tok-tokkie wrote: ↑16 Feb 2025, 08:51
Vanja #66 wrote: ↑14 Feb 2025, 19:47
FDD wrote: ↑14 Feb 2025, 16:02
If I remember well that kind of geometry is anti anti-dive.
Different aero management/interaction that is for sure, AFAIK and based on many analyses made by You and some other guys on
www.newsf1.it
As far as I know, over 100% anti dive leads to jacking, ie hopping under braking. It's more than bad
However, this would be a very different geometry, as you can see on this illustration, not really what McLaren is doing I think
https://livetodai.com/uploads/default/o ... 1e6d0.jpeg
These diagrams show that by lowering the rear arm of the upper wishbone they are REDUCING the ant-dive. Exactly the opposite of what the commentators are writing.
This is exactly what I and a few others have been trying to make clear to people for a long time. Just as the anti-dive value is ultimately influenced by other things... it's just complete nonsense what is being spread in the media that a low rear leg of the upper wishbone inevitably increases means "more" anti-dive. I also can't understand how people like Gary Anderson, who should actually know something like this, cheer such things on.
But anyway - what McLaren is actually doing here in my opinion, are two things - aerodynamic optimization and better driver feel/confidence. At the limit, especially in duels and under braking, Lando often didn't look good against Verstappen and Max usually came out on top. One reason for this could be a high anti-dive value, which impaired the feeling and feedback to the driver. One solution would be a lower anti-dive value with simultaneous optimization of the aerodynamics.
