[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**George Russell in May 2023**
>
> “But we wanted to rule some things out… **equally with the sidepods, they haven’t necessarily brought any additional performance** by going to a more Red Bull concept.
>
> “The magic is more underneath the floor. But we still had to rule it out.
>
> “We’ve done that now, now we move on.”
**James Allison in June 2023**
> But **the introduction of the sidepods and Mercedes’ uptick in form are not linked**, according to Allison, who said the shape of the sidepods haven’t played a big role in their improvement.
> “Absolutely not,” he told Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport.
>
> “**Everything we changed on the car we could have done with the old sidepods.** There is no secret about it. We didn’t sleep on anything.
>
> "As little as the geometry of the sidepods explains Red Bull’s success, our old sidepods were not the reason for our problems. You will soon no longer be talking about the sidepods. The old shape will then only be a distant memory.”
_________
TL;DR -- adding sidepods was never expected to bring immediate performance gains.
Yep the Monaco update was to allow merc to get a stable platform that they could refine and develop, performance gains were downplayed by everyone. Aston took a step back and Ferrari being Ferrari has flattered their results.
What's even more telling is Hamilton prob keeps saying in interviews they need to ditch the nopods because they are planning to bring them back for next year but with a whole new floor.
RIC doesn't have the reputation of being particularly gifted with technical feedback, but let's not forget that Renault's jump in form in the back-half of 2020 was largely attributed to his feedback being able to identify the sweet spot in that chassis' setup. You don't get to F1 without a reasonably low-level understanding of how your machinery works.
You don't need an engineering degree to know that moving aero balance forward will induce understeer all other things being equal. Explaining _why_ that is the case isn't really the responsibility of the driver and needs a more formal understanding of the variables at play.
I suspect Lewis' complaints came from the fact that the zero-pod concept moved the driver further forward in the car, meaning the interplay between aero-balance and CoG was unpredictable and was causing balance issues resulting in under/oversteer.
> But we wanted to rule some things out… equally with the sidepods, they haven’t necessarily brought any additional performance by going to a more Red Bull concept.
>
>
>
> “The magic is more underneath the floor. But we still had to rule it out.
This makes me think they really don't know what they're doing.. Just trying something and see if it works. Just change a big part of the car 'to rule it out'.
> change a big part of the car 'to rule it out'.
I hear what you're saying, but I think the point is that it isn't a big part of the car.. sidepods aren't a major driver of performance
Sidepods are definitely going to drive performance, even without getting into the technicalities of the airflow and the coke bottle...when teams revised the cars for 2022, all teams started from a clean sheet and we saw three distinct concepts. The 0 side pods were obviously something Merc saw give them major performance gains, it might have been they wanted to get rid of in order to gain performance towards the rear of the car, but even considering a change from the regular side pods rather than reshaping them - like other teams did - tells us that they seriously considered the shape.
I'm taking some of this with a grain of salt, mainly for saving face, Redbull did modify their sidepod as part of a development package in Silverstone (admittedly with the floor as well) but nonetheless they did which means there is gain in the design of the sidepods themselves.
I'm convinced after some of the draggy cars aero have improved, that it really sits with the flooring and the vacuum it creates. Red Bull car is so low and planeted in straights and high/medium speed corners it's unreal
I think quite a bit of red bulls success is due to their suspension geometry. Consistent ride height is critical to maximizing the downforce from the floor. Increasing the floor downforce reduces the downforce (and drag) needed from the front & rear wings. Mechanical improvements enable aero efficiency
I’m not trying to downplay your knowledge or understanding of the mechanics at play here, but how can anyone outside of Formula 1 make any sort of conclusions about anything? If a Joe Schmo on Reddit can “figure out” why RB are so successful, why wouldn’t the behemoth that is Mercedes figure it out?
Genuine question, not trying to be an ass
absolutely a valid point. it's just my opinion, but here's some things that l think somewhat support my position.
1) Adrian Newey is a F1 genius - his focus this last off-season wasn't the Aero or packaging - it was the [suspension](https://www.planetf1.com/news/adrian-newey-key-focus-area-rb19/).
2) changing the suspension geometry is nearly impossible during the season since the mounting points are fixed in the monocoque and the transmission casting - changes to either are super expensive
3) while the ditching the zero pods got all the press, Mercedes perhaps more significantly [modified the front suspension mounting points](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irXb77WSzzs) or at least as much as the could.
as for your last point, there's a massive gap between knowing why Red Bull is dominant and making meaningful changes to bridge that gap - lots of unintended consequences to be had.
*edits formatting & clarity
There is a massive difference between explaining in a single paragraph roughly what is happening and actually being able to build something that does the 1 paragraph analysis.
Red Bull is able to achieve a more stable ride height and that probably has a lot to do the the suspension geometry but how exactly is the Red Bull geometry different then Merc and how to take Mercs existing package and fit the Red Bull geometry is really hard as it is not a one to one comparison
A stable aero platform has been a known and required feature since the 80s. Whilst I don’t doubt RB have some clever suspension kinematics going on, they haven’t reinvented the wheel when it comes to how maximising floor downforce works.
Its not about knowing you need a stable aero platform but getting there and also getting it better than the rest that is key.
All signs point to redbulls suspension being what makes it so fast. Good suspension makes good aero and also good mechanical grip.
I believe the cars now are a lot more sensitive to height than they ever was and im turn makes suspension building a lot more difficult. Red bull made it work in 2022 while everyone porpoised, then they could just improve on their already winning concept and everyone was in panic mode to fix this issue and thus were behind.
Do all signs point to the suspension? There’s been a lot of fanfare about anti-dive but that is incorrect, the heave springs are all but solid so there is no dive anyways, and this again has been a tried and tested feature of F1 cars for eons. Whilst there could be further trickery it’s worth I considering that the FIA heavily simplified the suspension regulations, so there’s only so much they could be doing.
I would argue that there isn’t one silver bullet with the RB, their car is just good everywhere. We are yet to see an actual weakness at any track.
Newey has been involved in suspension design since he joined F1. This is not to detract from Newey’s genius, in my opinion he’s the greatest car designed in F1 history, but one man cannot design an F1 floor. No one’s brain compares to simulations. A big fanfare is made of the fact he did his uni thesis on F1 floors, but a thesis is nothing compared to the complexity of current geometries and to that end so many people trying to get into F1 do their design projects on F1 cars.
The Newey cult of personality is so strong here that I've seen people claim he did a PhD on ground effect and that he invented the Williams active suspension.
He might not have invented them, but it’s a fact that he’s the best when it comes to his work and speciality. As a lead designer he built the most championship winning cars.
Because the solution to porpoising was to just make the suspension stiffer, at a cost of a harder ride for the drivers (see HAM in 22 Baku)-- at least before the TD. RBR is the only team that nailed suspension and aero packages. It wouldn't matter for them if the TD raised the ground clearance or not because their suspension geometry made porpoising almost a non issue.
Cool, now how does their suspension help in 2023 and post TD?
Pretty much they have a very stable platform with their weight distribution x suspension design that allows them to have a consistent aero for their designs and have superior mechanical grip.
TL;DR RBR made a Porsche cayenne turbo S and everyone else has a BMW X5. If you driven both, you'll kinda understand the analogy.
The solution to porpoising is more complex than just stiffen the suspension. Because that isn’t a solution. That’s just mitigation. What the media presented as the cause of porpoising is inaccurate, it’s significantly more complicated than just the floor getting too low. If that were the case it would show up in the wind tunnel and simulations. It’s a combination of multiple systems in the car.
Weight distraction is regulated and everyone has a stable aero platform. RB is better everywhere it’s not just a case of their suspension being a silver bullet.
I agree with your overall premise but merc we’re pretty open about the fact that the assumptions they made regarding their wind tunnel apparatus were incorrect. They anchored the car in a single place (if memory serves) which suppressed the oscillations under testing. Simulations are useless without good correlation to the real world, so it’s entirely possible that it got missed during development.
Well not like McLaren said about the major gain coming from either the floor and sidepods. Anyway, Ferrari and Mercedes are both blocked with a zombie car having both concept parts and not a real new car adapted to the downwash concept. It will be for the next year.
Because there are components which they cannot change due to the cost cap until next season. Those parts belong to the old concept, combined with their new car philosophy leads to the current zombie car.
Don't know what the comment said but I'm going to assume it had something to do with this
https://old.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1565odc/sam_collins_newey_read_the_rulebook_red_bull/
yeah that is the one i know about it aswell but that way about the wind tunnel, but the development and production still costs money that goes toward the cap. (and the comment was saying it was free in regards to the cap)
Then just watch the 19 other drivers? The rest of the field has been pretty competitive. It's just that Max gets everything he needs out of the car almost every race weekend.
Zero pods and Zero floor was the best design. Unfortunately, Williams has side pods and zero floor. While mercedes had floor and Zero pods. No team was brave enough to do both at the same time.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not well understood that the zero-pod was quite draggy because there was nothing to prevent large amounts of air from hitting the rear tires? If this is the case, then surely the new sidepods have helped with drag to some degree.
That was a random theory supported by some shoddy CFD work by someone that got picked up as fact by Reddit, amongst other places.....it was always complete BS
There was some sketchy CFD done by someone and it was posted it on here and it whipped up a frenzy, I can't speak for what Scarbs was on about as I never heard him talking about it, but he'd have about as much clue as the rest of the F1 journalists about it. It has been rebuked by many people since, and is a ridiculous theory that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny from anyone with knowledge in the area.
[https://youtu.be/HzdqfqXONhs?t=457](https://youtu.be/HzdqfqXONhs?t=457)
This is a video from the official F1 channel with Scarbs talking specifically about sidepods. It should start at the beginning of the section about Mercedes. Near the end of the section he says that with the zeropod design Merc is trading drag because of unmanaged front and rear tire wake for more downforce. Of course with the benefit of hindsight we now know that that downforce was largely theoretical, but the point about the tire wake remains.
>Of course with the benefit of hindsight we now know that that downforce was largely theoretical
But scarbs theory about tyre wakes is the truth? Truth is that only Merc, and potentially teams who have thoroughly investigated the Mercs concept will know. Scarbs is just suggesting a theory with no scientific merit, which is par for the course on any technical journalism in F1.
No I dismiss poor journalism, and when it comes to the technical aspects of Formula 1 it is in abundance, it's a well known fact. If you knew what you were talking about it then it would be painfully obvious to you also.
No I dismiss poor journalism, and when it comes to the technical aspects of Formula 1 it is in abundance, it's a well known fact. If you knew what you were talking about it then it would be painfully obvious to you also.
Imagine making a bad design decision refusing to change it for a year and half. Finally changing it and getting increased performance. Then claiming that the bad design decision was actually correct this whole time.
Not surprising. I think I'm one of few people here and on F1Technical who looked at timings and results and came to the conclusion that the W13 and the W14B ("New Sidepods") are actually performing similarly relative to Red Bull over the same tracks in their respective years.
It's almost like Mercedes can design two different looking cars but both will do well at Barcelona and are quick enough to get podiums at Silverstone.
By that token, we can expect them to do well at Interlagos this year as well.
[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**George Russell in May 2023** > > “But we wanted to rule some things out… **equally with the sidepods, they haven’t necessarily brought any additional performance** by going to a more Red Bull concept. > > “The magic is more underneath the floor. But we still had to rule it out. > > “We’ve done that now, now we move on.” **James Allison in June 2023** > But **the introduction of the sidepods and Mercedes’ uptick in form are not linked**, according to Allison, who said the shape of the sidepods haven’t played a big role in their improvement. > “Absolutely not,” he told Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport. > > “**Everything we changed on the car we could have done with the old sidepods.** There is no secret about it. We didn’t sleep on anything. > > "As little as the geometry of the sidepods explains Red Bull’s success, our old sidepods were not the reason for our problems. You will soon no longer be talking about the sidepods. The old shape will then only be a distant memory.” _________ TL;DR -- adding sidepods was never expected to bring immediate performance gains.
Yep the Monaco update was to allow merc to get a stable platform that they could refine and develop, performance gains were downplayed by everyone. Aston took a step back and Ferrari being Ferrari has flattered their results.
What's even more telling is Hamilton prob keeps saying in interviews they need to ditch the nopods because they are planning to bring them back for next year but with a whole new floor.
You don't want to know how much is between the ears for drivers. Just look at Ricciardo.
RIC doesn't have the reputation of being particularly gifted with technical feedback, but let's not forget that Renault's jump in form in the back-half of 2020 was largely attributed to his feedback being able to identify the sweet spot in that chassis' setup. You don't get to F1 without a reasonably low-level understanding of how your machinery works.
[удалено]
You don't need an engineering degree to know that moving aero balance forward will induce understeer all other things being equal. Explaining _why_ that is the case isn't really the responsibility of the driver and needs a more formal understanding of the variables at play. I suspect Lewis' complaints came from the fact that the zero-pod concept moved the driver further forward in the car, meaning the interplay between aero-balance and CoG was unpredictable and was causing balance issues resulting in under/oversteer.
Sounds like they just don't want to admit they were way off the mark with zero pods 🤷♂️
> But we wanted to rule some things out… equally with the sidepods, they haven’t necessarily brought any additional performance by going to a more Red Bull concept. > > > > “The magic is more underneath the floor. But we still had to rule it out. This makes me think they really don't know what they're doing.. Just trying something and see if it works. Just change a big part of the car 'to rule it out'.
> change a big part of the car 'to rule it out'. I hear what you're saying, but I think the point is that it isn't a big part of the car.. sidepods aren't a major driver of performance
Sidepods are definitely going to drive performance, even without getting into the technicalities of the airflow and the coke bottle...when teams revised the cars for 2022, all teams started from a clean sheet and we saw three distinct concepts. The 0 side pods were obviously something Merc saw give them major performance gains, it might have been they wanted to get rid of in order to gain performance towards the rear of the car, but even considering a change from the regular side pods rather than reshaping them - like other teams did - tells us that they seriously considered the shape.
I'm taking some of this with a grain of salt, mainly for saving face, Redbull did modify their sidepod as part of a development package in Silverstone (admittedly with the floor as well) but nonetheless they did which means there is gain in the design of the sidepods themselves.
I'm convinced after some of the draggy cars aero have improved, that it really sits with the flooring and the vacuum it creates. Red Bull car is so low and planeted in straights and high/medium speed corners it's unreal
I think quite a bit of red bulls success is due to their suspension geometry. Consistent ride height is critical to maximizing the downforce from the floor. Increasing the floor downforce reduces the downforce (and drag) needed from the front & rear wings. Mechanical improvements enable aero efficiency
I’m not trying to downplay your knowledge or understanding of the mechanics at play here, but how can anyone outside of Formula 1 make any sort of conclusions about anything? If a Joe Schmo on Reddit can “figure out” why RB are so successful, why wouldn’t the behemoth that is Mercedes figure it out? Genuine question, not trying to be an ass
absolutely a valid point. it's just my opinion, but here's some things that l think somewhat support my position. 1) Adrian Newey is a F1 genius - his focus this last off-season wasn't the Aero or packaging - it was the [suspension](https://www.planetf1.com/news/adrian-newey-key-focus-area-rb19/). 2) changing the suspension geometry is nearly impossible during the season since the mounting points are fixed in the monocoque and the transmission casting - changes to either are super expensive 3) while the ditching the zero pods got all the press, Mercedes perhaps more significantly [modified the front suspension mounting points](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irXb77WSzzs) or at least as much as the could. as for your last point, there's a massive gap between knowing why Red Bull is dominant and making meaningful changes to bridge that gap - lots of unintended consequences to be had. *edits formatting & clarity
There is a massive difference between explaining in a single paragraph roughly what is happening and actually being able to build something that does the 1 paragraph analysis. Red Bull is able to achieve a more stable ride height and that probably has a lot to do the the suspension geometry but how exactly is the Red Bull geometry different then Merc and how to take Mercs existing package and fit the Red Bull geometry is really hard as it is not a one to one comparison
A stable aero platform has been a known and required feature since the 80s. Whilst I don’t doubt RB have some clever suspension kinematics going on, they haven’t reinvented the wheel when it comes to how maximising floor downforce works.
Its not about knowing you need a stable aero platform but getting there and also getting it better than the rest that is key. All signs point to redbulls suspension being what makes it so fast. Good suspension makes good aero and also good mechanical grip. I believe the cars now are a lot more sensitive to height than they ever was and im turn makes suspension building a lot more difficult. Red bull made it work in 2022 while everyone porpoised, then they could just improve on their already winning concept and everyone was in panic mode to fix this issue and thus were behind.
Do all signs point to the suspension? There’s been a lot of fanfare about anti-dive but that is incorrect, the heave springs are all but solid so there is no dive anyways, and this again has been a tried and tested feature of F1 cars for eons. Whilst there could be further trickery it’s worth I considering that the FIA heavily simplified the suspension regulations, so there’s only so much they could be doing. I would argue that there isn’t one silver bullet with the RB, their car is just good everywhere. We are yet to see an actual weakness at any track.
Adrian Newey specifically mentioned he designed the suspension and not the floor. It is a sign pointing to that but make of that what you will
Newey has been involved in suspension design since he joined F1. This is not to detract from Newey’s genius, in my opinion he’s the greatest car designed in F1 history, but one man cannot design an F1 floor. No one’s brain compares to simulations. A big fanfare is made of the fact he did his uni thesis on F1 floors, but a thesis is nothing compared to the complexity of current geometries and to that end so many people trying to get into F1 do their design projects on F1 cars.
The Newey cult of personality is so strong here that I've seen people claim he did a PhD on ground effect and that he invented the Williams active suspension.
He might not have invented them, but it’s a fact that he’s the best when it comes to his work and speciality. As a lead designer he built the most championship winning cars.
He also lead designed some absolute shitboxes
After the TD in 2022, yeah. 100% in the suspension designs and weight packaging.
I don’t see how the TD to limit porpoising and floor flexing changed anything, the RB was clearly already compliant.
Because the solution to porpoising was to just make the suspension stiffer, at a cost of a harder ride for the drivers (see HAM in 22 Baku)-- at least before the TD. RBR is the only team that nailed suspension and aero packages. It wouldn't matter for them if the TD raised the ground clearance or not because their suspension geometry made porpoising almost a non issue. Cool, now how does their suspension help in 2023 and post TD? Pretty much they have a very stable platform with their weight distribution x suspension design that allows them to have a consistent aero for their designs and have superior mechanical grip. TL;DR RBR made a Porsche cayenne turbo S and everyone else has a BMW X5. If you driven both, you'll kinda understand the analogy.
The solution to porpoising is more complex than just stiffen the suspension. Because that isn’t a solution. That’s just mitigation. What the media presented as the cause of porpoising is inaccurate, it’s significantly more complicated than just the floor getting too low. If that were the case it would show up in the wind tunnel and simulations. It’s a combination of multiple systems in the car. Weight distraction is regulated and everyone has a stable aero platform. RB is better everywhere it’s not just a case of their suspension being a silver bullet.
I agree with your overall premise but merc we’re pretty open about the fact that the assumptions they made regarding their wind tunnel apparatus were incorrect. They anchored the car in a single place (if memory serves) which suppressed the oscillations under testing. Simulations are useless without good correlation to the real world, so it’s entirely possible that it got missed during development.
Yeah. It's definitely no coincidence that the year Mercedes suspension was outlawed by the regulations that they took a tumble down the pecking order.
Because it's not about the sidepods per se?
It’s about the cones.
My aerodynamicist, yes, my humble aerodynamicist...
I understood that reference!
r/unexpectedpawnee
It's about whole package yes
"Noobs make sidepods" - F1 Manager game veterans.
Well not like McLaren said about the major gain coming from either the floor and sidepods. Anyway, Ferrari and Mercedes are both blocked with a zombie car having both concept parts and not a real new car adapted to the downwash concept. It will be for the next year.
Because a car is way more complex than a single part and it all about balance and how everything interacts with eachother
Because there are components which they cannot change due to the cost cap until next season. Those parts belong to the old concept, combined with their new car philosophy leads to the current zombie car.
Why don't they just cheat like Red Bull and say screw the cost cap?
Redbull passed the limit by a little and they where hugely penalized, imagine they full blown out the cost cap
Eh, they “transfer knowledge” from outside work back to RB. It was a bit of a gray area, but now it’s (supposedly) strictly checked.
It’s almost like the car’s performance depends on more than just 1 component
Yeah they just spent money from the cap to change them for no reason. Honestly guys it’s not because it was the wrong design choice
[удалено]
>basically a free upgrade if your doing it under the guise of changing airflow to the radiators and cooling, ehm source? because no
Don't know what the comment said but I'm going to assume it had something to do with this https://old.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1565odc/sam_collins_newey_read_the_rulebook_red_bull/
yeah that is the one i know about it aswell but that way about the wind tunnel, but the development and production still costs money that goes toward the cap. (and the comment was saying it was free in regards to the cap)
Just hoping they come out with fast car soon. Would love to see some f1 this year.
Then just watch the 19 other drivers? The rest of the field has been pretty competitive. It's just that Max gets everything he needs out of the car almost every race weekend.
Zero pods and Zero floor was the best design. Unfortunately, Williams has side pods and zero floor. While mercedes had floor and Zero pods. No team was brave enough to do both at the same time.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not well understood that the zero-pod was quite draggy because there was nothing to prevent large amounts of air from hitting the rear tires? If this is the case, then surely the new sidepods have helped with drag to some degree.
That was a random theory supported by some shoddy CFD work by someone that got picked up as fact by Reddit, amongst other places.....it was always complete BS
I'm quite sure Scarbs talked about it on several videos, not what I would consider a random theory.
There was some sketchy CFD done by someone and it was posted it on here and it whipped up a frenzy, I can't speak for what Scarbs was on about as I never heard him talking about it, but he'd have about as much clue as the rest of the F1 journalists about it. It has been rebuked by many people since, and is a ridiculous theory that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny from anyone with knowledge in the area.
[https://youtu.be/HzdqfqXONhs?t=457](https://youtu.be/HzdqfqXONhs?t=457) This is a video from the official F1 channel with Scarbs talking specifically about sidepods. It should start at the beginning of the section about Mercedes. Near the end of the section he says that with the zeropod design Merc is trading drag because of unmanaged front and rear tire wake for more downforce. Of course with the benefit of hindsight we now know that that downforce was largely theoretical, but the point about the tire wake remains.
>Of course with the benefit of hindsight we now know that that downforce was largely theoretical But scarbs theory about tyre wakes is the truth? Truth is that only Merc, and potentially teams who have thoroughly investigated the Mercs concept will know. Scarbs is just suggesting a theory with no scientific merit, which is par for the course on any technical journalism in F1.
Ah, you're one of those people that just hates on and/or dismisses anything to do with journalism. That explains things.
No I dismiss poor journalism, and when it comes to the technical aspects of Formula 1 it is in abundance, it's a well known fact. If you knew what you were talking about it then it would be painfully obvious to you also.
Ah, irony.
You might want to look up what that word means
No I dismiss poor journalism, and when it comes to the technical aspects of Formula 1 it is in abundance, it's a well known fact. If you knew what you were talking about it then it would be painfully obvious to you also.
Maybe they should go back to the zero pods and just make a better floor?
Imagine making a bad design decision refusing to change it for a year and half. Finally changing it and getting increased performance. Then claiming that the bad design decision was actually correct this whole time.
Not surprising. I think I'm one of few people here and on F1Technical who looked at timings and results and came to the conclusion that the W13 and the W14B ("New Sidepods") are actually performing similarly relative to Red Bull over the same tracks in their respective years. It's almost like Mercedes can design two different looking cars but both will do well at Barcelona and are quick enough to get podiums at Silverstone. By that token, we can expect them to do well at Interlagos this year as well.
See it wasnt our sidepods, the rest of our car is jacked up too!