Team: Tim Goss (director of engineering), Paddy Lowe (TD), Neil Oatley (DRD), Martin Whitmarsh (TP), Jonathan Neale (MD), Sam Michael (SD)
Drivers: Jenson Button (5), Sergio Pérez (6)
Pup wrote:I rarely know either. When in doubt, assume sarcasm.
More importantly, never take the rantings of a typing dog too seriously. Chances are, he's just messin with you.
"I don't think it's any secret that we are pretty weak in terms of traction and lateral load traction, so this circuit's tough for us.
"We'll make the best of it, but today's been pretty tricky.
"I think we'll get there in the end. We were trying lots of things today, and it's so difficult with the limited running you can do.
"I've got a good feeling already that we've found a set-up that we'll be running tomorrow that will be more competitive."
It's mental over there, I want to know, when all is said and done, just how on earth they got the car so wrong this year.Pup wrote:I'm a regular paradox.
On the subject of the car, elsewhere they say that McLaren are still hacking away at the floor. No pics that I can find.
The car and the track aren't suited for one another, but Jenson seems ok with the situation...
"I don't think it's any secret that we are pretty weak in terms of traction and lateral load traction, so this circuit's tough for us.
"We'll make the best of it, but today's been pretty tricky.
"I think we'll get there in the end. We were trying lots of things today, and it's so difficult with the limited running you can do.
"I've got a good feeling already that we've found a set-up that we'll be running tomorrow that will be more competitive."
Aerodynamically everything comes from the front wing. If you are all at sea then the first thing that goes is the front wing complexity.JimClarkFan wrote:^ The Mclaren front wing looks very basic compared to other cars.
Does anybody know why that is?
Except that that's not what's happening here – McLaren have had this front wing design (or roughly similar) for aeons. They just have a different philosophy about how they get good air to the back of the car compared to the rest of the teams.munudeges wrote:Aerodynamically everything comes from the front wing. If you are all at sea then the first thing that goes is the front wing complexity.JimClarkFan wrote:^ The Mclaren front wing looks very basic compared to other cars.
Does anybody know why that is?
I'm not so sure it is mainly suspension. Although it is probably one of their problems I have the feeling it is more aerodynamics related. Even with the improved sidepods the car looks bulky especially in the area leading to the inner part of the diffuser if you compare it to the Ferrari for example (which looks like the Benchmark in that department).ringo wrote:Force India produced a superior car to Mclaren.
It's very puzzling.... Looking at the car.
Suspension must be messed up beyond reasoning. So messed up and hard to figure out someone should lose their job for it.
Supposedly the problem is that the underfloor aero is very unstable and only stays attached at very high or very low ride heights. In the middle ride heights where cars spend the most time you need stable robust underfloor flow, but Mclaren supposedly has detachment issues in this region. I don't know if that's true, but I do believe Mac a understands kinematics and vehicle dynamics well enough that the suspension isn't the issue. I'd say Ferrari has proven that a front pull-rod system is perfectly workable and viable under these re s.ringo wrote:Force India produced a superior car to Mclaren.
It's very puzzling.... Looking at the car.
Suspension must be messed up beyond reasoning. So messed up and hard to figure out someone should lose their job for it.
That's an indication that it's actually very good, and doing exactly what they want – if it wasn't doing what they expected it to do, they would keep on changing it.turbof1 wrote:Why oh why do people keep shooting at the suspension.
I'd rather believe that the front wing isn't doing a proper job. Infact it has no progression at all; completely under developed.
Yes, and (repeating myself), that's an indication that they don't see anything wrong with it (and didn't last year when they were winning either). The problem is further down the car, not the front wing.Having a simple front wing isn't so much of a problem, but mclaren hasn't really done anything with it since abu dhabi last year, except actually removing stuff. Other teams bring almost every weekend updates to their FW's.
Which again – is an indication that the problem is not the front wing – the problem is further back on the carfeynman wrote:... or perhaps more likely an indication of continuing poor rear downforce, a balance problem which would only be further exacerbated by a high efficiency front wing. Until they fix the back, they are unable to put anything better at the front.
