Vodafone McLaren MP4-27 Mercedes

[Leon]

the only nice looking 2012 car so far all others seems to be platypus-nosed

[Shakeman]

Maybe this year will be the year that the conjecture that a pretty car is a fast car is proven or disproven in.

The McLaren just looks better and better compared to the rest.

[Schurcedes]

Recent tweet from Allen:

#f1 There are so many legality question marks around 2012 F1 cars apparently, that FIA's Charlie Whiting is going to attend Jerez test...

https://twitter.com/#!/Jamesallenonf1

There was also an article on Autosport (yes, I'm referring to That infamous article) that mentioned something about McLaren getting ready for a legality fight at the start of the season.

Could this have something to do with the MP4-27? This also came after the Ferrari launch, so I'm not too sure.

[Tyler]

When I look at the Ferrari F2012 next to the MP4-26 the nose of the Ferrari looks higher at the end.
I thought the MP4-26's nose was supposed to be slightly too high to be legal.
Does it have something to do with the angle I'm looking at them from, I can't believe the Ferrari nose would be illegal?

[beelsebob]

When I look at the Ferrari F2012 next to the MP4-26 the nose of the Ferrari looks higher at the end.
I thought the MP4-26's nose was supposed to be slightly too high to be legal.
Does it have something to do with the angle I'm looking at them from, I can't believe the Ferrari nose would be illegal?

There is a point that just clips the corner of the bounding box, but it's not the very front of it.

[ell66]

One thing I noticed about the packaging is how much better it is on the centre line of the car, look at the pictures from the rear and look how the body work has gone from pretty damn bulky to very tight. Also they could of made the rear far tighter had they not gone with the big undercut towards the front of the side pods.
I think the car looks good, its funny because in 2010 i felt the car looked kinda awkward which proved to be the case in slow bumpy corners and last years looked like a sweet handling car lacking a bit of df.
This one looks solid all round, cant wait for the testing and upgrades to start coming in.

[ell66]

Interesting. So how much downforce do think this car will make? What about drag? Where do think they can find downforce and reduce drag from the design? Do you think the car has better downforce and drag figures than the -26 or the RB8? Do you think it has a better or worse L/D than the -26 or the RB8?

I'm interested because you seem to be able to tell a lot from these few pictures and the "fact" that the car is "fat".

I am just giving my view, jeez. Why shouldnt we quit all discussion? No one here knows how much df and drag it makes, so conversation about it would be useless.

Okay so why dont you compare Red Bulls sidepods to this? Or from any other old team. You will see the sidepod is higher, and has less coke bottle shape than others. To be precise, the sidepods of the 24 were much smaller. They took away the U-sidepods so you'd expect the sidepods to be much more downsloping, or tighter at the rear, well they barely are.

Also exiting the air over the floor, not a great idea, when you can blow it a little higher and supply the top of the floor with clean airflow.

Apart from that, the sideview shows a shape of bodywork flowing upwards, generating the idea that McLAren took a lot of time in optimising internal aerodynamics.

It seems like they build some shelter in there, they claimed they knew Red Bulls secret so maybe they have Newey 'on board' again?

Also that bulge there, sure that is really good for aerodynamics. You do not need to be an aerodynamicist to know that that bulge is aerodynamic ruining in a critical area.

Overall the car looks incredibly fat and German, like I already said. How it will perform we will see but I'll say it again, that huge bulge will disappear before the first race

Your posts have zero logic wesley.
If you actually paid attention to the details you'd realize its an extremely well packaged car.
the 24 side pods were NOT smaller than the 27's they had zero undercut and looked positively fat.
As for this years car, you should note the large undercut underneath the sidepod intakes, you should also note how much bulk they'v lost from the cars centre line towars the rear and also that the wheel base is slightly shorter.
As for the comment on mclaren knowing RB's secerets, that intrerview was complete crap I cant believe anyone here would of taken that seriously, and no the car is far from fat.

[Redragon]

[img]http://jorgelizalde.co.uk/ferrrari ... .jpg[/img]

I think the nose that mclaren presented it is not the actual nose. If you see the frontal picture you can see different lights and shadows indicating there is an area higher and then a cut and lower area.

I don't think there nose it is going to be so clean after all.

[horse]

Haha, he confirms my hypothesis that the short chord rear wing is stalling the main plane as well as the DRS flap.

I'm more impressed that the BBC have someone who sounds a little like he knows what he's talking about. Sky can keep old Ted the 'vortice' man.

I don't think there nose it is going to be so clean after all.

That's pushing reality a little too far don't you think when the side view of the same car shows a totally smooth transition?

[Redragon]

Haha, he confirms my hypothesis that the short chord rear wing is stalling the main plane as well as the DRS flap.

I'm more impressed that the BBC have someone who sounds a little like he knows what he's talking about. Sky can keep old Ted the 'vortice' man.

I don't think there nose it is going to be so clean after all.

That's pushing reality a little too far don't you think when the side view of the same car shows a totally smooth transition?

I am photographer and I am telling you this lighting is not drawing a perfect o smooth line as you can see on the side.

[horse]

I am photographer and I am telling you this lighting is not drawing a perfect o smooth line as you can see on the side.

Well, you can't be a very good photographer if a) you don't realise those are simply reflections of the room the car was photographed in and b) the profile version of the same car shows no such "wobbles".

Frankly, I am inclined to think you are trolling.

[Redragon]

I am photographer and I am telling you this lighting is not drawing a perfect o smooth line as you can see on the side.

Well, you can't be a very good photographer if a) you don't realise those are simply reflections of the room the car was photographed in and b) the profile version of the same car shows no such "wobbles".

Frankly, I am inclined to think you are trolling.

Maybe I am trolling but I just showing you that in this pictures if you see and area shadowy, bright and shadowy, it is a depression on the surface and if can be draw by reflections or light, but the surface it is what matters. Maybe it is not so pronunciated as the others but there is some. let's see.

[Tyler]

^^ I smell BS

[Redragon]

Just adding fun.

[sAx]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfS2NwqfCkA[/youtube]

Haha, he confirms my hypothesis that the short chord rear wing is stalling the main plane as well as the DRS flap.

Gary Anderson's take is interesting. In particular a potential inability to maximise mass flow under the front using the 'pretty' but lower running MP4-27 chassis and nose, as opposed to those currently favouring the less aesthetic crocodile bulge abeam the front suspension. Next weeks testing is going to answer a few questions for sure.

sAx