Mercedes AMG F1 W07

[crbassassin]

Errrmmmm.....no. The active systems mostly all had passive springs still, to support the car in the event of a failure.

Teams would run without springs if it saves them several grams of mass.

[Jolle]

I think you're wrong. I think chance of such mishap is no greater than loss of breaks.
Probably it was politics and F1s constant desire to develop technologies that road cars would benefit from

It is far more complex then a brake system, with pumps, valves and a simple malfunction would have had a devastating outcome, turning a formula one car, wherever on the track (not just in a straight line braking zone, but also in corners like L'au Rouge, into a skating puck, without any form of control. Like four exploding tires all at once.

Errrmmmm.....no. The active systems mostly all had passive springs still, to support the car in the event of a failure.

If you google a bit you can see the Williams were 100% active, the McLaren might be a hybrid...

[Mark4211]

Hamilton onboard start analysis (video: https://streamable.com/0j5a)
- Three engages of clutch in neutral.
- Car into first and throttles for 20 seconds, even when the start lights have not been turned on. (clutch too cold?)
- Mercedes software detail showing (when clutch is engaged)

• TOO LOW [black] (3500rpm - 11000rpm)
• TOO LOW [red] (11000rpm - 11500rpm)
• RPM LOW (11500rpm - 11600rpm)
• RPM GOOD (11600rpm - 117000rpm+)

Edit:
Clutch warm up procedure RPM: ~10000rpm (Italy onboard formation start)
https://streamable.com/9jh0

[gdogg371]

Active suspension was effectively kyboshed at the 1993 Canadian GP when Charlie Whiting's Steward's Bulletin No.3 declared the system a moveable aerodynamic device and in contrevention of the regulations. There was panic at the time as to whether the FIA were going to implement a ban mid season or not, but in the end they posponded what was a massive change until the start of the 1994 season.

The problem with active suspension was that it had many of the same drawbacks as ground effect. Mechanical gremlins or driver error could suddenly put the car in a situation where it lost a substantial amount of downforce. Alex Zanardi's 200 mph crash coming out of Eau Rouge and Gerhard Berger coming out of the Estoril pit lane backwards at 180 mph were both directly attributed to active suspension failures.

Zanardi's Lotus suffered a hydraulic leak and in the case of Berger's Ferrari, the team had forgot to program the bumps of the pitlane into the system, causing the car to kangaroo on the way back out onto the circuit in the days before there was a speed limit in the pits.

The Lotus system was basically the same one Senna had won at Detroit with in 1987 and was notoriously unreliable, to the point where the team didn't run it at all circuits. If a team as well funded as Ferrari could make such a basic error, then as the system proliferated down the grid the chances of such incidents happening more often was very real. Footwork were running a client version of Mclaren's system by mid season and even Ligier and Simtek (who made their bow in 1994) had systems planned. Ligier were pretty annoyed at having to scrap their active program mid way through 1993 after having already spent a lot of money on it.

[sosic2121]

It is far more complex then a brake system, with pumps, valves and a simple malfunction would have had a devastating outcome, turning a formula one car, wherever on the track (not just in a straight line braking zone, but also in corners like L'au Rouge, into a skating puck, without any form of control. Like four exploding tires all at once.

Errrmmmm.....no. The active systems mostly all had passive springs still, to support the car in the event of a failure.

If you google a bit you can see the Williams were 100% active, the McLaren might be a hybrid...

I think he didn't mean springs were part of system, only a backup.

[Juzh]

Hamilton onboard start analysis (video: https://streamable.com/0j5a)
- Three engages of clutch in neutral.
- Car into first and throttles for 20 seconds, even when the start lights have not been turned on. (clutch too cold?)
- Mercedes software detail showing (when clutch is engaged)

• TOO LOW [black] (3500rpm - 11000rpm)
• TOO LOW [red] (11000rpm - 11500rpm)
• RPM LOW (11500rpm - 11600rpm)
• RPM GOOD (11600rpm - 117000rpm+)

Edit:
Clutch warm up procedure RPM: ~10000rpm (Italy onboard formation start)
https://streamable.com/9jh0

That was a very long rev-up.

[Jolle]

Errrmmmm.....no. The active systems mostly all had passive springs still, to support the car in the event of a failure.

If you google a bit you can see the Williams were 100% active, the McLaren might be a hybrid...

I think he didn't mean springs were part of system, only a backup.

There was no backup on the Williams system. No pressure or wrong setting -> all 4 wheels off the tarmac.

[sosic2121]

If you google a bit you can see the Williams were 100% active, the McLaren might be a hybrid...

I think he didn't mean springs were part of system, only a backup.

There was no backup on the Williams system. No pressure or wrong setting -> all 4 wheels off the tarmac.

I don't know if Williams system can be compared with Citroën suspension, but that one is very reliable.

[gdogg371]

The Mclaren active system in 1993 was actually a bit more advanced than the Williams one. If anyone might have been running a hybrid system it would have been Benetton, but even then I am dubious of that...The Williams system basically sat the car down as low as possible on the straight to get a small amount of ground effect. I think it was activated by a button in the cockpit. There is some video of Peter Windor and Valteri Bottas discussing it with a dancing FW15C in background on YouTube somewhere...

[misterbeam]

If the W07 flies like the W05, it's 100% certain to me that in 2015, Merc got screwed by Pirelli and Fia for the Monza farce (race before Singapore in 2015).

I'm still baffled by how the most dominant car of the grid could get a whack of 1.4 seconds from one race to another, unless someone is screwing with the tyres...

Finally some rational people around here ...

That was exactly my thought last year, there was absolutely no reason for Mercedes to be off the pace in Singapore, and it's really funny to see some websites trying to create some kind of suspense around this, because we all know that Mercedes will just be on the top Saturday night.

Rational?Bahahaha!

It doesn't matter now. Mercedes got the pole and won the race as expected ...

[Pierce89]

There was no backup on the Williams system. No pressure or wrong setting -> all 4 wheels off the tarmac.

Sounds unlikely, but if you show us a source I'd be more than happy to believe you.

[Jolle]

There was no backup on the Williams system. No pressure or wrong setting -> all 4 wheels off the tarmac.

Sounds unlikely, but if you show us a source I'd be more than happy to believe you.

A quote the driver himself:
https://books.google.nl/books?id=ayLbBg ... QQ6AEITTAQ

And a pic where you can see that there is no backup system whatsoever
http://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5zou ... 2_1280.jpg

[godlameroso]

https://vimeo.com/183872530

Either the Mercedes has a lot of body roll or the suspension is actually leaning into the turns.

[Mark4211]

https://vimeo.com/183872530

Either the Mercedes has a lot of body roll or the suspension is actually leaning into the turns.

Lots of roll - very very soft anti-roll bars, it got even more extreme 2013 onwards. (maybe independent suspension, i don't know)
https://streamable.com/1he9
https://streamable.com/i131
https://streamable.com/flvn

[zac510]

Those clips are cherry picked from either high speed turns, or when the driver took too much kerb and some are from 3+ seasons ago! Of course the suspension looks soft in those extreme scenarios.

That said, this one from Monaco was pretty awesome, considering the low speed:
https://streamable.com/zbm3

https://vimeo.com/183872530
Either the Mercedes has a lot of body roll or the suspension is actually leaning into the turns.

Aren't these two points mutually exclusive? I mean when someone says "it has lots of body roll" the usually mean the chassis is leaning to the outside of the turn, so if the suspension is leaning the chassis inwards then it's probably rolling less?