McLaren MP4-29 Mercedes

[megasyxx]

It's a nice easy to copy concept still, I think we'll see all teams with them by the first high downforce track.

Even on the Bahrain test we might see all of em having the bell pepper stuff

[RZS10]

He's just drawing what he heard they probably look like, each time he draws them they look different

Really? If I stole one of the wishbones, cut it in half and showed you the profile you would probably just say "ah that's just a one off wishbone, the ones they are using probably aren't like that".

People really need to let go of things in these technical threads. It's like how every duct on a car some how is linked to feeding the diffuser. Or every little sound the engine makes is some kind of new magic engine map that blows the diffuser. Seriously, drop the flavour of the month crap, it's getting old.

Wait, what? i just said that he probably doesn't know the exact shape as well, so him drawing them like that does not mean that they do look exactly like that, his illustrations are just another drawing, another guess at the shape. You could as well say that the car looks exaclty like he drew it from behind (which of course it doesn't). Because that is what you are doing now, taking his crude, fast sketch as the actual look of the part.
The sentence "each time he draws them they look different" just meant that his drawings are not to scale or very precise proportion wise, and that's a fact.
"He's just drawing what he heard they probably look like." - just watch the Williams video, there he even says "the picture that i saw in some magazine, i think" whilst drawing that low wing above the diffusor, it is safe to assume he has his info on the 'bells' just from other illustrations or pictures as well.

I honestly don't understand how you are connecting the fact that his drawings are different each time to me possibly saying that the wishbone would be a one-off looking different each time, there is just NO logic or cohesion whatsoever behind this statement...seriously...
Of course i would not say something idiotic as that because i am not retarded, to me it's just weird that you take 'just another drawing' as proof that the wishbones look like you said they would (even though his 'bells' are nicely curved and bell-like compared to your angular "super mario rockets" ...the only thing in common would be the rather low height of the 'gurneys')
Currently YOU are the one saying "look, look i was right" holding on to your 'crude drawing' without any real 'proof' , and that after you based your sketch on your previous idea that the wishbones are square in profile and not on a proper visual analysis. You were the one that insisted the wishbones were square even after I provided visual evidence that showed otherwise, saying you are unable to follow some easily comprehensible sketches.
I still believe that the 'gurneys' height is 1/2 to 1/3 of the main profile, bacause most pictures suggest so and we have no proof that would say otherwise.
We won't know the exact shape until we get more/better pictures (maybe crash with wheels off) or some official sketch/confirmation from McLaren.
_____________________________

It's a nice easy to copy concept still, I think we'll see all teams with them by the first high downforce track.

Even on the Bahrain test we might see all of em having the bell pepper stuff

Wouldn't be that surprised, maybe that's why no team is really complaining

p.s.: If you could steal a wishbone and cut it in half and it would look like you suggested i'd be the first to admit i was wrong.

[i70q7m7ghw]

He's just drawing what he heard they probably look like, each time he draws them they look different

Really? If I stole one of the wishbones, cut it in half and showed you the profile you would probably just say "ah that's just a one off wishbone, the ones they are using probably aren't like that".

People really need to let go of things in these technical threads. It's like how every duct on a car some how is linked to feeding the diffuser. Or every little sound the engine makes is some kind of new magic engine map that blows the diffuser. Seriously, drop the flavour of the month crap, it's getting old.

Wait, what? i just said that he probably doesn't know the exact shape as well, so him drawing them like that does not mean that they do look exactly like that, his illustrations are just another drawing, another guess at the shape. You could as well say that the car looks exaclty like he drew it from behind (which of course it doesn't). Because that is what you are doing now, taking his crude, fast sketch as the actual look of the part.
The sentence "each time he draws them they look different" just meant that his drawings are not to scale or very precise proportion wise, and that's a fact.
"He's just drawing what he heard they probably look like." - just watch the Williams video, there he even says "the picture that i saw in some magazine, i think" whilst drawing that low wing above the diffusor, it is safe to assume he has his info on the 'bells' just from other illustrations or pictures as well.

I honestly don't understand how you are connecting the fact that his drawings are different each time to me possibly saying that the wishbone would be a one-off looking different each time, there is just NO logic or cohesion whatsoever behind this statement...seriously...
Of course i would not say something idiotic as that because i am not retarded, to me it's just weird that you take 'just another drawing' as proof that the wishbones look like you said they would (even though his 'bells' are nicely curved and bell-like compared to your angular "super mario rockets" ...the only thing in common would be the rather low height of the 'gurneys')
Currently YOU are the one saying "look, look i was right" holding on to your 'crude drawing' without any real 'proof' , and that after you based your sketch on your previous idea that the wishbones are square in profile and not on a proper visual analysis. You were the one that insisted the wishbones were square even after I provided visual evidence that showed otherwise, saying you are unable to follow some easily comprehensible sketches.
I still believe that the 'gurneys' height is 1/2 to 1/3 of the main profile, bacause most pictures suggest so and we have no proof that would say otherwise.
We won't know the exact shape until we get more/better pictures (maybe crash with wheels off) or some official sketch/confirmation from McLaren.
_____________________________

It's a nice easy to copy concept still, I think we'll see all teams with them by the first high downforce track.

Even on the Bahrain test we might see all of em having the bell pepper stuff

Wouldn't be that surprised, maybe that's why no team is really complaining

p.s.: If you could steal a wishbone and cut it in half and it would look like you suggested i'd be the first to admit i was wrong.

Sure down-vote me, go ahead. Nowhere, In my post did I say It was proof. I was just saying it's nice to see he had a similar interpretation to mine.

[RZS10]

Would never do that just because we disagree, the voting system is not meant for that.

But yeah, your slightly 'aggressive' response irritated me... I might have misinterpreted your sentence, now that you said it it's obvious you meant "cool his drawing shows the same characteristics as mine" ...

[Shakeman]

It's a nice easy to copy concept still, I think we'll see all teams with them by the first high downforce track.

Nobody has pickup points even close to what McLaren have done. It would require at the least a redesigned gearbox casing and rear crash structure which would require a crash test, just to get the pick-up points in the right place. I would imagine the change to the suspension geometry would also cause some issues.

I think we can guarantee it's a fairly involved process getting butterfly suspension in place otherwise McLaren would've kept it back to a later test. They must know it can't be put on the car overnight.

However, no one has presented any figures to suggest that the McLaren suspension is a magic bullet and it will be copied by other teams. I'm a layman but I appreciate the affect the diffuser has on downforce but I can't square it with all that extra drag they'll be towing round especially in a fuel limited formula. How will this device affect the fuel consumption over a full race distance?

I wonder if the Williams deflector will prove to be the way forward for the other teams?

[zioture]

I hope you will appreciate my drawing McLaren - 29
It was a big job to do to get the track vector.
If anyone wants the pdf file vector I can put on my website for free




Can download PDF Vector file
http://www.newsf1.it/free-vector-f1-draw/

[Matt Somers]

Now I'm concentrating on smaller pieces (rather than some of the diatribes I used to produce) here's a little piece on the lower wing element used by McLaren to support the Rear Wing and create another flow structure ahead of the Diffuser / below the 'Wishbone Wings'.



http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/ ... ng_17.html

[Pup]

I think James Allen, or one of the other journos, mentioned that wing at the beginning. Apparently they're taking advantage of the same loophole as Williams, and the wing sits within the area defined for the diffuser.

Here's Scalabroni talking about the Williams version....
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMMN7nEbsdY[/youtube]

[Chuckjr]

However, no one has presented any figures to suggest that the McLaren suspension is a magic bullet and it will be copied by other teams. I'm a layman but I appreciate the affect the diffuser has on downforce but I can't square it with all that extra drag they'll be towing round especially in a fuel limited formula. How will this device affect the fuel consumption over a full race distance?

With all due respect, how are you sure it creates "all that extra drag"? I don't think we can assume they are as draggy as they may appear. Heck there's not even agreement on their shape yet! I don't think we know nearly enough to make any assumptions about these things and what they may do/cause.

[Shakeman]

However, no one has presented any figures to suggest that the McLaren suspension is a magic bullet and it will be copied by other teams. I'm a layman but I appreciate the affect the diffuser has on downforce but I can't square it with all that extra drag they'll be towing round especially in a fuel limited formula. How will this device affect the fuel consumption over a full race distance?

With all due respect, how are you sure it creates "all that extra drag"? I don't think we can assume they are as draggy as they may appear. Heck there's not even agreement on their shape yet! I don't think we know nearly enough to make any assumptions about these things and what they may do/cause.

With all due respect, Newey was the first to point out those shapes will be draggy not necessarily what you want in a fuel limited formula. I'm using what he said as a reference point. Common sense should indicate that the amount of obstruction to the air flow creates drag and that there is a considerable obstruction to the airflow, that's the whole point of it in the first place.

Show some calculations that prove the drag of the suspension is more than compensated by diffuser performance and lap time reduction over a full race and compare that with a car that doesn't have the louvred suspension over a race distance.

[f1rules]

offcourse newey will say this, he also said it looked illegal from concept, but obviously its not

[adrianjordan]

With all due respect, how are you sure it creates "all that extra drag"? I don't think we can assume they are as draggy as they may appear. Heck there's not even agreement on their shape yet! I don't think we know nearly enough to make any assumptions about these things and what they may do/cause.

With all due respect, Newey was the first to point out those shapes will be draggy not necessarily what you want in a fuel limited formula. I'm using what he said as a reference point. Common sense should indicate that the amount of obstruction to the air flow creates drag and that there is a considerable obstruction to the airflow, that's the whole point of it in the first place.

Show some calculations that prove the drag of the suspension is more than compensated by diffuser performance and lap time reduction over a full race and compare that with a car that doesn't have the louvred suspension over a race distance.

Selective quoting. Newey said that from what he'd heard they would be draggy. That quote was before he'd had the chance to actually look at them.

[Shakeman]

Selective quoting. Newey said that from what he'd heard they would be draggy. That quote was before he'd had the chance to actually look at them.

Why is quoting Newey, a fair comment of his BTW, somehow selective quoting?

Of course it's going to be draggy, you don't need to be Adrian Newey to see that.

The point is whether the drag of the louvered suspension is worth the extra diffuser performance and will prove to be an advantage in the race when fuel efficiency and maybe top speed will be at a premium.

I'm as interested as anyone to see if McLaren have got their sums right and this proves to be an overall benefit.

[Coefficient]

However, no one has presented any figures to suggest that the McLaren suspension is a magic bullet and it will be copied by other teams. I'm a layman but I appreciate the affect the diffuser has on downforce but I can't square it with all that extra drag they'll be towing round especially in a fuel limited formula. How will this device affect the fuel consumption over a full race distance?

With all due respect, how are you sure it creates "all that extra drag"? I don't think we can assume they are as draggy as they may appear. Heck there's not even agreement on their shape yet! I don't think we know nearly enough to make any assumptions about these things and what they may do/cause.

With all due respect, Newey was the first to point out those shapes will be draggy not necessarily what you want in a fuel limited formula. I'm using what he said as a reference point. Common sense should indicate that the amount of obstruction to the air flow creates drag and that there is a considerable obstruction to the airflow, that's the whole point of it in the first place.

Show some calculations that prove the drag of the suspension is more than compensated by diffuser performance and lap time reduction over a full race and compare that with a car that doesn't have the louvred suspension over a race distance.

There is very little point in debating the drag etc. We all know that downforce is KING so if this device brings a favourable augmentation (i.e. pros outweigh the cons) to the rear loadings it will stay and the rest of the grid will copy it.

[Coefficient]

The suspension helps the diffuser by lowering the pressure behind the car. It seems these will work better at medium to high speed. I don't think they will be very effective at low speeds.
They are basically a blockage to air flow in the right place. It's just changing the atmospheric condition behind the diffuser by separating flow.
Changes in ride height wont do much since the inner connecting points don't move. As the arms angle downward or upward the outer points will have the biggest movement. However the diffuser is most effective at the outer edges, so the contribution from the suspension arms will be a lesser percentage that it gives in the middle of the diffuser.

It's a nice easy to copy concept still, I think we'll see all teams with them by the first high downforce track.

I don't think the teams south of Lotus could afford to rush out a new rear end in season.