2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[dans79]

No one would be willing to do this deliberately. Engineers move between teams like trading cards. You could never keep something like this a secret.

It hasn't stopped them in the past, and this is but a small sample!
https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-ch ... e/6555687/

[AR3-GP]

No one would be willing to do this deliberately. Engineers move between teams like trading cards. You could never keep something like this a secret.

It hasn't stopped them in the past, and this is but a small sample!
https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-ch ... e/6555687/

they got caught precisely because conspiracies cannot be contained.

[dans79]

No one would be willing to do this deliberately. Engineers move between teams like trading cards. You could never keep something like this a secret.

It hasn't stopped them in the past, and this is but a small sample!
https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-ch ... e/6555687/

they got caught precisely because conspiracies cannot be contained.

That's not the point anyone is making here. Teams have done it in the past because it's a gamble that has a significant reward. In 1984 Tyrrell didn't get caught till Detroit (8th race of the season) before getting caught. Even then they only got caught because brundell finished second.

It only matters if they get caught in the act, and the fia isn't going to DSQ an entire team unless they have some irrefutable proof. Look at Benetton in 94, They had traction control software on the car, but because the fIA couldn't prove it was used nothing came of it. Benetton wasn't the only team questioned thats year either.

[ValeVida46]

Schumacher, Benetton, Spa, 1994.
Disqualified for plank wear infringement.
The team took the Stewards to a corner where MS had spun over the kerb during the race; there were still splinters of plank on the kerb that matched the wear (scrapes) in the floor.
Stayed disqualified.

I think everyone already knows the FIA are dumb and ignorant!

The metric they're using to check planks is laughable.

[AMG.Tzan]

Schumacher, Benetton, Spa, 1994.
Disqualified for plank wear infringement.
The team took the Stewards to a corner where MS had spun over the kerb during the race; there were still splinters of plank on the kerb that matched the wear (scrapes) in the floor.
Stayed disqualified.

I think everyone already knows the FIA are dumb and ignorant!

The metric they're using to check planks is laughable.

Just wait for the day that Max and Red Bull get DSQed for such and offense! Then the FIA will say “our metrics are wrong and in need of changing so we won’t penalize Max but the next offender will be penalized!”

[ValeVida46]

Just wait for the day that Max and Red Bull get DSQed for such and offense! Then the FIA will say “our metrics are wrong and in need of changing so we won’t penalize Max but the next offender will be penalized!”

Hamilton and Leclerc are keeping receipts.

[chrisc90]

I think everyone already knows the FIA are dumb and ignorant!

The metric they're using to check planks is laughable.

Just wait for the day that Max and Red Bull get DSQed for such and offense! Then the FIA will say “our metrics are wrong and in need of changing so we won’t penalize Max but the next offender will be penalized!”

That would be ok though as why would the FIA want to hurt the sport by disqualifying the star of the show?

I’m still amazed your using an ‘event that hurt the sport’ (which you clearly don’t agree with) to justify the FIA doing it again to not hurt the sport.

Convenient you didn’t reply to my example of if the shoe was on the other foot.

[AMG.Tzan]

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.

This is what you would like to understand for one reason or another! It probably fits your argument…

What I’m saying is that Mercedes didn’t do it on purpose! No team wants to get DSQed just to win maybe win a race! It’s only logical they’ll get inspected after that! Same goes for the example I gave for Red Bull! They didn’t manage to get it right whereas 9 other teams did it right! Did they do it on purpose? Probably not…

Half the forum is implying that Mercedes did it on purpose to gain an advantage or they “pushed things too much” which is wide off the mark since they couldn’t gain any advantage by running so low at such a bumpy track! This what “the Race” video also explains!
Simple factors played a role in this outcome:
1. One practice session
2. Bumpy track
3. Two Qualifyings and two races

Why didn’t the rest get caught? Only 4 samples, better race management and probably just luck! Ferrari was caught for a few tenths of a millimeter for example…

[ValeVida46]

That would be ok though as why would the FIA want to hurt the sport by disqualifying the star of the show?

Going out on a limb here, but maybe rules are for everyone and not those you deem the star of the show?

[chrisc90]

That would be ok though as why would the FIA want to hurt the sport by disqualifying the star of the show?

Going out on a limb here, but maybe rules are for everyone and not those you deem the star of the show?

That’s the point I’m trying to make, But AMG seems oblivious to it!

[ValeVida46]

This is what you would like to understand for one reason or another! It probably fits your argument…

What I’m saying is that Mercedes didn’t do it on purpose! No team wants to get DSQed just to win maybe win a race! It’s only logical they’ll get inspected after that! Same goes for the example I gave for Red Bull! They didn’t manage to get it right whereas 9 other teams did it right! Did they do it on purpose? Probably not…

Half the forum is implying that Mercedes did it on purpose to gain an advantage or they “pushed things too much” which is wide off the mark since they couldn’t gain any advantage by running so low at such a bumpy track! This what “the Race” video also explains!
Simple factors played a role in this outcome:
1. One practice session
2. Bumpy track
3. Two Qualifyings and two races

Why didn’t the rest get caught? Only 4 samples, better race management and probably just luck! Ferrari was caught for a few tenths of a millimeter for example…

Spot on.

All respectable outlets are reporting the same thing with consistency to the actual goings on of the weekend.
But of course the some people just want to type "Mercedes dropped the ball" and reacting to circular unprovable antagonisms.
Mods fully ‘on-it but unable to keep pace with the volume of posting for Merc threads but clearly not as much going down in the Red Bull thread.

Mod edits in bold italics…

[Farnborough]

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.

This is what you would like to understand for one reason or another! It probably fits your argument…

What I’m saying is that Mercedes didn’t do it on purpose! No team wants to get DSQed just to win maybe win a race! It’s only logical they’ll get inspected after that! Same goes for the example I gave for Red Bull! They didn’t manage to get it right whereas 9 other teams did it right! Did they do it on purpose? Probably not…

Half the forum is implying that Mercedes did it on purpose to gain an advantage or they “pushed things too much” which is wide off the mark since they couldn’t gain any advantage by running so low at such a bumpy track! This what “the Race” video also explains!
Simple factors played a role in this outcome:
1. One practice session
2. Bumpy track
3. Two Qualifyings and two races

Why didn’t the rest get caught? Only 4 samples, better race management and probably just luck! Ferrari was caught for a few tenths of a millimeter for example…

You didn't see the "bouncing" (new description for p*rp*ising, it serns) then ? This chassis still appears riddled with it, thats in addition to the track bumps obviously affecting all chassis.

The front end of floor, coupled with the suspension changes made from Monaco seem to have moved them go more contemporary characteristic, improved setup consistency being a primary gain. Doesn't appear to have changed much the rear though.

As soon as it got near terminal velocity it starts that familiar tyre impacted cadence of clattering the floor (a big wear contributor) where others are not showing this.

Seemed quite a step forward, this iteration of aero development, but emphatically not an answer to rear chassis dynamics in my observation of this race. Gàins likely more visible in coming races as it looks the most competitive it's been, but not a complete answer.

[Spoutnik]

[ValeVida46]

twitter.com

Definitely a weak point for the team. I don't see any reason why they should be losing time so consistently in the pitstops.

[K1Plus]

Plus very often they're conservative on strategy.
Still, even on their worst days, their bad strategy is better than a certain red team.