by saying it was "catering costs"! They could easily have spent 2M less and end up 30s off the pace.

I too don't expect you to understand my points but there you go.

By spinning the argument this way you're admitting mercedes f**ked up. However technical rules are black and white and long understood, whereas financial regs were new and changed even during course of the season, but i'm not getting into that again.

and no, im not implying mercedes did it intentionally, they tried to push things too given the circumstances and it didn't work out. Foruntately they were caught, but now it's worrisome that so few cars were checked over the course of entire season, apparently none were checked in qatar which is nuts.

[Cs98]

“randomly” checked 4 out of the 20 cars! There’s your answer

Run a legal car and you will pass "random" checks. All his biggest competitors were checked, so no point crying about it.

“run a legal car” said sarcastically the guy whose team were found 2M over the budget cap and received no penalty!


The car was perfectly legal! Skid block wear has nothing to do with the team! It usually gets worn out by stuff like kerbs and off track excursions! If it was worn out due to setup it would have caused issues already in the Sprint! When you’ve got 2 qualifying sessions and 2 races on a track so bumpy as COTA it’s only normal that some teams may have worn out skid blocks!

Skid blocks were supposed to be removed with the 2022 regulations as they bring nothing but weight to the cars! They were a fast measure introduced back in the middle of 1994 to prevent cars from stalling! There’s no such thing anymore…

Btw usually it’s only 1 car that’s taken for inspection! Red Bull has been the only team able to run its car so close to the ground yet they got inspected at a race that they weren’t dominant! Probably “randomly”

It has everything to do with the team and how they choose to set-up the car. Bumps, kerbs, all known factors which you can account for. The car was illegal and correctly got DQd, same goes for Charles.