2022 - McLaren Formula 1 Team

[Darth-Piekus]

Red Bull who aparently are masters of bending rules regarding Flexi Parts are complaining? That is ironic from their side and really good from our side that we have innovations that they are unable to copy so they call for their illegality.

[SmallSoldier]

It’s a very good sign that McLaren didn’t show the amount of porpoising other teams did, it is an small advantage not having to focus resources to solving the issue (even if the issue is something that you can copy from another competitor)… According to what I’ve read so far, dealing with it isn’t that simple as a couple of cuts in the floor or just raising the ride height (which ultimately have a negative effect in performance), it is related to the shape of the Tunnels themselves and the ratios between the inlet and smallest section.

The rest of the teams will find a solution (I just hope that they don’t lobby the FIA to change the rules and introduce simpler solutions, like the introduction of suspension components currently banned to help them solve the issue).

There is no pecking order yet, McLaren’s lap times could have well been done with low fuel (although, the speed traps seem to indicate that they weren’t glory runs, so I doubt it)… The only takeaways from testing should be that the car is:

A) Reliable
B) Composed (no reports of it been twitchy)
C) Balanced (not over or under steery)
D) Not suffering as much as others from Porpoising

If we consider that the car Mclaren presented in testing looked “simple” (with parts in early stage of development), then it is a great sign

Hopefully the fact that it looks like a solution can be found by one/ some teams then the FIA shouldnt need to get involved

Didn't the FIA say they wouldn't be introducing any rule tweeks mid season anyway?

On the contrary, they have left themselves a lot of leeway to make any changes if they feel the teams are exploiting loopholes

[SmallSoldier]

Lando in regards to the comments from Russell that McLaren looked strong:

“George obviously topped the timesheet, so if he thinks we're strong, we’re going to think he's strong,” Norris said after Friday’s morning session.

“But if there's any team on the grid right now that you'll expect to be at the front when it matters, it's got to be Mercedes and probably Red Bull.

“So no, I don't think we're in an amazing place. I think we're in a good place. We had a car which as soon as you put on the track, worked well. Of course, there's always new things and some unexpected issues here and there. But it's been a good start.”

[_cerber1]

McLaren: No clear answer for MCL36’s lack of porpoising in F1 test
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/mclar ... t/8541487/

[runningmanz]

Haha I think they know why, that's just muddying the waters a bit ensuring its a whole lot harder for other teams to copy and get it working.

[Balalu]

Ted Kravitz seems to be snubbing McLaren alot this year. Does not even consider them as a tiny possible threat.

[Emag]

Ted Kravitz seems to be snubbing McLaren alot this year. Does not even consider them as a tiny possible threat.

Well, we also don't know where McLaren will stand anyway.

Until proven otherwise, people will tend to consider the usual suspects as the more probable threats, so I wouldn't look much into it.

[mwillems]

Hopefully the fact that it looks like a solution can be found by one/ some teams then the FIA shouldnt need to get involved

Didn't the FIA say they wouldn't be introducing any rule tweeks mid season anyway?

On the contrary, they have left themselves a lot of leeway to make any changes if they feel the teams are exploiting loopholes

But they are obviously not talking about loopholes but about the FIA reacting to Porpoising.

It doesn't appear to be causing a safety issue but when we do some laps in anger we will see. I wonder how much of a time deficit comes from porpoising. I also wonder if perhaps Mclaren wanted to start with a clean concept and put parts on and see what might affect the car step by step, rather than turning up on track and having to unravel the design as other teams may have to. If that was the case then that was smart forward thinking.

[the EDGE]

Hopefully the fact that it looks like a solution can be found by one/ some teams then the FIA shouldnt need to get involved

Didn't the FIA say they wouldn't be introducing any rule tweeks mid season anyway?

On the contrary, they have left themselves a lot of leeway to make any changes if they feel the teams are exploiting loopholes

What they have done is reduce the need for from a unanimous vote by teams, down to only needing the support of 8 teams, along with FIA & FOM, to make in-season rule changes

[CjC]

I think banning or at least pegging Mclaren back with this floor issue would be counter productive.
What happens if Mclaren have to revert to a floor that isn’t counter acting porpoising and one of the drivers has a crash.... it’s not a smart move.
The others will have to look to Mclaren-then find their own solutions.

I was thinking- the engineers in the rear floor department at Mclaren need tying to long term deals... there was the extra strakes in the diffuser last season, now the none porpoising floor... hats off the them

[SmallSoldier]

Didn't the FIA say they wouldn't be introducing any rule tweeks mid season anyway?

On the contrary, they have left themselves a lot of leeway to make any changes if they feel the teams are exploiting loopholes

But they are obviously not talking about loopholes but about the FIA reacting to Porpoising.

It doesn't appear to be causing a safety issue but when we do some laps in anger we will see. I wonder how much of a time deficit comes from porpoising. I also wonder if perhaps Mclaren wanted to start with a clean concept and put parts on and see what might affect the car step by step, rather than turning up on track and having to unravel the design as other teams may have to. If that was the case then that was smart forward thinking.

I believe you are spot on, with a “basic” car, you have a way better chance of understanding what works and what doesn’t… If not, you can easily go down a rabbit hole trying to understand what is causing you pain.

[SmallSoldier]

Didn't the FIA say they wouldn't be introducing any rule tweeks mid season anyway?

On the contrary, they have left themselves a lot of leeway to make any changes if they feel the teams are exploiting loopholes

What they have done is reduce the need for from a unanimous vote by teams, down to only needing the support of 8 teams, along with FIA & FOM, to make in-season rule changes

Isn’t that for “normal” changes to regulations (for example, changing the minimum weight), but they can act faster and without the teams input for rule changes in regards to potential loopholes in the regulations? Trying to find the Brawn interview where he made mention of it… But so much information was out there during the last couple of weeks that I may be confused at this point.

[the EDGE]

On the contrary, they have left themselves a lot of leeway to make any changes if they feel the teams are exploiting loopholes

What they have done is reduce the need for from a unanimous vote by teams, down to only needing the support of 8 teams, along with FIA & FOM, to make in-season rule changes

Isn’t that for “normal” changes to regulations (for example, changing the minimum weight), but they can act faster and without the teams input for rule changes in regards to potential loopholes in the regulations? Trying to find the Brawn interview where he made mention of it… But so much information was out there during the last couple of weeks that I may be confused at this point.

Well they’ve always had the ability to make ‘rules clarifications’ & changes for safety, where they see fit, but that’s the only new rule I’m aware of that gives them greater powers

Explained here: https://the-race.com/formula-1/the-fias ... loopholes/

[SmallSoldier]

What they have done is reduce the need for from a unanimous vote by teams, down to only needing the support of 8 teams, along with FIA & FOM, to make in-season rule changes

Isn’t that for “normal” changes to regulations (for example, changing the minimum weight), but they can act faster and without the teams input for rule changes in regards to potential loopholes in the regulations? Trying to find the Brawn interview where he made mention of it… But so much information was out there during the last couple of weeks that I may be confused at this point.

Well they’ve always had the ability to make ‘rules clarifications’ & changes for safety, where they see fit, but that’s the only new rule I’m aware of that gives them greater powers

Explained here: https://the-race.com/formula-1/the-fias ... loopholes/

Thanks a lot for this, it clarifies it for me!

[f1316]

I think, at least from what I understood, there are two different things here:

1. Mclaren having a good solution to the porpoising with the shape and nature of the floor
2. Mclaren supposedly having a floor which deforms and alters the shape of the Venturi tunnels (which would be for ultimate performance)

1 doesn’t necessarily relate to 2 (maybe it does but not clear) and banning 2 - if indeed it is illegal (which, again, may well not be the case - does not necessarily mean they will then suffer from porpoising.