2026 McLaren Mastercard F1 Team

[dia6olo]

I have a feeling people will be disappointed because they expect too much. What McLaren did mid 2023 and 2024 is not the norm at all. It's incredibly rare to get teams going from 6-7 tenths off to being 1-2 tenths ahead within the same season like that. If they do it again it will be very impressive, but I personally doubt they'll catch Mercedes this year.

I concur, I think many are forgetting that the 2022 to 2025 era of cars were extremely sensitive to setup & upgrades, it was that extreme sensitivity that made those type of gains possible.
I very much doubt that we will see those gains with these cars. We are much more likely to see more normal/equal gains across the board with these cars.
I feel any gains outside of the “norm” will only be made by the PU but even that I feel will be short lived because the PU’s will eventually also line up, probably as early as next year.

But this is the biggest rule change in history with arguably more time to be found in big chunks than at any other point this century

I understand the argument that this is the "biggest rule change", the problem with that argument is that for me it falls apart when you look a little closer.
These cars are generally very basic, they don't need to be able to go around corners faster than their competition, heck I'd argue they don't even need to be all that good around corners.
These cars are all PU & they will all align in time.
That's not to say teams won't be able to find solid time with updates, I expect they will over the opening year or 2.
My counter argument is that because of the simplicity of these cars (other than the PU side of things), I don't see anyone gaining anything that pretty much all the others can't also gain.

[dia6olo]

Norris wasn’t a million miles away from the Ferraris in the sprint either

A sprint race is a third race distance and there was a late safety car.

[FittingMechanics]

I understand the argument that this is the "biggest rule change", the problem with that argument is that for me it falls apart when you look a little closer.
These cars are generally very basic, they don't need to be able to go around corners faster than their competition, heck I'd argue they don't even need to be all that good around corners.
These cars are all PU & they will all align in time.
That's not to say teams won't be able to find solid time with updates, I expect they will over the opening year or 2.
My counter argument is that because of the simplicity of these cars (other than the PU side of things), I don't see anyone gaining anything that pretty much all the others can't also gain.

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight. If you reach higher speed at the straight (because you needed less energy) then you can harvest from a higher speed (more energy). It is very wrong to assume these cars are so basic. If it was like that then Williams, Alpine and McLaren would be very close to Mercedes.

[dia6olo]

I understand the argument that this is the "biggest rule change", the problem with that argument is that for me it falls apart when you look a little closer.
These cars are generally very basic, they don't need to be able to go around corners faster than their competition, heck I'd argue they don't even need to be all that good around corners.
These cars are all PU & they will all align in time.
That's not to say teams won't be able to find solid time with updates, I expect they will over the opening year or 2.
My counter argument is that because of the simplicity of these cars (other than the PU side of things), I don't see anyone gaining anything that pretty much all the others can't also gain.

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight. If you reach higher speed at the straight (because you needed less energy) then you can harvest from a higher speed (more energy). It is very wrong to assume these cars are so basic. If it was like that then Williams, Alpine and McLaren would be very close to Mercedes.

The faster you go around corners the quicker you also chew through your tyres.
The Ferrari has probably demonstrated the best cornering ability so far and without fail always ran out of tyre towards the end of every stint.
I understand the cornering argument but in this era it seems to me that, that argument doesn't stand.
It looks like the balance has shifted to using the corners to recharge and save tyres.
Before all the difference was mostly made in the corners now it's all electrical and corners are needed for that.

[CjC]

Norris wasn’t a million miles away from the Ferraris in the sprint either

A sprint race is a quarter race distance and there was a late safety car.

I did take the late safety out of my assessment. Lando was within 3 seconds of Lewis when the safety came out

As for the 25% sprint race distance… that could have helped Ferrrai out for all we know

[API]

I have a feeling people will be disappointed because they expect too much. What McLaren did mid 2023 and 2024 is not the norm at all. It's incredibly rare to get teams going from 6-7 tenths off to being 1-2 tenths ahead within the same season like that. If they do it again it will be very impressive, but I personally doubt they'll catch Mercedes this year.

On the contrary, current engines allow customers to tune better than the factory team. If it succeeds and manages to do it, and clearly, it will not be right away and it has to be invented.
McLaren has different transmissions and that can be a big advantage. (But it may not be)

It's about how you learn to collect and use energy and that can be managed better than the factory team. You just have to invent it and be able to do it. The engines are exactly the same, just programmed differently.

Previously, you could only do cooling and transmissions differently.
Now you can also program and tune and adapt the car to energy collection and energy use.

McLaren supposedly has very sophisticated software that will allow you to really set up the energy collection and output. But it needs time for that and it didn't have it... (That's why Mercedes didn't give it the latest version of the engine for testing, although Renault probably had it)
Now the time and data are....

Wait and see what happens!!!

[basti313]

I understand the argument that this is the "biggest rule change", the problem with that argument is that for me it falls apart when you look a little closer.
These cars are generally very basic, they don't need to be able to go around corners faster than their competition, heck I'd argue they don't even need to be all that good around corners.
These cars are all PU & they will all align in time.
That's not to say teams won't be able to find solid time with updates, I expect they will over the opening year or 2.
My counter argument is that because of the simplicity of these cars (other than the PU side of things), I don't see anyone gaining anything that pretty much all the others can't also gain.

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight. If you reach higher speed at the straight (because you needed less energy) then you can harvest from a higher speed (more energy). It is very wrong to assume these cars are so basic. If it was like that then Williams, Alpine and McLaren would be very close to Mercedes.

The faster you go around corners the quicker you also chew through your tyres.
The Ferrari has probably demonstrated the best cornering ability so far and without fail always ran out of tyre towards the end of every stint.
I understand the cornering argument but in this era it seems to me that, that argument doesn't stand.
It looks like the balance has shifted to using the corners to recharge and save tyres.
Before all the difference was mostly made in the corners now it's all electrical and corners are needed for that.

I think this is a wrong assumption. Apex speed has nothing to do with recharging. For recharging they lift and coast or superclip BEFORE the corner. Some 10km/h apex speed do not change the recharging a lot, but cost laptime.

Mercedes is currently rolling around without pushing, even the Q3 runs look like no pushing. Once others are close, they need to push and have higher apex speeds. Once the engines converge in some years, everyone needs to push the corneres, and, thus use the tires again.

[dia6olo]

Norris wasn’t a million miles away from the Ferraris in the sprint either

A sprint race is a quarter race distance and there was a late safety car.

I did take the late safety out of my assessment. Lando was within 3 seconds of Lewis when the safety came out

As for the 25% sprint race distance… that could have helped Ferrrai out for all we know

Don't get me wrong, I think there's McLaren positives & I wouldn't back against them getting closer & maybe even ahead of Ferrari.

As I currently see it, McLaren have a good PU, Ferrari not so much, Ferrari's PU is probably not terrible but it clearly falls short of the Mercedes PU.
What remains to be seen is if McLaren with their current setup can better use their PU & if and how the PU balance might change going forward.
At this stage it's very early with many unknowns. I don't see any car upgrades making a whole lot of difference, with car upgrades I'm talking chassis/aero, I feel if there is going to be a jump it will be all PU...

[dia6olo]

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight. If you reach higher speed at the straight (because you needed less energy) then you can harvest from a higher speed (more energy). It is very wrong to assume these cars are so basic. If it was like that then Williams, Alpine and McLaren would be very close to Mercedes.

The faster you go around corners the quicker you also chew through your tyres.
The Ferrari has probably demonstrated the best cornering ability so far and without fail always ran out of tyre towards the end of every stint.
I understand the cornering argument but in this era it seems to me that, that argument doesn't stand.
It looks like the balance has shifted to using the corners to recharge and save tyres.
Before all the difference was mostly made in the corners now it's all electrical and corners are needed for that.

I think this is a wrong assumption. Apex speed has nothing to do with recharging. For recharging they lift and coast or superclip BEFORE the corner. Some 10km/h apex speed do not change the recharging a lot, but cost laptime.

Mercedes is currently rolling around without pushing, even the Q3 runs look like no pushing. Once others are close, they need to push and have higher apex speeds. Once the engines converge in some years, everyone needs to push the corneres, and, thus use the tires again.

As I said earlier I'm not disputing the cornering argument, my argument is they don't matter currently & will only matter if & when the PU's line up which is not going to happen tomorrow or the day after...

[AR3-GP]

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight.

Top speed isn't the defining parameter. It's "time on straight". The 1 tenth you might lose by harvesting more through a corner is made up for by the extra 1 seconds at 350kW/500Nm torque from MGU-K.

[Badger]

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight. If you reach higher speed at the straight (because you needed less energy) then you can harvest from a higher speed (more energy). It is very wrong to assume these cars are so basic. If it was like that then Williams, Alpine and McLaren would be very close to Mercedes.

The faster you go around corners the quicker you also chew through your tyres.
The Ferrari has probably demonstrated the best cornering ability so far and without fail always ran out of tyre towards the end of every stint.
I understand the cornering argument but in this era it seems to me that, that argument doesn't stand.
It looks like the balance has shifted to using the corners to recharge and save tyres.
Before all the difference was mostly made in the corners now it's all electrical and corners are needed for that.

I think this is a wrong assumption. Apex speed has nothing to do with recharging. For recharging they lift and coast or superclip BEFORE the corner. Some 10km/h apex speed do not change the recharging a lot, but cost laptime.

Mercedes is currently rolling around without pushing, even the Q3 runs look like no pushing. Once others are close, they need to push and have higher apex speeds. Once the engines converge in some years, everyone needs to push the corneres, and, thus use the tires again.

Mercedes isn't cruising because they are ahead, remember there are two drivers in that team who have personal ambitions, they are cruising because that is simply how you drive these cars quickly. You're only at 80% in the corners so you can go 100% on the straights.

Having a car that is fast and efficient in the corners is still a benefit, it means your 80% pace is quicker than everyone else's.

[FittingMechanics]

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight.

Top speed isn't the defining parameter. It's "time on straight". The 1 tenth you might lose by harvesting more through a corner is made up for by the extra 1 seconds at 350kW/500Nm torque from MGU-K.

Ofcourse. I was trying to keep it simple. You don't need to reach highest speeds if you reach them sooner (so your overall time on straight is shorter).

My point was that cornering speeds still matter and they matter a lot. Even if it was beneficial to do corners under the limit you would still cause less damage to the tires if your cornering potential was higher.

Ferrari is in a specific situation where it appears their engine is weak (or Mercedes is too strong) so they may have best chassis but aren't the fastest.

[ScottR267]

Unsure of the accuracy……..

[De Wet]

Unsure of the accuracy……..

I would love making our own engine. It's the only way you control 100% of your outcomes.

[WardenOfTheNorth]

I understand the argument that this is the "biggest rule change", the problem with that argument is that for me it falls apart when you look a little closer.
These cars are generally very basic, they don't need to be able to go around corners faster than their competition, heck I'd argue they don't even need to be all that good around corners.
These cars are all PU & they will all align in time.
That's not to say teams won't be able to find solid time with updates, I expect they will over the opening year or 2.
My counter argument is that because of the simplicity of these cars (other than the PU side of things), I don't see anyone gaining anything that pretty much all the others can't also gain.

The faster you can go around a corner means you need less energy to reach top speed at the subsequent straight. If you reach higher speed at the straight (because you needed less energy) then you can harvest from a higher speed (more energy). It is very wrong to assume these cars are so basic. If it was like that then Williams, Alpine and McLaren would be very close to Mercedes.

The faster you go around corners the quicker you also chew through your tyres.
The Ferrari has probably demonstrated the best cornering ability so far and without fail always ran out of tyre towards the end of every stint.
I understand the cornering argument but in this era it seems to me that, that argument doesn't stand.
It looks like the balance has shifted to using the corners to recharge and save tyres.
Before all the difference was mostly made in the corners now it's all electrical and corners are needed for that.

But better balance and more downforce will allow less slip during the corner, which means better tyre management. So it is absolutely still important how the cars perform in the corner. Especially if we think of Mclaren vs Merc where the PU potential is the same (albeit only once Mclaren learn how to maximise the PU).