2025 Las Vegas Grand Prix - Las Vegas Strip, Nov 21 - 23

[jz11]

Never forget we all have a somewhat voluntary stockholm syndrome and are factually donating our attention to 10 sticker selling companies, so the real sport can take place in our wallet.

yeah, this season felt like some sort of a script, Lando the underdog, getting it together by mid season to clinch the WDC trophy despite the reigning champions best efforts

the reality however looks very very different, senseless inexplicable performance differences, both from Lando and Oscar, it is like since the - "Oscar, we screwed up the pitstop and you must give the place to Lando," Oscar forgot how to drive, but Lando somehow figured it out? and Max doing Max things with that diva of a car, sometimes seemingly barely being able to be ahead of the 2nd squad but next weekend he is dominating like it's 2022

[venkyhere]

Guys, below is a fascinating sequence of radio messages b/w both Mclaren drivers with their respective engineers :

https://www.racefans.net/2025/11/23/the ... -the-race/

The team knew the plankwear issue right from the start, it wasn't as if they discovered it late in the final stint and pressed the panic button. This was a calculated risk they took even before setting up the car for Q. Most probably they expected Mercedes and Max to not have the pace they showed in the race today, and felt that even with LiCo the McL39 would have enough advantage to win. Operationally, they didn't have to do this for Norris, even if he finished P3 or P4, he would have had enough cushion in the WDC standings. Earlier, I thought the ride height choice was an 'unintentional calculation mistake' that they discovered late into the race ; now I know this was an 'intentional calculated gamble' they made. Probably apt for LasVegas. No wonder Norris was looking pale-faced in the post-race interviews & press conference - he was praying that he had done enough, so as to not have 'what was coming'.

[SB15]

Would this damage Mclaren's physique going into the Qatar? I think they're going to raise the ride height regardless just to stay within the confines of the rules and not risk another dsq, similar to Ferrari earlier in the season. They kinda expected Redbull to be quick, but did not expect the Mercedes to be almost as fast.

I hope they didn't do the skid block protection thing for the whole season because that would disappoint me extremely. Only because we potentially missed out on a lot of good races.

[f1isgood]

Guys, below is a fascinating sequence of radio messages b/w both Mclaren drivers with their respective engineers :

https://www.racefans.net/2025/11/23/the ... -the-race/

The team knew the plankwear issue right from the start, it wasn't as if they discovered it late in the final stint and pressed the panic button. This was a calculated risk they took even before setting up the car for Q. Most probably they expected Mercedes and Max to not have the pace they showed in the race today, and felt that even with LiCo the McL39 would have enough advantage to win. Operationally, they didn't have to do this for Norris, even if he finished P3 or P4, he would have had enough cushion in the WDC standings. Earlier, I thought the ride height choice was an 'unintentional calculation mistake' that they discovered late into the race ; now I know this was an 'intentional calculated gamble' they made. Probably apt for LasVegas. No wonder Norris was looking pale-faced in the post-race interviews & press conference - he was praying that he had done enough, so as to not have 'what was coming'.

Why would you gamble on something like this when you have a big lead in the championship? This seems like overconfidence and underestimating other cars capable of a win (RB and Merc)

[venkyhere]

I hope they didn't do the skid block protection thing for the whole season because that would disappoint me extremely. Only because we potentially missed out on a lot of good races.

There is no way to know, as the skid-protector was discovered only as late as Brazil. However, I wouldn't be surprised if that's how (clever cheating) they were able to achieve 'monster performance' over the entire season. Afterall, F1 is all about being clever and inventing things that can be hidden from scrutiny and gain performance advantage.

[search]

The team knew the plankwear issue right from the start, it wasn't as if they discovered it late in the final stint and pressed the panic button. This was a calculated risk they took even before setting up the car for Q.

according to the AmuS analysis about it, they changed the setup after Friday, and were surprised by the porpoising today, as they didn't suffer from it in Qualifying due to the low top speeds in the rain. So I guess while they may have noticed the risk early on, it probably was not from the start.

When they were precautious with the setup in Austin, their car turned out to be 5 mm too high, by the way, equalling 0.25s per lap. I hadn't seen those numbers before.

Also after the crash in Interlagos, Piastri's car turned out to be too high for quali & race, although I don't really understand why, tbh.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... erstappen/

[AR3-GP]

The team knew the plankwear issue right from the start, it wasn't as if they discovered it late in the final stint and pressed the panic button. This was a calculated risk they took even before setting up the car for Q.

according to the AmuS analysis about it, they changed the setup after Friday, and were surprised by the porpoising today, as they didn't suffer from it in Qualifying due to the low top speeds in the rain. So I guess while they may have noticed the risk early on, it probably was not from the start.

When they were precautious with the setup in Austin, their car turned out to be 5 mm too high, by the way, equalling 0.25s per lap. I hadn't seen those numbers before.

Also after the crash in Interlagos, Piastri's car turned out to be too high for quali & race, although I don't really understand why, tbh.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... erstappen/

Something else that's important here was this

A last attempt to defend McLaren that the wear and tear could be due to an underbody that was not properly fixed after accident damage was also not accepted. Team boss Andrea Stella confirmed: "We could see after the race that the ground was moving too much."

So the floor started to flex. This would have mitigated the plank wear (like Ferrari 2022) and yet Mclaren still failed the inspection. Stella tries to present this detail as a fact that exxagerated the plank wear, but it's the opposite. It would have reduced it. It's for this reason that the plank must be rigidly attached to the bottom of the car and that there are deflection test in many areas.

The Mclarens were making firework displays down all the straights. This car wasn't anywhere close to a legal ride height this weekend.

[f1isgood]

I hope they didn't do the skid block protection thing for the whole season because that would disappoint me extremely. Only because we potentially missed out on a lot of good races.

There is no way to know, as the skid-protector was discovered only as late as Brazil. However, I wouldn't be surprised if that's how (clever cheating) they were able to achieve 'monster performance' over the entire season. Afterall, F1 is all about being clever and inventing things that can be hidden from scrutiny and gain performance advantage.

Assuming they did this all year, how would it explain their excellent tire management in all conditions? Just that they could run lower because of this and simply that they have more downforce? That simple of an explanation?

[AR3-GP]

When they were precautious with the setup in Austin, their car turned out to be 5 mm too high, by the way, equalling 0.25s per lap. I hadn't seen those numbers before.
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... erstappen/

I think AMUS analysis is interesting, but it doesn't always work like this. Mclarens experienced porpoising in Las Vegas but it's also something that I noticed in COTA. Mclarens bouncing like mad into T1 while Verstappen looked like he was riding in an S-class. So if Mclaren had lowered the car in COTA, it's possible they would have hit this roadblock again and had to leave the car raised anyway. COTA has bumps like Las Vegas which tend to initiate the porpoising. Its a track where others have previously been disqualified for plank wear.

[PlatinumZealot]

As McLaren was running lower, didn't they have a big advantage in wet quali? I assume all cars were relatively high from the ground because of the lower speeds. And this is not a gradual effect.
Explaining the big difference with VER?

It could also be their spring and damper settings.

In the wet they might have went for more mechanical grip but that usually means more roll and a softer ride. Not good for plank wear given you have equal or even slightly more ride height than a rival.

To me this explains the porpoising they experienced. Simply didn't have enough data over the weeking to dial in the right suspension settings for the dry.

[Badger]

As McLaren was running lower, didn't they have a big advantage in wet quali? I assume all cars were relatively high from the ground because of the lower speeds. And this is not a gradual effect.
Explaining the big difference with VER?

It could also be their spring and damper settings.

In the wet they might have went for more mechanical grip but that usually means more roll and a softer ride. Not good for plank wear given you have equal or even slightly more ride height than a rival.

To me this explains the porpoising they experienced. Simply didn't have enough data over the weeking to dial in the right suspension settings for the dry.

I think you may be right. They were asked to lift in the fast left handers, turn 6, 11 and 17. And the skid wore out on the right hand side. The car was simply rolling too much in these super fast corners. This probably helped them a lot in the wet, and was good in the slow and medium speed stuff in the dry, but simply not stiff enough for the high speed corners, most of which are left handers.

[AR3-GP]

Its two sides of the same coin. A softer setting means the car gets closer to the ground when speed increases, generating even more downforce. That's the positive feedback loop with ground effect cars. It works up to the point that the car bottoms so hard that the driver loses control (Verstappen middle sector in Mexico qualy). Mclarens weren't bottoming to the point of losing control. They were just very lower in the corners compared to others and wearing more.

Whether the ride became low because of soft springs, or they had stiff springs and the static ground clearance was already low doesn't really matter. The point is that when you get this much plank wear, it means the car was running on average closer to the ground than others.

[mzso]

Does anyone have video about the cooldown car footage, maybe with the audio cleared up (god forbid even synced)? Honestly the cooldown stuff is more interesting the most parts of the races...

Also, I wonder if they told Leclerc that Antonelli had a 5s penalty, it would have been such a Ferrari thing to neglect this... Also whether Piastri got the info that things look bad with plank wear.
Did anyone look through the on-board footage?

[RonMexico]

Does anyone have video about the cooldown car footage, maybe with the audio cleared up (god forbid even synced)? Honestly the cooldown stuff is more interesting the most parts of the races...

Also, I wonder if they told Leclerc that Antonelli had a 5s penalty, it would have been such a Ferrari thing to neglect this... Also whether Piastri got the info that things look bad with plank wear.
Did anyone look through the on-board footage?

They did tell Leclerc but he had no more pace.

[PlatinumZealot]

Its two sides of the same coin. A softer setting means the car gets closer to the ground when speed increases, generating even more downforce. That's the positive feedback loop with ground effect cars. It works up to the point that the car bottoms so hard that the driver loses control (Verstappen middle sector in Mexico qualy). Mclarens weren't bottoming to the point of losing control. They were just very lower in the corners compared to others and wearing more.

Whether the ride became low because of soft springs, or they had stiff springs and the static ground clearance was already low doesn't really matter. The point is that when you get this much plank wear, it means the car was running on average closer to the ground than others.

Not only reasons. The dampers have different valvings (damp different rates at different velocites / acceleration of the wheel travel)... Very possible they can be running even higher than others and still only hitting the plank in certain corners.

Remember the ice skates? It was for the outer side of the car made to run as close as possible to the ground in the corners.