Look, so you are saying that in Monza or Baku without that wing they would have been exactly where they were in the race?FittingMechanics wrote:Who says no gain. Don't be making stuff up.dialtone wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:32This position doesn’t make sense.FittingMechanics wrote: Yes obviously but I don't think that the effect is significant. If it was McLaren would be relatively faster in Spa/Monza/Baku compared to other races and that is just not visible.
They designed it on purpose and are awesome for exploiting gray areas, but they did all of this for no gain and thus just spent money to gain nothing.
So are they awesome or what?
I don't think the effect is significant (important, large, or great, esp. in leading to a different result or to an important change). If it was some kind of magic bullet McLaren would dominate those races.
They did gain, they won the race in Bakudialtone wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:32This position doesn’t make sense.FittingMechanics wrote:Yes obviously but I don't think that the effect is significant. If it was McLaren would be relatively faster in Spa/Monza/Baku compared to other races and that is just not visible.
They designed it on purpose and are awesome for exploiting gray areas, but they did all of this for no gain and thus just spent money to gain nothing.
So are they awesome or what?
That is a massive difference, 0.1s in a single straight for 60 laps and you sit 6s behind the winner at best.Darth-Piekus wrote:What Fittings says is that the difference was miniscule. At best 1 tenth in a very long straight. Its not like it was asymmetric braking that gave more than 6 tenths and Red Bull kept it for two years.
Based on? No idea what the benefit was. And tge team aren't making anything for a miniscule difference.Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:36What Fittings says is that the difference was miniscule. At best 1 tenth in a very long straight. Its not like it was asymmetric braking that gave more than 6 tenths and Red Bull kept it for two years.
How do you know that it didn't make a difference in Monza?Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:42And yet the wing didnt really make a difference in Monza so I dont see where the fuss is about. As I said its not like it was something like asymmetric braking or the DAS that gave more than 5 tenths in race time.
It's not insignificant on that alone and even in this low estimate, from someone wanting to downplay it.dialtone wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:38That is a massive difference, 0.1s in a single straight for 60 laps and you sit 6s behind the winner at best.Darth-Piekus wrote:What Fittings says is that the difference was miniscule. At best 1 tenth in a very long straight. Its not like it was asymmetric braking that gave more than 6 tenths and Red Bull kept it for two years.
Calling 0.1s insignificant is not right.
I didn’t read an article and I think they journo said it was worth a tenth on the 2.2km straight in BakuBen1980 wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:43Based on? No idea what the benefit was. And tge team aren't making anything for a miniscule difference.Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑20 Sep 2024, 14:36What Fittings says is that the difference was miniscule. At best 1 tenth in a very long straight. Its not like it was asymmetric braking that gave more than 6 tenths and Red Bull kept it for two years.
Only footage where it seems to be happening is on the low downforce wing used in Spa, Monza and Baku. The effect was much less noticeable in Monza (at 331 kph it barely was deflected). In Baku it seems to be more flexible, maybe due to way wing was run.