McLaren MCL36

[DiogoBrand]

When you watch kyle f1 videos he often warns you that even he, who has worked for years as an aerodynamicist for the team that has won the most in the last decade, could not guess anything just by looking, so I have a lot of laughs when someone does categorical statements thanks to his own eyes.I like to imagine him scolded by his wife for not washing the dishes.

And the solution from these specialists is always "They need to copy the concepts of the team that's winning and they'll be instantly winning as well".

[Vanja #66]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

[Emag]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

Thank you for saying this. I keep seeing people here blaming the sidepod shape for not being anything like RB/Ferrari.

But the thing is, they are so far behind, the sidepod shape is clearly not the problem.

The lack of that level of detail could maybe justify that last half a second or so, but not 2 seconds. McLaren has deeper problems.

Their concept is not utilizing the tunnels to the same extent as the other teams. And it seems you share my view as well in regard to the lower reference point that McLaren had for what it considered enough downforce to start the season.

If their reference point was higher, warning bells would have been rang the moment they hit the track in Barcelona and verified the numbers.

[CjC]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

Where did you hear Lando say Mclaren are lacking 100 points in downforce?

*edit- just seen the article where Lando says so*

For me the pictures I’ve seen of the fences Red bull have in the throat of the floor compared to the Mclaren have much more shape to them which I assume energised the air flow.
I think first port of call for Mclaren is the bib and floor throat. Does the Mclaren have a ‘sprung’ bib like the Ferrari and Red bull?

Defo- Mclaren didn’t set a high enough target during the car conception which is absurd.

[M840TR]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

Where did you hear Lando say Mclaren are lacking 100 points in downforce?

*edit- just seen the article where Lando says so*

For me the pictures I’ve seen of the fences Red bull have in the throat of the floor compared to the Mclaren have much more shape to them which I assume energised the air flow.
I think first port of call for Mclaren is the bib and floor throat. Does the Mclaren have a ‘sprung’ bib like the Ferrari and Red bull?

Defo- Mclaren didn’t set a high enough target during the car conception which is absurd.

[mclaren111]

[101FlyingDutchman]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

Pretty much exactly my thoughts one page earlier. The fact it’s mostly downforce related according to Lando has me sincerely worried. There is no way a brake duct has that type of influence. Let’s hope the update + new brake ducts gets the car at least into the midfield pack again

[_cerber1]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOnHVyxWYAQ ... ame=medium

The wing seems huge compared to rivals.

[Emag]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOnHVyxWYAQ ... ame=medium

The wing seems huge compared to rivals.

The angle does play a role as well, but I wouldn't be surprised if they will have one of the biggest wings this race after admiting they lack quite a bit of downforce.

[kfrantzios]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

I don't know how teams decide what amount of downforce is enough. How do they set a target? Is it a process of "we assume that if we reach 2021 levels we are OK" or is it a constant pursue of more downforce in the most efficient way?
If they set a target and they reach it, they stop? If they don't its not a target its a milestone.

Key said that aero is working as expected. We have great results in Barcelona, reports that the car is really planted, agile and without porpoising issues. But then, in Bahrain, we see a car fully covered in flow vis, we read reports about corellation issues etc. This doesn't add up.
I'm utterly confused...

[JPower]

Key said that aero is working as expected. We have great results in Barcelona, reports that the car is really planted, agile and without porpoising issues. But then, in Bahrain, we see a car fully covered in flow vis, we read reports about corellation issues etc. This doesn't add up.
I'm utterly confused...

I don't think Barcelona is a great benchmark to use anymore. That was the first time any of these cars had seen a track. They weren't close to being pushed to the limit enough to expose any weaknesses outside of porpoising IMO. While Bahrain isn't representative of most tracks on the calendar, teams obviously were pushing the cars 100%. Quali and race days usually expose things fairly quickly.

[CjC]

Key said that aero is working as expected. We have great results in Barcelona, reports that the car is really planted, agile and without porpoising issues. But then, in Bahrain, we see a car fully covered in flow vis, we read reports about corellation issues etc. This doesn't add up.
I'm utterly confused...

I don't think Barcelona is a great benchmark to use anymore. That was the first time any of these cars had seen a track. They weren't close to being pushed to the limit enough to expose any weaknesses outside of porpoising IMO. While Bahrain isn't representative of most tracks on the calendar, teams obviously were pushing the cars 100%. Quali and race days usually expose things fairly quickly.

Exactly forget Barcelona.
Perhaps Mclaren was one of the fastest in Barcelona whilst the rest were getting up to speed with their new machinery. Once the rest started bringing updates and started optimising set up it started to shuffle Mclaren back through the pack

[CjC]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

Where did you hear Lando say Mclaren are lacking 100 points in downforce?

*edit- just seen the article where Lando says so*

For me the pictures I’ve seen of the fences Red bull have in the throat of the floor compared to the Mclaren have much more shape to them which I assume energised the air flow.
I think first port of call for Mclaren is the bib and floor throat. Does the Mclaren have a ‘sprung’ bib like the Ferrari and Red bull?

Defo- Mclaren didn’t set a high enough target during the car conception which is absurd.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOOBjISXMAE7AgW.jpg:large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMSQQyXXIAo ... name=large

Great work

These are what I was referring to

Red Bull
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOOBjISXMAE ... name=large
Previously
Posted by LM10

Mclaren
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FOTDNCjXIAg ... &name=orig
Previously posted by RZS10

[matteosc]

If Norris comments about 100 pts of downforce are correct, that's a lot. And surely comes mostly from the floor, since wings can only do so much on their own. Their floor sealing looked to be decent, but that doesn't tell us anything about the actual geometry underneath...

Sidepods can only do so much, once everything else is as it should be, so they can't be the reason, not even close. Also, having that big of a deficit is surely related to actual downforce requirements set for the launch spec. You can't go high enough if you don't aim high enough...

Do you think that the lack (relatively speaking) of porpoising for the McLaren from the beginning of the test is somehow related to the lower levels of downforce generated by the floor? If I remember correctly they where the quickest ones in solving the problem.

[Vanja #66]

I don't know how teams decide what amount of downforce is enough. How do they set a target? Is it a process of "we assume that if we reach 2021 levels we are OK" or is it a constant pursue of more downforce in the most efficient way?
If they set a target and they reach it, they stop? If they don't its not a target its a milestone.

I have no idea about team targets either. It might just be a case of them being fully commited to 2021 and neglecting the 2022 car a bit.

Do you think that the lack (relatively speaking) of porpoising for the McLaren from the beginning of the test is somehow related to the lower levels of downforce generated by the floor? If I remember correctly they where the quickest ones in solving the problem.

That would be a logical explanation, yes.