2024 Aston Martin | Aramco F1 Team

[diffuser]

3 of this 8 podiums were achieved after the front wing ban. I think this explanation is too simple, moreover I think noone here can judge if a floor is primitive or extremely developed. At least their first floor in 2023 gave them stable DF that the car was very predictable.

And as the flexiwings are back and obviously not banned for 2025, they can build their new car with the same philosophy as 2023 again. Strong in slow speed, with the bending also balanced in high speed. Let's see what Mercedes is doing at the rear, AMR at the front suspension. It's far from over.

It's also true when comparing yourself against you're previous year's model. We clearly see that the AMR24 is 1 second faster than the AMR23, so they did make it faster. The problem, is most teams improved more. AMR24 didn´t improve after Suzuka.

Yes and no.

In 2023 they were much more competitive in the race compared to the qualification. In 2024 its the other way round.

As the drivers and engineers said multiple times this year: the AMR24 can use the fresh rubber very good, with the effect that it uses too much of them in the race...

The working window of the car was much bigger in early 2023 too.

I must admit, there are alot of things I don't understand but that REALLY baffles me.

Someone mentioned that they ran alot of WING last year. I'll add they were super draggy in the straights to boot. If a car is slower in the straights, it's braking from lower speeds, less wheel spin out of corners on acceleration and that results in the tires getting consumed less.

In 2023 they made their speed from low speed acceleration. They tried getting better at high speed but in doing so they went completely to sucking at low speed acceleration, BTW I don't think what they did to make themselves more slippery caused them to be useless coming out slow corners. In summary, the car's traits put it's optimum setup in a window that just consumes tires more. At least that's part of it. If they improve slow speed acceleration , it will cure their tire consumption issue.

[-wkst-]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-o ... /10683113/

Key sentence:

Sources suggest that he (Cowell) has helped empower a new sharpness of focus that success comes from having the most useable platform - even if on paper that does not mean unleashing the highest downforce numbers.

Krack once again stated that in qualifying their weaknesses are masked due to new tyres, but in the races they come out...

[TyreSlip]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-o ... /10683113/

Key sentence:

Sources suggest that he (Cowell) has helped empower a new sharpness of focus that success comes from having the most useable platform - even if on paper that does not mean unleashing the highest downforce numbers.

Krack once again stated that in qualifying their weaknesses are masked due to new tyres, but in the races they come out...

It sounds like Cowell is taking a more hands-on approach to development guidance than the typical CEO.

[Rikrikrik]

They need prove something next year, they just talk and talk every single time and they not show any result.

[diffuser]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-o ... /10683113/

Key sentence:

Sources suggest that he (Cowell) has helped empower a new sharpness of focus that success comes from having the most useable platform - even if on paper that does not mean unleashing the highest downforce numbers.

Krack once again stated that in qualifying their weaknesses are masked due to new tyres, but in the races they come out...

It sounds like Cowell is taking a more hands-on approach to development guidance than the typical CEO.

Not sure if you're take on that comment is the same as mine .... as you know, Cowell was a PU guy for many years. He isn't gonna wake up 1 morning and be a chassis guru. The other thing is, with Cardile and Newey coming, what is the incentive for him? If I look at where I work, most of the GREAT managers are guys that came up from the engineering ranks. With Cowell coming from a PU back ground, I'm sure his "taking a more hands-on approach to development guidance" is not to be involved in development but to understand it better, be a more effective manager/CEO.

[Sherrinford]

It's also true when comparing yourself against you're previous year's model. We clearly see that the AMR24 is 1 second faster than the AMR23, so they did make it faster. The problem, is most teams improved more. AMR24 didn´t improve after Suzuka.

Yes and no.

In 2023 they were much more competitive in the race compared to the qualification. In 2024 its the other way round.

As the drivers and engineers said multiple times this year: the AMR24 can use the fresh rubber very good, with the effect that it uses too much of them in the race...

The working window of the car was much bigger in early 2023 too.

I must admit, there are alot of things I don't understand but that REALLY baffles me.

Someone mentioned that they ran alot of WING last year. I'll add they were super draggy in the straights to boot. If a car is slower in the straights, it's braking from lower speeds, less wheel spin out of corners on acceleration and that results in the tires getting consumed less.

In 2023 they made their speed from low speed acceleration. They tried getting better at high speed but in doing so they went completely to sucking at low speed acceleration, BTW I don't think what they did to make themselves more slippery caused them to be useless coming out slow corners. In summary, the car's traits put it's optimum setup in a window that just consumes tires more. At least that's part of it. If they improve slow speed acceleration , it will cure their tire consumption issue.

I repeat that comparing the laps is useless for me, you have to look at the race pace and the strong points of the cars. Today amr23 or amr24 would win, amr24 for sure, but many strong points have been lost. For example lamr23 had much more apex in the curves, or it did not have all those vibrations and distrusts that give the drivers. Or again, tire wear and you can't just focus on the fact that it was going slower. If the car is "squeezed" to the limit and does not wear tires, it means that it is a car that manages very good tires, on the contrary, he manages them badly.

[diffuser]

Yes and no.

In 2023 they were much more competitive in the race compared to the qualification. In 2024 its the other way round.

As the drivers and engineers said multiple times this year: the AMR24 can use the fresh rubber very good, with the effect that it uses too much of them in the race...

The working window of the car was much bigger in early 2023 too.

I must admit, there are alot of things I don't understand but that REALLY baffles me.

Someone mentioned that they ran alot of WING last year. I'll add they were super draggy in the straights to boot. If a car is slower in the straights, it's braking from lower speeds, less wheel spin out of corners on acceleration and that results in the tires getting consumed less.

In 2023 they made their speed from low speed acceleration. They tried getting better at high speed but in doing so they went completely to sucking at low speed acceleration, BTW I don't think what they did to make themselves more slippery caused them to be useless coming out slow corners. In summary, the car's traits put it's optimum setup in a window that just consumes tires more. At least that's part of it. If they improve slow speed acceleration , it will cure their tire consumption issue.

I repeat that comparing the laps is useless for me, you have to look at the race pace and the strong points of the cars. Today amr23 or amr24 would win, amr24 for sure, but many strong points have been lost. For example lamr23 had much more apex in the curves, or it did not have all those vibrations and distrusts that give the drivers. Or again, tire wear and you can't just focus on the fact that it was going slower. If the car is "squeezed" to the limit and does not wear tires, it means that it is a car that manages very good tires, on the contrary, he manages them badly.

The AMR24 is faster that the AMR23 in APEX speeds in all types of corners. No Question in that. If the AMR24 went around corners at the same speed as the AMR23, it's tires probably would last as long if not longer. it would also drive better.

The Difference is when you compare the AMR23 to other 2023 cars and when you do the same for the AMR24. Like I said the AMR24 has fallen behind almost everyone in slow corners because their traction is so poor.

Slow corners is just 1 of thier problem. Change of direction is another challenge. The also need more DF that is more consistent across speeds and corner types. If they solve all that, the race pace would follow.

Atleast that's my thinking until someone tells something different that makes sense to me

[-wkst-]

I think you dont understand what Sherrinford means.

When he says the AMR23 was better in x or y, he always means in comparison to the rest of field, not directly compared to the AMR24. Direct comparisons make no sense anyway.

[diffuser]

I think you dont understand what Sherrinford means.

When he says the AMR23 was better in x or y, he always means in comparison to the rest of field, not directly compared to the AMR24. Direct comparisons make no sense anyway.

That's just a small part of what I said... I've already had that discussion with him about race pace, how it's hard to know when drivers are flat out and when they're coasting. I firmly believe that the car's strengths decide, how to setup the car to go fast and that is not necessarily the best way to give the car the fastest race pace.
BTW, I'm not saying I'm right. I´m just saying what makes sense, to me, in my attempt to understand what might be occurring. Thinking out loud if you will....I welcome ideas.

[-wkst-]

Michael Schmidt (Auto Motor Sport):

With every update they brought, the car was more difficult to drive, the more difficult to find a setup which the driver can trust.

The aero-map is a pointy mountain, the car shines in a certain type of corner but looses too much time in all others.

To generate a reasonable amount of DF they drove the car at the back as low as possible. Only Mercedes drove as low at the back.

The characteristics of the two cars were similar, both liked it fast and cold, only then the degredation of the rear tyres were ok.

Bob Bell is the new man in charge and he is one of the few in F1 who has an overview of the whole car (Schmidt).

Change from peak DF to useable DF, therefor they needed to redefine their development goals.

Everything depends on if you understand what to do to get the car into the correct working window.

Sounds easy, but it easn't. Everyone tries to make the working window as big as possible. With every update which gives you more DF the window will be automatically smaller (quote Krack).

According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September.

They can't write off 2025, no matter how important 2026 is, because they need to prove themselves that they learned from their mistakes (quote Krack).

AMR can't afford to drive at the back of the field (quote Krack).



two things with a pinch of salt:

- Dan Fallows was moved back into the aero department and reports to Bell

According to McCullough in autumn, Fallows always reported to Bell, like him. Other reports said moreover that he works for AM Technologies now, that he doesn't count for the cap. Which makes sense. But who knows...

- Andrew Green was responsible as the head of the technical team for the success in 2023 and was moved aside as he didn't come along with Whitmarsh. A mistake from the present view.

Don't know if we can say he was "responsible", or the ideas Fallows, brought from RBR, were...

[peewon]

Michael Schmidt (Auto Motor Sport):

With every update they brought, the car was more difficult to drive, the more difficult to find a setup which the driver can trust.

The aero-map is a pointy mountain, the car shines in a certain type of corner but looses too much time in all others.

To generate a reasonable amount of DF they drove the car at the back as low as possible. Only Mercedes drove as low at the back.

The characteristics of the two cars were similar, both liked it fast and cold, only then the degredation of the rear tyres were ok.

Bob Bell is the new man in charge and he is one of the few in F1 who has an overview of the whole car (Schmidt).

Change from peak DF to useable DF, therefor they needed to redefine their development goals.

Everything depends on if you understand what to do to get the car into the correct working window.

Sounds easy, but it easn't. Everyone tries to make the working window as big as possible. With every update which gives you more DF the window will be automatically smaller (quote Krack).

According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September.

They can't write off 2025, no matter how important 2026 is, because they need to prove themselves that they learned from their mistakes (quote Krack).

AMR can't afford to drive at the back of the field (quote Krack).



two things with a pinch of salt:

- Dan Fallows was moved back into the aero department and reports to Bell

According to McCullough in autumn, Fallows always reported to Bell, like him. Other reports said moreover that he works for AM Technologies now, that he doesn't count for the cap. Which makes sense. But who knows...

- Andrew Green was responsible as the head of the technical team for the success in 2023 and was moved aside as he didn't come along with Whitmarsh. A mistake from the present view.

Don't know if we can say he was "responsible", or the ideas Fallows, brought from RBR, were...

I think AM are deluding themselves by thinking its only a performance window issue. Mercedes, even in limited range of conditions, actually was the fastest car and much more competitive overall. AM wasnt even within 0.5s of pole anywhere. They were miles off everywhere.

As for the team structure, its always a risk when you have so many people who are revered in their own way of politics and ego getting in the way. This where I think Krack should do better but I fear he lacks the F1 experience and gravitas to do so.

[Rikrikrik]

Interesting... Fallow was moved to aerodynamic sector now.

"After the upgrade failure in Austin, Aston Martin took consequences. Technical director Dan Fallows was reassigned to the aerodynamics department. He now reports to his successor, Bob Bell. He is one of the most experienced engineers in the industry and one of the few who still has an overall understanding of the car. Just like the former technical director Andy Green, who was last responsible for the successful model at the beginning of 2023.

Aston Martin had a year and a half to understand the problems and learn from them for the 2025 car. According to Krack, development on it began the moment the Austin upgrade was approved. So sometime in September.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... lick-2025/

[SSJ4]

I’ve always had disdain for Tom McCullough. Felt like he speaks the most and delivers the least. He and fallow had differing opinions on mercedes rear suspension for this year.

Glad they didn’t get rid of fallows fully. You don’t spend all that time at red bull without being capable

[diffuser]

Michael Schmidt (Auto Motor Sport):

With every update they brought, the car was more difficult to drive, the more difficult to find a setup which the driver can trust.

The aero-map is a pointy mountain, the car shines in a certain type of corner but looses too much time in all others.

To generate a reasonable amount of DF they drove the car at the back as low as possible. Only Mercedes drove as low at the back.

The characteristics of the two cars were similar, both liked it fast and cold, only then the degredation of the rear tyres were ok.

Bob Bell is the new man in charge and he is one of the few in F1 who has an overview of the whole car (Schmidt).

Change from peak DF to useable DF, therefor they needed to redefine their development goals.

Everything depends on if you understand what to do to get the car into the correct working window.

Sounds easy, but it easn't. Everyone tries to make the working window as big as possible. With every update which gives you more DF the window will be automatically smaller (quote Krack).

According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September.

They can't write off 2025, no matter how important 2026 is, because they need to prove themselves that they learned from their mistakes (quote Krack).

AMR can't afford to drive at the back of the field (quote Krack).



two things with a pinch of salt:

- Dan Fallows was moved back into the aero department and reports to Bell

According to McCullough in autumn, Fallows always reported to Bell, like him. Other reports said moreover that he works for AM Technologies now, that he doesn't count for the cap. Which makes sense. But who knows...

- Andrew Green was responsible as the head of the technical team for the success in 2023 and was moved aside as he didn't come along with Whitmarsh. A mistake from the present view.

Don't know if we can say he was "responsible", or the ideas Fallows, brought from RBR, were...

They're written stuff that has been wrong before. I'd wait to see an official statement from AMR to believe that Fallows is back. In the mean time, his linkedin says: ¨
Chief Engineer
Aston Martin Performance Technologies
Nov 2024 - Present · 2 mos
Silverstone, England, United Kingdom¨

Not sure why we care about Green. Not like anyone is running out to hire him from "Aston Martin Performance Technologies".


Merc and AMR running their cars so low to the ground is an indication of not being able to generate enough DF, therefore, they need to get closer to the ground. That kind of points the problem away from the Suspension and more towards the floor being lacking.

[Sherrinford]

Michael Schmidt (Auto Motor Sport):

With every update they brought, the car was more difficult to drive, the more difficult to find a setup which the driver can trust.

The aero-map is a pointy mountain, the car shines in a certain type of corner but looses too much time in all others.

To generate a reasonable amount of DF they drove the car at the back as low as possible. Only Mercedes drove as low at the back.

The characteristics of the two cars were similar, both liked it fast and cold, only then the degredation of the rear tyres were ok.

Bob Bell is the new man in charge and he is one of the few in F1 who has an overview of the whole car (Schmidt).

Change from peak DF to useable DF, therefor they needed to redefine their development goals.

Everything depends on if you understand what to do to get the car into the correct working window.

Sounds easy, but it easn't. Everyone tries to make the working window as big as possible. With every update which gives you more DF the window will be automatically smaller (quote Krack).

According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September.

They can't write off 2025, no matter how important 2026 is, because they need to prove themselves that they learned from their mistakes (quote Krack).

AMR can't afford to drive at the back of the field (quote Krack).



two things with a pinch of salt:

- Dan Fallows was moved back into the aero department and reports to Bell

According to McCullough in autumn, Fallows always reported to Bell, like him. Other reports said moreover that he works for AM Technologies now, that he doesn't count for the cap. Which makes sense. But who knows...

- Andrew Green was responsible as the head of the technical team for the success in 2023 and was moved aside as he didn't come along with Whitmarsh. A mistake from the present view.

Don't know if we can say he was "responsible", or the ideas Fallows, brought from RBR, were...

I think AM are deluding themselves by thinking its only a performance window issue. Mercedes, even in limited range of conditions, actually was the fastest car and much more competitive overall. AM wasnt even within 0.5s of pole anywhere. They were miles off everywhere.

As for the team structure, its always a risk when you have so many people who are revered in their own way of politics and ego getting in the way. This where I think Krack should do better but I fear he lacks the F1 experience and gravitas to do so.

I agree, it's not a window of use issue, the car has never come to life anywhere and in any grand prix. It seems to me that the car has a mechanical problem, the fact that the flow viz was disconnected from the tests at the beginning of the season indicates that at the front they are not fully certain of what is happening. Then there's everything else, including the Mercedes rear suspension. But if that were the only problem, Mercedes wouldn't have won any races this year.