Daily #F1 News and Comment: Thursday 24th April 2014


This page will be updated throughout the day.

Please if you are on Twitter press the tweet button below. If you re-write and tweet individual story headlines don’t forget to include #F1.

You may not realise how hugely important this is and has helped grow our community significantly.

Previously on TJ13:

#F1 Driver Focus: Fitness to Race (Part I)

Mercedes secret confirmed

Mattiacci begins flexing his power

Chinese flag official in need of hearing aid

Hakkinen blasts Vettel for ignoring orders (GMM)

The first morning’s proceedings from Munich courtroom A101

The way it once was at McLaren

Mercedes secret confirmed

Paddy Lowe met up with Giorgio Piola before the Chinese Grand Prix and congratulated him on his discovery of one the secrets that has provided Mercedes with a dominant car.

“Giorgio, you have uncovered one of our secrets but I’d like you to see the car at the end of the season so you can appreciate the other innovations we have designed which deserve as much credit for the car’s performance.”

Last year, Ross Brawn had spoken before his departure that the initial design route for the Mercedes W05 was too conservative and a decision was made after the summer break to chase very specific design goals with the new car.

As has been reported in recent weeks, the turbo and a smaller compressor are located at either end of the engine with the MGU-H mounted in the middle and connected by a shaft. The compressor is situated nearest the bulkhead whilst the turbo is located close to the gearbox. This design route was chosen because in its original spec – the hot air was heating the air coming through the air intake that was feeding the engine.

The heat exchanger for the engine has also been housed within the chassis with cooling ducts designed into the chassis. The Mercedes team also chose to use a very short exhaust which loses about 15bhp from the optimum; but the team felt the benefits of more efficient cooling allied to a less aerodynamic compromise out-weighed the loss of this power.

Aldo Costa and his team have thus been able to reduce the frontal area of the car and the placement of the relevant parts have allowed the team to reduce their dependency on longer cables, wires and pipework, which in turn has brought the car closer to the 692kg weight limit.

Mercedes have also chosen to  run a larger turbo than the opposition and its reduction of turbo lag means less power needs to be harvested from the ERS to keep the turbine spooled off throttle. The surplus energy is transferred to MGU-K which delivers instant energy to the power train whilst increasing economy.

The significance of this design is that although the MGU-K is limited to recovering only 2MJ from the braking system, the MGU-H is unlimited and the Mercedes can therefore recover all it’s power levels in the regulated 36 seconds per lap that would require the other teams 50 seconds to achieve. In essence Mercedes do not have to waste a lap replenishing the full amount of electrical charge as their competition currently has to.

Ferrari and Renault are aware of this ‘secret’ installation but due to the FIA’s homologation freeze of February 28th, they are powerless to do anything this year. In a year of massive change, with limited testing both before and during the season and with the biggest change in technology in a generation, it would have made more sense to allow the manufacturers a twelve month period to get their technology up to requirements.

There are arguments for and against testing but in a similar manner to last year’s disgraceful witch-hunt of Pirelli, something has to change. Why would any company want to get involved in F1 when the supposed benefit to road car development is hampered by restrictive rules that do not allow progress.


Mattiacci begins flexing his power

Reports from Italy are suggesting that the new team principal Marco Mattiacci has already begun making changes to the Ferrari infrastructure. He has received confirmation from Luca di Montezemolo that both human and financial resources will be made available to identify and effect a change for the 2014 season.

LdM and MM are reorganising the race department to produce technical solutions faster than the competition by streamlining internal procedures – “…implementing a simplification of the organisation aimed at strengthening key areas to add to the performance of the car. In addition support will be given to suppliers to reduce the reaction time to requests arriving from Maranello, limiting the delay of each component from prototype to the finished product.”

The Reparto Corse is still unsure if the F14-T’s current form was displayed in Alonso’s drive to the podium or if it’s true pace is what was displayed by Raikkonen. In similar fashion to Vettel, Raikkonen is struggling with his new car and despite him “looking like the man who left Ferrari in 2009” observers insist he hasn’t lost his ability over the winter after an impressive season last year.

In Spain in three weeks time Ferrari is expected to debut a new ‘extreme’ nose that has been kept under wraps since the launch of the car and further developments in fuel are coming from Shell who have reduced the horsepower deficit to Mercedes to around 20bhp. The software technicians are working on updates that will allow better integration of the two electric motors and a new aero package will be ready for the F14-T’s first major upgrade.

Perhaps of most significance is the message coming from Ferrari. There are still 15 races to go and it’s the ideal opportunity to assimilate the working groups into a collective whole. The 2015 design has already had about two months of work dedicated to it but any developments from this season will be built into the design of the new car.

Mattiacci is seen by the Agnelli family as Ferrari’s ‘Golden Boy’ and has delivered record sales to the company in different zones around the world. The politics behind his appointment will become clearer as time goes on but it’s a remarkable coincidence that he is taking over the most demanding job in Formula One at the same age that LdM took over the presidency of Ferrari in 1991.


Chinese flag official in need of hearing aid

The first indication the world had of the chequered flag being waved before the scheduled number of laps had been completed was when Lewis Hamilton stated to the Mercedes team – “I’ve just seen the flag”.

Martin Brundle and David Croft argued the message and couldn’t come to any definitive conclusion as to what Lewis had meant. It was shortly after the race that the full implications became clear.

Article 43.2 of the sporting regulations dictates that if the chequered flag is waved early, even in error, the race is over which nullified Kamui Kobayashi’s last-lap pass. A fight over 17th position will never make the headlines but it does not bear thinking about the legal consequences if it had been a pass for the race victory.

With two laps left to run, local race director Zhunag Tao asked Charlie Whiting if a white flag should be shown for the penultimate lap. Zhuang relayed Whiting’s response to the flag man saying “No flag now” but the Chinese official did not hear or misunderstood the word “No.

Considering the vitriol being expressed by different factions of F1 – as to the lack of noise with the new era – it seems astonishing that an official could even suggest ‘sound’ as being a problem.


Hakkinen blasts Vettel for ignoring orders (GMM)

Fellow world champion Mika Hakkinen has criticised Sebastian Vettel for ignoring team orders. Although Red Bull and the German driver have claimed Vettel ultimately decided to let teammate Daniel Ricciardo past in China, initially he answered “tough luck” when the radio call came. Finn Hakkinen, the now-retired 1998 and 1999 title winner, is unimpressed.

“For Vettel it’s an unpleasant surprise that Ricciardo is beating him,” he said, “but instructions from the team have to be followed. Even last year I was surprised by Vettel’s behaviour towards his team, and now it goes on,” Hakkinen, obviously referring to the ‘Multi-21’ scandal involving Mark Webber in 2013, told Hermes in an interview.

“Behaving like that will, sooner or later, hurt him. Maybe he (Vettel) is planning to change teams, but right now he’s not behaving in the right way,” he added.

Hakkinen also commented on Ferrari’s shock management switch, after Stefano Domenicali was suddenly replaced as team boss by the mainly unknown Marco Mattiacci.

“Stefano is a friend,” Hakkinen said, “but sometimes change is necessary. It’s difficult to say whether Ferrari has made the right decision, but when large companies are not getting results, heads can roll.”

When asked about Mattiacci, the former McLaren driver said: “Only time will tell how he will go, but if you don’t have much experience in formula one, it will be difficult to get straight down to work.”


The first morning’s proceedings from Munich courtroom A101

TJ13 reported a number of months ago that the Ecclestone trial beginning today in Munich, would sit for just 2 days a week to facilitate the F1 – so called – “supremo’s” schedule, much to the incredulity of some of our German colleagues.

Today the long awaited trial begins, and it is scheduled for no less than 13 weeks.

The man who has shaped Formula 1 for the past 4 decades arrived in a dark suit and told the jostling media, “I’m confident, the sun is shining,” Ecclestone faces up to 10 years in jail if convicted.

Ecclestone is sat between his lawyer and his interpreter. The Judge, Peter Noll, begins proceedings by asking the defendant politely, “How should I pronounce your name?”.Ecclestone appeared before Noll previously as a witness in the Gribkowsky trial, but he responds “Ecclestone is fine”.

Judge Noll practices the name out loud, “Ecclestone”, emphasising the “o” as in “stone”, which performed with a German accent sounds grand and proper.

In what would appear to be light hearted banter Judge Noll observes that the indictment states Ecclestone is divorced. “I thought you were married”, queries Noll. “Both are correct”, replies Ecclestone to much amusement in the courtroom. On a roll, Bernie adds, “I like to remember the divorce part”

Judge Noll reminds Ecclestone that his current marital status may be crucial in relation to certain financial transactions. Then in a very judge like manner he concludes the checking of technicalities reminding Ecclestone, “Those were the simpler questions in this process.”

The counsel for the prosecution then read the 22 page indictment. This is followed by Ecclestone’s lawyer commencing reading of a statement on behalf of his client, it is in the first person, and he advises the court this may take several hours.

Back at base in London it appears matters are unravelling much more quickly than expected. CVC are already briefing that Bernie Ecclestone’s time in Formula 1 is over. Sources close to CVC are quoted by Kevin Eason of the Times stating, “In truth, it (Ecclestone’s reign) has been over for a while, but Bernie has been allowed to continue as the face of the sport until this legal advice, which was devastating.”

The advice referred to is that of CVC’s lawyers. Following Judge Newey brandishing Mr. E as “untruthful and unreliable” in his summation of the Constantin vs Ecclestone case, the board of CVC were advised that Ecclestone must now be removed from his public role in Formula 1.

Ecclestone was forced to resign his statutory directorships from the myriad of inter-connected companies which own the commercial rights to Formula 1. All contractual matters requiring signatures were reassigned from Ecclestone to Donald MacKenzie along with all decisions on anything more than mundane day to day matters.

CVC have been biding their time before finalising the severance with Ecclestone, believing that damming evidence of a criminal nature will emerge from the proceedings in Munich, deflecting any criticism of them acting in a precipitous manner.



The way it once was at McLaren



47 responses to “Daily #F1 News and Comment: Thursday 24th April 2014

  1. I do agree that the freeze of development of the engines is a complete bullshit rule. Certainly this year. With testing and further building engines how they think it should be, both ferrari and some renault teams could make it an exciting season. Fia gives us artificial things on cars to pass each other, to make the races more thrilling. But something to make a whole season (possibly) thrilling, that’s one thing they ban… I was never against these major rule changes ( i loved the turbo idea) but it seems like the fia can’t really feel what their sport needs. It’s one thing to change everything completely but if you don’t work out the idea, it’s just lost time and effort. Nobody likes total domination . Whether it’s by mercedes, red bull of schumi. And now they have this amazing opportunity to bring the sport back to its essentials and what do they do? They fuck it up!

    • Couldn’t have said it better myself.

      The only positive I can see is that it gives an opportunity to do away with RBR dominance. Imagine if RBR were back tot heir best by mid-season and then blitzed the field like last year. Dominance is not good, but dominance by a different team, is still something.

    • But ask yourself this, what was the point of the rule? I don’t know but most of these regs were crafted *with* the manufacturers present.

      I’m all for blaming the FIA as a cesspool of bureaucratic incompetence, but I do wonder if there isn’t blame to be shared on this one. A quick look around Google suggests that in season development was banned as a cost saving measure in part and that the manufacturers were part of the dialogue, at the very least.

      So we can also blame teams for not coming to terms with cost cutting, forcing the FIA to try and do so by regulation.

      In truth, I don’t think any manufacturer imagined they could be that far behind. Hats off to Mercedes for that supreme light bulb moment, because that’s quite the design development and a huge advantage for them. Also, it’s exactly the kind of thing that’s liable to show up in road cars, I would think.

      • Oh no don’t get me wrong. Mercedes showed everybody that they do know what they are doing. And hats off to them for that. But isn’t it so that the teams still spend more now than ever? And I’m not saying it should be unlimited testing like it was in the day. Regulations and limitations aren’t that bad. And of course it isn’t only the fia to blame. But after all the fia is like the government. And the teams are the people. The fia is there to make rules and make sure the teams follow them. As always the teams and the people only want what’s best for them. And the fia should be the institution who sees that there is a way to satisfy everybody (including the audience) and if there isn’t a way then they should find a possibility that most suits everybody (wich is difficult, I know) but f1, to me, is the king of motorsport. Being a head in development and possibilities to every other class there is out there. And this freeze is something that stands in the way off that. Don’t get me wrong i love formula one. Always have always will. I just find it a bit weird they do artificial things to make it “better” but when there is some natural way to do it. They go against it as hard as they can.

        • “But after all the fia is like the government. And the teams are the people.”

          Not really. The teams are like the bankers and the audience is the people. The same way certain governments bow to their paymasters and we pick up the pieces, the same thing happens in F1, just a reflection of the wider society.

        • Yes, but they may be hamstrung by their own rules. Renault asked for an extension, but not all 3 manufacturers agreed, and I think it may be the case that even if the FIA want to open development back up, they couldn’t without all 3 manufacturers saying yes. And if you’re MB, looking at the RB chassis, why would you do that to yourself.

          I think that they didn’t anticipate just *how* much better MB would be and as a result, they made no provision for dealing with it.

          I would also say that the WEC has balance of performance rules to keep anyone from getting too far ahead, is that what you’re getting at?

      • “Also, it’s exactly the kind of thing that’s liable to show up in road cars, I would think.”

        I’ve always been intrigued by that kind of statement, and by the FIA’s mantra that F1 should be “relevant” to the motor industry. Unless you are willing to spend $200K+ on a car, how much technology that was exclusively developed for F1 has ever found it’s way into a road car that average person could buy? Hybrid systems aren’t new and many were developed by companies not in F1. Carbon fibre chassis’s are too complex and expensive for the average road car, even though the technology has been around for decades. Dual clutch systems and direct injection weren’t invented because of F1 either. Maybe some electronic systems have come out of F1.

        I’m all for new technology but the insistence that any new technology must be solely / mainly relevant to the motor industry calls into question whether F1 has been transformed from a competitive sport to merely a test-bed for a couple of manufactures, as most of F1 teams don’t make road cars and never will nor produce systems for them.

        • Gordon Murray has used the same principle and structures he used and developed in F1 to create a new range of lighter weight vehicles, we will probably start seeing fairly soon. As you suggest, they are to complex and expensive, so he has substituted the materials used in F1 i.e carbon fibre etc, for glass and paper, and a steel core. There is a nice interview with him on the Motorsport magazine podcast where he talks a little about this.

          I would say this is a perfect example of road relevance. Not directly transferable as it is, but the high level development of advanced techniques and technology which, which with a little addition effort, can be made directly useable in road cars.

          • I would argue that there’s very little true innovation in F1 but merely re-purposing of technology that was developed in the aerospace industry, and that most car manufacturers can and do utilize that technology without having to be involved in F1. Which leads me to the conclusion that the FIA’s road relevance campaign is twofold: PR to placate the eco-politics of Europe, and secondly the hope they can draw other manufacturers in. The first they’ll never win and the in the second there hasn’t been any rush of new manufacturers wanting involved in F1.

          • I think you left off a 3rd, that without at least the appearance of relevance, since the actuality of it can be argued to death, neither MB or Renault might still be producing engines for F1, and there is no way Honda would be involved. The Friday presser was very instructive in that regard as MB Honda and Renault were all in agreement about liking the new regulations and how transformative the new PU’s were.

        • Gordon Murray has used the same principle and structures he used and developed in F1 to create a new range of lighter weight vehicles, we will probably start seeing fairly soon. As you suggest, they are to complex and expensive, so he has substituted the materials used in F1 i.e carbon fibre etc, for glass and paper, and a steel core. There is a nice interview with him on the Motorsport magazine podcast where he talks a little about this.

          I would say this is a perfect example of road relevance. Not directly transferable as it is, but the high level development of advanced techniques and technology which, which with a little addition effort, can be made directly useable in road cars.

          • I’m not disagreeing with you per se, just saying that direct correlation isn’t always possible, and that whilst there is a lot of money in development of things like hybrid technology, there is nothing like hard competition to really advance technological development, and I’d argue, that the restrictions currently on development are a bad idea as they hurt this directly.

        • The tire technology for example is one that found the way to our cars. Bridgestone used it’s data to make better tires. Or all the safety precautions. Those found a way to road cars. As do the technologies such as drive by wire etc. Maybe not first used in f1 but some of those things get perfected by formula one. Just like steel brake discs. Not a formula one invention. But certainly gained a lot of performance there. Wich found its way to every road car. Maybe formula 1 is more of a testing ground for technology rather than an inventor.

          • Interesting point about disc brakes. they were first used in Le Mans racing iirc, and then transferred across to F1. I think sport-car racing has been more relevant to the advancement of car technology than F1 has ever been.

            Aerodynamics is important in any racing series, but if you think about the Audi and Peugeot’s in sports-cars, their technology filters into road cars more directly than Formula One. Forget diffusers, DRS, open cockpit dynamics, EBD, tyres that still follow a formula from decades ago, true advancement is found in endurance events.

          • But disc brakes were first developed for aircraft, then adopted for cars.

            It’s interesting how many very common technologies of street cars AREN’T used in F1. For example, variable valve timing; ABS, active suspension, and I am sure there are other things. And why are things like variable inlet trumpets banned? The manufacturers had a lot of input in the new rules, so there must have been cost reasons to keep some things out. Anyway, it could have been even more interesting.

            To be clear, I do not advocate ABS or active suspension for F1.

          • @ Steve. The suspension was banned by the fia. But it is a formula 1 invention…

          • I’m aware of that. And as I said I would not welcome it back in F1; there is talk of active suspension’s return as a ‘cost saver’.

          • @ bruznic

            active suspension is NOT a formula 1 invention…

            Lotus pioneered this on ROAD CARS !

            They were running testbed active suspension Esprit’s in the late 1970’s.

            Officially announced in the early 1980’s


            Nothing to do with F1

            In fact – I can’t think of a SINGLE thing that was pioneered in F1 …. it’s all copied or plagiarised

          • @ manky. Ok you proved me wrong. But that’s why I said Maybe formula 1 is more of a testing ground for technology rather than an inventor.

          • @ bruznic

            to me – motorsport is the testing ground you speak of …

            it always has been ….

            and F1 is just a very small part of motorsport – and those involved in it suffer from hubris

      • @ Mattpt55

        ” Also, it’s exactly the kind of thing that’s liable to show up in road cars, I would think. ”

        Only if they start fitting the intercoolers inside the passenger compartment ……..

        • LOL, I’m pretty sure if they wanted to they could figure out a place for the intercooler besides the passenger seat. Besides, the engines that are going to benefit are likely to be 3 and 4 cylinders revving to 6-7000 rpm where even something as simple as keeping the turbo spooled and taking some strain off the ICE (ala Mazda with it’s i-ELOOP) can make a huge difference for fleet averages and usable power.

          • Lol, I figured you were once I went back and reread the article :-D.

            And no, I’d not seen that.Those numbers are insane for a Golf. Though i wouldn’t mind giving one an extended (say 10 year) test drive if anyone from VW is listening. 🙂

          • @ Matt

            Volkswagen Group of America
            2200 Ferdinand Porsche Dr.
            Herndon, VA 20171
            (248) 754-5000


          • Challenge accepted 🙂 Open Letter to VW America

            “Dear Mr. Horn, may I call you Michael? How about Mike? Oh wait you’re German. Well, too late now I suppose. Anyway, Michael, it has come to my attention that you have a new car coming out in a few days the Golf RS400. I see that it has almost 400 hp, a number that might actually get some real ‘Muricans to pay attention to it. Since I know you must be a Busy Man, it may not have crossed your mind that letting me have an extended (say 10 years) test drive of your car might actually be good for your business.

            Let me explain. AS you know, we here in ‘Murica have a firm belief that driving any car not officially designated as ‘Murican will cause immediate loss of all gender identity followed by morphing into an asexual blob that will then be picked on by real ‘Muricans. Fortunately for you, I am an open minded citizen of the world and I know this isn’t true because I wound up with a rental Honda several weeks ago and my manhood is still intact (though I did have a few anxious moments after I returned the car, this being a business like letter I will refrain from sharing). Therefore, my extended test drive will demonstrate to my fellow citizens in the heartland of NYC that they have nothing to fear from driving a furrin car, unless it’s that my (well, OK, technically your) car is faster than theirs.

            I also see that your car has 4 wheel drive. In NYC we have snow. This would be the perfect situation in which to demonstrate to my fellow patriots my ability to spin the car on slippery roads and drive over their rubbish bins. You may not realize how important this skill is to locals, but trust me, it is.

            I’m sure you’re wondering where I will post my reviews and how many followers I have at this point. Well, to be completely honest I don’t actually have a website or reviews, but as a point in my favor the penniless musicians that I used to give rides to always nicknamed my by my car. So when I drove the ’77 Coupe de Ville I was Big-Car Mattpt55. Later, when the wiring decomposed entirely and the car would no longer start I got a Hyundai Excel and was then known as Formerly Big-Car Mattpt55.

            So you can clearly see that I have great influence amongst my peer group when it comes to automotive matters. But even more importantly, I know an actual person with enough real money to actually buy a new car. As he’s my dad, I feel fairly confident I can influence his buying decision, even though he’s looking for a 4 door sedan and your car is a hatchback.

            As you can clearly see, it’s in your own best interest to get me started on my test drive as soon as possible. Since I am sure you are desperate to get in touch with me right away, feel free to contact me via email, SMS or @Mattpt55 on Twitter and tell me where I can pick up my new car for its test drive.



          • ….. clearly a talent going to waste 😉

            Think a few more days of our lives episodes should satisfy the comedic writer – bursting to out!

    • The first comment starts with a big assumption: that if power unit development was not frozen the other two manufactures would somehow find more HP, while Mercedes stood still. “Nobody likes total domination”.

      This makes no sense of course. If the engines were unlocked Mercedes would continue to find more speed. The gap in expertise will not magically disappear if you change one rule.

      Aerodynamic development was open last year but this didn’t make any difference to the slower teams. RBR started out in front and then with their greater expertise out developed all the other teams throughout the year and ended in front. “Nobody likes total domination”.

      Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault… and Honda will all be working on developments for next year and guess what, once again Mercedes will have the best power unit. If there is going to be any parity the FIA you love to hate will have to step in and handicap Mercedes in some way.

      • ” … the FIA you love to hate will have to step in and handicap Mercedes in some way. ”

        They could force Mercedes to fit boom boxes to their cars 😉

        Thereby killing two birds with one stone 😀

  2. “So we can also blame teams for not coming to terms with cost cutting, forcing the FIA to try and do so by regulation.”

    Huh? Only the Ferrari engine is actually built by a department within an F1 team, the M-B engine is built by Mercedes AMG High Performance Powertrains which is a separate company from the M-B F1 team and Renault doesn’t run a team. There was never any budget restrictions on what could be spent developing the 2014 spec engine.

    • JT has been quoted as saying that FIA will use regulations to try and rein in costs since the teams could not agree amongst themselves. I found several articles stating that one of the purposes of the in season development freeze was to reduce costs. Most likely, as the costs then get passed on to the teams. Seemed fairly straight forward to me, but I have a rehearsal to get to so hopefully that clears up my meaning.

      • It’s widely been reported that Ferrari, Renault and M-B have collectively spent around $500M on the new 2014 spec engines. Honda will spend at least as much as the others if not more. These new engines are costing the customer teams any where from $5M -$10M more a season than the 2013 spec engines did. Doesn’t seem like cost cutting to me.

  3. ‘re- Merc’s secret design
    With the testing so limited and the engines now frozen untill next season, would it not be worth the other manufacturers working hard on an engine for next year and use it during the un season test sessions so as to gain that all important track time. I’m sure in testing the cars don’t have to fully conform to the regs. So instead of using a mule, use a current car with the new engine at a test. Simples!

  4. The use of expressions such as “last year’s disgraceful witch-hunt of Pirelli” is synonym with credibility blown out of the window. What begins as Mercedes secret confirmed and gives some interesting information ends as a typical keyboard warrior rant over a year old grudge.

    • I think you’re missing the point. Pirelli strong armed the FIA into more tests for their tyres. They got a public humiliation last year because of exploding tyres when that was the mandate from the FIA.

      All they wanted was to be able to test the tyres properly which is why tyre test days have been allowed this year.

      Hardly a year old grudge my friend..

      • Do you see what poor writing does?

        It began as a piece about Mercedes’ ingenuity and how the regulations help protect their advantage. But then it took a last paragraph detour into a rant over an incident that has nothing at all to with the current season and teams form. If an incident involving regulation freezes and the trouble it causes was necessary to illustrate the scenario, it would have actually been much more useful and intelligent to revisit the 2011 EBD saga.

        • @Erico Calixto.

          The statement by the author about the witch hunt against Pirelli is quite fair. With adequate testing, the problems would not have occurred.

          If you want to have a go at poor writing, then the technical misinformation that is being spouted by people on the ‘Mercedes secret’, would be a better target. Some of it is just being copied from one site to another. Mercedes probably started some of the disinformation, their pre-season video is a good example.


          +1 on your point about technology from WEC being more advanced. Active suspension on Citroen prior to Lotus?

          • I think you miss my point.

            Apples and oranges, except this time it’s Mercedes engines 2014 and Pirelli tyres 2013.

            That is poor writing.

  5. “Why would any company want to get involved in F1 when the supposed benefit to road car development is hampered by restrictive rules that do not allow progress.”

    Although I don’t like one team dominations, I’ve got to agree with Newey when he complained that it was frustrating to see his ideas copied so easily after putting so much effort into it. Mercedes have done a much better job. Why would it be easy for others to copy it. To me they shouldn’t even know what made their engine so efficient.
    It’s only fair that Mercedes should blow the opposition away. Just as it was fair for Red Bull to dominate. Their opponents ought to do a better job. Why should the regulation be changed to help them?
    Changing the regulation to reduce cost is one thing. But changing it to allow others to catch up while needed less resources to achieve it is ridiculous

  6. @manky

    My mistake. The XM was classed as semi active. The much later Xantia, had the option of active roll control.

  7. @mattpt55 dit “what misinformation are you referencing? Curiosity and all that.”

    From Mercedes, came that much publicised CGI film, and VG images of their 2014 engine, complete with Magnetti Marelli turbo/generator combo. At least Ferrari were honest and just showed an engine block and a few other bits. The Renault promo looks to be realistic. This AMuS article is relevant. http://tinyurl.com/m844t7o If you read the whole article by Mark Hughes, who supposedly discovered this secret, you will note a number of basic errors and contradictions, which are repeated in so many blogs. Then compound errors are introduced by the bloggers. I call out bingo!
    Buzzword bingo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzzword_bingo) At least the judge13 is free of this. A few examples seen elsewhere,

    “The turbo and exhaust is kept cooler so it gives more power” Really! Heat is energy, the last thing you want to do, is cool the exhaust.

    “The ‘trick turbo layout’ triggers a series of critical performance benefits. As the air is not travelling through as much pipework, a reduction in turbo lag means less power needs to be be harvested from the car’s ERS unit to keep the turbine spooled off throttle. That in turn improves the efficiency of the car, with more power reserved for performance gain and less fuel consequentially used up.” Doesn’t make sense – turbo lag and fuel usage are not linked. Energy has to come from fuel, and that recovered from GenH.

    “All the other (edit: Renault) teams but Red Bull are utilising an equal length manifold which resides aft of their engine and charge air cooling solutions. Red Bull have laid their manifold flat underneath the chargecoolers in a configuration that lends itself towards an equal length variant, however with the limited vertical space it’s difficult to ascertain whether it truly is equal length and could be a hybrid of both solutions, simply extending the header lengths……snip…” –

    Either it’s a log exhaust or it’s individual runners. The Renault engine CGI shows a twin scroll turbocharger, and different length runners. Twin scroll turbos are used when the designer wants to have power and torque from a low engine speed. The twin scrolls reduce pressure pulses reversing back down the manifold. High velocity/low volume one side of the divider and higher volume/relatively lower velocity the other side The author of the above quote illustrates his article with pictures of both sides of the Caterham Renault. http://tinyurl.com/q8dcwcr and http://tinyurl.com/mqxqbuf. Notice the difference between left and right banks, and the fourth pipe in the initial set of runners. No, Renault aren’t using a V8.

    oops better do a Pt 2

  8. @mattpt55 Pt 2

    Oh sorry, this is too long. But I’ve started so I’ll……

    It would be fair to assume that teams are using a SRM(Switched Reluctance Motor and Generator) or similar. http://tinyurl.com/3ao38ub and http://tinyurl.com/4xnl8s2. Whether motor or generator the main advantages compared to field coil type, are higher efficiency both electrical and mechanical. Electrically they can be 10% better, reaching 96% in the best examples. Also they have a better tolerance of heat, and they can work at very high speeds, i.e. the 100k rpm of a turbo, and full torque/power can be applied to the motor from almost stall speed. Reduced size is also a bonus. In motor mode the same efficiencies apply. But the inherent operation becomes useful in F1. The links show that the drive to the motor is a modified square wave – on – hold – off. PWM. But the motor electronics need to monitor the timing of the ‘pulses’. Also the electronics need to monitor the power supplied, Voltage and current. Again, so what? MGU K. Fine grained control of the supplied waveform/waveform shape/power to MGU K can be used as a crude but effective form of traction control. The issue of the battery/energy store is for another day.

    ps isn’t the Merc unit in violation of 5.2.4

    1.26 Motor Generator Unit – Heat (MGU-H) :
    The Heat Motor Generator Unit is the electrical machine linked to the exhaust turbine of a pressure charging system as part of the ERS.

    5.2.4 The MGU-H must be solely mechanically linked to the exhaust turbine of a pressure charging system. This mechanical link must be of fixed speed ratio to the exhaust turbine and may be clutched.The rotational speed of the MGU-H may not exceed 125,000rpm.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.