Mercedes AMG F1 W07

[F1Krof]

I know it doesn't nean that it is broken. But their design philosophy is more biased towards the front of the car. From what I see their front wing and nose is unique comparing to what others are doing. Especially the nose, they're stuck in that area for they cannot revert to a more conventional style because then they would have to make drastic changes to the rear as well.

They are overworking the front wing and the nose, that's why we see so many iterations of serrated pieces of front body work. Their whole performance depends on the ability to sweep as much clean air as possible to the back for the difusor to work properly. Therefore the difusser is heavliy relient on the front hence it cannot be freely developed on its own.

And this is the reason why I think they've reached or are almost are close to the limit of the chasis development.

Look at their sidepods for a second. Although much tighter than the W05, they are completely the same size as the W06. But they are slimmer as they go towards the rear, which leads me to believe that they have shrunk the radiators for the price of a humongous airbox.

Besides this modification and the addage of the S-duct I don't see any difference on the W07. Bunch of serrations all over the place and modified suspension geometry.

I'm not saying it isn't fast, but comparing to what Ferrari have done.... yeah I'm not very confident they are in front anymore.

[RobertPthe3rd]

Idk. Mercedes were so far ahead at the end of last season. I find it hard to believe that they still are not in the lead. The engine is still the best. With some claims of close to 1k hp in ideal situations. Also they have done some radical things with the barge boards, fw (from last year), the nose/duct. I'm 90% sure they are still way out front. But only Australia will tell us something. Australia is a bit of a wild card, so by the European season we will see if they are still dominant. I think they are actually farther up the road than last year, but we shall see. Ferrari needed to make big changes, they got their butts whooped last year. Simple evolution on the w07 could still have a large advantage. And with a power advantage they can put more df on than a less powerful rival. Like I said we shall see.

[bhall II]

Given three years of near-absolute regulatory stability and seven years of broad conceptual stability, all governed by the most restricted rulesets the sport has ever implemented, there's just not a whole lot left to do at this point, especially without a pressing need to undertake a radical overhaul a la SF16-H. There's virtually no way Mercedes could have made W07 better than what it is right now without taking a step backwards in order to get there, and prudence suggests that's a step better taken next year when new rules will more or less have everyone in the same boat. For now, maturity (read: level of refinement) is still on the team's side - sadly.

[giantfan10]

Idk. Mercedes were so far ahead at the end of last season3 tenths.
I find it hard to believe that they still are not in the lead. The engine is still the best.based on what? last year?
With some claims of close to 1k hp in ideal situations. Also they have done some radical things with the barge boards, fw (from last year), the nose/duct. I'm 90% sure they are still way out front.there is nothing radical about anything Mercedes did, everything they have bolted on has been seen before and some are copies of solutions ran by cars last year But only Australia will tell us something.Correct Australia is a bit of a wild card, so by the European season we will see if they are still dominant.
I think they are actually farther up the road than last year,based on what?
but we shall see. Ferrari needed to make big changes, they got their butts whooped last year. Simple evolution on the w07 couldand its quite possible that it does not still have a large advantage. And with a power advantagedo they still have a power advantage?
they can put more df on than a less powerful rival.both Ferrari Mercedes in testing were running similar wing angles which was more than any other teams Like I said we shall seeCorrect.

being more reliable with an evolution of last years car means absolutely nothing when it comes to speed and winning GPs .speaking of reliability the Ferrari looked pretty reliable to me over the last 4 days of testing,
will Mercedes be ahead in this coming season ? probably.. will they have increased the gap to Ferrari? highly unlikely .The SF15-T was a compromised car less than stellar airflow to the diffuser... less than stellar front suspension geometry.... an engine that even though it made plenty of power did not have a qualifying mode to match Mercedes.. with all that being said they beat Mercedes 3 times and pushed them into silly mistakes on several other occasions. all the problems the SF15T had have been remedied on the SF16-H along with Ferrari claiminga substantial power upgrade to their engine..... how does this translate to the gap being increased?
from Rosberg:
"We know that Ferrari is very close," he said. "They've been very quick.
"All of the teams have their strategists, so we know more or less what fuel the other teams are running and they know our fuel.
"So we know more or less where we are compared to Ferrari, that's why I say it's close.
"But we're not sure if we are ahead or behind."

[GPR-A duplicate2]

I'm not saying it isn't fast, but comparing to what Ferrari have done.... yeah I'm not very confident they are in front anymore.

Do you not remember McLaren MP4-28? A Revolution, instead of evolution? Which the McLaren believed, would give them more freedom to develop as the rules were more stable and hence evolution was not going to give them more space for development? Where did it land them up?
Where as the Red Bull and Mercedes continued with evolution. Where McLaren MP4-28 faltered, RB9 and W04 actually moved forward compared to previous year, quite significantly. There was close to 3 second jump for for W04 in Spanish GP qualifying, compared to W03 the previous year (using spanish GP as Australia and Malaysia were wet), a 9 tenth jump for RB9 and MP4-28 had lost close to half a second, compared to MP4-27. I remember Mercedes fans feeling disappointed by the looks of W04 when it was launched, as there was nothing different compared to W03, other than vanity panel on the nose.
There is no certainty that going for Revolution guarantees a jump in performance, it can go other way too. You never know what could potentially go wrong in such radicalization. In case of McLaren, it was trying to be adventurous and in case of Ferrari, it is desperation.

[Just_a_fan]

They are overworking the front wing and the nose, that's why we see so many iterations of serrated pieces of front body work. Their whole performance depends on the ability to sweep as much clean air as possible to the back for the difusor to work properly. Therefore the difusser is heavliy relient on the front hence it cannot be freely developed on its own.

That can be said of all of the cars today. The front wing sets up the entire aero performance of the car. It's interesting that most of the teams have moved towards a version of the Mercedes front wing, for example. Of course, doing that means they will have similar aero issues further back. That's one reason why the cars look so similar - there is one solution and they're all swirling around the plug hole trying to get closest to that solution without messing it up.

[F1Krof]

They are overworking the front wing and the nose, that's why we see so many iterations of serrated pieces of front body work. Their whole performance depends on the ability to sweep as much clean air as possible to the back for the difusor to work properly. Therefore the difusser is heavliy relient on the front hence it cannot be freely developed on its own.

That can be said of all of the cars today. The front wing sets up the entire aero performance of the car. It's interesting that most of the teams have moved towards a version of the Mercedes front wing, for example. Of course, doing that means they will have similar aero issues further back. That's one reason why the cars look so similar - there is one solution and they're all swirling around the plug hole trying to get closest to that solution without messing it up.

I agree completely. However Mercedes' version is the most extreme one. Just compare the angle of attack of their front wing versus the others you'll notice a massive difference.

[PhillipM]

I agree completely. However Mercedes' version is the most extreme one. Just compare the angle of attack of their front wing versus the others you'll notice a massive difference.

And what that should actually tell you is not that they 'overworking' the front wing, but that they've found a lot of rear end and floor downforce that needs balancing, since the cars are generally rear limited.

[wesley123]

I agree completely. However Mercedes' version is the most extreme one. Just compare the angle of attack of their front wing versus the others you'll notice a massive difference.

And what that should actually tell you is not that they 'overworking' the front wing, but that they've found a lot of rear end and floor downforce that needs balancing, since the cars are generally rear limited.

It could very well be that they are 'overworking' the front wing. Just because the car needs to be balanced does not mean they don't. afaik the teams are very much on the limit within the wing box. compared to a few years teams seem to be maxing out the AoA.

We have to remember that the front wing plays a large part in the rear downforce, and thus, it'll most likely be compromised on downforce to achieve that.

The small fins on the 4th element were largely believed to be used to delay stall, which pretty much confirms that they are working the front wing to it's limit.

[PhillipM]

I agree completely. However Mercedes' version is the most extreme one. Just compare the angle of attack of their front wing versus the others you'll notice a massive difference.

And what that should actually tell you is not that they 'overworking' the front wing, but that they've found a lot of rear end and floor downforce that needs balancing, since the cars are generally rear limited.

It could very well be that they are 'overworking' the front wing. Just because the car needs to be balanced does not mean they don't. afaik the teams are very much on the limit within the wing box. compared to a few years teams seem to be maxing out the AoA.

We have to remember that the front wing plays a large part in the rear downforce, and thus, it'll most likely be compromised on downforce to achieve that.

The small fins on the 4th element were largely believed to be used to delay stall, which pretty much confirms that they are working the front wing to it's limit.

If they needed to work the front wing to it's outright limit to balance the rear downforce, you'd see a lot of the conditioners disappear for pure downforce producing devices. That's when you're starting to get limited with a chassis because you start compromising downstream and overall downforce for balance.
I don't see any team doing that yet.

[Just_a_fan]

I agree completely. However Mercedes' version is the most extreme one. Just compare the angle of attack of their front wing versus the others you'll notice a massive difference.

Look at the wing. You'll see that it is actually three aerodynamic systems sharing a common mounting point. The outer section of the wing - the stuff that is generally black on the Mercedes - is all about flow conditioning around the front wheel. It generates downforce, yes, but it's really working the air to minimise the impact the big rotating front tyre has on the airflow behind it. The high angle portion of the wing - the inner section that isn't the FIA-defined section - generates lots of downforce but also sets up the airflow to flow back over the car to maximise downforce at the rear. It also pulls air from under the central, FIA-defined, portion. This helps this central portion generate some downforce too even though the intention was the exact opposite. The turning vanes below the nose also help here by generating a low pressure zone below the tub behind the neutral central wing section. (Interestingly, these turning vanes have a powerful effect on the performance of the main floor and diffuser too). Indeed, I believe this clever use of the supposedly aero-neutral portion of the front wing is what causes the cars to struggle in close company. By using this section to generate downforce the designers have set the system up to fail when following another car. The aero-neutral section was intended to be the bit that takes the brunt of the dirty air and so reduce the effect that the dirty air has on the front wing's performance.

No one denies that Mercedes are probably further along the scale of diminishing returns on the front wing - that's why they are developing clever barge boards etc. . But the diminishing returns aren't in the downforce that the front wing can produce but rather in what they can do with the air once it has left the front wing. The front wing is not the limiting factor on the car - the limiting factor is downforce behind the front wing. If you can get the floor to generate more downforce then you're opening up another avenue of development. That's what Mercedes are doing with the twiddly bits. They're making the rest of the car catch up with the performance of the front wing.

Mercedes have had good underfloor aero for a while, in part I feel, to the bat wing below the tub. We see RedBull developing similar structures now too. It's about pulling air off the front wing and getting it to go where it can next be of benefit. That's what Mercedes have done really well the last two years. The engine has helped them do that in a crude way - they had a power advantage so could afford to be a bit draggy in their approach. I think now that Ferrari have caught up on the engine front, Mercedes are having to refine their aero package to improve the L/D by reducing D while others are still doing the same by simply adding L. RedBull, being down on power, are doing the same as Mercedes but by making a "clean" car.

[wesley123]

If they needed to work the front wing to it's outright limit to balance the rear downforce, you'd see a lot of the conditioners disappear for pure downforce producing devices. That's when you're starting to get limited with a chassis because you start compromising downstream and overall downforce for balance.
I don't see any team doing that yet.

Balancing out the car by reducing downforce on the other end of the car isn't really a thing done commonly in top-level motorsports. Like said, the front wing is very important for rear downforce as well, and removing siad flow conditioners would hurt downforce(which then means you don't need to balance it with the front wing anymore, making the initial action virtually pointless). So to balance out the front without hurting the rear you need to push the AoA. That is why a lot of teams run a five-plane wing(and Red Bull even a six-plane), to be able to push the AoA, but attempting to reduce sensitivity.

[giantfan10]

If they needed to work the front wing to it's outright limit to balance the rear downforce, you'd see a lot of the conditioners disappear for pure downforce producing devices. That's when you're starting to get limited with a chassis because you start compromising downstream and overall downforce for balance.
I don't see any team doing that yet.

Balancing out the car by reducing downforce on the other end of the car isn't really a thing done commonly in top-level motorsports. Like said, the front wing is very important for rear downforce as well, and removing siad flow conditioners would hurt downforce(which then means you don't need to balance it with the front wing anymore, making the initial action virtually pointless). So to balance out the front without hurting the rear you need to push the AoA. That is why a lot of teams run a five-plane wing(and Red Bull even a six-plane), to be able to push the AoA, but attempting to reduce sensitivity.

another front wing point is that the front wing is also essentially a diffuser, the strakes below the wing and the teams trying to run the front wing as low as possible is evidence of this.

[PhillipM]

Balancing out the car by reducing downforce on the other end of the car isn't really a thing done commonly in top-level motorsports. Like said, the front wing is very important for rear downforce as well, and removing siad flow conditioners would hurt downforce(which then means you don't need to balance it with the front wing anymore, making the initial action virtually pointless). So to balance out the front without hurting the rear you need to push the AoA. That is why a lot of teams run a five-plane wing(and Red Bull even a six-plane), to be able to push the AoA, but attempting to reduce sensitivity.

...ergo, they're not at the limit of the chassis or overworking the front wing, because if they were, they wouldn't have the choice.
Course, maybe you're all right and Ferrari is going to pull a second a lap on the Merc 'cause they've reached the limit of development. But I won't hold my breath.

[flickerf1]

Scarbs on Mercedes & Ferrari. Mercedes review starts @ 3:46:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx01FeeJgVs