Mclaren Mercedes MP4-25

[zgred]

[PlatinumZealot]

Good that you posted that picture zgred. There are some Interesting differences between this and the leading Redbull.

[wesley123]

the diffuser changed once again at mclaren? The central part wasnt on it before, only in the start of 2009. Also it sems the diffuser extends alittle bit higher and wider

[ringo]

"On that last lap I literally got everything that was in the car, there was really nothing left," said Hamilton.

"So clearly the Red Bulls have quite a lot more downforce, specially in the middle sector - they're like half a second faster than me.

"Literally, I touched all the barriers I could touch and used all the road I could use, so I'm happy with my performance."

Mp25 not so good on the street circuit i guess. Could have to do with the increased rideheights required for the bumps, worse when there's no fuel in the car.
I say the car will find the performance when the fuel is in for the start. Maybe then it won't be lagging by that much in the middle sector.

[raymondu999]

Could there be something about the number 44 on Hamilton's helmet? The roulette ball is at 44. Just curious.

Also, I heard somewhere that the MP4-25's diffuser was more prone to stall when at a higher ride height then, say... the RB6's diffuser, meaning they probably had less downforce than they should have

[Halgovern]

Also, I heard somewhere that the MP4-25's diffuser was more prone to stall when at a higher ride height then, say... the RB6's diffuser, meaning they probably had less downforce than they should have

I think that was Mark Hughes on one of the autosport magazines. He was saying that because Mclaren's diffuser is so enormous and complicated, they were having a hard time finding sufficient airflow to feed it. In comparison, red bull's diffuser is much simpler, and less prone to stall.

What he said next, though, was extremely interesting. He said that, his personal opinion as to why Red bull are so fast in qualifying is because the RB6 derives most of its downforce from the upperbody, wings and the overall shape of the car, and that diffuser downforce was not as significant a proportion in total downforce as, say, the MP4-25. So when ride height is artificially increased for qualifying, redbull's total downforce iss less affected than McLaren's. He also says that this could be the reason why the MP4-25 has a faster race-pace, because then the ride height is lower and the diffuser starts working again.

This is Mark Hughes you know - so you've gotta give it some thought

[raymondu999]

Judging from the size of the diffuser (please bear in mind that all I know in terms of technical in Formula 1 is from these forums and technical articles on f1fanatic.co.uk.

I also heard though, that the development of the F10 and the RB6 was more concerned with the airflow around the general chassis as well as the chassis, and this allows the engineers of Ferrari and Red Bull to be able to produce better upgrades to the car's wings and diffusers etc because they understand the airflow so much better, while the McLaren, and the Brawn last year, just had an "ok" chassis and added the double diffuser, and wings, just working on increasing downforce, meaning they actually have much less potential for upgrades.

The Red Bull does seem to get more chassis downforce though doesn't it? while the McLaren seems highly dependent on a diffuser that is quite compromised in qualifying form with a tall ride height at 0 fuel.

I didn't quite get the comment on Mark Hughes though. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

[Halgovern]

ah sorry about that mate, i was just saying that Mark Hughes is an expert writer in F1 technology and he knows heaps about this stuff on characterisitics of particular cars in F1. His opinion on this matter is worth quite a lot.

[autogyro]

I believe the RB has a rear design that is superb. The suspension is at the bottom and to all intent and purpose done away with regarding aero. The coke bottle rear is designed around the best gearbox axle unit I have ever seen and would not look out of place in an art museum. The exhausts exit low down and feed smooth exhaust flow into a small and perfectly designed wing array. The ride height, pitch and roll is also perfectly controlled with a softer and more compliant and drivable suspension based on a far better set up rear pull suspension.

By comparison the McLaren is hauling a rear diffuser and wing array around that looks like a barn door and has a complex rear engine cover that looks like it came from a steam turbine. The drag must be far higher.

[Confused_Andy]

...

The Mclaren also has an extremely tight rear end but it is taller, the fact that its that tight but housing a push rod system is very impressive, if the drag is "far higher" why is the Mclaren universally considered the second fastest car on the grid?

...

[segedunum]

the diffuser changed once again at mclaren? The central part wasnt on it before, only in the start of 2009. Also it sems the diffuser extends alittle bit higher and wider

Expect this diffuser to change multiple times this year, because McLaren have fouled up. The automatic assumption this year from many has been that you would strap the biggest double diffuser on the back of the car which is why many were suprised that Red Bull still had their pull rod rear suspension. However, McLaren's engineers have been shown in no uncertain terms that that assumption is bollocks. It's about managing the airflow into the rear diffuser to make it as efficient as possible. Red Bull have done it, Ferrari have designed with that in mind and Renault have done that. However, it's difficult to see what McLaren can move around at the back of that crowded car to do that. They need to chop the rear off that car and design a new one basically. Mechanically speaking, they clearly had some balance issues with the car in slow corners, and as I'd said many pages back in this thread when I got panned, packaging and balance were going to be the dominant variables.

There are just some McLaren fans who are having a hard time grasping what the shortcomings of this car are that are becoming more apparent as the season progresses. It's not like it's anything new.

[wesley123]

well, as it seems we are going to see anoher brand new car for mclaren next year with the ban of the multideckers. Next year it is going to be as much downforce fron what you can get and a really low CofG. Teams have offered alot of CofG to get an much bigger diffuser, and that is something where the Red bulls have an advantage, an extremely low CofG, wich others lack. For example ferrari with their engine mounting, Renault because of their enormous diffuser etc.

[marcush.]

well, as it seems we are going to see anoher brand new car for mclaren next year with the ban of the multideckers. Next year it is going to be as much downforce fron what you can get and a really low CofG. Teams have offered alot of CofG to get an much bigger diffuser, and that is something where the Red bulls have an advantage, an extremely low CofG, wich others lack. For example ferrari with their engine mounting, Renault because of their enormous diffuser etc.

the key to low CofG is not really parts positioning as low as possible the key is having the lightest car of all wich opens the window of placing ballast .the more ballast you need to add the lower your CofG potentially is.With high nose concept the CofG without ballast for the font half of the car must be at or around hub height ...with now all aluminium uprights and aluminium calipers the advantage of placing the caliper on the bottom of the upright seems to be slim....

[wesley123]

that is true, but placing your light dampers low for example also helps. The pushrod from red bull helps also as it is placed mcuh lower.

But however they manage to do it, CofG will be a big part of the cars succes next year(or a team has to break up from the fota and run kers, F-duct and double deck diffuser lol)

The red bulls ultra low crashbox also increases the downforce from the beam wing. much more efficient either then when you bend it over it.

[raymondu999]

I thought the f-duct and double diffusers were FIA-banned not FOTA-banned?