McLaren MP4-28 Mercedes

[Shakeman]

Maybe he cut a corner?

Illegal ride height

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/106081

The car must not have been running its 'plank' or it was but tge ride height was too low and would have worn the plank away in a race, any other thoughts?

The ride height was probably fine with the fuel level they had, but had they brimmed the tank it would have grounded the car. I doubt they would be deliberately targeting an illegal setup, more likely that was their baseline setup and as they ran it they realised they needed to raise the ride height a bit. That can also help explain why they looked fast early in the tests but then didn't do any interesting times thereafter.

Whitmarsh explaining reason for early testing pace, "Improperly secured part meant that the car was very low suspended, giving the effect of a good pace. Unfortunately, it would not work on a bumpy track like this [in Albert Park]. This is because the car looks miserable at times and we need to do something about it. It was set that the majority of the track is not possible to use. "

http://translate.google.com/translate?u ... n&ie=UTF-8

[Matt89]

Names ending in 8 seem to be bad for this team. Remember the 18?

You could be right, it was a M8 that Bruce McLaren has his fatal accident

Let's not forget the M28

[Neno]

So from what i did understand, cars working fast in low configuration, but it cannot hold in long pace. And from what i did conclude car dose not work very good in high configuration either?! This can be only reason why they tried low configuration again, even on bumpy track like Australia.

[stefan_]

Wait... The car was fast because they mounted a part the wrong way thus the car being lower and having a better pace? Nice.

[foxivan]

the race pace seems a bit better the qualifying,yet can see the car still tend to understeer.

[Shakeman]

the race pace seems a bit better the qualifying,yet can see the car still tend to understeer.

According to Whitmarsh they can't dial it out. In doing so they lose the back end grip.

[Richard]

A quick reminder ....

Yes, the apparent McLaren slump in disappointing, but even so pleas remember the car threads are meant to focus on the actual features of the car.

[Trocola]

the race pace seems a bit better the qualifying,yet can see the car still tend to understeer.

Could that be because the new front wing? I know it is not a technical view, but the new one seems a basic design. Last year front wing looked like it was more developed and complex.

[Huntresa]

the race pace seems a bit better the qualifying,yet can see the car still tend to understeer.

Could that be because the new front wing? I know it is not a technical view, but the new one seems a basic design. Last year front wing looked like it was more developed and complex.

They are using the same FW as introduced late last year... And it has the same cascade and endplates as the wing before it just that they changed the bottom of it and the main planes.

It is also almost the same design philosophy as Lotus Fw and i think you wouldnt say their wing is so basic cause they won today

[beelsebob]

It is also almost the same design philosophy as Lotus Fw and i think you wouldnt say their wing is so basic cause they won today

I would say that it's basic – I would just disagree that basic designs and bad designs are equated

[munudeges]

It is also almost the same design philosophy as Lotus Fw...

[gary123]

the car needs a brand new front wing!! i watched 2 times the race and you can clearly see that the car suffers a lot of understeer...and the pull rod is very stiff!! the car bumps a lot...

[CjC]

Just a thought.....

I've read 2 Perez comments now where he has complained about a lack of downforce, have Mclaren in raising their chassis to improve airflow to the rear created some sort of stall in airflow? How ironic that in theory they have created a greater volume of air going to the rear and it's not working as good as the low chassis height from last year

?

Mclaren are commenting about a lack of ride quality and suggesting that this issue is talking performance away from the car, or at least taking performance set up changes/time from the car

[Huntresa]

It is also almost the same design philosophy as Lotus Fw...

???? It is the same philosophy

[Huntresa]

It is also almost the same design philosophy as Lotus Fw and i think you wouldnt say their wing is so basic cause they won today

I would say that it's basic – I would just disagree that basic designs and bad designs are equated

Yeah me too Basic isnt bad, but I don't even wanna say basic cause it still does what it is suppose to do, whether its basic or rocket science.