Mercedes AMG F1 W08 EQ Power +

[Cold Fussion]

Rules regarding fuel flow and max revs are intentionally written with lots of rev headway in mind. Primary reason for this is to avoid drs trains. I'd say the rules succeeded entirely in this aspect.

Surely the intention is to make MGU-H energy recovery more enticing since you have falling compressor power requirements beyond 10500 RPM.

[mahinderlasmibal]

[Sevach]

Ferrari style floor.

[Morteza]

[SiLo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9UTQviVYAAjWtW.jpg

Ferrari style floor.

Except it looks like this isn't designed to flex.

[Just_a_fan]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9UTQviVYAAjWtW.jpg

Ferrari style floor.

That flip up was slotted back in testing. See picture at top of page 16 of this thread.

[Sevach]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9UTQviVYAAjWtW.jpg

Ferrari style floor.

Except it looks like this isn't designed to flex.

The one Ferrari had today in Bahrain didn't flex nowhere near as much as the old one, that up and down motion may have been unintended.

[SiLo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9UTQviVYAAjWtW.jpg

Ferrari style floor.

Except it looks like this isn't designed to flex.

The one Ferrari had today in Bahrain didn't flex nowhere near as much as the old one, that up and down motion may have been unintended.

I wouldn't be so sure... What advantage would there be in having that part of the car flex anyway.

At that place, I assume it's sucking air out from the under the floor?

[Sevach]

Except it looks like this isn't designed to flex.

The one Ferrari had today in Bahrain didn't flex nowhere near as much as the old one, that up and down motion may have been unintended.

I wouldn't be so sure... What advantage would there be in having that part of the car flex anyway.

At that place, I assume it's sucking air out from the under the floor?

I assume it's another attempt at sealing the floor.

I also don't know what case you are making here... for intentional flex, or against it?

[SiLo]

The one Ferrari had today in Bahrain didn't flex nowhere near as much as the old one, that up and down motion may have been unintended.

I wouldn't be so sure... What advantage would there be in having that part of the car flex anyway.

At that place, I assume it's sucking air out from the under the floor?

I assume it's another attempt at sealing the floor.

I also don't know what case you are making here... for intentional flex, or against it?

Against it.

In other news, Bottas T-Wing failed again. Wonder if Mercedes will start to strengthen that part of the car?

[diego.liv]

Allison says it's a manufacturing defect https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/allis ... ne-893891/

[DRCorsa]

I am sorry but i don't buy easy enough the T-Wing structural integrity issue.
Maybe Mercedes has done that in purpose so FIA will ban it? Maybe it's more suited to Ferrari's aerodynamic package?

[diego.liv]

A tad Machiavellian approach don't you think?

[Sevach]

In other news, Bottas T-Wing failed again. Wonder if Mercedes will start to strengthen that part of the car?

There you go.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/merc ... ia-894083/

[wesley123]

I am sorry but i don't buy easy enough the T-Wing structural integrity issue.
Maybe Mercedes has done that in purpose so FIA will ban it? Maybe it's more suited to Ferrari's aerodynamic package?

Why would they? Merc has further developed their own wing. and outside of that, the area is pretty small and the device does not bring any significant effect