Mercedes-Benz CLR

[Aysedasi]

No, it didn't flip. Palmer was running in 5th on the Mulsanne at 200 mph or thereabouts when his 962 veered left into the barrier. The car flicked around, hit the barrier again and was launched over the right hand barrier, flying 100 metres before it landed again. I don't think there was much doubt his accident was caused by a mechanical failure, as evidence by the gouges found on the tarmac afterwards. The failure was thought to be that of a titanium suspension bolt, part of the mechanism joining the rear rocker to the main crossbeam. It was believed to have happened before to Bob Wollek (testing at Jerez) and possibly to Derek Bell as well (at Spa). New steel bolts were flown out from Weissach for Thursday morning's practice.

[BSchneiderFan]

Yannick Dalmas had flipped a Porsche 911 GT1-98 at Road Atlanta in 1998, and Bill Auberlen went on to flip his BMW V12 LMR in (I think) 2000 - I forget at which course. The footage of Dalmas' crash is pretty spectacular.

There is an argument that flipping was simply an inevitable hazard of flat-bottomed cars, and that maybe, just maybe, Mercedes-Benz were very unlucky to suffer several crashes at one event. It's a shame that the CLR never raced anywhere else to salvage its reputation.

[Aysedasi]

Unfortunately your right. After the poor showing the year before at Le Mans, Mercedes really needed to do the business there that year and their sportscar image was completely stuffed as a result of Norbert Haug's Flying Circus.....

[krt917]

I'm sure the flat-bottomed rules and 'track conditions' didn't help, but it can't be a coincidence that all the flips at that event were done by the Mercs.

If the flips hadn't happened then it would have been a contender. I think that, on pace the GT-One was a match, with the BMW a little further behind but perhaps more efficient (that and the speed of the pit-crew was what allowed them to fight the Toyotas). But at Le Mans, finishing is the main thing; that's why the slowest works BMW and slowest Toyota were 1-2 in '99. Whether or not one of the CLRs would have been around in a fit state by then is anyones guess.

It would have been great to see the likes of the Toyota and Merc battle it out over a whole season. I've never really understood why these companies spend all that money on the Great Race and then don't go on 'recouping' (in an advertising way) their losses in other events, but I suppose that's another thread.

Just one more thought, Mercedes showings at Le Mans seem to fall mainly into two categories; impressive displays of incredible efficiency ('52, '89) or complete and utter failure/disaster ('55, '88, '99).

[jhansen]

I've been looking for an article to support this comment, but couldn't find one. But it seems I remember something about the Mercedes flips occuring as they approached another car. Dirty air so to speak. In the pics on Mike's site it shows Webber's flipping car behind two other Mercs and one BMW. Does anyone else remember this? Did any of the flips occur with no other cars around? Mercedes obviously did thousands of miles of testing, but it was mostly private with only a few cars and no incidents (that we know of). Was wondering if there was something to this thought.

[Es Nes]

im not sure about the clr-lm flips, but, when a 911 gt1 98 and the bmw lmr flipped at road atlanta. they were both drafting.

[flor]

i think there was a toyota gt one in front of the clr when it flipped

[Es Nes]

i believe one of the practice flips, it was following a viper

[cybchris]

Originally posted by BSchneiderFan
One driver said he was sure that Mercedes was sandbagging, as the CLRs just blew by him on the straights.

What I had heard (sorry, I forget the source) was that Mercedes was afraid of getting outrun on the straights, so that's why they took all the downforce off - much to the unease of the drivers.

The diveplanes were added to hopefully nail the front down after the practice problems, but as noted, they got knocked off early in the race.

One theory behind the flips was a combination of being in the wake of another car, and cresting the hill, resulted in even less downforce being on the front.

I love aerodynamics - I'm an old Chapparal fan - but I think we have to face that advanced aero has damaged the quality of a lot of racing, making passing much more difficult (cars become unsettled in the wake when too close). I wonder if the racing would be more fun to watch in many a series if all the rear wings and spoilers were removed...

- CM

[Bob Riebe]

---"I love aerodynamics - I'm an old Chapparal fan - but I think we have to face that advanced aero has damaged the quality of a lot of racing, making passing much more difficult (cars become unsettled in the wake when too close). I wonder if the racing would be more fun to watch in many a series if all the rear wings and spoilers were removed..."---

I agree, or at least increase ground clearanc with no venturis underneath, plus no shrouds on suspension and engine bits.
One of John Greenwoods secrets to getting his cars to go so fast was eliminating as many items as he could under the car from disrupting the airflow. He was amazed the scrutineers allowed it.
Bob

[avsfan733]

I must point out that We have seen other series have flips, Indycars, NASCAR, and they are caused by a variety of things...overall its the giant flat bottom of a race car hitting the air at like 200+ MPH its like a big sail, thats the major problem the other issues are just semantics of pushign the envelope on everythingg...much like the suspension failures we see once in a while

[Try Hard]

From what i recall all the flips happened when following cars (this also goes for the gt1-98 and LMR), so basically you have a lack for front downforce due to the disturbed air. Add in a bump that doesn't usually have an affect (due to downforce), like the mulsanne hump, and combine this with the almost horizontal running (no rake) of the CLR at speed, and the front will lift far enough to get more air underneath, and then your on the road to sky....

Personally, I don't belive it's just the fact that the cars have a flat bottom, more with the actual size of the underside, as it is a hugh area to present to airflow when doing 200mph+. Ok, maybe if the cars didn't have the flat undersides they'd be less sensitive to ride height changes and running behind other cars, reducing flipping possibilities.

Merc took their car design (and setup) to the wrong side of the extreme, and paid the price.

BTW, I take it the new LMP regs apply all round (to closed tops as well as open), aren't these designed to try and avoid this happening?

[Cadete]

Try Hard, if I remmember well there were some rules made after the Mercedes flips, I think the cars are not pure flat-bottoms now to prevent such accidents from happening. At least that is what I remmember reading, but I can be wrong.

[MulsanneMike]

Yes, the '04 regulations regarding underbody design are not pure flat bottoms (though all '03 and older cars are true flat bottoms axle line to axle line). For '04 the onset of the diffuser is moved to within the wheelbase. Additional rules mandated design details provide for yaw stability. Though currently no one has designed a new chassis to the '04 regulations.

[Fab]

Originally posted by BSchneiderFan
I am, as some of you will well be aware, a great Mercedes-Benz fan ,so my question is this: how good, potentially or actually, was the Mercedes-Benz CLR?

I just wanted to support BSchneiderFan here : even if I sometime laugh about the "grey flying saucers", I was very impressed by the car itself and it's still one of my favorite car of the last years.

On the track, they were really impressive, and they matched the Toyotas, which is a good sign of what they could have done.

I was facing the straight big screen when Dumbreck flipped, and they was a huge "Ohhhhhhh" in the crowd, and then a terrible silence, or I felt there was (the cars were keeping on rolling, remember : no red flag at LM).

It was obvious that this accident, remembering the 1955 one of the Levegh Mercedes (in a way), will cause, as aftermath, the withdrawing of Mercedes team... and the end of the CLR carreer... a definitive unachievement IMHO...

If I'm not a "tech", I can remember that the "pumping" of the car at high speed could be a cause of the "taking off". The fact that the Mercedes was following the Toyota may have been a "false" cause...