Mercedes W13

[atanatizante]

Is there a flow wiz paint on the endplate RW? On the right side, it`s a blue colour but interesting on the other side, it`s a yellow one ...

There are rumours saying they were trying (just with HAM in Silverstone FP1, due to lack of time and spares) some alteration of the back cooling in order to see had they could energise the RW more with the slot in the engine cover near the N letter, something that RB18 is trying now ...

Then, we could see a nice picture from the downwash that creates the new front suspension bodywork/fairings ...

[continuum16]

https://postimages.org/

Is there a flow wiz paint on the endplate RW? On the right side, it`s a blue colour but interesting on the other side, it`s a yellow one ...

There are rumours saying they were trying (just with HAM in Silverstone FP1, due to lack of time and spares) some alteration of the back cooling in order to see had they could energise the RW more with the slot in the engine cover near the N letter, something that RB18 is trying now ...

Then, we could see a nice picture from the downwash that creates the new front suspension bodywork/fairings ...

Regarding the flow-viz, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure it was just an asymmetrical livery for an FTX promotion.

[holeindalip]

https://postimages.org/

Is there a flow wiz paint on the endplate RW? On the right side, it`s a blue colour but interesting on the other side, it`s a yellow one ...

There are rumours saying they were trying (just with HAM in Silverstone FP1, due to lack of time and spares) some alteration of the back cooling in order to see had they could energise the RW more with the slot in the engine cover near the N letter, something that RB18 is trying now ...

Then, we could see a nice picture from the downwash that creates the new front suspension bodywork/fairings ...

Regarding the flow-viz, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure it was just an asymmetrical livery for an FTX promotion.

That’s the way I see it as well

[ringo]

I suspect this car is still miles off. Ferrari revealed why the W13 looks like it has pace. Notice in the sprint Max seemed untouchable, this was becuase of low fuel weight. When the cars start on full tanks, it seems Max (which is suspect) isn't so great at setting up for good race pace and explains his relatively poor sprint performances. W13, and in particular Hamilton, looks good when other cars have high deg due to poor setup work. The Ferarri was nowhere in the sprint because the low weight wasn't enough to stress the RB's tyres and reveal it's wrong setup. But as soon as the race came, the F175 showed why it compromised sprint pace for race pace. So if Max does get his setup correctly, no one will touch him. I suspect Mercedes are even further behind than toto suggests. More like half a second or more behind.

[Vanja #66]

https://postimages.org/

Is there a flow wiz paint on the endplate RW? On the right side, it`s a blue colour but interesting on the other side, it`s a yellow one ...

There are rumours saying they were trying (just with HAM in Silverstone FP1, due to lack of time and spares) some alteration of the back cooling in order to see had they could energise the RW more with the slot in the engine cover near the N letter, something that RB18 is trying now ...

Then, we could see a nice picture from the downwash that creates the new front suspension bodywork/fairings ...

The cooling opening is there only for cooling purposes. Turbulent flow under the engine cover is too used-up to bring any benefit for flow energizing. On the other hand, if it starts mixing with colder air downstream, it might mess up cooling in that zone.

As for the front "downwash" there is nothing in that area that might create such an insane downwash, so it's definitely not flow-viz.

When the cars start on full tanks, it seems Max (which is suspect) isn't so great at setting up for good race pace and explains his relatively poor sprint performances. W13, and in particular Hamilton, looks good when other cars have high deg due to poor setup work. The Ferarri was nowhere in the sprint because the low weight wasn't enough to stress the RB's tyres and reveal it's wrong setup. But as soon as the race came, the F175 showed why it compromised sprint pace for race pace.

There was rain overnight before the main race and Leclerc asked for some changes to the car after the sprint race. So Sunday and Saturday were completely different in more ways than you mentioned. I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

[KeiKo403]

I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

While I normally read your posts and believe everything you say (given you 622 rating) I want to uneducatedly disagree with you here

There are other teams on the grid who have said as a concept the Merc design is quite good, I don’t know if that is just playing nice in public with some flattery but let’s not forget that Mercedes have the 3rd best concept right now. 7 other teams have done a worse job with (on the face of it) very similar concepts to what we could conceive as traditional designs.

Then there is talk of Ferrari & RedBull using loopholes in the rules which could be giving them some margin over the rest of the field which the FIA are looking to change, or not change, I haven’t yet caught up with the latest TD updates.

Overall I don’t think the Mercedes concept is wrong (not that you are saying it is)

Thank you for your technical and knowledgeable contributions on this forum though. If you do respond, be gentle

[mantikos]

I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

While I normally read your posts and believe everything you say (given you 622 rating) I want to uneducatedly disagree with you here

There are other teams on the grid who have said as a concept the Merc design is quite good, I don’t know if that is just playing nice in public with some flattery but let’s not forget that Mercedes have the 3rd best concept right now. 7 other teams have done a worse job with (on the face of it) very similar concepts to what we could conceive as traditional designs.

Then there is talk of Ferrari & RedBull using loopholes in the rules which could be giving them some margin over the rest of the field which the FIA are looking to change, or not change, I haven’t yet caught up with the latest TD updates.

Overall I don’t think the Mercedes concept is wrong (not that you are saying it is)

Thank you for your technical and knowledgeable contributions on this forum though. If you do respond, be gentle

I would trust the team of qualified aerodynamicists and engineers that won 8 in a row - right there with you. If wider pods were the magic bullet, everyone that switched would be leading or at least improving. How did that work out for the Williams and AMR?

[Just_a_fan]

I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

And if they bring an updated no-pods design next season, having learned from this season, and wipe the floor with everyone, will you still be of the opinion that the no-pods route is the wrong one?

There are high pods like the Red Bull and Ferrari that are behind Mercedes. There is a mini-pod and a big-pod design on track at the same time at Williams and the mini-pod car did better. AMR have had two versions of big-pod and languish around the back of the field even with the same drive train as the no-pod Merc.

What the two front runners have is an underfloor system that they are going to have to remove as it's possibly illegal.

If Mercedes end the season with a car that is capable of winning on merit, then changing to someone else's concept would be rather silly.

[Big Tea]

Is there a right or wrong way to go? or is it just one way is easier to develop and understand and the other takes more consideration. Maybe compounded by the lack of testing and (as the guy said) not being allowed to model it accurately enough due to rules.
This part may have been the mistake, if they realised soon enough they could not model it deep enough

[continuum16]

I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

And if they bring an updated no-pods design next season, having learned from this season, and wipe the floor with everyone, will you still be of the opinion that the no-pods route is the wrong one?

There are high pods like the Red Bull and Ferrari that are behind Mercedes. There is a mini-pod and a big-pod design on track at the same time at Williams and the mini-pod car did better. AMR have had two versions of big-pod and languish around the back of the field even with the same drive train as the no-pod Merc.

What the two front runners have is an underfloor system that they are going to have to remove as it's possibly illegal.

If Mercedes end the season with a car that is capable of winning on merit, then changing to someone else's concept would be rather silly.

Well yes, but you'd have to consider "winning on merit" as being competitive on all tracks. You can't win titles if your car only works on billard-table smooth circuits with fast corners.

On Vanja's point, I agree it is nowhere near the top two conceptually, but that doesn't mean it's behind. It's different. The current car, like many before it, is always on a knifedge. The suspension is extremely stiff (too stiff? Maybe, AMR use the same suspension and cannot find anywhere near the same performance as RB despite having a similar car aerodynamically) even relatively speaking and set-up window is extremely narrow. With the exception of maybe the W10 and W11 most Merc cars (since 2017 at least) have this characteristic.

I do not think the underfloor/plank thing will have huge competitive ramifications; RB have already said they don't have to do anything. Ferrari said they might have to make some changes but were not concerned.

It's much more important that Merc gets the correlation right. It was openly admitted that their models were way off reality regarding the Bahrain update. Recent updates seem to have shown better correlation. As others have noted, perhaps they underestimated how difficult it was to properly model their car concept. Will it pay off later? Maybe, but all we can do is speculate.

[wesley123]

or is it just one way is easier to develop and understand and the other takes more consideration. Maybe compounded by the lack of testing and (as the guy said) not being allowed to model it accurately enough due to rules.

I think this is more what is going on. iic the aero-induced porpoising was something they literally could not have simulated as rules didn't allow for testing at the required airspeeds.

If we compare cars then one thing that comes up with the Mercedes is that they are much more limited on packaging, everything has to be extremely compact, this would require much more resources to get right. The bigger sidepods seem to have more than sufficient space to house everything, meaning they could just design what they want, and place everything inside this box without any real effort. sidepod design would also be less aero-critical. I can imagine a slope like Red Bull is much easier to perfect than the aggressive slope of the Mercedes sidepod, which previously could be managed with all the aero devices around the sidepod.

Because of the limited time and resources, this automatically means Mercedes would have had less time to get the underbody right.

It's all speculation, of course, but I find it difficult to believe that the team that has been dominant on aerodynamics for the past years would get it so incredibly wrong, and would continue to get it wrong.

[Stu]

I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

And if they bring an updated no-pods design next season, having learned from this season, and wipe the floor with everyone, will you still be of the opinion that the no-pods route is the wrong one?

There are high pods like the Red Bull and Ferrari that are behind Mercedes. There is a mini-pod and a big-pod design on track at the same time at Williams and the mini-pod car did better. AMR have had two versions of big-pod and languish around the back of the field even with the same drive train as the no-pod Merc.

What the two front runners have is an underfloor system that is more effective over a wider range of operation.

If Mercedes end the season with a car that is capable of winning on merit, then changing to someone else's concept would be rather silly.

FTFY

[chrstphrln]

(...) There is a mini-pod and a big-pod design on track at the same time at Williams and the mini-pod car did better. (...)

Williams has a completely different opinion on this. Sure you're not seeing what you want to see?

[Just_a_fan]

I don't think W13 is anywhere near the top two cars conceptually, they should come up with a solution for wider sidepods with a high inlet to test it this year. Otherwise, W14 will also be compromised.

And if they bring an updated no-pods design next season, having learned from this season, and wipe the floor with everyone, will you still be of the opinion that the no-pods route is the wrong one?

There are high pods like the Red Bull and Ferrari that are behind Mercedes. There is a mini-pod and a big-pod design on track at the same time at Williams and the mini-pod car did better. AMR have had two versions of big-pod and languish around the back of the field even with the same drive train as the no-pod Merc.

What the two front runners have is an underfloor system that is more effective over a wider range of operation.

If Mercedes end the season with a car that is capable of winning on merit, then changing to someone else's concept would be rather silly.

FTFY

Didn't need fixing, thanks. It was accurate as it was.

[AA_2019]

What the two front runners have is an underfloor system that they are going to have to remove as it's possibly illegal.

I do not think the underfloor/plank thing will have huge competitive ramifications; RB have already said they don't have to do anything. Ferrari said they might have to make some changes but were not concerned.

Agree removing the flexi plank system should bring the w13 closer to the top two.

Merc certainly believe RB have some sort of flex floor/plank system. Whether the rule change from Belgium will stop them is another matter.

Christian Horner is absolutely brilliant at deflecting attention and blaming others. I remember watching him in 2010 on Sky F1 absolutely take the p*ss out of McLaren for saying RB's newly reintroduced exhaust blown diffuser was key to their performance, Horner claiming it had minimal impact on performance. All other teams copied the concept the next year as it had a massive impact on performance. Also read Adrian Newey's biography (How to Build a Car), he talks about the strategies used to delay FIA changes throughout his career.