Mclaren Mercedes MP4-25

[Owen.C93]

In the last few races, McLaren have seem to have lost the race pace advantage they saw before. Perhaps they have focused more on qualifying pace and sacrificed some race pace. Or maybe the Blown diffuser gives them big gains in qualifying but their race pace has remained the same. I'm also curious as to whether the blown diffuser requires more fuel for the race. Could perhaps explain it somewhat.

[ringo]

The car just can't deliver all aspects of performance at the same time.
Mclaren are playing a balancing act; sacrificing suspension quality for downforce among other things.
Redbull and Ferrari have it all. The have the best suspension qualities and the best aero qualities, whithout having to make one suffer for the other.

Mclaren's car is just ill shaped. It's not the floor, since the floors are all basically maximized now, and it's not necessarily the rear wing or front wings.

The problem is the suspension, body and hence the diffuser philosophy. Redbull and ferrari clearly have less sensitive diffusers and their suspension is supple yet prevents bottoming.
I don't know how the do it, but both look the same and carry similar front suspension and body shape.

I don't know what they can do to the Mp4 to help it, but i'm hoping it looks completely different for Brazil, becuase if it doesn't, that means it's the same old Mp4 25.
I'm advocating a completely new diffuser desing, suspension stiffness, damping, and new engine cover. Those should help.

[mx_tifoso]

Korea

[kalinka]

I don't see the race pace situation so tragic. I don't think McLaren has a fundamental weakness regarding the car's shape. If you consider their performance in Spa/Monza/Singapore...even Japan where they suffer from multiple issuses ( lack of testing time/gearbox change ), then it was about OK. It's just bad luck that strikes them more than anything else.
The suspension is a real trouble, but hey, they were winnig races, they were leading the championship, and they have a chance still to win it. So if you look at it as a whole, it's not that bad.
What bothers me after Korea is their wet-weather performance. I thougt before that hey have a bog advantage in wet, but it's just dissapeared this time, and I don't know the reason. I hope it was just a bad setup or something specific to Korea. They were so superior in China in wet...and that's gone. Now I don't know what to espect in Brasil. Should we cheer for a rain or no ?

[Halgovern]

I read somewhere ( I think a qoute from Jonathan Neal or someone) that if McLaren wanted to put downforce on its car, they can put buckets of downforce on. But the problem is the car design philosophy, the Mp4-24 is a low-drag, highly efficient car, unlike the Ferrari and the RedBull, which are both high downforce cars. This is why they didn't go for the V-nose like ferrari and redbull, because its a high drag solution for the extra downforce it generates. And obviously this is the reason for the F-duct: high downforce in corners without the resultant drag penalty: so it produces 'efficient' downforce

So if McLaren try and put loads of 'inefficient' downforce, yes, they will be faster through corners but horrendously slow on a straight that their overall performance will be lower. Red Bull and Ferrari can put as much downforce they want, because their cars are designed for a much lower aero-efficiency anyway. This means that for them the extra downforce makes up for the slower straight line speeds, while for the McLaren it doesnt, because they've got so much straight line speed and so little downforce compared to the Bull and the ferrari.

I think this could explain Macca's huge diffuser, because a diffuser is highly efficient: it gives buckets of downforce for very little drag.

Well then, why did McLaren go for a high-efficiency package rather than a high downforce one? seeing that there are more high-downforce races on the calender than low downforce races? I personally think McLaren overestimated the advantage of the F-duct. They've been developing it for 2 years and they knew that it was ridiculously hard to implement on a car which wasn't designed for one (as we saw a lot this year!). And besides, its an aero-dynamisist's dream: high downforce for almost zero drag

Anyway, thats my two cents worth . Hopefully they come up with a high-downforce car for next year.

[forty-two]

Given the amount of muck which the cars were sprayed with during the Korean GP, I wonder if there's any images out there showing the McLaren rear wing, especially the f-duct blowing outlets. Although, now these are located on the main plane, this might be harder to see!

[Owen.C93]

Well Martin Whitmarsh previously said they had an update for Abu Dhabi if they were still in the title hunt, perhaps something clever they don't want to share unless necessary.

But recently they changed their philosophy and he said they were chucking everything on the car to see if it works, so perhaps that's changed the update plans.

[ell66]

Well Martin Whitmarsh previously said they had an update for Abu Dhabi if they were still in the title hunt, perhaps something clever they don't want to share unless necessary.

But recently they changed their philosophy and he said they were chucking everything on the car to see if it works, so perhaps that's changed the update plans.

they aparently have upgrades for brazil.

[LotusF1]

I read somewhere ( I think a qoute from Jonathan Neal or someone) that if McLaren wanted to put downforce on its car, they can put buckets of downforce on. But the problem is the car design philosophy, the Mp4-24 is a low-drag, highly efficient car, unlike the Ferrari and the RedBull, which are both high downforce cars. This is why they didn't go for the V-nose like ferrari and redbull, because its a high drag solution for the extra downforce it generates. And obviously this is the reason for the F-duct: high downforce in corners without the resultant drag penalty: so it produces 'efficient' downforce

So if McLaren try and put loads of 'inefficient' downforce, yes, they will be faster through corners but horrendously slow on a straight that their overall performance will be lower. Red Bull and Ferrari can put as much downforce they want, because their cars are designed for a much lower aero-efficiency anyway. This means that for them the extra downforce makes up for the slower straight line speeds, while for the McLaren it doesnt, because they've got so much straight line speed and so little downforce compared to the Bull and the ferrari.

I think this could explain Macca's huge diffuser, because a diffuser is highly efficient: it gives buckets of downforce for very little drag.

Well then, why did McLaren go for a high-efficiency package rather than a high downforce one? seeing that there are more high-downforce races on the calender than low downforce races? I personally think McLaren overestimated the advantage of the F-duct. They've been developing it for 2 years and they knew that it was ridiculously hard to implement on a car which wasn't designed for one (as we saw a lot this year!). And besides, its an aero-dynamisist's dream: high downforce for almost zero drag

Anyway, thats my two cents worth . Hopefully they come up with a high-downforce car for next year.

These are the posts that make me laugh. Thank you.

[wesley123]

I read somewhere ( I think a qoute from Jonathan Neal or someone) that if McLaren wanted to put downforce on its car, they can put buckets of downforce on. But the problem is the car design philosophy, the Mp4-24 is a low-drag, highly efficient car, unlike the Ferrari and the RedBull, which are both high downforce cars. This is why they didn't go for the V-nose like ferrari and redbull, because its a high drag solution for the extra downforce it generates. And obviously this is the reason for the F-duct: high downforce in corners without the resultant drag penalty: so it produces 'efficient' downforce

An aerodynamicly car is an car that has the highest L/D ratio, thus downforce:drag, you are more likely to achieve an very efficient car with an high downforce car .

So if McLaren try and put loads of 'inefficient' downforce, yes, they will be faster through corners but horrendously slow on a straight that their overall performance will be lower. Red Bull and Ferrari can put as much downforce they want, because their cars are designed for a much lower aero-efficiency anyway. This means that for them the extra downforce makes up for the slower straight line speeds, while for the McLaren it doesnt, because they've got so much straight line speed and so little downforce compared to the Bull and the ferrari.

Ferrari and Red Bull are only 5kp/h behind, so why wont they put df on for this 5kph, then they would gain much more in the corners.

I think this could explain Macca's huge diffuser, because a diffuser is highly efficient: it gives buckets of downforce for very little drag.

Everyone knows that the McLaren diffuser is far from efficient with people even it says it is starving because there isnt enough air to feed the diffuser. also this is just contrasting to what you have said before.

[LotusF1]

I read somewhere ( I think a qoute from Jonathan Neal or someone) that if McLaren wanted to put downforce on its car, they can put buckets of downforce on. But the problem is the car design philosophy, the Mp4-24 is a low-drag, highly efficient car, unlike the Ferrari and the RedBull, which are both high downforce cars. This is why they didn't go for the V-nose like ferrari and redbull, because its a high drag solution for the extra downforce it generates. And obviously this is the reason for the F-duct: high downforce in corners without the resultant drag penalty: so it produces 'efficient' downforce

An aerodynamicly car is an car that has the highest L/D ratio, thus downforce:drag, you are more likely to achieve an very efficient car with an high downforce car .

So if McLaren try and put loads of 'inefficient' downforce, yes, they will be faster through corners but horrendously slow on a straight that their overall performance will be lower. Red Bull and Ferrari can put as much downforce they want, because their cars are designed for a much lower aero-efficiency anyway. This means that for them the extra downforce makes up for the slower straight line speeds, while for the McLaren it doesnt, because they've got so much straight line speed and so little downforce compared to the Bull and the ferrari.

Ferrari and Red Bull are only 5kp/h behind, so why wont they put df on for this 5kph, then they would gain much more in the corners.

I think this could explain Macca's huge diffuser, because a diffuser is highly efficient: it gives buckets of downforce for very little drag.

Everyone knows that the McLaren diffuser is far from efficient with people even it says it is starving because there isnt enough air to feed the diffuser. also this is just contrasting to what you have said before.

I tendo to agree only with your second quote...usually if you increase yourndownforce you increase drag and there is only soooo much you can get from an airfoil to the extent that you get only dray afterwardcs. as for your third quote, well...maybe you work for macca.-

[wesley123]

I wish I would work for them, too bad that I screwed school...

It is something that people say, the very dtiff suspension settings are very much related to the diffuser. McLaren has by far the largest tunnel, and people say that because of its size and build it might be starving as it cannot get enough air(for example, bad shape).

I wouldn't dare to say that the mclaren is lacking that much downforce and aimed more on low drag, I rather think it is an combination of more factors, like their stiff suspension, enormous diffuser etc. The McLaren has one of the best turn ins after all, which is due to their front splitter and impressive front wing.

I can somewhat also imagine balance problems, having the downforce balance way before or aft the weight balance. Seems like the 2 completely different drivers is handicapping them somewhat on the setup, because when Hamilton goes well, button goes bad and oposite too.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Everyone knows that the McLaren diffuser is far from efficient with people even it says it is starving because there isnt enough air to feed the diffuser. also this is just contrasting to what you have said before.

Nobody knows this, everything here is just educated guess.

In all fairness the McLaren is the third fastest car on the grid currently, so all this speculation about how inefficient and how much of a dog the McLaren is must be quite for off the mark.

In my opinion McLaren's main issue this year has been development. It seems the direction they took with the car very early on - no v-nose, intergrated f-duct, etc. - has made it difficult to develop areas like the EBD.

I expect next year's McLaren will probably look more like a Red Bull with double-diffusers being banned as well as the f-duct.

[wesley123]

well, I must agree with that. Their very low sidepod made the EBD already really hard to incorporate, plus that with that there is less of an coke bottle shape available.

[Owen.C93]

McLaren's Diffuser is very much dependent on underbody air flow, which can vary substantially with ride height changes. Other cars, specifically Red-Bull concentrated on more predictable over body air flow to maximise their diffuser, which plays well to an EBD.