McLaren MP4-26 Mercedes

[Mchamilton]

im sure ted kravits said something over the weekend (i think during qualy when MB n DC were questioning where mclaren had gained their performance from) about the RBR DRS still producing decent downforce in the open position, where as the mclaren's is designs to produce maximum efficient downforce when closed, but be completely stalled and dump the maximum drag when opened

[Shrieker]

I think the RBR 7 can DRS through places others can't simply because it has a more efficient underbody (diffuser) and that's where the extra downforce is coming from. With a less drag penalty too, mind you.

[raymondu999]

Actually I've been thinking of this; summing up Shrieker and beelsebob's points. Shrieker says that the majority of RBR downforce is very efficient, low-drag downforce from the underfloor and beelsebob is saying that in high downforce trim the McLaren is now the more efficient car (in terms of how much drag it needs to produce its downforce). Coupled together; the only logical conclusion is that the RBR rear wing is very inefficient, no?

[beelsebob]

Actually I've been thinking of this; summing up Shrieker and beelsebob's points. Shrieker says that the majority of RBR downforce is very efficient, low-drag downforce from the underfloor and beelsebob is saying that in high downforce trim the McLaren is now the more efficient car (in terms of how much drag it needs to produce its downforce). Coupled together; the only logical conclusion is that the RBR rear wing is very inefficient, no?

Well that would make sense wouldn't it – the point U pods is to make the beam wing and rear wing more efficient.

[raymondu999]

Yes I see what you're saying. That not the rear wing foils themselves are inefficient, but the airflow going to it, if that makes sense? Just surprised the U-channels proved more successful than the tight rear approach

[Javert]

They ran with this wing before SPA (even in Canada!)



high DF wing in closed and open positions, maybe this was the only way to get enough DF with open wing

After SPA maybe they gained a bit DF (from the floor) and could run the low-chord wing ... But not enough DF to do 130R with DRS open

Anyway, I thought the opposite of you about MP4-26: a car that has a "total" DF (with DRS closed ) greater than RB7, but much less efficient (given the Mercedes HPs and the performances in Valencia, SPA, Monza)
EDIT: much less efficient and with more fuel needed to do a race!

[beelsebob]

Anyway, I thought the opposite of you about MP4-26: a car that has a "total" DF (with DRS closed ) greater than RB7, but much less efficient (given the Mercedes HPs and the performances in Valencia, SPA, Monza)
EDIT: much less efficient and with more fuel needed to do a race!

Except that we're not discussing the traditional mantra, we're discussing what you can observe from recent races, and what this implies for the performance of different bits of the car. The bottom line is that the McLaren is faster at high downforce tracks – this means they have a more efficient high downforce setup (at least with the new "Suzuka" rear wing).

If the red bull diffuser is as good as everyone makes out (which I'm not that confident of), then McLaren's rear wing and beam wing must be significantly better than RBR's.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the RB's diffuser isn't all it's cracked up to be – that the car in general is all round good, rather than any specific component being the key. We saw this with the whole flexi-wing fiasco, everyone pinned that the flexing was where all their advantage was coming from... Now their flexing has been reduced, and other teams have figured out how to do it, but we haven't magically seen everyone close right up on them.

That said, I still expect that McLaren's rear wing is a bit more efficient, given that that's what the U pods are designed to do.

[raymondu999]

All good points beelsebob - but so was the shrink-wrapping of the RB rear (designed to clean airflow)

[beelsebob]

All good points beelsebob - but so was the shrink-wrapping of the RB rear (designed to clean airflow)

Agreed, hence why I'm not really convinced that the RB diffuser is the magic bullet that everyone claims it to be.

[raymondu999]

I don't think anyone has really claimed that. But it's a car that produces good downforce all around. I guess maybe with the law of diminishing returns; Newey thought that more lap time was there to be had if he switched focus on cutting drag rather than increasing the car's downforce.

The thing is they've been so good on their high-downforce trim in the past several years it's difficult to imagine it was gobbled up so easily.

I think if you had tyres that stayed prime no matter what happened (think video games with tyre wear => off) the Red Bull would have been quickest; but the lateral energy demands of long corners; compounded with the fact that the peak df of the RB is greater, is overworking the tyres which is providing greater rear deg. Just a theory.

IMO the gains McLaren have made this year are largely due to tyres. They seem to, since Germany, have unlocked the Pirellis a lot. They can switch them on quick; even the hardest Pirellis; they can maintain heat in the tyres and seemingly not overheat them; and get the maximum out of them. But again this is only conjecture.

[beelsebob]

IMO the gains McLaren have made this year are largely due to tyres. They seem to, since Germany, have unlocked the Pirellis a lot. They can switch them on quick; even the hardest Pirellis; they can maintain heat in the tyres and seemingly not overheat them; and get the maximum out of them. But again this is only conjecture.

Yep, that's a really good point – they seem much more able than the other teams to get the tyres to the right temp and keep them there.

[raymondu999]

In Canada; Valencia; Nurburgring (excluding the anomalous Silverstone) we saw that the McLaren could heat their tyres very quickly - in Valencia overly so. In Canada it meant that JB could be instantly on it as his tyres were just on song immediately in the drying conditions. I was convinced this would have meant overheating in the hot races; but we haven't seen that either. We've just basically seen a McLaren that seems to be unable to do any wrong to their tyres.

Were there not reports earlier in the year that Mclaren hired tyre engineers from Bridgestone and they've helped them improve tyre usage massively?

[beelsebob]

In Canada; Valencia; Nurburgring (excluding the anomalous Silverstone) we saw that the McLaren could heat their tyres very quickly - in Valencia overly so. In Canada it meant that JB could be instantly on it as his tyres were just on song immediately in the drying conditions. I was convinced this would have meant overheating in the hot races; but we haven't seen that either. We've just basically seen a McLaren that seems to be unable to do any wrong to their tyres.

Were there not reports earlier in the year that Mclaren hired tyre engineers from Bridgestone and they've helped them improve tyre usage massively?

An interesting point there – in a couple of races last year button switched early from inters to slicks and immediately got good lap times out of them... I wonder if the -25 exhibited a similar property, it was just less apparent due to the tyres being easier to work with.

[kalinka]

+1 for all above.
I think there's another aspect of the whole story : I think RB7's success this year is lying almost only in qualy. I think it's not a coincidence, it's designed that way, and that's the thing that other teams including McL didn't consider seriously enough. Even after few races almost everyone (including me, and majority on F1 forums ) thougth that in 2011 qualy wouldn't be so important with Pirellis. What we saw is the total opposite. I didn't say RB wouldn't win races without pole positions, but it was indeed a very important factor.
McL is better with tyres for sure, and maybe Newey's idea was that if they stay always in front, with their good DF, it doesnt matter that there's a few cars there with better race pace. And he was right. I mean look at Webber, he qualyfies down a few places, and there you go...almost every time he was out of contention for win. The whole RB car is made to get away from pole, I mean they even sacrifice KERS for that in the beginning...any opinions on that? Should McL design the MP4-27 for a qualy car next year?

[RB7ate9]

+1 for all above.
I think there's another aspect of the whole story : I think RB7's success this year is lying almost only in qualy. I think it's not a coincidence, it's designed that way, and that's the thing that other teams including McL didn't consider seriously enough. Even after few races almost everyone (including me, and majority on F1 forums ) thougth that in 2011 qualy wouldn't be so important with Pirellis. What we saw is the total opposite. I didn't say RB wouldn't win races without pole positions, but it was indeed a very important factor.
McL is better with tyres for sure, and maybe Newey's idea was that if they stay always in front, with their good DF, it doesnt matter that there's a few cars there with better race pace. And he was right. I mean look at Webber, he qualyfies down a few places, and there you go...almost every time he was out of contention for win. The whole RB car is made to get away from pole, I mean they even sacrifice KERS for that in the beginning...any opinions on that? Should McL design the MP4-27 for a qualy car next year?

Been saying that since Turkey, and was solidified in Singapore. The RB7 has been gambled to do its maximum in qualifying (with unlimited DRS) to stay out in front, with the other factor of tire strategy keeping it out in front.

Mark my words: RBR gambled on qualifying pace as one of their design goals.