2017 Mclaren F1 Team - Honda

[godlameroso]

Is Honda taking engine penalties at Abu Dhabi? I think the current package would go well there. It'll be fast enough to hold on to any position it lucks into, as long as there's not a safety car re-start, the McLaren is a sitting duck during those.

[godlameroso]

Dirty air can be an issue as far as 3 seconds back.

[NathanOlder]

If not a little more. Hence why everyone wants a good 5 second gap in Qualy. 1 second is terrible for wake

[restless]

do you have explanation why is that?

[fellowhoodlums]

Is Honda taking engine penalties at Abu Dhabi? I think the current package would go well there. It'll be fast enough to hold on to any position it lucks into, as long as there's not a safety car re-start, the McLaren is a sitting duck during those.

I heard that also. What's interesting here is that it might be intentional, not forced. Because in the USA they said they have enough engines in pool for last races of the season and for talk of taking penalties in Abu Dhabi to come out so soon and after no PU problems in Brazil sounds out-of-place.

[RonDennis]

It was first agreed by all (FIA + TEAMS) that the fin and the T wing will be gone for next year, so they must have worked on a cover without it for a long time and they were in advanced stage of development when the word came that the fin might stay due to better sponsor visibility, driver numbers ect....but still I'm surprised by the move. They must be very confident that they will have advantage in this area, but what could it be

Or they didn't want to spend the time/money/resources to reconfigure the car to include items they thought would be gone.

It seems only McLaren have those concerns which seems strange. I think it's more likely that they think they have found something which would be negated by a continuation of the current shark fins.

They probably developed something which is going to help and that's why they vetoed the decision now. It certainly won't help the others, because McLaren probably only followed one route, while acting like they were going to accept the shark fin. I also hope Zak Brown and his team come up with a new livery, because I really hate the look. The black looks terrible and cheap.

[stevesingo]

No, I compare McLaren with Red Bull after the pit stops of Alonso and Verstappen, when both of them were with new softs, and Alonso never closed the gap with Massa bellow 2 sec from lap 30 to lap 67. So, this cannot be excuse.

How can you compare VER in clean air with ALO 2-2.5sec behind MAS. Completely different circumstances.

The rest, read above...

The dirty air is below 1 sec gap. About your calculations: couple days ago I wrote you that taking into account only the drag and power you cannot have the real picture - the combination of downforce and drag is the important for the chassis performance. BTW, while this cannot be conclusive, it would be interesting to make your calculations with Mercedes and their clients, or Renault and their clients.

I explained last time that changing the aero load has a less significant effect than drag. 10% increase in vertical load from 21kN to 21.3kN increases the power requirement for the same speed the same as a 2.5% increase in drag.

I did a little comparison between qualifying and the race and it turned up some surprising results from Brasil. to the point that Horner shouldn't have any gripes about the extra Merc get out of qualifying modes.

Comparing works to customers would not turn up anything worthy IMO. I don't believe the Ferrari or Merc customers are getting access to the same modes. It might turn up the difference between the increase works teams get in qualifying as opposed to the customers.

[Singabule]

Removing shark fin is a political move, as their car is still empty from sponsor. Imagine FI unable to find more space in their car, and MCL would say 'hey, our car still empty, why not promote ur brand in our car instead, only for 10% higher price'

[diffuser]

Removing shark fin is a political move, as their car is still empty from sponsor. Imagine FI unable to find more space in their car, and MCL would say 'hey, our car still empty, why not promote ur brand in our car instead, only for 10% higher price'

Agreed.

[diffuser]

100+ sec lap, 60% FT doesn't sound like McHonda wheel house. S2 is basically 2+ kms of straights separated by 2 chicanes.

[j.yank]

How can you compare VER in clean air with ALO 2-2.5sec behind MAS. Completely different circumstances.

The rest, read above...

The dirty air is below 1 sec gap. About your calculations: couple days ago I wrote you that taking into account only the drag and power you cannot have the real picture - the combination of downforce and drag is the important for the chassis performance. BTW, while this cannot be conclusive, it would be interesting to make your calculations with Mercedes and their clients, or Renault and their clients.

I explained last time that changing the aero load has a less significant effect than drag. 10% increase in vertical load from 21kN to 21.3kN increases the power requirement for the same speed the same as a 2.5% increase in drag.

I did a little comparison between qualifying and the race and it turned up some surprising results from Brasil. to the point that Horner shouldn't have any gripes about the extra Merc get out of qualifying modes.

Comparing works to customers would not turn up anything worthy IMO. I don't believe the Ferrari or Merc customers are getting access to the same modes. It might turn up the difference between the increase works teams get in qualifying as opposed to the customers.

This is not about how much is the direct effect of the downforce on the power requirement but how it influences the exit corner speed, grip, traction, tires behavior, etc. - all of these eliminate the equal parameters in your calculations. However, speaking only about is it possible 10% difference in the drag, you can compare the frontal area of a thin rear wing - about 0.142 m2 against tick rear wing - about 0.285 m2. The difference is very close to 10% from the overall front area of F1 car. And this is only about the rear wing. When you have a good geometry of the front wing it sheds off most of the impact on the body parts of the car lowering even further the drag. So, this is quite possible to assume 10% difference in the drag, alone, not to count the other important factors influenced by the downforce.

Comparing works teams with customers is very important because we know for sure some baseline of the power units. The conspiracy theories that Mercedes and Ferrari supply PU with different parameters and software to their customers cannot explain the situation with Renault and Red Bull.

[j.yank]

Dirty air can be an issue as far as 3 seconds back.

We cannot see this in the lap times. Usually a faster car can cut off easily 10 sec with very constant rate per lap until about 1 sec gap. Also, this argument doesn't hold in this specific case, because when Alonso was loosing after 30 lap 0.7 in the second sector against Verstappen, he was about 2-2.5 sec behind Masa, but Verstappen was even closer to Ricciardo, and he never has actually a clean air even on merits of 5 sec.

[stevesingo]

The dirty air is below 1 sec gap. About your calculations: couple days ago I wrote you that taking into account only the drag and power you cannot have the real picture - the combination of downforce and drag is the important for the chassis performance. BTW, while this cannot be conclusive, it would be interesting to make your calculations with Mercedes and their clients, or Renault and their clients.

I explained last time that changing the aero load has a less significant effect than drag. 10% increase in vertical load from 21kN to 21.3kN increases the power requirement for the same speed the same as a 2.5% increase in drag.

I did a little comparison between qualifying and the race and it turned up some surprising results from Brasil. to the point that Horner shouldn't have any gripes about the extra Merc get out of qualifying modes.

Comparing works to customers would not turn up anything worthy IMO. I don't believe the Ferrari or Merc customers are getting access to the same modes. It might turn up the difference between the increase works teams get in qualifying as opposed to the customers.

This is not about how much is the direct effect of the downforce on the power requirement but how it influences the exit corner speed, grip, traction, tires behavior, etc. - all of these eliminate the equal parameters in your calculations. However, speaking only about is it possible 10% difference in the drag, you can compare the frontal area of a thin rear wing - about 0.142 m2 against tick rear wing - about 0.285 m2. The difference is very close to 10% from the overall front area of F1 car. And this is only about the rear wing. When you have a good geometry of the front wing it sheds off most of the impact on the body parts of the car lowering even further the drag. So, this is quite possible to assume 10% difference in the drag, alone, not to count the other important factors influenced by the downforce.

Comparing works teams with customers is very important because we know for sure some baseline of the power units. The conspiracy theories that Mercedes and Ferrari supply PU with different parameters and software to their customers cannot explain the situation with Renault and Red Bull.

I would tend to agree with the bolded part, but only on a short straight. At Interlagos, Alonso was WOT for 17secs following the T12 at 13kph, through T13, T14 and T15 to the breaking zone for T1. At the end of the straight the acceleration is negligible, in fact peak speed is achieved prior to the speed trap line. Getting a better exit only brings forward the point where peak speed is reached.

The RBR vs Renault works might make a good comparison. The Mercedes works vs Williams probably less so as we all saw in Azerbaijan the difference in engine modes when Bottas breezed by Stroll from way back.

[stevesingo]

Renault works vs RBR

Assuming 950hp in qualifying, same rolling resistance and aero load the Renault works car has 4.68% more drag.

I would guess that the RBR has a higher aero load as it goes around corners better, but I would need to write another excel for working out the effect of differing aero load and how that affects the drag difference. So, again roughly speaking, if the RBR has 5% more aero load the drag difference becomes 7.6%.

[GhostF1]

Removing shark fin is a political move, as their car is still empty from sponsor. Imagine FI unable to find more space in their car, and MCL would say 'hey, our car still empty, why not promote ur brand in our car instead, only for 10% higher price'

Agreed.

Definite sponsor drive there, but I'd say there is a little bit of tactical gain there as well... They've likely developed the MCL33 without the big sail and waited until the final vote was required (which by the way, needed a unanimous decision to continue for 2018) and then voted no, that screws the other teams who have been developing it.
There has been a couple teams who are not happy about the late decision and that is likely because of sponsor issues but also aero development will now have to restart in this area. It has been known that McLaren do not like the sail, now that could be for sponsor reasons, but there has also been comment that it affects the airflow onto the rear wing at all other angles except straight on... so.

Either way, we'd be silly to assume a company in the middle of a competition, trying to claw back to the top end of the field, have not thought about this possible advantage in saying no this late.