Formula 1 2020 - General Discussion Thread (See MOD warning on first post)

namloc1980

Harika wrote: »

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EfuHiNgWAAAiEHX?format=png&name=small

No one talking about the simulated fastest drivers since 1983? What a joke, as bad as the UK predicted grade sh!tshow
Only 2 drivers from the 80/90s made it into the list. No häkkinen Mansell ...

Mad list altogether. The first 3: Senna, Schumacher and Hamilton - yeah fair enough but after that absolute nonsense. Trulli, Norris and Kovalainen ahead of 4 time world champion Alain Prost. Charles Leclerc 7th

Frank Bullitt

quokula wrote: »

1. Their current management is completely incompetent. They’ve been making bad decision after bad decision at every level lately.

2. When they did actually have competent people in key positions in recent years, they seem to be outright cursed. They were looking strong and moving forward under the leadership of Sergio Marchione, before his unexpected illness and passing. His replacement seems to have little interest in F1 as far as I can tell. And it’s not just Marchione, a couple of years prior to that they had James Allison just getting started as tech director when his wife was diagnosed with terminal cancer, leading him to move back to England to focus on his family, then ultimately going on to join Mercedes who were closer to home.

3. Even if they do get everything right, Mercedes have such an ingrained advantage in the current formula that they’re almost impossible to catch. This goes back to the fact that they were developing their hybrid F1 engine years before anyone else, then used their political clout and threats to quit the sport to force the new formula to match their spec, while Renault argued for a flat 4 and Ferrari wanted to keep the V8s that had been reliably producing close seasons year in year out. Mercedes then had an entrenched advantage from day 1, with arbitrary restrictions like token systems combining with extremely limited testing days, narrow regulations, and the FIA actively shutting down any possible innovation paths, meaning that as long as Mercedes keep developing at a reasonable pace they are basically impossible to catch from behind.

If people in the future want to know how Merc were so rampant in this era of F1, they should just read this, reread this, and reread it again.

They basically formed the rule to their own advantage, this in turn showed results on the track and that has increased the valuation of their company overall. It was all for that.

Parsnips

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Anything to get the fans talking about something other than the latest Catalan borefest.

100% agree. what a joke My favourite sport has become.
Is there any hope left to save it now at this stage.:(

Harika

Concorde agreement now signed by all teams and going into effect in 2022

muckwarrior

Harika wrote: »

F1 together with aws. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.hamilton-schumacher-senna-machine-learning-reveals-the-fastest-f1-driver-of.3DwwPLW4glCmlunjciH1Cz.html

"which uses machine learning to compare drivers’ qualifying performances over time versus their team mates to establish an ultimate ranking"

The ranking could as easily have been titled "Drivers who had the worst team mates".

Harika

muckwarrior wrote: »

"which uses machine learning to compare drivers’ qualifying performances over time versus their team mates to establish an ultimate ranking"

The ranking could as easily have been titled "Drivers who had the worst team mates".

That none of this highly paid data scientist spotted that
1 driver started in the 70s
1 in the 80s
3 in the 90s
7 in the 00s
8 in the 10s

And in the earlier times more drivers were participating

recyclebin

Gintonious wrote: »

If people in the future want to know how Merc were so rampant in this era of F1, they should just read this, reread this, and reread it again.

They basically formed the rule to their own advantage, this in turn showed results on the track and that has increased the valuation of their company overall. It was all for that.

Where can I read more about Mercedes designing a power unit and then forming the rules. I'm a bit skeptical about it. Were they building this power unit specifically for Formula 1? Seems very risky to invest millions in something before rules are confirmed.

McLaren, Racing Point and Williams all had the same engine but were never successful to anywhere near the same extent.

GarIT

recyclebin wrote: »

Where can I read more about Mercedes designing a power unit and then forming the rules. I'm a bit skeptical about it. Were they building this power unit specifically for Formula 1? Seems very risky to invest millions in something before rules are confirmed.

McLaren, Racing Point and Williams all had the same engine but were never successful to anywhere near the same extent.

Mclaren haven't had the same engine. And until Last year or maybe the year before all other teams had year old or underspecced engines. The rule that engines supplied to customers must be the same as the works team is a new one.


Lotus claimed that they didn't have all of the mercedes engine modes available to them and Mercedes remotely sped up and slowed down the customer cars when it suited them.

Anjobe

GarIT wrote: »

Mercedes remotely sped up and slowed down the customer cars when it suited them.

Bold claim, is there any evidence for it or is it another thing that "everybody knows"?

GarIT

Anjobe wrote: »

Bold claim, is there any evidence for it or is it another thing that "everybody knows"?

The only results I'm getting is articles on the engine mode ban. This was definitely a thing at the time, don't know if it was proven but Lotus claimed it. That mercedes would give them an extra engine mode when they were in front of Ferrari and then take it away again.

EDIT: https://www.racefans.net/2017/11/09/how-a-secret-mercedes-engine-mode-helped-pressure-vettel-into-a-race-ending-puncture/

skipper_G

recyclebin wrote: »

Where can I read more about Mercedes designing a power unit and then forming the rules. I'm a bit skeptical about it. Were they building this power unit specifically for Formula 1? Seems very risky to invest millions in something before rules are confirmed.

McLaren, Racing Point and Williams all had the same engine but were never successful to anywhere near the same extent.

You won't read much about that because I don't think it happened. IMO it's another wild theory that has taken root and now is reported on here as fact. Mercedes along with Ferrari were opposed to changing the regs citing cost as the concern. The discussions included many manufacturers, including some who were not in F1 at the time. But it's much easier to say Mercedes wrote the rules and they're the problem, rather than the rest getting it wrong.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9255871.stm

Frank Bullitt

recyclebin wrote: »

Where can I read more about Mercedes designing a power unit and then forming the rules. I'm a bit skeptical about it. Were they building this power unit specifically for Formula 1? Seems very risky to invest millions in something before rules are confirmed.

McLaren, Racing Point and Williams all had the same engine but were never successful to anywhere near the same extent.

In a nutshell, it goes like this from the reading I have done.

Renault and Mercedes wanted the engine's to be more relevant to three road car production. The original proposal was an inline-4 turbo charged engine, but Ferrari vetoed that one due to them not wanting to go to an engine that small.

They all agreed on what we have now, V6 turbos.

Mercedes had been developing the I4 engine as far back as 2009, and it is worth bearing in mind that the Merc powered cars had the best KERS systems at the time. The I4 engine was also used to get Volkswagon, Porsche, Honda and BMW potentially interested in coming back to the sport.

In 2014, Dr Thomas Weber, the Daimler board member responsible for research and development, said Merc would have quit the sport had F1 not adopted these rule changes, Renault did the same also.

Merc had already learned a lot from its research about the energy recovery systems, coupled with Ross Brawn being at the team prior to 2014. Once the rules were confirmed in 2011, Brawn set aside a team dedicated to the 2014 rules, this was lead by Geoff Willis, he only worked on the packing of the hybrid unit into the chassis (a huge advantage that a works team has over a customer). Merc also invested heavily in this as well, as the data from the engines trickled into their road cars. The I4 F1 engine that Mercedes-AMG worked on found a new home in the A/CLA/GLA45 AMG that is sold at today. They had their eggs for hybrid tech in the basket very early on, they were't competing for titles with the V8 anymore so switching to the new units was a given, especially as it had a few benefits with F1 and the road car division, it was a safe bet.

On the KERS side, Brixworth had won contracts (internal) on the SLS E Cell project, an electric super car. They worked with the chassis team with Aldo Costa for a seamless integration of the new rules. Once the rules were confirmed in 2011, Merc opened the the investment into that structure, hence 2014 them being so far ahead at the time, along with the token system in place which only let unit changes for reliability.

Their unit was totally different from Renault and Ferrari, they had a split turbo where the turbine and compressor were at opposite ends of the V. This benefited them with cooling as well as performance. There were other benefits like better fuel efficiency and lower centre of gravity. They also kept this concept for a while because they have it refined. This advantage gives them huge room to explore and innovate for the future.

Engine and chassis integration is HUGE in this version of F1, even if McLaren, Racing Point and Williams have the same unit (as of next year), the integration with the chassis will not be the same.

To sum up (and this may or may not have missed a few bits here or there), the path that Merc has had to this has been paved with clever engineering and deep investment to a project that had multiple benefits for them, they get the championships and the use of the tech in its road cars. They started this so long ago, they have more or less have a monopoly on this technology and its application to F1. Weather they knew it would be THIS successful is impossible to say, but their investment that early, coupled with the teams they supplied (or have supplied), their status in the motoring world, that threat to leave was a clever chess move and set it up for themselves very well. Probably a stretch to say the made the rules, but they were set on what they wanted and used their power to get it.

vectra

Honda or Merc?
https://thejudge13.com/2020/08/18/fia-instigates-full-investigation-on-all-teams-cheating-ferrari-might-save-their-season/?fbclid=IwAR176NbsRqD75IjMLvqeD81v0eolkGi2zBOf8e4iesEMvHaBp8jqnIXe7yI

Frank Bullitt

vectra wrote: »

Honda or Merc?
https://thejudge13.com/2020/08/18/fia-instigates-full-investigation-on-all-teams-cheating-ferrari-might-save-their-season/?fbclid=IwAR176NbsRqD75IjMLvqeD81v0eolkGi2zBOf8e4iesEMvHaBp8jqnIXe7yI

This somehow feels like a big can of worms ready to open...not sure if it will be good or bad.

g1983d

Anjobe wrote: »

Bold claim, is there any evidence for it or is it another thing that "everybody knows"?

why do we need evidence for everything, can we not discuss everything including rumours without needing evidence?

Even f1.com has gossip printed every so often, its nearly the most entertaining part of f1 now

vectra

Gintonious wrote: »

This somehow feels like a big can of worms ready to open...not sure if it will be good or bad.

Hopefully if worse come to worse it will back Merc and Red Bull into the following pack, which would certainly make for more excitement.

Hopefully it wont totally destroy the season.

AMKC

Well they was talk here a while ago that a lot of people think or even suspect Mercedes might be cheating in some way. I guess we might find out sooner rather than later if that is true or not. It would certainly make maybe next season more interesting if it was found out they were and had less power in there PU next season.

Joeface

So is the reason the FIA didnt disclose the Ferrari findings fully is they realised everyone of the teams was cheating in someway with Engine modes and settings . And the needed time to decide how they were going to verifiy this .

sorry cheating is a harsh word , none of the teams were operating within the spirit of the rules.FIA are now going to clarify the rules

mickdw

AMKC wrote: »

Well they was talk here a while ago that a lot of people think or even suspect Mercedes might be cheating in some way. I guess we might find out sooner rather than later if that is true or not. It would certainly make maybe next season more interesting if it was found out they were and had less power in there PU next season.

I find it funny that mercedes were pretty certain that ferrari were cheating from looking at the data last year and basically saying that the power difference is so big that there must be more energy going in than allowable. To be fair, they were correct. Now this year mercedes have tsken a massive step in engine performance arguably beyond where ferrari were so is it even possible that they are legal - i doubt it.

H3llR4iser

Gintonious wrote: »

Renault and Mercedes wanted the engine's to be more relevant to three road car production. The original proposal was an inline-4 turbo charged engine, but Ferrari vetoed that one due to them not wanting to go to an engine that small.

In hindsight, that was the stupidest move they ever made - not only they favoured the introduction of a formula that is kind of "middle of the road" and doesn't directly benefit any specific road use (an hybrid V6 turbo has very limited application outside of the "super saloon" category, being too much for your average family car and too little for a supercar), they also aren't exactly performing at the best.

Once again, highlights Ferrari general management's lack of foresight - it's not like they were, I don't know, part of a bigger company that also owns sports brands which could have used the advantages of a hybrid, turbocharged 4I formula directly on their road products - a derated, 300HP 1.6 I4 hybrid unit would have been right at home under the hood of an Alfa Romeo, a Lancia or an Abarth. Also, scaling the technology UP is usually much easier and attainable than attempting to scale it down.

And before the usual crowd blabbering about "but but but...NOISE! LAWNMOWER ENGINES!" - the most fearsomely brutal and powerful F1 engine ever build WAS indeed an 4-in-line...which was originally designed to power a 4 door saloon. If they could do that 40 years ago...

ELM327

H3llR4iser wrote: »

In hindsight, that was the stupidest move they ever made - not only they favoured the introduction of a formula that is kind of "middle of the road" and doesn't directly benefit any specific road use (an hybrid V6 turbo has very limited application outside of the "super saloon" category, being too much for your average family car and too little for a supercar), they also aren't exactly performing at the best.

Once again, highlights Ferrari general management's lack of foresight - it's not like they were, I don't know, part of a bigger company that also owns sports brands which could have used the advantages of a hybrid, turbocharged 4I formula directly on their road products - a derated, 300HP 1.6 I4 hybrid unit would have been right at home under the hood of an Alfa Romeo, a Lancia or an Abarth. Also, scaling the technology UP is usually much easier and attainable than attempting to scale it down.

And before the usual crowd blabbering about "but but but...NOISE! LAWNMOWER ENGINES!" - the most fearsomely brutal and powerful F1 engine ever build WAS indeed an 4-in-line...which was originally designed to power a 4 door saloon. If they could do that 40 years ago...

They still havent reached the power levels that those insane turbo engines ran in quali mode. Wasnt the peak something like 1100hp?

H3llR4iser

ELM327 wrote: »

They still havent reached the power levels that those insane turbo engines ran in quali mode. Wasnt the peak something like 1100hp?

BMW used to say 1400HP in 1986 but most in F1 at the time rated them at over 1500HP.

They will never reach up to these limits as it is not the point of the current turbo engines, but if they wanted...it would be easy to leave these values in the dust today, if they had unrestricted fuel flow and turbo boost.

Still, while everyone is super tight-lipped about current power units outputs, they are in the vicinity or just past 1000HP - modern F1 cars have the cx of a brick wall and weigh three quarters of a ton, but are still able to push nearly 360 kph on the straights. There were some calculations floating around technical sites last season which put the Ferrari and Mercedes PUs at about 1030HP at the wheel, which would mean a bit more at the crank (I am not sure how much loss a F1 transmission induces, probably very little).

quokula

H3llR4iser wrote: »

In hindsight, that was the stupidest move they ever made - not only they favoured the introduction of a formula that is kind of "middle of the road" and doesn't directly benefit any specific road use (an hybrid V6 turbo has very limited application outside of the "super saloon" category, being too much for your average family car and too little for a supercar), they also aren't exactly performing at the best.

Once again, highlights Ferrari general management's lack of foresight - it's not like they were, I don't know, part of a bigger company that also owns sports brands which could have used the advantages of a hybrid, turbocharged 4I formula directly on their road products - a derated, 300HP 1.6 I4 hybrid unit would have been right at home under the hood of an Alfa Romeo, a Lancia or an Abarth. Also, scaling the technology UP is usually much easier and attainable than attempting to scale it down.

And before the usual crowd blabbering about "but but but...NOISE! LAWNMOWER ENGINES!" - the most fearsomely brutal and powerful F1 engine ever build WAS indeed an 4-in-line...which was originally designed to power a 4 door saloon. If they could do that 40 years ago...

They fully admitted that they were stupid to agree to the V6 Formula, but they didn't want to be seen to be holding the sport back when the Mercedes were pushing so hard for it. In hindsight it was a catastrophe for both Ferrari and for F1 of course.

https://www.grandprix247.com/2017/02/01/montezemolo-mercedes-worked-on-their-f1-engine-since-2007/

Debub

Ross Brawn defending the fastest driver rankings

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/brawn-defends-formula-ones-fastest-201933672.html list

ELM327

Yes, the requirements for longevity weren't there in those days. Even when I started watching in the 90's there were no restrictions on engines beyond making the end of the session.

recyclebin

It's a shame the FIA don't do independent dynos and aerodynamic downforce tests on the cars and publish the results. It would make it clearer which drivers are over and underachieving in the car.

Frank Bullitt

H3llR4iser wrote: »

In hindsight, that was the stupidest move they ever made - not only they favoured the introduction of a formula that is kind of "middle of the road" and doesn't directly benefit any specific road use (an hybrid V6 turbo has very limited application outside of the "super saloon" category, being too much for your average family car and too little for a supercar), they also aren't exactly performing at the best.

Once again, highlights Ferrari general management's lack of foresight - it's not like they were, I don't know, part of a bigger company that also owns sports brands which could have used the advantages of a hybrid, turbocharged 4I formula directly on their road products - a derated, 300HP 1.6 I4 hybrid unit would have been right at home under the hood of an Alfa Romeo, a Lancia or an Abarth. Also, scaling the technology UP is usually much easier and attainable than attempting to scale it down.

And before the usual crowd blabbering about "but but but...NOISE! LAWNMOWER ENGINES!" - the most fearsomely brutal and powerful F1 engine ever build WAS indeed an 4-in-line...which was originally designed to power a 4 door saloon. If they could do that 40 years ago...

Agreed.

I also find it funny that a company like Merc and Renault claim they need F1 to be more road relevant in order for them to compete, when the world of motoring is drastically switching to electric (Tesla are the most valuable car company in the world right now, even more so than Ford), and for that we have FE, with a lot of manufacturers competing in there (Porsche, Jag, Audi etc)

So why the hell does F1 need that as a reason? Feels like a softball reason to claim that when most production cars in a few years will be fully electric, then F1 will really be in a weird position.

I think the current units are both too complex and MASSIVELY over priced. Back in 2014, when budgets were all the rage, Christian Horner, who I do no always agree with, said the intro of units like this at that time made zero financial sense as they all had to spend an utter bomb on them. Look where it has gotten the sport.

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/CrystalRacing/status/1296249290629709833

Stats like this highlight the current issue more and more.

tigerboon

mickdw wrote: »

I find it funny that mercedes were pretty certain that ferrari were cheating from looking at the data last year and basically saying that the power difference is so big that there must be more energy going in than allowable. To be fair, they were correct. Now this year mercedes have tsken a massive step in engine performance arguably beyond where ferrari were so is it even possible that they are legal - i doubt it.

When they say they're "pretty certain ", what they mean is they're 99.9% certain. These guys are the best engineers out there. This year's merc is almost certainly illegal only nobody's figured out what they're up to.
One year back when Audi and Peugeot were competing at Le Mans, the Peugeot was a couple of seconds a lap quicker all through practice and qualifiers. Audi engineers went through their design and build the day before the race. They came to the conclusion that their car was perfect to the regulations and that Peugeot were running with revs too high. They told their drivers to just drive as planned as they reckoned the Peugeots wouldn't go the distance. They were right. The point is that the engineers know what can be done to any set of rules
In F1 2020 it's hard to believe only Mercedes can build a regulations perfect engine on regulations that have been there for a number of years.

mickdw

tigerboon wrote: »

When they say they're "pretty certain ", what they mean is they're 99.9% certain. These guys are the best engineers out there. This year's merc is almost certainly illegal only nobody's figured out what they're up to.
One year back when Audi and Peugeot were competing at Le Mans, the Peugeot was a couple of seconds a lap quicker all through practice and qualifiers. Audi engineers went through their design and build the day before the race. They came to the conclusion that their car was perfect to the regulations and that Peugeot were running with revs too high. They told their drivers to just drive as planned as they reckoned the Peugeots wouldn't go the distance. They were right. The point is that the engineers know what can be done to any set of rules
In F1 2020 it's hard to believe only Mercedes can build a regulations perfect engine on regulations that have been there for a number of years.

Yep id agree. Foolish for mercedes if they are running something dodgy as it would put a large cloud over all their success and Hamiltons entire career also.