Mclaren MP4-29 Pre-launch Speculation

[ajprice]

Apparently this was spotted on Scarbs twitter feed yesterday, but I cannot seem to find the tweet anymore (except the image hotlink):

http://i.imgur.com/MPbXqpz.jpg


any thoughts?

Orange and black is good, but I hope they have a sponsor to replace Vodafone. Having the drivers name on the car like that would mean the other car had 'Kevin' written on it in big letters

Side pods look interesting, a high up intake with the sides going down to make the tunnel underneath, sort of upside down MP4 26 side pods.

Nose, horrible.

[KeiKo403]

Do I spot an asymmetrical front wing again? (sorry, couldn't resist)

[AnthonyG]

Inwash for sure.

[Manoah2u]

http://i.imgur.com/MPbXqpz.jpg

Do I spot an asymmetrical front wing again? (sorry, couldn't resist)

I like that, it's odd, still looks f1. sorta has a tyrrell-look on it.
And i'm a sucker for that yellowish look [looks a bit like camel lotus].

could be very close to the actual product, mclaren has a tendency of doing weird stuff lately,
like the U-pods, F-duct, etc. very low nose would certainly fit macca classic philosophy.

I think it somehow actually looks really good.
missing the front camera's though.

i kinda like that sidepod shape, am i assuming correctly that below the intake is a 'free' flow opening to direct
air to the floor? is that legal? could the radiators be positioned vertically in tat sidepod area?

[henra]

any thoughts?

From an aesthetic perspeczive, I like it! It looks cool.
That said from what the challenges in next year's regulations are I would say it is the opposite to what you would want to achieve.
The nose will block much of the airflow to the floor pushing air to and above the sidepods. The sidepods on the other hand do not support air moving over them cleanly towards the diffuser, the airflow coming from the nose will not support the diffuser in any way. It will simply be wasted and create dirty (read slow) air over the diffuser. This will cost DF at the rear.
I would bet quite some moeny that we won't see a single car looking like that next year.

[i70q7m7ghw]

any thoughts?

From an aesthetic perspeczive, I like it! It looks cool.
That said from what the challenges in next year's regulations are I would say it is the opposite to what you would want to achieve.
The nose will block much of the airflow to the floor pushing air to and above the sidepods. The sidepods on the other hand do not support air moving over them cleanly towards the diffuser, the airflow coming from the nose will not support the diffuser in any way. It will simply be wasted and create dirty (read slow) air over the diffuser. This will cost DF at the rear.
I would bet quite some moeny that we won't see a single car looking like that next year.

You're right, with this design there will be 0% airflow to the floor. The floor will be in a vacuum.

Needs more ducts. Cover it in ducts, and pipe them all to the diffuser. They must feed the diffuser and the floor. If it's not fed enough it will starve and die. Nobody wan'ts a dead diffuser on their conscience.

[Felipe 92]

@ScarbsF1 brought on Twitter this picture made by same man who made the last one.

[jamiehiu]

How about L Shape sidepod?
do you think it'll come again?

[turbof1]

It almost looks like a trireme or brig:


Newey's fondness for boats going too far?

[Holm86]

@ScarbsF1 brought on Twitter this picture made by same man who made the last one. http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/mame_nafr/im ... d8c7c6.png

Its not legal. It has to have two pylons attached to the front wing.

[turbof1]

@ScarbsF1 brought on Twitter this picture made by same man who made the last one. http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/mame_nafr/im ... d8c7c6.png

Its not legal. It has to have two pylons attached to the front wing.

That's a very small adjustment with little to no impacts. The focus is about the nose and vanity panel anyhow.

What stops teams btw from using one pylon, putting a paperslot in it and calling it 2 pylons?

Anyhow, if the tip of the vanity panel gets a slightly better finish, I can actually life with that design.

[Holm86]

I thought vanity panels couldnt have an aerodynamic purpose. That they could only cover the step and thats it.

[turbof1]

It's very vague. Practically almost everything about the car has in the strict sense aero purpose somehow. Last year's cars who ran a vanity panel, ran it only because of it's aero effect (keeping airflow attached over the nose).

[Felipe 92]

@ScarbsF1 brought on Twitter this picture made by same man who made the last one. http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/mame_nafr/im ... d8c7c6.png

Its not legal. It has to have two pylons attached to the front wing.

On his twitter account I found this one. This one has 2 pylons attached to the front wing.

http://s15.postimg.org/uyecon517/1387204333439.jpg

And the most beautiful one (in my opinion)

[Holm86]

It's very vague. Practically almost everything about the car has in the strict sense aero purpose somehow. Last year's cars who ran a vanity panel, ran it only because of it's aero effect (keeping airflow attached over the nose).

I know it has a slight aero effect. But that's just a small bonus. As far as I know the rules said something about besides smoothening the step no aero benefit was allowed. Otherwise teams would have molded the vanity panel into a wing or diverter.

Perhaps its different next year I don't know. The vanity panel is not mentioned in the technical regulations. I cant find it anyways.