Is McLaren really off the pace?

[segedunum]

I take it this is an off-shoot thread then because the evidence just won't go away?

So, the times aren't enough to support McLaren but they are enough to damn them? As is said so often hereabouts, testing is meaningless because we know nothing about the tyres used, fuel loads, test schedules etc. You have just nicely demonstrated this...

No, you demonstrated that with this:

Really? They seemed to be comfortably in the top 10 for the last test. Indeed, Hamilton was P3 at the last test day.

While you can't get anything from a single arbitrary lap time, you can start building a picture once teams start doing longer runs over multiple sessions because then you can compare like more with like - and over time that correllation increases. For example, while Ferrari and Red Bull can hide as much as they like they just can't hide their consistency.

On runs of ten or twenty laps or so that McLaren have done they are quite a way behind the teams who've done the mileage so far, namely Red Bull and Ferrari. On one run Hamilton's times were so erratic the only explanation he could give was that he'd been stuck in traffic. Even more worrying for McLaren is that there have been two tests so far and we haven't seen them do anything close to any kind of race simulation. They just haven't done the mileage.

[raymondu999]

Can they even do a race sim with all those rakes around?

[segedunum]

Red Bull did exactly that last year.

Yes, they did. However, the reason why they didn't do that this year is because they needed the running with the tyres. You can do as much tyre modelling as you like but the only way you can get the data you need is to do the mileage and put the work in to get your car to work with them because the variables are huge. That's where Red Bull and Ferrari are miles ahead.

McLaren said they wanted more time to do more development back at the factory, but the only conclusion you can draw from a lack of spare parts when they've taken that time out is that they're quite a way behind in getting this car working.

They, however, have gone the evolutionary route which (in my opinion) gives them an early advantage of a known and reliable car but less potential for development throughout the season.

I don't understand this. We've had a pretty stable set of regulations, certainly aerodynamically, since 2009. The cars are all evolutionary. Look at the way the RB5 has morphed into versions since then, and even the unsuccessful Ferrari F10 morphed into the F50 and now into the F150. The teams who are confident in what they're doing have all evolved their cars, and with the regulations the way they are there isn't a huge amount of potential to gain large amounts of lap time and climb the grid.

The teams that have felt the need to revolve their cars in some fundamental way every year since 2009 have all had problems. We all know who they are.

[Just_a_fan]

Even more worrying for McLaren is that there have been two tests so far and we haven't seen them do anything close to any kind of race simulation. They just haven't done the mileage.

So it's not really possible for anyone to say what their race pace may or may not be isn't it?

They've spent most of their time running with different bits, with wake devices fitted etc. doing back-to-back tests etc.

If they turn up at the next test, do a number of race sim runs and are then obviously more than a few tenths off then we can say "they're off the pace". Until then, we don't know where they are.

Autosport, who I don't necessarily hold in the highest regard following some of their pre-season predictions, suggest that McLaren are trying to run their exhausts in to the centre of the diffuser and that there are heat-related issues with doing this. If they can get it to work reliably then it'll probably be the best such system on the grid. It's a big "if" at the mo though.

[Just_a_fan]

The teams that have felt the need to revolve their cars in some fundamental way every year since 2009 have all had problems. We all know who they are.

McLaren came up with a unique system last year that their car was, by necessity, built around. It was a successful system as evidenced by the fact that the other teams all developed their own versions of it as bolt-on systems.

This year the system has been banned so McLaren have had to start again - last year's car was too specialised (F-duct and big DDD) for it to be simply converted to this year's car. RBR and Ferrari both have the advantage that they could revert back to their previous development route. McLaren couldn't really do that so they've had to roll the dice and see if they can come up with something new. In effect they're 2 years behind the others.

Now, McLaren might have just done a RB6-lite for this year and hoped to luck-in on the RB-series' obvious strengths, but then they'd probably be accused of cheating again. After all, if anyone thinks they're copying another team the FIA can still hit them with a big slap thanks to the Stepney fiasco.

[ajdavison2]

...unsuccessful Ferrari F10 morphed into the F50 and now into the F150...

you mean F60-F10-F150th Italia?

[segedunum]

you mean F60-F10-F150th Italia?

I think so. Completely lost track with all those illogical and non-sequential names.

[segedunum]

So it's not really possible for anyone to say what their race pace may or may not be isn't it?

You're trying to read what you want into this. They've done just enough mileage that we can compare with other teams and we can say that the car just doesn't look fast in comparison. Contrast that with Ferrari and Red Bull who simply hit the ground running when they started testing.

They've spent most of their time running with different bits, with wake devices fitted etc. doing back-to-back tests etc.

Why? That's why you would not come to the first test - to do all this kind of thinking and simulating before you get to the track. You don't have time to do live development testing these days as you could in years gone by when top teams would ship parts direct from the factory and test in a round-robin fashion.

More importantly, it means they have a very, very limited amount of time looking at how they can work with the new tyres, and you can't just simulate that. You need mileage with your car working as you want it. The teams who can make efficient use of their time and plan ahead are the ones who reap the rewards from this.

If they can get it to work reliably then it'll probably be the best such system on the grid. It's a big "if" at the mo though.

I don't see it, because if it was so important you would expect to see the car be at least promisingly fast, if unreliable and inconsistent. You would expect to see something promising for your troubles - if there's a downside you want to see an upside. When you're not fast and not reliable you've got trouble. When they've changed from that exhaust layout to a more conventional one there has been no appreciable difference in times as far as anyone can see, and I don't know how they won't have cooling issues with it to be honest. It's a much more confined area.

There's just nowhere to run to and nowhere to hide in these circumstances.

[marcush.]

your tyre model does not depend on the car you use for it.And Mclaren did not miss any test did they?
So in my book Mclaren has the same knowledge about the tyre with the advantage they have used them also in reference to their 2010 contender so they are able to filter out car characteristic a bit better.

edit a tyre model should not depend on the car .It is a tyre model.

[segedunum]

You need mileage to build up the data and an accurate picture. It's clear that a lot of teams are confused by what they're seeing on track and any data they already have from Pirelli. Beyond that, you've got to get your tyres working with you car. Your car will affect tyre characteristics and it will introduce unwanted variables if you put them on another car.

Given that you have an idea of what the tyres will do but no detail you would much prefer to get out there as soon as possible and see what problems you have.

[McG]

It's testing and no one can tell. In the immortal words of Kimi Raikkonen...

"It doesn’t interest me yet what is going to happen. You’ll see it then."

[Florio]

Like everyone else has said. It's testing, at very low temperatures compared to the norm and also, every car is still incomplete in terms aero, mechanical and so on by the first GP.

There's hints from McLaren that they have pace, but with their testing programme we can't compare to the likes of RB and Ferrari.

Patience is what everyone needs, I mean, the next test in Barcelona should give some indication of pace, and pecking order, If not, Australia will.

[Giblet]

You need mileage to build up the data and an accurate picture. It's clear that a lot of teams are confused by what they're seeing on track and any data they already have from Pirelli. Beyond that, you've got to get your tyres working with you car. Your car will affect tyre characteristics and it will introduce unwanted variables if you put them on another car.

Given that you have an idea of what the tyres will do but no detail you would much prefer to get out there as soon as possible and see what problems you have.

This is partly true, however, using the old car to understand the tires and how they behave translates directly to a new car as well.

Once you can determine windows of performance and drop off etc. in the old car, you can narrow in on them in the new one, instead of slapping the new tires on the new car and trying to figure out the car and it's tires all at once.

Alternatively, slapping Bridgestones on the new car would have done the same thing.

Like they showed last year, they appeared faster in races than they did in testing and quali. They didn't have the luxury of toiling around the Fiorano track for 'filming' like Ferrari did to get their EBD working. Red Bull had a dominant car from the outset.

What I am trying to get at is that lack of testing is really hurting the sport. Teams need to be able to play catch up during the season so they can figure out their car, and give drivers much needed mileage.

[CHT]

What I am trying to get at is that lack of testing is really hurting the sport. Teams need to be able to play catch up during the season so they can figure out their car, and give drivers much needed mileage.

Then again, if teams are allowed to do unlimited testing, then the rich team like Ferrari and Mclaren will always dominate the sports because they have more resources for testing. Wont that hurt the sport as well?

[Alge7a]

I get the feeling that Red Bull and Ferrari have gone for an approach that optimises the way the basic chassis works the airflow around the car, and as a result, they understand this better. Upgrades are more likely to work. McLaren, however, it seems, have gone for something which I believe Brawn did in 2009 too. Rubbish main chassis, with lots of go-fast bits added to it. Case in point, moosepods. So I feel they don't actually fully understand how the car works, and so they have to go out, collect data, to then input to their CFD and simulators, so that they can actually understand the car better to be able to upgrade it better.

As a Mclaren fan i find this post really disturbing as it reads true. I think your absalutely right. Mc since 09 have been lost on basic downforce but terrific at designing gadgets. F-duct etc. I said many times before that in the deepest part of mclaren there is something fundamentaly wrong in the design team. Every time i write that, i hope a person better informed than me posts something that suggests otherwise. Rb just were so smooth last season. So much basic grip and my feeling is this season with tyre degredation playing a major part in the WDC Macca could be in trouble. Obviously more with Hamilton than Button. Only time will tell.