2022 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Zynerji]

Russell's higher DF rear wing was good in the wet, but I doubt that he could have held back Lewis (aka the guinea pig) who was nearly half a second a lap faster in the dry.

They are ALL guinea pigs. It's a prototype series.

Some just perform under pressure better than others.

[PlatinumZealot]

Russell's higher DF rear wing was good in the wet, but I doubt that he could have held back Lewis (aka the guinea pig) who was nearly half a second a lap faster in the dry.

They are ALL guinea pigs. It's a prototype series.

Some just perform under pressure better than others.

Guinea pig means someone who is experimented on.

Lewis has been trying experimental (unproven, unorthodox) setups up until now and he doesn't want to do that anymore.

[Zynerji]

Russell's higher DF rear wing was good in the wet, but I doubt that he could have held back Lewis (aka the guinea pig) who was nearly half a second a lap faster in the dry.

They are ALL guinea pigs. It's a prototype series.

Some just perform under pressure better than others.

Guinea pig means someone who is experimented on.

Lewis has been trying experimental (unproven, unorthodox) setups up until now and he doesn't want to do that anymore.

Unorthodox for whom?

[Stu]

They are ALL guinea pigs. It's a prototype series.

Some just perform under pressure better than others.

Guinea pig means someone who is experimented on.

Lewis has been trying experimental (unproven, unorthodox) setups up until now and he doesn't want to do that anymore.

Unorthodox for whom?

And in what manner?

They ran with different rear wings in Montreal, but I didn’t see any images of each from the rear, so there could have been different beam wing set-ups as well.
The ‘apparently’ very limited suspension movement/adjustment of the W13 is a worry (it really constrains the mechanical solutions to both porpoising and bouncing - if the two are unlinked); it is almost as though there is an over-reliance on design tools (that are themselves reliant on accurate coding and input data).
I have my doubts over the ‘stub’ winglets covering the upper SIS; they are required to have an open section (meaning that they are not a pure aerofoil) which is intrinsically draggy, I could see some sense in it IF it was utilised as a part of the cooling extraction (it would/could be used to create an air curtain to control front tyre wake - think Dyson air blade). However the surfaces/sections rules mean that this is not possible without having the ducting required built int the chassis structure.

What is worth bearing in mind is that for all of the talk of ‘huge’ gaps to the front of the grid, the percentage difference between a 90 second lap-time & a 90.7 second lap-time is tiny (0.7777777778%), so the car is far from being fundamentally poor; it is just a slightly less good interpretation of the rules.

[pursue_one's]

Guinea pig means someone who is experimented on.

Lewis has been trying experimental (unproven, unorthodox) setups up until now and he doesn't want to do that anymore.

Unorthodox for whom?

And in what manner?

They ran with different rear wings in Montreal, but I didn’t see any images of each from the rear, so there could have been different beam wing set-ups as well.
The ‘apparently’ very limited suspension movement/adjustment of the W13 is a worry (it really constrains the mechanical solutions to both porpoising and bouncing - if the two are unlinked); it is almost as though there is an over-reliance on design tools (that are themselves reliant on accurate coding and input data).
I have my doubts over the ‘stub’ winglets covering the upper SIS; they are required to have an open section (meaning that they are not a pure aerofoil) which is intrinsically draggy, I could see some sense in it IF it was utilised as a part of the cooling extraction (it would/could be used to create an air curtain to control front tyre wake - think Dyson air blade). However the surfaces/sections rules mean that this is not possible without having the ducting required built int the chassis structure.

What is worth bearing in mind is that for all of the talk of ‘huge’ gaps to the front of the grid, the percentage difference between a 90 second lap-time & a 90.7 second lap-time is tiny (0.7777777778%), so the car is far from being fundamentally poor; it is just a slightly less good interpretation of the rules.

Rear wing comparison

[chrisc90]

Aside from the rear wing, the upper beam wing has a much higher angle on George's car than lewis.

[Just_a_fan]

Aside from the rear wing, the upper beam wing has a much higher angle on George's car than lewis.

Different top corner shape on the rear wing flap too.

[PlatinumZealot]

I'm sort of expecting a different side pod concept for Silverstone. I imagine it will still be zero pods but it will be low and horizonal with a ramp like the cars from the eighties.

[adrianjordan]

Have they confirmed a significant update?

[De Jokke]

Not that I know of, only that they will bring 'bits' to Silverstone, so quite pessimistic

[SuperCNJ]

f

I'm sort of expecting a different side pod concept for Silverstone. I imagine it will still be zero pods but it will be low and horizonal with a ramp like the cars from the eighties.

Changing concept mid-season is a big deal and not something that can be done quickly. It doesn't seem that long ago when Merc were saying they didn't fully know the causes of the porpoising so its difficult to believe they can switch concepts, integrate, build and test the new concept in such a short space of time whilst keeping to budget. Great if they manage to pull it off, would love to see them in the mix up front but I remain a bit skeptical about a change of concept.

[PlatinumZealot]

f

I'm sort of expecting a different side pod concept for Silverstone. I imagine it will still be zero pods but it will be low and horizonal with a ramp like the cars from the eighties.

Changing concept mid-season is a big deal and not something that can be done quickly. It doesn't seem that long ago when Merc were saying they didn't fully know the causes of the porpoising so its difficult to believe they can switch concepts, integrate, build and test the new concept in such a short space of time whilst keeping to budget. Great if they manage to pull it off, would love to see them in the mix up front but I remain a bit skeptical about a change of concept.

Agreed but maybe I did not give a detailed enough description. I believe this will still be the zero pod concept, but with a longer ramp to the rear thereby stiffening the floor, and a shape that widens in plan-view to create more out-wash.

[des_1986]

Interview with Andrew Shovlin which includes some small detail about upgrades for Silverstone
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... r4TQl.html

"Not quite [sidepods] but we're looking at different front wings, rear wings, there'll be some changes on the floor, so a few other bits and bobs. But a lot of development this year is going on under the cars where people don't see it, but this will be a bit more obvious to those looking."

[mstar]

It be a new floor. And the edges of the floor and new front and rear wing it looks like. I wonder if suspension? as lewis ran experimental rear suspension in Baku but it was a disaster

[Spoutnik]