Mercedes AMG F1 W03 (pre-launch speculation)

[Pierce89]

1 -LWB instead SWB
This will improve the CoG
More overall Downforce
More space too solve problems like cooling issues. (also lower fuelltank)


2 -RBR like Rear end of the car
Improves better airflow.
Less (side) resistance in corners.

3 -Optimized Periscope exhaust
Only blow when in corners which can be possible by somekind of ridehight system.
So the exhaust and rear wing shouldnt have linear connections. When the car is on straight the car (especially the rear) will be pushed down. If the exhaust doesnt move in the same angle you can create an effective blown rear wing

4 -No time and money expensive investigation in things like front fduct and double flour. They are not in the situation right now. They have to keep it simple and conservative.

If they can workout the subjects on the lists they could be in the top 3 very easy.

1, LWB was optimum for EBD. No EBD - keep the SWB. Totally wrong there.
2, Everybody has an RB -like rear end. Even Ferrari went for pull-rods this year.
3, You cannot "blow" anywhere, mate. Least of all corners. You cannot "optimize" anything, that kind of engine mapping is banned.
4, There was time enough, and the team is loaded. They have not investigated anything. If the front f-duct worked, it will be on the car. If not they have dumped it long ago.
They are exactly in the situation to be a little creative. No rush there. They have said they are not out for the WDC yet, they want to edge closer.

You might want to collect your thoughts before posting rubbish.

This is absolutely not the place to call someone's thoughts rubbish. So what if he doesn't have the technical understanding of some other members. Better that than being rude to people you don't know.

[Pierce89]

1 -LWB instead SWB
This will improve the CoG
More overall Downforce
More space too solve problems like cooling issues. (also lower fuelltank)


2 -RBR like Rear end of the car
Improves better airflow.
Less (side) resistance in corners.

3 -Optimized Periscope exhaust
Only blow when in corners which can be possible by somekind of ridehight system.
So the exhaust and rear wing shouldnt have linear connections. When the car is on straight the car (especially the rear) will be pushed down. If the exhaust doesnt move in the same angle you can create an effective blown rear wing

4 -No time and money expensive investigation in things like front fduct and double flour. They are not in the situation right now. They have to keep it simple and conservative.

If they can workout the subjects on the lists they could be in the top 3 very easy.

1, LWB was optimum for EBD. No EBD - keep the SWB. Totally wrong there.
2, Everybody has an RB -like rear end. Even Ferrari went for pull-rods this year.
3, You cannot "blow" anywhere, mate. Least of all corners. You cannot "optimize" anything, that kind of engine mapping is banned.
4, There was time enough, and the team is loaded. They have not investigated anything. If the front f-duct worked, it will be on the car. If not they have dumped it long ago.
They are exactly in the situation to be a little creative. No rush there. They have said they are not out for the WDC yet, they want to edge closer.

You might want to collect your thoughts before posting rubbish.

This is absolutely not the place to call someone's thoughts rubbish. So what if he doesn't have the technical understanding of some other members. Better that than being rude to people you don't know.

[Schulteiss]

[/quote]
This is absolutely not the place to call someone's thoughts rubbish. So what if he doesn't have the technical understanding of some other members. Better that than being rude to people you don't know.[/quote]

I apologize. Last sentence was rude yes.

[Mr.S]

They said they will miss the 1st test with reference to the new car debuting.

As I remember it further statements have said that the TEAM will skip the test; not the CAR.

I think they will go back on their word. Why waste days when they can get useful mileage,atleast some info about the general level of downforce tyres or exhaust or just dry running which is always useful for the drivers. Missing a test sounds SO stupid anyway. I think they will change their mind later maybe. Or I hope so.

[Mr.S]

1 -LWB instead SWB
This will improve the CoG
More overall Downforce
More space too solve problems like cooling issues. (also lower fuelltank)


2 -RBR like Rear end of the car
Improves better airflow.
Less (side) resistance in corners.

3 -Optimized Periscope exhaust
Only blow when in corners which can be possible by somekind of ridehight system.
So the exhaust and rear wing shouldnt have linear connections. When the car is on straight the car (especially the rear) will be pushed down. If the exhaust doesnt move in the same angle you can create an effective blown rear wing

4 -No time and money expensive investigation in things like front fduct and double flour. They are not in the situation right now. They have to keep it simple and conservative.

If they can workout the subjects on the lists they could be in the top 3 very easy.

If I follow your points Mercedes will get beaten by HRT. Conservation gets you nowhere. Ridiculous ideas come on brother. A Front F-duct,it is possible it can possibly win the championship. I dont know how much it is possible but if you can get clean air into the diffuser & any amount of downforce & if they modify their whole floor,front wing to suit,there MIGHT be substantial benefits.

By your logic the EBD should not have been developed last year as well isn't it. Noe expensive investigation. That is what brought team more than a second. Some 1s,some 1.5s & it varied. Now we hear about Renault's ride hide control,another possible game changing scenario. Mercedes atleast have to do its best to atleast see if it has substantial benefits.

If there are 4-5 such Great innovations then Mercedes start below the pack,like full 1.5-2 seconds back & should fight with HRT who will be close to 2 seconds off comparatively faster this year as they had no engine mapping,EBD & KERS.


Mclaren are shortening their wheelbases too. Let's not rush into comparisons. With new exhaust we dont know how it should work. Maybe a slightler longer wheelbase but nobody when what is optimum.

What is sure is Mercedes needs 1 or 2 HUGE innovations or atleast copy it very successfully. Brawn had DD,RBR had EBD,that is how cars have been winning the last few years,thanks to innovation.

[atanatizante]

...
3 -Optimized Periscope exhaust
...

Right dude! Some people are speaking about the fact that the two exhausts covers and the rear wing should have linear connections!
These exhaust covers must be angled like RB6 nose fins, in order to divert the air flow towards both ends of the rear wing:

[yener]

1, LWB was optimum for EBD. No EBD - keep the SWB. Totally wrong there.
2, Everybody has an RB -like rear end. Even Ferrari went for pull-rods this year.
3, You cannot "blow" anywhere, mate. Least of all corners. You cannot "optimize" anything, that kind of engine mapping is banned.
4, There was time enough, and the team is loaded. They have not investigated anything. If the front f-duct worked, it will be on the car. If not they have dumped it long ago.
They are exactly in the situation to be a little creative. No rush there. They have said they are not out for the WDC yet, they want to edge closer.

You might want to collect your thoughts before posting rubbish.

1, LOL!!!!! LWB wasnt designed for EBD. While the other teams where sleeping RBR was the one which came with EBD and all the other teams choose for a LWB without using EBD except MGP!
The reason why MGP did go for a SWB has been explained in this thread. Read it!
2, By rearend i dont mean the difuser mate! Look at the picture. It's a fact that RBR has way better airflow at the end of the sidepods.
3, Blowing is always possible. After breaking into a corner we all go on throttle in the exit of the corner. Still need grip their dont you? Thats why you cant forbid EBD by only banning Engine Mapping
4, The SWB choice was a HERO or ZERO choice. It ended in ZERO.
Also they didnt have plenty of time, read more dude. And every second is precious for all f1 teams. They have to be very efficient with every second they have!

[Schulteiss]

1, LOL!!!!! LWB wasnt designed for EBD. While the other teams where sleeping RBR was the one which came with EBD and all the other teams choose for a LWB without using EBD except MGP!
The reason why MGP did go for a SWB has been explained in this thread. Read it!
2, By rearend i dont mean the difuser mate! Look at the picture. It's a fact that RBR has way better airflow at the end of the sidepods.
3, Blowing is always possible. After breaking into a corner we all go on throttle in the exit of the corner. Still need grip their dont you? Thats why you cant forbid EBD by only banning Engine Mapping
4, The SWB choice was a HERO or ZERO choice. It ended in ZERO.
Also they didnt have plenty of time, read more dude. And every second is precious for all f1 teams. They have to be very efficient with every second they have!

Yaye! Mate, my last sentence was not an insult after all.


1. You are still wrong there I'm afraid. RB said the SWB was a mistake in hindsight for the EBD, basically. In RB's case, the LWB was part of the design concept, with the 7, it got longer, and had by a very big margin the most effective EBD on the grid(LWB is of course, not the sole reason for that) All the team who went for SWB were fecked, basically, if you take the time to read a tad bit back. So no, please don't try to persuade me that its a must to go longer. SWB may (or may not) pay off now, because of the EBD ban. I suspect the W03 will not be significantly longer, but who knows? We are speculating here, no?
2. well, you show me a picture of 2011 cars, when we are speaking of 2012. ORLY? Why do you think Ferrari switched to pull rod this year? To fatten its behind? Half the grid will boast a similar rear to RB's. Where on earth did you get the idea I meant the diff?
3.Sorry, but this point is so senseless it is not worth a word of debate. It bleeds from more wounds than it contains words.
4. Why do they have to keep it simple and conservative? So all the brainpower they bought in the last twelve months can relax and have a nice, pressure-less, refreshing season, starting at the design office with a double dai'quiri every morning, and drawing motorsport art for enterior designers? Now is the time for some creativity, if there ever was. No big rule changes, evolutionary designs spiked with creativity, yes? Conservative,simple? NO!! THANK YOU!!

[raymondu999]

@Schulteiss - the RB7 is one of the shorter cars of 2011, as the RB6 was of 2010.

@yener - what do you intend to blow with the exhaust, when 2012 exhausts are pointing at clean air?

[Schulteiss]

@Schulteiss - the RB7 is one of the shorter cars of 2011, as the RB6 was of 2010.

@yener - what do you intend to blow with the exhaust, when 2012 exhausts are pointing at clean air?

oopsss...

[amouzouris]

@Schulteiss - the RB7 is one of the shorter cars of 2011, as the RB6 was of 2010.

@yener - what do you intend to blow with the exhaust, when 2012 exhausts are pointing at clean air?

What are you talking about?? the rb7 is the longest...and the exhaust can blow the rear wings..

[allstaruk08]

im with amouzouris on this the rb7 was long and under the rear wing will be a target for blowing

[NonNewtonic]

I hardly think they will miss out on collecting data on the 2012 rubbers. Even if it is with the W02, they will have a direct comparison between the 2011-2012 Pirellis. First test will be about the Pirellis for everybody anyways, IMHO.[/quote]

What I think is Mercedes is saving the rubber for the in season testing after Malaysia GP as teams are limited to 100 sets of tyres for testing and you wouldn't want to waste a few sets of tyres on the W02 in the first test just to understand the rubber where you can do it during the second test

[ak21_rao]

Hey guys..is it possible under the current rules for a design with a wider front track and a slightly narrow rear track..The design can be helpful if the car has a LWB and a rear biased weight distribution as the above design will reduce oversteer and won't kill the rear tires either. The drawback could be difficulty in setting up the car.

[marcush.]

the RB7 is just incredibly slim ans heavily wasted simply because of having a ,longwheelbase and positioning the KERS Energy storage in the bellhousing area freeing up considerable package space for tank volume in front of the rearbulkhead.
I think this is the key feature and only Mclaren came close by introducing their l shaped sidepods creating a direct flow path towards the rear and avoiding to bend mass airflow as Mercedes needed to .