[Team] Mercedes: Will they ever dominate again?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I wonder how aerodynamic his garden is......?

All his plants create negative lift so in a storm everything remains firmly planted...

[chillibowl]

Obviously like everyone way behind RB but otherwise has Merc been over playing how far behind they are? Some showmanship at play?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Obviously like everyone way behind RB but otherwise has Merc been over playing how far behind they are? Some showmanship at play?

That's something Alonso and Sainz have intimated.


https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/me...nso-/10451632/

[Adam43]

Outrage. Sportsman, or indeed anyone, play down their chances. Never been known before.

[seanyb505]

Oddly enough, it's that about Mercedes that has set them as the villain over the last 5 years or so. Ultimately, whoever wins doesn't impact me, so as I choose to watch for entertainment, a close race is what I like to see. Too many times Mercedes will indicate the race will be or is actually much closer than it appears, only for them to run away or nothing happens. Again today. Alonso's fast, my tires won't last, our car sucks, etc only for Hamilton to casually pick up the gap any time Alonso made a push. I get Hamilton has skills, but man what a downer for anyone who wanted to see a battle.

You hate to wish ill for anyone in a motor race, but man if Mercedes running top of mid pack isn't entertaining to me.

[Adam43]

Crikey, when you put it like that there is no wonder they’re vilified.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

That's something Alonso and Sainz have intimated.


https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/me...nso-/10451632/

I think they have been very busy over the last four weeks.
1. There is not as much wrong with the car as some people think.
2. the problems are a function of aerodynamic flow, not so much in the overall concept. Therefore, going back and looking at what the issue was and tackling it from a different point of perspective has opened the door to some alternative developments that are working.
3, This circuit is different from the previous two so some things may be working here that would not work so well at another venue and vice versa.

I made similar comment in an earlier post (713) on this thread.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

I think they have been very busy over the last four weeks.
1. There is not as much wrong with the car as some people think.
2. the problems are a function of aerodynamic flow, not so much in the overall concept. Therefore, going back and looking at what the issue was and tackling it from a different point of perspective has opened the door to some alternative developments that are working.
3, This circuit is different from the previous two so some things may be working here that would not work so well at another venue and vice versa.

I made similar comment in an earlier post (713) on this thread.

One lap pace is one thing, I'd say they are still a very long way off RB pace overall.

[Aysedasi]

I don't have any doubts about that. Max knows he can breeze past any of the opposition, and when aided by DRS it's close to embarrassing.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I don't have any doubts about that. Max knows he can breeze past any of the opposition, and when aided by DRS it's close to embarrassing.

RBR is a whole level above everyone.
The car is a very stable platform so any changes and set up produces a reaction they can verify from the baseline. The AMR is the second most stable platform and MB have had Hamilton suggest the MB is far from that at the rear..

Then there is the aero game and a suggestion from Gary Anderson that the beam wing is designed to stall the floor when DRS is applied, reducing again the drag giving additional speed on top of the DRS gain. Suggestions of of 33kph difference on a car without DRS....So engineering rules the day and no one but RBR has a handle on this gain.

[Richard C]

I suspect the RB has a much wider (and maybe deeper) performance window. So probably works well on most tracks and might be blindingly fast in many. The Mercedes might have a much narrower window. So obviously slow in more situations than the RB and maybe even when quick, not at quick as the RB.

Richard

[Tourer]

Changing of roles within the technical dept at Mercedes. On the face of it, sounds like they're getting themselves sorted out, but as we know, performance swings shouldn't be expected overnight.

The accompanying analysis piece is quite interesting, with more detail, even though some of it is conjecture, included.

Certainly sounds like a successful team that then lost a few key people and also took its eye well and truly off the ball - will see how it all plays out.

[S griffin]

Not surprised they've bought Allison back into that role, they seem a bit lost without him there

[daneferrari]

I think there's every chance. They got off to a good start in this year's Constructors' Cup

[chillibowl]

actually thought their Monaco updates seemed to yield some positives in Spain but this article with quotes from Shovlin would seem to indicate that their focus particularly in the rear suspension area is more about development for 2024?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/m...ment/10481878/

could just be the way the article has been framed, but starting to sound like Merc have already switched focus to next year?

on a separate note, also sounds like they are getting closer to extending Ham's contract.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

actually thought their Monaco updates seemed to yield some positives in Spain but this article with quotes from Shovlin would seem to indicate that their focus particularly in the rear suspension area is more about development for 2024?

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/m...ment/10481878/

could just be the way the article has been framed, but starting to sound like Merc have already switched focus to next year?

on a separate note, also sounds like they are getting closer to extending Ham's contract.

Could well be that they are focusing on next year more, as the budget cap may not give them enough to "get there" this year, even if they have all the needed answers.

No doubt they'll do as much as they can this year within the budget contstraints though - hopefully in Canada both AM and Ferrari have more "regular" weekends too and we can get a better idea of exactly how the updated MB lines up against them.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

could just be the way the article has been framed, but starting to sound like Merc have already switched focus to next year?

I expect that even in cases like Mercedes in which they feel they have multiple areas to work on that we may see evolutionary updates vs. just showing up next year with a radically different car. As mentioned above, this is driven by the budget cap and I think this is a great example of the cap working as desired.

Richard

[chillibowl]

agreed. very much like that the cap prevents a team from just spending their way out of trouble. so for me also, its a big win for the process and also like how Merc are taking it on the chin and (as far as we know) accepting that this is the new way of things.

that said though, i do hope this doesnt limit teams from taking chances/pushing the boundaries as there may be more merit to ideas like size zero sidepods then initially observed...so who knows, perhaps we will see the idea come back one day?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

that said though, i do hope this doesnt limit teams from taking chances/pushing the boundaries as there may be more merit to ideas like size zero sidepods then initially observed...so who knows, perhaps we will see the idea come back one day?

That is a good question. I can see it happening both ways. On one hand, you might have a conservative approach that you don't try to go down a path that if it proves to be wrong will be costly to reverse course. That should mean less radical solutions just showing up.

On the other hand, I don't think F1 has a history of teams playing it safe. Even in this new cost capped era, I think teams will still have that core DNA of taking risks if they think it will pay off. I think we all have seen how people, businesses, teams, etc. to convince themselves that something will work and take the risk. Even if logically it might be a bad move.

Overall, I can see some damping effect especially if the new idea requires costly up/front R&D. But otherwise I think teams will try new ideas, but at the same time converge on/copy ideas that others are using that work.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

On the other hand, I don't think F1 has a history of teams playing it safe. Even in this new cost capped era, I think teams will still have that core DNA of taking risks if they think it will pay off. I think we all have seen how people, businesses, teams, etc. to convince themselves that something will work and take the risk. Even if logically it might be a bad move.

good point...that very much does ring true!

[P38 in workshop]

Words are insufficient to express my reaction to this https://www.pitpass.com/75489/Hamilt...-on-domination.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

Words are insufficient to express my reaction to this https://www.pitpass.com/75489/Hamilt...-on-domination.

I mean if you ignore the entire irony and entitlement of the entire thing, to me its an indication that F1 probably is not much fun for Lewis now that he is no longer winning.

Richard

[Greem]

I have a sneaking suspicion that the article is a classic piece of misdirection - I would wager real money that Hamilton was led into those answers by some very directed questioning. It's always interesting when a press piece doesn't quote the whole interview, isn't it?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Greem

I have a sneaking suspicion that the article is a classic piece of misdirection - I would wager real money that Hamilton was led into those answers by some very directed questioning. It's always interesting when a press piece doesn't quote the whole interview, isn't it?

Agree 100%.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Greem

I have a sneaking suspicion that the article is a classic piece of misdirection - I would wager real money that Hamilton was led into those answers by some very directed questioning. It's always interesting when a press piece doesn't quote the whole interview, isn't it?

A few thoughts...

Regarding "directed questioning" are we saying he is that naive that he was somehow trapped? He has been doing F1 interviews for what 16 years? He knows what he is saying.

Do print articles ever include the entire interview? I would say that most of the time they do not.

Yes, this could be some type of hack job with selective editing. But it's more than just the prior link that is running the story and there is enough quotes to see what is being said. Example being the Autosport/Motorsport article...

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/h...ield/10489088/

For me, it provides a bit more depth, but in the end, he is asking for something that is highly ironic given his history and it's also something he never asked for when it was on top of the world. He is a great driver, but like anyone else, he is capable of saying dumb and self serving things.

Richard