The new Mercedes suspension did not live up to expectations. In Formula 1, this kind of outcome can happen when a team brings an update that simply fails to deliver. The latest example comes from Mercedes, whose much-discussed suspension modification was eventually scrapped. The main issue was a delicate compromise between the lift and squat phases, a balance that never worked properly and created several complications. Let’s break down why it failed in detail.
W16: Mercedes’ rear suspension intervention
Recently, James Allison and Simone Resta spoke to Racecar Engineering, clarifying many of the technical challenges faced by Mercedes this season, especially regarding the suspension. At the beginning of the year, the team decided to go against the trend by maintaining the push-rod setup, unlike Ferrari, which switched to a new configuration for the final year of the current technical regulations.
As Simone Resta himself revealed, the rear of the car was not modified over the winter. However, the engineers quickly realized they were behind McLaren and decided to focus on the rear end. During the Imola Grand Prix, the Mercedes W16 introduced an updated version of the rear suspension system, which featured changes in the positioning of the suspension links.
More specifically, the update concerned the incidence angle of the upper wishbone’s front arm. It was a “typical” and not particularly large change, similar to what Ferrari also implemented during the season — but potentially crucial. By adjusting that link’s position, the team can directly affect the percentages of anti-lift and anti-squat in the rear suspension. The term “lift” refers to the rear of the car rising under braking.
By contrast, “squat” occurs under acceleration, when the rear of the car compresses downward. Mercedes decided to introduce this modification without redesigning the gearbox casing, a clever move that significantly reduced development time. However, the change did not provide the expected driving feel for the drivers, creating new handling challenges from the start.
The difficult compromise on ride heights
According to former Ferrari engineer Simone Resta, George Russell even suspected that one of the suspension links was broken, given how poorly the car behaved after the first test. By the Monaco and Barcelona rounds, Mercedes had reverted to the previous version. The new specification only returned in Canada, after the team took time to analyze the issue and believed they had found a solution.
To fully understand the situation, a brief premise is necessary. James Allison explained that the key problem with this generation of cars is that “you need to keep the car within a very narrow ride height window, because downforce drops off dramatically as soon as you move away from the asphalt.” This is the same limitation that has plagued Ferrari throughout the season.
The term “window” refers to the narrow range within which the car performs optimally. Lowering the chassis too much can also cause performance losses and excessive floor wear — a problem Ferrari also experienced, as detailed in a separate technical analysis. As a result, every team aims to keep their aerodynamic platform as stable as possible throughout various phases of the lap.
Why Mercedes went back to the old rear suspension
The Brackley-based team had increased the anti-lift percentage of the suspension to reduce rear-end lift under braking, allowing for a more stable aerodynamic platform. However, the car also needed a “pro-squat” behavior — a geometry that compresses under acceleration to lower the floor and generate more downforce. These two requirements, however, are fundamentally opposed to each other.
A rear end that compresses under acceleration naturally tends to rise more under braking, losing stability and aerodynamic load. At the Canadian Grand Prix, the increased anti-lift worked perfectly for the Mercedes W16, as the track features heavy braking zones that reward a stable platform. That setup played a key role in the team’s victory, and environmental conditions alone were not the reason for the success — the suspension update made a real difference there.
However, the same suspension setup proved problematic on other circuits. With higher anti-lift values, Mercedes suffered performance drops in long, sweeping corners, as well as during combined braking and steering phases. This led to the decision to revert to the previous version — a more manageable and balanced setup that performs more consistently across the majority of circuits on the calendar.
Leave a Reply