McLaren MP4-31 Honda

[Andres125sx]

3rd best would be simply impossible.
Especially not this year since Williams, Force India, Torro Rosso and possibly Red Bull all look very strong.

And I don't think they are sandbagging, it didn't look like they were fast with any tyres and any amount of fuel. They just chose not to run high power low fuel on US tyres for whatever reason. That's a shame, they could have snatched at least third and made the headlines on the last Barca testing day.

I see this often, but I´m afraid it´s wrong.

"Barca" is the short name we use for FC Barcelona (football/soccer team), wich actually is Barça, not Barca, or if you don´t have that letter in your keyboard the pronunciation is a lot closer to Barsa.

But the city of Barcelona cannot be called Barça/Barca/Barsa, this short name only apply to the football team. If you want to use a short name or acronym for Barcelona, it´s Bcn


Sorry for the OT, but this is not the first time I read it (so it is more or less common) and I thought it was worth clarifing

Than again, if we are talking about Barca.. it is clear we are not talking about Madrid

But it is not clear if you´re talking about football or F1

[Postmoe]

I see this often, but I´m afraid it´s wrong.

"Barca" is the short name we use for FC Barcelona (football/soccer team), wich actually is Barça, not Barca, or if you don´t have that letter in your keyboard the pronunciation is a lot closer to Barsa.

But the city of Barcelona cannot be called Barça/Barca/Barsa, this short name only apply to the football team. If you want to use a short name or acronym for Barcelona, it´s Bcn


Sorry for the OT, but this is not the first time I read it (so it is more or less common) and I thought it was worth clarifing

Than again, if we are talking about Barca.. it is clear we are not talking about Madrid

But it is not clear if you´re talking about football or F1

Or a boat. He could be talking about a boat, who knows.

[George-Jung]

Why should I discuss football or a boat on a F1 forum?

but let's move on, before I get a reprimand

[basti313]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcskWS4W4AAztKy.jpg:large

In context, I propose that this is working with the monkey seat, spreading the exhaust plume over a wider operating surface.

Is it possible they might be blowing part of the exhaust gases to the rear wing through the central pylon?

No. The central pylon is just "shaping" the flow to have less turbulent flow, thus extracting a bit more and having better flow for the monkey seat and crash structure. There is no way by the rules to have the exhaust gases directed/exited towards the rear wing.

[turbof1]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcskWS4W4AAztKy.jpg:large

In context, I propose that this is working with the monkey seat, spreading the exhaust plume over a wider operating surface.

Is it possible they might be blowing part of the exhaust gases to the rear wing through the central pylon?

No. The central pylon is just "shaping" the flow to have less turbulent flow, thus extracting a bit more and having better flow for the monkey seat and crash structure. There is no way by the rules to have the exhaust gases directed/exited towards the rear wing.

Actually there are heat images around showing the exhaust plume is being upwashed that much it really reaches the underside of the rear wing. The monkey seat makes sure for that upwash.

It's not a game changer though. Technically it's blowing, but in reality these gasses don't possess that much energy anymore.

[basti313]

Maybe they are heavily sandbagging ? Something tells me though that by the end of the season they can be the 3rd best team.

Again?
Sorry, but this "sandbagging" theory is total nonsense.
Especially now, that engine lifetime and fuel consumption is defining your performance. If you detune your engine, you do not learn anything from testing, thus, you need to run it like during a normal race.
The second thing is aero: You run different aero packages, maybe not perfectly suitable for the track. But in the end you will do most running on the perfect aero package, to have a normal load on all components and as you need to find a perfect setup for your car to have a good starting point. Without this perfect setup you will be nowhere when the season starts.

So most of the long runs need to be in full race mode...realistic fuel loads, new tires to start a stint, perfect setup to stress the chassis. And that is what we see in the numbers: The 2015 longrun test data gave a good hint to what happend during the season. If we trust the 2016 data in the same way, we can see that McLaren gained 1sec according to JA...and I do not really see promising long run data at all for McLaren.
Did I miss it or didn't they run a full race simulation?

[turbof1]

You know what the thing is with discussions about sandbagging? It fills up so many sacs the weight pulls the topic down. The sand gets inbetween everywhere and it itches so hard. Finally sand reminds me of beaches and well... I hate beaches.

So let's stop discussing sandbagging, ok?

[McG]

Bit disappointed that after all the size zero crap that from behind the McLaren looks quite bulky. Well, the cooling outlet anyway. Looks like the biggest outlets of all cars?

[McG]

Is it possible they might be blowing part of the exhaust gases to the rear wing through the central pylon?

No. The central pylon is just "shaping" the flow to have less turbulent flow, thus extracting a bit more and having better flow for the monkey seat and crash structure. There is no way by the rules to have the exhaust gases directed/exited towards the rear wing.

Actually there are heat images around showing the exhaust plume is being upwashed that much it really reaches the underside of the rear wing. The monkey seat makes sure for that upwash.

It's not a game changer though. Technically it's blowing, but in reality these gasses don't possess that much energy anymore.

Even without a monkey seat the exhaust gas was going upwards.

[McG]

Maybe they are heavily sandbagging ? Something tells me though that by the end of the season they can be the 3rd best team.

Again?
Sorry, but this "sandbagging" theory is total nonsense.
Especially now, that engine lifetime and fuel consumption is defining your performance. If you detune your engine, you do not learn anything from testing, thus, you need to run it like during a normal race.
The second thing is aero: You run different aero packages, maybe not perfectly suitable for the track. But in the end you will do most running on the perfect aero package, to have a normal load on all components and as you need to find a perfect setup for your car to have a good starting point. Without this perfect setup you will be nowhere when the season starts.

So most of the long runs need to be in full race mode...realistic fuel loads, new tires to start a stint, perfect setup to stress the chassis. And that is what we see in the numbers: The 2015 longrun test data gave a good hint to what happend during the season. If we trust the 2016 data in the same way, we can see that McLaren gained 1sec according to JA...and I do not really see promising long run data at all for McLaren.
Did I miss it or didn't they run a full race simulation?

Actually McLaren said they were running conservatively. I doubt that means sandbagging which is a silly term anyway.

Alonso confirms this in a recent interview.

Go and troll yourself in a mirror.

[GoranF1]

I am not sure due to poor translation but i think it say that the slots in FW pilars do not work as ecpected.

https://twitter.com/Motorsport_IT/statu ... 0004940800

[proteus]

I guess they will be better than Manor, Sauber and Haas. Sauber had quite a lot of problems getting its car together, Haas underestimated the situation and Manor is simply too small to jump so many classes up in the order. Renault has reliability issues which can make them volnureable as well and STR - even though they are quick, they are never really really capable of seizing it and use it whole season. So my final guess is that the car is somewhere 13th and 14th on the grid in qualifying. In race somewhere in low points or just out of them.

[George-Jung]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcskWS4W4AAztKy.jpg:large

In context, I propose that this is working with the monkey seat, spreading the exhaust plume over a wider operating surface.

Is it possible they might be blowing part of the exhaust gases to the rear wing through the central pylon?

No. The central pylon is just "shaping" the flow to have less turbulent flow, thus extracting a bit more and having better flow for the monkey seat and crash structure. There is no way by the rules to have the exhaust gases directed/exited towards the rear wing.

Could you direct the flow of the exhaust gases upwards by shaping the central pylon a bit thicker on the top than the bottom?

[palimpodio]

I am not sure due to poor translation but i think it say that the slots in FW pilars do not work as ecpected.


https://twitter.com/Motorsport_IT/statu ... 0004940800

Yes, I understand they're saying that the McLaren aerodynamicists are quite disappointed with on-track test - CFD comparison. They had expected a better behaviour of their very much sculpted nose and front wing. I really wonder how motorsport.it can assure this.

[PhillipM]

No. The central pylon is just "shaping" the flow to have less turbulent flow, thus extracting a bit more and having better flow for the monkey seat and crash structure. There is no way by the rules to have the exhaust gases directed/exited towards the rear wing.

Less turbulant? Have you seen flow around a pillar at high velocity? It's more turbulant, you make little vortices that eddy off left and right.
Which is why I wondered if they were using them to attach the flow to the monkey seat earlier.