2013 Belgian GP - Spa

For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.
Post Reply
komninosm
0
Joined: 05 Apr 2009, 18:41
Location: Macedonia

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

Juzh wrote:
Shrieker wrote:On a second thought, Merc's Eau Rogue exit speed was slow because the plank was scraping the track more than others, result of extra downforce being carried. Now that makes sense. Especially coupled with Hamilton's sector 2 performance in q3.
Mercs had noweher near as much downforce as red bull did, prooven by 2nd sector times troughout the race. More wing doesn't stricly mean more downforce.
Sometimes less is more?

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

It isn't all about the rear wing. Say mercedes went for a wet setup. That could have meant the suspension had both a higher and softer setup. That's good for keeping stability and driveability in the wet. However, in the dry it'll mean the diffuser is much less efficient. So that way your car can have less downforce despite a bigger rear wing.
#AeroFrodo

User avatar
Vasconia
6
Joined: 30 Aug 2012, 10:45
Location: Basque Country

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

turbof1 wrote:It isn't all about the rear wing. Say mercedes went for a wet setup. That could have meant the suspension had both a higher and softer setup. That's good for keeping stability and driveability in the wet. However, in the dry it'll mean the diffuser is much less efficient. So that way your car can have less downforce despite a bigger rear wing.
True, and in consequence the unexpeted (and boring) dry conditions ruined the team´s options for the victory. I would like to see a wet race because a 1-2 for the german team is more than a real chance.

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

Vasconia wrote:I would like to see a wet race because a 1-2 for the german team is more than a real chance.
Based on what?

User avatar
Powershift
-2
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 04:32

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

turbof1 wrote:It isn't all about the rear wing. Say mercedes went for a wet setup. That could have meant the suspension had both a higher and softer setup. That's good for keeping stability and driveability in the wet. However, in the dry it'll mean the diffuser is much less efficient. So that way your car can have less downforce despite a bigger rear wing.
I dont think they went for a wet setup, I think they just misjudged the amount of rear wing to run and ran too much. It just so happened to help them in the damp Qualifying, but hurt them in the dry race.
Winning is the most important. Everything is consequence of that. Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose.-Ayrton Senna

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

Powershift wrote:
turbof1 wrote:It isn't all about the rear wing. Say mercedes went for a wet setup. That could have meant the suspension had both a higher and softer setup. That's good for keeping stability and driveability in the wet. However, in the dry it'll mean the diffuser is much less efficient. So that way your car can have less downforce despite a bigger rear wing.
I dont think they went for a wet setup, I think they just misjudged the amount of rear wing to run and ran too much. It just so happened to help them in the damp Qualifying, but hurt them in the dry race.
Except they weren't fastest anywhere. You'd expect that normally that amount of rear wing helps you in sector 2 and on top of eau rouge, but Mercedes was nowhere good.
#AeroFrodo

User avatar
Powershift
-2
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 04:32

Re: 2013 Belgian GP - Spa

Post

turbof1 wrote:
Powershift wrote:
turbof1 wrote:It isn't all about the rear wing. Say mercedes went for a wet setup. That could have meant the suspension had both a higher and softer setup. That's good for keeping stability and driveability in the wet. However, in the dry it'll mean the diffuser is much less efficient. So that way your car can have less downforce despite a bigger rear wing.
I dont think they went for a wet setup, I think they just misjudged the amount of rear wing to run and ran too much. It just so happened to help them in the damp Qualifying, but hurt them in the dry race.
Except they weren't fastest anywhere. You'd expect that normally that amount of rear wing helps you in sector 2 and on top of eau rouge, but Mercedes was nowhere good.
A valid point, it was a very difficult weekend to make any solid conclusions from the outside with the wild weather fluctuations.
Winning is the most important. Everything is consequence of that. Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose.-Ayrton Senna

Post Reply