2025 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[SB15]

They did put more anti-lift the on he rear suspension but the problem is that the car is very prone to overheating the rears, the same issue that plagued the W15 as well. For some reason only the Mercedes is the car can't keep its temps in working order with the Pirelli's, that maybe the big flaw with the Downwash sidepods because they never had this issue with the Zero-pod concept. Mike Elliot came up with a concept where it doesn't impact the tyres as much with the W13.

And this is inline about what I said about the importance on mechanical parts, you can bring whatever big aero upgrade you want @OverheatedTurbo, but the main focus for them is without question the brake drum cooling front and rear, cooling internally for the engine and distribution of heat with the cooling outlets, and more suspension modifications.

Team needs take a page out of Alain Prost's strategy and put extreme focus on racing simulations because it's my main pet peeve when I race, because points are always awarded on Sunday.

When will that be implemented tho? JA said that the focus is to keep rears under control and I thought that most of the package was focused on that..

Don't know. Best way forward is ironically look at the Post-W14 design with the side-pods. Mclaren must've seen how the W14 handled its aero wake for the rear tyres that was blind to Mercedes, and now that Redbull did the same design language with the upgrades, the picture became very clear to me.

It may seem Mercedes got blindsided again that the W14 aero design had far more potential than they thought and the W13 aero concept was ahead of it's time and wasn't as bad as everyone foretold because of how both cars avoided the future issue which was the overheating of the Pirelli's.

[Lasssept]

George: We've been doing everything with the setup to try and find solutions, but there's clearly something more fundamental in the car...

[SB15]

George: We've been doing everything with the setup to try and find solutions, but there's clearly something more fundamental in the car...

It's probably the Aero design and the management of hot air wake from the front tyres, wheel brows, sidepods, endplate, Venturi- tunnel exits from the floor edge when it interacts with the rears. This may also be exaggerated when behind another car in dirty air. In cooler conditions, this isn't a problem because the air isn't as nearly as hot when interacting with the cars aero platform.

That's probably why Mercedes were soo quick in Las Vegas because the W15's overbody aero wake allowed the tyres to be in the right optimal temperatures that had minimal wear and minimal graining in those chilly conditions

This is probably what Mclaren and Redbull were trying to avoid when they race in average weather conditions.

[maygun]

I started to believe that not upgrading the car but fine-tuning and finding the sweet spot, is the way to go for this regulation of the cars, Williams didn't change their car but just fine-tuning every weekend and they are literally become faster than Merc and Ferrari, this upgrades might be more promising but it would take at least couple of race weekends to get the correct performance from them.

[OverheatedTurbo]

I started to believe that not upgrading the car but fine-tuning and finding the sweet spot, is the way to go for this regulation of the cars, Williams didn't change their car but just fine-tuning every weekend and they are literally become faster than Merc and Ferrari, this upgrades might be more promising but it would take at least couple of race weekends to get the correct performance from them.

Maybe. China and Bahrain were hot and they did really good. Could be a setup issue with the revised rear suspension. Rus said it felt it was moving on the straights. Oh well, they’ll learn and regroup.

[F1Krof]

22-25 it's a farce. Better scratch it now and focus on 26. With less reliance on underbody DF, they might fair better aero wise. The ground-effect aero philosophy just isn't their thing. I'm still convinced that they should've stubbornly stayed with their won zero-pod (whatever) philosophy they had in the beginning. As somebody pointed out, their weakest part was the drag, low top speed, but they almost always better on race then in qualy, and their tyre management was very good, if not the best. You just can't be a champion by being a copy-cat.

[venkyhere]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

[Farnborough]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

I wondered the same, but without having definitive confirmation of exactly what was used throughout the weekend.

Seeing that it would be valuable in getting real race experience IF they've changed to meet compliance level expectations, certainly seem to change race performance. Making it clear, I've not seen confirmation of what was used.

By contrast, the slo-mo of Williams across the Variante Alta ? track section showed the most extraordinary level of "constructional elasticity " in front wing complete assembly.

[Lasssept]

The Race

Mercedes' tyre management hasn't improved

What was already a question mark over a key Mercedes weakness from 2024 has seemingly been definitively answered after a third race in a row where tyre management has badly let it down.

“We had absolutely zero pace,” lamented George Russell. “Clearly a trend. When it's hot, we're nowhere.”

On another track, with different conditions and using different compounds, Mercedes was once again vulnerable on race pace after a great qualifying effort from Russell to line up third.
..
In fact, things were so bad Russell was convinced something had broken on the car, although the data Mercedes had available before getting the car back properly afterwards hadn’t indicated a problem.

Instead it just seems to be that despite a step in one-lap pace, Mercedes’ main weakness is still very much there. As deputy technical director Simone Resta admitted: “I don't think necessarily that there's been an improvement in terms of tyre management.

“I can see a more generic pace improvement last year to this year, but nothing specific to the tyre management so far.”

[SB15]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

No it’s the repositioning of the wishbones they did with the rear suspension this weekend. They did not have this much rear tyre overheating until they made this change. I think they did it to improve high-speed cornering, which Fdataanalysis on Twitter shown that the car was very good in, but we should all know that less give (stiffness) on the suspension promotes more tyre heat because how much strain the tyres are in vs softer setups.

But this weekend showed something that is very clear to me.

So what’s my theory?

Well, I remember seeing the rain aero flow and with the RB19. I can now see why RBR made their sidepods as wide as possible and uniquely design their Venturi exits on the floor edge to make sure the air wake goes around the rear wheels as possible, hence their aero efficiency and straight line speed, but some of the wake does hit the tyre slightly and since the Redbull is more stiffer than others the tyres heats up.

McLaren probably design their car to have more inward inwash, which allow air to flow more towards the beam-wing, promoting more downforce and that’s maybe why they’re slower on the straights. How I noticed is because of how the rear engine cover is designed that looks like exactly like the Launch-spec W13’s rear engine cover. Brake cooling was not the whole story with the MCL39 to managing rear tyre temps, it may seem it’s the overall aero package took huge inspiration from the End-season Mercedes W14 and some queues from
The W13 last year with the MCL38.

Mike Elliot was not the issue, the zeropod concept design clearly was ahead of its time. Best thing for Merc is to go back to the old rear suspension design and redesign their floor edge, front wing end plates, and sidepods. Then decide if they want the wake to go more around the rears like RBR or more inwards like the McLaren. If it were me, I would go with McLaren’s solution.

[Space-heat]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

No it’s the repositioning of the wishbones they did with the rear suspension this weekend. They did not have this much rear tyre overheating until they made this change. I think they did it to improve high-speed cornering, which Fdataanalysis on Twitter shown that the car was very good in, but we should all know that less give (stiffness) on the suspension promotes more tyre heat because how much strain the tyres are in vs softer setups.

But this weekend showed something that is very clear to me.

So what’s my theory?

Well, I remember seeing the rain aero flow and with the RB19. I can now see why RBR made their sidepods as wide as possible and uniquely design their Venturi exits on the floor edge to make sure the air wake goes around the rear wheels as possible, hence their aero efficiency and straight line speed, but some of the wake does hit the tyre slightly and since the Redbull is more stiffer than others the tyres heats up.

McLaren probably design their car to have more inward inwash, which allow air to flow more towards the beam-wing, promoting more downforce and that’s maybe why they’re slower on the straights. How I noticed is because of how the rear engine cover is designed that looks like exactly like the Launch-spec W13’s rear engine cover. Brake cooling was not the whole story with the MCL39 to managing rear tyre temps, it may seem it’s the overall aero package took huge inspiration from the End-season Mercedes W14 and some queues from
The W13 last year with the MCL38.

Mike Elliot was not the issue, the zeropod concept design clearly was ahead of its time. Best thing for Merc is to go back to the old rear suspension design and redesign their floor edge, front wing end plates, and sidepods. Then decide if they want the wake to go more around the rears like RBR or more inwards like the McLaren. If it were me, I would go with McLaren’s solution.

It is pretty clear the mid-wing that Merc first integrated, now on the Ferrari, McL and RB was ahead of its time. It is hard to say the Zeropod itself was a winning philosophy. The down washing and undercut engine cover geometry clearly plays a role.

Unfortunately from Merc, if like Ferrari, they have an mechanical issue at the rear then there is no quick fix. At this point, they might be best looking toward 26'. Especially if they feel the Spain TD will hit hard. Outside resolving the overheating so they can avoid a repeat in the 26' car.

The 26' engine seems to be competitive and with GE era ending, the amount of carry over will be limited. Completely changing the car as you listed this season is not feasible.

[OverheatedTurbo]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

No it’s the repositioning of the wishbones they did with the rear suspension this weekend. They did not have this much rear tyre overheating until they made this change. I think they did it to improve high-speed cornering, which Fdataanalysis on Twitter shown that the car was very good in, but we should all know that less give (stiffness) on the suspension promotes more tyre heat because how much strain the tyres are in vs softer setups.

But this weekend showed something that is very clear to me.

So what’s my theory?

Well, I remember seeing the rain aero flow and with the RB19. I can now see why RBR made their sidepods as wide as possible and uniquely design their Venturi exits on the floor edge to make sure the air wake goes around the rear wheels as possible, hence their aero efficiency and straight line speed, but some of the wake does hit the tyre slightly and since the Redbull is more stiffer than others the tyres heats up.

McLaren probably design their car to have more inward inwash, which allow air to flow more towards the beam-wing, promoting more downforce and that’s maybe why they’re slower on the straights. How I noticed is because of how the rear engine cover is designed that looks like exactly like the Launch-spec W13’s rear engine cover. Brake cooling was not the whole story with the MCL39 to managing rear tyre temps, it may seem it’s the overall aero package took huge inspiration from the End-season Mercedes W14 and some queues from
The W13 last year with the MCL38.

Mike Elliot was not the issue, the zeropod concept design clearly was ahead of its time. Best thing for Merc is to go back to the old rear suspension design and redesign their floor edge, front wing end plates, and sidepods. Then decide if they want the wake to go more around the rears like RBR or more inwards like the McLaren. If it were me, I would go with McLaren’s solution.

It is pretty clear the mid-wing that Merc first integrated, now on the Ferrari, McL and RB was ahead of its time. It is hard to say the Zeropod itself was a winning philosophy. The down washing and undercut engine cover geometry clearly plays a role.

Unfortunately from Merc, if like Ferrari, they have an mechanical issue at the rear then there is no quick fix. At this point, they might be best looking toward 26'. Especially if they feel the Spain TD will hit hard. Outside resolving the overheating so they can avoid a repeat in the 26' car.

The 26' engine seems to be competitive and with GE era ending, the amount of carry over will be limited. Completely changing the car as you listed this season is not feasible.

We don’t know what the issue could be. I’m not too sure if the team knows either (I could be wrong). They should invest in the rear brake drums ASAP and try to tun the car softer, George reported that the ride was bad this weekend.

[Matt2725]

No it’s the repositioning of the wishbones they did with the rear suspension this weekend. They did not have this much rear tyre overheating until they made this change. I think they did it to improve high-speed cornering, which Fdataanalysis on Twitter shown that the car was very good in, but we should all know that less give (stiffness) on the suspension promotes more tyre heat because how much strain the tyres are in vs softer setups.

But this weekend showed something that is very clear to me.

So what’s my theory?

Well, I remember seeing the rain aero flow and with the RB19. I can now see why RBR made their sidepods as wide as possible and uniquely design their Venturi exits on the floor edge to make sure the air wake goes around the rear wheels as possible, hence their aero efficiency and straight line speed, but some of the wake does hit the tyre slightly and since the Redbull is more stiffer than others the tyres heats up.

McLaren probably design their car to have more inward inwash, which allow air to flow more towards the beam-wing, promoting more downforce and that’s maybe why they’re slower on the straights. How I noticed is because of how the rear engine cover is designed that looks like exactly like the Launch-spec W13’s rear engine cover. Brake cooling was not the whole story with the MCL39 to managing rear tyre temps, it may seem it’s the overall aero package took huge inspiration from the End-season Mercedes W14 and some queues from
The W13 last year with the MCL38.

Mike Elliot was not the issue, the zeropod concept design clearly was ahead of its time. Best thing for Merc is to go back to the old rear suspension design and redesign their floor edge, front wing end plates, and sidepods. Then decide if they want the wake to go more around the rears like RBR or more inwards like the McLaren. If it were me, I would go with McLaren’s solution.

It is pretty clear the mid-wing that Merc first integrated, now on the Ferrari, McL and RB was ahead of its time. It is hard to say the Zeropod itself was a winning philosophy. The down washing and undercut engine cover geometry clearly plays a role.

Unfortunately from Merc, if like Ferrari, they have an mechanical issue at the rear then there is no quick fix. At this point, they might be best looking toward 26'. Especially if they feel the Spain TD will hit hard. Outside resolving the overheating so they can avoid a repeat in the 26' car.

The 26' engine seems to be competitive and with GE era ending, the amount of carry over will be limited. Completely changing the car as you listed this season is not feasible.

We don’t know what the issue could be. I’m not too sure if the team knows either (I could be wrong). They should invest in the rear brake drums ASAP and try to tun the car softer, George reported that the ride was bad this weekend.

He did, although it seemed to get progressively worse over the weekend as they were dialling in the setup.

[Waz]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

Why would they compromise a race without needing to? What's the point of having more data on the new wing against teams using superior flexi wings?

[SB15]

Mercedes brought their flex-corrected front wing and used it here. Could it have played a role w.r.t sub-par performance, particularly with how it would have affected high speed balance and as a result, the rear tyres ?

No it’s the repositioning of the wishbones they did with the rear suspension this weekend. They did not have this much rear tyre overheating until they made this change. I think they did it to improve high-speed cornering, which Fdataanalysis on Twitter shown that the car was very good in, but we should all know that less give (stiffness) on the suspension promotes more tyre heat because how much strain the tyres are in vs softer setups.

But this weekend showed something that is very clear to me.

So what’s my theory?

Well, I remember seeing the rain aero flow and with the RB19. I can now see why RBR made their sidepods as wide as possible and uniquely design their Venturi exits on the floor edge to make sure the air wake goes around the rear wheels as possible, hence their aero efficiency and straight line speed, but some of the wake does hit the tyre slightly and since the Redbull is more stiffer than others the tyres heats up.

McLaren probably design their car to have more inward inwash, which allow air to flow more towards the beam-wing, promoting more downforce and that’s maybe why they’re slower on the straights. How I noticed is because of how the rear engine cover is designed that looks like exactly like the Launch-spec W13’s rear engine cover. Brake cooling was not the whole story with the MCL39 to managing rear tyre temps, it may seem it’s the overall aero package took huge inspiration from the End-season Mercedes W14 and some queues from
The W13 last year with the MCL38.

Mike Elliot was not the issue, the zeropod concept design clearly was ahead of its time. Best thing for Merc is to go back to the old rear suspension design and redesign their floor edge, front wing end plates, and sidepods. Then decide if they want the wake to go more around the rears like RBR or more inwards like the McLaren. If it were me, I would go with McLaren’s solution.

It is pretty clear the mid-wing that Merc first integrated, now on the Ferrari, McL and RB was ahead of its time. It is hard to say the Zeropod itself was a winning philosophy. The down washing and undercut engine cover geometry clearly plays a role.

Unfortunately from Merc, if like Ferrari, they have an mechanical issue at the rear then there is no quick fix. At this point, they might be best looking toward 26'. Especially if they feel the Spain TD will hit hard. Outside resolving the overheating so they can avoid a repeat in the 26' car.

The 26' engine seems to be competitive and with GE era ending, the amount of carry over will be limited. Completely changing the car as you listed this season is not feasible.

The New Front wing they're running is a TD018 compliant version, you could make the argument they were hit hard but it's more on the new rear suspension that promoted more anti-lift that caused it.

Also, I'm not suggesting that zero-pod was a winning philosophy for this regulation, I'm only highlighting what Mike Elliot thought what was important especially with how these tyres are designed and limited on cooling because of how stiff these cars run + plus the addition of the wheel covers and wheel brows doesn't make it any better, that's completely on the FIA. However in the next set of regulation, wouldn't be shocked if the concept made a return since "Inwash" is the main philosophy.

Now relating to this year, they don't need to change the car completley, just reangle the front end plates and redesign the floor edge similar to Mclaren's or Redbull for now. Sidepods could incorporate the mid-wing as well, if they want to, they could slim down the sidepod shape and minimize the undercut but that depends if they want to take that route.