Mclaren MCL40

[Emag]

The airbox is not only big, it’s big quite a long way back too.

I suppose they had to do it because the undercut is quite massive (you can refer to another post I made in the previous page).

Would be interesting to see a comparison between the RedBull's centerline and McLaren's.

I didn’t mean the airbox was rearwards, more that it’s big and has volume quite a lot towards the rear (for clarity)

Yes that's what I took in as well. The centerline behind the inlet is quite beefy.

[De Wet]

Looks to me like a "rearwards slanted" sidepod opening. Look how far back the mirror support goes to reach the edge.

[fourmula1]

This car makes it feel like the driver is really far forward. Not sure if it’s just illusion or how the wheel base has changed relative to cockpit position. It didn’t stand out so much on other cars, but I can unsee it now.

[AR3-GP]

The diffuser sidewall is the same as the render. The render is showing the rear but you can see that this multi-winglet extends forward and you are seeing the entrance of the winglet in the frontal views, not a slot.

[PlatinumZealot]

Less is more. Minimalist, "passive aggressive" design.

[Dr Obbs]

His evidence for that is that "it's there", and he draws a line where there is nothing. Sometimes I feel like these "analysts" are just engagement farming, telling fans what they want to hear. If you can't see it... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xaag9XwAA ... name=large

Thanks for the reminder as to why I don’t post here. Real constructive….

[AR3-GP]

With DRS engaged. Interestingly, that huge top element is still visible and potentially generating some upwash/drag even on the open position.

This car has a LOT of rake.

[SmallSoldier]

[Stu]

The diffuser sidewall doesn't seem to have a slot like Ferrari and Mercedes (RedBull looks like it doesn't even have a sidewall at all by the way, too extreme).

As suspected from the blury images, the bottom bit of the "bargeboard" is segmented and curled. It's interesting that they only deemed it worth it to have this bottom half like this, whereas Ferrari, Mercedes and RedBull have all opted for horizontal cuts along the entire height.

https://i.postimg.cc/QMtV1PwC/image.png

At the moment this car is not doing anything peculiar with the areas we deemed interesting in the other top 3 revealed so far. Overall sidepod philosophy is also nothing crazy, just very well executed for what it is. (Cadillac and VCARB are basically the same, but not as tight).

In short, there's not much that draws attention to my eyes in a way that says "people will copy that". Time will tell how much this seemingly "simple" interpretation will pay off for them.

Without being able to see/feel/touch it is difficult to say for sure, but this seems to be the most aggressive treatment of the ‘mouse hole’ that we have seen yet. There is no part of this outer portion that does not have a roof (from what I can tell all of the others have a much smaller enclosed section here). I would suspect that this is more powerful and completely eradicates losses due to tyre-squirt in the diffuser itself.
With the barge-board they have focused the horizontal slots in the area of greatest pressure differential (just above the floor surface), again providing a more powerful effect on the tyre wake outboard of the fence; the large vertical section working in conjunction with the massive undercut to provide good flow over the floor. By concentrating the power of the slats lower they will continue to work with the front wing in low drag mode (less on/off effect than what we saw in the RB wet-running shots).
They are not the only team to have chosen this barge-board solution.
The other thing that I have noticed more on this car than any other is the shear amount of volume under the nose (anteater noses are back!), this is a long lead item area to copy due to it having to pass crash tests. The follow on effect of this is that you can either work the FW harder in the centre or provide greater mass flow to the front floor area (T-tray and barge-board); McLaren have followed the second route (so far), using the outboard loaded FW (which also looks as though it has downstream effects on dealing with front tyre wake; teaming up with the barge-board to potentially provide massive outflow behind the front wheel with super clean mass flow from the centre section to feed the floor surfaces.

[McFAN]

His evidence for that is that "it's there", and he draws a line where there is nothing. Sometimes I feel like these "analysts" are just engagement farming, telling fans what they want to hear. If you can't see it... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xaag9XwAA ... name=large

Thanks for the reminder as to why I don’t post here. Real constructive….

I, for what it's worth, found your analysis very well formulated and instructive,
Keep it going.

[McFAN]

The diffuser sidewall doesn't seem to have a slot like Ferrari and Mercedes (RedBull looks like it doesn't even have a sidewall at all by the way, too extreme).

As suspected from the blury images, the bottom bit of the "bargeboard" is segmented and curled. It's interesting that they only deemed it worth it to have this bottom half like this, whereas Ferrari, Mercedes and RedBull have all opted for horizontal cuts along the entire height.

https://i.postimg.cc/QMtV1PwC/image.png

At the moment this car is not doing anything peculiar with the areas we deemed interesting in the other top 3 revealed so far. Overall sidepod philosophy is also nothing crazy, just very well executed for what it is. (Cadillac and VCARB are basically the same, but not as tight).

In short, there's not much that draws attention to my eyes in a way that says "people will copy that". Time will tell how much this seemingly "simple" interpretation will pay off for them.

Without being able to see/feel/touch it is difficult to say for sure, but this seems to be the most aggressive treatment of the ‘mouse hole’ that we have seen yet. There is no part of this outer portion that does not have a roof (from what I can tell all of the others have a much smaller enclosed section here). I would suspect that this is more powerful and completely eradicates losses due to tyre-squirt in the diffuser itself.
With the barge-board they have focused the horizontal slots in the area of greatest pressure differential (just above the floor surface), again providing a more powerful effect on the tyre wake outboard of the fence; the large vertical section working in conjunction with the massive undercut to provide good flow over the floor. By concentrating the power of the slats lower they will continue to work with the front wing in low drag mode (less on/off effect than what we saw in the RB wet-running shots).
They are not the only team to have chosen this barge-board solution.
The other thing that I have noticed more on this car than any other is the shear amount of volume under the nose (anteater noses are back!), this is a long lead item area to copy due to it having to pass crash tests. The follow on effect of this is that you can either work the FW harder in the centre or provide greater mass flow to the front floor area (T-tray and barge-board); McLaren have followed the second route (so far), using the outboard loaded FW (which also looks as though it has downstream effects on dealing with front tyre wake; teaming up with the barge-board to potentially provide massive outflow behind the front wheel with super clean mass flow from the centre section to feed the floor surfaces.

Yeah, while it's very hard to make out exactly what's going on there, they do seem to have treated the mouse hole area quite differently to the others, it seems to have the widest gap to the diffuser sidewall (if that's indeed what it is)

[michl420]

Last year mclaren had this very long upper rear leg in the front suspension, this year it is the lower one. I guess primary for aerodynamic reasons.

About rake of the car. The rear of the car can not go down on the straight in the same way like pre 22 because suspensions have a different regulation. Maybe they can do it another way (if disired).

[the EDGE]

Last year mclaren had this very long upper rear leg in the front suspension, this year it is the lower one. I guess primary for aerodynamic reasons.

About rake of the car. The rear of the car can not go down on the straight in the same way like pre 22 because suspensions have a different regulation. Maybe they can do it another way (if disired).

They won’t need the rear of the car to compress on the straights, active aero will shed the required drag

[Farnborough]

Last year mclaren had this very long upper rear leg in the front suspension, this year it is the lower one. I guess primary for aerodynamic reasons.

About rake of the car. The rear of the car can not go down on the straight in the same way like pre 22 because suspensions have a different regulation. Maybe they can do it another way (if disired).

They won’t need the rear of the car to compress on the straights, active aero will shed the required drag

My understanding is that stalling the diffuser at higher speed always gives welcome, and significant, benefit in drag reduction. That's regardless of of wing level.
Use of changing leverage ratio within support design can and does do this, without the need of any control device. Belleville springs give a natural drop in rate as they pass through critical geometry, often seen on heave damper and tea-tray support for this reason.

[Badger]

His evidence for that is that "it's there", and he draws a line where there is nothing. Sometimes I feel like these "analysts" are just engagement farming, telling fans what they want to hear. If you can't see it... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xaag9XwAA ... name=large

Thanks for the reminder as to why I don’t post here. Real constructive….

You wrote in all caps that the MCL40 has a diffuser cut, despite the fact that it can't be seen in any of the images. If you hadn't been so assertive in your speculation I wouldn't have been so non-constructive in my response. It's actually why I like this forum, there's no gatekeeping.