They could raise the beam wing in the central section as some of the other teams do. However I think McLaren have rejected that idea, at least for now, as it's something they ran in 2009 so they're definitely aware of it.Robbobnob wrote:No, the rear crash structure have been homologated since the crash test
James Allen mentioned 17kph on Australian TV post qualifying and given the fact that Vettel was consistently 3-4 tenths faster than Hamilton through the last sector, I have little reason to doubt the veracity of the claim that the RB was significantly faster through 11-12.raymondu999 wrote:Nah. Next week it'll stay 20. But people will say it was in m/s
He was also that much faster than Webber through that sector, so it could be more about driver, tyre, and setup just gelling rather than an inherent car advantage. Or did Webber somehow have less downforce?Tumbarello wrote:James Allen mentioned 17kph on Australian TV post qualifying and given the fact that Vettel was consistently 3-4 tenths faster than Hamilton through the last sector, I have little reason to doubt the veracity of the claim that the RB was significantly faster through 11-12.raymondu999 wrote:Nah. Next week it'll stay 20. But people will say it was in m/s
Not sure they can. The rules define the box that the beam wing sits in and the only way to separate the wing and crash structure is to have a more S shaped crash structure or a very n-shaped centre 150mm portion - but how effective would that be anyway?myurr wrote:They could raise the beam wing in the central section as some of the other teams do. However I think McLaren have rejected that idea, at least for now, as it's something they ran in 2009 so they're definitely aware of it.Robbobnob wrote:No, the rear crash structure have been homologated since the crash test
Presumably this. They must have found that the thing was very effective to have gone to all of the effort of effectively designing the car around it.murtoidf1 wrote:TO get things back on topic.
Brawn mentioned that an octopus exhaust would go hand in hand with L shaped side pods.. So my question is, how are they fast already with the basic exhaust? Or is this still slow compared to how fast the original concept would have been.
If that is the case, they could built it of pyrosic and test properly on Friday, to see, if it gives expected gains in real life. If so, then it would be worth of trying to find some way to construct it using only allowed materials or circumvent the rules. Or are they so sure of their concept, they don't need to prove it - of course if bespoken rumour is true.Just_a_fan wrote:Presumably this. They must have found that the thing was very effective to have gone to all of the effort of effectively designing the car around it.
I expect to see the exhaust more concealed at future races - having it exposed like that can't be doing the aerodynamics of that part of the car any good.bot6 wrote:Impressive how the Mackie Boys have bounced back. Gives some credence to what Hamilton was saying about his guys never giving up.
I think the McLaren cannon exhaust is really interesting as it seems to use slightly shorter pipes than the Ferrari and Red Bull ones. The exhausts also seem to be raised slightly above the floor instead of being completely integrated in the floor. I think that little foil in front of the wheel helps them get away with it by channeling the exhaust, ending up with a simpler, lighter solution with less heat transmitted to the floor and less power loss due to the longer pipes.
Really interesting solution!
That's the benefit of the U sidepods, because they doesn't need that flow around the sidepods to the back so desperately like other teams, so they can make this compromise without significant drawback. I espect too though that they're working on more sophisticated-integrated solution.bot6 wrote:The exhausts also seem to be raised slightly above the floor instead of being completely integrated in the floor. I think that little foil in front of the wheel helps them get away with it by channeling the exhaust, ending up with a simpler, lighter solution with less heat transmitted to the floor and less power loss due to the longer pipes.
It definitely looks absolutely planted. Almost as if it has much more rear downforce than at the front, which is something that Button alluded to earlier in the weekend. Bringing front end downforce to the car should be a lot easier than increasing it at the rear.SiLo wrote:Is it me, or is this the easiest car to drive on the grid? Even when watching the Red Bull it is only similar/little bit more twitchy.
http://vimeo.com/21491368