Are Mercedes creating the longest period of dominance on record?

[NathanOlder]

So your saying the FIA have done nothing to try and mix up the front end. Remember that every rule change in F1 for as long as I can remember has stopped the champions retaining their crowns. Mercedes are the only team to go through a big reg change and come out champs again.

(I could be wrong though)

[JordanMugen]

So your saying the FIA have done nothing to try and mix up the front end.

2019 rule change compromises high-rake, 2021 rule change compromises high-rake again. It's not ideal on that front!

Mercedes are the only team to go through a big reg change and come out champs again.

What big reg change?

The 2017 cars were just scaled-up 2016 cars (even the front and rear tyres were scaled proportionally to the old tyres). 2014 until present has been the same aerodynamic formula. 2022 rules are the first new aerodynamic rules in quite some time.

[NathanOlder]

2017 is a big regulation change. It was done to try and shift the formula away from an engine formula to an aero formula. Even James Key said its the biggest reg change in the last 2 decades.

[Bill]

2017 introduced to make car faster because the lap times were too close to Gp2 and alleged that the cars were too easy to drive f1 needed to separate man from boys

[Xwang]

In one of the 2019 issues of Racecar Engineering they were speaking about the newer rally cars engine rules and one of the Ford team engineer told that in a fuel flow limited formula at the end wins the one who spend the most to obtain the best combustion efficiency.
So I think that F1 is in this trap and it will be until 2025.
Maybe they should add a maximum power limit (let's say 1000 HP) using a torque metering like in LMH so that to equalize the maximum amount of power and still keeping the high efficiency (the limit could be increased year by year by the rule makers so that to keep improving the efficiency, but in a way which is affordable by all the constructors and maybe without the need to continue exploiting grey areas in order to gain the ultimate gain in power as we see nowadays).

[Mamba]

2017 is a big regulation change. It was done to try and shift the formula away from an engine formula to an aero formula. Even James Key said its the biggest reg change in the last 2 decades.

I said before that everything you could do in 2016 was legal in 2017 only on a much bigger scale. In 2009 nothing from 2008 was applicable anymore. Massive decrease in barge boards, minimum radii, no holes in the bodywork, FW lower & wider etc. All the 2017 regulations changed was increase the speed of the cars substantially so how was 2017 more radical than 2009?

The increased size increased the drag the cars produce further increasing the need for a more powerful engine to overcome that drag and run optimal DF to preserve your tyres. It is no surprise Merc won and has continued to do so. They already had the most powerful engine and they could just increase what they have been doing in 2016 on the aero front with highly intricate vortices etc. It wasn't like in 2009 where your entire aero philosophy had to change suddenly.

[Zynerji]

I think history will reveal that Merc simply had better people people, and quite possibly, better AI design tools.

The design tools developed in-house by the teams is literally the black box of F1.

T-Flop limits on computing can be like Fuel Flow limits on an engine. The most efficient code will get more out of it.

[dans79]

Adrian Newey disagrees with all of you saying the 2017 rule changes weren't significant/major etc......

https://www.gptoday.net/en/news/f1/2144 ... rian-newey

It’s a very different set of aerodynamic regulations and it poses a lot of challenges," he said. "When you first look at them, the changes appear relatively small. Although the tyres are wider, the inside shoulder is in roughly the same place, some of the box regulations are swept to give the illusion of speed - but once you get into the details then it’s actually hugely different and throwing up a lot of challenges and with challenges comes opportunities."

[NathanOlder]

2017 is a big regulation change. It was done to try and shift the formula away from an engine formula to an aero formula. Even James Key said its the biggest reg change in the last 2 decades.

I said before that everything you could do in 2016 was legal in 2017 only on a much bigger scale. In 2009 nothing from 2008 was applicable anymore. Massive decrease in barge boards, minimum radii, no holes in the bodywork, FW lower & wider etc. All the 2017 regulations changed was increase the speed of the cars substantially so how was 2017 more radical than 2009?

The increased size increased the drag the cars produce further increasing the need for a more powerful engine to overcome that drag and run optimal DF to preserve your tyres. It is no surprise Merc won and has continued to do so. They already had the most powerful engine and they could just increase what they have been doing in 2016 on the aero front with highly intricate vortices etc. It wasn't like in 2009 where your entire aero philosophy had to change suddenly.

So 2017 was the same regulations as 2016 ? Or was there a big reg change ? How many parts were carried over ? None of the suspension, none of the wings, none of the barge boards, not the floor, not the difuser. Sounds pretty big when ALL the parts needed to be designed again.

[NathanOlder]

Adrian Newey disagrees with all of you saying the 2017 rule changes weren't significant/major etc......

https://www.gptoday.net/en/news/f1/2144 ... rian-newey

It’s a very different set of aerodynamic regulations and it poses a lot of challenges," he said. "When you first look at them, the changes appear relatively small. Although the tyres are wider, the inside shoulder is in roughly the same place, some of the box regulations are swept to give the illusion of speed - but once you get into the details then it’s actually hugely different and throwing up a lot of challenges and with challenges comes opportunities."

Exactly, Newey, James Key both saying the same thing. But obviously they must be wrong. Nothing has be changed in the regs since 2014 according to some here!

[Shrieker]

I would argue Hamilton would've managed to snatch 1 title away from Mercedes if he was driving for Ferrari, and Vettel was no:1 at Merc., either in 2017 or 18. Also, if they had a team like McLaren had in '12, they would've lost in 2017 or 18 (or both) despite having the fastest/joint fastest (or the best) car.

They've had the best team, the best driver and the best car for years now.

[PlatinumZealot]

Lewis commented that Mercedes has the best aerodynamicist in the sport. Seems that Newey has lost his throne? Or was Newey never an aero-guy but a whole-car type of guy?

[Zynerji]

Lewis commented that Mercedes has the best aerodynamicist in the sport. Seems that Newey has lost his throne? Or was Newey never an aero-guy but a whole-car type of guy?

Merc has kicked RB's butt with a competing aero philosophy for years now. I think Newey lost that throne in 2014.

[dans79]

Lewis commented that Mercedes has the best aerodynamicist in the sport. Seems that Newey has lost his throne? Or was Newey never an aero-guy but a whole-car type of guy?

Merc has kicked RB's butt with a competing aero philosophy for years now. I think Newey lost that throne in 2014.

IMO, the 2010-14 championships are as much about the Renault engine being fuel efficient and very tunable as they are about Newey's aerodynamic prowess!

[El Scorchio]

Lewis commented that Mercedes has the best aerodynamicist in the sport. Seems that Newey has lost his throne? Or was Newey never an aero-guy but a whole-car type of guy?

Maybe the game has changed a bit or things have moved on slightly from what separated him from other designers. It happens to everyone.
It will happen to Mercedes F1 one day as well.

Although let's not pretend of course Newey was a one trick pony only at Red Bull. His history is extraordinary.