2024 Mclaren Formula 1 Team

[SilviuAgo]

That was really strange...Didn't see that for a long time in F1:

[FittingMechanics]

Pretty decent sprint how things looked in SQ and FP1.

A shame Norris fell for Sainz fake, really good move by Sainz but decent pace in sprint.

I think Norris having to fight Russel caused him to lose a lot of tyre life. Otherwise pace was comparable to Verstappen. As usual, clean air is king.

About the top speed difference between PIA and NOR. This is almost certainly because PIA had multiple DRS+tow overtakes.

WDC hopes may be diminished but I think many overreacted after domination in Singapore, the car was not that fast in other races so it's not surprising it is not dominant here.

[Darth-Piekus]

Fine, you are the authority on judging driver talent.
(I guess you haven't watched brazil 2016).

I cant say that I have the authority to judge but considering I've watched Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel and many drivers of the past I can safely say that they have done more. At the end of the day it's just my opinion and you are free to have your opinion.

Anyway. We are off to qualifying to get a better set up.

[Zaamy]

Oscar had a brand new site of tyres where as Lando's were used, so that might account for some of the difference as well

[mwillems]

It may have had no issue, but if the cars are designed for certain rear wings and these are changed, even a bit, will surely have an impact somewhere.

Would love to know how changing a rear wing so that it is aerodynamically and physically the same, with the only exception being that it no longer flexes at high-speed to open a gap that increased straight line speed slightly with DRS closed, can make a car stiff, increase tire wear and (probably) mess up tire temps.

Likey to maintain top speed with flap closed (important here for defence of position) the rear would now encompass less load/drag if that is primary setup target.

That reduction has to be matched by front flap reduction too, else it becomes too nervous in oversteer risk.

Ultimately proves the gain available from rear, when flex was observed, was real inspite of team protestations they all say that when forced to make a change though.

Here it seemed to push them into "at the limit" uncertainty for the driver in dragging one lap,pace from it.

It'll be interesting to see if they fundamentally alter that balance now, trading peak speed, to approach qualli with more emphasis on total load. Perhaps with a different aim in tire life for race stints. Maybe that tradeoff will bring more ease to that end of stint tire life.

I think you're reading too much into a car that was likely far from an optimal setup.

[CjC]

We shall see in 3 hours if the team manages to find a more ideal set up cause I notice that Mclaren doesn't find the ideal set up immediately. Unless though we are very weak at Austin.

🗣 Andrea Stella after the sprint race:

"We have learnt and gathered good data which we can use to change the set up."

These changes will be key, if Mclaren want to show the others they are up for this championship fight it’s time to show their mettle

[SilviuAgo]

Oscar had a brand new site of tyres where as Lando's were used, so that might account for some of the difference as well

It may be an explanation but Lando was complaining about his Mediums since lap 6 or 7. After couple of laps the tires come back to him only to drop again in the last laps. Considering this Sprint Race was "only" 19 laps, and tomorrow race will be 56, I am wondering if a Medium - Hard strategy is valid, or we'll have a 2 stop race.

[Ben1980]

Oscar had a brand new site of tyres where as Lando's were used, so that might account for some of the difference as well

It may be an explanation but Lando was complaining about his Mediums since lap 6 or 7. After couple of laps the tires come back to him only to drop again in the last laps. Considering this Sprint Race was "only" 19 laps, and tomorrow race will be 56, I am wondering if a Medium - Hard strategy is valid, or we'll have a 2 stop race.

Landos mediums were 5 laps old, similar to Russell? ( I think) but older than Max and others.

[Farnborough]

Would love to know how changing a rear wing so that it is aerodynamically and physically the same, with the only exception being that it no longer flexes at high-speed to open a gap that increased straight line speed slightly with DRS closed, can make a car stiff, increase tire wear and (probably) mess up tire temps.

Likey to maintain top speed with flap closed (important here for defence of position) the rear would now encompass less load/drag if that is primary setup target.

That reduction has to be matched by front flap reduction too, else it becomes too nervous in oversteer risk.

Ultimately proves the gain available from rear, when flex was observed, was real inspite of team protestations they all say that when forced to make a change though.

Here it seemed to push them into "at the limit" uncertainty for the driver in dragging one lap,pace from it.

It'll be interesting to see if they fundamentally alter that balance now, trading peak speed, to approach qualli with more emphasis on total load. Perhaps with a different aim in tire life for race stints. Maybe that tradeoff will bring more ease to that end of stint tire life.

So in order to get the benefit of 2-3 kmh they decide to mess up the entire car balance? And it's not like they don't have the data of how the car performs at different DF levels, the gimmicky rear wing was introduced at Spa and all subsequent new rear wings were variations of that concept for different DF levels.

You're saying that even though they have run most of the season without that rear wing, now that they were forced to revert they don't know how to setup the car?

Interesting theory, but I don't think it holds up.

As for setup changes going forward, they will probably be mostly mechanical. I would start by going for a softer ride instead of this stiff jumpy boat of a platform they went for.

No, not at all. The whole paddock of teams know exactly what benefit a flexing rear wing will bring, a notably wider performance envelope, with less compromise in setup choices. That's why its desirable, for any team.

Removing that facility will always bring a harder choice in setting levels, they know exactly what they are doing. They wouldn't have made a flexing structure in the first place. I'm not critical of that previous wing structure (and made views clear in here that the rules were lacking in this aspect, rather than the team doing something wrong) but see it as naive that removing that distribution of load would not now bring compromise.

Emphasise that they clearly do know what they are doing, but just have less choices now in how they trade one performance criteria against another.

We'll see what choices they make now for qualli.

[CjC]

Lando massively tempering expectations:

https://www.racefans.net/2024/10/19/nor ... rstappens/

[FittingMechanics]

Lando always overreacting. I'm willing to bet Lando would have won the sprint if he started from pole.

[Darth-Piekus]

Easily with the clear air as the clear air is a huge advantage.

[dialtone]

Lando massively tempering expectations:

https://www.racefans.net/2024/10/19/nor ... rstappens/

He’s gonna lock all his wheels braking so hard.

Claiming Mercedes has more in it than them is fantasy.

[SilviuAgo]

[Ben1980]

Ferrari clearly looked faster, as did RB. But, as we know it's all set in, and if Lando doesn't win, it will be about not winning with the fastest car.

Like the claims Max has been dragging out some sort of Sauber into miraculous finishes .