2019 Mclaren F1 Team - Renault

[ispano6]

Sauber had the nose last year and McLaren came out with something midyear that was snapping and breaking in Austria so no I dont think so.

Wasn't McLarens rear suspension a dud? Why would anyone copy it? I certainly don't believe you when you say every team is using their suspension layout.

The only design elements that seemed to have come from McLaren that I can recognize today is the stubby front and nosewing mount gills of STR and some other things like slots in the floor.

[Ground Effect]

Sauber had the nose last year and McLaren came out with something midyear that was snapping and breaking in Austria so no I dont think so.

Wasn't McLarens rear suspension a dud? Why would anyone copy it? I certainly don't believe you when you say every team is using their suspension layout.

The only design elements that seemed to have come from McLaren that I can recognize today is the stubby front and nosewing mount gills of STR and some other things like slots in the floor.

Rear wing

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferr ... a/3181017/

[diffuser]

If you look at all the Aero ideas PP had on our cars that have been copied, I'd say he's been doing very well...

Our cars has just not worked as a complete package yet... This year looks promising...

Which ideas exactly? Seemed to me he took ideas from Sauber and Force India with that angelfish face with slots and nostrils. He hasn't come up with any novel mirror concepts either so I'm curious what he's done that others are copying.

You mean only this year, right?... Because if not, they were the ones that came out with the strakes on the rear wing end plates that “everyone” uses in one shape or another today, Ferrari has copied their front wing support (which was originally on the 2017 car)... Actually, I believe that every team is using their rear suspension layout (which debuted last year)... I’m sure the list goes on if we really make an analysis of it.

In regards to the intakes in the front wing, even though they followed the concept of getting air through the front of the nose cone, the air management of it and how it works with the cape is unique to Mclaren... I would argue that Alfa’s nose this year followed Mclaren’s concept more than the other way around.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don't forget the floor

[SmallSoldier]

Sauber had the nose last year and McLaren came out with something midyear that was snapping and breaking in Austria so no I dont think so.

Wasn't McLarens rear suspension a dud? Why would anyone copy it? I certainly don't believe you when you say every team is using their suspension layout.

The only design elements that seemed to have come from McLaren that I can recognize today is the stubby front and nosewing mount gills of STR and some other things like slots in the floor.

The Mclaren nose last year was in development before the start of the season, so no, it wasn’t a copy of Sauber... It was a different design and they were having issues to make it pass the crash tests and that’s why it was delayed and deployed in Spain.

Mclaren’s rear suspension wasn’t a “dud”, actually joining the upper wishbones is what they brought to the table and was copied this season by all teams... I don’t know where you are getting that it was a “dud”, since Mclaren’s problems last year were never because of their rear suspension.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[makecry]

Sauber had the nose last year and McLaren came out with something midyear that was snapping and breaking in Austria so no I dont think so.

Wasn't McLarens rear suspension a dud? Why would anyone copy it? I certainly don't believe you when you say every team is using their suspension layout.

The only design elements that seemed to have come from McLaren that I can recognize today is the stubby front and nosewing mount gills of STR and some other things like slots in the floor.

There is so much wrong here that I don't even wanna bother.

Anyway, what's your point again?

[ispano6]

Sauber had the nose last year and McLaren came out with something midyear that was snapping and breaking in Austria so no I dont think so.

Wasn't McLarens rear suspension a dud? Why would anyone copy it? I certainly don't believe you when you say every team is using their suspension layout.

The only design elements that seemed to have come from McLaren that I can recognize today is the stubby front and nosewing mount gills of STR and some other things like slots in the floor.

There is so much wrong here that I don't even wanna bother.

Anyway, what's your point again?

Point is I don't think most of the current grid copied Peter Prods designs as the originating coversation alluded to. McLaren was the only team that seemed to suffer from burning bodywork or an arching suspension design that broke. Only their PU had a mechanical issue so it would lead me to believe the chassis is flimsy or user or installation error. Or the Renault engine is fragile. So I expect McLaren to be around 6th in the championship this second year with Renault as they had been with Honda in their second year. That is if Sainz and Norris can add up to what Alonso could muster.

[mclaren111]

Which ideas exactly? Seemed to me he took ideas from Sauber and Force India with that angelfish face with slots and nostrils. He hasn't come up with any novel mirror concepts either so I'm curious what he's done that others are copying.

You mean only this year, right?... Because if not, they were the ones that came out with the strakes on the rear wing end plates that “everyone” uses in one shape or another today, Ferrari has copied their front wing support (which was originally on the 2017 car)... Actually, I believe that every team is using their rear suspension layout (which debuted last year)... I’m sure the list goes on if we really make an analysis of it.

In regards to the intakes in the front wing, even though they followed the concept of getting air through the front of the nose cone, the air management of it and how it works with the cape is unique to Mclaren... I would argue that Alfa’s nose this year followed Mclaren’s concept more than the other way around.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don't forget the floor

https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/upl ... _HiRes.jpg

Don't forget the Nose... Ferrari still using it this year...

Size Zero which RBR are using this year...

[mclaren111]

GPTechnical:




According to this analysis, we lost ground to most of the midfield around us...

Really hope we can get our development in top gear asap...

[mwillems]

GPTechnical:

https://f1tcdn.net/images/news/2019/int ... mances.png


According to this analysis, we lost ground to most of the midfield around us...

Really hope we can get our development in top gear asap...

If that is based on fastest qualifying lap, then I don't think it would be crazy to suggest that Sainz would have been faster than Norris without his issues.

[diffuser]

GPTechnical:

https://f1tcdn.net/images/news/2019/int ... mances.png


According to this analysis, we lost ground to most of the midfield around us...

Really hope we can get our development in top gear asap...

That's based on quali comparison 2018 vs 2019. I like it but their could be several reasons why a team had a poor times last year.

[Capharol]

GPTechnical:

https://f1tcdn.net/images/news/2019/int ... mances.png


According to this analysis, we lost ground to most of the midfield around us...

Really hope we can get our development in top gear asap...

That's based on quali comparison 2018 vs 2019. I like it but their could be several reasons why a team had a poor times last year.

yes there is... other wings, other bargeboards, other temperatures, for some other engines, for some other drivers.....
to many different facts compared to last year, and therefore in my opinion you can't compare 2018 anymore with 2019, due to these other wings, tyres etc.
see 2019 as year 0 with new regulations, same goes for 2021 by the way

[SmallSoldier]

GPTechnical:

https://f1tcdn.net/images/news/2019/int ... mances.png


According to this analysis, we lost ground to most of the midfield around us...

Really hope we can get our development in top gear asap...

That's based on quali comparison 2018 vs 2019. I like it but their could be several reasons why a team had a poor times last year.

yes there is... other wings, other bargeboards, other temperatures, for some other engines, for some other drivers.....
to many different facts compared to last year, and therefore in my opinion you can't compare 2018 anymore with 2019, due to these other wings, tyres etc.
see 2019 as year 0 with new regulations, same goes for 2021 by the way

You keep saying that, but your logic is flawed... You can’t compare the times of one car year on year because of all the changes... But comparing the improvement of every car against each other is a valid argument since all the teams used the same regulations last year and this year.

So even though, there are new wings, bargeboards, etc... You can compare the improvement from every team and in that regard there are teams that made great improvements (Alfa and STR)... There are teams that made good improvements (RP, Mclaren, Haas)... There are teams that were expected to get less improvement than the midfield due to the law of diminishing returns but still made good improvements (Mercedes and Ferrari) and there are teams that disappointed (RBR with better engine or Williams).

You don’t want to accept this logic because it means your team either was lying about how much better the engine is, or didn’t made as good of a job with their chassis as the rest of the field... But the fact that the analysis doesn’t show what “you” want to see, doesn’t make it invalid.

I believe that in the RBH topic I mentioned before the weekend started that I was surprised that RBH were rushing their China upgrade and that it was most probably because after testing they realized that they were way farther than they thought from Mercedes and Ferrari... Wonder how far they would have been if they didn’t rushed it in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SmallSoldier]

GPTechnical:

https://f1tcdn.net/images/news/2019/int ... mances.png


According to this analysis, we lost ground to most of the midfield around us...

Really hope we can get our development in top gear asap...

If that is based on fastest qualifying lap, then I don't think it would be crazy to suggest that Sainz would have been faster than Norris without his issues.

You can also read as if Mclaren has shorten the gap to the front a little bit, which is a positive to start the year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Capharol]

That's based on quali comparison 2018 vs 2019. I like it but their could be several reasons why a team had a poor times last year.

yes there is... other wings, other bargeboards, other temperatures, for some other engines, for some other drivers.....
to many different facts compared to last year, and therefore in my opinion you can't compare 2018 anymore with 2019, due to these other wings, tyres etc.
see 2019 as year 0 with new regulations, same goes for 2021 by the way

You keep saying that, but your logic is flawed... You can’t compare the times of one car year on year because of all the changes... But comparing the improvement of every car against each other is a valid argument since all the teams used the same regulations last year and this year.

So even though, there are new wings, bargeboards, etc... You can compare the improvement from every team and in that regard there are teams that made great improvements (Alfa and STR)... There are teams that made good improvements (RP, Mclaren, Haas)... There are teams that were expected to get less improvement than the midfield due to the law of diminishing returns but still made good improvements (Mercedes and Ferrari) and there are teams that disappointed (RBR with better engine or Williams).

You don’t want to accept this logic because it means your team either was lying about how much better the engine is, or didn’t made as good of a job with their chassis as the rest of the field... But the fact that the analysis doesn’t show what “you” want to see, doesn’t make it invalid.

I believe that in the RBH topic I mentioned before the weekend started that I was surprised that RBH were rushing their China upgrade and that it was most probably because after testing they realized that they were way farther than they thought from Mercedes and Ferrari... Wonder how far they would have been if they didn’t rushed it in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

first of all: yes you can compare 2019 teams against eachother in 2019
second: you missed my point probably I said "you can't compare 2018 to 2019 because of the different changes made this year", clearly meaning ….. you can't compare McLaren 2018 to McLaren 2019, or Mercedes 2018 v Mercedes 2019, etc.
and i accept any logical explanation and for you Information i have several teams i like and several drivers i like so FYI you know nothing of what is logical to me or not.... but we established that already in a previous disagreement that we want to Agree to Disagree and we established aswell that you aren't a person who wants to accept others opinion so thats why i have you on ignore (which showed again that i am correct i did it)

and as far of the upgrade from RB that was meant for China, which they moved forward:
1. this isn't the topic to discuss it
2. to answer your question…..WE might never know, only RB personal will know(and not even all of them)

[diffuser]

That's based on quali comparison 2018 vs 2019. I like it but their could be several reasons why a team had a poor times last year.

yes there is... other wings, other bargeboards, other temperatures, for some other engines, for some other drivers.....
to many different facts compared to last year, and therefore in my opinion you can't compare 2018 anymore with 2019, due to these other wings, tyres etc.
see 2019 as year 0 with new regulations, same goes for 2021 by the way

You keep saying that, but your logic is flawed... You can’t compare the times of one car year on year because of all the changes... But comparing the improvement of every car against each other is a valid argument since all the teams used the same regulations last year and this year.

So even though, there are new wings, bargeboards, etc... You can compare the improvement from every team and in that regard there are teams that made great improvements (Alfa and STR)... There are teams that made good improvements (RP, Mclaren, Haas)... There are teams that were expected to get less improvement than the midfield due to the law of diminishing returns but still made good improvements (Mercedes and Ferrari) and there are teams that disappointed (RBR with better engine or Williams).

You don’t want to accept this logic because it means your team either was lying about how much better the engine is, or didn’t made as good of a job with their chassis as the rest of the field... But the fact that the analysis doesn’t show what “you” want to see, doesn’t make it invalid.

I believe that in the RBH topic I mentioned before the weekend started that I was surprised that RBH were rushing their China upgrade and that it was most probably because after testing they realized that they were way farther than they thought from Mercedes and Ferrari... Wonder how far they would have been if they didn’t rushed it in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My point was that I seem to remember STR/Alfa having problems in Quali Aus 2018. I think we just need to be mindful of causes for time discrepancies. That it isn't always just pure pace. If we use the data to create trends and averages, it will be interesting.

Since McLaren's car stopped improving right around Spain last year. It will be interesting to see that trend widen.