2018 McLaren F1 Team - Renault

[ollandos]

aero simple there is no there on slow corners ..i am not sure for exactly numbers but the first barrier is on 160km/h and the next on 240 ..something like this ...there is no pressure on wings at 60-70-80km/h corners ...about monaco track all the first sector have and need good aero and engine ..the first corner its not so slow ..and after is the 'S' with turn in on higher gear and exit with lower ...the middle sector need aero only on tounel and on the s before pisine curve ..the sector three have turns on 60-70 km/h and the start-finish line ....no aero work there

[ollandos]

If you find you can't afford some food, is it better if you have no money or almost enough? Likewise if you can't generate meaningful aero, is it better to have none at all, or almost enough?

I think that your understanding of the situation is as good as your analogy.

"Very fast corners that are easily flat" only are easily flat because of the reliance on aero to make the car stick to it, cars that are not as good generating downforce will generally have to lift sooner consequently spending less time on throttle.

I never said that aero is not important in the slow corners, but its importance is severly reduced. So if the car is generating only 10% of the downforce that it can ultimately produce and is still losing most of its time in those corners, one can deduce that the mechanical part is not working at its best and is probably the main cause of the majority of the time lost.

The analogy like your statment leaves a lot of factors out of the table, i can still manage to eat even though i dont have money at all.

What mechanical aspect do you think is causing loss of time in a part of the track that emphasises aero performance?

simple ..take your car ...move on 50-60 km/h ..open the window (do it on safe place) and move your hand out like plane wing or f1 car rear wing ...and try it again on over 100km/h ..to see the different loads ..after 100 is imposimple to do it ....like motocycle ..is very hard to keep your eyes open with out helmet on 170-180km/h ...lower of 100 is much more easier ..,

[PhillipM]

Given both the struggle with a few corners and the quotes from Alonso and the rest of the team about struggling to get the car to respond to setup and having to gamble on some changes, I'm going to take that small bit of info, run with it, and point fingers back at the rear suspension setup we were discussing off season - that's exactly the sort of thing you get with compliance issues if your install isn't stiff enough (and you may have seen previous on cars with cracked chassis, etc - they have the same handling traits even with setup changes.

[godlameroso]

You think this is what Vandoorne was referring to regarding the transmission? Seeing as the suspension bolts to it you could be right. Maybe some worn rose bushings?

[McMika98]

You think this is what Vandoorne was referring to regarding the transmission? Seeing as the suspension bolts to it you could be right. Maybe some worn rose bushings?

People need to just accept the fact that Mclaren have not built a decent chassis in the last 5 years and thats it. Why does it always have to a car issue or damage if they in the midfield group? Thats all what the car can do as they dont fully understand the kinematics of the new suspension nothing wrong with the bushings and certainly not due to aero.

Problem is everyone jumps on the hype train early only to be disappointed.

[PhillipM]

You think this is what Vandoorne was referring to regarding the transmission? Seeing as the suspension bolts to it you could be right. Maybe some worn rose bushings?

No, I think what VD was refering to was the diff - if you watched some of the onboard he's flicking diff entry settings up and down before the hairpin like it's either making no difference or he's struggling for a setting he likes.

But yes, it could be a worn joint or a little play in something at the rear causing it as it would be exaggerated given the massive angles they're running - but I think it unlikely at Mclaren - and instead it could just be the compromise of installation stiffness/weight vs aero that they've taken with the rear end suspension.
Pure speculation on my part really, but what Alonso and the team were describing with the setup issues is a classic symptom of something like that somewhere on the car.

[kasio]

aero simple there is no there on slow corners ..i am not sure for exactly numbers but the first barrier is on 160km/h and the next on 240 ..something like this ...there is no pressure on wings at 60-70-80km/h corners ...about monaco track all the first sector have and need good aero and engine ..the first corner its not so slow ..and after is the 'S' with turn in on higher gear and exit with lower ...the middle sector need aero only on tounel and on the s before pisine curve ..the sector three have turns on 60-70 km/h and the start-finish line ....no aero work there

some planes takeoff at that speed. are you sure about your theory? (30mph)

[Webber2011]

aero simple there is no there on slow corners ..i am not sure for exactly numbers but the first barrier is on 160km/h and the next on 240 ..something like this ...there is no pressure on wings at 60-70-80km/h corners ...about monaco track all the first sector have and need good aero and engine ..the first corner its not so slow ..and after is the 'S' with turn in on higher gear and exit with lower ...the middle sector need aero only on tounel and on the s before pisine curve ..the sector three have turns on 60-70 km/h and the start-finish line ....no aero work there

some planes takeoff at that speed. are you sure about your theory? (30mph)

If we could run a f1 car upside down it would take off at some speed or other too, but I'm pretty sure you know that
Different scenarios

Isn't it pretty widely accepted that f1 cars don't really start generating any useful downforce till about 120km/h, and it increases from there ?

That's what I've been led to believe

[Giblet]

You think this is what Vandoorne was referring to regarding the transmission? Seeing as the suspension bolts to it you could be right. Maybe some worn rose bushings?

People need to just accept the fact that Mclaren have not built a decent chassis in the last 5 years and thats it. Why does it always have to a car issue or damage if they in the midfield group? Thats all what the car can do as they dont fully understand the kinematics of the new suspension nothing wrong with the bushings and certainly not due to aero.

Problem is everyone jumps on the hype train early only to be disappointed.

Alonso got 7th, beating all but one customer team from Mercedes and Ferrari.

The chasis is clearly decent. Decent might not be a good word to use since it's not at all quantatative.

It just means OK in these terms.

[kasio]

aero simple there is no there on slow corners ..i am not sure for exactly numbers but the first barrier is on 160km/h and the next on 240 ..something like this ...there is no pressure on wings at 60-70-80km/h corners ...about monaco track all the first sector have and need good aero and engine ..the first corner its not so slow ..and after is the 'S' with turn in on higher gear and exit with lower ...the middle sector need aero only on tounel and on the s before pisine curve ..the sector three have turns on 60-70 km/h and the start-finish line ....no aero work there

some planes takeoff at that speed. are you sure about your theory? (30mph)

If we could run a f1 car upside down it would take off at some speed or other too, but I'm pretty sure you know that
Different scenarios

Isn't it pretty widely accepted that f1 cars don't really start generating any useful downforce till about 120km/h, and it increases from there ?

That's what I've been led to believe

as i understand it is that all downforce is useful and of course it depends on speed. but there is at every speed and in f1 they use it even at that speed. actually IMO thats why the bigger wings as you could use "bigger" wings to have more DF at low speed.

[dp12]

Since when did this become DOWNFORCE vs MECHANICAL GRIP around Monaco.

[godlameroso]

I really dislike that term. Downforce is mechanical grip.

[Jolle]

some planes takeoff at that speed. are you sure about your theory? (30mph)

If we could run a f1 car upside down it would take off at some speed or other too, but I'm pretty sure you know that
Different scenarios

Isn't it pretty widely accepted that f1 cars don't really start generating any useful downforce till about 120km/h, and it increases from there ?

That's what I've been led to believe

as i understand it is that all downforce is useful and of course it depends on speed. but there is at every speed and in f1 they use it even at that speed. actually IMO thats why the bigger wings as you could use "bigger" wings to have more DF at low speed.

Good chance there is a way to design a car that generates downforce at low speeds, just like that plane. But you can’t go fast with that car then, remember, even at Monaco speeds up to 300km/h are reached. That plane won’t go much faster then 40 mls/h on sea level. And even planes that can take off at low speed are very light weight, a huge wing with a profile that has too much drag at higher speeds (might even stall due to turbulence?)

[Alonso Fan]

You think this is what Vandoorne was referring to regarding the transmission? Seeing as the suspension bolts to it you could be right. Maybe some worn rose bushings?

People need to just accept the fact that Mclaren have not built a decent chassis in the last 5 years and thats it. Why does it always have to a car issue or damage if they in the midfield group? Thats all what the car can do as they dont fully understand the kinematics of the new suspension nothing wrong with the bushings and certainly not due to aero.

Problem is everyone jumps on the hype train early only to be disappointed.

Speak for yourself

I'm reasonably happy with qualifying considering their practice issues.

Also I disagree that they have not built a decent chassis. Last year at monaco they were the same distance back from the front with what we know was a weaker engine than they have now. That shows that last year's chassis was closer to the top than this years chassis is. They've lost ground over the winter and they've not got it back yet.

Decent in my eyes is 4th best considering their budget and workforce so last year's chassis was decent because it was most probably 4th best

Edit: I should write IMO before I get mowed down

[mwillems]

I think wing to vehicle ratio renders the comparison a little useless. Mclaren have openly admitted that the traction is not good. Has anyome actually seen the rear wheels spin or slide in the slow corners?

If this is the case, i wonder if this is why Goss was kicked out, as it may have undermined the whole season.

I guess a track without particularly long straights and no low speed corners is where mclaren would be fastest.