AMG ONE [Official] Mercedes-AMG Project ONE

[Revvd]

*cell notes are there to either signify a super damp spot or hybrid running out of battery

 

[LaArtist]

And still they hate

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

And still they hate

Agreed.

 

[Sunny]

*cell notes are there to either signify a super damp spot or hybrid running out of battery

Damn the GT3 RS corner speeds!

 

[Rolf]

Damn the GT3 RS corner speeds!

Yeah it has some serious downforce on some of those higher speed corners trapping at 10 to 20km/h higher than the others. Amazing.

 

[Bridster]

*cell notes are there to either signify a super damp spot or hybrid running out of battery

I see, so the straight line speeds are actually greater, except for the final one.

 

[klier]

992 GT2 RS (MR) will soon take over.

 

[AbsoluteUnit]

992 GT2 RS (MR) will soon take over.

14 seconds a lap faster would certainly require some effort to overcome.

 

[Revvd]

I see, so the straight line speeds are actually greater, except for the final one.

Yep. In 2024, on Döttinger, he run out of energy way earlier compared to 2022.

The biggest gain in lap time comes from the Kesselchen kink, which was covered in dirt on the 2022 lap. He lost about 45 kph through there alone.

992 GT2 RS (MR) will soon take over.

If they gave GT3 RS the T-Hybrid system and kept the aero, it might get into 6:3X also, IMO.

 

[Sunny]

Damn the GT3 RS corner speeds!

*cell notes are there to either signify a super damp spot or hybrid running out of battery

This is awesome data! Using the first 5 sets of data (and GPT), I was able to cook up with a rough model to predict lap times -
Predicted Average Speed (km/h)=β0+β1×avg_min+β2×avg_trap
Where:

• β0=−30.599
• β1=0.435
• β2=0.574

Using the model a "992 GT2 RS" that can do the same avg min as the 992 GT3 RS but avg trap speed a 991.2 GT2 RS MR, should lap around ~6:32.5. May be why AMG set the new laptime. They knew the 6:35 wasn't safe for too long.

Also so lame that Mclaren Senna and AM Valkrie haven't set a lapime.

 

[Tourbillon]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[tristatez28lt1]

@Revvd and @Sunny you guys are famous now!! Props for the amazing data and props to him for giving the credit.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Tourbillon]

@Revvd and @Sunny you guys are famous now!! Props for the amazing data and props to him for giving the credit.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Wait a minute I'm f#cking famous too. I, er shared the bloody link.

@Jonathan19 is going to be upset.

But in all seriousness Well Done.

 

[martinbo]

Awesome stuff @Revvd and @Sunny!

 

[klier]

Probs to Mischa. Respect +1

For people who don't want to watch the whole thing, the germancarforum.com part starts at 9:45 min

 

[Revvd]

"I know personally that there is an offer on the table for someone to do lap time from a private collector
so we might see something but it will be not an official Aston Martin attempt."

This gets me curious. Any idea which owner he might be talking about? Could it be one of the Brits? Or perhaps the gentleman from Soujon Supercars?

I'd argue against the notion, expressed in Misha's video, that Valkyrie's ride height is partly why the factory Nords effort never happened. Yeah, the Track Pack is stupidly low, but the standard version should have nearly identical road clearance as the AMG (~70 mm). And it certainly looks like there's less stuff on the underside that could scrape. Valkyrie doesn't have a flat floor - it's only the sides that are low. The front approach angle also looks fine to me.

(cars pictured above are of the same scale)

Judging by how relaxed that AMG One lap looked, I have to imagine that Valkyrie would be faster, maybe even without factory support. Being 300 kg lighter is already huge difference, and that's before you start comparing downforce, which favors Valkyrie as well.

It'd be a fascinating battle. AMG heavily relies on its AWD hybrid for acceleration out of corners. But then it's limited by energy management - it slows down a lot once it runs out of battery (340 PS per ton on ICE only).
On the other hand, the Aston Martin might just have way higher corner exit speeds to begin with and so the AWD advantage is likely negated. And then the V12 just never stops accelerating and it has less drag to fight against. It'll have the edge under braking as well.

That's an easy production car lap record, if you ask me. Sadly AM just don't want to spend money they don't have on a track session.

 

[Matski]

I'd argue against the notion, expressed in Misha's video, that Valkyrie's ride height is partly why the factory Nords effort never happened. Yeah, the Track Pack is stupidly low, but the standard version should have nearly identical road clearance as the AMG (~70 mm).

Could perhaps be that it looses a lot of downforce from the underbody if it's ride height is effectively far more inconsistent due to the bumpy nature of the track.

 

[Bridster]

This gets me curious. Any idea which owner he might be talking about? Could it be one of the Brits? Or perhaps the gentleman from Soujon Supercars?

I'd argue against the notion, expressed in Misha's video, that Valkyrie's ride height is partly why the factory Nords effort never happened. Yeah, the Track Pack is stupidly low, but the standard version should have nearly identical road clearance as the AMG (~70 mm). And it certainly looks like there's less stuff on the underside that could scrape. Valkyrie doesn't have a flat floor - it's only the sides that are low. The front approach angle also looks fine to me.

(cars pictured above are of the same scale)

Judging by how relaxed that AMG One lap looked, I have to imagine that Valkyrie would be faster, maybe even without factory support. Being 300 kg lighter is already huge difference, and that's before you start comparing downforce, which favors Valkyrie as well.

It'd be a fascinating battle. AMG heavily relies on its AWD hybrid for acceleration out of corners. But then it's limited by energy management - it slows down a lot once it runs out of battery (340 PS per ton on ICE only).
On the other hand, the Aston Martin might just have way higher corner exit speeds to begin with and so the AWD advantage is likely negated. And then the V12 just never stops accelerating and it has less drag to fight against. It'll have the edge under braking as well.

That's an easy production car lap record, if you ask me. Sadly AM just don't want to spend money they don't have on a track session.

I think that most people would imagine the Valkyrie would be faster, but then again it's been shown that lap times come down to more than just raw specs.

918 vs P1, classic example. The 918 is 100kg heavier, less powerful, much less downforce if you were to believe factory claims (600kg vs 207kg at 250km/h), yet the 918 managed 6:57 lap and the P1 never went under 7. And on other tracks they were roughly even.

Specifically on the N-ring, MB have been testing the One there since 2020. Did a lap after two years of testing, then took another two years of fine tuning to improve it. The Valkyrie, in the meanwhile, has done zero testing there. So you would be taking one completely unoptimized car and putting it against another car, that's been tested and optimized for that particular track to the n-th degree. I think that even with factory support the Valkyrie would struggle, just because of that fact.

Finally, a large portion of the lap time comes from driver confidence. The Valkyrie has been shown to be quite skittish on the limit, so it would probably take a lot of laps for any driver to really get used to it, and even then it probably wouldn't give the same confidence as the AWD AMG One.

So yeah, everything being equal I agree the Valkyrie should be faster. But it's not.

 

[Revvd]

Could perhaps be that it looses a lot of downforce from the underbody if it's ride height is effectively far more inconsistent due to the bumpy nature of the track.

I'm sure the downforce varies with the suspension travel. That said, I would think Valkyrie is less prone to venturis stalling as opposed to flat floor based designs, given the raised inlets and lateral expansion of the tunnels.

I think that most people would imagine the Valkyrie would be faster, but then again it's been shown that lap times come down to more than just raw specs.

918 vs P1, classic example. The 918 is 100kg heavier, less powerful, much less downforce if you were to believe factory claims (600kg vs 207kg at 250km/h), yet the 918 managed 6:57 lap and the P1 never went under 7. And on other tracks they were roughly even.

Specifically on the N-ring, MB have been testing the One there since 2020. Did a lap after two years of testing, then took another two years of fine tuning to improve it. The Valkyrie, in the meanwhile, has done zero testing there. So you would be taking one completely unoptimized car and putting it against another car, that's been tested and optimized for that particular track to the n-th degree. I think that even with factory support the Valkyrie would struggle, just because of that fact.

Finally, a large portion of the lap time comes from driver confidence. The Valkyrie has been shown to be quite skittish on the limit, so it would probably take a lot of laps for any driver to really get used to it, and even then it probably wouldn't give the same confidence as the AWD AMG One.

So yeah, everything being equal I agree the Valkyrie should be faster. But it's not.

Good points!
AMG has done tons of testing there. But again, I have to come back to how relaxed that lap seemed to my eyes. Even with Mr. Engel driving, they weren't quite at the limit. I would imagine working out the best possible energy managment strategy took up a large portion of all that testing.

Honestly, I would be more than happy if this private collector lent his Valkyrie to Sport Auto. I'd much rather have consistent set of data using the same driver, despite knowing he's leaving seconds of lap time on the table compared to a factory pro driver.

Taking the hybrid management aside, I do agree that the learning curve for Valkyrie is probably much steeper than the AMG. A lot of seat time would be needed to get comfortable with the car.

 

[Matski]

I'm sure the downforce varies with the suspension travel. That said, I would think Valkyrie is less prone to venturis stalling as opposed to flat floor based designs, given the raised inlets and lateral expansion of the tunnels.

I've studied neither enough to come to any kind of conclusion, but it strikes me that rates at which the suspension load up (or unload) are perhaps sufficiently different that the Valkyrie ends up with a sub optimal set up, versus what they might do at Silverstone, or any other Grade 1 track.