McLaren MCL39

[RedNEO]

We don't know where the cars were and at what speeds/lateral/longitudinal loads and/or bumps were being put into the suspension.

Also the idea that Mclaren's "tire management and consistency" comes from "higher ride height" is not right.

Must be some kind of special suspension that helps tire life maybe?

[Blackout]

I wonder how the hot air of the gearbox radiator that sits at the rear-end of the centerline cooling is vented, since it seems to be 'completely' shrouded in the Mcl...


Motosrsport images
.

I didn't follow the last 2 seasons. Is Mclaren still using air to air intercoolers or did they adopt the air to water one, or else?

AFAIK, only Honda uses air-to-air IC, Mercedes and Ferrari PUs shifted to water-to-air long time back ; have no idea about Renault PU

Mercedes (factory) and Ferrari (all teams) since 2014. Alpine since 2022, but...

[SilviuAgo]

MCL39 in Mexico:










Source: mclaren

[AR3-GP]

On the surface you could wonder if Mclaren's cooling system uses air. It's quite odd to see such a breakaway design when engineers move between teams all of the time. The technology they are using has clearly made it's way to not only the engine and oil cooling, but also the brakes. It's all a bit strange. The others can't hope to be competitive next year if they are not fully understanding what Mclaren has done.

[SilviuAgo]

On the surface you could wonder if Mclaren's cooling system uses air. It's quite odd to see such a breakaway design when engineers move between teams all of the time. The technology they are using has clearly made it's way to not only the engine and oil cooling, but also the brakes. It's all a bit strange. The others can't hope to be competitive next year if they are not fully understanding what Mclaren has done.

Indeed, when you compare McLaren to the rest of the field is a huge difference. Having MCL39 and SF-25 side by side looks that cars from different eras. Even vs Mercedes, the factory team, McLaren has miles away a better cooling system. That is the beauty of Formula 1 nd innovation. And I am glad that McLaren is "the smartest one" here.

[Brahmal]

Indeed, when you compare McLaren to the rest of the field is a huge difference. Having MCL39 and SF-25 side by side looks that cars from different eras.

Ferrari has very little if any centerline cooling, hence big sidepod louvres. But yes, definitely a step or two behind.

[SilviuAgo]

Indeed, when you compare McLaren to the rest of the field is a huge difference. Having MCL39 and SF-25 side by side looks that cars from different eras.

Ferrari has very little if any centerline cooling, hence big sidepod louvres. But yes, definitely a step or two behind.

According to funoanalisitecnica during the Mexican Grand Prix McLaren's MCL39 featured smaller openings, reducing drag, which is crucial on high-speed tracks like Mexico. This approach contrasts with Ferrari's larger gills.

The MCL39 and Red Bull's RB21 have similar bonnet sizes, but McLaren's solution occupies less area. Ferrari and Haas, sharing the same power unit, have comparable dimensions, highlighting the Italian engine's need for larger thermal disposal.

Aerodynamic philosophy dictates the number of blades within the bonnet openings. Red Bull uses fewer, larger paddles, while McLaren opt for smaller shovels, increasing incidence to manage airflow and reduce turbulence.

The Italian power unit's efficiency is a key factor. Unlike Honda and Mercedes engines, Ferrari's unit converts less fuel energy into power, necessitating larger thermal management systems, especially at high altitudes where air is less dense.

Effective heat transfer is vital. To maximize radiator efficiency, the airflow speed must be reduced. This requires a narrowing of the intake section, followed by a gradual increase in size to slow the fluid mass, optimizing heat exchange.

[venkyhere]

I took the pic from the previous post and hand drew some yellow lines, and I am perhaps repeating some points that @SilviuAgo already made :

1. The difference in floors (by tracing the G-line) shows that the size of the venturi neck is "similar" (using the tyres as the bottom line reference) in both cases, but the length of this neck is longer in the RB21. Btw, this is RB21's latest and newest floor brought in Mexico.

2. The difference in floors also shows the different curvatures fore and aft of the neck and also the number and location of 'kicks'.

(I am too amateur to make any judgements about #1 and #2 above, and hence just pointing out the differences, no comments on effectiveness differences, if any)

3. Only the rear arm of the front upper wishbone is clearly visible, but the difference in length 'could' point to 'more wheel travel for given stiffness' which in turn, could be a vital reason for better bump/kerb ride quality shown by the McL39 given that the stiffness setup for a track, is always a compromise between mechanical and aerodynamic needs (my conjecture is that the fronts are by design much stiffer than the rears anyway, hence the front suspension defines bump/kerb riding).

4. The top of engine cover and the top of the sidepod, both indicate the difference in the 'shape' of air that is fed to the rear downforce structures (rear wing, beam wing) and which eventually has to marry with the air exiting the floor via the diffuser. The shape differences point to a much better packaging job in the McL39.

5. We have seen 'posterior pics' of both cars, where the engine cover rear exit of the McL39 is far smaller than that of RB21. This, alongwith #4 above, together provide a good idea of the sheer 'volume advantage' of feed-air (air getting squeezed by the engine cover and the sidepod and guided to the rear wings) that the McL39 enjoys.

6. Finally, the difference b/w the amount of cooling openings on the engine cover - they not only point to better heat exchanger design and cooling flow management by the McL39, the difference proves vital in terms of the 'quality of air' (boundary layer spoiled less if less hot air exits) hitting the rear downforce structures.

(#5 and #6 show a 'double whammy' effect on the amount of downforce available on the rear of the car

[organic]

I don't know if point 3's analysis wrt "better kerb/bump" characteristics holds up to scrutiny. McLaren have a lot of problems where there are bumps on the track under braking, and I don't think they have a particular advantage relative to red bull (or others) in terms of kerb riding this season.

[mwillems]

From watching races and listening to the team, I got the impression that the Bumps were impacting how the car likes to be handled under braking in the entry to a corner. It's seemingly been an issue with this car all year long, in particular for Lando, and was explicitly called out as the reason we couldn't do better at Singapore and COTA, by Stella.

The kerbs and to a lesser extent bumps I think also impact the downforce generation and the overall performance of the package if it is compromised when adapting ride height and suspension settings to accommodate track configurations. I get the impression that the car has a wide operating window when it is set up the way we want it to be, but when taken out of its comfort zone then it has a lot of struggles.