I'm not angry at all . And you do have a point: It is possible that McLaren's aerodynamics are underdeveloped, as was the case with last year's Red Bull. But also, look at their split front wing elements and their slotted front wing pillars. Both of these were copied by none other than Ferrari. Then there are their rear wing endplates, that I would actually say look overdeveloped which may or may not be a good thing. The only place that may just look a bit too simple is the bargeboard space, and it's practically unchanged from last season. But let's wait, a lot of times Boullier is a master of defecating through his mouth, but I do expect them to steadily upgrade the car once they understand what they have in hands.Sieper wrote: ↑23 Mar 2018, 22:55Diogo, good post but please man, don’t be so angry. I agree with you that you cannot tell anything from a car just by looking at its exterior and concluding it looks basic. However, last years Red Bull was also looking bare at season start and I too thought, well, this says nothing, the shapes and flows might be just right. But after bits got started adding to it it did achieve more efficient downforce. Now what is happening inside the RBR13/14 we also cannot tell, nor extrapolating this to the MCL33 would be sensible, but you cannot simply discard the Notion altogether. Lets wait and see how the season progresses. I do expect we are going to see a more intricate sidepod flow conditioner over the comming months.
You touched a good subject there about their rear suspension. When people saw it, everyone said right away that "their rear suspension is bad, they're gonna have no traction, McLaren is doomed".Sieper wrote: ↑23 Mar 2018, 23:28Misiterpreted your mood, sorry for sure there are already a lot of components that are at the spearpoint of tech, like you mentioned but also the rear upper wishbone. also, I love the tightly packed, smaller, high rake concept, I feel that is what a race car is about, not making it longer and longer, and then longer.
The bargeboards and the sidepod deflectors is where my rather amateurish view is where in the more obvious department we will see the MCL33 get developed further during the season, I expect significant gains from that.
No slots? OMG we want slots!jh199 wrote: ↑24 Mar 2018, 01:29https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYqx-pmXcAAivZj.jpg:large
I don't know exactly how that wavy bargeboard element works but based off of the overall space and elements used, the Mclaren certainly falls short of most if not all the teams. Not to beat a dead horse but the barge board side deflector looks like it could use a ton of work. Even Renault, with their similar concept, has at least added slots to it.
Perhaps this is in part down to technology and resources. They are, I imagine, increasingly difficult to model and build, and with CFD and tunnel time limited, maybe it's been beyond some teams to develop / implement the more complex solutions?
Even amongst the top teams you see completely different flow philosophy, some are hell bent on turning the flow to feed the floor, some are much more concerned with generating downforce in the middle of the car and turning the flow is secondary, and some are working the corner of the floor or even just there to help flow attachment around the sidepod.
Yea, my point being that Mclaren has done near nothing to this element while near everyone else have entirely revamped it or at least done something small to it. I bet we see some slots in 2 weeks time thoughAndres125sx wrote: ↑24 Mar 2018, 19:41No slots? OMG we want slots!jh199 wrote: ↑24 Mar 2018, 01:29https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYqx-pmXcAAivZj.jpg:large
I don't know exactly how that wavy bargeboard element works but based off of the overall space and elements used, the Mclaren certainly falls short of most if not all the teams. Not to beat a dead horse but the barge board side deflector looks like it could use a ton of work. Even Renault, with their similar concept, has at least added slots to it.
#aerogollumturbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!