2023 - McLaren Formula 1 Team

[mwillems]

This race was more boring than usual, the DRS zone was too small and from a Mclaren perspective we set up with more DF than we needed.

It may well be that the team didn't want to create or didn't have the bandwidth to create a low down force RW for this race, or that they thought it was optimum to have more DF. I would argue we would have been better running less wing. A few times we have seen that the optimal lap time setup is not the right setup for a street race or indeed any race where it can be tough to overtake. It is only optimal in optimal racing conditions and outside of that (Which is usually the case) not edging the balance towards speed leaves you in no mans land.

[SmallSoldier]

This race was more boring than usual, the DRS zone was too small and from a Mclaren perspective we set up with more DF than we needed.

It may well be that the team didn't want to create or didn't have the bandwidth to create a low down force RW for this race, or that they thought it was optimum to have more DF. I would argue we would have been better running less wing. A few times we have seen that the optimal lap time setup is not the right setup for a street race or indeed any race where it can be tough to overtake. It is only optimal in optimal racing conditions and outside of that (Which is usually the case) not edging the balance towards speed leaves you in no mans land.

You also need to take into account that there was effectively just 1 hour of practice to setup the car, not only for performance (one lap / race pace) but also tire degradation… After yesterday’s Sprint, there was even talk of a potential two stop strategy for the race… Higher DF to protect the tires and gain time in the rest of the lap is not a bad idea… We saw how Lando dropped places in the Sprint once his tires were gone or similar Hulk in today’s race when his tires finally gave up.

The Safety Car was also a bit unlucky and placed them in a DRS train… The reality is that Baku with the shorter DRS zone, the lower effect of the tow (the tow isn’t as strong in this generation compared to the last one) as a track were making an overtake was going to be difficult for anyone, even the Red Bulls struggled if not close to half a second exiting the last corner (as we saw in the Sprint)

[mwillems]

But on a track where a Safety Car can change everything and has a very high likelihood of happening I don't think it is the right choice, but that is my opinion.

The graphs posted on Friday showing us ahead of Hamilton and Alonso by over three tenths at various points of the Q3 lap, losing a little on the first two straights before going back to 3 tenths up, before losing the lot and being 1 tenth back after the straight (Albeit we had no tow), demonstrate that we had pace but bet heavily on the twisty section and on more Downforce.

I don't think we could have had P4 like Lando suggested on Friday, maybe P5, but it is frustrating because the team messed this up a little weekend.
Sending the two out without a tow on Friday, into clean air, was silly, as was wasting tyres but that's just the sprint race. Putting on the downforce they did gave us the "logically" fastest setup that was always going to too easy come undone in the race. We can't overtake in the corners here, what is the point of that downforce other than for Qualy and for tyres which I think was less important than making headway on the straights. Even then we changed before many others anyway, so there was no need to protect the tyres. I don't even think having more DF made us much faster, I think we could have been just as fast by scrubbing some wing and had more pace to overtake on the straights.

I feel like we could have done much better there and the team didn't have their best day at the strategy office.

Grrrr

[Ground Effect]

Just saw Oscar's interview post race, the poor kid really looks off, no colour in his face. Hope he'll get a good couple of days rest and be fine for Miami.

[SmallSoldier]

But on a track where a Safety Car can change everything and has a very high likelihood of happening I don't think it is the right choice, but that is my opinion.

The graphs posted on Friday showing us ahead of Hamilton and Alonso by over three tenths at various points of the Q3 lap, losing a little on the first two straights before going back to 3 tenths up, before losing the lot and being 1 tenth back after the straight (Albeit we had no tow), demonstrate that we had pace but bet heavily on the twisty section and on more Downforce.

I don't think we could have had P4 like Lando suggested on Friday, maybe P5, but it is frustrating because the team messed this up a little weekend.
Sending the two out without a tow on Friday, into clean air, was silly, as was wasting tyres but that's just the sprint race. Putting on the downforce they did gave us the "logically" fastest setup that was always going to too easy come undone in the race. We can't overtake in the corners here, what is the point of that downforce other than for Qualy and for tyres which I think was less important than making headway on the straights. Even then we changed before many others anyway, so there was no need to protect the tyres. I don't even think having more DF made us much faster, I think we could have been just as fast by scrubbing some wing and had more pace to overtake on the straights.

I feel like we could have done much better there and the team didn't have their best day at the strategy office.

Grrrr

Your logic is sound, but we may not know all the variables… Not disagreeing with your assessment of qualifying and sending them out without a potential tow, you are spot on and that was a mistake by Team.

Regarding the race, the team did pit early in the stint to get out of the Mediums, was it because wear/degradation? If that was the case (which I presume was), imagine how the deg would have been without the additional DF, maybe virtually impossible to do a one-stop race (or drop like a bomb at the end of the race)… I would argue that the team expected to be racing in no-mans land, effectively behind the “top 4” and with clean air, if that’s the case the lower DF config is the fastest way to finish the race, since with more DF you are effectively carrying more speed in every corner (when not under acceleration), this is what creates “race pace” and the biggest difference between the top teams and the rest, beyond protecting the tires.

In addition, a lower DF configuration isn’t a guarantee of an overtake, since the problem resides somewhere else… With less DF, not only do you wear your tires faster, the “dirty air” behind another increases it and is harder to stay close to the car in front of you, therefore by the time you finished S2 you may actually be out of DRS range and it doesn’t matter how low your DF config is, you are not overtaking.

The Red Bull actually had more DF than the Ferrari’s for this race, that’s why while Perez / Verstappen were able to close in on Leclerc in S2 (and therefore make the overtake in the main straight), for Leclerc it was the opposite, it was in S2 were he lost most of the lap time to the other two and simply couldn’t stay in within DRS range… Why was the Ferrari faster in Qualy? Because with sticky soft tires and low fuel, lack of DF can be masked… During the race and having to protect the tires, that goes away.

I would argue that as frustrating as it was to watch Norris behind Hulkenberg all race long (or 80% of it at least), it wasn’t due to a bad strategy call from the Team, simply a reflection of a car that isn’t the fastest or slipperiest on the track in a race where overtaking was almost impossible unless you had a huge pace delta to the car in front (and that car didn’t had DRS or a tow).

[LionsHeart]

SmallSoldier, you are fully correct!

[KimiRai]

Good performance from Mclaren. But Alpine might bounce back in Miami with 3 FPs to test their upgrades.

[SmallSoldier]

Good performance from Mclaren. But Alpine might bounce back in Miami with 3 FPs to test their upgrades.

The same 3 FP’s that McLaren will have to test theirs

[KimiRai]

Good performance from Mclaren. But Alpine might bounce back in Miami with 3 FPs to test their upgrades.

The same 3 FP’s that McLaren will have to test theirs

Yes but Alpine is a bigger unknown, they had terrible luck.

[Ground Effect]

Good performance from Mclaren. But Alpine might bounce back in Miami with 3 FPs to test their upgrades.

The same 3 FP’s that McLaren will have to test theirs

Yes but Alpine is a bigger unknown, they had terrible luck.

The team already said the upgrades won't show it's true potential on a track like Baku. It sounded like they expect Miami to be more representative. I think they and Alpine are in the same boat, should be interesting.

[FittingMechanics]

To be honest, this was a pretty good result, there were no crashes or problems up front so P9 was best we could get. Both cars in Q3, no luck with the safety car and yet P9 and P11.

Let's remember that at the start of the season everyone assumed the season is a total write off and that the car is one of the slowest. Now it seems to be clearly 5th best car and on a track which is exactly opposite of what suits this car. This car has a lot of downforce but also a lot of drag. I am quite happy with the turnaround and I hope that they can improve further once they understand the car more.

One thing to keep in mind is that all changes McLaren described in that document for FIA say that they are done to reduce drag. So the team is working on it.

[mwillems]

But on a track where a Safety Car can change everything and has a very high likelihood of happening I don't think it is the right choice, but that is my opinion.

The graphs posted on Friday showing us ahead of Hamilton and Alonso by over three tenths at various points of the Q3 lap, losing a little on the first two straights before going back to 3 tenths up, before losing the lot and being 1 tenth back after the straight (Albeit we had no tow), demonstrate that we had pace but bet heavily on the twisty section and on more Downforce.

I don't think we could have had P4 like Lando suggested on Friday, maybe P5, but it is frustrating because the team messed this up a little weekend.
Sending the two out without a tow on Friday, into clean air, was silly, as was wasting tyres but that's just the sprint race. Putting on the downforce they did gave us the "logically" fastest setup that was always going to too easy come undone in the race. We can't overtake in the corners here, what is the point of that downforce other than for Qualy and for tyres which I think was less important than making headway on the straights. Even then we changed before many others anyway, so there was no need to protect the tyres. I don't even think having more DF made us much faster, I think we could have been just as fast by scrubbing some wing and had more pace to overtake on the straights.

I feel like we could have done much better there and the team didn't have their best day at the strategy office.

Grrrr

Your logic is sound, but we may not know all the variables… Not disagreeing with your assessment of qualifying and sending them out without a potential tow, you are spot on and that was a mistake by Team.

Regarding the race, the team did pit early in the stint to get out of the Mediums, was it because wear/degradation? If that was the case (which I presume was), imagine how the deg would have been without the additional DF, maybe virtually impossible to do a one-stop race (or drop like a bomb at the end of the race)… I would argue that the team expected to be racing in no-mans land, effectively behind the “top 4” and with clean air, if that’s the case the lower DF config is the fastest way to finish the race, since with more DF you are effectively carrying more speed in every corner (when not under acceleration), this is what creates “race pace” and the biggest difference between the top teams and the rest, beyond protecting the tires.

In addition, a lower DF configuration isn’t a guarantee of an overtake, since the problem resides somewhere else… With less DF, not only do you wear your tires faster, the “dirty air” behind another increases it and is harder to stay close to the car in front of you, therefore by the time you finished S2 you may actually be out of DRS range and it doesn’t matter how low your DF config is, you are not overtaking.

The Red Bull actually had more DF than the Ferrari’s for this race, that’s why while Perez / Verstappen were able to close in on Leclerc in S2 (and therefore make the overtake in the main straight), for Leclerc it was the opposite, it was in S2 were he lost most of the lap time to the other two and simply couldn’t stay in within DRS range… Why was the Ferrari faster in Qualy? Because with sticky soft tires and low fuel, lack of DF can be masked… During the race and having to protect the tires, that goes away.

I would argue that as frustrating as it was to watch Norris behind Hulkenberg all race long (or 80% of it at least), it wasn’t due to a bad strategy call from the Team, simply a reflection of a car that isn’t the fastest or slipperiest on the track in a race where overtaking was almost impossible unless you had a huge pace delta to the car in front (and that car didn’t had DRS or a tow).

RBs are incredibly slippy with DRS open and closed so they can afford the DF, we have no such slippiness and the balance has to be traded very carefully. I don't think the tyres were going off a cliff either or that we had too much deg at that point, it looked like an attempt at an undercut that didn't pan out, so I cannot move beyond the fact that the DF was a waste and the wrong focus.

In terms of hulk, for several laps he did not have DRS so I think that scrubbing the wing a bit would have helped.
The car is not the fastest, but it has more pace than they allowed it to show today and I maintain my point that had we gone with a lower DF setup we would have had a better result, obviously that is just my opinion.

Regarding a huge delta, you don't need a huge delta, you need to be able to put pressure on the guy in front to make a mistake trying to cover and work your opportunity, it's just as common as blasting past someone on outright pace and more fun to watch. We were a cats whisker of pace away from being able to start pushing Lando into Hulks rear.

[FittingMechanics]

I think everyone here assumes McLaren can setup the car with a slim rear wing and be a slippery car. I don't think that is true, I believe that the floor and the bodywork creates a lot of downforce but it also is quite draggy. They can't just bolt on a slim rear wing and be done with it.

[mwillems]

I don't think it is true either. I explicitly questioned if indeed they did have the bandwidth to develop a low DF RW because it does indeed require a full design process to ensure it works with the car.

What is then implied/implicit is that this would have been because they have more pressing parts to develop than the RW, such as an entire upgrade package, 3 times this season.

But I still think they had the wing opened up quite a bit and from the data we had, they were not slow, they made a choice to run with quite a bit of DF, I simply wish they hadn't.

[AR3-GP]

It's clear Mclaren are going to be very strong with this kind of package on specific, low speed circuits. They have to look at making sure the package works everywhere which is usually how you become a dominant team.