F1 2014 Car Comparison Thread

[Owen.C93]

I've tried to match this up as best I can but I still find it hard to believe that everything on the Merc is so much lower. However there is no denying that the sidepod height is lower because you can see how the turning vanes are set to the maximum height.



We also know that the DRS flaps are likely to be equal in size, which shows that the Merc is running a shallower rear wing than the McL/max regulation state. So perhaps they really do have enough rear downforce. (Something that RBR have done the past few years)

(RB10 is similar to the McLaren in sidepod height, dont have the patience to align these up in GIMP on a trackpad: http://www.formule1.nl/media/uploads/me ... 862.44.jpg)

[avatar]

I've used Owen's image, copied, flipped and overlaid the Merc front left onto the Macca's right with the bottom of the tyres lined up - marked in yellow.

It shows quite a lot of the difference is probably down to the lens on the camera foreshortening things.
Even with that, the Merc still looks lower in parts, but not nearly as much difference as the original pic...

Other factors:
- r/w endplate suggests either the macca is pointing to its right slightly or the zoom level is distorting it.
- the difference between the height of the front and rear wheels in the photo is smaller on the macca which could suggest the car>photographer angle is different, changing the relative distances it a bit more.


Side note: what's the metal under the Maclaren? Really chunky metal leading edge on the t-tray? On a trolley? Part of f/w?

[avatar]

Hi Owen,

Do you have links to the source photos?
I was looking at trying to compensate for lens/sight angle, but then noticed the Macca isn't cut down the centreline, but slightly less than the centreline.

Taking that into account, it looks like the lens distortion (&poss sight angle) is making it hard to long things up, but the biggest difference may just be scale; the Mclaren pic is larger than the Merc pic....

[Owen.C93]

Sure.
http://www.formule1.nl/media/uploads/me ... 863.16.jpg
http://www.formule1.nl/media/uploads/me ... 863.64.jpg

Making the McLaren smaller would only make the difference in sidepod height larger though, which is why I played it on the safe side to avoid any arguments.

[Blackout]

http://www7.pic-upload.de/01.03.14/k1d9dv4hqgoy.jpg
Sutton - Motorsport.com - Nextgen-auto
Got more pics with the same angle ?

[Blackout]

[Chuckjr]

The tightness/smallness of the Force India pods is insanity. Very impressive.

Edit: AND they will get HEAPS of air through that donkey d**g nose. That may be the dark horse right there.

[f1rules]

lotus and mclaren layout pretty similar, lotus exit the hot air lower it seems, but other its very similar

[Chuckjr]

Ya think? A lot of the people here are poo pooing the lotus front nose and the Macca's hole is smaller. Just sayin. When a 1,000ths of a second count big, an extra pound or two of air counts large...

[beelsebob]

Ya think? A lot of the people here are poo pooing the lotus front nose and the Macca's hole is smaller. Just sayin. When a 1,000ths of a second count big, an extra pound or two of air counts large...

I can't get a good dead-straight on shot of the lotus to compare it to the Mclaren above, but my inclination is that the McLaren actually collects more clean air around the nose, with roughly half the blockage.

[Chuckjr]

Ya think? A lot of the people here are poo pooing the lotus front nose and the Macca's hole is smaller. Just sayin. When a 1,000ths of a second count big, an extra pound or two of air counts large...

I can't get a good dead-straight on shot of the lotus to compare it to the Mclaren above, but my inclination is that the McLaren actually collects more clean air around the nose, with roughly half the blockage.

Can you explain why that is your inclination? I'd like to understand better if/how the Macca pulls more air in with a smaller hole.

[beelsebob]

Ya think? A lot of the people here are poo pooing the lotus front nose and the Macca's hole is smaller. Just sayin. When a 1,000ths of a second count big, an extra pound or two of air counts large...

I can't get a good dead-straight on shot of the lotus to compare it to the Mclaren above, but my inclination is that the McLaren actually collects more clean air around the nose, with roughly half the blockage.

Can you explain why that is your inclination? I'd like to understand better if/how the Macca pulls more air in with a smaller hole.

It doesn't – my inclination is that the McLaren has a larger hole.

[Jef Patat]

It doesn't – my inclination is that the McLaren has a larger hole.

Slightly different angle, but the lotus hole still looks massive. Is it better? I cannot judge. Just a hole comparisson

[Chuckjr]

It doesn't – my inclination is that the McLaren has a larger hole.

Ok. I dunno how to paste images to a reply, so I have provided links below.

I tried to find a better front shot of the direct front of the Force India, but could not with the time I have. I am hampered by an internet connection at my house that is almost dial up speed as I live in the rural mountains. I have done the best I can with the time I have to give this.

I don't know how the Macca nose could let in more air than the chasm that is the Force India front end. Its like the grand canyon that thing--very impressive. If I was Merc, I would be concerned. The front wing detail is also nice to look at--dunno if it's fast-- but it has a considerable amount of elements. I do believe this may be the dark horse of the cars this year.

I don't know how the Macca could be larger, but I am happy to be wrong if it can be shown in a better comparison.

http://www.formule1.nl/media/uploads/me ... 882.55.jpg

http://media.cdn.mclaren.com/images/gal ... 9P0147.jpg

http://img4.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Ser ... 751440.jpg

[beelsebob]

Okay, so I compared the two with the photos above. The angles are not the same, so it's not great, but the above-the-car angle of the lotus shot should give it an advantage, so I think we can get something useful from it...



I scaled the two to get the front wings the same length, so that we're looking at the areas at the front reasonably accurately.

The results – the area under the nose on the lotus – around 7000 pixels. The area under the nose on the McLaren - around 7000 pixels.

Given that the angle of the photo on the lotus is not exactly head on, it will make the height of the hole appear greater than it is, so I get from this that the gap in the nose on the McLaren is larger (but not hugely) than on the lotus.