It’s a hard life being a Mclaren fan.Macklaren wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 20:50More details on the Stella interview and drag comments here
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... /10436133/
It’s a hard life being a Mclaren fan.Macklaren wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 20:50More details on the Stella interview and drag comments here
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... /10436133/
Yep but I like to stay positive. The concept is good. They’re not in the woods - correlation with simulations seem on point. Now it’s just a straight question of: how good is your TD?CjC wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 21:03It’s a hard life being a Mclaren fan.Macklaren wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 20:50More details on the Stella interview and drag comments here
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... /10436133/
Efficiency is the coefficient of downforce at a certain amount of drag… It doesn’t mean that they haven’t improve their drag compared to last year, but they are not producing as much downforce as they would like to for a given amount of drag.
And after he said "Nothing alarming, just the usual testing bugs."Seerix wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 18:45They are just quoting Zak you know... no need to pretend otherwiseGround Effect wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 18:43F1 pundits and journalists now peddle and transact on feelings, sounds and vibes. Has anyone come up with any deep delve analysis of the data, which is what they should be working with? Like I said, McLaren may actually be in a bad way, but there's nothing concrete about anything. With "teething" problems, the team did nearly 140 laps today. One day to go, lets see how tomorrow pans out.
“We had some teething problems yesterday,” Brown admitted
https://www.racefans.net/2023/02/24/mcl ... 023-brown/
Good question. If Mclaren aren’t close to the front (not necessarily fighting for wins) once the the wind tunnel is up and running then current Mclaren employees will be looking for a new job- and I’m not the sacking for sacking sake type of guy.101FlyingDutchman wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 21:06Yep but I like to stay positive. The concept is good. They’re not in the woods - correlation with simulations seem on point. Now it’s just a straight question of: how good is your TD?CjC wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 21:03It’s a hard life being a Mclaren fan.Macklaren wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 20:50More details on the Stella interview and drag comments here
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... /10436133/
Sounding like Aston Martin and Alpine are ahead in the pecking order to me from those comments. Think we might be in for a season long battle with Mclarens old team principle for P6mwillems wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 21:48And after he said "Nothing alarming, just the usual testing bugs."Seerix wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 18:45They are just quoting Zak you know... no need to pretend otherwiseGround Effect wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 18:43F1 pundits and journalists now peddle and transact on feelings, sounds and vibes. Has anyone come up with any deep delve analysis of the data, which is what they should be working with? Like I said, McLaren may actually be in a bad way, but there's nothing concrete about anything. With "teething" problems, the team did nearly 140 laps today. One day to go, lets see how tomorrow pans out.
“We had some teething problems yesterday,” Brown admitted
https://www.racefans.net/2023/02/24/mcl ... 023-brown/
And then "“But I think we will be going into the the first race off of our projected targets and it’s hard to really know where that means we’ll be on the grid.”"
It sure sounds like we could be faster, but it doesn't sound like doom and gloom.
This is Andreas Stella today:
"Last year, we had some clear objectives in terms of development, they had to do with aerodynamic efficiency, some development related to the exploitation of the tyres, and also some other objectives to improve the balance," explained Stella.
"The reality is that most of these objectives have actually been met. But the objective in terms of aerodynamic efficiency of the car, that's the one where we are still shy of what was our target.
"So some of the objectives have been met. Aerodynamic efficiency is still not where we would like it to be, or where we would like it to be a top-four contender. So I would say that's the one in which we are still short."
And we know that the team have an upgrade package which deals with the outwash from the front wing and should offer a good step forward.
Possibly. I think my point is that there are a lot of articles with differing perspectives, the car is not good vs specific efficiency targets not being met whilst all the others were.CjC wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 22:02Sounding like Aston Martin and Alpine are ahead in the pecking order to me from those comments. Think we might be in for a season long battle with Mclarens old team principle for P6mwillems wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 21:48And after he said "Nothing alarming, just the usual testing bugs."Seerix wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 18:45
They are just quoting Zak you know... no need to pretend otherwise
“We had some teething problems yesterday,” Brown admitted
https://www.racefans.net/2023/02/24/mcl ... 023-brown/
And then "“But I think we will be going into the the first race off of our projected targets and it’s hard to really know where that means we’ll be on the grid.”"
It sure sounds like we could be faster, but it doesn't sound like doom and gloom.
This is Andreas Stella today:
"Last year, we had some clear objectives in terms of development, they had to do with aerodynamic efficiency, some development related to the exploitation of the tyres, and also some other objectives to improve the balance," explained Stella.
"The reality is that most of these objectives have actually been met. But the objective in terms of aerodynamic efficiency of the car, that's the one where we are still shy of what was our target.
"So some of the objectives have been met. Aerodynamic efficiency is still not where we would like it to be, or where we would like it to be a top-four contender. So I would say that's the one in which we are still short."
And we know that the team have an upgrade package which deals with the outwash from the front wing and should offer a good step forward.
Good idea, wait until we still don't have enough data to come to a conclusion.Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 21:19I would say let's wait the last day to see where the car stands and then we can make assumptions.
100%…we all went through McHonda surely it can’t be that bad right… rightthe EDGE wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 22:26Stay positive guys... No one said being a McLaren fan was easy
Just look how McLaren turned it around last year... Race 1, they were nowhere... race 4. and a well earned podium
We already know there is a big update coming in a couple of months, so even if it its not good next weekend, there's plenty to be happy about, and that's not to mention having the best driver on the grid, and most highly rated rookie in say... the last 4 years, behind the 2 car's steering wheels...ops, I just did
Yes, we saw when they made a 2015 car with intention to win the championship and we all know how that truned out to be...BrunoH wrote: ↑24 Feb 2023, 22:53as i said before the lack of ambition even before the test now shows.. we want to be the 4 best... cmon its planning to fail from the start! i really hope the new tunnel and tech really help this otherwise we are the new Williams.... im really afraid we have killed Mclaren! they need to be doing a car with the aim to win at least races!