Vodafone McLaren MP4-27 Mercedes

[zoro_f1]

hi there. this is my first post and i didn't find place where to introduce myself so it's up to you guy's is this the right place or not.

i like to share the new photo's from yesterdays launch of mp4-27 and i really like this car compare to caterham.

thank's









ps-anyway, i'm a williams fan and sorry to mention this here.

[Piraxian]

I have a quick question for the people smarter then I.

What would happen if that 'exhaust' section was not for the exhaust but was open at the back, so the air could flow straight through the side pod and out onto the rear diffuser? And then the exit for the exhaust was positioned in that small plate section just below the engine cover?

I know cooling would be an issue but assuming a solution to that was possible?

[zoro_f1]

is this scrab? if he is, than he is sitting in the second row behind ron dennis and martin whitmarsh.

[ianwit]

is this scrab? if he is, than he is sitting in the second row behind ron dennis and martin whitmarsh.

Yes it is Scarbs

[Javert]

All design faults that there were last year (Octopus which led to U-pods and high gearbox) have been solved.

The car is visibly reliable and has a decent amount of downforce, see for example

how much space have in the rear, compared to last year. The design have been thought around Pirelli tires, to make them last longer.

Is this the best possible design for downforce? Let's see what RBR and Ferrari have done and how much reliable is.

They will have possibly the best DF to drag ratio this year

[Pandamasque]

Racing cars shouldn't have big ratio between width and length, and some of the modern F1 cars like recent Mclarens and Ferraris are simply fugly.

What's so bad about a race car with a wheelbase longer than that of a Chevy Tahoe?

Does that make it a Suburban?

Anyway I wouldn't say it's especially ugly, not a Gatorham at least, even somewhat better looking than last MP4-26. That's relative of course, all the cancer-shaped post-2009 cars are ugly with these ridiculous wings...
Then again there were rumors about some 'controversial' design features that will be immediately evident on this car. Maybe we'll see those in testing. So far apart from the exhaust packaging the 27 looks very conservative.


@zoro_f1 I think the fuzzy hair slightly to the left of scarbs (right above Whitmarsh) belongs to another F1T member ss_collins

[Coefficient]

I'm still trying to work out how they got it within the rules with a smooth nose



All I can think of is that their 275mm section starts lower than the drawing, making the underside of the nose lower (maybe allowing them to make that extended tea tray up to the front wing. So the top surface is the gentle curve from cockpit to nose tip. The Caterham is more like the drawing, with a straight line from the cockpit, a step down and a straight line to the nose tip.

Do the rules state that the top of the 275mm section has to be the same height as the cockpit, or just that that section of the car has to be 275mm deep?

It is not mandatory to keep the top of the tub at 625mm, it is optional. Mclaren have blended the top surface of the tub with the new mandatory height of the nose cone.

The initial revision of the rules stated that the top of the tub also had to be lowered but some of the less wealthy teams who wanted to recycle their tubs complained so the rule revision was made to make last years tubs compatible with this years nose.

[tok-tokkie]

The 'radiator' inlets are much larger (especially compared to the -25). Last year's secondary air inlet behind the engine inlet seems to have been moved tothe 'radiator' inlets. This comparison 25/27 shows the difference well http://mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page=srch&ch1=22&ch2=5

[raymondu999]

The car is visibly reliable and has a decent amount of downforce

The design have been thought around Pirelli tires, to make them last longer.

How exactly do you see reliability, downforce, and tyre preservation?

[ledzep4pm]

The 'radiator' inlets are much larger (especially compared to the -25). Last year's secondary air inlet behind the engine inlet seems to have been moved tothe 'radiator' inlets. This comparison 25/27 shows the difference well http://mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page=srch&ch1=22&ch2=5

You can't tell if you look at that, they are not scaled. The rear wing is a lot bigger on the 27's photo andd so are the tyres etc.

[RB7ate9]

The 'radiator' inlets are much larger (especially compared to the -25). Last year's secondary air inlet behind the engine inlet seems to have been moved tothe 'radiator' inlets. This comparison 25/27 shows the difference well http://mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page=srch&ch1=22&ch2=5

Edit: Nevermind. It is difficult to really compare them truly accurately. From the top-down view, the inlets seem to be the same size.

[raymondu999]

Adam Cooper's talk with Paddy Lowe and Tim Goss: http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/ ... r-to-beat/

I found it rather surprising that despite some people saying that Silverstone, due to the numerous technical U-turns issued by the FIA that week, was unrepresentative, Lowe and Goss both point to Silverstone to say that they had more to lose from the EBD removal. Managing expectations perhaps?

[horse]

The 'radiator' inlets are much larger (especially compared to the -25). Last year's secondary air inlet behind the engine inlet seems to have been moved tothe 'radiator' inlets. This comparison 25/27 shows the difference well http://mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page=srch&ch1=22&ch2=5

You can't tell if you look at that, they are not scaled. The rear wing is a lot bigger on the 27's photo andd so are the tyres etc.

Agreed, they are not properly scaled. But you can see more distance between the side pods and the turning vanes on the 25 than the 27, so I do think that the inlets on the 27 are a bit wider, yes.

[astracrazy]

what concerns me though is the talk about the targets they have set and they haven't reached them yet. For example

"We've set ourselves very, very tough and ambitious targets, and we fully intend to reach those by the first race" - Tim Goss

"We have set ourselves some tough targets that if we reach we think we can fight for the Championship. We haven't reached those targets yet, but with some work we will do" - Whitmarsh

Telling the truth, or being modest? Where does the car stand now in relation to those targets and where will the car be on the grid if those targets ain't met? What if there targets are wrong and in fact Red Bull and/or Ferrari raise the barrier, are we going to be along way behind?

[horse]

Who knows! What sort of targets do they set themselves anyway? And they only have simulated data to work with to confirm those targets. Even if it's just downforce and drag from the wind tunnel, it's still not totally reliable. If they're working for laptime targets from the simulator then, even though they find it very useful, I'd still be sceptical about concluding real world pace from its performance. Remember, at this point they have no on track validation data.