2025 McLaren F1 Team

[AR3-GP]

... cut for better readability

Not sure where the "incensed" vibe came from. I thought I was just tossing my thoughts into the ring on a much-discussed topic. I saw it was mentioned over and over again so I gave my opinion.

Just to quickly clarify a couple of things from my end, as I think there might have been a slight misunderstanding on one point:

- When I used the phrase "one-trick-pony," I was specifically referring to the idea that McLaren's effective rear tyre temperature management could be attributed solely to a singular clever design within the rear brake drums themselves. I absolutely agree the car is a sum of many parts, or an onion, as you say. My point was that a complex thermal behaviour like this likely involves a more holistic design approach across the entire rear end, rather than one isolated magic bullet in the drums, especially given the regs.

Ultimately, I've just been offering my opinion. My core thought is that achieving the kind of rear tyre temperature management McLaren seems to have is unlikely to be possible solely through clever brake drum design alone, mainly because that specific area is so heavily constrained by the Technical Regulations and Directives. I believe it points to a more integrated solution. But hey, that's just my take, and you're absolutely free to have a different view.

It feels more like a game of whack-a-mole here where if anyone would suggest that something is benefitting the Mclaren, others would suggest it's a mirage, or "not it". What is "it"? The Mclaren is the sum of many parts.

They were benefitting from the flexi-wings (front AND rear). Stella told us why (drag reduction) but now the narrative is that it was really nothing at all, "negligible gains"...Why did they develop it then?

The brake ducts are not constrained. There are phenomenal illustrations of the differences between some teams in the brake duct thread and why teams are interested in this area.
Mercedes: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 9#p1290949
Mclaren: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 8#p1284698

There are other reasons for good tire management. Having lots of downforce is a part of it, but Red Bull was the fastest car in T14 in Spain...they have "downforce". Having a good mechanical platform is useful, but Lando Norris said Red Bull is good in the low speed corners too: https://www.motorsportweek.com/2025/05/ ... -weakness/. Red Bull recently introduced Mclaren style sidepods and made a step, by copying. We are not comparing a Sauber to a Mclaren. We're talking about the last 2-3 tenths that separate Mclaren from the others and those incremental gains come from some of the many subjects which have been discussed, and others which have not. RBR is a championship winning F1 team. If they think there are improvements in the wheel corner area that they can make, then it's probably true. The "Blue, orange, and red spots" discovery is profound. It's something which other teams cannot ignore.

Arguing that every visible thing on the Mclaren is negligible and not worth anything has the opposite effect. It implies that there is one larger "thing" that actually makes the difference. I'm not sure that's what you intended. That is the definition of "1-trick pony". Mclaren have had incremental gains in a few different areas and some of them have been discussed here. The reality is the differences between the cars are quite small, and that's why they can lap within 2-3 tenths of one another. That last bit, tends to end up being the physical differences between the cars.

[Emag]

It feels more like a game of whack-a-mole here where if anyone would suggest that something is benefitting the Mclaren, others would suggest it's a mirage, or "not it". What is "it"? The Mclaren is the sum of many parts.

They were benefitting from the flexi-wings (front AND rear). Stella told us why (drag reduction) but now the narrative is that it was really nothing at all, "negligible gains"...Why did they develop it then?

The brake ducts are not constrained. There are phenomenal illustrations of the differences between some teams in the brake duct thread and why teams are interested in this area.
Mercedes: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 9#p1290949
Mclaren: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 8#p1284698

There are other reasons for good tire management. Having lots of downforce is a part of it, but Red Bull was the fastest car in T14 in Spain...they have "downforce". Having a good mechanical platform is useful, but Lando Norris said Red Bull is good in the low speed corners too: https://www.motorsportweek.com/2025/05/ ... -weakness/. Red Bull recently introduced Mclaren style sidepods and made a step, by copying. We are not comparing a Sauber to a Mclaren. We're talking about the last 2-3 tenths that separate Mclaren from the others and those incremental gains come from some of the many subjects which have been discussed, and others which have not. RBR is a championship winning F1 team. If they think there are improvements in the wheel corner area that they can make, then it's probably true. The "Blue, orange, and red spots" discovery is profound. It's something which other teams cannot ignore.

Arguing that every visible thing on the Mclaren is negligible and not worth anything has the opposite effect. It implies that there is one larger "thing" that actually makes the difference. I'm not sure that's what you intended. That is the definition of "1-trick pony". Mclaren have had incremental gains in a few different areas and some of them have been discussed here. The reality is the differences between the cars are quite small, and that's why they can lap within 2-3 tenths of one another. That last bit, tends to end up being the physical differences between the cars.

1) Not what I was suggesting, but it's pretty fair to say that everything that is visible, it's easily copy-able. If a significant part of the advantage was where other teams could see it, then you can kiss your long-lasting advantage good bye, because it will be on your competitor's cars as soon as their logistics allow it, yet nobody has come close to replicating the idea so far. Since I am touching on this part to begin with, addressing your last point, no, it doesn't have to mean that there is one larger thing that makes the difference. It implies that there's a collective of design choices and implementations that together create the advantage that McLaren is currently enjoying.

2) McLaren has always had the same stance on flexi-wings. It's the rest who were claiming it has significant balance implications. Asking why a Formula 1 team developed something even for marginal gains is redundant, even as an attempted irony. A part that brings 0.001s advantage is always worth putting in the car for a formula 1 team. It's also something that has hardly any development cost. Not a new feature by any means, its been part of the sport since forever. They said it wouldn't change much even if restricted, so far they're right on their evaluation. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be better off with it.

3) The fact that the brake ducts are complicated does not negate the fact that they're restricted. Everything is complicated in Formula1. But teams don't have anywhere near the same freedom they used to have around brake drums. The PCM stuff, which with the benefit of hindsight is turning to be more of a self-promotion by the original source rather than a legit idea, is highly unlikely to be possible at all under current regulations. Which goes back to my previous assessment. How is it that McLaren has come up with such an intricate legal brake duct design that none of the other teams managed to in 3 years of these regulations? It must be some crazy exotic piece of engineering since according to RedBull it completely blows every other team's rear temp management solution out of the water.

4) T14 is not a valid data point. McLaren had a smaller rear wing and they were arriving at T14 quicker so they couldn't take the corner flat. One corner alone can't be used as an indicator of who has more downforce. Alpine also took the corner flat, they're nowhere near RedBull and McLaren. Being good in low speed corners doesn't automatically mean you have a good mechanical platform either. You're looking at things in isolation. It's the overall balance that is most important, not how good you are at one particular area/corner.

5) Your Sauber to RedBull comparison, is in my opinion, spun around. It's precisely because RedBull and McLaren are at the sharp end of the field that it's so difficult for competitors to catch up. Sauber may have plenty of areas they can improve on to close that gap. RedBull, Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren are exploiting the current regulations at the absolute limit. The closer you get to that limit, the more difficult it is to find the next tenth in laptime.

But as I said before, you're inclined to your opinion as I am to mine. Until proven wrong, I maintain that McLaren's rear temp management solution is unlikely to come from their brake duct design alone. The fact that RedBull believed it's not possible to get that sort of cooling through air alone just enforces my belief.

A final thing to add to this, you're also kind of using this RedBull source as the word of god. We don't really know what exactly they observed. There is no sense of scale whatsoever. All we know is that they saw blue spots where other team's were red. Yeah, okay cool, what is red and what is blue exactly? I can make a scale where 60 degress is white, 65 degrees is red hot and 55 degrees is dark blue. Context is important. Also, where exactly was this measurement taken? And when? Which track, which lap, which session, which corner, what was the speed, etc ... Too many variables we don't know.

I’ll step back, we can agree to disagree and move on. I just wanted to share my perspective. If future events prove me wrong, I’ll gladly admit it

[mwillems]

I think he could read a menu and think it was being unreasonable with him.

That's genuinely one of the most bizarre and left field responses I've seen from AR3 or the forum in general, it barely even seemed to relate to the original post, which clearly just wanted to try and engage constructively.

[AR3-GP]

1) Not what I was suggesting, but it's pretty fair to say that everything that is visible, it's easily copy-able. If a significant part of the advantage was where other teams could see it, then you can kiss your long-lasting advantage good bye, because it will be on your competitor's cars as soon as their logistics allow it, yet nobody has come close to replicating the idea so far. Since I am touching on this part to begin with, addressing your last point, no, it doesn't have to mean that there is one larger thing that makes the difference. It implies that there's a collective of design choices and implementations that together create the advantage that McLaren is currently enjoying.

Seeing something that is visible, doesn't mean you copy it right away because you first have to understand why it would benefit your own car. It took Mercedes 2-3 years to make real sidepods even though they could have just copied it since 2022. There were images of Red Bull's floor in 2022 and 2023. It takes time to understand and then replicate. Williams made Red Bull clone sidepods for this year. They've seen those sidepods since 2022. There are other examples.

3) The fact that the brake ducts are complicated does not negate the fact that they're restricted. Everything is complicated in Formula1. But teams don't have anywhere near the same freedom they used to have around brake drums. The PCM stuff, which with the benefit of hindsight is turning to be more of a self-promotion by B-Sport rather than a legit idea, is highly unlikely to be possible at all under current regulations. Which goes back to my previous assessment. How is it that McLaren has come up with such an intricate legal brake duct design that none of the other teams managed to in 3 years of these regulations? It must be some crazy exotic piece of engineering since according to RedBull it completely blows every other team's rear temp management solution out of the water.

You could turn it around and ask how Mclaren have managed to invent mini-DRS last year, when the wing regulations were well known? Well, that's just what the better teams do. They find clever things to do where no one else did before...Arguing that the regs are restrictive and nothing interesting can be done is not how to win.

5) Your Sauber to RedBull comparison, in my opinion, spun around. It's precisely because RedBull and McLaren are at the sharp end of the field that it's so difficult for competitors to catch up. Sauber may have plenty of areas they can improve on to close that gap. RedBull, Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren are exploiting the current regulations at the absolute limit. The closer you get to that limit, the more difficult it is to find the next tenth in laptime.

There's no sense that we are close to any development ceiling. Mclaren have argued that their rate of progression has not lowered.

Stella says that the rate of development has been consistent with that he has seen during his tenure as team principal, one that helped the team turn around its dismal start to 2023 to constructors’ champion in 2024.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/analy ... /10695628/

A final thing to add to this, you're also kind of using this RedBull source as the word of god. We don't really know what exactly they observed. There is no sense of scale whatsoever. All we know is that they saw blue spots where other team's were red. Yeah, okay cool, what is red and what is blue exactly? I can make a scale where 60 degress is white, 65 degrees is red hot and 55 degrees is dark blue. Context is important. Also, where exactly was this measurement taken? And when? Which track, which corner, what was the speed, etc ... Too many variables we don't know.

I don't think they would invent an observation that was not real or immaterial, and then try to imitate it. It's more logical that the colors have a physical significance from a temperature/performance point of view, and that's why they are seeking to make upgrades in this area. There's no reason to assume they are a bunch of amateurs who missed the context of the images. They are much smarter than we are.




At the end of the day, I think there are gains for other teams to follow in the brake duct area. The evidence is certainly compelling. I can't find the article that I wanted now (I believe it was originally written in German which makes it hard to find from English language search engines). While many of the articles (autosport, motorsport, etc) discussed the colors, one of them said the photos were from the pitstops when the wheels were removed at either Bahrain, Japan, or China.

It is understood that Red Bull has looked at some thermal images obtained from an outside party, which have shown interesting "blue" spots - indicating that certain parts of the McLaren brake drums are remarkably cold compared to others.

Things only get interesting when the mechanics work on the extremely complex cooling system. But that's exactly when McLaren employees line up in front of the car like footballers at the free-kick wall, and you can't see anything.

The question of all questions is why mechanics always behave so suspiciously. That might be the answer. The solution might only be found if one could see what the mechanics are changing, adjusting, replacing, or checking. The regulations regarding brake ventilation are relatively clear. The so-called drum, which encloses the entire assembly and is located directly under the rim, is subject to strict regulations regarding its dimensions. However, the air flow inside and the materials used are free.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... -kuehlung/


It's no silver bullet, but at the moment Mclaren is the car to have and it's full of good ideas. The other teams should understand and implement them.

[FittingMechanics]

It's likely that blue on thermal camera means ambient temperature (or close to it) while red is hottest (maybe 100C or so).

To me it just means that McLaren probably just has a super effective isolation (or great cooling) in parts of the brakes.

[Quantum]

It's likely that blue on thermal camera means ambient temperature (or close to it) while red is hottest (maybe 100C or so).

To me it just means that McLaren probably just has a super effective isolation (or great cooling) in parts of the brakes.

Anyone seen these images?
Amazed Red Bull haven't released them.

$40k thermal cameras fixatedly pointed at rivals rather than their own car does seem to be wasteful.

[FittingMechanics]

Anyone seen these images?
Amazed Red Bull haven't released them.

$40k thermal cameras fixatedly pointed at rivals rather than their own car does seem to be wasteful.

To me this is a prime example of "--- stirring". Red Bull knows exactly the temperatures of those areas but they've decided to say that they are "blue" and that they can't be cooled by air. Effectively saying that McLaren is cheating and implying temperature is lower than ambient.

[BMMR61]

Red Bull seem to put bullets in the FIA's gun and ask them to fire away. First was flexi-wings rear, then flexi-wings front, mini DRS, water cooled tyres, and the latest of all allegations is the brake drum using phase-change cooling or some space age tech. The mind boggles with all this Horner nonsense, with either nothing or little to back much of it up. The methods of measuring wing deflection using static load was established long ago then recently modified due to Red Bull's and others' concerns. Pirelli brushed away the w/c tyres with half a sentence, and the FIA did a close examination of the brake "cake-tins" (sorry I'm old and "brake drums" have other connotations!) with an unequivocal all clear.

It's not hard to understand why serious McLaren fans are feeling more vindicated than relieved by the Barcelona performance. Stella and others said "it won't change much", someone in Red Bull was feeding the media saying "McLaren will be nowhere". So if we are to ask who has been more honest throughout this - Red Bull or McLaren, it should be a no-brainer. Whose words are proven more factual? I doubt it will stop another round of some totally spurious concoction, most likely from the office of Christian Horner. It was nice that Toto basically said "enough of all these accusations". Yes M-B do supply power units but.....

It shouldn't be a surprise that the team which has had arguably the most "grey area" innovations in the past two decades should also say "they must be cheating".

[Quantum]

To me this is a prime example of "--- stirring". Red Bull knows exactly the temperatures of those areas but they've decided to say that they are "blue" and that they can't be cooled by air. Effectively saying that McLaren is cheating and implying temperature is lower than ambient.

Precisely.
Publish the photos and point to the irregularity reasoning for illegality. Or....get on with it(I know some have a real issue with that, but it really is as simple as that).
Instead we have an PR machine churning out endless stories about how they're "unhappy" with what McLaren are doing along with highly misleading suggestions of cheating.
The way McLaren are dealing with these incessant, unhealthy and irregular obsessions is exemplary to be quite frank.
Kudos to the Macca crew.

[mwillems]

I haven't noticed anything special about Mclaren starts. They have some good ones on a day when others have bad ones but they also have some bad ones on a day when others have good ones.

Russell had the best start in Imola. Norris didn't have a good one in Spain. Piastri had the best one in Jeddah. Verstappen had the best one in Japan. Not a clear trend to me. Rear traction in a race stint is connected to tire temperatures among other things.

The starts are noticeably better than last year in my view, and the car is generally better off the line than others.

More important is the empirical view. The telemetry demonstrates my points of the way the car is driven through corners and also of strong launch speeds, where the Mclaren is in general running at the fastest speed for most of the launch phase through to the first corner. Sometimes it is a bigger gap, sometimes not, but it is consistently a strong car from launch.

The Mclaren would appear to have excellent rear traction.

[mwillems]

To me this is a prime example of "--- stirring". Red Bull knows exactly the temperatures of those areas but they've decided to say that they are "blue" and that they can't be cooled by air. Effectively saying that McLaren is cheating and implying temperature is lower than ambient.

Precisely.
Publish the photos and point to the irregularity reasoning for illegality. Or....get on with it(I know some have a real issue with that, but it really is as simple as that).
Instead we have an PR machine churning out endless stories about how they're "unhappy" with what McLaren are doing along with highly misleading suggestions of cheating.
The way McLaren are dealing with these incessant, unhealthy and irregular obsessions is exemplary to be quite frank.
Kudos to the Macca crew.

I'm sure we are running colder, but the idea that blue = "brake temps as if idling" is nonsense.
This was clearly there for some of the less informed members of the public to hook onto a perception.
Also, when was this taken? Was this after a very slow in lap with almost no use of the brakes and plenty of cooling?

Most of what is posted about the Mclaren and its drivers are fully unsubstantiated opinions (Posed at times as fact), which clearly have a bias, that when reviewed or questioned, you end up in a circular argument because either the quoting from articles was so selective in order to support a specific argument - or the "context window" of the individual is so small replies are made that were covered a few posts back, and you end up circling round endlessly.

When you have a conversation with someone who's motivation in a discussion is to somehow work through everything to make it fit an outcome and to utilise selective memory and selective quoting, let's be honest, it's an utter waste of time engaging with them.

[Quantum]

I'm sure we are running colder, but the idea that blue = "brake temps as if idling" is nonsense.
This was clearly there for some of the less informed members of the public to hook onto a perception.
Also, when was this taken? Was this after a very slow in lap with almost no use of the brakes and plenty of cooling?

Highly likely to be the case they are running cooler. However if there is no presented Thermal Imaging, it may as well just be "thermal imagining".

Most of what is posted about the Mclaren and its drivers are fully unsubstantiated opinions (Posed at times as fact), which clearly have a bias, that when reviewed or questioned, you end up in a circular argument because either the quoting from articles was so selective in order to support a specific argument - or the "context window" of the individual is so small replies are made that were covered a few posts back, and you end up circling round endlessly.

A by-product of "thermal imagining" and negatively associated context by way of acrimonious finger pointing. All you have to do now is go behind the scenes and complain to the FIA(along with your "sister" team), then spill some crumbs to Michael Schmidt to perpetuate the propaganda reel.

At what point do those guys just *"fix their f--ing car"?
Or are the thermal cameras designated to be pointed away from their own cars?

*Trademarked

[Emag]

It's not even that to be honest, everyone has their own bias. Of course, selling opinions for facts with selective sources is not something I agree with either, but everyone has their own perception of what is a high quality source and what is not. So naturally, you will disagree with them.

I just think the arguments in general were weak and that's where I wanted to chime in, offering my view on the topic.

The "wall" of mechanics when the car is bare, which is used as the biggest indicator of something going on there, is one example of confirmation bias. There's a million reasons why mechanics hide things from the camera when the bodywork is removed. Every team does it. If you believe there is something tricky going on in the brake ducts though, you will just take that as a sign to confirm your belief.

McLaren in particular do it to an "extreme" degree and they have been doing it for a while. I remember even with the MCL35-M, they tried to hide the diffuser for as long as they could. And that was just a simple different interpretation of the rules which didn't end up getting copied from anyone.

I have a slight feeling McLaren is leading the opposition into a wild-goose chase with this brake duct thing, although unintentionally. It was RedBull who started the "rumor" with something possibly going on there after this "blue spots" debacle.

[Farnborough]

It's likely that blue on thermal camera means ambient temperature (or close to it) while red is hottest (maybe 100C or so).

To me it just means that McLaren probably just has a super effective isolation (or great cooling) in parts of the brakes.

Anyone seen these images?
Amazed Red Bull haven't released them.

$40k thermal cameras fixatedly pointed at rivals rather than their own car does seem to be wasteful.

I'd not be so certain of that detail in cost and availability. Virtually all DSLR image capture sensitivity covers IR but screened post lens to avoid collated detail from that part of spectrum. The big manufacturers will remove that through service facility if requested, it wouldn't look any different from casual observation in use and among other photographers.
To screen out the visible spectrum also a IR passing filter can be used .... the longer telephoto lenses have filtration slot back near camera body to facilitate if needed. That would leave just a IR spectrum image in its entirety, no human visible light as part of image consolidation.

Nobody could really tell if one was being used in this configuration in reality.

[AR3-GP]

It's likely that blue on thermal camera means ambient temperature (or close to it) while red is hottest (maybe 100C or so).

To me it just means that McLaren probably just has a super effective isolation (or great cooling) in parts of the brakes.

Anyone seen these images?
Amazed Red Bull haven't released them.

$40k thermal cameras fixatedly pointed at rivals rather than their own car does seem to be wasteful.

Read what is being posted, or don't, but don't create confusion for others because you don't want to read: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewt ... 1#p1291131

and reposted:

It is understood that Red Bull has looked at some thermal images obtained from an outside party, which have shown interesting "blue" spots - indicating that certain parts of the McLaren brake drums are remarkably cold compared to others.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/heat ... /10720911/