2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[Vanja #66]

4-5kph with that setup.... best to use the Qualy setup as that was the one that offered the right balance

But you can see the point, the diffence with this wing is much bigger in the slower corners than the straights. In fact, more wing didn't help us much more in the slower corners in FP3, we just needed a wing that was getting sufficient load that the aero was working properly, after that the floor could do it's job better. I really do not think this is a wing issue but the loading at the front of the car enabling the car to condition and use the airlfow.

I don't think aero matters much in 100 kmh or slower corners, it's all mechanical grip. At 250kmh you get about 6.2 times more downforce than 100kmh, and with these cars and low ride height at such speeds, it might be over 6.5 times bigger

[Tomsky]

The exit out of T10 is absolutely mighty against the Ferrari and Lando is matching Max there. There is a lift compromising T9, but the gains on T10 are worthwhile (almost 0.3 on Carlos). Then it's a bit of a bummer the car loses out on the slow corners in the end, but that's the situation at the moment.

https://i.imgur.com/aEuh9Ii.png

Carlos made a mistake in the combination of 9 and 10.

[mwillems]

4-5kph with that setup.... best to use the Qualy setup as that was the one that offered the right balance

But you can see the point, the diffence with this wing is much bigger in the slower corners than the straights. In fact, more wing didn't help us much more in the slower corners in FP3, we just needed a wing that was getting sufficient load that the aero was working properly, after that the floor could do it's job better. I really do not think this is a wing issue but the loading at the front of the car enabling the car to condition and use the airlfow.

I don't think aero matters much in 100 kmh or slower corners, it's all mechanical grip. At 250kmh you get about 6.2 times more downforce than 100kmh, and with these cars and low ride height at such speeds, it might be over 6.5 times bigger

It's not downforce from wings I'm talking about, it's flow conditioning and downforce from the floor. I disagree that the floor is making meaningful difference, the data and results seem bears out each time that it does and that a stalling floor in slow corners is the difference between us winning here.

An article from Stella talking about the front being the problem of the car in slow speed corners, because of flow conditioning, specifically from the front.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mcla ... ntil-2025/

The telemetry bears out the loaded wings benefit in slow corners.

I'd also wager that we spend around 6.2times longer in long slow corners than very quick high speed. It's all relative...

[mwillems]

https://www.planetf1.com/news/mclaren-n ... de-package

Even in low speed, we are faster because we added downforce overall, but most of the downforce was added in the medium range.

“So the low speed still deserves some specific work, and this is what in particular the aerodynamic group are working on.

can’t add many more details but, yes, we added some downforce in low speed.

“But we see that there is more at stake with some specific work to get low speed grip. And even if a Formula 1 car is at 80kph still, there’s quite a lot of load generated aerodynamically and that still remains the key variable for low speed grip.”

[LionsHeart]

Bahrain vs Jeddah Wing

• Rear Wing has little effect on top speed

• Rear wing has a little benefit in the high speed section, the Mclaren is fast in it's own right here

• Biggest benefits found in slower corners where a loaded wing helps the cars aero in those corners

https://i.ibb.co/Qcjmn6w/AusQ.png

Fundamentally this is a good car. Fixing the slow speed corners will help the top speed of the car also and an update here will see us competing with RB, since part of our issue at the first 2 tracks is the tricky corners leading to the long straights. With this gone we will get better exits and more speed. Though there is still clearly work to do on DRS efficiency, but I do think that this is in part deployment. It's the only reason I can think that we are dropping off like we are.

Bear in mind that the third (Err, second I think I mean?) DRS zone is a long curved run up to the DRS zone with plenty of time with DRS closed first getting our speed up (Like long straights with DRS that have previously punished us),and this time we only really suffer when we run out of electrical energy. Before that, with DRS open, we were very close to Ferrari.

https://media.formula1.com/image/upload ... /image.png

It's not the rear wing folks.

Is this a qualification? Then there is an error in the analysis. In qualifying, both McLaren drivers ran with a Saudi-spec rear wing. Only in the third practice did the specifications differ.

[LionsHeart]

Norris only used Bahrain wing in FP3 and was 4-5kmh slower on every straight. No improvements in corners and only losses on straights of 4 tenths in total. Jeddah wing is a very good and efficient wing, no doubt I spoke too soon in Bahrain, McLaren did improve on drag in the winter - if they are smart and keep the Jeddah wing as baseline mid-level wing

https://i.ibb.co/1TjVrYx/aus-fp3-mcl.jpg

I agree. For now, this only confirms that some rear wings are less effective, and on the other hand, the floor creates sufficient downforce specifically on this track.

[LionsHeart]

Did Lando use the Bahrain wing in quali?

Nope, just Saudi spec.

[LionsHeart]

Norris only used Bahrain wing in FP3 and was 4-5kmh slower on every straight. No improvements in corners and only losses on straights of 4 tenths in total. Jeddah wing is a very good and efficient wing, no doubt I spoke too soon in Bahrain, McLaren did improve on drag in the winter - if they are smart and keep the Jeddah wing as baseline mid-level wing

https://i.ibb.co/1TjVrYx/aus-fp3-mcl.jpg

4-5kph with that setup.... best to use the Qualy setup as that was the one that offered the right balance

But you can see the point, the diffence with this wing is much bigger in the slower corners than the straights. In fact, more wing in FP3 didn't help us much more in the slower corners vs Qualy's bigger wing, we just needed a wing that was getting sufficient load that the aero was working properly, after that the floor could do it's job better. I really do not think this is a rear wing issue but the loading at the front of the car enabling the car to condition and use the airlfow.

The rear wing is the most visible consequence to the increase of wing at the front, and it naturally draws a lot of attention. Doesn't mean we didn't need more traction at front and rear, just that it is the floor that is not operating properly in these situations due to airflow preceding it. I may turn out to be wrong, and I'm clearly going up against the creme de la creme now, but I don't think I am

But I agree with these conclusions.
There is no point in overloading the chassis with downforce through the wings if there is no noticeable impact in them. True, it is unknown how the race will go. In a race it might be easier to save the tires with a larger rear wing. Mercedes, however, installed a larger rear wing today after Friday. In the case of McLaren it didn't work and they went back to where they started.

If the race pace is high and stable, then the engineers will discover a lot of new things for themselves and perhaps, in the future, McLaren will not be a lame duck on the straights in racing conditions.

[LionsHeart]

The exit out of T10 is absolutely mighty against the Ferrari and Lando is matching Max there. There is a lift compromising T9, but the gains on T10 are worthwhile (almost 0.3 on Carlos). Then it's a bit of a bummer the car loses out on the slow corners in the end, but that's the situation at the moment.

https://i.imgur.com/aEuh9Ii.png

This suggests that Ferraris have a stable rear end on corner entry, which allows them to carry more speed into the corner. But this plays a cruel joke on the exit of the turn. This is some kind of compromise. Your photo clearly shows that in the end, Ferrari does not win anything because McLaren has high traction when exiting corners. And perhaps this is where McLaren will use all the peak power of the hybrid part of the power plant because the chassis allows them to do so. But in this case, on long straights, McLaren loses before the braking zones, since the battery capacity is the same for everyone. And if there is an increase in one area, then you will have to lose in another.

[LionsHeart]

4-5kph with that setup.... best to use the Qualy setup as that was the one that offered the right balance

But you can see the point, the diffence with this wing is much bigger in the slower corners than the straights. In fact, more wing didn't help us much more in the slower corners in FP3, we just needed a wing that was getting sufficient load that the aero was working properly, after that the floor could do it's job better. I really do not think this is a wing issue but the loading at the front of the car enabling the car to condition and use the airlfow.

I don't think aero matters much in 100 kmh or slower corners, it's all mechanical grip. At 250kmh you get about 6.2 times more downforce than 100kmh, and with these cars and low ride height at such speeds, it might be over 6.5 times bigger

Just for your curiosity: try opening the driver's door when the car is parked. And try to repeat the same thing at a speed of 80-100 km/h. Let's see if drag will affect it or not. I tried this many years ago and I know that it is difficult. This means that downforce is also created at these relatively low speeds.

[mwillems]

Bahrain vs Jeddah Wing

• Rear Wing has little effect on top speed

• Rear wing has a little benefit in the high speed section, the Mclaren is fast in it's own right here

• Biggest benefits found in slower corners where a loaded wing helps the cars aero in those corners

https://i.ibb.co/Qcjmn6w/AusQ.png

Fundamentally this is a good car. Fixing the slow speed corners will help the top speed of the car also and an update here will see us competing with RB, since part of our issue at the first 2 tracks is the tricky corners leading to the long straights. With this gone we will get better exits and more speed. Though there is still clearly work to do on DRS efficiency, but I do think that this is in part deployment. It's the only reason I can think that we are dropping off like we are.

Bear in mind that the third (Err, second I think I mean?) DRS zone is a long curved run up to the DRS zone with plenty of time with DRS closed first getting our speed up (Like long straights with DRS that have previously punished us),and this time we only really suffer when we run out of electrical energy. Before that, with DRS open, we were very close to Ferrari.

https://media.formula1.com/image/upload ... /image.png

It's not the rear wing folks.

Is this a qualification? Then there is an error in the analysis. In qualifying, both McLaren drivers ran with a Saudi-spec rear wing. Only in the third practice did the specifications differ.

Argh! Oops. Got that comparison wrong, but don't think it changes the outcome, but will review.

As you say, it will help the tyres a bit, looking forward to the race.

[Macklaren]

Both cars on the clean side of the grid now. This is huge on a track where grip has been sketchy all weekend

[mwillems]

4-5kph with that setup.... best to use the Qualy setup as that was the one that offered the right balance

But you can see the point, the diffence with this wing is much bigger in the slower corners than the straights. In fact, more wing didn't help us much more in the slower corners in FP3, we just needed a wing that was getting sufficient load that the aero was working properly, after that the floor could do it's job better. I really do not think this is a wing issue but the loading at the front of the car enabling the car to condition and use the airlfow.

I don't think aero matters much in 100 kmh or slower corners, it's all mechanical grip. At 250kmh you get about 6.2 times more downforce than 100kmh, and with these cars and low ride height at such speeds, it might be over 6.5 times bigger

Just wanted to say I'll go back to the telemetry in a bit, though I still think the floor is doing a big job in those slow corners. Only thing that I think is outstanding is how much of a difference there is in top speed. Clearly the bigger wing is the right wing though, and there's too much evidence supporting aero impact at low speed to ignore.

[Emag]

I believe the downforce is not important during rotation but rather the initial slowdown and brake application. With more aero load you have better braking, but more importantly on these types of corners is that you get more rotation during the initial phase of trail braking. This is crucial for time gain. As Mario Andretti used to say "I am amazed that drivers still think the brakes are for slowing the car down".

This is of course no longer true with modern drivers, as each of them is a master of the technique albeit at different levels, but I feel like most of general fans are not aware that the brakes are a very 'powerful' tool that allows the driver to control the pitch and the weight balance of the car, making the rear light and more prone to rotate while giving the fronts more load. Of course, overdo it and you lock up, or spin the car around. So it's not really easy finding the right balance each corner.

Anyway, the point is, with more peak downforce you have more initial rotation during this crucial and delicate turn-in point. Then the downforce "washes-off" as speed is scrubbed and it's down to the mechanical platform/grip to keep the car pointing in that direction.

This is what I believe enables the drivers to go faster on slower corners with a higher-downforce setup.

[SilviuAgo]

Both cars on the clean side of the grid now. This is huge on a track where grip has been sketchy all weekend

In theory this may sound fair, but last Aus GP's showed how quick you can lose the entrance in T1 or T2 being on outside of the turn.

Aus 2022:

Aus 2023: