2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[ValeVida46]

This race is clearly not a good benchmark for a new upgrade when it is revealed you've ran the car illegally.

Let's just put it on record, we both think each other are biased. I mean, you accused me of calling the floor illegal when I did no such thing. Clear bias. But who cares? Make a good argument instead of resorting to these claims of bias.

The plank wear was not measured after the sprint race. And it's not the plank wear itself that yields performance. Setting the car up too low will yield a performance advantage for the entire race, even before the plank has worn down below the limit. This is a clear performance advantage and thus we will have to wait to truly evaluate the effect of their new floor.

Your rhetoric is indicative of inciting a reaction. As if Mercedes ran the car intentionally illegally.
From The Race:

HOW MUCH OF A PACE ADVANTAGE WOULD IT BE?
It’s impossible to answer this question with even an educated guess based on the available information.
There are various parameters. It’s true that running lower can make the ground effect floor work harder and therefore generate more downforce. However, at a bumpy track, it could well be specific parts of the circuit or even kerb strikes with the underside that are responsible for the illegal wear.
What’s more, if you run the car too low and are hitting the ground, that could have a negative effect. So you could spin almost any kind of argument for performance gains or losses, but there’s no definitive answer.
However, there’s nothing to suggest that the Mercedes or Ferrari were running in a ride height range that would have transformed their pace either way.
Teams are also cautious about plank wear because it is almost inevitably an instant exclusion, so it would be absurd to deliberately take the risk just because it confers a performance gain.

What's wrong with just saying there wasn't enough time to get optimum set up and both Ferrari and Mercedes where slightly more aggressive than others? We don't know the measurement of each planks wear, and it might have been miniscule gnats ball hair out of the window by Merc and Ferrari or conversely in by RB/Macca.

[ValeVida46]

Pic for clarity

What clarity?

There's no lap number.
There's not even any indication if one was from practice, a warm down lap, a race lap, a quali lap, zip.
Without that, it's nothing but confirmation bias. Again.

Yu can't even be sure it's the same corner!

Well I have this...probably taken shortly after the RB pic...

[organic]

Pic for clarity

What clarity?

There's no lap number.
There's not even any indication if one was from practice, a warm down lap, a race lap, a quali lap, zip.
Without that, it's nothing but confirmation bias. Again.

Yu can't even be sure it's the same corner!

We can because they were all taken by the same photographer in FP1 from the same position.

We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar. You can also use the striped kerb on the left to further judge where they are relative to one another.

[ValeVida46]

We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar. You can also use the striped kerb on the left to further judge where they are relative to one another.

https://www.the-race.com/content/images ... iRes-1.jpg

This must be a different Ferrari then right? Same lateral load. Same angle, Same corner. No sparks.

So clearly, not informative at all.

[mwillems]

I do not know how any conclusions can be ascertained at this point, from either perspective.

[mwillems]

We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar. You can also use the striped kerb on the left to further judge where they are relative to one another.

https://www.the-race.com/content/images ... iRes-1.jpg

This must be a different Ferrari then right? Same lateral load. Same angle, Same corner. No sparks.

So clearly, not informative at all.

He didn't say it was, he corrected someone who was factually incorrect and nothing more, take a moment, you're getting way to into this

[ValeVida46]

We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar. You can also use the striped kerb on the left to further judge where they are relative to one another.

https://www.the-race.com/content/images ... iRes-1.jpg

This must be a different Ferrari then right? Same lateral load. Same angle, Same corner. No sparks.

So clearly, not informative at all.

He didn't say it was, he corrected someone who was factually incorrect and nothing more, take a moment, you're getting way to into this

"We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar"

Dunno... reads as similar but point taken.

[organic]

https://www.the-race.com/content/images ... iRes-1.jpg

This must be a different Ferrari then right? Same lateral load. Same angle, Same corner. No sparks.

So clearly, not informative at all.

He didn't say it was, he corrected someone who was factually incorrect and nothing more, take a moment, you're getting way to into this

"We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar"

Dunno... reads as similar but point taken.

I am not wishing to claim it's scientific or perfectly accurate. But that a comparison drawn on Friday after fp1 highlighting visible large differences (and the pictures selected simply one comparison of many that show this) was then followed by disqualifications for 2/3 teams each of whom were running aggressively. Usually such stark differences are not so plainly obvious

[Cs98]

This race is clearly not a good benchmark for a new upgrade when it is revealed you've ran the car illegally.

Let's just put it on record, we both think each other are biased. I mean, you accused me of calling the floor illegal when I did no such thing. Clear bias. But who cares? Make a good argument instead of resorting to these claims of bias.

The plank wear was not measured after the sprint race. And it's not the plank wear itself that yields performance. Setting the car up too low will yield a performance advantage for the entire race, even before the plank has worn down below the limit. This is a clear performance advantage and thus we will have to wait to truly evaluate the effect of their new floor.

Your rhetoric is indicative of inciting a reaction. As if Mercedes ran the car intentionally illegally.

That is your assumption based on your personal feelings, I can't speak to that. I also can't speak to fence-sitters like The Race, they are after all trying to not alienate certain fans. All we know for sure are the facts. Which is that they ran an illegal set-up with the car too low to the ground. That's a performance differentiator with this generation of cars. Aerodynamic priniciples don't stop applying just because Merc (or Ferrari) run their cars outside the legal limits. We'll see soon enough what the real performance is.

[Cs98]

He didn't say it was, he corrected someone who was factually incorrect and nothing more, take a moment, you're getting way to into this

"We can also see the tyre deformation, as well as the amount the tyre separates from the rim. All are experiencing this in similar amounts. This gives a direct indication that the lateral load experienced by each car is similar"

Dunno... reads as similar but point taken.

I am not wishing to claim it's scientific or perfectly accurate. But that a comparison drawn on Friday after fp1 highlighting visible large differences (and the pictures selected simply one comparison of many that show this) was then followed by disqualifications for 2/3 teams each of whom were running aggressively. Usually such stark differences are not so plainly obvious

Indeed, not proof of anything on its own. But taken as a piece of the puzzle with the massive final puzzle piece being literal confirmation of them running the cars too low through DQ, it is an interesting picture.

[Luscion]

What clarity?

There's no lap number.
There's not even any indication if one was from practice, a warm down lap, a race lap, a quali lap, zip.
Without that, it's nothing but confirmation bias. Again.

Yu can't even be sure it's the same corner!

Well I have this...probably taken shortly after the RB pic...
https://www.the-race.com/content/images ... iRes-1.jpg

The guy whos photos everyone is using to show how much higher the RB was is now telling people not to read into it because it was one set of photos and he has more of the RB sparking in that corner just like the rest of the cars



Hell here's a picture he has of the RB sparking on the ground like the others

[organic]

RB is clearly far past the apex there

[Luscion]

RB is clearly far past the apex there

He says he has photos of it so maybe he will post them, also explaining that it's due to them riding the kerb on the left, says that RB is ofc using a higher ride height but its not massive. It's better to look at his Twitter than me relaying it as he's explaining his reasoning for what he's saying right now

[organic]

RB is clearly far past the apex there

He says he has photos of it so maybe he will post them, also explaining that it's due to them riding the kerb on the left, says that RB is ofc using a higher ride height but its not massive. It's better to look at his Twitter than me relaying it as he's explaining his reasoning for what he's saying right now

Fair enough. We don't have to use his pics though

[ValeVida46]

I am not wishing to claim it's scientific or perfectly accurate. But that a comparison drawn on Friday after fp1 highlighting visible large differences (and the pictures selected simply one comparison of many that show this) was then followed by disqualifications for 2/3 teams each of whom were running aggressively. Usually such stark differences are not so plainly obvious

But then we do have the photo of the Ferrari ambling without it's belly scraping the floor.
We also have photo's of the RB19 scraping the floor at a flatter section of that corner.
Maybe RB just...JUST...got into the confines of legality basing it on the photos and the "visible large differences".