2025 McLaren F1 Team

[Emag]

It's the upward flexion at the bottom edge of the DRS flap. This is the same type of flex that they got in trouble for at Baku. I can't determine if it's as much flex this year (we have to see it at higher speed, Baku was 320 kph, this is only 280), but there is definitely still flex there. Of all the wings I've seen from the test and last year only McLaren has this.

For reference from the test.
https://twitter.com/robertofunoat/statu ... 5536698836
https://twitter.com/robertofunoat/statu ... 8371882220

There is no movement of the drs flap at all, I don't even know what the video with the arrow is showing or implying. The gap where the arrow is pointing is there in every rear wing. You can take a frame screenshot at low speed, compare it with the frame at high speed and there is no flexing of the drs flap upwards at all.

We literally did this last year and people still don't know where to look Okay, I will show it more clearly.

Gap
https://i.imgur.com/0rTiDPK.png
No gap
https://i.imgur.com/HqoR1z0.png
I tried to match it so that the kerb is behind in both images. It's the same area as last year during the Baku controversy. The FIA took exception to this which is why I find it interesting that it is still a thing. I've only ever seen it on the McLaren. It may be exaggerated by the RW assembly flexing as well, but to my eye there is still movement in this area.

Eh well, there's no convincing some people I suppose. Let's see what the FIA thinks about it with the stricter monitoring in Australia : )

[Cs98]

There is no movement of the drs flap at all, I don't even know what the video with the arrow is showing or implying. The gap where the arrow is pointing is there in every rear wing. You can take a frame screenshot at low speed, compare it with the frame at high speed and there is no flexing of the drs flap upwards at all.

We literally did this last year and people still don't know where to look Okay, I will show it more clearly.

Gap
https://i.imgur.com/0rTiDPK.png
No gap
https://i.imgur.com/HqoR1z0.png
I tried to match it so that the kerb is behind in both images. It's the same area as last year during the Baku controversy. The FIA took exception to this which is why I find it interesting that it is still a thing. I've only ever seen it on the McLaren. It may be exaggerated by the RW assembly flexing as well, but to my eye there is still movement in this area.

Eh well, there's no convincing some people I suppose. Let's see what the FIA thinks about it with the stricter monitoring in Australia : )

Indeed.

[Farnborough]

https://i.imgur.com/mij1s5G.gif

Just normal flexing of the rear wing assembly like the other teams. The gap appears to open up because on the first frame you're looking at the dark asphalt behind, whereas at the end of the straight, the white kerb behind provides some contrast and makes it more obvious to see where the gap is.

Actually, your comparison there does show what is really moving (between those two frames? ) in that the whole wing assembly is rotating back and down under load.

Look at the paint detail "after" the front lip of main plane, you can see more / less detail of the rise area towards the main rear component moving into and out of obscured view.

The "slot" detail that's been picked up to comment along, is changing (not in size) from and to more or less oblique alignment with camera axis. That makes it APPEAR to change size, but caused by the whole wing assembly rotating backwards and away from the camera site which remains static in reference to chassis whole.

The rotation backward is what all other team's wings do as well. What was banned last year was the upward flex of the drs flap edge. RedBull can complain about the overall flex of the rear wing (where actually Mercedes has the most, not McLaren), but the claim that McLaren is still using the mini DRS trick is just pure hokum as there is no proof it exists on the MCL39.

You can see it here, how the the drs flap gets "disjointed" at the bottom edge :

https://i.imgur.com/HrIeF7o.png

I'm well aware of the history built last year,,of which component was bending too.

Also not making comparison to any other chassis at all. But that wing is absolutely bending backwards in those still image frames, that's just a view entirely of this wing on this car during that test.

That is controlled by "pullback" testing by the fia. As to whether it complies, I'm not making a statement. We'll see both here at 1st GP and again after Spanish FIA "upgrade" in test methods and definitions as to it's suitability.

[Emag]

We literally did this last year and people still don't know where to look Okay, I will show it more clearly.

Gap
https://i.imgur.com/0rTiDPK.png
No gap
https://i.imgur.com/HqoR1z0.png
I tried to match it so that the kerb is behind in both images. It's the same area as last year during the Baku controversy. The FIA took exception to this which is why I find it interesting that it is still a thing. I've only ever seen it on the McLaren. It may be exaggerated by the RW assembly flexing as well, but to my eye there is still movement in this area.

Eh well, there's no convincing some people I suppose. Let's see what the FIA thinks about it with the stricter monitoring in Australia : )

Indeed.

There is no flap flex like there was last year (the whole assembly is moving backwards so the static camera is "seeing" more of the gap) and that much is pretty obvious to see just by comparing it to how it was last year. The movement you point out, is not related to what made the mini DRS illegal last year.

On top of that, if you believe it is, you're implying that McLaren, after "offering" (being forced) to remove their gimmicky rear wing from their car last year, suddenly decides to put it back into the car knowing full well it's not allowed to be used and they would be forced to remove it again. That would be some genius decision considering the budget cap and the critical resource management that is needed with a new regulation set looming next year.

But sure, I am the one who is deluded.

[Emag]

Actually, your comparison there does show what is really moving (between those two frames? ) in that the whole wing assembly is rotating back and down under load.

Look at the paint detail "after" the front lip of main plane, you can see more / less detail of the rise area towards the main rear component moving into and out of obscured view.

The "slot" detail that's been picked up to comment along, is changing (not in size) from and to more or less oblique alignment with camera axis. That makes it APPEAR to change size, but caused by the whole wing assembly rotating backwards and away from the camera site which remains static in reference to chassis whole.

The rotation backward is what all other team's wings do as well. What was banned last year was the upward flex of the drs flap edge. RedBull can complain about the overall flex of the rear wing (where actually Mercedes has the most, not McLaren), but the claim that McLaren is still using the mini DRS trick is just pure hokum as there is no proof it exists on the MCL39.

You can see it here, how the the drs flap gets "disjointed" at the bottom edge :

https://i.imgur.com/HrIeF7o.png

I'm well aware of the history built last year,,of which component was bending too.

Also not making comparison to any other chassis at all. But that wing is absolutely bending backwards in those still image frames, that's just a view entirely of this wing on this car during that test.

That is controlled by "pullback" testing by the fia. As to whether it complies, I'm not making a statement. We'll see both here at 1st GP and again after Spanish FIA "upgrade" in test methods and definitions as to it's suitability.

Exactly, but RedBull's complaint specifically referred to the mini-DRS trick :

"I think Ferrari and McLaren are doing the mini-DRS stuff still."

And the movement we can see from this year's rear wing is not at all like the mini DRS.

[Xero]

I see a lot of casual fans online thinking the mini-DRS is the slot gap, and that the slot gap itself is illegal. It's great that DTS has grown the F1 community massively, but by god has it dumbed it down.

[Cs98]

Eh well, there's no convincing some people I suppose. Let's see what the FIA thinks about it with the stricter monitoring in Australia : )

Indeed.

There is no flap flex like there was last year (the whole assembly is moving backwards so the static camera is "seeing" more of the gap) and that much is pretty obvious to see just by comparing it to how it was last year. The movement you point out, is not related to what made the mini DRS illegal last year.

On top of that, if you believe it is, you're implying that McLaren, after "offering" (being forced) to remove their gimmicky rear wing from their car last year, suddenly decides to put it back into the car knowing full well it's not allowed to be used and they would be forced to remove it again. That would be some genius decision considering the budget cap and the critical resource management that is needed with a new regulation set looming next year.

But sure, I am the one who is deluded.

If it was just the assembly flexing you would get a broader see-through slot gap covering a larger part of the wing. The reason it's so visible at the edge is that the edge is flexing upwards at the same time as the assembly is flexing backwards. It's quite obvious when you look at the dynamic shots that there is local movement on the edge of the DRS flap.

All we can judge is the video. Your attempts at rationalizing isn't proof of anything. The equally proof-less counter-rationalization to that is to say, "if there's nothing to see why is the FIA spending extra resources trying to check it at the first race. Why is a team lodging a complaint for nothing?". This is a sport where teams constantly tread on the limit of the rules, sometimes it's allowed other times it isn't. We'll see what happens.

[FittingMechanics]

That video shows minimal amount of flex, there is no way FIA will introduce a test for that. If they did, they would open themselves up to protests from teams for all other surfaces, front wings, rear wings, winglets, etc. All of those flex as well, some much more than that slot gap.

I'm pretty sure that Red Bull has a similar flex as well.

[venkyhere]

This is a flexi wing, it's jumping up when braking and going down on the straight

While I can't really see what the fuss is about, w.r.t McLaren footage, what I want to ask w.r.t the above video of RB16 is : is this (the two coloured lines drawn in the video) really demonstrating "flexing wing" or relative movement between the car and the wheels due to suspension being acted upon by aero load ?
- rear suspension getting unloaded due to downforce reducing + nose diving during braking
- rear suspension getting loaded in the straights due to downforce coming on massively at high speeds

I think the illusion of flexing wing (maybe it flexes a little) in this footage is created because of the movement of the camera mounted on the car relative to the road.

[Emag]

Indeed.

There is no flap flex like there was last year (the whole assembly is moving backwards so the static camera is "seeing" more of the gap) and that much is pretty obvious to see just by comparing it to how it was last year. The movement you point out, is not related to what made the mini DRS illegal last year.

On top of that, if you believe it is, you're implying that McLaren, after "offering" (being forced) to remove their gimmicky rear wing from their car last year, suddenly decides to put it back into the car knowing full well it's not allowed to be used and they would be forced to remove it again. That would be some genius decision considering the budget cap and the critical resource management that is needed with a new regulation set looming next year.

But sure, I am the one who is deluded.

If it was just the assembly flexing you would get a broader see-through slot gap covering a larger part of the wing. The reason it's so visible at the edge is that the edge is flexing upwards at the same time as the assembly is flexing backwards. It's quite obvious when you look at the dynamic shots that there is local movement on the edge of the DRS flap.

All we can judge is the video. Your attempts at rationalizing isn't proof of anything. The equally proof-less counter-rationalization to that is to say, "if there's nothing to see why is the FIA spending extra resources trying to check it at the first race. Why is a team lodging a complaint for nothing?". This is a sport where teams constantly tread on the limit of the rules, sometimes it's allowed other times it isn't. We'll see what happens.

You're the only one who sees this.

The whole assembly is moving backwards, including the bottom plane of the rear wing. Looking at the bottom plane of the rear wing between shots is the easiest way to spot that this is what is creating the effect of the gap opening up when viewed from the static camera. The flap isn't bending upwards like it was on the mini DRS last year at all.

[Darth-Piekus]

I also don't see any Mini DRS flex here and I find it hard to understand where is the problem. It seems to me that Red Bull are doing their controversial complaints about everything again and it's boring at this point but who am I to stop them and the FIA from getting embarrassed again.