McLaren MP4-26 Mercedes

[ringo]

It never existed. And it wouldn't make the side pods work any better.

The L sidepods have slightly more downforce than a typical design, but less than a certain design; which i wont go into detail, but we know already who's got the most downforce.

It doesn't have a raw downoforce advantage in any respect. And it is actually a compromise to the rear end of the car.

The car just isn't great. It's at its limit, just like how the 25 reached it's limit 3/4 way into the season.

The side pods need to change drastically.

[Robbobnob]

I agree, they seem to have run out of development potential

[kalinka]

I disagree. The car run well on all kind of tracks. Barcelona, Monaco, Canada...etc..
It tells me that it has the overall speed, and it hasn't some major design flaw.

It's just that they don't understand it in such detail as RBR understands the RB7. And it's quite understandable, because RB7 is developed for at least 3 years now, while McL turned to this desing in 2011. I think it has (the long-term ) potential, and for me it's unlikely that they would drop the L-pod design for next year. As I mentioned before here, I can't remeber any source within team, which stated that they should go with conventional sidepods, and the L-pods are for scrap. Can you?
I think L-pods has to give them some advantage, otherwise we would end up with lot of statements on how to get rid of it. Last year it was that stiff suspension +pushrod that everyone knows, but what's that key disadvantage in 2011 ? Tyre usage is a bit mistery, because we saw good and bad examples for that all year, but never on the worst end.
I think they only need better undersanding of this concept, and yes, maybe it'll happen only in 2012.

[Crafty]

Scarbs explains the new rear wing: http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/07/1 ... rear-wing/

Been thinking about this a bit, I'm confused.
I looked at the speeds at silverstone and they are in the ballpark compared to other cars and scarbs also says the car is roughly on the pace with regard to top speeds... so efforts to make the DRS more efficient are only going to increase that.. but the car (as it stands) is some distance behind the RBR, so how will making the DRS better help overall lap time ? Maybe its a gamble to try and qualify higher, and try to keep the competition behind through the race ? surely thats optimistic though as the car would have to defend with no DRS vs a following car running DRS ? there must be an improvement on the performance when DRS isn't deployed as well ?

The other changes are obviously trying to improve the wing - the slots are more intricate and must of taken quite a bit of effort in the wind tunnel/modelling stages to come up with such a specific design.
The removal of the pillar must also clean up the air as it exits the rear of the car and I guess improve the air speed too ?

I'm far from an expert on aero, but I'd like to understand it more.

[ajdavison2]

Does the mandated weight distribution still stand in 2012?

[kalinka]

But why they didn't use the new wing on sunday ? Maybe the old wing is better in rain? It makes sense if they espected rain for the race...Any info on why they changed back to old wing ? Hell, I managed to post only questions

[Holm86]

Does the mandated weight distribution still stand in 2012?

Not as far as i know. Only this year so nobody had an advantage with the new tyres.

[hardingfv32]

I thought it had something to do with the use of KERS. Less motivation not to use it.

I believe that KERS was to be twice as powerful with the engine reg change. Maybe the distribution rule will stand because of the engine reg delays.

Brian

[speedsense]

But why they didn't use the new wing on sunday ? Maybe the old wing is better in rain? It makes sense if they espected rain for the race...Any info on why they changed back to old wing ? Hell, I managed to post only questions

Can't use DRS in the rain? And more experience with the old one in wet conditions?

[beelsebob]

But why they didn't use the new wing on sunday ?

Because they got no opportunity to run it in the dry – not one. They had no idea whether it worked or not, and it wasn't worth the risk. Not forgetting that the cars are in park ferme from Q1, so they couldn't change the part between sat and sun anyway.

[Boost]

I thought it had something to do with the use of KERS. Less motivation not to use it.

I believe that KERS was to be twice as powerful with the engine reg change. Maybe the distribution rule will stand because of the engine reg delays.

Brian

The weight distribution rule was bought in because of the unknown quality of the tyres and prevent anyone being put at a serious disadvantage by getting things wrong (as Merc did last year).

The minimum weight limit was increased to make KERs less of a problem.

[PhillipM]

I'd imagine part of the new reason they didn't run the new wing was their practise and qualifying setup times indicated that they'd lost a lot more rear downforce from the EBD farce than they actually have.
The new rear wing looks similar to the Merc one in that it's pretty pitch sensitive for re-attaching airflow - if they felt the car was lacking downforce at the rear to keep the chassis stable over Silverstone's bumps, then the last thing you want is a rear wing that the flow struggles to reattach to.

Find out one way or the other if they run it at the next race now EBD's are back.

[Pierce89]

Scarbs explains the new rear wing: http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/07/1 ... rear-wing/

Been thinking about this a bit, I'm confused.
I looked at the speeds at silverstone and they are in the ballpark compared to other cars and scarbs also says the car is roughly on the pace with regard to top speeds... so efforts to make the DRS more efficient are only going to increase that.. but the car (as it stands) is some distance behind the RBR, so how will making the DRS better help overall lap time ? Maybe its a gamble to try and qualify higher, and try to keep the competition behind through the race ? surely thats optimistic though as the car would have to defend with no DRS vs a following car running DRS ? there must be an improvement on the performance when DRS isn't deployed as well ?

The other changes are obviously trying to improve the wing - the slots are more intricate and must of taken quite a bit of effort in the wind tunnel/modelling stages to come up with such a specific design.
The removal of the pillar must also clean up the air as it exits the rear of the car and I guess improve the air speed too ?

I'm far from an expert on aero, but I'd like to understand it more.

The reason for the new DRS is to get closer to Red Bull in qualifying where it's use is unlimited. In race pace they've already been there or therabouts. Qulaifying is where they get beaten. If Lewis could get a pole the race pace would be there for the win. Mclaren's main problem however is the RED RESURGENCE baby.

[i70q7m7ghw]

IIRC they didn't use the wing in qualifying or the race.

[Crafty]

Scarbs explains the new rear wing: http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/07/1 ... rear-wing/

Been thinking about this a bit, I'm confused.
I looked at the speeds at silverstone and they are in the ballpark compared to other cars and scarbs also says the car is roughly on the pace with regard to top speeds... so efforts to make the DRS more efficient are only going to increase that.. but the car (as it stands) is some distance behind the RBR, so how will making the DRS better help overall lap time ? Maybe its a gamble to try and qualify higher, and try to keep the competition behind through the race ? surely thats optimistic though as the car would have to defend with no DRS vs a following car running DRS ? there must be an improvement on the performance when DRS isn't deployed as well ?

The other changes are obviously trying to improve the wing - the slots are more intricate and must of taken quite a bit of effort in the wind tunnel/modelling stages to come up with such a specific design.
The removal of the pillar must also clean up the air as it exits the rear of the car and I guess improve the air speed too ?

I'm far from an expert on aero, but I'd like to understand it more.

The reason for the new DRS is to get closer to Red Bull in qualifying where it's use is unlimited. In race pace they've already been there or therabouts. Qulaifying is where they get beaten. If Lewis could get a pole the race pace would be there for the win. Mclaren's main problem however is the RED RESURGENCE baby.

Yep, but say one of them gets pole by a tenth or two, with no DRS the RBR/Ferrari would be examining his gearbox, into DRS zone and theres no way you could defend.. The only way this would work is if the new wing is better when DRS isn't deployed, so they could stay close to the car thats just overtaken and keep swapping for the lead and hopefully jump them in the pit stops ?