McLaren MP4-31 Honda

[AmateurExpert]

From F1 Analisi Tecnica, there are better photos that show that the interface of the flap with the outer wing and also shape of the leading edge (to maintain an even gap with the element below it) below it are much more curved on the latest spec of the wing - so there is no way they could have just simply bolted the old flap on the new wing:



The whole article is worth a read. On the various permutations of the FW that McLaren brought to Spain (via Google Translate): "The Woking team wanted to acquire all of the weekend sessions lot of data regarding the new front wing without bringing both drivers on what could be the wrong path"

[OviJohn]

From F1 Analisi Tecnica, there are better photos that show that the interface of the flap with the outer wing and also shape of the leading edge (to maintain an even gap with the element below it) below it are much more curved on the latest spec of the wing - so there is no way they could have just simply bolted the old flap on the new wing:

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-poSPGhMRblQ/ ... eriore.png

Hate having to play "devils advocate" here for Diogo, but in that very same article (some scrolls below) they do compare both wing (GP and Test version) and follow with this conclusion:

Notate come il flap superiore, sull'ala utilizzata nell'ultimo giorno di test, è tornato "tradizionale" e senza la soffiatura nella parte interna. E' molto probabile che la suddivisione dei vortici Y250 abbia creato qualche scompenso aerodinamico alla MP4-31 ed è per questo che si è voluto testare una versione di ala anteriore intermedia e più tradizionale in quella particolare zona.

Google trans:

Notice how the top flap , the wing used in the last day of testing , is back " traditional" and without blowing the inside. It ' very likely that the division of Y250 vortices has created some aerodynamic failure to MP4-31 and this is why we wanted to test a version of intermediate front wing and more traditional in that particular area .

So yeah, personally I dont mind them being "somewhat lost" as long as they eventually turn it to solid improvement. Next week at Monaco we´ll know for sure which version stays and if truly the car chassis will be up there with the big boys.

[AmateurExpert]

This is testing. They bring different versions of updates to validate and measure how well they deliver the desired improvements - you can't accuse them of not having a clue based on that. The lead time for taking a FW from concept to the track is six to eight weeks - according to Matt Morris (McLaren article about aero upgrades):

It’s also a complete bonded assembly, so you can’t just bolt things on and off, except the adjustable flap. In terms of concept to track – it takes between six to eight weeks.

The point is that Diogo accusing them of not having a clue because they hacked an old flap onto the new wing at the last moment is laughable and wrong. Yes the flap can be changed, but that's just a kernel of truth embedded in a lie to make it seem legitimate.

[wesley123]

This is testing. They bring different versions of updates to validate and measure how well they deliver the desired improvements - you can't accuse them of not having a clue based on that. The lead time for taking a FW from concept to the track is six to eight weeks - according to Matt Morris (McLaren article about aero upgrades):

I don't think I have ever seen an F1 team actually mix and match parts.

[Piraxian]

Button ran with the new wing the whole weekend, and he was slower.

That surely can not be your argument

What's your argument? That Button was faster even though he took longer to complete the laps?

But of course, it's really very common for teams to revert back to old solutions when the new ones turn out to be better.

I wonder how that meeting went:
"Hey boss, we from the aero department have developed a whole new front wing, but since we aren't sure it's going to work we also made a part that's pretty much the same as the old one".

Happens all the time for people who know what they're doing, I suppose.

What I think is more likely to have happened is the following:

"We've developed a new front wing concept and have throughly tested it both in CFD and at 60% in the wind tunnel. Our tests have shown that it provides us an extra 5%-20% air flow to the rear of the car but also requires additional changes to the side pods and rear wing to realise the 20% gains, sadly at the moment those changes still need more testing."

"The tests show that once scaled up on on to the current race car configuration without any side pod or rear wing changes it should provide us with the lower estimate 5% extra flow. However with certain wind conditions during cornering there is a 33% chance that the modified airflow could detach from the car and reduce the rear wing efficiency by 25% during the corner. We believe this risk is worth trying on one of the race cars at Barcelona as it's a track we are familiar with the performance of the old wing concept and will give us some baselines for further development once the data has been analysed."

"We've also developed a 3rd variant which is hybrid of the 2 concepts. Tests show it will only provide an extra 2% of air flow to the rear of the car and will mitigate the risk of detachment during corners in certain wind conditions. We don't believe it it worth running on the cars during the race weekend however we would like to use this wing during the tests to make sure that our estimates from the CFD and wind tunnel match our exceptions around detachment in a real world scenario so we can feed that data back into the development of the side pods and rear wing."

[Alonso Fan]

Piraxian nailed it

[Joseki]

The F1AT article simply states that at the moment the new front wing changed the way the air flows across the car, it's not about being "wrong". Also Boullier said it's not the final spec of the new front wing since it will debut in Monaco (I hope for both cars this time).

By the way the rest of the article speaks well about the car stating is faster then Ferrari and behind only Red Bull and Mercedes, which is also what I've seen last weekend at the circuit staying a the final section of the cuircuit, the car is bloody quick in medium/low speed.

[siwillems]

The F1AT article simply states that at the moment the new front wing changed the way the air flows across the car, it's not about being "wrong". Also Boullier said it's not the final spec of the new front wing since it will debut in Monaco (I hope for both cars this time).

By the way the rest of the article speaks well about the car stating is faster then Ferrari and behind only Red Bull and Mercedes, which is also what I've seen last weekend at the circuit staying a the final section of the cuircuit, the car is bloody quick in medium/low speed.

Looks as if Mclaren are going for a good effort in Monaco, possibly using the last race and testing to sort the car out for the track were there engine has the least impact.

[mclaren111]

Somers F1:



This is serious rake - more than before !!

[hollus]

First post in just about every other car thread, from the moderator team:

This the official car topic about the 2016 [InserCarNameHere] contender, the XXXX-Y##-Z. This thread will handle more stringent rules:

-Absolutely no livery talk in the car topic. Liveries are by nature topics assigned to the team thread, and should be discussed there. Posts about liveries in the car thread will be removed.

-Discussion about the car's hardware only. No discussion about the laptimes (should be discussed in the testing or race threads). No speculation or rumors towards future features of the car; no speculation about the competitive performance (car beats car B but car C, etc.). Such discussions will be removed as well.

-Discussion about the Power Unit should belong in its own topic. How the car's chassis and bodywork is adapted to it remains in the car thread, but pure features of the PU don't go there. Since this is quite a grey area, we will not remove transgressions on that front, but will move them when appropiate.

That might sound strict and is infact so, but this is done to safeguard the topic quality. We will be very thorough about that this year! If you don't find anything worthwhile to post, please resist the urge and do not post. There is nothing wrong with that and is infact the better option when there's nothing new.

[shady]

Somers F1:

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Iyc3x5pfNt8/ ... 354910.jpg

This is serious rake - more than before !!

Is it the lighting or angle, but there doesnt appear to be vertical conditioning strakes for the diffuser section of that floor..

[Jackles-UK]

Watching as a back-and-forth argument fills nearly two full pages of text like ...



Let's keep it relevant and friendly shall we gents?

[mclaren111]

Shady wrote:

Is it the lighting or angle, but there doesnt appear to be vertical conditioning strakes for the diffuser section of that floor..

Lighting or the lack thereof.

Here is a better picture of updated floor & diffuser (Russia).

[GoranF1]

Chassis thread so, sector 3 times from BCN(if i put it in other threads Ferrari fans will cry alot! )

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjH9WA8WEAAZhie.jpg

After so many interviews to Ferrari guys I think it should be clear by now that sector 3 was a problem for Ferrari not because of the chassis but because of tyre management + wrong setup (which are correlated).

and who's fault is tyre management and wrong setup?

[turbof1]

Not in here guys...