2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[ringo]

I think ride control as hamilton says is maybe what's at play along sith ride height.
Since 2022 redbull seem to have very fine control of their floor as it approaches the lower regions of compression.
In fact i hate to say it but i did enjoy watching the Redbull go through the esses at COTA each lap. It's a very mesmerizing car to watch. Super smooth.
Mexico would give a good idea of how real Mercedes performance was at COTA. But i am hoping that next year they improve the suspension. They have admitted openly that rheir ride is not the best.

[Luscion]

I think ride control as hamilton says is maybe what's at play along sith ride height.
Since 2022 redbull seem to have very fine control of their floor as it approaches the lower regions of compression.
In fact i hate to say it but i did enjoy watching the Redbull go through the esses at COTA each lap. It's a very mesmerizing car to watch. Super smooth.
Mexico would give a good idea of how real Mercedes performance was at COTA. But i am hoping that next year they improve the suspension. They have admitted openly that rheir ride is not the best.

They're going to put a lot more focus on the suspension for the W15 than they did with the 13 & 14. They said that there was a lot to find with suspension after upgrading their front suspension in Monaco. I'm just surprised it took a team like Merc two seasons to realize how basic their suspension was and how much it played a role in performance

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... /10481878/

"Shovlin expects bespoke suspension, particularly around the rear of the car, to be a major point of focus for the 2024 Mercedes when the budget cap and aerodynamic testing restrictions reset."

[AR3-GP]

Mexico would give a good idea of how real Mercedes performance was at COTA.

High altitude circuits are outliers. Red Bull won in Mexico (and Austria,Brazil) in many years where they were not competitive anywhere else.

[Big Tea]

and apparently they were off by 0.5mm... which is ridiculous. there are no performance benefits or additional risk to driver over what essentially is zero.
theres more tolerance on spacecraft this!

remember back in 1976 hunts car was reinstated despite being cms too wide!

0.05 that is, 0.5 would have been a lot.
1.05mm of wear compared to 1.00mm of wear may be a small benefit, but compared to a 'safe' setup the performance benefit would have been significant. They search for the limit for a reason.
Red bull apparently had hardly any plank wear. That would translate to a clear difference in ride height. 1mm wear is not due to 1mm too low ride height, it more likely to be 5mm or more. So on equal wear setups, I doubt Mercedes would have been this close.

Only semantics really, but it was worn by 0.05 too much, not in total. We have no idea how much was actually removed from what ever actually gets ground down, but it would probably have been on the safe side of the reg. It was not a measuring mistake, it was a miscalculation of how much they could afford to 'risk'. As most probably agree it was not an attempt to cheat by using something out of spec deliberatly

[TimW]

and apparently they were off by 0.5mm... which is ridiculous. there are no performance benefits or additional risk to driver over what essentially is zero.
theres more tolerance on spacecraft this!

remember back in 1976 hunts car was reinstated despite being cms too wide!

0.05 that is, 0.5 would have been a lot.
1.05mm of wear compared to 1.00mm of wear may be a small benefit, but compared to a 'safe' setup the performance benefit would have been significant. They search for the limit for a reason.
Red bull apparently had hardly any plank wear. That would translate to a clear difference in ride height. 1mm wear is not due to 1mm too low ride height, it more likely to be 5mm or more. So on equal wear setups, I doubt Mercedes would have been this close.

Only semantics really, but it was worn by 0.05 too much, not in total. We have no idea how much was actually removed from what ever actually gets ground down, but it would probably have been on the safe side of the reg. It was not a measuring mistake, it was a miscalculation of how much they could afford to 'risk'. As most probably agree it was not an attempt to cheat by using something out of spec deliberatly

Yes that is what I meant. Assuming the nominal plank starting thickness the limit is 1mm wear, so 0.05 mm over the limit means they had 1.05mm of wear in total.

[SuperCNJ]

I think there is simply too much speculation and too many factors to consider for there to be any meaningful debate on this. With such fine differences, for all we know, it could just be down to something like the different driving techniques of each driver, the lines they take etc. If one driver takes a line that hits a particular bump more so than another or brakes differently in a certain part of the track, it could potentially cause a difference in wear.

[Hammerfist]

and apparently they were off by 0.5mm... which is ridiculous. there are no performance benefits or additional risk to driver over what essentially is zero.
theres more tolerance on spacecraft this!

remember back in 1976 hunts car was reinstated despite being cms too wide!

0.05 that is, 0.5 would have been a lot.
1.05mm of wear compared to 1.00mm of wear may be a small benefit, but compared to a 'safe' setup the performance benefit would have been significant. They search for the limit for a reason.
Red bull apparently had hardly any plank wear. That would translate to a clear difference in ride height. 1mm wear is not due to 1mm too low ride height, it more likely to be 5mm or more. So on equal wear setups, I doubt Mercedes would have been this close.

Were they really that close though? In the sprint max gapped lewis as easily as he did back in spain. I suspect maxs brake issue is the main reason why it was so close. Funny how many people seem to wish that mercs performance was because of the lower ride height when in fact they performed like they always have. The fact they ran bigger wings always brings them closer anyway. Duh…

[RonMexico]

I think ride control as hamilton says is maybe what's at play along sith ride height.
Since 2022 redbull seem to have very fine control of their floor as it approaches the lower regions of compression.
In fact i hate to say it but i did enjoy watching the Redbull go through the esses at COTA each lap. It's a very mesmerizing car to watch. Super smooth.
Mexico would give a good idea of how real Mercedes performance was at COTA. But i am hoping that next year they improve the suspension. They have admitted openly that rheir ride is not the best.

They're going to put a lot more focus on the suspension for the W15 than they did with the 13 & 14. They said that there was a lot to find with suspension after upgrading their front suspension in Monaco. I'm just surprised it took a team like Merc two seasons to realize how basic their suspension was and how much it played a role in performance

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... /10481878/

"Shovlin expects bespoke suspension, particularly around the rear of the car, to be a major point of focus for the 2024 Mercedes when the budget cap and aerodynamic testing restrictions reset."

They had Russell clamouring for active suspension almost immediately after Bahrain in 2022. They knew but obviously lacked the skill/ability to bring a competitive suspension to fruition.

[Luscion]

Yes I know it's TikTok but here's Charles saying they gained nothing from their ride height in COTA.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMjpQyVMH/

If Charles and Lewis are both saying the same thing I believe them more over a media outlet getting second or even third hand information. I guess we'll see this weekend

[chrisc90]

Yes I know it's TikTok but here's Charles saying they gained nothing from their ride height in COTA.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMjpQyVMH/

If Charles and Lewis are both saying the same thing I believe them more over a media outlet getting second or even third hand information. I guess we'll see this weekend

To reverse the question....how much do you lose by raising the car up?

[Farnborough]

If they gained nothing by running too low, then they should have factored that in to their setup.

Then we could all have judged the performance against other legally specified finishers.

Really simple, they went too far in this case and know the penalty that's in place. Likely they'll ensure future diligence to comply.

[j_ste]

Yes I know it's TikTok but here's Charles saying they gained nothing from their ride height in COTA.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMjpQyVMH/

If Charles and Lewis are both saying the same thing I believe them more over a media outlet getting second or even third hand information. I guess we'll see this weekend

They know nothing, John Snow

Yes I know it's TikTok but here's Charles saying they gained nothing from their ride height in COTA.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMjpQyVMH/

If Charles and Lewis are both saying the same thing I believe them more over a media outlet getting second or even third hand information. I guess we'll see this weekend

To reverse the question....how much do you lose by raising the car up?

Thats the question that nobody but the teams can answer. But everyone seems comfortable in calling two drivers liars, in the process

[chrisc90]

They know nothing, John Snow

To reverse the question....how much do you lose by raising the car up?

Thats the question that nobody but the teams can answer. But everyone seems comfortable in calling two drivers liars, in the process

I think you will lose a decent bit of laptime. RB werent anywhere near their normal race pace on Sunday. A lot of teams were saying last year when all the porpoising stuff was kicking off that being able to run the car low was worth good laptime. Some teams werent as quick when they needed to raise the car to counter the porpoising.

To say you arent gaining anything by being as low as possible, im not fully buying to be fair. If there was nothing to gain - teams wouldnt chase getting the car as close to the ground as possible.

[214270]

For what it’s worth HAM seems to have confirmed the 0.05mm in an interview.

[trinidefender]

It was just said by the commentary team during FP1 that Leclerc and Hamilton were originally checked based on some data that the FIA had. What data that was wasn't specified.

It was then stated that Norris and Verstappen were checked after but it wasn't stated if they were checked based on data or based on them being the next best performing car/driver.