McLaren MCL34

[makecry]

GPR -A:

https://i.screenshot.net/5w95yt7

Some comparison on the mid-field teams. There was race sim data available for either Renault or for Haas.

McLaren seems to be very very strong! Looking from lap 37 onwards, they started running in 1m21s, which is serious mid-race pace. No other mid-field team has shown that so far.

While I did not find times for a Renault race sim, looking through various stints from Renault drivers, they seem to be up with McLaren.

Haas seems to be behind these two and then behind are Toro Rosso and Alfa. Needless to say, Williams is the last.

I could not find good representative long run times from RP. So, not sure where they sit.

3 stop. anyone calculated the difference between 3/2 stop?

Not sure what you're asking.... The difference between a 2 stop and a 3 stop is 1 stop ...


The 3 stop car has to make up the 20-25 seconds it looses in that pit stop with more speed on the fresh tires.

Spain has 66 laps.
2 stops = 3 sets of tires 66/3=22 laps. Laps per stint might look like 17, 22, 27

3 stops = 4 sets of tires 66/4=~16 laps Laps per stint might look like 10,16,16, 22

I haven't factored in a harder compound in that.

No the question was, do we know or do we have the data that would tell us how would the times be on 2 stop vs 3 stop. As in was a 3 stop faster or a 2 stop. Were we the only team that even did a 3 stop, if so , why?

[FittingMechanics]

No the question was, do we know or do we have the data that would tell us how would the times be on 2 stop vs 3 stop. As in was a 3 stop faster or a 2 stop. Were we the only team that even did a 3 stop, if so , why?

McLaren started the race sim on dev tires. If there is a difference between them and real C3, there is little point in running a prolonged stint on a tire that won't be used in 2019. That could be the reason for the early pitstop. Seeing that those tires had a really heavy dropoff in just a handful of laps, it's possible those tires were old or in some other way unsuited for the stint.

I'd say that the value of 3 stopper vs 2 stopper is vastly overblown in this situation. McLaren did not benefit in any way from it because first stint was really slow and short (so did not help them with pace) and other two stints were only marginally shorter because the first stint was not that long.

Only possible issue is that McLaren destroys C3 (or dev) tires very quickly and with F1 forcing you to use two tire compounds, it forces McLaren to run a short, slow stint on C3 to be able to use C2 in the rest of the race. I sincerely doubt this is the case.

[diffuser]

No the question was, do we know or do we have the data that would tell us how would the times be on 2 stop vs 3 stop. As in was a 3 stop faster or a 2 stop. Were we the only team that even did a 3 stop, if so , why?

McLaren started the race sim on dev tires. If there is a difference between them and real C3, there is little point in running a prolonged stint on a tire that won't be used in 2019. That could be the reason for the early pitstop. Seeing that those tires had a really heavy dropoff in just a handful of laps, it's possible those tires were old or in some other way unsuited for the stint.

I'd say that the value of 3 stopper vs 2 stopper is vastly overblown in this situation. McLaren did not benefit in any way from it because first stint was really slow and short (so did not help them with pace) and other two stints were only marginally shorter because the first stint was not that long.

Only possible issue is that McLaren destroys C3 (or dev) tires very quickly and with F1 forcing you to use two tire compounds, it forces McLaren to run a short, slow stint on C3 to be able to use C2 in the rest of the race. I sincerely doubt this is the case.

It's also traditional hard to pass in Spain. Unless the new formula make's it significantly easier or it is extremely hot on race day, I don't see a 3 stop being very likely.

[nzjrs]

No the question was, do we know or do we have the data that would tell us how would the times be on 2 stop vs 3 stop. As in was a 3 stop faster or a 2 stop. Were we the only team that even did a 3 stop, if so , why?

McLaren started the race sim on dev tires. If there is a difference between them and real C3, there is little point in running a prolonged stint on a tire that won't be used in 2019. That could be the reason for the early pitstop. Seeing that those tires had a really heavy dropoff in just a handful of laps, it's possible those tires were old or in some other way unsuited for the stint.

I'd say that the value of 3 stopper vs 2 stopper is vastly overblown in this situation. McLaren did not benefit in any way from it because first stint was really slow and short (so did not help them with pace) and other two stints were only marginally shorter because the first stint was not that long.

Only possible issue is that McLaren destroys C3 (or dev) tires very quickly and with F1 forcing you to use two tire compounds, it forces McLaren to run a short, slow stint on C3 to be able to use C2 in the rest of the race. I sincerely doubt this is the case.

It's my recollection, probably from Buxton paddock pass, or the autosport post test day videos, that test 1 development tires were actual development tires, and test two development tires were the same specification but from the alternate (non Turkey?) manufacturing plant.

[FittingMechanics]

It's my recollection, probably from Buxton paddock pass, or the autosport post test day videos, that test 1 development tires were actual development tires, and test two development tires were the same specification but from the alternate (non Turkey?) manufacturing plant.

I remember that there was talk of this, but I am not sure it was ever officially stated or if we know which tires were at which moment on the car. Dev tire Sainz used in the race sim apparently degraded in only 4-5 laps.

In any case, my point was, McLaren's race sim didn't really benefit from the 3rd pitstop because stint with softer tires was slower than there is any logic for it to be, and it was very short which means that stints on harder compounds were much improved due to ability to push tires more. I doubt that the three stopper was a real strategy, perhaps more of a test of how used tires would work with a heavy car and then switched to a more traditional compound for the rest of the run.

[M840TR]

[proteus]

It's my recollection, probably from Buxton paddock pass, or the autosport post test day videos, that test 1 development tires were actual development tires, and test two development tires were the same specification but from the alternate (non Turkey?) manufacturing plant.

I remember that there was talk of this, but I am not sure it was ever officially stated or if we know which tires were at which moment on the car. Dev tire Sainz used in the race sim apparently degraded in only 4-5 laps.

In any case, my point was, McLaren's race sim didn't really benefit from the 3rd pitstop because stint with softer tires was slower than there is any logic for it to be, and it was very short which means that stints on harder compounds were much improved due to ability to push tires more. I doubt that the three stopper was a real strategy, perhaps more of a test of how used tires would work with a heavy car and then switched to a more traditional compound for the rest of the run.

In one shot i have seen that the tyres are made in Romania, but i dont know if Romania is a standard manufacturer for current tyres.

[f1rules]

i think leaving all this fre space above the radiator will help reduce drag and improve internal airflow?

[mclaren111]

i think leaving all this fre space above the radiator will help reduce drag and improve internal airflow?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D09reQuWwAAex27.png:large

Is that an opening / slot at the edge of the Sidepod ??

[Holm86]

i think leaving all this fre space above the radiator will help reduce drag and improve internal airflow?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D09reQuWwAAex27.png:large

Maybe they are bleeding some clean air over and behind the radiator, to increase the airspeed and lower the pressure behind the radiator??? Making it more efficient, and giving less internal drag?

[trinidefender]

i think leaving all this fre space above the radiator will help reduce drag and improve internal airflow?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D09reQuWwAAex27.png:large

Maybe they are bleeding some clean air over and behind the radiator, to increase the airspeed and lower the pressure behind the radiator??? Making it more efficient, and giving less internal drag?

This goes completely against the working principles of radiators. You want to increase the pressure differential between the 2 sides of a radiator. This encourages flow through the radiator increasing cooling.

What you propose, having a hole that allows airflow to go behind the radiator will decrease the pressure differential and hurt cooling.

There is no space there, what you are seeing is just matt black paint on a surface so it looks like it is a hole to the back of the radiator.

[PhillipM]

It wouldn't necessarily, you don't get much of gain by trying to constrain and ram air into the radiator, you get it by slowing high velocity air right down by expanding it into an airbox in front of the radiator - if there's a splitter in there and they flow some of the high speed air over the back of the radiator it could concievably increase the pressure differential across the radiators - this is what ferrari have been doing with their radiator louvers for years after all. Plus some of that air will be going to cool other components.

Anyway, yes, that tiny shroud/slot on the outside looks interesting, not sure if it's just a trick of the light.

[trinidefender]

It wouldn't necessarily, you don't get much of gain by trying to constrain and ram air into the radiator, you get it by slowing high velocity air right down by expanding it into an airbox in front of the radiator - if there's a splitter in there and they flow some of the high speed air over the back of the radiator it could concievably increase the pressure differential across the radiators - this is what ferrari have been doing with their radiator louvers for years after all. Plus some of that air will be going to cool other components.

Anyway, yes, that tiny shroud/slot on the outside looks interesting, not sure if it's just a trick of the light.

That would only work if the radiator wasn't such a heavy restriction to the airflow. What happens in practice is if you create a hole to the back of the radiator, the restriction of forcing air to flow through it causes large amounts of air to simply divert around it through the vent/hole.

This is what kills the pressure differential. Airflow will always take the path of least resistance and going through a hole will always be easier than going through a radiator.

The concept of slowing down high velocity air to increase its pressure in a diffuser is obviously true.

[Zynerji]

It wouldn't necessarily, you don't get much of gain by trying to constrain and ram air into the radiator, you get it by slowing high velocity air right down by expanding it into an airbox in front of the radiator - if there's a splitter in there and they flow some of the high speed air over the back of the radiator it could concievably increase the pressure differential across the radiators - this is what ferrari have been doing with their radiator louvers for years after all. Plus some of that air will be going to cool other components.

Anyway, yes, that tiny shroud/slot on the outside looks interesting, not sure if it's just a trick of the light.

That would only work if the radiator wasn't such a heavy restriction to the airflow. What happens in practice is if you create a hole to the back of the radiator, the restriction of forcing air to flow through it causes large amounts of air to simply divert around it through the vent/hole.

This is what kills the pressure differential. Airflow will always take the path of least resistance and going through a hole will always be easier than going through a radiator.

The concept of slowing down high velocity air to increase its pressure in a diffuser is obviously true.

Could you, theoretically, build a vortex "panel" across the back of the radiator to create a very low pressure zone?

[PhillipM]

This is what kills the pressure differential. Airflow will always take the path of least resistance and going through a hole will always be easier than going through a radiator.

No, it won't, because if you have a large area it can expand into from the tiny airbox intake, that's also a path of low resistance.

Otherwise we'd never get any air into the intakes because it'd just go around the side of the sidepods instead.