Poll: F1 2022 - Pre-season testing and discussion

[Entai]

Yes and no, they should be enforcing the ride height, the rear floor edges were rubbing on the track and presumably forming some sort of seal. The instability is causing the issues. One of the risks of introducing such a radical change.

Actually no yoiu have it the wrong way round.

Because the teams are trying to run as low as possible, to get the most out of the GE you get the porpoiseing, causing the issues.

Enforcing a ride height will loose a lot of the GE and have the cars loose a load of performance.

Teams will not be happy with that.

F1 and FIA introducing new rules, then enforcing a ride height that negates the new rules.

 

[Slam62]

Actually no yoiu have it the wrong way round.

Because the teams are trying to run as low as possible, to get the most out of the GE you get the porpoiseing, causing the issues.

Enforcing a ride height will loose a lot of the GE and have the cars loose a load of performance.

Teams will not be happy with that.

F1 and FIA introducing new rules, then enforcing a ride height that negates the new rules.

Of course I don't have it wrong, that's exactly what I expect and would like. The ride height rule is not new, of course you know that, so they would be complying with the rule.

The load test on wings was introduced for this very reason.

You of course will remember that years ago the cars had suspension that jacked the car up below a certain speed to pass the ride height tests. Nowadays there will be ways to stop such tricks.

I have to say at this point time the aerodynamics and in particular the venturi sealing is a mess.

 

[Jono8]

Rumours coming out that their simulator shown massive gains from this design. I can already hear Horner crying to the FIA if Merc win the first race

I imagine if the FIA try anything with Mercedes it will be like:

"Remember when your race director did something preposterously ridiculous and unfair that handed the driver's title to our competitor when we should have won it last year...?"

 

[Slam62]

I imagine if the FIA try anything with Mercedes it will be like:

"Remember when your race director did something preposterously ridiculous and unfair that handed the driver's title to our competitor when we should have won it last year...?"

It's already been through the fia checking process, the main issue is whether it compromises the following cars and hence negates the principle of the new rules, it has been assessed and found not to do this.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

Ironic that Newey and co always argue that there is no “spirit of the rules” rule.

I maintain that if the Merc is quick, there will be toys getting launched in to orbit.

 

[Slam62]

Looked to me like the rb could easily be modified to be similar.

 

[Mr Jack]

Looked to me like the rb could easily be modified to be similar.

Depends on how the engine and cooling is packaged under the skin, doesn't it?

 

[Slam62]

Depends on how the engine and cooling is packaged under the skin, doesn't it?

Looks pretty tight, only the inlet looked big, but who knows.

 

[steve45]

Looked to me like the rb could easily be modified to be similar.

You are assuming that the engine and ancils can be packaged effectively and provide enough cooling. I'm not so sure its that simple. As it stands the only other car on the grid that I see that could make a transition to Merc style sidepods is Williams.
Regardless, we dont even know if its worth it yet. This might end up being a failed concept. I dont think anybody will be investing much time it other than to analyse what Merc have done and how they have acheived it. At least until the end of testing/First race.
It would be a bit silly for teams that have their own development program to go chasing down rabbit holes when they dont even know if the juice is worth the squeeze.

 

[Slam62]

You are assuming that the engine and ancils can be packaged effectively and provide enough cooling. I'm not so sure its that simple. As it stands the only other car on the grid that I see that could make a transition to Merc style sidepods is Williams.
Regardless, we dont even know if its worth it yet. This might end up being a failed concept. I dont think anybody will be investing much time it other than to analyse what Merc have done and how they have acheived it. At least until the end of testing/First race.
It would be a bit silly for teams that have their own development program to go chasing down rabbit holes when they dont even know if the juice is worth the squeeze.

Indeed, especially given the cost cap, personally I don't think it's going to be a huge advantage if at all, we shall see.

 

[Entai]

Of course I don't have it wrong, that's exactly what I expect and would like. The ride height rule is not new, of course you know that, so they would be complying with the rule.

The load test on wings was introduced for this very reason.

You of course will remember that years ago the cars had suspension that jacked the car up below a certain speed to pass the ride height tests. Nowadays there will be ways to stop such tricks.

I have to say at this point time the aerodynamics and in particular the venturi sealing is a mess.

What ride height rule?

There is no ride height specified in current regulations.

 

[Slam62]

What ride height rule?

There is no ride height specified in current regulations.

Oh ok

They define a "reference plane" and specify that the non-central part of the (car's) floor must be 5 centimeters higher than the central parts. The central parts are where the "plank" is located, a wooden plank made of certain material that can have some titanium in certain areas.
The only think limiting you from running the car even lower is that the plank must not wear off by more than 1mm during the race. You run as close to the tarmac as you dare to.

 

[cuke2u]

Looked to me like the rb could easily be modified to be similar.

Yet to be proven that the Mercedes interpretation actually works though. Didn't look like it today but they could have just been doing correlation and aero tests, however the car was still bouncing...

 

[Slam62]

Yet to be proven that the Mercedes interpretation actually works though. Didn't look like it today but they could have just been doing correlation and aero tests, however the car was still bouncing...

There is evidence that they were heavily sandbagging

 

[Mr Jack]

Yet to be proven that the Mercedes interpretation actually works though. Didn't look like it today but they could have just been doing correlation and aero tests, however the car was still bouncing...

Mercedes said they were mostly doing shakedown testing today. As for the porpoising, they mostly removed that by adjusting the suspension. The problem is that they still didn't look particularly attached or agile.

 

[JBeck]

Because Horner hasn't 'whinged' about anything. Just another made up quote. It's the commentators that haven't stopped talking about the Mercedes sidepods all morning.

It wasn't made up at all, source for your claims?

 

[CaptainRAVE]

Looked to me like the rb could easily be modified to be similar.

Cant be that easy, Mercedes have designed their engine around this concept.

Yet to be proven that the Mercedes interpretation actually works though. Didn't look like it today but they could have just been doing correlation and aero tests, however the car was still bouncing...

They are hardly going to give it full beans on day 1…possibly not in testing at all.

Mercedes said they were mostly doing shakedown testing today. As for the porpoising, they mostly removed that by adjusting the suspension. The problem is that they still didn't look particularly attached or agile.

Plenty of Mercedes WCC and WDC cars have been absolute handfuls, yet still ridiculously quick. It’s hard to imagine these cars not being absolutely dominant on the straights with such low drag, it’s the corners that are up in the air until we see them go for lap times.

 

[Entai]

Oh ok

They define a "reference plane" and specify that the non-central part of the (car's) floor must be 5 centimeters higher than the central parts. The central parts are where the "plank" is located, a wooden plank made of certain material that can have some titanium in certain areas.
The only think limiting you from running the car even lower is that the plank must not wear off by more than 1mm during the race. You run as close to the tarmac as you dare to.

How is that specifying a ride height?

That does not say, nor even imply, "your ride height must be X millimetres"

The ride height, could be anything from zero upwards.

 

[Slam62]

How is that specifying a ride height?

That does not say, nor even imply, "your ride height must be X millimetres"

The ride height, could be anything from zero upwards.

Let it go man,

 

[PikeyPriest]

How is that specifying a ride height?

That does not say, nor even imply, "your ride height must be X millimetres"

The ride height, could be anything from zero upwards.

Ride height is defined like that as otherwise we would be in a situation where teams would have a car with 5mm clearance (say that was the minimum) on the grid, that would then be 1-2mm on the straights with downforce. Ride height is a product of weight, downforce, suspension, cornering speed and likely other things I can’t think of. Using the wood block rule it stops teams doing exactly what happened with the wing flexing situation where you box tick to show you adhere to the rule in a specific situation knowing full well that you breach it when over 30mph. What better way for a rule to be enforced than it take in to account all factors of weight..etc and disqualify those who breach with a clear scientific metric with no wiggle room.