McLaren MP4-28 Mercedes

[CjC]

Seems fair enough.

To me, the MP4-28 looks like the result of a back-to-basics design philosophy in the wake of losing their in-house innovations like the F-duct and the U-pods, and one also undertaken in preparation for the wholesale regulation shift next year. My guess is that the MP4-29 will not be powered by Mercedes, either. That's how I rationalize the sidepods anyway. It's senseless to go down an engine-defined cooling/aerodynamic route when the work can't be carried over. This is especially true when the engine supply is a total unknown. (Personally, I think they're big and bulky to derive a sort of baseline path for an engine manufacturer who hasn't been around for a few years and may not be at an elite level anymore in terms of packaging and cooling - like Honda.)

However, none of that makes sense of the car's bizarre front suspension. Meh.

Err, I agree with you about the powerplant for next season, definately 2015.
I dont agree with you about the current sidepod philosophy- about making a sidepod that is compatiable with another engine, surely you'd think that they couldn't make the decision mid to late 2012 on their next side pod design for a different potential engine supplier 18 month down the line? F1 surely is about making the most of what you currently have ie. wringing all the avaliable performance out of the current (Mercedes) technical partenership?

On a different note, I've just read this:

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2013/03/a ... a-f1-test/

some people at the bottom of this page have posted something about Mclaren calling their current car the MP4-28A, A? really? Fuelling speculation that they are designing a B spec.

First of all could this be true?

Secondly, if it is true what possible problems could have shown up for a B spec car to be needed

And thirdly, chassis are homologated right? and the suspension pick up points are on the chassis so they cant revert back to pull rod now, or am I wrong?

Forthly, if the chassis are homologated, could bringing an upgrade to the sidepods, engine cover, floor, diffuser, front and rear wings be enough to call it a B spec car? Surely upgrades to those parts of the car is standard?

OR, could it just be a storm in a tea cup and the speculation is just speculation, like last season when it was speculated that Mclaren would be bringing a raised chassis half way through the season?

[Pup]

Officially, there is always the A. They referred to last year's car as the MP4-27A-xx, for example...

http://www.mclaren.com/formula1/page/20 ... grand-prix

[onewingedangel]

The car has always been the MP4-28A.

The suffix is a trend that has been carried through from when it was common to have B, C, D spec cars.

Last years car was the MP4-27A, the year prior MP4-26A, prior to that MP4-25A etc. - none of which had B specs.

Even the MP4-24A which had a massive change in philosophy that debuted at the German GP in 2009, didn't get a change in name to a B-spec.

[R_Redding]

The car has always been the MP4-28A.

McLaren use a "McLaren internal Vehicle Performance Index" to derive names for their cars as they do/did in the recent MP4-12c .(which is why they have the F1 MP4-12 from 1997 and the new MP4-12c sportscar.)

but appear not to for F1 related.

MP4-28A.....McLaren & Project4 - car 28 version A. (Project4 was a Ron Dennis organisation).

Rob

[bhall]

Err, I agree with you about the powerplant for next season, definately 2015.
I dont agree with you about the current sidepod philosophy- about making a sidepod that is compatiable with another engine, surely you'd think that they couldn't make the decision mid to late 2012 on their next side pod design for a different potential engine supplier 18 month down the line? F1 surely is about making the most of what you currently have ie. wringing all the avaliable performance out of the current (Mercedes) technical partenership?

[...]

I don't think it's necessarily about making a sidepod that's compatible with another engine; it's about implementing an entirely new design philosophy - packaging, cooling, aero, power - around a completely unknown commodity. Would you really do that and just hope the speculations pan out and the lessons bear fruit? Or would you go with something a bit more generic until you know exactly what you're going to be working with? I think the latter makes much more sense, even if the cost is a relatively uncompetitive season that may or may not disappoint the other end of a technical relationship that's clearly gone sour. If you go for broke and get it wrong, you lose two years and piss off two partners.

That said, and relating somewhat to the MP4-28A, McLaren are the one team on the grid that would not surprise me if they showed up in Australia with a decent car that bears little resemblance to what we've seen thus far. Simulation is an awesome tool, yanno?

[JoeE]

All top teams can easily have several tracks of development going on so I doubt any engine choice other than Merc has been factored into this car.

[atanatizante]

...

In sum, McLaren have risked going backwards in the short-term to make substantial long-term gain - and, one month after their new car's track debut, their test season has scarcely begun.

I think that is a measured and fair assessment, would you?

How about this strategy: after 3 or 4 races they`ll sorted out the car and after that in summer they`ll stop developments, coz they have to take care about the 2014 car.
When you`ve got the quickest car at the end of the year, the best strategy was to continue with it, bearing in mind that everyone will shift their resources towards 2014 until June.

My rhetorical question is why didn`t RB done the same approach?

[Neno]

...

In sum, McLaren have risked going backwards in the short-term to make substantial long-term gain - and, one month after their new car's track debut, their test season has scarcely begun.

I think that is a measured and fair assessment, would you?

How about this strategy: after 3 or 4 races they`ll sorted out the car and after that in summer they`ll stop developments, coz they have to take care about the 2014 car.
When you`ve got the quickest car at the end of the year, the best strategy was to continue with it, bearing in mind that everyone will shift their resources towards 2014 until June.

My rhetorical question is why didn`t RB done the same approach?

In RB they think RB9 have enough devolopment room to win this year championship. If they can devolop and make progress with evolution of car who was last year one of fastest, till around June-August they have good chance to win championship, because most of teams will around that time shift all resources on 2014. Same princip followed Ferrari, Lotus and Mercedes. They know 2014. is too important because many changes, you will not year previous make completely new car who's 1% of parts cant be transferred on 2014 car. For Mclaren is quiet gamble, if they cant make new car work out how it should and spend too much time on that, they will not only lose 2013 fight for championship they will also begin to lose 2014 race. But if they make it work they will probably have potential advantage for car devoloping at end of year where championship will be decided.

[KingHamilton01]

...

In sum, McLaren have risked going backwards in the short-term to make substantial long-term gain - and, one month after their new car's track debut, their test season has scarcely begun.

I think that is a measured and fair assessment, would you?

How about this strategy: after 3 or 4 races they`ll sorted out the car and after that in summer they`ll stop developments, coz they have to take care about the 2014 car.
When you`ve got the quickest car at the end of the year, the best strategy was to continue with it, bearing in mind that everyone will shift their resources towards 2014 until June.

My rhetorical question is why didn`t RB done the same approach?

they obviously don`t agree which is why they have taken go down a different development route, I think the Mp4-28 has a lot of potential and I think could look a lot different by the time it turn`s up to melbourne!

[allstaruk08]

"For Mclaren is quiet gamble, if they cant make new car work out how it should and spend too much time on that, they will not only lose 2013 fight for championship they will also begin to lose 2014 race. But if they make it work they will probably have potential advantage for car devoloping at end of year where championship will be decided."

You could say the exact same for all the teams! i'm sure McLaren will have a model drawn up of a basic 2014 car with the regs that are available at the moment and will develop from there when the time is right. But for the moment McLaren will concentrate on this year, the MP4-28 and how much performance they can extract from it with new updates. When the time comes for new engine, new cooling, new regs (and how to exploit them) they will concentrate on that, but WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT. look at BMW in 2008 they had a car that could have potentially challenged for the title but they slowed development to concentrate on the 2009 regs, starting early doesnt always give the best results.

[spinmastermic]

McLaren are well into the developement of the MP4-29, they just started on the concept for the MP4-30.

[raymondu999]

McLaren are well into the developement of the MP4-29, they just started on the concept for the MP4-30.

Why would they start on the 2015 car now?

[Sevach]

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... G_2012.jpg
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... G_1899.jpg

Look at how 'fat' the mclaren looks around the rear end/sidepods compared to the ferrari

A couple of things, Ferrari has a great coke because of their radiator positioning, it makes the front of the sidepod boxy, but after that they can really shrink it.
Plus Mclaren apparently choose to envelop their coanda bulge to the point where it doesn't look like a bulge anymore, it's a smooth line progression, i would say it's intentionally bigger there with the objective of not having an "disconnected" piece body work hanging in there.

[Raptor22]

appearing to rather underdeveloped and podgey compared to the ferrari, SAuber, Mercedes, Red Bull and Lotus...

Why is that? not enough VG's per cm²?

Whichever way you want to call it, it just looks basic and bloated. I have a feeling that they're struggling to get development onto the car since Lowe is on gardening leave and they're reshuffling internally. Poaching Lowe is certainly a strategic move by Mercedes to move a spot up the grid.
Either WAy I hope they get this car working. At the moment it doesn't look very consistent

[Blackout]

Someone got better pics of these monocoques ?
The MP4 27 fuel cell looks much wider than the Caterham