- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: Toto Wolff (Executive Director - Business), Paddy Lowe (Executive Director - Technical), Andy Cowell (Executive Director of Mercedes AMG Powertrains), Niki Lauda (Chairman), Bob Bell (TD), Aldo Costa (ED), Geoffrey Willis (Technology Director), Ron Meadows (SD), Andrew Shovlin (CRE), Simon Cole (CTE), Matthew Dane (CM)
Drivers: Nico Rosberg (6), Lewis Hamilton (44)
Team name: Mercedes AMG F1 Petronas
Damn! Was just about to post this, you beat me to it haha!Emerson.F wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOKa_VvoIQ
At first glance there is nothing super special about the humble log manifold so it was overlooked by the other teams. Sometimes engineers think too hard to solve simple problems and cause bigger more complex problems.Owen.C93 wrote:Although it's a good example of how being a manufacturer is an advantage, it's worth pointing out that the teams are at liberty to design their own exhaust manifolds as can be seen with all the other engines and their customers. I'm surprised Mercedes HPE even gave the other teams a copy of their exhausts at all.
Assuming that Mercedes haven't made an unprecedented contract where the other teams have to use their spec exhaust manifolds.
I think this might be it.l4mbch0ps wrote:It's also possible that other teams had anticipated required higher levels of efficiency re: the exhaust tuning to maintain turbo velocity. The split scroll Mercedes solution has shortened the tubing enough to potentially render the spaghetti manifolds obsolete perhaps?
That's why Force India were testing new sidepods in bahrainEmerson.F wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOKa_VvoIQ
The side pods are more or less the same in comparison to what they ran before, just check out the SFI-F1 thread. Force India will introduce a redesigned chassis in a couple of races (Canada). Force India doest have money to get priority manufacturing, that's why it takes them so long. From what I've read, McLaren are introducing a new Package for this weekend (China). I don't know about Williams.MercAMGF1Fans wrote:That's why Force India were testing new sidepods in bahrainEmerson.F wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOKa_VvoIQ
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/ ... 24c6b8.jpg
I think it's worth keeping mind that this year, with turbos, the exhausts are much more a part of the operation of the engine than before - I.e, it's used to drive the turbo (well, the gases are, not exhausts themselves).l4mbch0ps wrote:I think the teams are obviously at liberty within the rules to make their own exhaust manifolds, however they might be included in the PU package. They're a little bit more important of a part of the package in a turbo charged engine than NA, so they might be trickier to design. Teams might have jumped at that saying "oh great, we can divert our design focus elsewhere if they will design it for us" and now are kicking themselves.
Actually that is inncorrect. Before the exhaust manifolds were crucial to the tuning the engines powerband. The exhaust pulses had to be timed to be in phases to not interfere with the exhaust flows of other cylinders, also in a certain rpm range the exhaust headers create a situation where the exhaust pulses are out of phase and actually help to suck the gases out of the cylinder. It gets a lot more complicated than that but that is the general concept.NewtonMeter wrote:I think it's worth keeping mind that this year, with turbos, the exhausts are much more a part of the operation of the engine than before - I.e, it's used to drive the turbo (well, the gases are, not exhausts themselves).l4mbch0ps wrote:I think the teams are obviously at liberty within the rules to make their own exhaust manifolds, however they might be included in the PU package. They're a little bit more important of a part of the package in a turbo charged engine than NA, so they might be trickier to design. Teams might have jumped at that saying "oh great, we can divert our design focus elsewhere if they will design it for us" and now are kicking themselves.
Touchetheformula wrote:Damn! Was just about to post this, you beat me to it haha!Emerson.F wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOKa_VvoIQ
It still uses the wing pillars as part of the "nose"(crash structure). that's not "structurally normal" compared to the previous norm in f1.turbof1 wrote:Mercedes bent the nose in into a u shape. The mathmatical middle point of that nose floats on the maximum 185mm height point. So this isn't a twin tusk as the whole of the crash structure is involved.
When the nose came out I was thinking it was it was a twin tusk combined with clever use of the vanity panel. Then hamilton crashed and it turned out to be a structural normal nose.
So? Obviously it passed the crash test. So in my opinion there is no problem. Just smart interpretation of rules, that is all.Pierce89 wrote:It still uses the wing pillars as part of the "nose"(crash structure). that's not "structurally normal" compared to the previous norm in f1.turbof1 wrote:Mercedes bent the nose in into a u shape. The mathmatical middle point of that nose floats on the maximum 185mm height point. So this isn't a twin tusk as the whole of the crash structure is involved.
When the nose came out I was thinking it was it was a twin tusk combined with clever use of the vanity panel. Then hamilton crashed and it turned out to be a structural normal nose.