2021 AMG Mercedes F1 Team

[basti313]

Is it me or it seems that this year they just swapped the teams, coz it resembles me with what RB did last year and a couple of years ago:
- correlation issues or underestimate of the 2021 regs (especially regarding the floor rule);
- unreliable engine/PU;
- lower top speed due to a weaker PU;
- forced and unforced driver errors;
- race strategic blunders;
and you could add here if you want ...

In return, the 2021 RB team seems like the Merc team from the last years: a conservative approach, having a reliable car, good strategic choices in the race, few drivers errors, powerful and reliable PU and other qualities that we`ve used to see over years ...

I think 'driver errors' (and to an extent reliability and strategy decisions) are absolutely indicative of where the cars stand against each other. It's flipped 180 simply because RBR and drivers were having to push harder and take more risks in all aspects (driver, engine, strategy) to keep pace with Mercedes for the last few years, but now they are the pacesetters (regardless of what some of the less enlightened or purposely provocative forum members keep suggesting) which means Mercedes and drivers are having to push harder and take more risks than they'd like in all aspects to keep pace with Red Bull and do all the things Red Bull were historically forced to. It's pretty simple really.

Dunno where you take this from. Especially with Ham vs. Ros we had the strongest push between drivers ever.
If you look at the Q, you nearly always see one Merc driver with a deciding fault, both Mercs with a clean Q3 lap is really hard to find.
But I generally do not agree to the overall nonsense or sense that is tried to be made out of singular events:
- Ham bottled the Q3 laps at US
- Ver bottled the first Q3 lap
- Redbull bottled the Q3 on strategic terms by sending the cars out too late into drizzle.
- I have not seen flames/oil out of an exhaust in a race or Q. So where is the proof for any reliability issue?

So what exactly can we state from this crazy singular events? We even do not know where the cars stand in a clean Q3 session.

From which number do you take a weaker engine? Over the whole grid I can not see a difference from Merc to Honda on average. If anything the Merc is still stronger.
There is so much nonsense story played by Toto and Horner....people should trust their eyes and not the gossip.

[ringo]

What are you talking about Ham bottled laps? lol.
Anyhow, the RB package has been very good.
Works every and has traction in all temperatures. The list goes on.

The difference between now and the past is that in thr past redbull were further behind so they did not push as much. They just knew they did not have the pace and only pushed when they sniffed blood.
Now Mercedes are behind but closer than redbull were to them in the past. So theyre sniffing blood every week and really pushing to take advantage of the situation.
We could see from the last GP that the car was sliding all over the place. This was just Lewis trying to get more from the car than it could give. Which has been the story of the year for the team since winter testing.

I am very interested in what they can do in Mexico. If they will put on huge wings and if they will go with an aggressive engine map on both cars to try and claw back at least 10 points in Lewis' favour.

[El Scorchio]

Is it me or it seems that this year they just swapped the teams, coz it resembles me with what RB did last year and a couple of years ago:
- correlation issues or underestimate of the 2021 regs (especially regarding the floor rule);
- unreliable engine/PU;
- lower top speed due to a weaker PU;
- forced and unforced driver errors;
- race strategic blunders;
and you could add here if you want ...

In return, the 2021 RB team seems like the Merc team from the last years: a conservative approach, having a reliable car, good strategic choices in the race, few drivers errors, powerful and reliable PU and other qualities that we`ve used to see over years ...

I think 'driver errors' (and to an extent reliability and strategy decisions) are absolutely indicative of where the cars stand against each other. It's flipped 180 simply because RBR and drivers were having to push harder and take more risks in all aspects (driver, engine, strategy) to keep pace with Mercedes for the last few years, but now they are the pacesetters (regardless of what some of the less enlightened or purposely provocative forum members keep suggesting) which means Mercedes and drivers are having to push harder and take more risks than they'd like in all aspects to keep pace with Red Bull and do all the things Red Bull were historically forced to. It's pretty simple really.

Dunno where you take this from. Especially with Ham vs. Ros we had the strongest push between drivers ever.
If you look at the Q, you nearly always see one Merc driver with a deciding fault, both Mercs with a clean Q3 lap is really hard to find.
But I generally do not agree to the overall nonsense or sense that is tried to be made out of singular events:
- Ham bottled the Q3 laps at US
- Ver bottled the first Q3 lap
- Redbull bottled the Q3 on strategic terms by sending the cars out too late into drizzle.
- I have not seen flames/oil out of an exhaust in a race or Q. So where is the proof for any reliability issue?

So what exactly can we state from this crazy singular events? We even do not know where the cars stand in a clean Q3 session.

From which number do you take a weaker engine? Over the whole grid I can not see a difference from Merc to Honda on average. If anything the Merc is still stronger.
There is so much nonsense story played by Toto and Horner....people should trust their eyes and not the gossip.

It's fairly obvious and straightforward, isn't it? The more pressure you're under, the more risks you need to take. The more risks you take, the higher the probability of errors or setbacks.

The Mercedes team and Hamilton are under a great deal of pressure more than they have been in recent years and playing catch up, so there are more risks taken and more errors showing themselves. The inverse is true for Red Bull and Verstappen this season, who are no longer playing catch up but setting the benchmark.

[Marty_Y]

They haven't released a debrief video today, I wonder why?

[Kingshark]

They haven't released a debrief video today, I wonder why?

"I think the pace that we showed in Turkey and Sochi, in particular in terms of the race pace, it probably puts us a bit further ahead of them than they have been ahead of us here," he added. - Andrew Shovlin

I saw this quote from another forum and just assumed that it was from the debrief. I am surprised that they did not post their usual debrief video today.

[atanatizante]

What were the reasons behind they took a step back between FP1 and the rest of the weekend and most of all which one has had the biggest effect on car`s performance:

1. Altering the ride height in order to cope better with the bumps. Thus was downforced reduced which led to a triple-negative effect: a lower top speed, then they couldn`t run their squat setup proper and finally more rear tyre sliding even though they compensate with a bigger rear wing setup for the race

2. Higher track temperatures affected them more than RB, something that affected them back at Bahrein

3. The need to run some conservative PU/ICE mappings

There`s a blog (sometimes reliable) that throws a theory about the fact that between FP1 and FP3 they have had too many simulations to make (bear in mind that on the team YouTube channel there is an official team member saying there are millions of simulations to make for a particular race) and thus less time to try the best of them on the driver simulator rig, simulations that had to deal with at least 3 modified parameters like: track temp, tyre wear, bumps and squat setup. It`s said that RB is ahead of them in the area with the help of IA technology provided by Oracle, their IT team partner and also sponsor. Thus Merc drivers were on the back foot and need to sacrifice the FP3 session in order to try solutions ending with no so optimal setup for the rear tyres in the race. In contrast, RB drivers started the FP3 session hitting the ground running as we could see when they topped the timesheets ...

[atanatizante]

A funny but also usefully video on the team YouTube channel:



At the end of the clip, one child is stepping on the cascade parts of the front wing and Lewis quickly tells him not to step there rather on the main plain front wing, in this way he didn`t allow us to see how bending on those parts is acting, something that easily could be seen when we see footage on the camera front wing, when the car is load under braking or on the straights ...

[Just_a_fan]

A funny but also usefully video on the team YouTube channel:



At the end of the clip, one child is stepping on the cascade parts of the front wing and Lewis quickly tells him not to step there rather on the main plain front wing, in this way he didn`t allow us to see how bending on those parts is acting, something that easily could be seen when we see footage on the camera front wing, when the car is load under braking or on the straights ...

Haven't yet watched the video, but standing on the front wing flaps would probably damage them, that's why they wouldn't want them stood on. They're not designed to take a point load such as a person standing on them.

[e30ernest]

Debrief is out:

[SiLo]

A funny but also usefully video on the team YouTube channel:



At the end of the clip, one child is stepping on the cascade parts of the front wing and Lewis quickly tells him not to step there rather on the main plain front wing, in this way he didn`t allow us to see how bending on those parts is acting, something that easily could be seen when we see footage on the camera front wing, when the car is load under braking or on the straights ...

Haven't yet watched the video, but standing on the front wing flaps would probably damage them, that's why they wouldn't want them stood on. They're not designed to take a point load such as a person standing on them.

A person standing on them will be offering far less stress than what they get at 180mph. There are multiple videos of Lewis standing on the front wing because they are so strong.

[Just_a_fan]

A funny but also usefully video on the team YouTube channel:



At the end of the clip, one child is stepping on the cascade parts of the front wing and Lewis quickly tells him not to step there rather on the main plain front wing, in this way he didn`t allow us to see how bending on those parts is acting, something that easily could be seen when we see footage on the camera front wing, when the car is load under braking or on the straights ...

Haven't yet watched the video, but standing on the front wing flaps would probably damage them, that's why they wouldn't want them stood on. They're not designed to take a point load such as a person standing on them.

A person standing on them will be offering far less stress than what they get at 180mph. There are multiple videos of Lewis standing on the front wing because they are so strong.

The wing as a whole is very strong, yes, but the rear-most flap won't be in comparison, especially at the inboard end of it where it's just got a single point of support from the flap below. Have a child jump on the rear flap and I'd expect some damage. It's worth remembering that these devices are designed to support a uniformly distributed load across the entire piece, not a single point load applied in a disadvantageous location.

[SiLo]

Sorry I missed that part of the video as I skipped through some bits! You are correct the smaller flaps would likely break.

[atanatizante]

One question: if HAM had mirrored VER`s strategy for pitting right the next lap for new tyres and the same compound, bearing in mind that HAM has the upper hand in tyre management, would HAM have had a better chance at the end of the race? I mean the undercut of 1,5-2 sec. would have had nullified after each 3-4 laps afterwards and it would end to which driver (and car) would have managed the tyres better at the end of the race ...

[Gillian]

One question: if HAM had mirrored VER`s strategy for pitting right the next lap for new tyres and the same compound, bearing in mind that HAM has the upper hand in tyre management, would HAM have had a better chance at the end of the race? I mean the undercut of 1,5-2 sec. would have had nullified after each 3-4 laps afterwards and it would end to which driver (and car) would have managed the tyres better at the end of the race ...

He could not overtake with fresher tires. In your scenario they'd have similar tires. I don't see a different outcome in that.

[RZS10]

Was his pace advantage on hards as big as Max' advantage on the mediums? (i don't believe it was)
Max could easily stick to his gearbox throughout the entire first stint, without going a bit longer Lewis could have gone in the very next lap which would have put him close to Max right away (without the need to close the gap) and IF he could have stuck to him for the entire stint maybe, just maybe, he could have gone for the undercut for the second stop himself - but that ignores potential issues in clearing the traffic and what role Perez might have played.