Russell suggests Mercedes' current struggled could be down to stricter front wing rules

By on

On the back of a tough race weekend for the Brackley-based outfit, four-time Grand Prix winner George Russell suggests Mercedes' current struggled could be down to stricter front wing rules.

Mercedes endured a tough weekend at the Belgian Grand Prix. George Russell endured an early exit in sprint qualifying, and was unable to make any real progress, ending the 100km dash pointless.

The Briton then went on to qualify in a distant sixth place on Saturday before making little progress in the race to finish fifth, more than half a minute down on race winner Oscar Piastri.

His team-mate Andrea Kimi Antonelli suffered a shock SQ1/Q1 exit in the sprint and the standard qualifying session.

Although the Italian looked fairly competitive on damp surface, he was unable to make huge progress, and a tactical move to pit for a second time backfired, and saw Antonelli wound up outside the points in 16th.

Speaking of Mercedes' recent difficulties, Russell suggested the current lack of speed could be down to the changes the team made in the wake of the clampdown on front wing flexing in Barcelona.

The FIA announced in January that more stringent flexibility tests on front wings would be introduced from the Spanish Grand Prix. Although flexible bodywork is outlawed in F1, but there is a tolerance. At the Barcelona round, this leeway has been lessened from 15mm to 10mm on the front wing and its flap.

“Obviously, we had to change the front wing in Barcelona. We then went in a slightly different direction afterwards to tackle the issue of the change of front wing and clearly since that point we've taken a big step backwards.

Speaking of what Mercedes could do to address the issues, Russell noted: "It could be as simple as reverting back to something that we had earlier in the season.

“Of course you can do that with the front wing, but in terms of the rest of the setup. But I don't know, it seems quite strange how we've gone so far backwards.”