Mclaren MCL40

[matteosc]

I always thought having a shorter car it is easier to reach the min weight limit. But with a rear axle more forward it needs more ballast at the front to have the regulated weight distribution. So maybe it is harder.

Not sure what you mean. The regs set a minimum axle weight. You can have any weight distrubtion you like, so long as one axle isn't under weight.

The sum of the weight on the two axis gives you the total weight of the car. The weight distribution gives you how the total weight is distributed between the two axes. So no, you cannot have any weight distribution you like.

[De Wet]

Any pictures of the new diffuser from behind ?

[Owen.C93]

I always thought having a shorter car it is easier to reach the min weight limit. But with a rear axle more forward it needs more ballast at the front to have the regulated weight distribution. So maybe it is harder.

Not sure what you mean. The regs set a minimum axle weight. You can have any weight distrubtion you like, so long as one axle isn't under weight.

The sum of the weight on the two axis gives you the total weight of the car. The weight distribution gives you how the total weight is distributed between the two axes. So no, you cannot have any weight distribution you like.

You can. There isnt a weight distrubution rule, only a minimum axle weight. So you wouldn't have to add ballast to the front because of anything you do on the rear.

C4.1 Minimum mass
During the Sprint Qualifying and Qualifying sessions, The Minimum Mass is 726kg plus the Nominal
Tyre Mass. In all other sessions, the Minimum Mass is 724kg plus the Nominal Tyre Mass

C4.2 Mass distribution
At all times during the Qualifying and Sprint Qualifying Sessions, with the car resting on a horizontal
plane:
i. the mass measured at the front axle must not be less than the Minimum Mass specified in
Article C4.1 factored by 0.44.
ii. the mass measured at the rear axle must not be less than the Minimum Mass specified in
Article C4.1 factored by 0.54

[matteosc]

Not sure what you mean. The regs set a minimum axle weight. You can have any weight distrubtion you like, so long as one axle isn't under weight.

The sum of the weight on the two axis gives you the total weight of the car. The weight distribution gives you how the total weight is distributed between the two axes. So no, you cannot have any weight distribution you like.

You can. There isnt a weight distrubution rule, only a minimum axle weight. So you wouldn't have to add ballast to the front because of anything you do on the rear.

C4.1 Minimum mass
During the Sprint Qualifying and Qualifying sessions, The Minimum Mass is 726kg plus the Nominal
Tyre Mass. In all other sessions, the Minimum Mass is 724kg plus the Nominal Tyre Mass

C4.2 Mass distribution
At all times during the Qualifying and Sprint Qualifying Sessions, with the car resting on a horizontal
plane:
i. the mass measured at the front axle must not be less than the Minimum Mass specified in
Article C4.1 factored by 0.44.
ii. the mass measured at the rear axle must not be less than the Minimum Mass specified in
Article C4.1 factored by 0.54

The weight distribution is the minimum axle weight, if you want to stick to the minimum weight of the car. Of course you can use a different distribution if you want your car to be havier, but I seriously doubt anyone would want to do that. To be fair there is some room in the weight distribution that still allows you to keep the car at a minimum weight, but you cannot just pick any distribution you like without having to increase the overall weight.

[michl420]

I always thought having a shorter car it is easier to reach the min weight limit. But with a rear axle more forward it needs more ballast at the front to have the regulated weight distribution. So maybe it is harder.

Not sure what you mean. The regs set a minimum axle weight. You can have any weight distrubtion you like, so long as one axle isn't under weight.

You are right. I had this wrong in my head.

[Stu]

Mclaren have this bulges by the mounting points on the chassis. By the suspension I can understand it (big forces). But by the mounting for the barge board it is odd.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HHTfLpNXsAA ... ame=medium

I would hazard a guess that with it being year one of these regs some of these solutions are a sticking plaster rather than a fix, this attachment method in the linked photo of the bargeboard mount does look very ‘adapt and overcome’, the strut is an add-on (AFAICS), not being part of the original design. Probably a ‘we’ll add a strut there because it has an aero function’?

[SilviuAgo]