Vodafone McLaren MP4-27 Mercedes

[shelly]

I think you can set a wide range of targets:
-average aero coefficient on your windtunnel aero maps
-aero balance setup window
-total ballast available
-cg height, inertial properties of tha car
-stiffeness of the tub (even if we are now out of the stiffer, the better)

are just the first, most general that come to mind.

These key chararcteristics may flow down to "local" targets like: "reduce paintwork weight by 50% compared to last year", that would impact on cg and ballast.
I think paint is 3-5 kg on a complete f1 car, why not shed a couple of them?

[Shakeman]

I'd still be sceptical about concluding real world pace from its performance. Remember, at this point they have no on track validation data.

They have years of data to rely on when validating a design. Each year's data feeds into the database. Listening to Jensen's comments re high speed down force and the confidence he showed. I think they feel like they've got a good platform.

(Not directed at horse but a general comment)
Something that people seem to be overlooking here is how much work has gone on underneath the body work. It's very easy to make throw-away remarks about the car being conservative but know one knows just what they've done under the bodywork that could bring more performance to the track especially wrt to tyre performance. The relatively unglamorous world of weight distribution could yield massive gains on the track by just using tyres better. There were plant of times last year when raw performance came at a cost of tyre wear.

[shelly]

I think there is no fia rule about painting. The ponsors ruel in this field.

Stickers are avoidd in f1, logos are painted I think

[bhall]

I think they feel like they've got a good platform.

To be fair, that sentiment isn't exactly uncommon amongst the teams this time of year.

The relatively unglamorous world of weight distribution [...]

...has only one resident, and it's the offspring of an FIA regulation.

[Froggolo]

i think is better to wait before to define conservative the Mp4/27.

The rear of the car shown in the presentation is just a dummy,
and the real /27 has still to be shown in its whole look.

[horse]

They have years of data to rely on when validating a design. Each year's data feeds into the database. Listening to Jensen's comments re high speed down force and the confidence he showed. I think they feel like they've got a good platform.

Well, they allways think they do! But look at the 24, it was a complete disaster in terms of what they thought it could do and what it really did. Sure, the tools they have show performance gains and you need some tools and metrics (such as the nice list shelly just provided) to try to determine if you're doing the right thing. Still, however, they've been banging on about how new the 27 is and (as we found out with last years exhaust) the greatest of experimentally tested stuff is truely not proven until it is out there going beyond experimental conditions.

In a nut shell, each prediction made comes with risk and I should imagine that risk is quite high before they put the thing onto the track.

[adrianjordan]

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?

I thought Martin W went on to say that the targets were ones they wanted to meet by the first race and that if they continue working at the rate they are currently then they will hit them in time.

Of course once everyone gets on track they could find the goalposts moving either way...

[Giblet]

Lets please talk about just the car and its parts. Not the painting of motorcycles or painting in general. The car is silver. Its not black.

[Coefficient]

It's probably an insert so that they can adjust the size of the hole depending on cooling requirements.

Well, that could indeed be a more down-to-Earth explanation. I can't recall seeing something like that in recent history, though. Red Bull for instant had a significant hot air exhaust last year but it was always opened iirc.

Mclaren tinkered with this opening all year last year. Sometimes it was wide open and sometimes it had a black carbon insert with a small square hole cut into it and anywhere in between.

[Coefficient]

What's the reasoning for the regulations which make for narrow stance cars?

With a name like Tumbarello I'd have thought you could figure this out. Narrow track cars were introduced as yet another measure to slow them down in the corners.

[Alexgtt]

Car looks very nice and I like the fact that they haven't done the predictable and reactionary "let's copy the RB7" route. They've stuck to their ideas and evolved the design.

The rear end packaging looks great and the exhaust solution with the panels that can be easily changed will be seen on plenty of other cars this season.

Picture earlier in thread suggests to me they are looking to blow the rear hub winglets. Looks like heat shield coatings on the upper winglet.

[Coefficient]

I think there is no fia rule about painting. The ponsors ruel in this field.

Stickers are avoidd in f1, logos are painted I think

I think you're confusing cars with overalls there. I've seen all teams renewing the decals on their cars after practice and qualy both in person at races and on the TV.

Sponsor endorsments on overalls are sewn on instead stuck or printed to reduce flamability.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Auto Motor und Sport's MP4-27 Technical Analysis:

McLaren MP4-27 is in the technical analysis: The Secret of the exhaust bump

With the McLaren MP4-27 is the first potential winning car on the market. Even if the engineers had shown at the presentation in Woking not all, certain trends can be discerned. We are trying a new McLaren under the silver skin to look.

Deceive and camouflaging part of the business. The presentation of the cars are rarely identical with that rolls during the first test rides on the track. And they differ markedly from what is shown in the season opener in Melbourne. Probably one sees in the hall, only half the truth. So it is also the new McLaren.

The front wing was old, the new rear wing. The nose remains as it is. She wears no dent and actually goes to a height of 550 mm chassis and directly into the tube towards the cockpit. It is announced at the exhaust caution. That which there peeped out from the tailpipe of a dent in the side box, was a badly-made imitation. Red Bull had even allowed the fun to paint the exhaust outlet in the airbrush on panel

One can not blame McLaren, that they keep the exhaust topic covered. If they already show the final solution, they would face the competition with his nose on it, which substitute for the concept in blown diffuser pursue them. For where the exhaust is hinzielen finally, the engineers expect, obviously, the best compensation for the lost downforce in the rear. And will be tremendous.

"We have to balance the cars are new." Jenson Button predicted. Lewis Hamilton added: "If there was a problem last year enough downforce generating front, it will be reversed this year." Technical director Paddy Lowe regrets: "The new exhaust rules, force us into a very narrow cage it must result in a certain area at a certain angle thus we have set limits, where the afferent as exhaust fumes..."
This is new on the McLaren MP4-27:

The side boxes are a return to familiar forms. Front high, behind low, sloping sides, with an extremely early entry, but only a discreet incision on the underside. The ear shape of the MP4-26 has had its side panels. "She was part of the concept of blown-in diffuser," says Lowe. "Because they were useful because they have forced the downward flow. With the new exhaust position would have this type of side pods made no sense."
It is striking:

The McLaren is on a big car. The wheelbase was shortened only very subtly. The length allows for a small tank, and thus a narrow tail. This was mandatory after the exhaust in the rear will contribute much less pressure. So was the Red Bull McLaren-way. A slim waist back guarantees a perfect fluid on the top of the diffuser and a trouble-free operation of the lower rear wing element.

Instead of following the trend of Red Bull with a razor-thin snout, the McLaren-typical nose drops below the splitter from fairly massive. In the area of ​​the front axle, the chassis is lower than other cars. Thus, although by less air flows beneath the nose, but it is free in the design of the front axle geometry and placement of springs and dampers. "There is not only the aerodynamics," warns Paddy Lowe. "A low nose means a low center of gravity and torsional stiffness of the advantages."
We like the McLaren MP4-27:

McLaren renounces a dent in the front section of the chassis. The MP4-27 looks in profile, not as a duck or a platypus. I hope he wins not only a beauty contest. What is herschenkt to air flow underneath the nose, you get by reducing the air resistance and the lower center of gravity back again perhaps. Since this nose merges smoothly into the chassis hull, one also knows the height of the chassis tube. It is not much higher than 550 millimeters.

Others are in the area in front of the cockpit on the maximum height of 625 millimeters. With consequences. Reassuring, is that McLaren denies that any new way. The aerodynamics under Simon Lacey have been working with the principle of the nose and deep below the splitter, which directs the flow to where it should go. On that splinters are now at the end of two mini-mounted wing, which will ensure a better alignment of the direction of air flow under the floor.
This is standard:

The front suspension uses struts (pushrods), the rear axle as usual, most recently with struts (Pullrods). Even the widely splayed base of the rear suspension is standard. This allows a sleek rear in gear and create a stiff composite. The Red Bull air box follows the trend. McLaren also derives from the hot exhaust air from the radiators of a kind gun barrel at the end of the engine cover. Otherwise, the tail is completely closed.
Conclusion:

Until now, the new McLaren is still not a revolution. Rather an evolution of proven technology with new priorities. Strengthening of the classical aerodynamic aids at the expense of the exhaust and optimization benchmarks such as mechanical strength and focus.

Until now we have discovered no coup on the car, which falls into the category of F-shaft, double diffuser or be blown diffuser. But that may come. Let's wait for the final exhaust position. Now we are looking forward to the new Ferrari, which is said to include a whole range of new approaches. That would be the reversal of long-standing laws. Last Ferrari rather than McLaren was responsible for conservative technique.


http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 67507.html

[ringo]

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?

Could be talking about tyres.

[shelly]

I think there is no fia rule about painting. The ponsors ruel in this field.

Stickers are avoidd in f1, logos are painted I think

I think you're confusing cars with overalls there. I've seen all teams renewing the decals on their cars after practice and qualy both in person at races and on the TV.

Sponsor endorsments on overalls are sewn on instead stuck or printed to reduce flamability.

I am talking about cars: stickers are avoided as much as possible in f1 from some years on, especially on aero relevant surfaces. When did you see decals renewing last, and for which f1 team?