2018 Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula One Team

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Personally I think in a theoretical clean race where vettel does not get overtaken in pitstops

Undercut is quite a common thing and is not an exception. He would be in that window of getting undercut, itself is an evidence that there is hardly any performance gap. A Driver driving behind closely, tends to lose performance, whereas the driver ahead in clear air, should be much better placed to eke out performance. Despite that, if the driver ahead gets caught in the undercut window, means the driver ahead isn't faster than the driver behind and most likely, the driver behind struggling in dirty air, is actually faster, if he pulls off the undercut and then goes on to maintain the lead.

[Juzh]

Personally I think in a theoretical clean race where vettel does not get overtaken in pitstops

Undercut is quite a common thing and is not an exception. He would be in that window of getting undercut, itself is an evidence that there is hardly any performance gap. A Driver driving behind closely, tends to lose performance, whereas the driver ahead in clear air, should be much better placed to eke out performance. Despite that, if the driver ahead gets caught in the undercut window, means the driver ahead isn't faster than the driver behind and most likely, the driver behind struggling in dirty air, is actually faster, if he pulls off the undercut and then goes on to maintain the lead.

Quite simple fact is bottas was unable to pull away from anyone, while himself was being dropped in the first stint. Are you going to deny that somehow? Not to mention he was being caught by raikkonen by up to 8 tenths per lap at some point, and that much difference can not be explained just by having 8 laps younger tires, especially since some people were doing personal bests on 30+ laps old rubber, so tire drop off on mediums wasn't at all that big.

This is not to say ferrari will remain the best car, or that it was in australia and bahrain (compromised race strategy in that one), but it was 100% the best one in china.

[Phil]

You are ignoring the points GPR-A mentioned. This is endurance racing. The tires have finite amount of grip and it's up to the driver and the team strategy to determine the best and most efficient usage. If Vettel had a clear pace advantage, he would have driven out a bigger gap than the 3.9s (at one point) and when Bottas pitted, he would have reacted. The fact that he didn't/couldn't and that indeed he was undercut, shows that Ferrari didn't have this superior pace during the race and in the first stint. He just used his tires differently - he opted to drive out a gap at the beginning to get out of DRS and give him some headroom. At the same time, just because Bottas let the gap extend to 3.9s doesn't mean he was driving full-out. He might have just been conserving his tires more to have that bit extra in hand around his pit-window - which in fact he did utilize to the detriment of Vettel's race.

2nd stint and comparing it to Kimi is irrelevant: Kimi was on a comfortable one-stop, whereas Bottas (and Vettel) on a theoretical two stop that later forced both of them to a highly compromised one-stop race.

Again; no one is saying that Mercedes had the quicker car in China. All points indicate that on the soft-tires and the medium-tires, both Mercedes and Ferrari were nigh on identical. If you want to continue in favor of Ferrari having the "best car", you're really only arguing semantics.

Anyway, the good news (to Mercedes) is that even last year, Ferrari was extremely close to Mercedes and that was on tires that were better suited to Mercedes (2017-SS vs 2018-US for QF). So even though most of us expected a strong(er) Mercedes here relative to Ferrari, last year showed us that the difference wasn't that much in reality.

The worrying thing for Mercedes now is that this year there is a clear trend by Pirelli to bring softer compounds to the races to 'spice up the show'. It also seems the W09 has inherited very similar traits to the W08 so far.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

The worrying thing for Mercedes now is that this year there is a clear trend by Pirelli to bring softer compounds to the races to 'spice up the show'. It also seems the W09 has inherited very similar traits to the W08 so far.

I guess, one compound missing in between (M-SS-?-US), created headaches for W09 setup. Up until last year, it was sequential selection (M-S-SS OR S-SS-US) and Merc can setup the car for the middle compound and the compromise probably wasn't really great for the softest compound. Now, in China, they probably set up the car for Softs and the difference in setup is probably much larger to US and that didn't work in their favor. If I am right, then every track where PIRELLI opts to skip a compound in between, Mercedes might end up with tyre management headaches.

[dans79]

If I am right, then every track where PIRELLI opts to skip a compound in between, Mercedes might end up with tyre management headaches.

Unless like last year they bring an upgrade package that addresses the issue.

[Brenton]

Not to mention he was being caught by raikkonen by up to 8 tenths per lap at some point, and that much difference can not be explained just by having 8 laps younger tires, especially since some people were doing personal bests on 30+ laps old rubber, so tire drop off on mediums wasn't at all that big.

Laptimes were generally consistent throughout a tire stint for most drivers, making it possible to have the best lap early or late in the run depending on various factors like traffic. If there wasn't any tire wear, 30 laps on tires should be much, much faster than the first laps, because of there being far less fuel in the car.

So pitting 8 laps later generally resulted in laptimes consistently faster throughout the stint than pitting 8 laps earlier. By faded memory I'm guessing close to 0.05s per lap improvement on less fuel. If we use the figure of 0.05s as accurate (I might be off by a couple hundredths) ... then if both drivers had the same driving performance and same car performance, Raikkonen would have been about ~0.4s per lap faster.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... 0Raikkonen

Looking at the times, he was roughly 0.4s a lap faster on 8 lap fresher tires. This suggests that they were nearly identical in performance. The big anomaly was Bottas' second lap on new tires. 1m37.0s to do the undercut was phenomenal. Was that in part due to the "Party Mode"? But outside of the incredible undercut performance, Bottas looked fairly equal to Raikkonen. While Raikkonen was generally a quarter to half second a lap slower on driving performance than Vettel in this race.

tl/dr: He wasn't 8 tenths faster on 8 lap newer tires. Closer to half of that difference, which is close to the performance gain that 8 lap fresher tires should bring throughout a stint. So my view on the laptime evidence is that Bottas and Raikkonen were almost identical in car and driver performance on their average lap performance at this race. (not factoring in how well they handled traffic)

I don't think Ferrari and Mercedes could be any closer to each other than the evidence shown so far this season. This season is likely to be the most exciting battle between two teams for WDC since 2012.

[Phil]

If I am right, then every track where PIRELLI opts to skip a compound in between, Mercedes might end up with tyre management headaches.

Unless like last year they bring an upgrade package that addresses the issue.

AFAIK, Mercedes never brought an update that widened the operating window of their car. IMO they simply overcame the "problem" by acing the set-up using past data experience and FP1 and FP2. They evidently got it more often right than wrong. Also, I think they got it more often right on the harder tire compounds and in cooler conditions and especially tracks with a smooth surface. In hotter conditions, they struggled more. Even so, I think the problem they may be facing is just an inherent characteristic of their car. They may solve it by acing set-up, but not acing it could show significant performance issues (relative to RB and Ferrari).

Also, last year; Mercedes had a clear advantage in qualifying, at least beyond the Canadian GP when whatever Ferrari were doing with their second oil tank got prohibited by the FIA. This year, they have clearly (IMO) overcome this deficit, so Mercedes no longer has that advantage in QF.

What may still play into Mercedes hands is that perhaps they really do have a slight PU advantage where fuel economy is concerned. This may not be evident in QF, but may be in the race on certain tracks. It may also play a role in QF like in Melbourne, when Ferrari slightly compromised their car for less drag and better fuel economy during the race, but also suffered this drawback during QF.

[Juzh]

tl/dr: He wasn't 8 tenths faster on 8 lap newer tires. Closer to half of that difference, which is close to the performance gain that 8 lap fresher tires should bring throughout a stint.

There's quite a few laps where difference is anywhere between 0.5s and 0.8s which is what I've been saying. As soon as RAI hits dirty air obviously his advantage diminishes.

[senja]

I thought Bottas said even with tires in perfect range they did not have 0.5s in China.

He did say that. But it wasn't just the tires - the car setup had turned nightmarish between FP2 and FP3; Hamilton could barely keep the car on track in FP3 and the abundance of understeer was readily apparent.

Mercedes explained they were trying to make sure the setup would be kind to the tires in the race (no excessive overheating), which would be warmer.

When you take into account the tire issues, a bad/compromised set-up, and an off-form Hamilton, one can easily see the sudden loss of 5 tenths in Q3.

What's interesting though is that both Mercs were comfortably faster than the Ferraris in Q2 on the Softs:

HAM: 1:31.914 BOT: 1:32.063

VET: 1:32.385 RAI: 1:32.286

The Merc stopped liking the US in FP3.

Are you watched Qualifying or just times? Mercedes have 3 fast laps on soft in Q2. Ferrari have just one fast lap. And their first and only fast lap in Q2 was faster then Mercedes first and second fast lap. They beaten Ferrari's time only in third attempt.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

If I am right, then every track where PIRELLI opts to skip a compound in between, Mercedes might end up with tyre management headaches.

Unless like last year they bring an upgrade package that addresses the issue.

AFAIK, Mercedes never brought an update that widened the operating window of their car. IMO they simply overcame the "problem" by acing the set-up using past data experience and FP1 and FP2. They evidently got it more often right than wrong. Also, I think they got it more often right on the harder tire compounds and in cooler conditions and especially tracks with a smooth surface. In hotter conditions, they struggled more. Even so, I think the problem they may be facing is just an inherent characteristic of their car. They may solve it by acing set-up, but not acing it could show significant performance issues (relative to RB and Ferrari).

Many folks from Mercedes that include Hamilton and Toto, at various stages of the past season mentioned that, some of the problems are fundamental to the car and it can only be fixed for next year's car. Whether they succeeded with W09, doesn't seem so, based on how the car is behaving. It is impossible to believe that, in the last 12 months, their car stood still, based on the qualifying times from last year and this, in the Chinese GP. Their tyre woes with W09 are probably much bigger than W08!

[BwajSF]

Unless like last year they bring an upgrade package that addresses the issue.

AFAIK, Mercedes never brought an update that widened the operating window of their car. IMO they simply overcame the "problem" by acing the set-up using past data experience and FP1 and FP2. They evidently got it more often right than wrong. Also, I think they got it more often right on the harder tire compounds and in cooler conditions and especially tracks with a smooth surface. In hotter conditions, they struggled more. Even so, I think the problem they may be facing is just an inherent characteristic of their car. They may solve it by acing set-up, but not acing it could show significant performance issues (relative to RB and Ferrari).

Many folks from Mercedes that include Hamilton and Toto, at various stages of the past season mentioned that, some of the problems are fundamental to the car and it can only be fixed for next year's car. Whether they succeeded with W09, doesn't seem so, based on how the car is behaving. It is impossible to believe that, in the last 12 months, their car stood still, based on the qualifying times from last year and this, in the Chinese GP. Their tyre woes with W09 are probably much bigger than W08!

It may be so or Mercs just had a Off day in the office in China.. Remember Ferrari Last Year in Silverstone 2017.. 1 Sec off in Qualifying and Struggled Hard to even touch Mercs in Race.. Because they couldnt switch on the tyres.. I really Believe its just a one off and Media are Making a Big deal out of it..

TO Be absolutely Real..

Australia : Merc were the Fastest and the best car there .. they deserved to Win but lost out in the end due to the safety car. so hypothetically speaking without safety car Mercs Wins race 1 Comfortably.

Bahrain : Okay Ferrari Won.. But sit Mercs Out Foxed Ferrari and almost Won it..

China : Bottas Got the Lead from Vettel with an Awesome Under Cut and Out Lap. Without the Safety Car.. It was Clearly Merc and Bottas to the top Step.

So in Parallel Universe if everything was based on Performance alone and not luck..

Australia - Hamilton
Bahrain - Vettel
China - Bottas

Merc winning 2 out 3 races
Ferrari winning 1 out 3 races
Close Fight.

Mercs Still have the Edge...

[Phil]

AFAIK, Many folks from Mercedes that include Hamilton and Toto, at various stages of the past season mentioned that, some of the problems are fundamental to the car and it can only be fixed for next year's car. Whether they succeeded with W09, doesn't seem so, based on how the car is behaving. It is impossible to believe that, in the last 12 months, their car stood still, based on the qualifying times from last year and this, in the Chinese GP. Their tyre woes with W09 are probably much bigger than W08!

I agree. My take is that there are a few issues that are working against them:

- Tire compounds softer than last year. Also they are having blistering problems on the very soft compounds, though Pirelli may change the outer layer of their tire for "safety reasons" (reported by AMuS) that may help them somewhat.

- Oil burning significantly reduced to 0.6l/100 from last year - which yields less of an advantage in QF vs other teams.

- Renault and Ferrari have closed the gap to Mercedes somewhat on the PU (diminishing returns).

- China wasn't a typical "strong Mercedes track" even last year, yet somehow we all believed it was

- my hunch is that some teams, perhaps even Ferrari included, are targeting using 4 PUs this year?

I'd say overall, the PU advantage they've been riding on has masked some of their fundamental tire problems or chassis/aero deficiencies. No doubt they have a very good car, but so does Ferrari and RedBull. Riding a performance advantage simply gave them a comfortable edge these last few years. Now that that difference has closed/diminished, it is exposing other flaws in their car we couldn't gauge earlier. Also, tires have always been a substantial factor in how much performance you can effectively put down. Not getting that right will prove very costly, especially now that the engine advantage has decreased. Good news is that their car is an evolution from last year, so in theory, they should have a better understanding on how to set-up their car from last years data. This only holds true however if the track conditions remain similar. Also, the tire compounds this year are quite different (and softer), so perhaps that data is not going help them too much.

Either way, Mercedes are in for a tough season. That RedBull / Ricciardo won and Max 'took out' Vettel was the best thing to happen to them. The gap isn't that big yet and Mercedes are even leading the WCC at the moment...

[LM10]

Do you think that Mercedes' concept is aggressive in a way that they have a much reduced working range of tyres? Did they kind of sacrifice a wide window in which the tyres work to have a big pure performance and solving the tyre problem would decrease this performance?

[BwajSF]

Do you think that Mercedes' concept is aggressive in a way that they have a much reduced working range of tyres? Did they kind of sacrifice a wide window in which the tyres work to have a big pure performance and solving the tyre problem would decrease this performance?

I dont think so @LM10 Cause no matter how Awesome the Engine Might be its the Four Tyres That are gonna put that power to the ground.. so they must have worked on how to widen the Sweet Spot of W08 so that this year challenger W09 would be must easier to setup..

But Frankly its just 3 races and Mercs are just trying to find thier Feet.. Its just a matter of time.. Come Barcelona we will know that real deal of who is where.

[Phil]

If I am to take another guess - and these are just my humble thoughts; I think some of it stems from Mercedes 2010 to 2013 years when they had a very fast car but suffered extreme degradation. This led them to invest heavily into advanced suspension designs: FRIC was born, later banned and replaced by the "trick suspension" that was also banned prior to the 2017 season. The trick suspension allowed them to run a car with little rake, but have a car that could retain planted throughout corners with less body roll. Since the trick suspension was banned, I believe some of the older traits of their aero/chassis concept have returned. I am not sure if it something that can be solved, unless they abandon their current design philosophy and go in the direction of RedBull and Ferrari (high[er] rake). Perhaps they can minimize the effect by acing the setup of the car to the track surface and the tire, but given that they are dealing with 3 different compounds at every race (and sometimes changing conditions between QF and the R as well as a car fully loaded with fuel and without), I think the car will always be at a greater compromise at some point in certain conditions than perhaps rivaling teams that follow a different design concept.

Even though in my opinion, the above (if true) sounds rather bleak, they are still a few things working in Mercedes favor: They probably still have the best PU (most efficient one at least) that may prove a bigger differentiator in some races still to come and the car at least on the harder compounds seems to be very competitive so far. It was clearly the fastest in Melbourne (vs a compromized Ferrari due to higher fuel usage), but Bahrain they seemed fairly competitive - at least on that one-stop strategy on the hard tires and forcing Ferrari to go along and in China during the race they seemed to be equal during the race as well (again, on the harder tires).

Baku may be closer to Melbourne again and work in Mercedes advantage.