2026 McLaren Mastercard F1 Team

[mwillems]

At the moment we are 3 tenths off the best time as Mercedes and the upgraded Ferrari seem to have the upper hand.

On F1TV before FP2 they said Ferrari told them they ran the engine harder (to test it out).

Mercedes looks fastest to me, especially Antonelli. Luckily he'll start from the back.

FPs tend to be a bit more representative this year in the drive to build mappings for the engines. At the moment, it looks close but it also doesn't look like we are pole contenders. If Antonelli didn't have the penalty it'd be a different thing, I don't think we could dream of P1 tomorrow. But as it is, we're hanging in there.

Race will be different. The tyres and the heat will make Q performance less important.

[CjC]

Personally I don’t feel that the top prizes are within reach this weekend.

Lando isn’t filling me with confidence either.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... G5fJUoMXCN

[Nicktendo86]

Meh I think they will improve a lot overnight, good news that the Macarena wing is working as intended

[mwillems]

Personally I don’t feel that the top prizes are within reach this weekend.

Lando isn’t filling me with confidence either.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... G5fJUoMXCN

It's normal Lando speak. How many bets has Stella won with Lando, saying they WILL be competitive

I suspect that they will be setting up for the race more than Q and I don't expect outright pace to shock anyone.

[Darth-Piekus]

Hopefully overnight they will find something more to cover the deficit.

[mwillems]

They often fare better in FP3. I'd hazard a guess that the amount of data to analyse is much bigger this season and the overnights allow them the time to understand the right setup directions for car and engine.

[venkyhere]

They often fare better in FP3. I'd hazard a guess that the amount of data to analyse is much bigger this season and the overnights allow them the time to understand the right setup directions for car and engine.

The game has shifted from
(2017 - 2025) : after the initial 3 years of stable 'track-correlated data' (only a handful of new tracks came, others have remained the same, except a few corner modifications on some of them) => easy to get the 'simulator baseline setup' fairly matching the final well tuned one. FP2/FP3 is all about fine tuning and getting as close as possible to theoretical performance from the car.

(2026 -- ) : despite the evolution of sim tech, data crunching AI etc, the gap between 'model' and 'actual' doesn't vanish. Track-collected data is still invaluable. Given the completely new energy distribution and presence of SLM modes => total reset of the 'modelling parameters' in the sim tools. Only 'some aspects' of a decade of legacy track data is useful. That means 'getting it first time right' for FP1 is hard. Only post FP2 do the teams have a 'baseline'. Then they get only FP3, in non-representative conditions, to 'fine-tune'. On top of this, before every weekend, the FIA provide which energy-usage-profile 'band-aid plaster' applies for that particular weekend's track -> the simulator algorithms cannot use a lot of 'learning' from some previous track with the same car, that had similar asphalt grain and similar corner profile. So no car on the grid is anywhere near the 'precision tune' that previous era cars achieved, before going into Q. It will be late 2027 or even 2028, by the time they do that. Until then, all teams are in a huge flux all the way through the endf of FP3.

[mwillems]

Yes there's tons to review. Next year we'll have baselines for the formula and it all gets easier.

This is the same for all teams though. Mclarens weakness is that they have more work to do to get the info they need compared to works teams.

It's more impactful on a sprint race, but has got easier as the season progresses. Next year this will not be much of a thing.

The setup and the mappings will not be independent.

People were talking about tbe wings saying "look how much downforce the floor makes", whereas in fact there's a good chance that with shorter gears they are forced to make the car as slippy as possible as power loss on the straights will cost more than speed in high speed corners, where we are already good.

[Farnborough]

Yes there's tons to review. Next year we'll have baselines for the formula and it all gets easier.

This is the same for all teams though. Mclarens weakness is that they have more work to do to get the info they need compared to works teams.

It's more impactful on a sprint race, but has got easier as the season progresses. Next year this will not be much of a thing.

The setup and the mappings will not be independent.

People were talking about tbe wings saying "look how much downforce the floor makes", whereas in fact there's a good chance that with shorter gears they are forced to make the car as slippy as possible as power loss on the straights will cost more than speed in high speed corners, where we are already good.

This is the wrong, inverse, projection in evaluation.

Shorter/lower gearing will allow the PU to pull MORE load rather than less. It simply runs out of revs, ultimately, when others can run less hindered in rpm range from their higher maximum/outright gear ratio.

If a PU is geared too long to pull load, then reducing wing/drag will help there in realised max speed, which is the opposite of the highlighted statement.

[Darth-Piekus]

Again we are missing 3 tenths to the top and probably this is where the car stands due to its low top speed. The only solution is to use Piastri for a TOW to Norris. Everyone will do this and Norris must be as front as possible from Antonelli who starts from the back.

[Macklaren]

PIA purple in S1 on the last lap though. We are losing a ton of time in S3. Hopefully just tow related. For now, looking like third row at best and counting on race pace/deg

[101FlyingDutchman]

Sadly, we lose it in the parabolica in comparison to the others

[CjC]

Sadly, we lose it in the parabolica in comparison to the others

Which surprises me. I thought that would have been Mclarens ‘best’ corner considering Lando said that the are good in the high speed corners. Different downforce levels here I guess.

[Emag]

Sadly, we lose it in the parabolica in comparison to the others

Which surprises me. I thought that would have been Mclarens ‘best’ corner considering Lando said that the are good in the high speed corners. Different downforce levels here I guess.

It's not parabolica. Piastri overcooked it a bit in Ascari, but they're very slow in the penultimate straight anyway. Different deployment strategy, and they're not making up enough time in S1 and S2 to cover the deficit in S3.

[mwillems]

Yes there's tons to review. Next year we'll have baselines for the formula and it all gets easier.

This is the same for all teams though. Mclarens weakness is that they have more work to do to get the info they need compared to works teams.

It's more impactful on a sprint race, but has got easier as the season progresses. Next year this will not be much of a thing.

The setup and the mappings will not be independent.

People were talking about tbe wings saying "look how much downforce the floor makes", whereas in fact there's a good chance that with shorter gears they are forced to make the car as slippy as possible as power loss on the straights will cost more than speed in high speed corners, where we are already good.

This is the wrong, inverse, projection in evaluation.

Shorter/lower gearing will allow the PU to pull MORE load rather than less. It simply runs out of revs, ultimately, when others can run less hindered in rpm range from their higher maximum/outright gear ratio.

If a PU is geared too long to pull load, then reducing wing/drag will help there in realised max speed, which is the opposite of the highlighted statement.

Less drag can mean a little less power needed to maintain a suitable top.sperd but used over more of the straight.

Car will hit a rev limit, no, due to the gears?