Mercedes Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Zynerji]

Come on guys. The rules dictate that the hardware has to be the same between all teams.
The only difference is that Mercedes for Example might run more aggressive calibration because they can afford to do so.

How can they afford to do so, and others not, if they have identical hardware?

The only time this makes sense is on year old PU deals.

I bet Sauber started Australia with the same map(ish) Ferrari ended with at AbuDhabi.

[restless]

hardware is same. Software is not.

[MrPotatoHead]

Come on guys. The rules dictate that the hardware has to be the same between all teams.
The only difference is that Mercedes for Example might run more aggressive calibration because they can afford to do so.

How can they afford to do so, and others not, if they have identical hardware?

The only time this makes sense is on year old PU deals.

I bet Sauber started Australia with the same map(ish) Ferrari ended with at AbuDhabi.

Because the customer teams have to pay for their engines... I thought that was obvious.

[dans79]

How can they afford to do so, and others not, if they have identical hardware?

Because they know every little detail about the engines design and it's capabilities.

If I build and engines and sell them to you, you are just getting the engines, maps and specs that ensure they last the amount of miles required by the contract.

You aren't getting my intellectual property

• blueprints
• details about the manufacturing process
• access to my the detailed R&D archive

Because I have access to the intellectual properly, I might know:

• I can push the engine to 107% of it's rated output for 1% of its life span at the cost of reducing it's total life span by 10%.
• I can push the engine to 103% of it's rated output for 1% of it's life span, if i can keep the temps below a certain level and I run a certain oil.
• I can push the engine to 102% of it's rated output for 1% of it's life span, if i can keep the temps below a certain level and I run a certain fuel mixture.

[Zynerji]

Come on guys. The rules dictate that the hardware has to be the same between all teams.
The only difference is that Mercedes for Example might run more aggressive calibration because they can afford to do so.

How can they afford to do so, and others not, if they have identical hardware?

The only time this makes sense is on year old PU deals.

I bet Sauber started Australia with the same map(ish) Ferrari ended with at AbuDhabi.

Because the customer teams have to pay for their engines... I thought that was obvious.

That makes no sense...

If Merc spend 500m to develop engines, then makes 30 identical for a season, and sells 20 for 10m, what makes them able to "afford" more performance out of their engine modes?

They are holding back for a performance advantage, and that cripples fair competition. That is literally signing a contract to always lose the race. I have no respect for that.

[dans79]

If Merc spend 500m to develop engines, then makes 30 identical for a season, and sells 20 for 10m, what makes them able to "afford" more performance out of their engine modes?

See my post directly above.

[MrPotatoHead]

How can they afford to do so, and others not, if they have identical hardware?

The only time this makes sense is on year old PU deals.

I bet Sauber started Australia with the same map(ish) Ferrari ended with at AbuDhabi.

Because the customer teams have to pay for their engines... I thought that was obvious.

That makes no sense...

If Merc spend 500m to develop engines, then makes 30 identical for a season, and sells 20 for 10m, what makes them able to "afford" more performance out of their engine modes?

It's a minor detail but Mercedes can afford to run closer to the limit because if they do have an engine failure they don't have to pay retail price for extra engines... where customers do, most of the customer teams don't have extra budget laying around for extra engines... i thought that much was obvious.

[Zynerji]

If Merc spend 500m to develop engines, then makes 30 identical for a season, and sells 20 for 10m, what makes them able to "afford" more performance out of their engine modes?

See my post directly above.

So, they lie to their customers about maximum operating parameters of the hardware? To reserve a competitive advantage?

[dans79]

If Merc spend 500m to develop engines, then makes 30 identical for a season, and sells 20 for 10m, what makes them able to "afford" more performance out of their engine modes?

See my post directly above.

So, they lie to their customers about maximum operating parameters of the hardware? To reserve a competitive advantage?

No, the world isn't as black and white as you want to paint it.

Every team has literally hundreds of different contractual obligations, to everything from brake, to radiator, to fuel and oil manufacturse. This was exactly the case with Mclaren in 2014, they ran ExxonMobil products while Mercedes ran Petronas. Dennis was upset specifically because Mercedes wouldn't optimize their engine to meet his needs, aka his contractual obligations.

As I said in the past Mercedes and every other factory team designs the engine to the exact specs of their team.

If The 2018 Merc power unit can produce 950HP regardless of who your oil & fuel manufacture is, but 1000HP running Petronas blends, it's your problem if your running ExxonMobil or shell not theirs.

[atanatizante]

These are the facts:

1.The rules dictate that the hardware has to be the same between all teams. More of that, customers should have the same PU mappings as works team (Toto was saying that on Sky at the beginning of the year)

2.Merc team is always designing a car around their PU and the customers teams are doing the other way around …

3. Of course, being both PU and chassis supplier Merc team has a superior integration that lead them to having better inter-coolers, rads, fluids, therefore better internal heat flow, hence allowing them to run their PU harder …

4.Williams has his own gearbox and have another lube&fuel partner and Force India has the same gearbox as Merc team but not so sure about their fuel&lube provider … Bear in mind that only fuel formula alone could provide them at least 20HP, as one of the McLaren officials said back in 2014 it was one of the reason they went to Honda …

5.Customers teams, even if they have superior fuel, lubs, rads, internal heat flow, PU mapping and so on, in the end they couldn`t afford to get an engine blow or other PU failure, hence they always run with a safe mapping on board …

On another note, I`m interesting to know, now they have a 5 race per PU rule next year, had they been going to decrease the power output or rather increase it coz they reinforced the whole PU?

[63l8qrrfy6]

This is getting a bit out of hand.

Hardware is not exactly the same as customers design their own charge air coolers and radiators to Merc performance specs. I suppose they do have the freedom to play with engine output and cooling package size based on specific track needs.

When Mercedes do their chassis dyno tests they will be using an MGP car with MGP specific cooling package which means customer setups are never fully validated. I think it is just common sense for customers to run the engines more conservatively - be it slightly different modes or fewer laps for the same modes. This is just being sensible rather than trying to cheat others like some here claim.

Also let's not forget that Brixworth engineers get big podium bonuses for any Merc PU regardless what car it's in.

[Craigy]

This is getting a bit out of hand.

Hardware is not exactly the same as customers design their own charge air coolers and radiators to Merc performance specs. I suppose they do have the freedom to play with engine output and cooling package size based on specific track needs.

Interesting to note that the "performance specs" (eg. sizing) can change without any warning at all.
Example: Mclaren being totally wrongfooted by Mercedes over the log-style exhausts at the preseasontests in 2014 with the MP4-29.
Shenanigans on the part of Mercedes meant that McLaren had actually enough spare space to package a luggage compartment into their car, because the dimensions of the exhausts were changed at the last minute.

Basically, even if the specs are shared, *when* the information is shared is crucial, and there's really no restriction on that.

[63l8qrrfy6]

This is getting a bit out of hand.

Hardware is not exactly the same as customers design their own charge air coolers and radiators to Merc performance specs. I suppose they do have the freedom to play with engine output and cooling package size based on specific track needs.

Interesting to note that the "performance specs" (eg. sizing) can change without any warning at all.
Example: Mclaren being totally wrongfooted by Mercedes over the log-style exhausts at the preseasontests in 2014 with the MP4-29.
Shenanigans on the part of Mercedes meant that McLaren had actually enough spare space to package a luggage compartment into their car, because the dimensions of the exhausts were changed at the last minute.

Basically, even if the specs are shared, *when* the information is shared is crucial, and there's really no restriction on that.

I don't remember the McLaren episode very well, but I think at some point towards the end of the season they gave up on log exhausts anyway ? Or was it the next season ?

But yeah, point taken, as an engine supplier you do get opportunities to play some nasty tricks on purpose or through genuine oversight.

[Webber2011]

If this "Strat 7" is programmed in, what's to stop a team like Williams using it whenever they want ?

Say they are 4th and closing in on a podium, why wouldn't they ?

Because strat 7 is not always there, and sometimes it does something else. It seemsis it totally changeable track to track depensing on what Mercedes wants to do with it. Sort of like the blank tile in scrabble.

OK, cheers mate.

The way I was reading into all this was that Merc would have a track specific "strat 7" extra power mode at every event, but the customer teams could only use it upon request, (i. e. When it suits Mercedes.)

That's what I personally disagree with.

I understand all the talk about Merc having the best optimisation as far as packaging, fuel/lubricants and the like, and have no problem with that.

They are fully entitled to have that advantage.
I'd be very disappointed if they had to share those secrets.

I guess it's a lot more complex than what we see at first glance.


Mercedes would be well pi$$ed if let's say Williams, decided to run in the highest mode for too long, and next thing there's 100 million viewers witnessing one of their engines scattered all down the pit straight.

It still doesn't sit right with me if the customer teams are not given equal power settings though.
It seems like an unfair advantage.

Would it not be more reasonable for the customers to always have the same modes, but maybe with firm instructions on how long/often they are safe to be used ?

[Zynerji]

My point exactly.