2025 McLaren F1 Team

[Ben1980]

Its hurting my head trying to work out what the arguments have been.

In Brazil, I think its clear Max was faster, but that was because after his early ( tactical or lucky) stop, he didn't need to manage. He had 2 new(?) mediums which were tge best tyres and a new soft which were the second best, therefore he could push and he did.

Mclaren obviously realised one stop was a dead option so tried to manage, they needed to eek out a soft stint so managed that, especially after the sprint dramas on the soft. And then had the used mediums to manage home, and Lando did manage as he had to ensure tyres in case of a safety car or in case Max came at him hard.

But..the race is different if Red Bull don't finish 16th. But you'd say, that if they hot the setup correct you expect them to challenge for the win.

I'd make Max favourite for Vegas, unless Merc have one of their good weekends, which is possible.

I'd expect it close between Mc and RB in Qatar and AD.

I'd think Lando should win, but I highly expected Oscar to cruise to the title, only needing top 3s. So what do I know.

[Ben1980]

Of the era?

2022 RB won 17/22 races, don't think
Maca can match that.

They won 21/22 in 2023 though interestingly 12 poles.

A good season for Mclarem doesn't erase those previous ones.

Red Bull have been the dominant team in the ground effect era with the best cars, just this season they've been caught and passed.

I am not talking about relative performance to competition in a season. I am talking about 'pure car performance' - the McL39 has more performance than RB18 & RB19 - look at the lap records it has broken. It's the best car of the entire ground effect ruleset which is going to end in a months' time.

Nope, not having that. Its probably recency bias. I can't see how anything comes close to a car winning 21/22 races, and smashing it at all tracks. And demolishing the opposition.

I'm not sure anything will come close to that achievement for a long time, if ever.

[Farnborough]

Here we go again...
'the competition to say their favourite team/driver didn't have the fastest car'.

Is it going to make any difference ?
is the WDC going to be any less special if the winner wins it in the fastest car ? No. So why are we spending so much energy on which car was fastest on a particular track ?

I think it's best that we all agree to the simple fact that the McL39 is the 'car of the ground effect era' - super consistent, super robust, super fast, super reliable - an engineering masterpiece. Will some other car be fastest in a particular race or particular quali ? of course there will be some car, on some track. But how consistently throughout the season ? not much at all.

But that doesn't make Norris any less deserving of the title, even if he wins it in the fastest car on the grid (I don't understand the booing when he gets on the podium, it's disgraceful and infantile). Neither would Piastri be any less deserving, even if deficiencies in his technical & mindset side have shown up in the latter half of 2025, hitherto unseen over the past 1.5 years. That's fine, it's all part of how a driver matures. Look how many years it has taken Norris.

No matter who wins the WDC, Max is a better driver than Norris/Piastri, AT PRESENT. Max has had more experience being in the sport, he has had more 'battling at the front' seasons, he has more raw talent (which alone is not enough, it has to be chiselled with intellect/attitude) -- these are facts. Things like tactical ability, in cockpit game-reading ability, adapting to changing track conditions etc etc - don't even want to get into those topics.

None of this means Norris won't become a better driver in the future - he has just started with 2 seasons of 'fighting at the front'. Even Max hasn't stayed still, he has been improving over the years. Look what happened to Hamilton in the ground effect era, where his method of super-late super-aggressive braking in corner entry with steering lock, doesn't work because the venturi platform doesn't like to be 'disturbed' with as much pitch/roll variance as was prevalent in previous rule sets with the same driving style. He has been trying to get rid of instinct/muscle-memory formed from 20 yrs ago, but isn't able to. Hence, a driver is not an absolute entity, they evolve, usually for the better. Any driver who wins the WDC, no matter the pace advantage his car has, proves one thing about himself - consistency in driving, ability to handle pressure, talent to not just drive fast, but to also assess risk v/s reward. Pick any driver from any era who has won the WDC, you will see these traits in them.

The only bone-to-pick I have is if one of the McLaren drivers DON'T win the WDC - because from the engineering side they have been given the best car of this entire ground effect era. And they have had to deal with only one other real contender, who has an inconsistent and 'peaky' car at his disposal, no matter how talented he is. Nobody can drive a car beyond it's theoretical limit, so it's not like Max is achieving something his car can't achieve (the phrase 'outdriving the car' actually means driving at 99.xx% of the theoretical limit). The Mclaren drivers & McLaren race operations can't 'excuse' themselves off blaming the machinery they have (which is far more consistent, far more predictable, with a large window of 'base performance'). The McL39 in it's worst setup is easily faster than atleast 6-7 teams with their cars in the best setup for any given track. So even if we discount for the talent gap, the gap in the equipment far exceeds the deficiency in talent of Norris&Piastri w.r.t Max. When I say 'deficiency in talent' it's like 99 vs 98 v 97 etc. It takes some nepo kid who doesnt' deserve to be in F1, but has been trained in junior categories with dad's money, like Mazepin or Latifi ; to be counted as 85-90 on this scale. Otherwise they are all super-talented. Teams wouldn't give them a seat if they weren't.

Agree with you on almost all points.

The highlighted one, I believe there's just a little more nuance to that though:- in that a very well rounded and experienced driver can "hide" some of the vulnerabilities within a chassis performance sphere such that they don't impact, so much, the overall performance. Knowing how to do that in deployment is an important part of holding a chassis etc within (from the outside view) a higher ultimate performance position by exquisite application of their skill. Many drivers are so very fast, so many just can't, or don't apply themselves to this aspect effectively.

Lando has been fast definitely from his first testing prior being given the F1 seat, the rest of his ability has taken time to evolve, including that emotional deployment necessary to beat another good driver consistently, and over a championship full season combative reality.
There's definitely a different air to LN this year, in my view since Imola. The full realisation of just what it takes to grab this opportunity i feel can be seen "floating" through his demeanour and intent. He looks like he's really grasped this now. Ultimately a more formidable version is in play, with absolute knowledge of how he wants to commit his actions in closing out this championship.

[Quantum]

As for Mercedes in 2021, the rules have changed since then.

They actually haven't, at least not the publicly available rules. (Interpretations might have, but I don't know that)

Here are the relevant rules:
From the financial regulations:

3.1: In calculating Relevant Costs, the following costs and amounts within Total Costs of the
Reporting Group must be excluded ("Excluded Costs"):
...
(n) All costs of goods and services within the Power Unit Supply Perimeter for use by the
F1 Team, up to an amount in any Full Year Reporting Period equal to the applicable
maximum price as set out in the Technical Regulations;

For what is included in the Supply Perimeter: (Technical regulations, Appendix 3, Item No. A)

PU and spares for all Competitions in F1 World Championship plus 5000 km testing.
Minimum number of PUs per team to be (number of PUs per driver per season according to
Sporting Regulations) x 2 + Necessary number of units to achieve 5000 km of testing.
Additional PUs or spares required to replace units out of service due to accident damage
or other cause induced by team will be outside the supply perimeter and will incur additional charges

Having checked for anything related to specific caps, there is none published.

But there is the implied:

The issue revolves around what is understood to be guidelines from the FIA about when engine changes do or do not need to be included within a cost cap figure.

It is an area that is not specifically covered in the published regulations, but falls under the remit of understandings that have been reached between competitors and the governing body.

So nothing the layman can run off.

A feature of the FIA these days.

[Emag]

Here we go again...
'the competition to say their favourite team/driver didn't have the fastest car'.

Is it going to make any difference ?
is the WDC going to be any less special if the winner wins it in the fastest car ? No. So why are we spending so much energy on which car was fastest on a particular track ?

I think it's best that we all agree to the simple fact that the McL39 is the 'car of the ground effect era' - super consistent, super robust, super fast, super reliable - an engineering masterpiece. Will some other car be fastest in a particular race or particular quali ? of course there will be some car, on some track. But how consistently throughout the season ? not much at all.

But that doesn't make Norris any less deserving of the title, even if he wins it in the fastest car on the grid (I don't understand the booing when he gets on the podium, it's disgraceful and infantile). Neither would Piastri be any less deserving, even if deficiencies in his technical & mindset side have shown up in the latter half of 2025, hitherto unseen over the past 1.5 years. That's fine, it's all part of how a driver matures. Look how many years it has taken Norris.

No matter who wins the WDC, Max is a better driver than Norris/Piastri, AT PRESENT. Max has had more experience being in the sport, he has had more 'battling at the front' seasons, he has more raw talent (which alone is not enough, it has to be chiselled with intellect/attitude) -- these are facts. Things like tactical ability, in cockpit game-reading ability, adapting to changing track conditions etc etc - don't even want to get into those topics.

None of this means Norris won't become a better driver in the future - he has just started with 2 seasons of 'fighting at the front'. Even Max hasn't stayed still, he has been improving over the years. Look what happened to Hamilton in the ground effect era, where his method of super-late super-aggressive braking in corner entry with steering lock, doesn't work because the venturi platform doesn't like to be 'disturbed' with as much pitch/roll variance as was prevalent in previous rule sets with the same driving style. He has been trying to get rid of instinct/muscle-memory formed from 20 yrs ago, but isn't able to. Hence, a driver is not an absolute entity, they evolve, usually for the better. Any driver who wins the WDC, no matter the pace advantage his car has, proves one thing about himself - consistency in driving, ability to handle pressure, talent to not just drive fast, but to also assess risk v/s reward. Pick any driver from any era who has won the WDC, you will see these traits in them.

The only bone-to-pick I have is if one of the McLaren drivers DON'T win the WDC - because from the engineering side they have been given the best car of this entire ground effect era. And they have had to deal with only one other real contender, who has an inconsistent and 'peaky' car at his disposal, no matter how talented he is. Nobody can drive a car beyond it's theoretical limit, so it's not like Max is achieving something his car can't achieve (the phrase 'outdriving the car' actually means driving at 99.xx% of the theoretical limit). The Mclaren drivers & McLaren race operations can't 'excuse' themselves off blaming the machinery they have (which is far more consistent, far more predictable, with a large window of 'base performance'). The McL39 in it's worst setup is easily faster than atleast 6-7 teams with their cars in the best setup for any given track. So even if we discount for the talent gap, the gap in the equipment far exceeds the deficiency in talent of Norris&Piastri w.r.t Max. When I say 'deficiency in talent' it's like 99 vs 98 v 97 etc. It takes some nepo kid who doesnt' deserve to be in F1, but has been trained in junior categories with dad's money, like Mazepin or Latifi ; to be counted as 85-90 on this scale. Otherwise they are all super-talented. Teams wouldn't give them a seat if they weren't.

All what you said here is true. Lando is not better than Max. You can’t be taken seriously if you say that. McLaren has also had the best car this season. Sometimes by a lot, sometimes by a little, but the best car nonetheless. What “bothers” me though is when people extrapolate and assume that because McLaren is the best 90% of the time, they have to be the best on that remaining 10% too, no matter the result, when that quite clearly isn’t the case. It was the same last year. McLaren wins Miami and suddenly they’re supposed to be the fastest car by a country mile the rest of the season. In every track.

These are untrue statements and are used to build narratives online that glorify one side at the expense of damaging the other.

[RonMexico]

Of the era?

2022 RB won 17/22 races, don't think
Maca can match that.

They won 21/22 in 2023 though interestingly 12 poles.

A good season for Mclarem doesn't erase those previous ones.

Red Bull have been the dominant team in the ground effect era with the best cars, just this season they've been caught and passed.

I am not talking about relative performance to competition in a season. I am talking about 'pure car performance' - the McL39 has more performance than RB18 & RB19 - look at the lap records it has broken. It's the best car of the entire ground effect ruleset which is going to end in a months' time.

Nope, not having that. Its probably recency bias. I can't see how anything comes close to a car winning 21/22 races, and smashing it at all tracks. And demolishing the opposition.

I'm not sure anything will come close to that achievement for a long time, if ever.

Those records tend to be set by the best drivers when they are in the fastest car.

It begs the question why certain drivers weren't able to do something similar over the last 12 or so years.

[Darth-Piekus]

If you are referring to Hamilton its because he had superior teammates and two cars that actually competed instead of everyone working for one car.

[RonMexico]

Bottas? Come on

[Darth-Piekus]

Not just Bottas. Rosberg, Button, Alonso. Even with Bottas, Hamilton as a person was not egotistical and would prefer to give back a place he got with team orders even if it broke his streak of wins. That and the fact that both cars were treated as equal. Think of how many wins, fastest laps, poles, grand slams he has lost due to good teammates.

Without Norris or Piastri the sole No.1 driver in Mclaren could have had 17 or 18 victories and poles out of 24 races.

[RonMexico]

He didn't do it because he wasn't able.

[Darth-Piekus]

Lets be reasonable. Hamilton was so much better than Bottas and he gave his position many times when asked by Mercedes. If he was egotistical he would have ignored team orders and taken whatever was left from Bottas wins.