Team: Bob Bell (TD), Aldo Costa (ED), Geoff Willis (Technology Director), Andrew Shovlin (CRE), Simon Cole (CTE), Ron Meadows (SD), Matthew Deane (CM), Ross Brawn (TP), Nick Fry (CEO), Toto Wolff (Exec Director), Andy Cowell (MD of powertrain),
Drivers: Nico Rosberg (9), Lewis Hamilton (10)
Team name: Mercedes AMG Petronas
Do you have sources you can share for this?scuderiafan wrote:From what I've collected, it's more of a conventional setup. I know that last years was based around some funky hydraulic system, and this years using conventional springs and dampers and such.
Of course it is guessing from our part. We are a technical forum, but we don't have any data on it. Teams always have run a bit rake, as it is beneficial. The problem though is that if you run too much you'll get tyre squirt and airflow from the sides of the car interfering with the airflow coming from underneath the car, removing downforce instead of adding to it. In the "ground effect" era they indeed had the best solution, running skirts. That is forbidden and so with no bodywork allowed teams have to rely on the exhaust gasses, not an optimal solution at all, but they take what they have. I know you know all of this, but I think the exhaust gasses play a more prominent role to get more downforce. Teams are looking to extract the maximum out of difficult placed exhausts; I believe the more they can extract and can get under the floor, the higher the optical point lies of optimal rake. Of course I am basing this on pure reasoning; I would even piss off Briatore in order to get a hand onto the data.Arthur Craft wrote:To stay on topic, eventhough the point you made is coherent, I'm not entirely sure that more rake definitely proves how successfull a team(in this case W04) is sealing the diffuser. It might be, but I'm just not sure yet and it would be nice if some F1 engineer confirmed it in any of those, quite rare unfortunately, technical interviews
n smikle wrote:The suspension is actually much simpler and more workable than the 2012 suspension.
scuderiafan wrote:From what I've collected, it's more of a conventional setup. I know that last years was based around some funky hydraulic system, and this years using conventional springs and dampers and such.richard_leeds wrote:In what way, are there any known specifics ?n smikle wrote:The suspension is actually much simpler and more workable than the 2012 suspension.
Not so fast....mantikos wrote:
In fact conventional wisdom is that Costa 'fixed' the interlinked suspension...and the use of interlinked suspension was discussed a few pages ago - there was an interview with someone from the team who mentioned the dampers used etc.
Heh, I can't help but giggle at the irony here.n smikle wrote:Not so fast....
proof?
Agreed, I think Oz will be a very important race for Mercedes. Not a high downforce track, not very high temperatures predicted and maybe some top teams still struggling (?). It is a great opportunity for Mercedes to win a race.Ferraripilot wrote:Be interesting to see if Nico runs with a monkey seat as he did Sunday (on and off) and if Lewis runs minus one as he did Saturday. I suspect the difference found in running one will be felt differently per driver and their setup preferences.
Temps on Oz should be similar to Saturday running temps during test 2. Oz is not particularly hard on anything but the mechanical grip of this car should make itself known in certain areas. I wonder how smooth the circuit is this year though. Lots of track changing/evolution too.
re suspension:
Whether or not W04s suspension is not only front to back connected but also diagonally connected like W03 has yet to be known. If I had to guess, I conjecture the level of interconnection remains but the system itself is simplified as has been alluded. Lewis and Nico have both stated the mechanical grip is excellent with this car and if they were running a more traditional front to back connected arrangement I do not see how the system could be mechanically declared as better or worse than Mp4-27 which Lewis has stated W04 is better mechanically. W04s mechanical grip is also made quite evident by its throttle application in S3 at Barcelona where witnesses and videos alike yield posititive and immediate throttle application.
re front wing end plates:
W04s end plates have remained similar for some years now in that they deflect air around the tires, but the endplates are designed with such horizontal curvature that they on their own merit yield downforce as well albeit probably a small amount. We're seeing several teams opt for end plates which employ outboard openings that direct air inward towards the main wing outer elements yielding some downforce at the other elementsbut with less air directed around the wheels. Is there any advantage in going with one vs the other? Is it more important to create a wake around the front wheels and create almost a gurney with redirecting endplates thus making flow underneath and at the curved areas under the front wing more effective? Other teams end plates seems to create more drag on the front wing.
Mika1 wrote:Bob Bell confirms the F1W04 has more rear downforce, glad to hear that!
http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news ... 30815.htmlFerraripilot wrote:Mika1 wrote:Bob Bell confirms the F1W04 has more rear downforce, glad to hear that!
Link?
It is a Rosberg quote though. He is typically optimistic. But if it is true, it backs a lot of what we have been saying over the last year. The tire issues were part of the result of a lack in rear downforce.Pandabeer wrote:"Wir haben viel mehr Abtrieb auf der Hinterachse als 2012. Das Auto klebt regelrecht auf der Straße. Das dürfte auch den Reifen nicht schaden", so Rosberg gegenüber 'Autobild motorsport'.
Translated: We have a lote more rear DF compared to 2012. The car downright sticks to the track which should in no way hurt the tyres.
Seems very positive.
