McLaren MCL34

[SmallSoldier]

Alright. Main changes:

Packaging: Previous philosophy for Mcl32 & Mcl33 were focused on CoG. All the weight was at the bottom with a vacancy on top. This obviously wasn't good for aero as the bulky sidepods blocked air moving towards the diffuser and cleared it for the rear wing. Hence the drag issue. This year is the opposite; aero over CoG.

Sidepods: Moved back to be less sensitive from tyre wake. Crash structure moved up to widen the undercut.

Bargeboards: Longer this year which lessens drag and manages tyre wake better - hence no diffuser stall in corners - which was apparently one of Mcl33's main issue.

The only concept carried over from last year is the nose and rear suspension; rest are regulation based changes like front & rear wing etc.

I would add I think the car is a little longer.

https://i.redd.it/4l9kkdw43rg21.png

That's just a rendering though.

Last year’s car was 3550mm and this year is 3648mm, the car is definitely larger.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SmallSoldier]

Alright. Main changes:

Packaging: Previous philosophy for Mcl32 & Mcl33 were focused on CoG. All the weight was at the bottom with a vacancy on top. This obviously wasn't good for aero as the bulky sidepods blocked air moving towards the diffuser and cleared it for the rear wing. Hence the drag issue. This year is the opposite; aero over CoG.

Sidepods: Moved back to be less sensitive from tyre wake. Crash structure moved up to widen the undercut.

Bargeboards: Longer this year which lessens drag and manages tyre wake better - hence no diffuser stall in corners - which was apparently one of Mcl33's main issue.

The only concept carried over from last year is the nose and rear suspension; rest are regulation based changes like front & rear wing etc.

That is a great post!

I guess we need to add the following:

A) Front suspension: The team is now using a raised front suspension, which will require a few races to understand it’s behavior and reaction to changes at the track.

B) Sidepods: It is important to note that the upper crash beams have actually been moved to the “lowest” position, with the sidepod now residing a top of it (when one is looking a picture of the front of car, the portion below the side pod that extends into the bargeboard (black) is the crash beam)... This changes not only how the car gets cooling, but most importantly how air moves on top and below the Sidepod “entrance” which is wider than in previous year

C) Rake: I had my suspicious based on the initial renderings, but the car seemed to have less rake than in previous years... This is a “massive” change in regards to air management through the car and a surprising one since the tendency was to use high rakes, Mclaren has had a high rake / short wheel base for most of the hybrid era... Even though they haven’t gone to a Mercedes concept (long wheel base low rake), they are closer to it today than to Red Bull (actually, in this regard Ferrari is the closest concept for them).

D) Wheel Base: The car has grown in regards to last year and this will also have an effect in how they manage air around the car.

All of the above changes (adding the ones for Packaging, Bargeboards and Sidepods) imply a very different way of managing air around the car and how the car is setup... If we think about the rest of the teams, their aero concepts or philosophies have been maintained from previous season with the obvious introduction of the new wings and some tweaks, but for the most part same philosophies in regards to how the air is managed towards the back of the car (an example of this is Racing Point, which during testing used a 2018 car with some 2019 parts during testing and wasn’t way off the pace).

The change in concept / philosophy for the team implies that they will have an slow start of the season since they have to learn and understand it’s behavior, if the car starts reacting the way they expect it to changes in setup and the parts coming in, that means that the concept works and their rate of development and improvement should be very interesting (which is encouraging considering that they are in the mix with the midfield at this point).

I have a theory on what is causing the balance problems for Mclaren and if I’m right, they will fix it and once they do, they should/could make a big leap in times / positions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Care to share your theory?

Sent from my G8341 using Tapatalk

I don’t want to look like a fool! Haha

As long as we all agree that this is only theory and that I’m aware I could be way off the mark

It seems to me that this year’s concept has managed to create an important amount of downforce at the rear, specially from the diffuser... Nevertheless the team hasn’t been able to develop a front wing that matches the amount of downforce at the rear back...

Since the downforce generated by the diffuser can’t be “controlled” (it’s not something you can really adjust), the only way for the team to adjust / fine tune the rear downforce is through the rear wing... This would be the reason why the team has used a “Medium Downforce” rear wing in testing and in Australia (2 tracks where a High Downforce rear wing is more desirable).

The use of the Medium Downforce wing could also explain the changes we’ve seeing from the team in regards to top speed and time gained at the straights (Mclaren was one of the biggest gainers in this respect) and could also explain what seems to be a problem with slow corners.

If the above is accurate, the team “simply” (using this term loosely since I’m sure it’s no easy task) need to develop a front wing that still manages the tire wake as it does today, but that has higher downforce allowing the team to maximize the cars concept / potential (I believe that’s what they are referring to when talking about the car).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PhillipM]

That fits with everything I heard about upgrades pre-season - and what the drivers/engineers were saying - they're struggling a little with front end understeer and tyre temperature, but they think they have upgrade parts in the pipeline to fix most of it.

Wait and see, this weekend should give a clearer idea as it's a bit of a mix - rear tyre temperatures are usually a struggle but you also need a pointy front end for the low speed corners. So there's two distinct regions that should show us which end limiting them the most.

[CLKGTR]

If that is correct, that means they should be OK balance wise on the tracks where the max downforce isn't neccessary, like in Bahrain this weekend.

[SmallSoldier]

That fits with everything I heard about upgrades pre-season - and what the drivers/engineers were saying - they're struggling a little with front end understeer and tyre temperature, but they think they have upgrade parts in the pipeline to fix most of it.

Wait and see, this weekend should give a clearer idea as it's a bit of a mix - rear tyre temperatures are usually a struggle but you also need a pointy front end for the low speed corners. So there's two distinct regions that should show us which end limiting them the most.

I believe you are right... This weekend should allows us to understand a bit more what is going (not that the team is in any kind of crisis).

I also believe that the team is pulling a “Mercedes” this year... What I mean by that is that they have focused on a car that should work on most high speed circuits and not necessarily in the slow ones... And that’s absolutely fine and would make a lot of sense (and a big departure from the cars they had, which were focused on the slow / hard to pass circuits)... I believe this is also the reason why the team was surprised with Melbourne, which wasn’t one of the circuits they were targeting for a good result.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SmallSoldier]

If that is correct, that means they should be OK balance wise on the tracks where the max downforce isn't neccessary, like in Bahrain this weekend.

Yes sir! I’m really intrigued about it! Bahrain and China should give us a better idea on where the team is in the pecking order and what the strengths / weaknesses of the car are.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CLKGTR]

If that is correct, that means they should be OK balance wise on the tracks where the max downforce isn't neccessary, like in Bahrain this weekend.

Yes sir! I’m really intrigued about it! Bahrain and China should give us a better idea on where the team is in the pecking order and what the strengths / weaknesses of the car are.

Right. Even if they have some understeer in Bahrain it is ok for this track because it gives better confidence for the driver when applying power and it protects rear tyres which are critical in Bahrain (very rear tyre limited circuit, contrary to, for example, China which is front tyre limited track).

[Chicane]

If you look at the quotes coming from Mclaren, there is not even an iota of doubt that they are struggling to generate enough front downforce to compliment the rear on tracks requiring high downforce like Barcelona and Albert Park. They are suffering from understeer in slow speed corners. They don't generate enough front downforce to run a barn door rear wing atm.

The drivers are complaining about lack of balance and an inability to find a decent compromise on all types of corners. It is not just the front wing which is responsible for generating front downforce, at least not all of it and Mclaren are working on bringing in addition to the front wing in order to make the car have broader working range.

Aero depends a lot on the mechanical platform. In a f1 car the tyre sidewalls contribute to most of the suspension travel and the main job of the suspension is to provide a stable platform to make the aero work effectively. In my opinion Mclaren will be bringing mechanical chassis related upgrades to complement the aero ones.

MCL34 is in its infancy. In F1 the trick always lies in the details. Mclaren need to fine tune the whole package not just by adding new bits but how to mix and match those to get the best balance.

Bahrain will be an ideal test for the medium downforce rear wing Mclaren are currently running. Theoretically, on paper they should not have that many balance issues here in comparison to Barcelona or Albert Park. I bet the team are excited as we are to find out how the MCL34 performs on a track which at least on paper appears to suit a lot better than Melbourne.

[diffuser]

Alright. Main changes:

Packaging: Previous philosophy for Mcl32 & Mcl33 were focused on CoG. All the weight was at the bottom with a vacancy on top. This obviously wasn't good for aero as the bulky sidepods blocked air moving towards the diffuser and cleared it for the rear wing. Hence the drag issue. This year is the opposite; aero over CoG.

Sidepods: Moved back to be less sensitive from tyre wake. Crash structure moved up to widen the undercut.

Bargeboards: Longer this year which lessens drag and manages tyre wake better - hence no diffuser stall in corners - which was apparently one of Mcl33's main issue.

The only concept carried over from last year is the nose and rear suspension; rest are regulation based changes like front & rear wing etc.

I would add I think the car is a little longer.

https://i.redd.it/4l9kkdw43rg21.png

That's just a rendering though.

Agreed, it's why I said 'I think'.

[PhillipM]

The car is definately longer, the chassis itself is longer - confirmed that last year when they were making it

[kfrantzios]

I can not understand how on earth they cant produce downforce with such a massive front wing! Look at that of Alpha. It's way slimmer but they don't seem to complain about front wing downforce.

Sent from my G8341 using Tapatalk

[RonDennis]

Wasn't the drag issue just caused by the fact they had to run more wing, because they miscalculated the gap between the sidepods and front tires, which made the car very unstable. They also used the Melbourne spec wing in Barcelona, which gave the car too much downforce.

[mclaren111]

I can not understand how on earth they cant produce downforce with such a massive front wing! Look at that of Alpha. It's way slimmer but they don't seem to complain about front wing downforce.

Sent from my G8341 using Tapatalk

Someone posted earlier in the tread that the diffuser is generating very good and effective DF, and therefore "creates" understeer and difficulty in finding a good balance...

[SmallSoldier]

I can not understand how on earth they cant produce downforce with such a massive front wing! Look at that of Alpha. It's way slimmer but they don't seem to complain about front wing downforce.

Sent from my G8341 using Tapatalk

The problem is as much the creation of downforce, but how much downforce is needed... If the rear of the car creates more downforce than the front, you will have understeer... My theory is that they have managed to create a lot of downforce at the rear (which is great) and are struggling to create as much from the front.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SmallSoldier]

Wasn't the drag issue just caused by the fact they had to run more wing, because they miscalculated the gap between the sidepods and front tires, which made the car very unstable. They also used the Melbourne spec wing in Barcelona, which gave the car too much downforce.

Last year they have to add drag to compensate for the loss of downforce when in a turn... The problem with the distance between the front wheels and the bargeboard area was that there wasn’t enough space for the bargeboard to properly manage the tire wake, therefore creating stall issues and loss of downforce... This forced the team to increase both rear wing and front wing in an effort to recover the lost downforce at the expense of drag.

Now, the goal of every team is to create downforce without adding too much drag... That’s what Mclaren has tried to do this season, by increasing the length of the car they have more “floor”, their nose, sidepod design and undercut are all sending additional clean air to the diffuser, therefore creating downforce without the drag expense.

They aren’t using the Medium Downforce wing to reduce drag necessarily, my theory is that if they would add a regular high downforce wing, the front wing won’t be able to cope with the additional rear downforce and that’s what is limiting them.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk