Mercedes GP MGP W01

[ggajic]

Red Bull doesn't even have F-duct. They even have less horse power engine compared to others. Yet they are able to run faster then anyone. No matter how good nose or front wing are - remember that vortexes form at the end - trailing edges. Superior rear end is what makes Red Bull currently fastest. I hope that Mercedes will manage to solve this issue. However I don`t expect any other team to run pull rod.. Btw. Mercedes also introduced wider rear end diffuser which might be causing some loss of speed on straights..

[vealio]

Anyone else surprised that Mercedes obviously spend not much time to refine the front and rear wing? Renault come up with a new FW almost every GP (McLaren and Red Bull too), while the FW of the MGP has maybe changed only very slighly since the beginning of the season. The rear wing actually looks to 99% the same as last years Brawn.
Why do Mercedes not use the potential they have there (or is there nothing left?)

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Anyone else surprised that Mercedes obviously spend not much time to refine the front and rear wing? Renault come up with a new FW almost every GP (McLaren and Red Bull too), while the FW of the MGP has maybe changed only very slighly since the beginning of the season. The rear wing actually looks to 99% the same as last years Brawn.
Why do Mercedes not use the potential they have there (or is there nothing left?)

Yes this stumps me too.
If they have a drag issue, why not look to the Front and rear wing?

[ggajic]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lo%C3%AFc_Bigois

I don't know if this is current chief of aerodynamics in Mercedes GP - but I strongly doubt that he can match skills of Adrian Newey. Not to mention Rory Byrne. Btw. Byrne designed every car in which Schumacher won championship. So they better get him on board. Otherwise it would be shame that team with one of the most powerful engine lacks top straight line speeds..

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Loic Bigois is class. BGP001?

The problem is ideas that work. And alot of what they are doing isnt working.
Remember Mercedes GP have the smallest available resources of McLaren, Ferrari and Renault. Newey is a one off, its the way he works thats so unlike anyone else in F1.

Comparing Bigois to anyone else in F1 and he has a track record thats second to none.
Byrne is gone, and Newey wont be around forever.

Lets see where MErcedes stand next year with the resource restriction they appear to be operating under this year.

[ggajic]

BGP001? How about Honda? Or even better - Minardi? BGP001 benefited from fact that Mercedes engines were lighter and far more fuel efficient then Honda engines. Also if rules were clear, I am wondering how that car would behave without DDD? I don't like idea, but I think that BGP001 will be his only car to win both drivers and constructors championship. Yes, Byrne has retired, but he did so back in 1995. so I do not see reason why he should not come out of retirement once more

[raymondu999]

I don't see how the Brawn would've been the championship car last year without a DDD. That is a opinion that we will never be able to prove. Also, engine weights are standardised, I believe, and so everyone is running on the engines with the same weight.

[Confused_Andy]

I don't see how the Brawn would've been the championship car last year without a DDD. That is a opinion that we will never be able to prove. Also, engine weights are standardised, I believe, and so everyone is running on the engines with the same weight.

You missed the fact that Toyota & Williams also started the season DD, the Brawn was just an overall better and more efficient package even though it was a botched job.

[PlatinumZealot]

The Brawn showed that there front wing design was the way to go. Most of the cars have some variation of he Brawn front wing. My guess it that the Mercedes front wing was very developed from the beginning!

[aral]

I don't see how the Brawn would've been the championship car last year without a DDD. That is a opinion that we will never be able to prove. Also, engine weights are standardised, I believe, and so everyone is running on the engines with the same weight.

Cylinder capacity is standardised, so therefore stroke, but the weights are NOT standardised. Any weight difference is made up by ballasting the car. In my opinion, it would be impossible to dictate a standardised weigh for engines!

[aral]

The Brawn showed that there front wing design was the way to go. Most of the cars have some variation of he Brawn front wing. My guess it that the Mercedes front wing was very developed from the beginning!

Odd statement! There is really no similarity between the front wings of different cars, but layout would be dictated by rules on mmeasurement. But obviously, Brawn decided that their wing last year was optimised, and stuck with it for 2010. But even this has changed since testing. They really should have gone back to the drawing board.

[wesley123]

The Brawn showed that there front wing design was the way to go. Most of the cars have some variation of he Brawn front wing. My guess it that the Mercedes front wing was very developed from the beginning!

Odd statement! There is really no similarity between the front wings of different cars, but layout would be dictated by rules on mmeasurement. But obviously, Brawn decided that their wing last year was optimised, and stuck with it for 2010. But even this has changed since testing. They really should have gone back to the drawing board.

No, it is true. Compare renaults new second deck, looks pretty similair to what merc runs, red bull went similair, FI and others too. they all copied the brawn idea in some way. and the double end plate idea is copied by most too.

[marcush.]

I don't see how the Brawn would've been the championship car last year without a DDD. That is a opinion that we will never be able to prove. Also, engine weights are standardised, I believe, and so everyone is running on the engines with the same weight.

Cylinder capacity is standardised, so therefore stroke, but the weights are NOT standardised. Any weight difference is made up by ballasting the car. In my opinion, it would be impossible to dictate a standardised weigh for engines!

not correct :
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 9/fia.html

5.4.1 overall weight of the engine must be a minimum of 95kg...
5.4.2 the centre of gravity must be 165mm above reference plane..

even sideways Cof G position is specified..

[aral]

I don't see how the Brawn would've been the championship car last year without a DDD. That is a opinion that we will never be able to prove. Also, engine weights are standardised, I believe, and so everyone is running on the engines with the same weight.

Cylinder capacity is standardised, so therefore stroke, but the weights are NOT standardised. Any weight difference is made up by ballasting the car. In my opinion, it would be impossible to dictate a standardised weigh for engines!

not correct :
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 9/fia.html

5.4.1 overall weight of the engine must be a minimum of 95kg...
5.4.2 the centre of gravity must be 165mm above reference plane..

even sideways Cof G position is specified..

Where does it say the max weight must also be 95kg? The min weight introduced so as to avoid the use of Berylium and other exotic lightweight materials. You will find that due to castings, strengtheners etc, very few engines, if any, are down the the minimum weight. Therefore engine weight is NOT standardised.
The c of g position is fixed so as to be ABOVE the reference plane, so you could have a light bottom end and a heavy top end, so as to bring c of g up, or vice versa, if you wish to lower the c of g to the lowest acceptable position. Look how Ferrari went about lowering theirs, so as they were the only ones to do this, it means that they must have had a heavier top end??

[bugref]

That was a small brake fire creating the smoke. Not the tyre.

To me it seemed like tire, but I guess I am wrong. I will have to find recording of race somewhere to check it again, but even Schumacher said that his rear tires lost pressure in formation lap and that is one of the reason he could hold Button for one lap. Of course - this is not excuse, McLarens could keep pace with Red Bull, but since so many people are claiming that the nose of the car is problem, I might suggest that problem might not be at all with nose. After all / longer wheelbase solved understeering problem, yet car is still lacking pace..

They have solve the understeer problem with the longer wheelbase car, yet the car is still lacks pace, nice observation. maybe because the drooping nose was still present in a long wheel base car, right. no matter how theyd change the car but still their problem of straight line speed was not solved, what do you think is the reason? base on my observation looking at the car, whether its a long or short wheelbase, speed has always been the issue of this car, they have made a number of radical changes but theres no significant success at all. if you look at the whole body of the car they have change most of it but there is one part of the car they failed to remodify, the drooping nose. when I look at the car of merc, I dont think they have an issue in aerodynamic on the cockpit side of the car, they are almost as identical to the maclaren. So I dont think they have a problem in these side of the car. I can only speculate that the designer developed a car that emphasizes so much on the downforce, thats why they design this drooping nose, but on the other hand, miscalculated the factor of what we now know as DRAG, I believe they failed to consider this factor, thereby the car suffer so much in a straight line speed Speed. Look at the redbull, without F-duct, slower engine, but still fast in all aspect of the circuit. Newey did brilliantly design a car, where a downforce and straight line speed can coexist without compromising either one of it, and resulted to a well balance car, than can perform well in every circuit in the calendar.