2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[Farnborough]

I don't feel the tires and how they work is understood here in your comments.

Emphatically, the tires structure were never going to overheat here at this ambient and pressure combination. Any mitigation from team or driver would be to place more load into the tire (whole assembly) through aero and or their actions, not less.

MB aero map had it in spades, and it showed by considerable margin, over everyone else. McL moved themselves behind the three teams that had cars finish in front of them. That's the observable reality.

McL couldn't pull theirs into range with the aero load map they chose to run. That was also compromised by their mid season choice to develop the flex rear wing. That has an affect, and we could see it here.

The driver can, by pushing brake bias forward, load more extremely the front tires to bring heat into them, as needed here.
Making it clear, THERE'S NO SUGGESTION IN MY WRITING THAT SAYS THEY CAN CHANGE AERO MAP FROM STEERING WHEEL loading front tires is completely normal under extreme braking, more so with bias moved in that direction.

If you don't hold a full picture of the tire characteristics, then most debate will lead to nowhere. In which case there's no logical and productive discourse to be had in this topic.

[mwillems]

Just remembering something else, the Monza wing did not flex like Baku. Few wings had that flex built in. Unless evidence can be found that the Monza wing flexed in a Baku style. So I'm not sure that going back to the previous Monza wing will bring any additional balance.

But from previous analysis I think only the one wing flexed in that manner that was used 3 times this year.

Will be interesting to look at the upgrades docs and see how many rear wings have changed since.

[mwillems]

Indeed. Having looked at every car submission document since Baku, there was the introduction of a new medium df rear wing run at Brazil (Baku replacement), but i think was then replaced later by a higher DF wing because of the weather. The wing has not been run since and no other updates have been brought because the other wings did not require this change.

Flexi wing has bugger all to do with any races since Baku except the Brazil sprint, because every other wing weve ran since baku also ran previously.

This was the replacement for Mclarens only flexiwing:



Baku spec wing is too high DF, even with flexing, for Vegas, same reason it wasn't run at Monza.

Please, let's stop the tin foil theories about flexi wing.

[CjC]

Im hoping to see this Brazil wing in Abu Dhabi (unless it’s total downforce is too low)

[mwillems]

I don't feel the tires and how they work is understood here in your comments.

Emphatically, the tires structure were never going to overheat here at this ambient and pressure combination. Any mitigation from team or driver would be to place more load into the tire (whole assembly) through aero and or their actions, not less.

MB aero map had it in spades, and it showed by considerable margin, over everyone else. McL moved themselves behind the three teams that had cars finish in front of them. That's the observable reality.

McL couldn't pull theirs into range with the aero load map they chose to run. That was also compromised by their mid season choice to develop the flex rear wing. That has an affect, and we could see it here.

The driver can, by pushing brake bias forward, load more extremely the front tires to bring heat into them, as needed here.
Making it clear, THERE'S NO SUGGESTION IN MY WRITING THAT SAYS THEY CAN CHANGE AERO MAP FROM STEERING WHEEL loading front tires is completely normal under extreme braking, more so with bias moved in that direction.

If you don't hold a full picture of the tire characteristics, then most debate will lead to nowhere. In which case there's no logical and productive discourse to be had in this topic.

"The gaps here had nothing to do with the wing, IMO, and everything about mechanical traction, partially down to how we could get the car to interact with the tyres."

Interaction with the tires is pure load, from the wings and floor. Take any away from that total and it'll get harder, choices less, driver confidence diminished, etc. Graining increased and so forth. It's there in plain sight.

Stella even confirmed this in his words of "Extreme set up shift from drivers steering wheel controls" or words to that effect. Those to counter load missing from the setup they chose to Q and race with.

1) In this conversation about whether the flexi wing has hindered the Mclaren at Vegas, no new wing, no reinforced wing, has run at Vegas, both wings here are old spec wings that were at Monza
2) You yourself have stated that all the load into the tyres comes from aero and I have quoted this again above.

I know that changing the settings can get more heat into the tyres. Mechanical changes can affect how much load goes into the different tyres under braking. I may not be technically minded, but this is what I am explaining. but it is not the point, I was just trying to debunk the idea that the issues were aero related and whilst your replies have slowly creeped away from this, this was the only point I was debunking.

There was no new wing run here, flexi wings had nothing to do with it and the car ran as fast as the fastest cars in front once mechanical changes had occurred. Pointing the fingers at flexi wings or aero is simply way wide of the mark.

As to whether there was an increase in aero load due to the changes or the car was just handling differently, ultimately we won't know. it's more likely to be the latter, at least in the majority. The Mclaren was fast at Vegas, they just didn't know how to get the speed until it was too late.

Edit: Hang on, I never said overheating you've just put that word into my mouth, I said kinder to the front tyres. This may mean they are doing less work at certain areas of the braking phase and more work at others, or getting the front more inclined to turn in without fuss ,as well as how the driver is handling the car, so that the tyres are less likely to grain from the corner entries and braking zones.

[organic]

If they still had the flexi Spa/Monza/Baku wing they would've used that at Vegas though, and that higher DF wing likely would've allowed them to energise the tyres better and been more competitive. But it isn't allowed anymore so that has hurt them

[mwillems]

If they still had the Flexi Monza wing they would've used that at Vegas though, and that higher DF wing likely would've allowed them to energise the tyres better and been more competitive

All the wings flex. Only the Baku one merited attention to change, so far. The Monza wing was brought to Vegas as is mentioned on Mclarens Team Stream

Andrew Jarvis
November 22nd, 2024 02:23
The other issue here is that we have long straights, and low downforce, so we must decide what the correct rear wing to use is. We’ve got two options here: a low and an ultra-low downforce version. We have a slight preference for one over the other, but they’re really close and it’s quite likely we’ll take a look at both.


These wings are:
the new wing not run at Monza but run here, and the very same wing that was always speculated to run at Vegas, designed before the flexi wing saga...
And the Monza wing, because no other new wings have been declared, so that low DF wing can only be the Monza wing.

[organic]

If they still had the Flexi Monza wing they would've used that at Vegas though, and that higher DF wing likely would've allowed them to energise the tyres better and been more competitive

All the wings flex. Only the Baku one merited attention to change, so far. I believe that the Monza wing was brought to Vegas.

I'm pretty sure McLaren said they made changes to multiple wings when the FIA asked

We have made minor adjustments to all our rear wings since Baku to varying extents to ensure no further issues in this area."

What I'm saying is that if the "low" downforce spa/Baku wing were still available with its previous downforce/drag tradeoff then they'd have run it in Vegas.

[mwillems]

If they still had the Flexi Monza wing they would've used that at Vegas though, and that higher DF wing likely would've allowed them to energise the tyres better and been more competitive

All the wings flex. Only the Baku one merited attention to change, so far. I believe that the Monza wing was brought to Vegas.

I'm pretty sure McLaren said they made changes to multiple wings when the FIA asked

We have made minor adjustments to all our rear wings since Baku to varying extents to ensure no further issues in this area."

What I'm saying is that if the "low" downforce spa/Baku wing were still available with its previous downforce/drag tradeoff then they'd have run it in Vegas.

Nothing new on the design documents however.

[mwillems]

If they still had the Flexi Monza wing they would've used that at Vegas though, and that higher DF wing likely would've allowed them to energise the tyres better and been more competitive

All the wings flex. Only the Baku one merited attention to change, so far. I believe that the Monza wing was brought to Vegas.

I'm pretty sure McLaren said they made changes to multiple wings when the FIA asked

We have made minor adjustments to all our rear wings since Baku to varying extents to ensure no further issues in this area."

What I'm saying is that if the "low" downforce spa/Baku wing were still available with its previous downforce/drag tradeoff then they'd have run it in Vegas.

If they didn't run it at Monza, they wouldn't run it at Vegas, I don't think. As I say, this wing was always coming to Vegas as Mclaren stated at Monza. it's also so tiny that flexi wing is going to do very little here. It's like saying if wear only a belt, but double the size of the belt to 4 inches, it will keep your legs warm

[organic]

All the wings flex. Only the Baku one merited attention to change, so far. I believe that the Monza wing was brought to Vegas.

I'm pretty sure McLaren said they made changes to multiple wings when the FIA asked

We have made minor adjustments to all our rear wings since Baku to varying extents to ensure no further issues in this area."

What I'm saying is that if the "low" downforce spa/Baku wing were still available with its previous downforce/drag tradeoff then they'd have run it in Vegas.

If they didn't run it at Monza, they wouldn't run it at Vegas, I don't think. As I say, this wing was always coming to Vegas as Mclaren stated at Monza. it's also so tiny that flexi wing is going to do very little here.

I don't understand. McLaren used the same wing in the grand Prix at Baku and Monza, no? This is the "low" downforce wing used at spa, Baku and Monza I believe

Baku

Italy



And this (below) is the "very low" brought at Monza but not used there in competitive sessions and raced at Vegas.



The entire wing assembly of the Baku wing rotated backwards, not only a slot gap opening. I don't agree that a slimmer DRS flap means that the flexi-wing is significantly less potent.

But I was just chiming in that with the flexi-wing trick still available the Baku wing would've been an easy choice for Vegas considering the graining issues and already running it at Monza

[mwillems]

You're right that the Monza wing was the Baku wing, my mistake. None the less, I'll say I doubt that wing would run here anyway.

But even so, flexi wing was not the reason we were 7 tenths off in Qualifying with the benefit of DRS. With the team able to mechanically bring the car to the pace of the front runners in the race then, again, this demonstrates that the struggles at Vegas were not to do with Flexi wing. This whole conversation came from the fact that Mclaren were blaming this in the conditions. Reality was, it was their poor setup.

Out of interest, has it been published anywhere the data or evidence that demonstrates the impact Flexi Wing saga has had on Mclaren? It does seem to be very much the trend to need to show flexi wing didn't have an impact, rather than show that it did.

Incidentally, the reason I mention flexi wings at three races is because I believe previously it was demonstrated only to be flexing excessively at three races by onboards posted on this site, whilst there may have been minor strengthening, I maintain that Baku was the only wing really affected. Was it Vanja who posted footage and only one wing that Mclaren had used 3 times in total at Baku had the mini DRS..?

Also

"We issued after Singapore some communication about rear wings, saying what we would consider acceptable or not acceptable," explained Tombazis. "Two or three teams had to make some small tweaks to adjust to that."

It is not confirmed which other teams had to make changes as a response to the FIA guidance, but sources suggest that all of 2024's race-winning outfits have been under the spotlight for potentially pushing the limit of the rules with regard to rear wing flexing.

[mwillems]

It was Hollus and I did point out at the time it was the Monza wing, my brain skipped this.

Looking at past races onboards... there isn't rear facing footage for both drivers at every race. Where there is footage:
Whatever is going on with this DRS edge lift, it was already there (looks like with a smaller movement) in Monza in Piastri's car, but it does not seem to have been there, also for Piastri, in Zandvoort.
Norris had a bit of it in Spa.
Piastri did not have it in Hungary. Norris didn't either in Hungary.
Norris didn't have it in Silverstone.
Norris had a minusculous amount of it in Austria.
Piastri did not have it in Spain.
It was either absent on miniscule for Piastri in Miami.
Norris didn't have it in Jeddah.

So either this a relatively new development, or it correlates with very low load wings.

The wing at Baku was the Spa and Monza wing, so your observations seem to align correctly with and confine any real flex to this wing.

But it's worth noting that that wing is used on tracks with very high speed and long straights, which will also be part of the reason for flex.

The rigidity/thickness of the different wings may not be that different but the forces they expect to receive are. Seems like quite a cute design.

Unless it can be demonstrated otherwise, I can see the only real change being the Baku wing, which isn't the answer to Mclarens relative drop in pace recently, which has only been at Brazil and Vegas. One was soaking wet where we otherwise dominated and the other extreme cold in comparison to the rest of the season

The team demonstrates they could fix the issue through setup, yet still the willingness dive onto flexi wings as the source of the issue. And this was inevitable if we had any kind of poor performance here.

[organic]

You're right that the Monza wing was the Baku wing, my mistake. None the less, I'll say I doubt that wing would run here anyway.

But even so, flexi wing was not the reason we were 7 tenths off in Qualifying with the benefit of DRS. With the team able to mechanically bring the car to the pace of the front runners in the race then, again, this demonstrates that the struggles at Vegas were not to do with Flexi wing. This whole conversation came from the fact that Mclaren were blaming this in the conditions. Reality was, it was their poor setup.

Out of interest, has it been published anywhere the data or evidence that demonstrates the impact Flexi Wing saga has had on Mclaren? It does seem to be very much the trend to need to show flexi wing didn't have an impact, rather than show that it did.

Incidentally, the reason I mention flexi wings at three races is because I believe previously it was demonstrated only to be flexing excessively at three races by onboards posted on this site, whilst there may have been minor strengthening, I maintain that Baku was the only wing really affected. Was it Vanja who posted footage and only one wing that Mclaren had used 3 times in total at Baku had the mini DRS..?

Also

"We issued after Singapore some communication about rear wings, saying what we would consider acceptable or not acceptable," explained Tombazis. "Two or three teams had to make some small tweaks to adjust to that."

It is not confirmed which other teams had to make changes as a response to the FIA guidance, but sources suggest that all of 2024's race-winning outfits have been under the spotlight for potentially pushing the limit of the rules with regard to rear wing flexing.

The issues McLaren and Ferrari suffered with were related to not having enough load, and the team said themselves at Vegas they were between two wings already - the low and very low load. With the flexible spa/Monza/Baku wing they would've been efficient enough with sufficient load to energise the tyres, enabling a whole different setup window. But without the flexible aspect it pushed them towards lower loads and they suffered with graining horribly

Quite a few weekends in a row where McLaren don't nail their setup lining up well with the loss of their Flexi wings..

[mwillems]

You're right that the Monza wing was the Baku wing, my mistake. None the less, I'll say I doubt that wing would run here anyway.

But even so, flexi wing was not the reason we were 7 tenths off in Qualifying with the benefit of DRS. With the team able to mechanically bring the car to the pace of the front runners in the race then, again, this demonstrates that the struggles at Vegas were not to do with Flexi wing. This whole conversation came from the fact that Mclaren were blaming this in the conditions. Reality was, it was their poor setup.

Out of interest, has it been published anywhere the data or evidence that demonstrates the impact Flexi Wing saga has had on Mclaren? It does seem to be very much the trend to need to show flexi wing didn't have an impact, rather than show that it did.

Incidentally, the reason I mention flexi wings at three races is because I believe previously it was demonstrated only to be flexing excessively at three races by onboards posted on this site, whilst there may have been minor strengthening, I maintain that Baku was the only wing really affected. Was it Vanja who posted footage and only one wing that Mclaren had used 3 times in total at Baku had the mini DRS..?

Also

"We issued after Singapore some communication about rear wings, saying what we would consider acceptable or not acceptable," explained Tombazis. "Two or three teams had to make some small tweaks to adjust to that."

It is not confirmed which other teams had to make changes as a response to the FIA guidance, but sources suggest that all of 2024's race-winning outfits have been under the spotlight for potentially pushing the limit of the rules with regard to rear wing flexing.

The issues McLaren and Ferrari suffered with were related to not having enough load, and the team said themselves at Vegas they were between two wings already - the low and very low load. With the flexible spa/Monza/Baku wing they would've been efficient enough with sufficient load to energise the tyres, enabling a whole different setup window. But without the flexible aspect it pushed them towards lower loads and they suffered with graining horribly

Quite a few weekends in a row where McLaren don't nail their setup lining up well with the loss of their Flexi wings..

They dominated Brazil until they messed up the race, looked great in the US and had pole, screwed it on the first lap, again, qualified 3rd and finished second in Mexico.

I can't see a pace issue, i see two races where driver and team screwed themselves yet again and one good finish.

Vegas has, as far as I can see, been the only race since the melodrama where we've not been on it. But even then, it was demonstrated we can match the pace with the wings we had.