- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
This is lovely. I think some combination between this and the silverstone livery (with preferably a touch more of a hark to the Marlboro era pattern) would be my preferred full-time McLaren look.De Wet wrote: ↑31 Dec 2025, 11:43x = @McLarenF1France:
https://i.ibb.co/9mGQxkp5/G9bz5-NXWEAAe-I5-Y.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/YFn0QTtc/G9bz5-NTXUAEbck-Z.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/pB7DP0W3/G9bz5-NZWo-AAisu-E.jpg
Not bad at all... Can someone send it to Zak...
That’s not a great article. Too many words to say so little. Honestly feels like they saw that article discussing McLaren’s disadvantages for 2026 and asked ChatGPT to write some counter-arguments._cerber1 wrote: ↑12 Jan 2026, 20:01A bit of reasoning
https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/2026 ... aggio.html
Doubt it because it will look like Google Chrome is our main sponsor (which is switching to Gemini for 2026 anyway) instead of Mastercard
Worst livery for testing. Every detail is very clearly visible. I hope the car will be camouflaged. And completely black.
Confirmed by Neil Houldley, with some actual numbers provided as well :AR3-GP wrote: ↑04 Jan 2026, 13:00Stella:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/why- ... /10770826/"From an aerodynamic point of view, our car was already quite mature. It takes weeks for us to add one point of aerodynamic efficiency because we were at a plateau in our aerodynamic development.
"On the 2026 car, every week we add a lot of downforce. So that's where, with the best information you have available, you have to make a call. We were so much in the diminishing returns, we needed to be realistic and shift our attention to 2026."
They stopped developing because it was difficult to find gains.
With those sort of gains, it really seems like McLaren had already reached the peak of its concept, but it's also interesting how they believe there would have been big consequences to the 2026 project had they proceeded with continuous development in 2025. Shows a difference with how they work compared to RedBull in particular, who to my eyes, remain one of the most efficient teams in the grid.“If we had continued to develop in 2025, we would have certainly gone into 2026 slower than we’re going to,” Houldley revealed to the media, including outlets like Motorsport Week. McLaren’s decision marked a definitive turning point, clearly distinguishing their approach from Red Bull’s relentless push for improvement.
The team reached a critical juncture where their upgrades were yielding only marginal gains. “We were looking for milliseconds; 30 milliseconds was a good upgrade at that point,” Houldley explained. With such minute improvements on the table, it became apparent to the team that shifting focus was the best course of action.
However, as rivals like Red Bull capitalized on their continuous development, the implications of McLaren’s decision are being put to the test. Houldley remains optimistic, asserting that their strategy will ultimately pay off, saying, “I still think we’ve made the right decision, and when we get to 2026, hopefully, that will be proved.”
I think it's apples and oranges here. Mclaren had the smallest windtunnel and CFD allocation last year and continue to have the smallest allocation until June 2026. So they simply have to be more selective, especially when there was little time to find on the MCL39. Red Bull had around 15% more resources and some fairly low hanging fruit in their 2025 car.Emag wrote: ↑17 Jan 2026, 20:09Confirmed by Neil Houldley, with some actual numbers provided as well :AR3-GP wrote: ↑04 Jan 2026, 13:00Stella:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/why- ... /10770826/"From an aerodynamic point of view, our car was already quite mature. It takes weeks for us to add one point of aerodynamic efficiency because we were at a plateau in our aerodynamic development.
"On the 2026 car, every week we add a lot of downforce. So that's where, with the best information you have available, you have to make a call. We were so much in the diminishing returns, we needed to be realistic and shift our attention to 2026."
They stopped developing because it was difficult to find gains.
With those sort of gains, it really seems like McLaren had already reached the peak of its concept, but it's also interesting how they believe there would have been big consequences to the 2026 project had they proceeded with continuous development in 2025. Shows a difference with how they work compared to RedBull in particular, who to my eyes, remain one of the most efficient teams in the grid.“If we had continued to develop in 2025, we would have certainly gone into 2026 slower than we’re going to,” Houldley revealed to the media, including outlets like Motorsport Week. McLaren’s decision marked a definitive turning point, clearly distinguishing their approach from Red Bull’s relentless push for improvement.
The team reached a critical juncture where their upgrades were yielding only marginal gains. “We were looking for milliseconds; 30 milliseconds was a good upgrade at that point,” Houldley explained. With such minute improvements on the table, it became apparent to the team that shifting focus was the best course of action.
However, as rivals like Red Bull capitalized on their continuous development, the implications of McLaren’s decision are being put to the test. Houldley remains optimistic, asserting that their strategy will ultimately pay off, saying, “I still think we’ve made the right decision, and when we get to 2026, hopefully, that will be proved.”
They did the same thing in 2021, continued to develop as late as they could, and still started 2022 as joint-leaders. Very impressive, considering budget caps were already in place back then.
