2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[mwillems]

https://postimg.cc/zyvbZ6GX

If Red Bulls have bigger wings, why do they lose more at the apex of corners? Or is their chassis not the best in slow corners? Somehow I missed that point.

I think not all is as it seems at Red Bull.

Do you know what beam Wing they and we are running?
They don't look draggy on any straight and they don't look fast in corners, so the data suggests that they have less drag and we have more DF. I can see they have a big rear wing, but something else is at play on the car that offsets this somewhat.

You can see on Max' laps that top speed was the same everywhere except from where he had a tow and gained .08 on his previous fastest lap. Actually that puts to bed the discussion about whether he gained a tenth or more.

Lando gained .047 on the straight over his previous lap.

I suggested Lando had made a mistake at the last turn. Actually, He was the same speed here each lap. This is just where Red Bull are much faster.

[LionsHeart]

From a personal standpoint, it's hard for me to claim McLaren has the outright best car, when they fall off at certain conditions. As I mentioned before, in Imola the first stint was not good. Canada as well, the dry stint was not good on pure pace, with Mercedes and Max being the obvious faster car. And here, I was quite happy after qualifying, but then Lando said the car was nervous on the high speed and we has leaving time on the table all weekend playing it safe. It took him going all out to barely pip Max. It could have gone wrong, and the vibe here would be quite a bit different, with people probably blaming Lando for fumbling it again on Q3.

Then on the other side, you look at Max and he is comfortable pushing the limits all the way through. It just makes me think that he will perhaps be able to get laptime easier and more consistently tomorrow in the race. But also, as I said, I would love it to be wrong.

Your position is somewhat one-sided. In that case, I would say that Max's pace in the second stint was worse than Lando's in Imola. In Montreal, in the rain, Lando was faster, but he saved his tires, and then in the drying conditions he drove faster.

Unless you look at it from that perspective, you can say that Red Bull is faster and McLaren is slower. You have to look at the whole picture, not just pick out individual things.

But I can't pick out those, because they were not relevant for the whole race result. Max was slow on the second stint, but only towards the end. And how much can you attribute that to McLaren being better on the hard tires and how much was it RedBull not optimizing their car?

In Canada, Lando was quickest in the most quirkiest and unrepresentative of true pace track conditions. He simply took care of the intermediates better than the others and he could push it more at the end when track was drying. And also, people forget to mention McLaren actually started the race with more front wing downforce, something the others were able to fix only after the first round of pitstops (which could explain why the pace advantage disappeared on the second intermediate stint).

I would absolutely take those points into consideration, if they were the deciding factor on giving a race win to McLaren. But they weren't. The weak moments were more relevant for the final race results.

How is that in atypical conditions? You just take part of the race out of the equation? It's strange to me. But all the drivers were struggling with the car at that time, making mistakes. Some more, some less, but everyone made mistakes. But this is pure piloting and concentration, the ability to feel the car in slippery conditions.

Wing angle, tyre pressure and other factors are what teams focus on. I remind you that in 2011 McLaren did poorly in qualifying because they were set up for a rain race. It could be the same here. Just take the whole race distance into account. I think that would be fair. Otherwise, I can agree with you.

[Emag]

Your position is somewhat one-sided. In that case, I would say that Max's pace in the second stint was worse than Lando's in Imola. In Montreal, in the rain, Lando was faster, but he saved his tires, and then in the drying conditions he drove faster.

Unless you look at it from that perspective, you can say that Red Bull is faster and McLaren is slower. You have to look at the whole picture, not just pick out individual things.

But I can't pick out those, because they were not relevant for the whole race result. Max was slow on the second stint, but only towards the end. And how much can you attribute that to McLaren being better on the hard tires and how much was it RedBull not optimizing their car?

In Canada, Lando was quickest in the most quirkiest and unrepresentative of true pace track conditions. He simply took care of the intermediates better than the others and he could push it more at the end when track was drying. And also, people forget to mention McLaren actually started the race with more front wing downforce, something the others were able to fix only after the first round of pitstops (which could explain why the pace advantage disappeared on the second intermediate stint).

I would absolutely take those points into consideration, if they were the deciding factor on giving a race win to McLaren. But they weren't. The weak moments were more relevant for the final race results.

How is that in atypical conditions? You just take part of the race out of the equation? It's strange to me. But all the drivers were struggling with the car at that time, making mistakes. Some more, some less, but everyone made mistakes. But this is pure piloting and concentration, the ability to feel the car in slippery conditions.

Wing angle, tyre pressure and other factors are what teams focus on. I remind you that in 2011 McLaren did poorly in qualifying because they were set up for a rain race. It could be the same here. Just take the whole race distance into account. I think that would be fair. Otherwise, I can agree with you.

Because drying conditions on a semi-wet track is far from being representative of the true potential of a car.

As a reminder, Lando was the fastest driver on track by a significant margin last year in Monaco after the rain hit the track. And that was on the MCL60 which hadn't received any of the big upgrades. Pace on a wet or semi-wet drying track tells you nothing about the true pace of the car more so than it does about driver ability to make the most out of the conditions.

[LionsHeart]

https://postimg.cc/zyvbZ6GX

If Red Bulls have bigger wings, why do they lose more at the apex of corners? Or is their chassis not the best in slow corners? Somehow I missed that point.

I think not all is as it seems at Red Bull.

Do you know what beam Wing they and we are running?
They don't look draggy on any straight and they don't look fast in corners, so the data suggests that they have less drag and we have more DF. I can see they have a big rear wing, but something else is at play on the car that offsets this somewhat.

You can see on Max' laps that top speed was the same everywhere except from where he had a tow and gained .08 on his previous fastest lap. Actually that puts to bed the discussion about whether he gained a tenth or more.

Lando gained .047 on the straight over his previous lap.

I just looked at the rear wing and it's comparable to ours. In general, of course. I didn't measure them with a ruler myself. And I didn't pay any attention to the Red Bull beam wing, to be honest.

It's amazing to see McLaren so strong in slow corners. Usually Red Bulls are strong here too. It would be nice to see Ferrari too. Where are they losing time anyway.

[mwillems]

If Red Bulls have bigger wings, why do they lose more at the apex of corners? Or is their chassis not the best in slow corners? Somehow I missed that point.

I think not all is as it seems at Red Bull.

Do you know what beam Wing they and we are running?
They don't look draggy on any straight and they don't look fast in corners, so the data suggests that they have less drag and we have more DF. I can see they have a big rear wing, but something else is at play on the car that offsets this somewhat.

You can see on Max' laps that top speed was the same everywhere except from where he had a tow and gained .08 on his previous fastest lap. Actually that puts to bed the discussion about whether he gained a tenth or more.

Lando gained .047 on the straight over his previous lap.

I just looked at the rear wing and it's comparable to ours. In general, of course. I didn't measure them with a ruler myself. And I didn't pay any attention to the Red Bull beam wing, to be honest.

It's amazing to see McLaren so strong in slow corners. Usually Red Bulls are strong here too. It would be nice to see Ferrari too. Where are they losing time anyway.

Personally I don't think they are carrying much more wing than us. but there is also the beam wing and other set ups like tyre pressures, camber, ride height, suspension stiffness etc that determine corner entry and exit abilities, drive on the straights etc

My view is that we have a better car on the parts of the track where the tyres are going to be pushed and hopefully we will do well on deg tomorrow.

There isn't a place on the track where the Red Bull is faster than us on merit except the final corner.

[LionsHeart]

But I can't pick out those, because they were not relevant for the whole race result. Max was slow on the second stint, but only towards the end. And how much can you attribute that to McLaren being better on the hard tires and how much was it RedBull not optimizing their car?

In Canada, Lando was quickest in the most quirkiest and unrepresentative of true pace track conditions. He simply took care of the intermediates better than the others and he could push it more at the end when track was drying. And also, people forget to mention McLaren actually started the race with more front wing downforce, something the others were able to fix only after the first round of pitstops (which could explain why the pace advantage disappeared on the second intermediate stint).

I would absolutely take those points into consideration, if they were the deciding factor on giving a race win to McLaren. But they weren't. The weak moments were more relevant for the final race results.

How is that in atypical conditions? You just take part of the race out of the equation? It's strange to me. But all the drivers were struggling with the car at that time, making mistakes. Some more, some less, but everyone made mistakes. But this is pure piloting and concentration, the ability to feel the car in slippery conditions.

Wing angle, tyre pressure and other factors are what teams focus on. I remind you that in 2011 McLaren did poorly in qualifying because they were set up for a rain race. It could be the same here. Just take the whole race distance into account. I think that would be fair. Otherwise, I can agree with you.

Because drying conditions on a semi-wet track is far from being representative of the true potential of a car.

As a reminder, Lando was the fastest driver on track by a significant margin last year in Monaco after the rain hit the track. And that was on the MCL60 which hadn't received any of the big upgrades. Pace on a wet or semi-wet drying track tells you nothing about the true pace of the car more so than it does about driver ability to make the most out of the conditions.

Yes, I agree with that. No questions asked.
But it is a bit wrong to take into account some sections and turn a blind eye to others. After all, the race was divided into sections separated by a safety car.

You remember, I don’t like analyzing the average pace in a race, because it also doesn’t reflect the true essence. And I have already given an example before. For example, those graphs don’t take into account the number of pit stops, and they affect the average pace. And if you take into account the time at the finish, then all the pit stops will be included. It seems to be more fair here.

I can repeat my position. I still don’t think that McLaren is the fastest. But it has been consistently in the top 2 in the last five races. And this is already an indicator, since all this was on different tracks with different configurations, with a different number of slow, medium-speed and fast corners.

McLaren is now about where it was in the 2010-2012 seasons. And that's pretty much what I expected after the pre-season tests. On that side, I'm already happy with where the team is. On the other side, the team is aiming higher and wants to win here and now. Maybe they feel the time has come.

[LionsHeart]

I think not all is as it seems at Red Bull.

Do you know what beam Wing they and we are running?
They don't look draggy on any straight and they don't look fast in corners, so the data suggests that they have less drag and we have more DF. I can see they have a big rear wing, but something else is at play on the car that offsets this somewhat.

You can see on Max' laps that top speed was the same everywhere except from where he had a tow and gained .08 on his previous fastest lap. Actually that puts to bed the discussion about whether he gained a tenth or more.

Lando gained .047 on the straight over his previous lap.

I just looked at the rear wing and it's comparable to ours. In general, of course. I didn't measure them with a ruler myself. And I didn't pay any attention to the Red Bull beam wing, to be honest.

It's amazing to see McLaren so strong in slow corners. Usually Red Bulls are strong here too. It would be nice to see Ferrari too. Where are they losing time anyway.

Personally I don't think they are carrying much more wing than us. but there is also the beam wing and other set ups like tyre pressures, camber etc that determine corner entry and exit abilities, drive on the straights etc

My view is that we have a better car on the parts of the track where the tyres are going to be pushed and hopefully we will do well on deg tomorrow.

There isn't a place on the track where the Red Bull is faster than us on merit except the final corner.

There is one point I would like to highlight. Full tanks in the slow long corners. There is a possibility that we will lose in relation to Red Bull there. And these are exactly 10 and 12 turns. So the victory is not yet guaranteed. Tomorrow Lando will have to give everything and have luck in his hands to beat Max at the finish.

[Emag]

How is that in atypical conditions? You just take part of the race out of the equation? It's strange to me. But all the drivers were struggling with the car at that time, making mistakes. Some more, some less, but everyone made mistakes. But this is pure piloting and concentration, the ability to feel the car in slippery conditions.

Wing angle, tyre pressure and other factors are what teams focus on. I remind you that in 2011 McLaren did poorly in qualifying because they were set up for a rain race. It could be the same here. Just take the whole race distance into account. I think that would be fair. Otherwise, I can agree with you.

Because drying conditions on a semi-wet track is far from being representative of the true potential of a car.

As a reminder, Lando was the fastest driver on track by a significant margin last year in Monaco after the rain hit the track. And that was on the MCL60 which hadn't received any of the big upgrades. Pace on a wet or semi-wet drying track tells you nothing about the true pace of the car more so than it does about driver ability to make the most out of the conditions.

Yes, I agree with that. No questions asked.
But it is a bit wrong to take into account some sections and turn a blind eye to others. After all, the race was divided into sections separated by a safety car.

You remember, I don’t like analyzing the average pace in a race, because it also doesn’t reflect the true essence. And I have already given an example before. For example, those graphs don’t take into account the number of pit stops, and they affect the average pace. And if you take into account the time at the finish, then all the pit stops will be included. It seems to be more fair here.

I can repeat my position. I still don’t think that McLaren is the fastest. But it has been consistently in the top 2 in the last five races. And this is already an indicator, since all this was on different tracks with different configurations, with a different number of slow, medium-speed and fast corners.

McLaren is now about where it was in the 2010-2012 seasons. And that's pretty much what I expected after the pre-season tests. On that side, I'm already happy with where the team is. On the other side, the team is aiming higher and wants to win here and now. Maybe they feel the time has come.

Then we are on the same boat. I don't know why people attack the notion of McLaren not having the outright fastest car. I always get confronted when I point that out. It's very quickly become the norm for people to expect them to be on pole and fight for wins. A year back and before that, we were happy to have both cars in Q3. Mindblowing progress and they're performing at a much higher level than should be normally expected of even the already affirmed "top" F1 teams.

Remember, even Ferrari needed 2 burner years to get back to winning races after getting slapped back in 2020. It's very impressive what McLaren has done, and them not having the fastest car does not change that.

[LionsHeart]

Mwillems, as you said earlier.

Precipitation is possible on Sunday. However, it will mostly affect fans and drivers of youth series, and by 11 am the rain will subside.
Drivers should go on a warm-up lap at 15:00 local time. By this time, the air will warm up to 22C with a cloudy sky and a gusty south-east wind. The probability of precipitation during the race is currently estimated at 12%.

[LionsHeart]

Because drying conditions on a semi-wet track is far from being representative of the true potential of a car.

As a reminder, Lando was the fastest driver on track by a significant margin last year in Monaco after the rain hit the track. And that was on the MCL60 which hadn't received any of the big upgrades. Pace on a wet or semi-wet drying track tells you nothing about the true pace of the car more so than it does about driver ability to make the most out of the conditions.

Yes, I agree with that. No questions asked.
But it is a bit wrong to take into account some sections and turn a blind eye to others. After all, the race was divided into sections separated by a safety car.

You remember, I don’t like analyzing the average pace in a race, because it also doesn’t reflect the true essence. And I have already given an example before. For example, those graphs don’t take into account the number of pit stops, and they affect the average pace. And if you take into account the time at the finish, then all the pit stops will be included. It seems to be more fair here.

I can repeat my position. I still don’t think that McLaren is the fastest. But it has been consistently in the top 2 in the last five races. And this is already an indicator, since all this was on different tracks with different configurations, with a different number of slow, medium-speed and fast corners.

McLaren is now about where it was in the 2010-2012 seasons. And that's pretty much what I expected after the pre-season tests. On that side, I'm already happy with where the team is. On the other side, the team is aiming higher and wants to win here and now. Maybe they feel the time has come.

Then we are on the same boat. I don't know why people attack the notion of McLaren not having the outright fastest car. I always get confronted when I point that out. It's very quickly become the norm for people to expect them to be on pole and fight for wins. A year back and before that, we were happy to have both cars in Q3. Mindblowing progress and they're performing at a much higher level than should be normally expected of even the already affirmed "top" F1 teams.

Remember, even Ferrari needed 2 burner years to get back to winning races after getting slapped back in 2020. It's very impressive what McLaren has done, and them not having the fastest car does not change that.

Well, that's a good point. I understand that any victory for McLaren will be won by a hair's breadth or due to certain conditions. Maybe even external factors.

And that's why I don't want to make predictions after Imola. The density of results has increased many times over. And that surprises and impresses me at the same time. Every little thing matters now. This is not the case when Red Bull or Mercedes from the recent past had the fastest car and instantly drove away from the entire peloton. When I remember Bahrain 2014, I feel sick.

[mwillems]

I just looked at the rear wing and it's comparable to ours. In general, of course. I didn't measure them with a ruler myself. And I didn't pay any attention to the Red Bull beam wing, to be honest.

It's amazing to see McLaren so strong in slow corners. Usually Red Bulls are strong here too. It would be nice to see Ferrari too. Where are they losing time anyway.

Personally I don't think they are carrying much more wing than us. but there is also the beam wing and other set ups like tyre pressures, camber etc that determine corner entry and exit abilities, drive on the straights etc

My view is that we have a better car on the parts of the track where the tyres are going to be pushed and hopefully we will do well on deg tomorrow.

There isn't a place on the track where the Red Bull is faster than us on merit except the final corner.

There is one point I would like to highlight. Full tanks in the slow long corners. There is a possibility that we will lose in relation to Red Bull there. And these are exactly 10 and 12 turns. So the victory is not yet guaranteed. Tomorrow Lando will have to give everything and have luck in his hands to beat Max at the finish.

I should caveat that I'm just talking about Qualy, I'm not suggesting we are a certainty for the win, I don't want that suggestion pinned on to me

Full tank, a damp or green track, wind direction, these things can change it all.

Still, we'd have to be favourites at this point, right...?

[the EDGE]

I think the starts going to be the hardest. It’s a long run to turn 1, and RB are quick in a straight line

What’s more, Lando’s biggest strength recently has been the way in which he bring’s in the tyres. He’s going to be under big pressure at the start, the 2 biggest names in F1 are breathing down his neck. Lando will not have the luxury of managing his tyres early in the stint tomorrow

If he can survive the 1st lap, he can win the race

[LionsHeart]

Personally I don't think they are carrying much more wing than us. but there is also the beam wing and other set ups like tyre pressures, camber etc that determine corner entry and exit abilities, drive on the straights etc

My view is that we have a better car on the parts of the track where the tyres are going to be pushed and hopefully we will do well on deg tomorrow.

There isn't a place on the track where the Red Bull is faster than us on merit except the final corner.

There is one point I would like to highlight. Full tanks in the slow long corners. There is a possibility that we will lose in relation to Red Bull there. And these are exactly 10 and 12 turns. So the victory is not yet guaranteed. Tomorrow Lando will have to give everything and have luck in his hands to beat Max at the finish.

I should caveat that I'm just talking about Qualy, I'm not suggesting we are a certainty for the win, I don't want that suggestion pinned on to me

Full tank, a damp or green track, wind direction, these things can change it all.

Still, we'd have to be favourites at this point, right...?

Maybe I don’t know.

I could write a couple of sentences why Lando or Max should win. So to speak, highlight their strengths. But I'd rather not. The race will be as it will be. And I don't want to predict anything in advance. I just don't want to jinx it. But I'm still very pleased with Lando's lap. The car drove smoothly, as if on an air cushion. Maybe even like on rails. I only watched that lap once.

Lando says that he was confident that pole position was possible. And I didn't think about pole position at all. There was no expectation of pole position, despite stable top 3 in all free practices.

I'll say this, I expected either Max or one of the Ferraris to take pole.

[mwillems]

Can't say I understand the fine differences in the cars now as they continue to confound expectations. Red Bull and the high kerbs of Canada, for instance! They didn't do too badly. Ferrari also loving kerbs, surely they will do well on Montreal! Wrong again.

I may also recall someone saying that Mclaren fans were in for a rude awakening in Spain, but we'll leave that one there as I only mention it in jest

I think some of it can be down to set up and what you are able to get out of the car, the margins are that fine. Which is why I suspect it is much the same here today. It isn't just rear wings being the differences between the cars (RBs does look a little bigger), there is a ton of finely tuned differences in how they want the car to behave for the drivers. These details are driving the cars "traits" as much as anything else now, I think.

I wish they could delay the new regs by another year.

[Mostlyeels]

I think the starts going to be the hardest. It’s a long run to turn 1, and RB are quick in a straight line

What’s more, Lando’s biggest strength recently has been the way in which he bring’s in the tyres. He’s going to be under big pressure at the start, the 2 biggest names in F1 are breathing down his neck. Lando will not have the luxury of managing his tyres early in the stint tomorrow

If he can survive the 1st lap, he can win the race

Max has been nailing the starts recently too, and McLaren has had a couple of bad starts this year from memory. Lando has kept Max behind on at least one SC restart though, in a very calm manner. Tyre deg seems much improved in the car this year, which has opened up strategy (at least on-par).

FWIW someone posted in the race thread the F1.com's side-by-side of Max and Lando's lap, and the difference in turn 1 (braking, throttle, and gear changes) was easier for me to grasp, due to the audio.

Damn shame to see Piastri's second Q3 lap though. Looks like he just carried too much speed into the previous corner, hit the yellow curb, then understeered?