Mercedes AMG Hyper Car

[Jolle]

This means if you take a corner at 120 kph, your wheels are skidding, at 130 you crash out but at 150 you get the downforce to work and you have grip again.

This is not true. I think this is some stupidity spread by the dumbest of the three idiots on Top Gear. Downforce raises at a square of the speed and effectively raises the Cf of the tire at the same curve. It's progressive. So long as your tires are up to temp, the point at which the car begins to oversteer or understeer is the highest speed you will achieve in that particular corner before the tire starts to slip. Most aero cars are dialed in with aero understeer, with the CoP ~3% behind the CoG.

I’m quoting from personal experience, not from a TV show

[Andres125sx]

I´ve heard several F1 drivers saying the same, I think one was Montoya after going wide at some corner. He said since he was not in a hurry he was just cruising around, but he reduced speed too much, DF went down too much, and the car went wide.


... but if top gear have said this, probably it´s the opposite and Montoya was wrong

[rscsr]

I´ve heard several F1 drivers saying the same, I think one was Montoya after going wide at some corner. He said since he was not in a hurry he was just cruising around, but he reduced speed too much, DF went down too much, and the car went wide.


... but if top gear have said this, probably it´s the opposite and Montoya was wrong

more likely to do with tire temps than anything else.

[Andres125sx]

Maybe, but I wouldn´t assume a F1 driver is wrong by default, and they perfectly know tires must be kept at their operating window

[SectorOne]

This means if you take a corner at 120 kph, your wheels are skidding, at 130 you crash out but at 150 you get the downforce to work and you have grip again.

This is not true. I think this is some stupidity spread by the dumbest of the three idiots on Top Gear. Downforce raises at a square of the speed and effectively raises the Cf of the tire at the same curve. It's progressive. So long as your tires are up to temp, the point at which the car begins to oversteer or understeer is the highest speed you will achieve in that particular corner before the tire starts to slip. Most aero cars are dialed in with aero understeer, with the CoP ~3% behind the CoG.

I’m quoting from personal experience, not from a TV show

It´s complete BS regardless of your personal experiences.

Edit: why? Because physics.

[NoDivergence]

The Toyota Mkiii Eagle made 10000 lbf of downforce with a flat floor and front and rear diffusers. The rear diffuser is a double diffuser, but three times the size of anything the 2009 F1 cars used. Current F1 cars must be idiotic to run S ducts as it generates very little downforce. This is like 10 times bigger volume of airflow. Don't know what you are talking about with the floor. The whole floor is low pressure and it's wetted area is generating downforce. All of the airflow under the floor is lower pressure than what's above the body. It's literally the reason why Mercedes went with a long wheelbase on the 2017 F1 car. Diffuser volume is what is important, not necessarily just the angle. Yeah, 40-45 degree AOA is optimum for downforce for a flap. The electric motors are not in hub, my mistake. But they are independent for each wheel, allowing electric torque vectoring. I'll offer you more than a beer that those mirrors do more than no benefit, but just adding drag. Their F1 car does have arrangements like this for the side mirror. I think on a track like Nordschleiffe, it'll be more like 20-30 seconds a lap faster. Around tighter tracks, 7 seconds.

The Valkyrie is not something you want to get in and out of often. Especially with a passenger. It's like trying to contort yourself into a large suitcase, sure it's human sized. But it's not ideal. Even the Ford GT is too tight for comfort. The Valkrie is even tighter

The distance of the Valkryie tunnel is signifcant from the ground. Downforce is a function of distance of the floor to the ground. There's no point of the Valkyrie floor that's as close as the Project One's

1. "Flat floor" as we know it by F1 and previous WEC regulations is NOT what the mandatory flat floor section was in the GTP and Group C rules of the time. The rules stated a short section of flat floor from behind the rearward most point of the front tire to 900 mm behind it. Behind that point (around where you'd want to start your ramp anyway), it was basically open (later a 280 mm tunnel depth was mandated). The tunnels were still HUGE, not at all "double", which was just a loophole exploited and not ideal.

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/ToytaEagleMkIII-RH6.jpg

2. Both volume and angle are important, as is the working plan area feeding the volume. ~14 deg is about where you'd start to see separations, most tunneled cars have a step from steeper then to shallower to the back of the car as seen above and below. The bellmouth shape ahead of the rear wheels allows the tunnels to work over a wider cross section of the floor and a much wider floor than F1 is allowed. F1 does things entirely differently because of rules. Most run an absurd amount of rake, to make the entirety of the underfloor essentially a shallow diffuser then excite it with the most aggressive kick up permitted and feasible at the diffuser itself. The extreme wheelbase (which is unregulated) gets the most out of that formula possible. No one would run this without rules. For instance, the Volkswagen I.D. R and similar unlimited hillclimb cars have essentially "GTP/Group C" tunnels, not an F1 floor.

https://i.imgur.com/GIzbL4F.jpg

3. The Eagle Mk. III with the bi-plane rear wing setup and dive planes was 9725 lbs @ 200 mph with an L:D ratio of 4.42:1. Other cars in the era were quoted at or around 10,000 lbs, and 6.0:1+ L:D ratios were achieved.

4. The Valkyrie is running at what looks like "cruising" height or something making the tunnels look further from the road than I'm sure they are. The AMR version has the car absolutely slammed which is surely how it will work on-track.

Your definition and my definition of tunnels and diffusers in racecar application must be very different. Diffusers transition from a flat section to a raised one. A tunnel starts near the front tire section of the car and extends to the rear. There is no completely flat section along the chord of the floor. So modern F1 and WEC dictates that the diffuser can't start until near the rear wheel. That's still a flat floor design as the Eagle Mk iii had.

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/ToyotaEagleMkIII-2.html

[Zynerji]

Not a "flat floor" with 6mm of variance IMHO.

[VARIANT | one]

Your definition and my definition of tunnels and diffusers in racecar application must be very different. Diffusers transition from a flat section to a raised one. A tunnel starts near the front tire section of the car and extends to the rear. There is no completely flat section along the chord of the floor. So modern F1 and WEC dictates that the diffuser can't start until near the rear wheel. That's still a flat floor design as the Eagle Mk iii had.

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/ToyotaEagleMkIII-2.html

Nomenclature, from back in the day anyway, referred to all the Group C/GTP underbodies as "tunnels". *shrug

No one started using the term "diffuser" until the dinky ones aft of the rear axle line started showing up on the 1994 WSC cars. I say if you can crawl into them, they're tunnels.

[MtthsMlw]

Haven't seen these active aero elements in action yet.

[WaikeCU]

Haven't seen these active aero elements in action yet.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BlNYhz6FKVA/

Air brakes?

[Just_a_fan]

Haven't seen these active aero elements in action yet.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BlNYhz6FKVA/

Air brakes?

No. They let high pressure air out of the front wheel arches. It reduces front end lift, basically, and may give rise to increased front end downforce if coupled to clever underbody aero behind the front splitter.

[Morteza]

First spy shots of the car (being tested in Bedfordshire)

[Just_a_fan]

If I had the money, I'd buy one just so I could cut that ridiculous fin off the back of the poor thing!

[jh199]

I love this photo of the wind tunnel model for the project one! It shows some details that disappear with a livery in place. And this second photo really shows how thin the drivers cell is. It looks like an lmp1 car. Check out the Jalopnik article below for a gif of the car in the wind tunnel as the car lowers into race mode. (Does anyone know how to link a gif into this thread?)

https://jalopnik.com/mercedes-is-like-t ... 1829386738

[Pat Pending]

Some slight differences in the tested prototype over the previously released images/photos - mirror stalks seem narrower and there is no fairing/deflector behind the front wheel. May not be representative of the final customer car configuration of course.