2023 - McLaren Formula 1 Team

[AR3-GP]

They have no input to the PU packaging or compromise between thermal requirements and aerodynamics.

Yes this is true, I agreed with that earlier. I just can't see any other advantage and I don't see that as being much of a disadvantage.

All of the engines would likely fit into all the cars with some chassis adaptations and minimal impact on aero other than by cooling requirements. Even then I don't think they'd differ much now.

New regs would see greater engine disparities for a couple of years before equalising though.

The cooling requirements are not mandated by the aero / chassis team… The engine manufacturer/ department will make the most powerful and reliable unit they can make and then let the other departments know what they requirements are and not viceversa… The teams build their chassis (Tub) and their radiators to meet those requirements and their new car design… That’s why you can have the same PU in a car with Zero Pods (Mercedes), a car with a very narrow mid section (the MCL36), the 2 different iterations of the AMR last year and a very different side pod arrangement like the 2022 Williams… All of them with same PU architecture

Do you have any references to back up your claims? Most of what I know from actual F1 teams is the opposite of you what you claim.

Ferrari:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/axed ... ri/455457/

Let's set the record straight - with my colleagues I made a smaller size (engine) than Mercedes and Renault because that is what Mr (Nikolas) Tombazis, the project manager of the car, asked for.He said he wanted a very compact PU, with small radiators, because the reduced power would be compensated by aerodynamic solutions that give us an advantage over the Mercedes and Renault cars.

Renault:

Push him on the progress Renault's engine made on the power front this year and his response is swift.

“To be honest I don’t care about that,” he says. “What I care about is the performance of the car.

“We made some choices on the PU to have the best car. Maybe we could have done a better figure on the dyno, but with a slower car at the end.

“Instead, the A522 has been designed with the engine, and the engine has been designed to get the best compromise for the best car. We will keep working in that way.”

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-a ... /10247142/


Aston Martin:

In his media round in Monaco, he placed particular emphasis on the integration of engine development with chassis design:

"If you look at the engine regulations for the 2026 season and the chassis regulations that will be developed from them, you can see that full integration or at least a high degree of integration with the power unit is needed in order to to develop the chassis suitable for this regulation."

"If you have a working association, the flow of information is much more open, you get data sooner, for example on energy management, the aerodynamic configuration that you have to choose to achieve the right objective. It is a great advantage for this interpretation of the normative".

[MrGapes]

"We would have liked to have been top four in the championship, but by the time we catch up to their speed, they will have pulled out a gap in the points that will probably be too big to overcome," Brown said.

"So in reality, we are in a fight for fifth with Alpine, and the others aren't very far behind.

"Our goal is to be mixing it up inside the top four by the end of the year, but given the head start [of McLaren’s rivals] and slow start we've had, to actually get fourth in the points will probably be a tall order.

"We're fighting for fifth, and then our goal is to be racing inside the top four by the end of the year and then putting a better car out at the start of next year."

https://f1i.com/news/474876-brown-antic ... laren.html

[Ben1980]

Would being a works team have its benefits. Yea obviously.

Would it have its risks, yes obviously.

Would it guarantee success, no.

Would it guarantee a team being better than a customer team no.

And Sauber winning a race with BMW is minimal as the team almost folded, similar for Mclaren with Honda

[AR3-GP]

Would being a works team have its benefits. Yea obviously.

Would it have its risks, yes obviously.

Would it guarantee success, no.

Would it guarantee a team being better than a customer team no.

And Sauber winning a race with BMW is minimal as the team almost folded, similar for Mclaren with Honda

Sauber almost folded because of a financial crisis affecting BMW, the team owner.

No one is asking Mclaren to sell the house to a manufacturer. They just have to be aware that at the sharp end of the grid, all of the ducks need to be lined up.

[Ground Effect]

Would being a works team have its benefits. Yea obviously.

Would it have its risks, yes obviously.

Would it guarantee success, no.

Would it guarantee a team being better than a customer team no.

And Sauber winning a race with BMW is minimal as the team almost folded, similar for Mclaren with Honda

Sauber almost folded because of a financial crisis affecting BMW, the team owner.

No one is asking Mclaren to sell the house to a manufacturer. They just have to be aware that at the sharp end of the grid, all of the ducks need to be lined up.

But that's what Audi wanted, a buyout. So in the pursuit of an engine partner, the deal has to work for McLaren. Works team or not, McLaren must push on with the target of fighting for championships.

[AR3-GP]

Would being a works team have its benefits. Yea obviously.

Would it have its risks, yes obviously.

Would it guarantee success, no.

Would it guarantee a team being better than a customer team no.

And Sauber winning a race with BMW is minimal as the team almost folded, similar for Mclaren with Honda

Sauber almost folded because of a financial crisis affecting BMW, the team owner.

No one is asking Mclaren to sell the house to a manufacturer. They just have to be aware that at the sharp end of the grid, all of the ducks need to be lined up.

But that's what Audi wanted, a buyout. So in the pursuit of an engine partner, the deal has to work for McLaren. Works team or not, McLaren must push on with the target of fighting for championships.

I don't know what Audi wanted. Much of what was written was speculative.

[MrGapes]

Sauber almost folded because of a financial crisis affecting BMW, the team owner.

No one is asking Mclaren to sell the house to a manufacturer. They just have to be aware that at the sharp end of the grid, all of the ducks need to be lined up.

But that's what Audi wanted, a buyout. So in the pursuit of an engine partner, the deal has to work for McLaren. Works team or not, McLaren must push on with the target of fighting for championships.

I don't know what Audi wanted. Much of what was written was speculative.

I think it was quite consistent through several reputable sources that Audi wanted a buyout.

[Ground Effect]

Sauber almost folded because of a financial crisis affecting BMW, the team owner.

No one is asking Mclaren to sell the house to a manufacturer. They just have to be aware that at the sharp end of the grid, all of the ducks need to be lined up.

But that's what Audi wanted, a buyout. So in the pursuit of an engine partner, the deal has to work for McLaren. Works team or not, McLaren must push on with the target of fighting for championships.

I don't know what Audi wanted. Much of what was written was speculative.

Here’s a pretty detailed report on what transpired, I’m with Zak on this one

https://the-race.com/formula-1/why-mcla ... n-to-audi/

[McL-H]

If Audi and Porsche wouldn’t have been so arrogant and would not have disrespected McLaren by proposing a buyout, but rather accepted a more modest role as an engine partner, they could have had a good entry.

Now Audi has to do with a team needing a lot of infrastructure investments, with a very weak CEO that runs your team to the ground before he bails out. And Porsche has ended up having no entry at all. I think it is their loss, not McLaren’s.

[Seerix]

Manufacturer teams (RB, Ferr, Merc, Alpine) have certain advantages. That's very clear to me. There being couple of outliers like Brawn or AM in this season does not mean it's normal situation.
Is there a possibility of a team beating manufacturer team? Yes, ofcourse.
Is the chance of manufacturer team beating customer teams higher? Again, yes.
You don't want to be an outlier, you want to try to maximize your chances of beating others. The chance is higher when you are manufacturer team. That's it.

[mwillems]

They have no input to the PU packaging or compromise between thermal requirements and aerodynamics.

Yes this is true, I agreed with that earlier. I just can't see any other advantage and I don't see that as being much of a disadvantage.

All of the engines would likely fit into all the cars with some chassis adaptations and minimal impact on aero other than by cooling requirements. Even then I don't think they'd differ much now.

New regs would see greater engine disparities for a couple of years before equalising though.

The cooling requirements are not mandated by the aero / chassis team… The engine manufacturer/ department will make the most powerful and reliable unit they can make and then let the other departments know what they requirements are and not viceversa… The teams build their chassis (Tub) and their radiators to meet those requirements and their new car design… That’s why you can have the same PU in a car with Zero Pods (Mercedes), a car with a very narrow mid section (the MCL36), the 2 different iterations of the AMR last year and a very different side pod arrangement like the 2022 Williams… All of them with same PU architecture

When the Mclaren moved from Renault to Merc there was a wealth of information around the change. Engines required different level of cooling in different places, some engines more heat efficient than others etc

That said, I don't think that it is THAT much of a difference that it can impact the cars that much, but who knows, perhaps even small changes to the angine cover or Sidepod shape can make large changes to aero efficiency.

But ultimately, teams get the CAD designs early on and the thermal profiles, so they are able to design an effective solution that fits the car with probably almost no impact so again, I can't see much of a disadvantage.

I just can't see an engineering reason that stands up as to why works team is so good and has anything more than minor benefits.

Even the idea that the engine is designed for a chassis. I highly doubt it, if the engine team says they can get 30 more HP from this other shape, they will take that shape and the chassis will change for it, because ultimately the engine can be made to fit without compromising aero or by working around it.

[mwillems]

They have no input to the PU packaging or compromise between thermal requirements and aerodynamics.

Yes this is true, I agreed with that earlier. I just can't see any other advantage and I don't see that as being much of a disadvantage.

All of the engines would likely fit into all the cars with some chassis adaptations and minimal impact on aero other than by cooling requirements. Even then I don't think they'd differ much now.

New regs would see greater engine disparities for a couple of years before equalising though.

The cooling requirements are not mandated by the aero / chassis team… The engine manufacturer/ department will make the most powerful and reliable unit they can make and then let the other departments know what they requirements are and not viceversa… The teams build their chassis (Tub) and their radiators to meet those requirements and their new car design… That’s why you can have the same PU in a car with Zero Pods (Mercedes), a car with a very narrow mid section (the MCL36), the 2 different iterations of the AMR last year and a very different side pod arrangement like the 2022 Williams… All of them with same PU architecture

By the way, we are agreeing with each other, it just seems like somehow we aren't, but we are. The only difference being that as a works team I'm sure there will be some time advantage found from some preference in parts quality that isn't mentioned and I'm sure there will be some slight advantage in other little tricks. I just don't think that in these regs, there can be much of an advantage.

In terms of cooling requirements there will just be a thermal profile given to the teams, then naturally we push it as close to the bone as we can, hence Mclarens burning engine covers in testing a few years back. But yes the solution is totally each individual teams.

What I'm not saying very well is that there will be a more pronounced difference at the start of the new regs in 26, where there will be more divergence in the properties and shapes of the engines. But today? I doubt it makes much of a difference at all.

[CjC]

So we are in agreement- Aston Martin-Honda WCC champions 2026

[mwillems]

So we are in agreement- Aston Martin-Honda WCC champions 2026

Ahaha

I actually think the car is decent, and a step up from last year, but I think another part of the Improvment is Alsonso, I don't think they had a driver before that could extract the max like he can.

I totally get that his reactions might be a bit slower, but that doesn't take away from his feel for the limit, and how to get to the limit, which is about as close to the best as it could ever be. Yes the chassis is good, Alonso probably bought just as much time as the chassis.

I love the fact that his "kindness" towards helping his teammate is really just utterly demonstrating the gulf in class and the fact he is being destroyed by Alonso. How nice of him to be so "kind" ahahahahaha!

I miss his speed, but not the "just barely passive" nature of his considerable charming aggression to destroy his teammate and demonstrate just how good he is.

[mclaren111]