2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[Seanspeed]

The low speed improvement is the most significant thing that's changed the competitive picture. It's basically eliminated the biggest weakness, and it's extremely noticeable watching onboards how much more agile it is in these low speed corners, and the front basically just goes right where the steering points without fuss.

It's pretty interesting if this was not intended behavior of the new package.

[LionsHeart]

When Lando's car was picked up in Miami, I saw one curious detail that immediately stood out to me. The lowest pressure area under the floor is now moved back closer to the diffuser area. Thereby shifting the center of pressure back, closer to the center of mass of the chassis. This step allows the use of softer front suspension settings. Wear on the control bar indicates the same thing. I am sure that such a change in aerodynamics played a key role, due to which both balance and handling changed.

The car is now easier for Lando and Oscar to handle because the wear on the front tires is not as bad as before and the chassis does not cause severe understeer. And in some places it’s even the opposite, Lando often pays attention to excessive controllability. As far as I remember, he likes this option better. And Oscar too. And overall the chassis rides much smoother than before.

The softer suspension lowers the front end slightly lower at low speeds. As speed increases, the aerodynamics independently equalize the ground clearance, lowering the front and rear evenly. But the front end now acts as the main link around which the chassis rotates. At Imola I didn't see any sign of a lack of grip at the front end at Turn 7. Everything was great in Miami too. In Monaco, the chassis turned easily at the hairpin and at the exit of turn 10.

The overall center of pressure under the floor and the center of mass of the chassis are now more closely connected and have one common point, around which a more stable balance occurs in all corners.

Your CFD eyes are very strong, lol

Look for photos of previous specifications and compare with the latest iteration. No CFD knowledge is required here. Knowledge of geometry is enough.

[LionsHeart]

The full article.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... /10617803/

Stella thinks that some of the unexpected improvement is likely the result of increased driver confidence allowing Norris and Piastri to push harder, but equally there are some technical elements that he thinks need to be better understood.

...

For us, it’s still an open point as to why the car now seems to be pretty decent in low-speed. And we don’t want to jump to conclusions too early because it’s pretty fundamental that we derive the most precise answer to this question.

“It could be a big opportunity for further development, so we need to understand exactly why the car is now competitive in low-speed.”

But Stella is clear that the issue of the car producing more than expected is not down to a factory/track correlation issue – as its actual downforce gain is on target.

Drivers having confidence to push harder reminds me of "success breeds success". Good to hear that it's across the board too e.g. not specific to low-speed corners. Will be interesting to see how this plays out across the season.

Imola had a setup directed towards low speeds, so did Miami and Monaco. It's safe to say that this car has not been tested yet where it is to be set up for a tracks like Canada and Barcelona. Barcelona is known as a great place to test what your car can do, just like Japan.

I think it was spoken about at length over the past 6 to 8 weeks that a car that you trust and where you can more readily feel the limits is a car that the drivers will be more confident in extracting consistent time in the race and allow the drivers to find a smaller amount of time on their fast laps, but also be able to reliably get in laps that were close to, but stayed on the right side of, the edge of what the car can do.

The answer likely lies in some mix of the drivers getting less from the raw downforce potential of the previous car than expected, they are getting more from the potential of the current car or quite simply when all the variables are put together as a package that works well, additional time can be found that isn't specific to a part of the car.

I look forward to hearing from the team in a race or two about why this worked, although I suspect this is something they will keep quiet.

It's great to hear that the low speed corners are the area most improved and that it is looking "good" in the low speeds. Suggests the old weaknesses of the car are gone.

But as I say, it's not yet been seen at a track where the setup isn't so focussed. This is why I was saying to LionsHeart that the next 3 tracks would be very interesting.

Well, since you mentioned me, I’ll just repeat that I’m personally looking forward to Montreal. Features long straights separated by chicanes, high curbs and soft suspension. This track should show whether it is true that slow corners are no longer a weak point. At the same time, look at the drag on the straights. We were already able to get the first answer in Miami, but in Montreal we will either see a repeat of Miami, or there will be something similar to Imola.

But as far as I understand correctly, the choice of air package should be like in Miami. At Imola the aerodynamic load was higher. In this regard, I feel calm and do not yet feel any signs of anxiety.

[Seanspeed]

When Lando's car was picked up in Miami, I saw one curious detail that immediately stood out to me. The lowest pressure area under the floor is now moved back closer to the diffuser area. Thereby shifting the center of pressure back, closer to the center of mass of the chassis. This step allows the use of softer front suspension settings. Wear on the control bar indicates the same thing. I am sure that such a change in aerodynamics played a key role, due to which both balance and handling changed.

The car is now easier for Lando and Oscar to handle because the wear on the front tires is not as bad as before and the chassis does not cause severe understeer. And in some places it’s even the opposite, Lando often pays attention to excessive controllability. As far as I remember, he likes this option better. And Oscar too. And overall the chassis rides much smoother than before.

The softer suspension lowers the front end slightly lower at low speeds. As speed increases, the aerodynamics independently equalize the ground clearance, lowering the front and rear evenly. But the front end now acts as the main link around which the chassis rotates. At Imola I didn't see any sign of a lack of grip at the front end at Turn 7. Everything was great in Miami too. In Monaco, the chassis turned easily at the hairpin and at the exit of turn 10.

The overall center of pressure under the floor and the center of mass of the chassis are now more closely connected and have one common point, around which a more stable balance occurs in all corners.

Your CFD eyes are very strong, lol

Look for photos of previous specifications and compare with the latest iteration. No CFD knowledge is required here. Knowledge of geometry is enough.

Dude, you may have some knowledge, but you are jumping to lots of very certain conclusions off of fairly little here. Even Mclaren themselves seem unsure of exactly why they've improved so much, so ascertaining that you have figured everything out by looking at a picture and a bit of footage is a little much man.

[SmallSoldier]

Your CFD eyes are very strong, lol

Look for photos of previous specifications and compare with the latest iteration. No CFD knowledge is required here. Knowledge of geometry is enough.

Dude, you may have some knowledge, but you are jumping to lots of very certain conclusions off of fairly little here. Even Mclaren themselves seem unsure of exactly why they've improved so much, so ascertaining that you have figured everything out by looking at a picture and a bit of footage is a little much man.

Nah… He can not only deduct movements on CoP based on a picture by simply using Geometry… I’m guessing he can also do volumetric geometry without using a single calculation… And someway somehow determine the stiffness of the suspension based on that too.

Shame on McLaren, they shouldn’t spend Millions in Aerodynamicists, Engineers, CFD tools, Wind Tunnel, etc… It was never about Fluid Dynamics, it was all about finding someone that could look at flows, pressure gradients and suspension dynamics from a picture.

[LionsHeart]

Your CFD eyes are very strong, lol

Look for photos of previous specifications and compare with the latest iteration. No CFD knowledge is required here. Knowledge of geometry is enough.

Dude, you may have some knowledge, but you are jumping to lots of very certain conclusions off of fairly little here. Even Mclaren themselves seem unsure of exactly why they've improved so much, so ascertaining that you have figured everything out by looking at a picture and a bit of footage is a little much man.

All my comments here are just my conclusions. Yes, I'm used to sorting out the technical part. This is much more interesting than talking about liveries. Perhaps the team knows the answer but doesn't want to tell us. Have you thought about it? Having all the telemetry and comments from Lando and Oscar, they should understand what the real reasons are. Be that as it may, this is just my opinion.

[LionsHeart]

Look for photos of previous specifications and compare with the latest iteration. No CFD knowledge is required here. Knowledge of geometry is enough.

Dude, you may have some knowledge, but you are jumping to lots of very certain conclusions off of fairly little here. Even Mclaren themselves seem unsure of exactly why they've improved so much, so ascertaining that you have figured everything out by looking at a picture and a bit of footage is a little much man.

Nah… He can not only deduct movements on CoP based on a picture by simply using Geometry… I’m guessing he can also do volumetric geometry without using a single calculation… And someway somehow determine the stiffness of the suspension based on that too.

Shame on McLaren, they shouldn’t spend Millions in Aerodynamicists, Engineers, CFD tools, Wind Tunnel, etc… It was never about Fluid Dynamics, it was all about finding someone that could look at flows, pressure gradients and suspension dynamics from a picture.

It's very interesting to read your trolling. Come on, keep going.

[bluechris]

I personally read all the team threads simply for the open mind that some people have and what they bring to the table. I am not personal in a position to check what someone says as correct but this is what i love in this forum.
Bottom line is, the people here that bash someone with an opinion, have really know what they say and can they backup that or not?

[Seanspeed]

Look for photos of previous specifications and compare with the latest iteration. No CFD knowledge is required here. Knowledge of geometry is enough.

Dude, you may have some knowledge, but you are jumping to lots of very certain conclusions off of fairly little here. Even Mclaren themselves seem unsure of exactly why they've improved so much, so ascertaining that you have figured everything out by looking at a picture and a bit of footage is a little much man.

All my comments here are just my conclusions. Yes, I'm used to sorting out the technical part. This is much more interesting than talking about liveries. Perhaps the team knows the answer but doesn't want to tell us. Have you thought about it? Having all the telemetry and comments from Lando and Oscar, they should understand what the real reasons are. Be that as it may, this is just my opinion.

Having listened to plenty of genuinely professional aerodynamicists, the level of complete confidence you have in your analysis is the giant red flag that anybody should be able to notice. You say it's just your opinion, but you were making huge conclusions here, not just some "Well perhaps it's doing this or that", you were straight up using one huge conclusion and then leaping off that to make another huge conclusion, til you literally had the the whole thing figured out.

And have I thought about whether Mclaren actually has it all figured out and are just lying, pretending they dont? Yea, I did actually. And my second thought after that was realizing how stupid it would be for F1 engineers to make themselves sound incompetent.

[Seanspeed]

I personally read all the team threads simply for the open mind that some people have and what they bring to the table. I am not personal in a position to check what someone says as correct but this is what i love in this forum.
Bottom line is, the people here that bash someone with an opinion, have really know what they say and can they backup that or not?

See that's the problem. It's very easy to make yourself sound smart on the internet and fool a lot of people into taking you seriously by simply hoping everybody you're talking to doesn't know better.

But here, I dont think that's even necessary. You dont need to be some expert aerodynamicist to know that this person was jumping to huge conclusion after huge conclusion based on some very loose evidence(a picture and some footage). And it might even have been useful speculation if Mclaren themselves weren't saying they themselves dont fully know the extent of why they've improved to the level they have. Yet this random person, based on a picture and some footage, has it all figured out?

I'd be a lot more inclined to be interested in what they have to say if they didn't try and state their analysis so confidently, as if it was just the truth. Had they just worded things to be more speculative, I wouldn't have said anything at all. I have no problem with speculation. That person's post was not just speculation, though. They were making outright conclusions and declarations of what was happening.

[Scorpia]

I’ve been reading this forum for many, many years now. I got no technical knowledge, so I don’t bother to post. But I do enjoy reading all news, updates and so on coming on here. Beeing a fan isn’t easy. Especially not for McLaren the last 12 years. But how fun would it be if everything was easy? Sometimes you lose, sometimes you win. McLaren have been on a very long loosing streak. But since 2019 there has been gains and signs that our beloved team is on the right path. Sure, not straight forward but we have made progress.

Now it’s 2024 and look where we are now. In the mix with red bull and Ferrari.

Why do we still bother bashing each other and the team (when things go bad) instead of listening to each others opinions and thoughts? I’ve seen so many leave this thread over the years because of this negativity. (Some of them are really missed)

I don’t really know what I want to come with this post, more than saying that we should respect each others thoughts. No one of us will ever know better than the team. But without all you die hard fans that has passion for every single detail, this thread would be so boring to read. Just reposts from journalists and so on.

There will be ups, and there will be downs. We will get setup right for many more gps this year, but it’s also a possibility we get things wrong. That doesn’t mean we are on the wrong trail. Just that the team keeps pushing!

Smallsoldier, lionsheat, Emag and mwillems I’ve read your comments for a long time and all of you contribute with much technical info and analyses. If it’s 100% right? I don’t care. As I said befor. The team will always know better. But I do enjoy your contribution to this thread.

Life will always be easier if seeing the cup half full than half empty!


Now let’s look forward to Canadian gp!

[Waz]

I don't remember McLaren saying they don't know why they've improved so much. Stella made a small comment that the on track gains have been slightly more than the simulated data suggests, but that could easily just be a difference in track conditions or favourable temperatures.

Comparing 2 different specifications and making a conclusion based on the expected outcomes is quite different to actually creating those designs in the first place.

It's much more straightforward to look at car behaviour before and after a spec change, and make an educated guess as to what those different specs allow.

[BMMR61]

Commemorating today..... the death of New Zealander Bruce McLaren 54 years ago today. Bruce suffered a crippling disease (Perthes) as a child and spent time strapped in a frame but overcame the physical effects of one leg shorter than the other to become the youngest driver to win a F1 Grand Prix in 1959, his first season. His cars from 1968 set the standard for workmanship and the McLaren brand he founded went on to win 184 GPs. Between Emerson Fittipaldi in 1974 and Lewis Hamilton in 2008 McLaren won 12 drivers and 8 constructors championships. McLaren also built cars which dominated Indianapolis and sports car (CanAm) events.

Bruce McLaren would be proud of the team today which bears his name as well as the high performance supercars which were a dream of his, before tragedy took him from us. He is survived by his daughter Amanda who works for McLaren Group.

"To do something well is so worthwhile that to die trying to do it better cannot be foolhardy. It would be a waste of life to do nothing with one's ability, for I feel that life is measured in achievement, not in years alone."

[mwillems]

I don't remember McLaren saying they don't know why they've improved so much. Stella made a small comment that the on track gains have been slightly more than the simulated data suggests, but that could easily just be a difference in track conditions or favourable temperatures.

Comparing 2 different specifications and making a conclusion based on the expected outcomes is quite different to actually creating those designs in the first place.

It's much more straightforward to look at car behaviour before and after a spec change, and make an educated guess as to what those different specs allow.

The full article.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... /10617803/

Stella thinks that some of the unexpected improvement is likely the result of increased driver confidence allowing Norris and Piastri to push harder, but equally there are some technical elements that he thinks need to be better understood.

...

For us, it’s still an open point as to why the car now seems to be pretty decent in low-speed. And we don’t want to jump to conclusions too early because it’s pretty fundamental that we derive the most precise answer to this question.

“It could be a big opportunity for further development, so we need to understand exactly why the car is now competitive in low-speed.”

But Stella is clear that the issue of the car producing more than expected is not down to a factory/track correlation issue – as its actual downforce gain is on target.

[mwillems]

I personally read all the team threads simply for the open mind that some people have and what they bring to the table. I am not personal in a position to check what someone says as correct but this is what i love in this forum.
Bottom line is, the people here that bash someone with an opinion, have really know what they say and can they backup that or not?

Indeed, most people have the ability to choose how to disseminate posts so it isn't about that, it's just ego. Periodically you get the condescending posts and almost always from people who have said some pretty stupid things themselves, as we are all human.

I tend to give LionsHeart a bit more leeway because he uses a translator and because I know that culturally, away from the Anglosphere, people are generally more blunt or direct, particularly in Russia. I have no way of qualifying his post as right or wrong so I just don't reply to it trying to repudiate it, I just bear it in mind for further down the line as things become clearer.

The thread had got much better than a couple of years ago with a lot less personally directed remarks and more car and team related talk, hopefully it just passes as quickly as it came in the heat of the moment.

Though I won't disagree that the post has a few too many assumptions for my liking and I have no idea how accurate the post is, the idea that moving the pressure "pivot" rearwards so that the front is hindered less in it's lateral movement is an interesting one that I will bear in mind and this idea probably wasn't obvious to everyone. I guess questions I'd think about are if they did do this, how much front downforce would they lose, if any. Would this be compensated by the front wing somewhat?

The pointless discussion that followed will be forgotten as quickly as it should be, especially if everyone just doesn't reply to it from this point on.