McLaren MP4-26 Mercedes

[Giblet]

The odd 'lumpy' shape could have something to do with the other things that Whitmarsh was talking about that nobody but Mclaren know about at this point.

Next test, we'll get a lot more to disseminate I am sure.

[forty-two]

Next test, we'll get a lot more to disseminate I am sure.

I reckon they'll be sandbagging until Bahrain meself. Can't see them showing their cards during the tests.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

Next test, we'll get a lot more to disseminate I am sure.

I reckon they'll be sandbagging until Bahrain meself. Can't see them showing their cards during the tests.

To an extent. They can't afford to not test any of their more radical solutions. That would be madness.

[Shafto]

Next test, we'll get a lot more to disseminate I am sure.

I reckon they'll be sandbagging until Bahrain meself. Can't see them showing their cards during the tests.

yes they may sandbag a laptime, but they would have to push there car in areas of the track so they know what is going on. If they didnt, they would not know what there car does on track, if what is being implemented works and weather or not they have to go 'omg, these sidepods have to go!'

[Just_a_fan]

Amused by those who say it is fat-arsed or ugly. Compared to the RB7 yes, it is fat arsed. But then it has a different concept to the RB7. The RB7 is designed to maximise airflow around the sidepods to the beam wing / diffuser. The MP4-26 is obviously designed to maximise the benefit from air flowing over the sidepods to the beam wing / diffuser.

The MP4-26 is the most unique design on the grid; to compare it to the others without a wheel being turned is just folly.

Maybe the nay-sayers are right and it'll be slow. But if it's the fastest car on the grid then suddenly the odd aesthetics will be forgotten (except by those who say "sure it's fast but it's ugly").

No points for beauty in F1. If there were then most of the champions wouldn't have won a race...

[Just_a_fan]

I would like to see how the radiators are located relative to the L shape.

I'm not quite sure if it's necessary to form this extreme L-shape. The upper quarter of the inlets seem to be useless, because there the air strikes on the border of the radiator. They could have slimmed the inlets because of their additional cooling inlets on top of/behind the airbox.
Otherwise, if they've had closed the sidepods up there, dirty air would mix with clean air, wouldn't it?

What a pity that the sidepod inlets look like ugly Korean consumer car design, but if it's efficient, I like it.

Suggest you look at the radiator installation pictures. The L entry feeds a duc that then impinges air on to the front of a very large radiator. The L shape will have been chosen because it provides the necessary mass flow through the radiators whilst reducing blockage to the rear end.

The air will bend downwards as it enters the L entry so that air flows through the entire rad core. The bit entering at the top won't just go through the top bit of the rad core.

I'm guessing that if they could, they would have had the L shape pointing downwards so that the top of the sidepods was level with the lowest point shown above (next to the cockpit). But I'm also guessing thta they couldn't get enough air through the entry plus the airflow around the sidepod would hav ebeen too poor for the airlow over it to compensate.

As I've said elsewhere - these cars are a bucket full of compromises and the shape of the sidepods and their entries here will be just one example of this.

[n_anirudh]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89292

So, the only real thing we saw was the shell yesterday?

[NoDivergence]

Yeah, it's just a shell of bodywork. The real wings we have not seen yet either (the ARW), the internals are a misdirect, and the sidepods are the only real stunner that McLaren chose to throw at us. I'm curious though if they planned the sidepod to be in that shape not only to allow flow to the rear beam wing through the channel, but also that they are also using that whole outboard slab on the sidepod as a kind of huge barge board in order to redirect flow around the rear wheels as well (or using the raised section to work like a splitter directing flow around the rear wheel). I'm convinced that this solution will allow more mass flow air to the rear more cleanly. What I'm not sure about is if McLaren decided to sacrifice drag for downforce as they figure they'll make up the difference with ARW and KERS. If McLaren can make a downforce monster, and if the wear characteristics on the Pirellis is as good as anyone else's, this will be a huge win for McLaren's aero department

[Tamburello]

Im not a McLaren hater but from front on the 26 is F'UGLY!! However it looks great from the side! imo the last good looking Macca was the MP4-24 from '09 and before that the MP4-23 was a brilliant looking car!

I pretty much agree. The MP4-24 was one of the most beautiful cars of 09, too bad it was a dog on the track. McLaren usually make good looking cars. I wouldn't necessarily call the new 'ugly', it certainly looks better than last year's car in profile, and also looks aggressive if not 'pretty' from the front.

And I'm not a McLaren fan and hope they get their arses whooped by Red Bull.

[kalinka]

Looking at 2011 cars compared to MP4-26 I think (maybe) I get the philosophy of McLaren. It's a speculations, beacuse you can't say it's true or false without real data, but here it is :
Looking at other car's tight a**es, even before McLaren launch, I thougth that they're very optimistic to think that the high speed air will easily follow that agressive undercut curvature in all circumstances. If you have a sidepod like RBR, the airflow must stay attached to the sidepod all the way trough to the beam wing, otherwise it wouldn't reach it, and you get turbulence+drag. The more agressive is the undercut, the airflow is more likely to detach from it. So I think McLaren's thinking was : Let's not challenge this problem, and think another way. The result is visible. Even if you consider that this sidepod has quite a curvature too( but vertically ), it probably gets much cleaner air. I agree with some others here , that the lower nose and lower front suspension is playing big part in this conception. Hope it'll work

[tok-tokkie]

Putting the radiator air inlet in dirty air may give another considerable benefit. Besides allowing clean air through to the lower rear wing it should make slipstreaming another car easier. In the sense that the cooling airflow will not be much changed so engine cooling will not be adversely affected. We regularly see cars having to back off (or move out sideways)after a few laps of slipstreaming to allow their engines to cool down.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Putting the radiator air inlet in dirty air may give another considerable benefit. Besides allowing clean air through to the lower rear wing it should make slipstreaming another car easier. In the sense that the cooling airflow will not be much changed so engine cooling will not be adversely affected. We regularly see cars having to back off (or move out sideways)after a few laps of slipstreaming to allow their engines to cool down.

That's more to do with the fact the air coming off the back of another car is hot (relatively), not really a turbulence thing.

[myurr]

That's more to do with the fact the air coming off the back of another car is hot (relatively), not really a turbulence thing.

I thought it was a combination of both. Typically the car sidepod inlets are sized as they are due to the quality of the airflow reaching them, hence the McLaren running larger inlets to make up for the relatively poor quality of the air flow reaching them. Stick another car in front and you no longer get that clean airflow straight into the side pods, so relatively McLaren may be less affected.

Equally they may be more affected by lack of clear airflow to the rear of the car, so until we see the cars on track in racing conditions we won't know if there is an inherent strength or weakness there.

[myurr]

I'm going to go out on a limp here...

I think the MP4-26 looks good.

Let me be clear here, I DO NOT mean its pretty. In that regard it certainly isn't. I thought the MP4-25 looked sleek and purposeful, while not nessecarily pretty it was, IMHO, the best looking car of 2010.

I'm not gonna say the MP4-26 is gonna be the best looking car of 2011, but I think it looks cool. Ok those sidepods will take some getting used to. But I will get used to them lol.

For me the 26 is a pretty car except when viewed from head on - the sidepods just look a little too weird when seen in profile. But from every other angle I think the car looks great.

[kilcoo316]

"Clean" air into a radiator is bad.



Turbulent flow has much better thermal boundary layer properties.