Comparison of all 2011 cars

[gcdugas]

I haven't seen anyone comment on the McLaren's much lower front body work. The driver's feet must be 2 full inches lower in the Mac than all other cars. With the central section of the front wing profile spec'd to give next to no downforce I would guess that we should see the noses get lower since there is little wake to clean up before the splitter... however Mac is the only team to do so and many are going for real high noses.

[Richard]

Yes McLaren have a lower nose. That is because they are seeking to divert the air over their lower sidepods.

The others have a high nose because they want to divert air around the sides of their high sidepods.

Is it better for air to go over (shorter path, less angular deviation) or around (allows large clear floor as seen with Williams and RB)?
We'll find out next year when the others copy McL, or not.

[gcdugas]

Low sidepods are risky... Williams was a flop in 2004? 2005? when they tried it... the following year they were back up high... but that was before the Zero-DF FIA spec center section front wing.

I think there is some front suspension geometry advantages as well as an undeniable CG advantage. We shall see.

[raymondu999]

Doesn't it seem interesting that McLaren seems to want to not manipulate the airflow, and just wants to let it flow through with as little obstruction as possible? For example the Red Bull and the Williams packaging seems to be confident enough to allow the air around and through to the back with their packaging. Kinda seems like they're lacking confidence in their aero capabilities, I guess? I don't know.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Or Maybe air flow not being manipulated creates less drag if they have the required downforce...I reckon the Maccas will fly in a straight line.

[raymondu999]

They did last year too. I could be wrong, it could be in fact that they have enough confidence to be radical anyways, or it could be that they didn't have enough confidence to have to make the airflow go around sidepods. It's just that the first one was the one that popped first.

The Maccas have seemed to have that philosophy since 2009. Be fast in a straight line (2009, Merc V8 + KERS. 2010, Merc V8 + efficient, slippery car+fduct, 2011, Seemingly aimed at low drag again) and ratchet up the wing. Versus the Red Bull, which just seems aimed at producing downforce whenever and wherever possible.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I would still take the Red Bull Ethos everytime.

It may be, the team couldnt get close to the numbers being ratcheted up by Red Bull, so intead of going down the RB path, they attempted a unique concept that will favour them at high speed venues.

I wonder if they have a workeable solution for highdownforce tracks. Maybe they wont need it if the 26 flies....?

[raymondu999]

Traditionally McLaren have been mechanical kings, with good traction out of slow corner exits, good braking stability, great turn in, kerb/bump riding, generally good slow-corner grip. But the MP4-25 seemed to nullify their past mechanical dominance with an aero setup that kept their car bouncing everytime it hit a bump.

I think actually the removal of the double diffuser might have helped them in that section, and that should give them back their mechanical strengths. I think.

[roadie]

Interesting thread, but all the photos are from different angles, however small the difference might be, which makes it very hard to judge things accurately.

[timbo]

Traditionally McLaren have been mechanical kings, with good traction out of slow corner exits, good braking stability, great turn in, kerb/bump riding, generally good slow-corner grip. But the MP4-25 seemed to nullify their past mechanical dominance with an aero setup that kept their car bouncing everytime it hit a bump.

IMO the trend started with MP4-24.

[PNSD]

The 24 had awesome mechanical grip. It was constantly one of the quickest through the slow stuff...

[raymondu999]

Don't forget the MP4-24 was competitive in Monaco too. Despite the anemic levels of downforce they had then. Until Lewis binned it, that is.

[King Six]

Sam Micheal has no love for the McLaren Moosepods

"There's the Williams gearbox, there's the Red Bull exhaust system and the way it blows the diffuser, there's the Renault exhaust system and the way it blows the front of the diffuser and there's the Toro Rosso double floor.

"Those four things are the ones that stand out."

[ringo]

"People have got nice cars and they've pushed and tweaked and done things differently but the other things aren't differentiators. Those four things I can see creating a difference during the year."

It goes to show that certain aspects of a car can act as an obstacle to further development.
Most things on these cars can be copied, it's the unique aspects that can't be easily copied that will give the edge and contrastingly there are parts that can hinder copying and refinement (if in theory all cars converge on the same solutions after exhausting all copying options).

Things such as pushrod suspension, fused beam wing to crash structure can come back and bite a team in the ass down the road if they do come in the way of further development. Though this assumes the team exhaust all it's possible developments to that critical point.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

No homologation for 2011 means everything is up for copying....some more easily than others.