2025 McLaren F1 Team

[Wouter]

Lando was in Amsterdam this morning filming in front of the Astoria Hotel .

[SilviuAgo]

Nice one from McLaren. #history

[Balalu]

Might have been mentioned on here before: McLaren are now the team with the most wins on different tacks - 51

[CjC]

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

Nice to know that good honest engineering got Mclaren to the top. I’m glad all the accusations and insinuations are over.
Wait till we get to next year though…..

[Emag]

I almost forgot about all the drama lol. Can’t blame RedBull for trying whats within their right I guess, but in the end, none of it mattered. I insiniuated before that RedBull letting out those “rumors” about the cold spots might have led the others into a wild goose chase.

After all the tests and scrutiny that McLaren has had to go through, there was no water in the tires. There were no fancy brakes and the flexi wings were hardly a significant contributor to McLaren’s advantage.

It’s almost as if this is just an extremely well-engineered car. By this point I am pretty much entirely convinced there is no single trick or clever gimmick that is entirely responsible for McLaren’s advantage.

Looking back, the pace advantage has been quite circumstantial and track-dependent. I personally thing it has more to do with others falling out their optimal window easier than McLaren rather than McLaren’s car having a specific advantage under certain conditions.

[CjC]

One thing I’ve praised McLaren for over the last few years, they seem to identify a weakness with the car and what ever remedy they implement on the following years car they then become the class of the field in a that previously weak area.

For instance wet races. From what we have seen so far this season, when it’s been a wet race we’ve seen a Mclaren win and arguably it should have been a 1-2 every time.
But recall Brazil last year, yes Max drove amazingly well and Lando haters jumped all over Lando. Stella defended Lando and said that the car was lacking performance in the wet, especially under braking. Come the first race of 2025- it’s raining and boom Lando wins.

Bravo team, Bravo

(You watch it rain in the Netherlands next week and McLaren don’t win now )

[Big Tea]

I almost forgot about all the drama lol. Can’t blame RedBull for trying whats within their right I guess, but in the end, none of it mattered. I insiniuated before that RedBull letting out those “rumors” about the cold spots might have led the others into a wild goose chase.

After all the tests and scrutiny that McLaren has had to go through, there was no water in the tires. There were no fancy brakes and the flexi wings were hardly a significant contributor to McLaren’s advantage.

It’s almost as if this is just an extremely well-engineered car. By this point I am pretty much entirely convinced there is no single trick or clever gimmick that is entirely responsible for McLaren’s advantage.

Looking back, the pace advantage has been quite circumstantial and track-dependent. I personally thing it has more to do with others falling out their optimal window easier than McLaren rather than McLaren’s car having a specific advantage under certain conditions.

It probably ended up being beneficial. Other teams spent time and resources looking into all the claims that could have been better used elsewhere.

[AR3-GP]

I almost forgot about all the drama lol. Can’t blame RedBull for trying whats within their right I guess, but in the end, none of it mattered. I insiniuated before that RedBull letting out those “rumors” about the cold spots might have led the others into a wild goose chase.

After all the tests and scrutiny that McLaren has had to go through, there was no water in the tires. There were no fancy brakes and the flexi wings were hardly a significant contributor to McLaren’s advantage.

It’s almost as if this is just an extremely well-engineered car. By this point I am pretty much entirely convinced there is no single trick or clever gimmick that is entirely responsible for McLaren’s advantage.

Looking back, the pace advantage has been quite circumstantial and track-dependent. I personally thing it has more to do with others falling out their optimal window easier than McLaren rather than McLaren’s car having a specific advantage under certain conditions.

It probably ended up being beneficial. Other teams spent time and resources looking into all the claims that could have been better used elsewhere.

There were updates to various parts of the regulations concerning these topics. It further clarifies where teams can spend resources and where they do not need to. This is a sport with a frightening amount of technical freedom . Engineers have a permanent fear of missing out. So, it is great benefit when the regulators rule out something that you don't have. It means it's one less area to fall behind in.

These talking points create additional motivation, spark new conversations, and lead to new innovations that otherwise may not occur. We may not see them until next year. It's just too short-sighted to imagine that the competitors didn't gain anything. All it takes is one Sauber engineer who is otherwise bored of the ideas in their own head to get inspired to innovate and then suddenly you've made a big impact to the car. Anyone who has a job doing anything in a competitive industry should be able to understand this. That's why I think better to say nothing at all than to accidentally inspire a competitor.

[mwillems]

I almost forgot about all the drama lol. Can’t blame RedBull for trying whats within their right I guess, but in the end, none of it mattered. I insiniuated before that RedBull letting out those “rumors” about the cold spots might have led the others into a wild goose chase.

After all the tests and scrutiny that McLaren has had to go through, there was no water in the tires. There were no fancy brakes and the flexi wings were hardly a significant contributor to McLaren’s advantage.

It’s almost as if this is just an extremely well-engineered car. By this point I am pretty much entirely convinced there is no single trick or clever gimmick that is entirely responsible for McLaren’s advantage.

Looking back, the pace advantage has been quite circumstantial and track-dependent. I personally thing it has more to do with others falling out their optimal window easier than McLaren rather than McLaren’s car having a specific advantage under certain conditions.

It probably ended up being beneficial. Other teams spent time and resources looking into all the claims that could have been better used elsewhere.

There were updates to various parts of the regulations concerning these topics. It further clarifies where teams can spend resources and where they do not need to. This is a sport with a frightening amount of technical freedom . Engineers have a permanent fear of missing out. So, it is great benefit when the regulators rule out something that you don't have. It means it's one less area to fall behind in.

These talking points create additional motivation, spark new conversations, and lead to new innovations that otherwise may not occur. We may not see them until next year. It's just too short-sighted to imagine that the competitors didn't gain anything. All it takes is one Sauber engineer who is otherwise bored of the ideas in their own head to get inspired to innovate and then suddenly you've made a big impact to the car. Anyone who has a job doing anything in a competitive industry should be able to understand this. That's why I think better to say nothing at all than to accidentally inspire a competitor.

“Better to say nothing than inspire a competitor.”

Then why seed insinuations in the first place? If your idea is that talk only helps others, Red Bull’s very public hints were self-defeating. The productive path—if you truly suspect illegality—is a documented protest, not rumour. (Zak Brown explicitly called for penalties to deter frivolous claims.). In just this reason alone It was obviously a really poor PR smear attempt that seemed to be taken seriously by very few (stunk.of desperation), and just made a mockery of the Red Bull image.

Any thoughts that since somehow hampered or slowed Mclaren are misguided, as the timesheets show
Mclaren have only got faster.



“It inspired innovation” is speculative – there is zero evidence of this. Yet at the same time the reg changes closed the areas of speculation in which innovation was being inspired.

This is largely some flowery meaningless word soup of an attempt to suggest it was all just really positive and helpful.

[AR3-GP]

“Better to say nothing than inspire a competitor.”

Then why seed insinuations in the first place? If your idea is that talk only helps others, Red Bull’s very public hints were self-defeating. The productive path—if you truly suspect illegality—is a documented protest, not rumour. (Zak Brown explicitly called for penalties to deter frivolous claims.). In just this reason alone It was obviously a really poor PR smear attempt that almost everyone rolled their eyes at immediately (stunk.of desperation), and just made a mockery of the Red Bull image.

Any thoughts that since somehow hampered or slowed Mclaren are misguided, as the timesheets show
Mclaren have only got faster.

A few points:

(1) PR isn't going to make Mclaren's downforce disappear. If that's what Horner thought, maybe that is why he was sacked?
(2) I think Red Bull should have expressed their concerns with the FIA and that it shouldn't have escaped that room. Giving other teams ideas about brake tins, tire cooling, and anything else just inspiration. I wouldn't want anyone to "come-to" a day sooner than they otherwise would have. Even just a 1-2 month head start can make a difference. However, with the regulation's clarifications, I think the outcome is close to neutral (for now). No one is permitted to pursue anything like was speculated. For next year, we'll have to wait and see who is fast and understand why/how.

“Better to say nothing than inspire a competitor.”
Then why seed insinuations in the first place? If your idea is that talk only helps others,

It is my opinion. I am not an employee of Red Bull. Therefore, I cannot be questioned about their actions. However, I've given it some thought and Zak Brown explained this once before:

“The goal is to make ourselves as fast as possible, but there’s also a strategy of destabilising the competition. We try to create tension or disrupt other teams, which isn’t unique to F1 but is particularly pronounced here.

“You’re constantly fighting for employees, drivers, sponsors, and media attention plays a big role. If you can generate some instability in rival teams – and it doesn’t always work in our favor – it can slow them down while we focus on speeding up.”

https://www.cityam.com/zak-brown-admits ... stigation/

So maybe it was just that? Maybe Horner was alone in a room and thought to himself "What would Zak Brown do?"

[mwillems]

My point is that your reasonings are contradictory and shallow, not that teams don't play political games nor does it mean that all teams play those games at the same levels or with the same boundaries. No downforce would go, it was an attempt to publicly discredit Mclarens success and bolster the image of RB as fighting fairly against the cheats - and idea fabricated knowingly based on imagination.

I still feel this is nonsense but there's even more to address so I'll duck out.

[mwillems]

He said the device could have been manipulated. The FIA agreed it was feasible. They put a cap on it.

Its not quite the same is making public statements about how Mclaren have cheated as if ignorance alone is the basis for a public protest.


Edit: you appear to have deleted your post.

[Big Tea]

I would also believe part of Horner's job would be to keep the words "RED BULL" in the news, being due to racing results of scandal. I think the higher ups at Red Bull would be quite pleased with that part, the parting of ways must be due to other things