McLaren MCL36

[Ground Effect]

James Key says McLaren doesn’t seem to have missed anything, based on the AM

https://www.planetf1.com/news/mclaren-j ... tin-amr22/

[Emag]

Well, Ferrari has gone for a similar concept. So that lifts some of the doubts over this decision. Now if Mercedes and RedBull have gone for something similar it would certainly be very reassuring

[f1rules]

not regarding suspension ferrai was one of the teams expected to change, and they didnt, and mclaren in the past had a tendency to overthink/over engineer solutions, lets hope its exactly a thing of the past...
Testing for sure will be VERY interesting since we already have so many interpetations, and design details spread onto different cars

[FittingMechanics]

James Key says McLaren doesn’t seem to have missed anything, based on the AM

https://www.planetf1.com/news/mclaren-j ... tin-amr22/

Should we be cautiously optimistic? Key seems to think that the new solution could be "really really right". My understanding of those words is that they expect a decent performance benefit from the solution, but as always, if you are mistaken or have correlation issues, that could end up being very wrong.

He definitely doesn't think it's no big deal like most pundits said (majority view is that the changes don't really affect much).

“We haven’t been influenced by anything else. And I think, it’s definitely some difficult designs on the car, which I guess we did for good reason. They’ll become more obvious when images of the car more readily available in winter testing. So I think, in that respect, we’ve got some some work on the track to prove that all works mechanically as well as aerodynamically.

So I guess there is more to come.

[Emag]

All we can say for sure at this point is that the changes were definitely not made just for the sake of changing something.

They have been evaluated and with the data that the team had, they have judged this to be the correct approach. But until we get racing, there is no way to validate the decision.

[Hoffman900]

James Key says McLaren doesn’t seem to have missed anything, based on the AM

https://www.planetf1.com/news/mclaren-j ... tin-amr22/

I might be projecting, but working with and managing engineers, this was bit of a low key dig at Aston Martin.

TBD for sure.

[SmallSoldier]

James Key says McLaren doesn’t seem to have missed anything, based on the AM

https://www.planetf1.com/news/mclaren-j ... tin-amr22/

Should we be cautiously optimistic? Key seems to think that the new solution could be "really really right". My understanding of those words is that they expect a decent performance benefit from the solution, but as always, if you are mistaken or have correlation issues, that could end up being very wrong.

He definitely doesn't think it's no big deal like most pundits said (majority view is that the changes don't really affect much).

“We haven’t been influenced by anything else. And I think, it’s definitely some difficult designs on the car, which I guess we did for good reason. They’ll become more obvious when images of the car more readily available in winter testing. So I think, in that respect, we’ve got some some work on the track to prove that all works mechanically as well as aerodynamically.

So I guess there is more to come.

I really liked that he talked in extremes… Is either really right or… That means that compared to previous solutions, this one showed a lot of promise… The previous iteration of the suspension geometry is one that is well known by the team, therefore they can make good comparisons between them.

[FittingMechanics]

I really liked that he talked in extremes… Is either really right or… That means that compared to previous solutions, this one showed a lot of promise… The previous iteration of the suspension geometry is one that is well known by the team, therefore they can make good comparisons between them.

Agreed. You can always play it safe but in order to catch up, you need to take some risk. Hopefully we won't go back in pace . But the fact he was talking in extremes tells me they see a big difference to doing things normally. Why risk it if it is not a big benefit.

Btw looking at all the cars so far, I'd say the McLaren is the slimmest. Maybe that's a fan in me talking.

[the EDGE]

As many have said, the choice to Push or Pull really isn't a game changer. Until Newey used pull on the rear suspension for Aero reasons, teams used Push, and it worked just fine. McLaren have simply done a Newey in reverse

As fo the front, the angle of the Pull is a lot more favourable under the new regs that it was the old when Ferrari & McLaren opted for this previously, again this route would have been taken for reasons the made more sense to them than using Push

[SmallSoldier]

As many have said, the choice to Push or Pull really isn't a game changer. Until Newey used pull on the rear suspension for Aero reasons, teams used Push, and it worked just fine. McLaren have simply done a Newey in reverse

As fo the front, the angle of the Pull is a lot more favourable under the new regs that it was the old when Ferrari & McLaren opted for this previously, again this route would have been taken for reasons the made more sense to them than using Push

If I’m in interpreting Key’s comments correctly, there is a considerable difference between the suspension geometries and it isn’t just due to aero benefits (like Newey using pull rod to help airflow in the diffuser)… This was a change driven by the expected performance gain from the suspension itself, to the point that aero has been accommodated to the change and not the other way around.

[Hoffman900]

As many have said, the choice to Push or Pull really isn't a game changer. Until Newey used pull on the rear suspension for Aero reasons, teams used Push, and it worked just fine. McLaren have simply done a Newey in reverse

As fo the front, the angle of the Pull is a lot more favourable under the new regs that it was the old when Ferrari & McLaren opted for this previously, again this route would have been taken for reasons the made more sense to them than using Push

If I’m in interpreting Key’s comments correctly, there is a considerable difference between the suspension geometries and it isn’t just due to aero benefits (like Newey using pull rod to help airflow in the diffuser)… This was a change driven by the expected performance gain from the suspension itself, to the point that aero has been accommodated to the change and not the other way around.

I believe there is real worry that these new designs will have poorer low speed performance vs. previous. Considering all the hairpin corners through all the tracks in a season, mechanical grip becomes an even more important consideration.

[_cerber1]

[SmallSoldier]

As many have said, the choice to Push or Pull really isn't a game changer. Until Newey used pull on the rear suspension for Aero reasons, teams used Push, and it worked just fine. McLaren have simply done a Newey in reverse

As fo the front, the angle of the Pull is a lot more favourable under the new regs that it was the old when Ferrari & McLaren opted for this previously, again this route would have been taken for reasons the made more sense to them than using Push

If I’m in interpreting Key’s comments correctly, there is a considerable difference between the suspension geometries and it isn’t just due to aero benefits (like Newey using pull rod to help airflow in the diffuser)… This was a change driven by the expected performance gain from the suspension itself, to the point that aero has been accommodated to the change and not the other way around.

I believe there is real worry that these new designs will have poorer low speed performance vs. previous. Considering all the hairpin corners through all the tracks in a season, mechanical grip becomes an even more important consideration.

I’ve read the same… And with the mechanical parts been harder to iterate / improve throughout the season compared to the aero (which is constantly evolving) I can understand why they gave preference to whichever geometry / chassis gave them the most performance with the expectation that they can always improve the aerodynamic performance (even if that means changing concepts).

[Zynerji]

Do teams tend to evolve an early season, highly adjustable suspension concept into more of a lighter weight, but fixed setting system later into the season as they learn the setup window?

[_cerber1]