The Official 2016 Italian Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**
Discussion
angrymoby said:
Dr Z said:
How about that Mercedes tyre test in 2013? Car chews up the tyres like nothing else in the race with the team at a loss to remedy the situation. Team conducts some extensive in-season tyre testing with their race drivers, apparently all above board. Car becomes class of the field in tyre management (amongst other things but arguably the most important element) and dominates the Championships in the next three years.
Sorry, but that's rubbish.Merc probably gained from the test before Monaco (which they went on to win) ...but that's hardly surprising, considering they were popping them previously & i'd hardly call 100km 'extensive' either.
But to suggest they were subsequently the class of the field after that, is disengenuous in the extreme.
Red Bull were the class act in 2013 & won 11 of the 14 races after Merc's 'illegal' testing of the Pirelli's at Catalunya, indeed they won all of the last 9!
The main reason Merc have dominated in 2014/15/16 is simple ...horse power
It is far too simplistic to suggest that horsepower is the reason for Merc's rise to dominance in the past few years. You can have all the horsepower and downforce in the world but if you can't put it on the ground via those black round things, you are not going anywhere fast as Mercedes ably demonstrated in 2013!
Dr Z said:
I fail to see how I'm being extremely disingenuous in suggesting that it played an important part in their dominance in subsequent years?
Because that test was for a mixture of various 2013 (upgraded & planned upgrade) tyres & some testing of potential 2014 tyres/compounds ...& at that point (May) Pirelli weren't even definite tyre suppliers for 2014.so that's x amount of tyres to be tested over 3 days & 1000km ...& baring in mind that Merc normally do roughly 2-2.5km of testing when they do a 3 day test.
& you think that this has given Merc their main advantage over other teams for the last 2-2.5 years? ...teams which had access to said tyres every test, practice, quali & race since
...rather than Merc's PU?
Dream on.
Edited by angrymoby on Wednesday 7th September 15:25
angrymoby said:
Dr Z said:
I fail to see how I'm being extremely disingenuous in suggesting that it played an important part in their dominance in subsequent years?
Because that test was for a mixture of various 2013 (upgraded & planned upgrade) tyres & some testing of potential 2014 tyres/compounds ...& at that point (May) Pirelli weren't even definite tyre suppliers for 2014.& you think that this has given Merc their main advantage over other teams for the last 2-2.5 years? ...teams which had access to said tyres every test, practice, quali & race since
...rather than Merc's PU?
Dream on.
angrymoby said:
Dr Z said:
I fail to see how I'm being extremely disingenuous in suggesting that it played an important part in their dominance in subsequent years?
Because that test was for a mixture of various 2013 (upgraded & planned upgrade) tyres & some testing of potential 2014 tyres/compounds ...& at that point (May) Pirelli weren't even definite tyre suppliers for 2014.so that's x amount of tyres to be tested over 3 days & 1000km ...& baring in mind that Merc normally do roughly 2-2.5km of testing when they do a 3 day test.
& you think that this has given Merc their main advantage over other teams for the last 2-2.5 years? ...teams which had access to said tyres every test, practice, quali & race since
...rather than Merc's PU?
Dream on.
Explain the Merc's superiority over every other chassis in low speed corners on most circuits where the effect of PU is the least.
I certainly think that tyre test switched on the light bulb for them. With such limited testing available in-season, a team would rip your arm off for having extra time devoted to just understanding the tyres...especially Merc having found themselves in that predicament.
Other observers with a keener eye have also noted the more softly sprung nature of the Merc chassis and also the roll that the car exhibits with little or no side effects in terms of under/oversteer that this often entails.
That Pirelli will have continued supply into the Hybrid era was not under much debate then IIRC. Bernie liked them, and that was that.
Would be happy to be corrected if you can share some wisdom on the above points.
It's more than just the engine. Mercedes were able to build their car to fit the engine and the engine to fit the car. I remember reading something in Auto sport about the advantages of the whole car being a unit.
Further, modifications to the PU to overcome an issue would be something customer teams would have to cope with.
The message was that a new car had to be fast out of the box as significant mods were difficult to incorporate. I remember Williams having problems when revs were reduced as it set up sympathetic vibrations. Both cars had suspension failures at the next race.
So could Mercedes modify their cars to suit the tyres and obtain a significant advantage? They can't stop chewing them up at the moment.
Further, modifications to the PU to overcome an issue would be something customer teams would have to cope with.
The message was that a new car had to be fast out of the box as significant mods were difficult to incorporate. I remember Williams having problems when revs were reduced as it set up sympathetic vibrations. Both cars had suspension failures at the next race.
So could Mercedes modify their cars to suit the tyres and obtain a significant advantage? They can't stop chewing them up at the moment.
Derek Smith said:
It's more than just the engine. Mercedes were able to build their car to fit the engine and the engine to fit the car. I remember reading something in Auto sport about the advantages of the whole car being a unit.
Further, modifications to the PU to overcome an issue would be something customer teams would have to cope with.
The message was that a new car had to be fast out of the box as significant mods were difficult to incorporate. I remember Williams having problems when revs were reduced as it set up sympathetic vibrations. Both cars had suspension failures at the next race.
So could Mercedes modify their cars to suit the tyres and obtain a significant advantage? They can't stop chewing them up at the moment.
this & software & fluids that customer teams don't/ can't get access to ...plus a budget of £400m p.a helpsFurther, modifications to the PU to overcome an issue would be something customer teams would have to cope with.
The message was that a new car had to be fast out of the box as significant mods were difficult to incorporate. I remember Williams having problems when revs were reduced as it set up sympathetic vibrations. Both cars had suspension failures at the next race.
So could Mercedes modify their cars to suit the tyres and obtain a significant advantage? They can't stop chewing them up at the moment.
to suggest that a 3 day test of possible/ possibly not 2014 spec tyres back in 2013 went to propel Merc to the success they've had, is at best ludicrous & at worst an insult to all the folk who work in Brackley.
iirc all that test told Merc was, why their new wheel design was overheating their Pirelli's & why ...& hence they stopped going backwards on race day & won a few ...well, until Red Bull marched on.
I wouldn't say Mercedes enjoy spectacularly good tyre life. If they do have a tyre life advantage at some / all circuits, it is probably partly due to the fact that as the Mercedes engine is stronger, they can use a greater level of downforce while still being among the fastest through the speedtraps. The more downforce you can run the less slip the tyre experiences and the longer it lasts.
Dr Z said:
By your logic, other teams who have access to this magic bullet of a PU from Merc have all beaten other constructors these past few years then?
Williams....beat Ferrari in 2014 & Red Bull in 2015 (still essentially Renaults 'works' team at that point)
On a quarter of Ferrari's/ Red Bulls budgets.
Still not convinced? How well have other Ferrari/Renault customer engined teams done, compared to Merc ones? ...all the Merc powered ones in the top half, ALL the others in the bottom half
angrymoby said:
this & software & fluids that customer teams don't/ can't get access to ...plus a budget of £400m p.a helps
to suggest that a 3 day test of possible/ possibly not 2014 spec tyres back in 2013 went to propel Merc to the success they've had, is at best ludicrous & at worst an insult to all the folk who work in Brackley.
iirc all that test told Merc was, why their new wheel design was overheating their Pirelli's & why ...& hence they stopped going backwards on race day & won a few ...well, until Red Bull marched on.
Quite the Angry Moby. Congratulations for misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I said.to suggest that a 3 day test of possible/ possibly not 2014 spec tyres back in 2013 went to propel Merc to the success they've had, is at best ludicrous & at worst an insult to all the folk who work in Brackley.
iirc all that test told Merc was, why their new wheel design was overheating their Pirelli's & why ...& hence they stopped going backwards on race day & won a few ...well, until Red Bull marched on.
Dr Z said:
Quite the Angry Moby. Congratulations for misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I said.
Dr Z said:
How about that Mercedes tyre test in 2013? Car chews up the tyres like nothing else in the race with the team at a loss to remedy the situation. Team conducts some extensive in-season tyre testing with their race drivers, apparently all above board. Car becomes class of the field in tyre management (amongst other things but arguably the most important element) and dominates the Championships in the next three years.
Your words. Not entirely sure that can be taken any other way tbhDerek Smith said:
It's more than just the engine. Mercedes were able to build their car to fit the engine and the engine to fit the car. I remember reading something in Auto sport about the advantages of the whole car being a unit.
Which is also very much why (with Bridgestone) Ferrari got it so right in the Schumacher era.angrymoby said:
Dr Z said:
Quite the Angry Moby. Congratulations for misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I said.
Dr Z said:
How about that Mercedes tyre test in 2013? Car chews up the tyres like nothing else in the race with the team at a loss to remedy the situation. Team conducts some extensive in-season tyre testing with their race drivers, apparently all above board. Car becomes class of the field in tyre management (amongst other things but arguably the most important element) and dominates the Championships in the next three years.
Your words. Not entirely sure that can be taken any other way tbhFor context, a non-armchair opinion on the test:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/06/04/what-could-m...
angrymoby said:
Derek Smith said:
It's more than just the engine. Mercedes were able to build their car to fit the engine and the engine to fit the car. I remember reading something in Auto sport about the advantages of the whole car being a unit.
Further, modifications to the PU to overcome an issue would be something customer teams would have to cope with.
The message was that a new car had to be fast out of the box as significant mods were difficult to incorporate. I remember Williams having problems when revs were reduced as it set up sympathetic vibrations. Both cars had suspension failures at the next race.
So could Mercedes modify their cars to suit the tyres and obtain a significant advantage? They can't stop chewing them up at the moment.
this & software & fluids that customer teams don't/ can't get access to ...plus a budget of £400m p.a helpsFurther, modifications to the PU to overcome an issue would be something customer teams would have to cope with.
The message was that a new car had to be fast out of the box as significant mods were difficult to incorporate. I remember Williams having problems when revs were reduced as it set up sympathetic vibrations. Both cars had suspension failures at the next race.
So could Mercedes modify their cars to suit the tyres and obtain a significant advantage? They can't stop chewing them up at the moment.
to suggest that a 3 day test of possible/ possibly not 2014 spec tyres back in 2013 went to propel Merc to the success they've had, is at best ludicrous & at worst an insult to all the folk who work in Brackley.
iirc all that test told Merc was, why their new wheel design was overheating their Pirelli's & why ...& hence they stopped going backwards on race day & won a few ...well, until Red Bull marched on.
Dr Z said:
You don't seem to deny that an advantage was gained in that tyre test which was conducted in direct contravention of the rules with a current chassis, and that whatever was learned in that test helped the team in subsequent races in dealing with the problem they had. But you deny that, whatever was learned in that test helped them directly or indirectly (conceptual/development avenues) in the design of their cars to manage its tyres better for subsequent years? I see those two notions at odds with each other. Don't you?
For context, a non-armchair opinion on the test:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/06/04/what-could-m...
I don't deny it, no ...it undoubtebly helped them in 2013, but it could hardly have made things worse could it? But strangely post Silverstone (the test they were excluded from) everyone had caught back up again & Red Bull kept going!For context, a non-armchair opinion on the test:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/06/04/what-could-m...
But to suggest it helped them in 2014 which Mark Priestly doesn't even mention in his article is fanciful in the extreme.
For Merc to gain any advantage in that test for 2014, they would have had to guess which way Pirelli were going in 2014 (from a mixture of contruction & compounds) & again the test was for both 2013 upgraded & 2014 spec tyres.
They'd have to also at least simulate 2014 power delivery & torque of 2014 spec engines (someone might notice a muted v6 turbo) which was massively different to 2013 spec
They'd also have to simulate expected levels of 2014 downforce by adding a few points of estimated down force gain.
They'd have also had to test planned 'softer' 2014 suspension upgrades (& hope they worked first time out of the box)
& all the above would take a herculean amount of effort & be condensed into a 1000km test.
Even Ferrari, would've struggled with this amount of clandestine activity ...speaking of which, they could've done exactly the same with their 2011 'mule' themselves & if anyone would, they would've, yet how did their 2014 season start/end??
Edited by angrymoby on Wednesday 7th September 20:57
Edited by angrymoby on Wednesday 7th September 21:01
With the exception of the Indycar, there were different reasons for those other six wheelers i.e. they were an attempt to lower the aerodynamic profile (in the case of the Tyrell) or improved airflow through the sidepods in the others. Therefore, these six wheelers were so arranged for aerodynamic purposes.
Earlier six wheelers were more about greater grip.
Earlier six wheelers were more about greater grip.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff