McLaren MP4-28 Mercedes

[Lycoming]

Mclaren has a chassis problem. It's all in their mounting points on both chassis and gear box. That's why they will have a headache fixing it.

so you're saying that the reason why they're so slow is down to suspension geometry? why do you think that's the case?

[trinidefender]

Mclaren has a chassis problem. It's all in their mounting points on both chassis and gear box. That's why they will have a headache fixing it.

so you're saying that the reason why they're so slow is down to suspension geometry? why do you think that's the case?

Of course they have a chassis problem ringo, don't mind that all the work they have done so far this season has been pretty much aero based

[wesley123]

Mclaren has a chassis problem. It's all in their mounting points on both chassis and gear box. That's why they will have a headache fixing it.

so you're saying that the reason why they're so slow is down to suspension geometry? why do you think that's the case?

Of course they have a chassis problem ringo, don't mind that all the work they have done so far this season has been pretty much aero based

Yeah causing changing tubs and gearboxes and crashtesting them in between will fit the schedule...

[Coefficient]

I want to see Mclaren come back strong and dominate every single race from here, with Perez becoming world champion, and Button to look like a mug.

And Mclaren will be like... "see we were right all along"

Not likely though is it.

I think Perez has shown he can get good mileage from tyres which is why we saw him luck into some good results last year. Bahrain was more of the same imho and I think the pendulum will swing back in buttons favour for most of the year as I believe Perez is pretty ordinary on pace really.

I do think the team will start to reveal some good pace from the car soon though.

[Pup]

Mclaren has a chassis problem. It's all in their mounting points on both chassis and gear box. That's why they will have a headache fixing it.

so you're saying that the reason why they're so slow is down to suspension geometry? why do you think that's the case?

Of course they have a chassis problem ringo, don't mind that all the work they have done so far this season has been pretty much aero based

The wing nuts and front suspension worriers aren't changing their tune anytime soon. They've both been at it since the first test, and neither have succumbed to any of the counter arguments yet. Fully entrenched. Firm in their beliefs. Which is O.K. by me - more logic for the rest of us.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

The wing nuts and front suspension worriers aren't changing their tune anytime soon. They've both been at it since the first test, and neither have succumbed to any of the counter arguments yet. Fully entrenched. Firm in their beliefs. Which is O.K. by me - more logic for the rest of us.

It was the exact same last year in the F2012 thread saying the suspension was the problem. Once McLaren sort out their problems & get some good results ppl will be forced to reassess their thoughts on the 28's woes. I'm interested to see these Barcelona updates & how they effect the performance of the car.

[ringo]

So far we've seen band aids on the car.
Mclaren are pretty good on aero development. They don't often miss. If they have been trying to fix the car for the past 4 races, expecting the problem to go away with each attempt, i'd be worried.
Truth is Mclaren know what their problem is, but the problem is so messed up, it's not just a simple wing change and voila! Redbull beater!
Putting a new nose on a dog of a car wont magically make everything work. The whole front wing affects "everything behind it" is true to some extent, but is very over exaggerated and overstated to the point things get out of hand.

Loking on last years car, which was very quick coming down to season's end, and this year's car you will have to look on what has changed.
It's more logical to point out the changes as the problem than something tried and proven like the front wing.

Now maybe, just maybe they do need a new multi element wing, to synchronize with the aerodynamic characteristics of what they have now. Maybe the Mp4-28 transient behavior warrants a 5 element wing. But the elephant in the room may be the less easier to blame things. Things that take more analysis to understand or things that simply cannot be changed, like the tub, and the team has to work around it.

[Lycoming]

So far nobody has answered my question, as nobody has given a valid justification to the viewpoint that they need to change their suspension geometry. I just see a bunch of hand waving type statements...

[Sebp]

So far nobody has answered my question, as nobody has given a valid justification to the viewpoint that they need to change their suspension geometry. I just see a bunch of hand waving type statements...

Maybe this helps a bit:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqh01JhEjMU[/youtube]

McLaren may have put their front roll centre in the wrong place this year. Who knows?

[ringo]

So far nobody has answered my question, as nobody has given a valid justification to the viewpoint that they need to change their suspension geometry. I just see a bunch of hand waving type statements...

The car has too much anti dive. Because the upper arms are taking a greater portion of the wheel loading and not the springs and dampers. I suspect becuase the dampers aren't taking that laoding as well that the car may have vibration issues.
This is a vicous cycle with the aerodynamics side of things.
I supose either they work on the geometry, or the work on the aero, so that the geometry has less an effect on it.
They really wanted to have the car ride at a low height for a race distance. I guess that's the whole point behind their super rigid front geometry?
That's my layman's take on it. I just have more reasons against blaming the front wing.

[Tim.Wright]

The car has too much anti dive. Because the upper arms are taking a greater portion of the wheel loading and not the springs and dampers. I suspect becuase the dampers aren't taking that laoding as well that the car may have vibration issues.

Anti dive? Looks totally the opposite to me. Either very low anti dive or even pro dive. Anti dive would have the arms sloping the other way. Can't think why they would be doing this though.

[trinidefender]

So far nobody has answered my question, as nobody has given a valid justification to the viewpoint that they need to change their suspension geometry. I just see a bunch of hand waving type statements...

The car has too much anti dive. Because the upper arms are taking a greater portion of the wheel loading and not the springs and dampers. I suspect becuase the dampers aren't taking that laoding as well that the car may have vibration issues.
This is a vicous cycle with the aerodynamics side of things.
I supose either they work on the geometry, or the work on the aero, so that the geometry has less an effect on it.
They really wanted to have the car ride at a low height for a race distance. I guess that's the whole point behind their super rigid front geometry?
That's my layman's take on it. I just have more reasons against blaming the front wing.

If the car had less anti-dive on it then they would have to run a higher ride height than they are already doing which doesn't affect front DF so much but reduces rear DF a lot because the diffuser has to be very close to the ground to work properly. Especially with how aggressive their diffuser is designed.

Also if they ran less anti-dive then the apparent angle of attack of the FW would increase more than may be acceptable under heavy braking causing the FW (or at least parts of it) to stall. The solution to this can be to add another element to the front wing. However this adds more turbulence to the airflow creating more problems that the team has to deal with further back on the car. Also it will add to the total drag of the car at any particular speed. Marginal but still there.

Currently it appears that with their wing with so few elements they are running such a FW to the highest angle that they can get reliable DF from it. To run that angle and also to help the rear diffuser to work (if not optimally) they have to run a lot of anti-dive.

[trinidefender]

So basically they are sacrificing mechanical grip in an attempt the get their aero to work how it was modeled to work in their CFD. Remember back per-season testing when they ran the car lower than legally allowed it was setting some blistering lap times. Clearly they are trying to get their car to work like that again.

If they changed their suspension geometry to have more mechanical grip with less anti-dive then they would have to rethink too much of their aero which no team in F1 has the resources to do.

[Pup]

The car has too much anti dive. Because the upper arms are taking a greater portion of the wheel loading and not the springs and dampers. I suspect becuase the dampers aren't taking that laoding as well that the car may have vibration issues.

Anti dive? Looks totally the opposite to me. Either very low anti dive or even pro dive. Anti dive would have the arms sloping the other way. Can't think why they would be doing this though.

Same anti-dive as McLaren alway runs.. I gave a whole pictoral essay on it aeons ago when this was first mentioned.

[Tim.Wright]

Throw us a link.

I dont see how it can be anti dive, the side view centre looks to be under the ground.