2025 McLaren F1 Team

[bauc]

What a disappointment guys, a disaster with 2.5 rounds left in the championship, but it is still in NOR control, if he can win one of the remaining races or finish P2 in both + the stint he is a champ, the road for PIA is more difficult the same as MAX but noting is impossible at this point. What a nightmare this track is for us....

But a hero is recognized when the times are the darkest, just before the dawn... so lets go and finish this ..... one this is for sure, this season will be remembered one way or the other.

[FittingMechanics]

Guys, below is a fascinating sequence of radio messages b/w both Mclaren drivers with their respective engineers :

https://www.racefans.net/2025/11/23/the ... -the-race/

The team knew the plankwear issue right from the start, it wasn't as if they discovered it late in the final stint and pressed the panic button. This was a calculated risk they took even before setting up the car for Q. Most probably they expected Mercedes and Max to not have the pace they showed in the race today, and felt that even with LiCo the McL39 would have enough advantage to win. Operationally, they didn't have to do this for Norris, even if he finished P3 or P4, he would have had enough cushion in the WDC standings. Earlier, I thought the ride height choice was an 'unintentional calculation mistake' that they discovered late into the race ; now I know this was an 'intentional calculated gamble' they made. Probably apt for LasVegas. No wonder Norris was looking pale-faced in the post-race interviews & press conference - he was praying that he had done enough, so as to not have 'what was coming'.

Their plan A was two stop. If the degradation was high as they expected, they would probably not fail due to skid wear as tires would have more rubber.

Just bad data.

[WardenOfTheNorth]

Sorry dude , if the diameter of the tyre is larger the car sits higher , look at spa when because of tyre wear the car sits lower and wears out the plank more.

You were talking about Hamiltons penalty for exceeding the pit lane speed limit and said (quote) "Seems ride height comes into consideration also then" in relation to the pit limiter.

The pit limiter has nothing to do with ride height. It's purely a calibration of tire rotational speed and circumference. It doesn't care one iota about ride height.

Tire diameter obviously matters in relation to ride height and skid wear. But it has nothing to do with Hamilton, which you were talking about. So i was merely correcting you.

How do you work out that tyre diameter has nothing to do with Hamilton?

If you increase tyre circumference, then you need to recalibrate your speedo.

Speed = Tyre Circumference x Revolutions per minute

Therefore if you increase Tyre Circumference but do not recalibrate, then you speedo will read artificially low. This is what happened to Lewis. For whatever reason, his car was not set to work out speed based on the larger wet tyres. So when he hit the pit lane limiter, he was actually going slightly faster than the limit.

[Balalu]

As an avid McLaren fan, days like today make my stomach turn, and I’ve got a pretty sturdy stomach.

But even so, I’m grateful for this team. Back-to-back WCCs and still leading the WDC despite everything. I completely believe in this team, and in both of our drivers.

In just a few days we’ll be back on track again. Let’s finish what we started, team (and give the haters even more reasons to hate).

[organic]

Guys, below is a fascinating sequence of radio messages b/w both Mclaren drivers with their respective engineers :

https://www.racefans.net/2025/11/23/the ... -the-race/

The team knew the plankwear issue right from the start, it wasn't as if they discovered it late in the final stint and pressed the panic button. This was a calculated risk they took even before setting up the car for Q. Most probably they expected Mercedes and Max to not have the pace they showed in the race today, and felt that even with LiCo the McL39 would have enough advantage to win. Operationally, they didn't have to do this for Norris, even if he finished P3 or P4, he would have had enough cushion in the WDC standings. Earlier, I thought the ride height choice was an 'unintentional calculation mistake' that they discovered late into the race ; now I know this was an 'intentional calculated gamble' they made. Probably apt for LasVegas. No wonder Norris was looking pale-faced in the post-race interviews & press conference - he was praying that he had done enough, so as to not have 'what was coming'.

Their plan A was two stop. If the degradation was high as they expected, they would probably not fail due to skid wear as tires would have more rubber.

Just bad data.

But with a 2 stop you run faster and corner at much higher speeds, no?

[JordanMugen]

Their plan A was two stop. If the degradation was high as they expected, they would probably not fail due to skid wear as tires would have more rubber.

Just bad data.

McLaren could have also used the high tyre pressure trick that Ferrari applied to Leclerc in Hungary, to minimise their plank wear (and slow their car of course, as a dutiful competitor).

On the first stop, McLaren could have gone with, say, +3 psi on all tyres pressures as Ferrari did skillfully in Hungary.

[aMessageToCharlie]

The Mclaren team gets loads of praise for building the fastest car, and rightfully so, but their operations and management is Ferrari-level bad. They fumbled the WDC last year already with indecisiveness and might still fumble another WDC due to questionable team orders and getting both cars DQ'd when all they needed was to play it save for a couple more races and bag the trophy.

IF they manage to lose this WDC again, IMO changes should be made to the management team. You don't get these chances very often in F1.

[TFSA]

How do you work out that tyre diameter has nothing to do with Hamilton?

Because i didn't? I said ride height. Read again

[Ben1980]

I'm still annoyed with the mess up.

Still don't think its anything more than risking to much on a track they've been traditional struggling at.

But, it shouldn't have happened.

[Ben1980]

The Mclaren team gets loads of praise for building the fastest car, and rightfully so, but their operations and management is Ferrari-level bad. They fumbled the WDC last year already with indecisiveness and might still fumble another WDC due to questionable team orders and getting both cars DQ'd when all they needed was to play it save for a couple more races and bag the trophy.

IF they manage to lose this WDC again, IMO changes should be made to the management team. You don't get these chances very often in F1.

I think they've generally been fine this year, apart from this weekends balls up.

But, there are already changes coming in for next year.

[Farnborough]

I'm still annoyed with the mess up.

Still don't think its anything more than risking to much on a track they've been traditional struggling at.

But, it shouldn't have happened.

I agree with you.

In pure technical terms, they are admirably accurate in both setup and repeatability, and across both chassis too.

To have a single point in breech that could have been extraneous and explainable with a heavy curb strike, would be one thing. But, to have multiple locations worn to very similar degree and repeated across both chassis and consequently, driver styles etc, that showing remarkable consistency and ultimately that the intention was wrong in going too far in risk direction.
Not an intention to run illegal (ill add for clarity) but to not allow sufficient contingency to keep inside the wear profile all teams will work with for their chassis characteristics.

Unfortunately, a very heavy dose of learning experience for them.

[Trocola]

Their plan A was two stop. If the degradation was high as they expected, they would probably not fail due to skid wear as tires would have more rubber.

Just bad data.

My guess is that they expected at least one safety car. That would have reduced the number of laps at race speed and they could have manage better the wear. And there was only one VSC, if I remember correctly. Not enough to manage the wear alongside the lift-and-coast

[Farnborough]

Their plan A was two stop. If the degradation was high as they expected, they would probably not fail due to skid wear as tires would have more rubber.

Just bad data.

My guess is that they expected at least one safety car. That would have reduced the number of laps at race speed and they could have manage better the wear. And there was only one VSC, if I remember correctly. Not enough to manage the wear alongside the lift-and-coast

Just bad interpretation and risk analysis ....... given that they had substantial clearance in points gap, and now they haven't.

[Badger]

So should they carry margin for the final races now and risk a bit of performance, or try to optimise?

[Farnborough]

Really only they can decide.

They have, through not fully examining the risk they ran at LV, now backed themselves into a tight corner in all reality.

They've got to commit either way. Some are going to have sleepless nights, certainly.