Mclaren Mercedes MP4-25

[RobHen]

The central strut has me curious - I don't see how the exhaust is blowing on it any more than anything else around it, so why is it completely foil covered?

just a hunch but the pipe (or whatever it is) may get hot when the air travels down it.

[Giblet]

It's beaMwing.

This is Wing Bean:


The wings previously had a central pillar, but I think the beamwing is a wing thatis supported solely by the endplates, allowing more air and better diffuser reaction.

I just base this on the fact a beam spans two points.

[mx_tifoso]

Could you possibly explain what is ment by the beanwing??? Sorry to be a pain but im not very techno minded....Thanks!

The beamwing is where the Bridgestone decals are on the McLaren. It spans from one side of the wing to another.

[f1rules]

still looking at the pics i cant see any suspension parts closing the gap between beam an top diffuser channel

[Scotracer]

The beam wing gets around the issue of rear wing elements. Whilst it is technically part of the rear wing (i.e. it's load bearing between the wing and mount) it is out of the area that is completely restricted for aero work. The Mclaren solution to mate it up with the beam wing is very saucy indeed

[Sambo]

Ooops sorry typo error....thanks for the definition gilbert!!

This is the section wiith bridgestone on it above the diffusor, right??

[Sambo]

Ahhh spot on thanks guys....

[f1rules]

The beam wing gets around the issue of rear wing elements. Whilst it is technically part of the rear wing (i.e. it's load bearing between the wing and mount) it is out of the area that is completely restricted for aero work. The Mclaren solution to mate it up with the beam wing is very saucy indeed

but thats what i thought was illegal to raise the top diffuser channel so much, that it interacts with the beam wing, i thought the height restrictions of the diffuser were still there

[wesley123]

true, but that counts at the trailing edge, not in the middle if im correct.

[myurr]

The beam wing gets around the issue of rear wing elements. Whilst it is technically part of the rear wing (i.e. it's load bearing between the wing and mount) it is out of the area that is completely restricted for aero work. The Mclaren solution to mate it up with the beam wing is very saucy indeed

but thats what i thought was illegal to raise the top diffuser channel so much, that it interacts with the beam wing, i thought the height restrictions of the diffuser were still there

That was the intention, but in terms of letter of the law the top of the diffuser is in fact the top of the lower channel in the McLaren, and other teams, designs. Hence all the fuss at the beginning of 2009, and the ban for next year. Also this is perhaps one reason that the cars weren't any easier to pass last year as the wake from those coupled wings is huge.

[Sambo]

The beam wing gets around the issue of rear wing elements. Whilst it is technically part of the rear wing (i.e. it's load bearing between the wing and mount) it is out of the area that is completely restricted for aero work. The Mclaren solution to mate it up with the beam wing is very saucy indeed

but thats what i thought was illegal to raise the top diffuser channel so much, that it interacts with the beam wing, i thought the height restrictions of the diffuser were still there

According to the regs the diffusor can be no higher than 175mm, so do mclaren get round this by effectivly raising the central section???

[i70q7m7ghw]

The beam wing gets around the issue of rear wing elements. Whilst it is technically part of the rear wing (i.e. it's load bearing between the wing and mount) it is out of the area that is completely restricted for aero work. The Mclaren solution to mate it up with the beam wing is very saucy indeed

but thats what i thought was illegal to raise the top diffuser channel so much, that it interacts with the beam wing, i thought the height restrictions of the diffuser were still there

The top half isn't diffuser by the rules, it's body work. That's why they could build the second deck. You then have a hole underneath to feed it, but you still need the original diffuser to make sure you can't see the second upper diffuser from underneath, otherwise it would be illegal.... am I right?

[ISLAMATRON]

The central strut has me curious - I don't see how the exhaust is blowing on it any more than anything else around it, so why is it completely foil covered?

The hot air from the engine exhaust are located more centrally on the McLaren than on any other car we've seen thus far... plus there is the fot air coming from the split in the engine cover and also the fact that there is only 1 central wing support rather than the usual two.

[ISLAMATRON]

The beam wing gets around the issue of rear wing elements. Whilst it is technically part of the rear wing (i.e. it's load bearing between the wing and mount) it is out of the area that is completely restricted for aero work. The Mclaren solution to mate it up with the beam wing is very saucy indeed

but thats what i thought was illegal to raise the top diffuser channel so much, that it interacts with the beam wing, i thought the height restrictions of the diffuser were still there

The top half isn't diffuser by the rules, it's body work. That's why they could build the second deck. You then have a hole underneath to feed it, but you still need the original diffuser to make sure you can't see the second upper diffuser from underneath, otherwise it would be illegal.... am I right?

Thats pretty much how I've always seen/understood it

[f1rules]

ah, thanks a lot for the answers