2015 Testing Comparative Performance Speculation Thread

[turbof1]

There are some numbers circulating that Mercedes had around 60hp more then the competition, which equals around a second a lap.

And then there's this thing called fuel consumption and weight. All in favour of guess who.

Mercedes definitely will have compromised on their aero settings in favor of lower drag-lower fuel consumption during a lot of the races. Infact we know they took away downforce at the Russian GP because they got scared of the Williams.

Admittingly, you made a correct assertion about the Spanish GP. We know that Red Bull too compromised on max DF.

[Chene_Mostert]

I did not want to admit it myself last year, but Mercedes had a very good aerodynamic package. You could see all the little nuances; the curved front wings, the little bat wing under the nose, the forked control arms, the trapezoidal air intakes, ultra tight side pods, the monkey throne, fancy rear wing, fancy brake ducts... Everything you could see on a RedBull the Mercedes had it, with sugar on top. They have a fantastic chassis. No doubt all those chefs were really working in those two years leading up to these regs.

On another note... I really came here for the race simulation graphs. Who was doing it last year? Where is he?

No,
there is no way to judge their Aero and chassis package with such a big PU advantage. we can only judge Aero and chassis when all PU's performance are closer.

Obviously you are looking at merc aero/design features with rose tinted glasses (suggested by your profile pic) and not thinking laterally and definitely not analysing critically.
If Merc looked like Sauber you would still consider it to be the best aero package out there.

Chene we already talked about this yesterday and in the past: He perhaps might make assumptions, but you are doing just the same. You are telling that there's no way of judging their aero and chassis package, but you are doing exactly that by saying it's all about their PU.

So we are at that moment again: I'm kindly asking you now to stop telling people they can't judge while you are yourself judging. If you don't agree with their arguments, then you'll have to bring counterfacts yourself.

There are some numbers circulating that Mercedes had around 60hp more then the competition, which equals around a second a lap. That's exactly what they had in advantage last year to red bull, which could indicate that if we take that second advantage away, that they have roughly equal chassis and aero performance. We don't know that for sure, but like SectorOne pointed out very nicely, Mercedes had a big advantage at both Singapore and Monaco, the circuits where PU power means the least and downforce the most.

There are other arguments in favour of this infact. Red Bull infact copied Mercedes their RW-endplates, meaning that Mercedes indeed had alteast some solutions which were better then Red Bull's.

Totally agree TurboF1
At no point am I telling users they can not judge, also if you read my comments you would find that they mostly consists of counter arguments and you will also find that the "for" Merc comments lack a serious amount of "counter facts" to my arguments.
My point is: I do not think Mercedes AMG F1 is unbeatable this season, guess we will know in November? Might be one of the most exiting seasons in decades

[Jordan44]

But, in fairness, the bmw engine didn't have nearly the advantage the Mercedes did last year- both in terms of pure power and ability to push lap after lap.

However you are right about the customer cars last year.

I did slightly wonder if Mercedes lucked into fixing their tyre wear problems last year. Their qualifying pace in 2013 was surely aided by the thing that hampered them in the race, I.e an aggressive tyre heating ability. Last year, Pirelli went consciously conservative in order to manage the increased torque, but that fact could have helped Mercedes.

I too wondered this, but they seemed confident about 2014 for a long long time. It's not like they suddenly became confident after testing with the prototype tyres for the first time that it worked for them. It was a clear weakness to them in 2013 and I don't think they'd have just hoped that it would go away with so much expectation on them. They would have certainly invested it.

[Chene_Mostert]

There are some numbers circulating that Mercedes had around 60hp more then the competition, which equals around a second a lap.

And then there's this thing called fuel consumption and weight. All in favour of guess who.

All items that can be addressed by other teams.

[Spoutnik]

If, you telling the truth, who had the best chassis or aero ? Red Bull ?

[turbof1]

Chene, I was specifically talking about this:

there is no way to judge their Aero and chassis package with such a big PU advantage

Telling there is no way to judge aero and chassis is telling people they can't judge it. That's how I read it and probably most of the others.

However, we are f1technical, we have specific car threads where we judge aero and chassis all the time. We give honest and well argumentated opinions about that. Opinions aren't laws, but what is a rule around here, is that you have to allow the others to argumentate, to discuss it.

So let me ask this: why do you think personally that Mercedes don't have a good aero/chassis package? Their PU is good and in 2014 definitely the edge they had over Red Bull, but surely Ferrari, Mclaren and Williams had more deficits then that?

Also, how will this correlate all to Melbourne? Remember that's when Renault, Ferrari and Mercedes need to decide on what tokens they want to use and which ones they want to keep in development. I heard Renault for instance also tested a few parts that probably will stay in development until later in the season. And of course there might still be aero changes. Last year Mercedes used a wing that was fairly new yet also was closely related to the 2013 wing, during testing. But in Melbourne they suddenly introduced a totally new wing. Granted, they didn't used it until China, but I think there's still a lot to change.

[Juzh]

There are some numbers circulating that Mercedes had around 60hp more then the competition, which equals around a second a lap.

And then there's this thing called fuel consumption and weight. All in favour of guess who.

Mercedes definitely will have compromised on their aero settings in favor of lower drag-lower fuel consumption during a lot of the races. Infact we know they took away downforce at the Russian GP because they got scared of the Williams.

Admittingly, you made a correct assertion about the Spanish GP. We know that Red Bull too compromised on max DF.

Scale of compromise between RB and mercedes can't be compared in the slightest.

[George-Jung]

Just open minded, and considering that the possibility exist for other teams to get their PU's on the same level as Merc.
At the end of the day it is a technical item with design restrictions, If one team can get it to work others can also

Open minded? "considering"

you haven´t considered anything, you´ve already decided what your beliefs are.

"When I look at the lap time deltas that we have to Mercedes and I look at some of their speeds through the high-speed corners, that's pure aerodynamics," he said.

"They've got some significant advantages over us in pure aerodynamics. So yes, there's still a lot to be had in aero.

"Even comparing it to the teams that traditionally had good aerodynamics, like Red Bull, Mercedes are still significantly quicker. We've got a lot to learn from them.

- Andy Green

Now do we believe a guy on F1T or an engineer working for an F1 team that obviously have taken into account them running extra wing on the car at SOME tracks?

I´ll give you some examples of when the engine is superior but the chassis, aero is not.
Williams BMW 2001-2005
Mclaren 2014
Williams 2014
Force India 2014

Your logic fails on the fact that if it was 100% engine, Mclaren, Williams, Force India, Mercedes all would be Top 4 in the WCC standings. Don´t need to be a genius to understand this.

I am not going to argue about the total package of the Mercedes was perfect (engine, chassis, aero and drivers) but I think everybody will agree with the 'fact' that their engine.. or power unit I have to say, contributed a lot in their dominance..

Williams also came out of nowhere after their bad 2013 season and same goes for Force India.. allthough they had a reasonable 2013 season. Last but not least, McLaren just totally f*cked up 2014..

If you could have put the mercedes power unit in the Red Bull last year, I think we would have had a totally different season..

[Chene_Mostert]

Chene, I was specifically talking about this:

there is no way to judge their Aero and chassis package with such a big PU advantage

Telling there is no way to judge aero and chassis is telling people they can't judge it. That's how I read it and probably most of the others.

However, we are f1technical, we have specific car threads where we judge aero and chassis all the time. We give honest and well argumentated opinions about that. Opinions aren't laws, but what is a rule around here, is that you have to allow the others to argumentate, to discuss it.

So let me ask this: why do you think personally that Mercedes don't have a good aero/chassis package? Their PU is good and in 2014 definitely the edge they had over Red Bull, but surely Ferrari, Mclaren and Williams had more deficits then that?

I am not saying Merc does not have a "good" aero/chassis package, my opinion is that it can not be judged unless we have some form of common constant - the PU.
Maybe I phrased my comment a little to aggressive, let me put it like this:
it's not easy to judge the Merc aero/chassis package with such a large PU advantage compared to the other competitors.

[turbof1]

Bingo, now you got it. Moving on.

[dans79]

it's not easy to judge the Merc aero/chassis package with such a large PU advantage compared to the other competitors.

It's pretty easy to judge that it was way better than all the other Merc powered cars. The only team that came close was Williams, and that was because they went ultra low downforce/drag, and paid for it dearly in adverse conditions.

[SectorOne]

Well sectorOne
No need to get aggressive because I don't share the same fascination with Merc's godliness.
I'm sure I am entitled to my opinion and to debate points where I might have an alternate view?
I am willing to see how the season pans out, either way some will feel their comments were justified and some will be disappointed.
Fortunately I'm not a blinkered Merc follower so my odds are 4:1 in favour of not being disappointed.

There are logical fallacies that disprove your theory.

Again. If it was 100% the engine that made Mercedes sucess, why isn´t Force India, Williams, Mclaren occupying the top 3 slots below Mercedes in the WCC standings?

You´ll realize if you try to answer this question you will automatically venture into chassis and aero thereby disproving your own theory.

Here´s your statement:

but what I know Merc Dominance was only down to their PU advantage.

So please...answer my question.

I am not saying Merc does not have a "good" aero/chassis package, my opinion is that it can not be judged unless we have some form of common constant - the PU.

Again, not true because there are tracks where teams throw everything in the kitchen sink in terms of downforce.
You also haven´t adressed that.
(we got at least one F1 guy from a team saying Mercedes were ahead of everyone, including Red Bull in "pure" aerodynamics)

Plain and simple, the data shows the Mercedes to be at the very least equal to the Red Bull in pure aerodynamics.
On top of that you have excellent chassis and and an excellent engine.

When you as Red Bull get outqualified by Toro Rosso around a circuit you got way bigger issues then simply not having an engine as good as Mercedes. Because the Renault engine was the common denominator so what happened there?

[turbof1]

it's not easy to judge the Merc aero/chassis package with such a large PU advantage compared to the other competitors.

It's pretty easy to judge that it was way better than all the other Merc powered cars. The only team that came close was Williams, and that was because they went ultra low downforce/drag, and paid for it dearly in adverse conditions.

Yes, but in all fairness he is correct that the lines blur when we are talking about Ferrari and Red Bull.

But dialing this back to the current Barcelona test: we haven't learned anything yet really concerning the pecking order between Merc, RBR and Ferrari:
-Yesterday it was a Lotus on top.
-Today a Red Bull, however Mercedes were driving on harder tyres so you have to question then again how much fuel was on board, etc etc, all the while having a 2014 FI in the mix.
-Ferrari does want to give us the impression they are fast, but how fast really?

What do know? Ferrari and Mercedes don't break down. So they are reliable. Mercedes seems to be doing more longer runs, while Ferrari slightly shorter. We also know Red Bull more or less got on top of its issues today, while Mclaren is finally seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.

[Chene_Mostert]

Well sectorOne
No need to get aggressive because I don't share the same fascination with Merc's godliness.
I'm sure I am entitled to my opinion and to debate points where I might have an alternate view?
I am willing to see how the season pans out, either way some will feel their comments were justified and some will be disappointed.
Fortunately I'm not a blinkered Merc follower so my odds are 4:1 in favour of not being disappointed.

You don´t even adress the obvious logical fallacies that disprove your theory.
You´re not here to discuss what made the Merc good, that is something you have already made up.

Again. If it was 100% the engine that made Mercedes sucess, why isn´t Force India, Williams, Mclaren occupying the top 3 slots below Mercedes in the WCC standings?

You´ll realize if you try to answer this question you will automatically venture into chassis and aero thereby disproving your own theory.

Here´s your own statement just incase you forgot it.

but what I know Merc Dominance was only down to their PU advantage.

So please...answer my question.

1. Mercedes PU elevated Mercedes from P2 in 2013 to P1 in 2014.
2. Mercedes PU elevated Williams from P9 in 2013 to P3 in 2014 5 pnts in 2013 Vs 320 pnts in 2014, only 85 behind RB
3. FI 77 pnts in 2013, 2014 = 155 pnts
4. Mercedes PU occupies positions 1,3,5&6 in constructors championship.
5. the only "other" teams to mix with Merc powered teams are "works teams" Ferrari and RB
6. Renault and Ferrari powered "customer" teams were whipped by Merc powered customer teams.
7. RB has always been renowned for their excellent chassis - they did not forget how to build a car from 2013 to 2014. RB chassis beat "detuned" Merc powered Williams F1 ( McLaren confirmed that customer engines are not in the same state of tune as the works engine)
8. Merc engine in Williams was not in the same state of tune as "works" engine PETRONAS developed specifically for the Merc engine, Williams used Petro Braz.

[dans79]

it's not easy to judge the Merc aero/chassis package with such a large PU advantage compared to the other competitors.

It's pretty easy to judge that it was way better than all the other Merc powered cars. The only team that came close was Williams, and that was because they went ultra low downforce/drag, and paid for it dearly in adverse conditions.

Yes, but in all fairness he is correct that the lines blur when we are talking about Ferrari and Red Bull.

But dialing this back to the current Barcelona test: we haven't learned anything yet really concerning the pecking order between Merc, RBR and Ferrari:
-Yesterday it was a Lotus on top.
-Today a Red Bull, however Mercedes were driving on harder tyres so you have to question then again how much fuel was on board, etc etc, all the while having a 2014 FI in the mix.
-Ferrari does want to give us the impression they are fast, but how fast really?

What do know? Ferrari and Mercedes don't break down. So they are reliable. Mercedes seems to be doing more longer runs, while Ferrari slightly shorter. We also know Red Bull more or less got on top of its issues today, while Mclaren is finally seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.

My assumption is that Merc will still hold a power advantage over everyone else, maybe 30-40hp. I also belive they are focusing on what they had issues with last year, reliability and have asked all the customers to do so as well. To be more precise, i think they are focusing on being able to run reliably in higher performance engine modes. Many times last year, you would hear a driver being told to not use a given engine mode for more than a few laps. Merc calling it "strat 6" or whatever it was, and Williams calling it "overtake".