2018 McLaren F1 Team - Renault

[godlameroso]

Let's agree to disagree.

On Boullier being an engineer?

No - I want him gone and you don't

That's an interesting interpretation of my POV. I don't care who keeps or doesn't keep their job, I don't work for McLaren. The politics is a direct result of their performance, the people in power at McLaren will use politics to preserve their status and position because they know the situation is dire. When the performance of the car increases the politics will decrease, but the performance of the car can't increase when political egos get in the way of developing the car. The fact McLaren now has limited resources makes development of the car more difficult because development has to be a sure thing, McLaren can't waste money developing dead ends. Because of their reluctance to make a radical change, development will take longer, so although development will go according to the resources, the time frame of bad performance while they catch up is just going to keep damaging the brand.

I don't envy their situation at all, I almost feel bad for them, the mighty McLaren fighting with Williams to spare themselves from finishing dead last.

[RonDennis]

On Boullier being an engineer?

No - I want him gone and you don't

That's an interesting interpretation of my POV. I don't care who keeps or doesn't keep their job, I don't work for McLaren. The politics is a direct result of their performance, the people in power at McLaren will use politics to preserve their status and position because they know the situation is dire. When the performance of the car increases the politics will decrease, but the performance of the car can't increase when political egos get in the way of developing the car. The fact McLaren now has limited resources make development of the car more difficult because development has to be a sure thing, McLaren can't waste money developing dead ends. Because of their reluctance to make a radical change, development will take longer, so although development will go according to the resources, the time frame of bad performance while they catch up is just going to keep damaging the brand.

I don't envy their situation at all, I almost feel bad for them, the mighty McLaren fighting with Williams to spare themselves from finishing dead last.

You act like they're some broke ass company. We're talking about a team that said goodbye to the Honda millions, resigned Alonso and tries to get Ricciardo. They don't have the same budget as Red Bull, but the positions they're currently in are just a joke. Nothing to do with budget, just incapable leaders/staff. I would agree with you when they were let's say around 7 or 8 tenths of the Red Bull, especially in the first year with Renault, but we're talking about seconds.

We're in for some tough races:

McLaren chief Zak Brown said fans would have to "bear with us" as the team looked to resolve the problems with their car, explaining that a solution would probably not be found during the triple header.

[mclaren111]

This year is my 30th Anniversary as a McLaren supporter.

We have been here before, and like before, we will get out of it.

[mwillems]

Probably track characteristics.

Was OK at BCN and good at Monaco. Why is it now so terrible? Two very different tracks.

Because the other teams upgraded their cars better than McLaren was able to, now they're behind until the next raft of upgrades come in.

Monaco was before Canada, yet the issue was poor traction, which they haven't solved. So the information given still doesn't fit what we can see, as far as I can tell.

So let us be specific, why poor traction at Canada (Particularly in the hairpin we are told), but not Monaco (more than one hairpin). Is there a technical explanation of why we wouldn't have this issue in Monaco but would have it in Canada? A setup difference? Do you see what I'm getting at?

[RonDennis]

Was OK at BCN and good at Monaco. Why is it now so terrible? Two very different tracks.

Because the other teams upgraded their cars better than McLaren was able to, now they're behind until the next raft of upgrades come in.

Monaco was before Canada, yet the issue was poor traction, which they haven't solved. So the information given still doesn't fit what we can see, as far as I can tell.

So let us be specific, why poor traction at Canada (Particularly in the hairpin we are told), but not Monaco (more than one hairpin). Is there a technical explanation of why we wouldn't have this issue in Monaco but would have it in Canada? A setup difference? Do you see what I'm getting at?

Because you get punished by the straights in Canada if you need to run more downforce to get better traction.

[mwillems]

Possibly, but even if they cut back on overtime they'd still be producing updates and moving forward. My own though is that they are prioritising finding and fixing the existing issue. But still, I personally don't feel this explains what is happening with the car in relation to Mclarens explanation. We have issues with low speed traction but both BCN and MON have low speed traction and we weren't bad.

Ultimately I'm trying to tie up Mclarens reasoning to what we can see on the track, and I don't see it. I might just not have enough knowledge to understand, but nobody here really seems to be able to tie up the question of Monaco and BCN good performance to the issue of low speed traction issues, they do not correlate. Like I said, I'm not knowledgeable and I'm not trying to say that the explanation definitely doesn't fit, but please, someone show me how?

That's because the straights aren't extremely long in Spain and Monaco, which means you can run more downforce to fix the low speed traction. On high speed tracks like Paul Richard and Canada you'll get heavily punished for running more downforce. Barcelona is also a track that they know as their back pocket, which makes their life a lot easier setup wise. But let's not forget they were 1,3 seconds slower then the Red Bull in Monaco, a track that takes only 1:10 to complete.

Apologies, I just saw this, thanks for the info, time to contemplate.

[Nuvolari]

Was OK at BCN and good at Monaco. Why is it now so terrible? Two very different tracks.

Because the other teams upgraded their cars better than McLaren was able to, now they're behind until the next raft of upgrades come in.

Monaco was before Canada, yet the issue was poor traction, which they haven't solved. So the information given still doesn't fit what we can see, as far as I can tell.

So let us be specific, why poor traction at Canada (Particularly in the hairpin we are told), but not Monaco (more than one hairpin). Is there a technical explanation of why we wouldn't have this issue in Monaco but would have it in Canada? A setup difference? Do you see what I'm getting at?

No, traction out of the hairpin at Canada was fine. There was a video comparison by @Juzh with Hamilton's lap and Alonso loses very little out of the hairpin during traction, but loses more in the run to the final chicane. If traction was a problem, Alonso would have been a sitting duck for Gasly in the TR but never got overtaken there in the run to the chicane.

In Monaco the drivers were understeering badly at the hairpin on entry, from memory.

Monaco is maximum df vs Canada was low-medium df. There was a pic shared around on Canada where McLaren specifically ran a smaller RW in Canada whereas most other teams were running fatter RWs especially with the extra DRS zone added for this year.

[Dipesh1995]

The thing is it’s not like they’ve stood relatively still in terms of chassis performance between MCL32 and MCL33. The MCL33 is a significantly poorer chassis than the 32. Their qualifying in Spain (a real car performance track) really showed that where they only managed to close the deficit to the top by 3 tenths (1.9 seconds in 2017 compared to 1.6 seconds in 2018 if I recall correctly) despite having a significantly better PU and 12 months of additional chassis development time.

I think they’ve done another 2013 but worse where they had a great car in 2012 and came up with a dog in 2013.

I think there are a few assumptions here:

1, The MCL33 is a significantly poorer chassis than the 32. Early on it is an evolution right? Before the nose, it is not that big of a departure AERO wise? This is all speculation but if we are making assumptions then we need to have some evidence. Most people point to the rear suspension because that's the biggest departure from 32, or the rear end for adaptation of the new engine. From the outside, how do we know 32 is significantly better if the PU was so bad.

2. "having a significantly better PU". Not a debate of honda/McLaren again from this please. Honda had reliability issue for I would argue 2/3 of the year. Last part of the season, when reliabilty was sorted, many suggest it is slightly behind on Renault. We have to make some assumptions and make logical deduction. If we believe MC32 was the best chassis and world beater to RBR, then the deficit in the last few races are down to the PU differences. OR if we believe that Honda is slightly down from Renault then the deficit is in the Chassis.

1.

From the outside, how do we know 32 is significantly better if the PU was so bad

From logic. I’ve compared Spain 2018 to Spain 2017. It’s a fact that the Honda PU was still a mess at this point and thus it’s power deficit to the Mercedes was significantly greater than the deficit the Renault PU had in Spain 2018. Therefore, to only gain 3 tenths on the competition really points to an underperforming chassis. Comparing Canada 2018 to Canada 2017 only reinforces this where they only gained 8 tenths from their quali time set in 2017 and the majority of that was from the faster tyres. As for the aerodynamics, yes they may not be a large change from 2017 apart from nose in terms of external aerodynamics but Brown said that they had some different aero parts on the car last year which aren’t on the car this year, one example of this is the absence of the aero detail behind the bargeboards on this year’s car. It’s details such as this that can make all the difference. Why they’ve removed such detail, I don’t know but looking at the competition especially the top cars, all of them have detail around this region that McLaren don’t. Furthermore, there is no doubt that the internal aero will have changed significantly to accommodate the cooling requirements of the new PU which will have had an impact on overall aero performance.

2. Like I said, I compared to Spain 2017 to Spain 2018. In Spain 2017, McLaren were running a PU which was significantly inferior to the Mercedes compared to the race-winning PU they are running right now. For clarification, I’m not saying the MCL32 was a world beater; imo, it was the fourth best last year but the MCL33 is nowhere near fourth best in qualifying and lately, not in the race either which is why I’m saying they’ve gone backwards.

[ALO_Power]

It's funny to have aero correlation problems and most teams of the grid to copy parts of them and do better than them.

[PlatinumZealot]

That a stretch my friend...may I call you that?

I have more articles and hearsay. Just like I said it was aero and not suspension - people didn't believe but it finally came to light. I think it is best we wait for more to be revealed. I hope Amazon makes a post Honda documentary.

[BrunoH]

belive me, even they dont know what it is because balance is good.

they again had the worst top speed, lack of traction and overal grip. alonso looked to have understeer to snap over in the first sector several times, running wide etc...

i will assume that the lack of top speed again was due to running more wing levels. however this did not translate in equal or better cornering speeds.. they are lost because after the update the car no longer corners as it did, and the top speed is still low...
they just do not know how to fix this.

They are better off returning to a more conventional chassis / suspension design, and fully focus for next year in a way they have guarantees it works.
if i was them, wold start to take off the front wings winglets and run a more simple ( next year front wing and car setup
like rules ) to start and simulate next year.. start to understand on the track what will work etc etc, this way they take out the windtunnel possible correlation factors out..
work on the internal ducts etc and in what ways they can reduce the total drag.

this year is lost. lets focus right now on next year in full! i rather them not have a single update that is not going to be used next year. full focus on next year aero and mechanical

[wesley123]

they just do not know how to fix this.

That's McLaren in the past 6 seasons. I remember reading an article on their 2012 car, the car was very good however, the team did not know why it was good. And it seemed that this has continued from then on.

And then we have Alonso hoping it is a one-off, when they have been crap since Monaco. And then they say everything is well, but they're just 'not quick enough'.

This just gives me the suggestion that McLaren has absolutely no clue about what they are doing anymore.

[Zynerji]

belive me, even they dont know what it is because balance is good.

they again had the worst top speed, lack of traction and overal grip. alonso looked to have understeer to snap over in the first sector several times, running wide etc...

i will assume that the lack of top speed again was due to running more wing levels. however this did not translate in equal or better cornering speeds.. they are lost because after the update the car no longer corners as it did, and the top speed is still low...
they just do not know how to fix this.

They are better off returning to a more conventional chassis / suspension design, and fully focus for next year in a way they have guarantees it works.
if i was them, wold start to take off the front wings winglets and run a more simple ( next year front wing and car setup
like rules ) to start and simulate next year.. start to understand on the track what will work etc etc, this way they take out the windtunnel possible correlation factors out..
work on the internal ducts etc and in what ways they can reduce the total drag.

this year is lost. lets focus right now on next year in full! i rather them not have a single update that is not going to be used next year. full focus on next year aero and mechanical

My question at this point is about how much the setup can effect things. My only personal experience is SIM racing, but I have found enormous amounts of lap time over the years by rebalancing the setup in different, often non-sensical ways.

Is it possible that "common sense" could be holding them back in setup? Following rules of thumb only got me so far in the SIM world, and some odd changes that no one else in my league thought to try turned out to be a huge advantage.

Can the data paralyze setup progress? I'd love an 8 hour stint in the McL simulator...

[RonDennis]

You have to wonder if the chassis isn't fundamentally flawed. Nobody knows when these problems started, but they were already aware at the start of the season that something didn't match. The pace of the car has never been good. The MCL32 certainly wasn't the best chassis on the grid, but it was decent, just look at the performance of several races at the end of the year.

[makecry]

You have to wonder if the chassis isn't fundamentally flawed. Nobody knows when these problems started, but they were already aware at the start of the season that something didn't match. The pace of the car has never been good. The MCL32 certainly wasn't the best chassis on the grid, but it was decent, just look at the performance of several races at the end of the year.

The race pace of MCL33 has been very good. Bahrain, Alonso finished right behind Hulk despite running on harder tires for 40 out of 56(?) laps. China again, Hulk got a free pitstop and ALO lost out on safety car, Canada he was 0.15s faster than Hulk when they were in free air. Monaco again he had 4th fastest race pace, Baku wasn't really representative.

France was the first time they had very very shitty pace.