2024 Aston Martin | Aramco F1 Team

[Sherrinford]

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.

In my opinion, which is not the absolute truth, the car has improved since last year only aerodynamically and has gained performance from there. But for everything else it seems to have gone backwards. If you compare the barhain 23 and barhain 24 turns you will notice how amr23 has much more apex and that it is much closer to the curbs. The fact that a car goes slower does not automatically mean that it has more apex, there is a difference in stability and confidence in the drivers that is not there today. Amr24 would win for sure,but it would be more of a victory of strength due to the extra year of development . As I said, lamr23 squeezed to the max by the drivers showed no signs of tire wear, no instability. Amr24 can't be pushed to the limit and burns the tires. On top of everything else. I don't know if I explained well

[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.

In my opinion, which is not the absolute truth, the car has improved since last year only aerodynamically and has gained performance from there. But for everything else it seems to have gone backwards. If you compare the barhain 23 and barhain 24 turns you will notice how amr23 has much more apex and that it is much closer to the curbs. The fact that a car goes slower does not automatically mean that it has more apex, there is a difference in stability and confidence in the drivers that is not there today. Amr24 would win for sure,but it would be more of a victory of strength due to the extra year of development . As I said, lamr23 squeezed to the max by the drivers showed no signs of tire wear, no instability. Amr24 can't be pushed to the limit and burns the tires. On top of everything else. I don't know if I explained well

not sure what you mean by ¨more APEX". Do you mean it is closer to the apex of the corner ? In corneres that you have to accelerate out of, going deep allows you to straighten the car out sooner and help with the rear traction. If you're closer to the apex, takes longer to straighten the car out.

[peewon]

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.

Yeah, McLaren and RB seemed to have made suspension a key focus of their development from the start. I think Newey personally only focused on the suspension for these regs. They have admitted AM struggles to maintain a stable platform over kerbs and bumps which is why it has inconsistent downforce and setup issues.

Maybe Mercedes is able to make better compromises because their front end is more sorted with the flexi wings. The only time AM looked to have good front end was first half of '23 when they had the flexi wing.

[collindsilva]

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.

Can someone explain what he means by this sentence "According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September"

[KimiRai]

If there's a thing I like is how this thread is totally focused on technical stuff and car performance instead of politics like some other teams. I guess you could say it makes sense as that is AM's biggest shortcoming at the moment, but also true that the driver picture is stable for the medium term and there is no interference from the company business. I hope that's a positive for the future...

[diffuser]

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.

Can someone explain what he means by this sentence "According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September"

When it went to manufacturing. That would be 8-12 weeks prior to the Austin race. That race was after the 2 week in October...minimum mid August for that package to have gone to manufacturing. Although, there was a month break between the Austin race and the previous race. So they might not gave needed the full month to have that package ready. Still sticking with mid August.

[-wkst-]

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.

Can someone explain what he means by this sentence "According to Krack they changed philosophy in the moment the package for Austin was approved, so around September"

With the Austin package they tried to combine the Suzuka und Budapest floor. Once this package was finished in the tunnel and CFD, ready for production, they started to develop this new route, going for useable instead of peak DF.

[diffuser]

If there's a thing I like is how this thread is totally focused on technical stuff and car performance instead of politics like some other teams. I guess you could say it makes sense as that is AM's biggest shortcoming at the moment, but also true that the driver picture is stable for the medium term and there is no interference from the company business. I hope that's a positive for the future...

Wonder if has to do with AMR down trending performance, all the bandwagonners have left or have their focus elsewhere?