Vodafone McLaren Team 2012

[beelsebob]

Faster on fast corners and slower in slow ones, than RB?

Actually, is more important to be fast in the slow ones (tracks like Monaco, Singapore, Hungaroring, Nurburgring, Canada, Abu Dhabi, China (maybe))
than in the fast (tracks like Malesya, Spain, SPA, India)

Is it? Last year the RB7 was faster than the MP4-26 in fast corners, but slower than it in slow ones.

RB7 was clearly superior as chassis, tyre management, overall grip, weight distribution ...

MP4-26 have had some tricks, and the most efficient exhaust system, this led them to win some races but their handicappated chassis (U-pods and high gearbox) finally costed them the title.

If two cars are of the same quality, the best in slow corners wins

If your claim is that the RB7 was better in the slow corners, how was the McLaren making up 0.7 seconds in the last sector at Barcelona last year, but loosing it over the high speed portion of the lap?

[ell66]

Actually, is more important to be fast in the slow ones (tracks like Monaco, Singapore, Hungaroring, Nurburgring, Canada, Abu Dhabi, China (maybe))
than in the fast (tracks like Malesya, Spain, SPA, India)

Is it? Last year the RB7 was faster than the MP4-26 in fast corners, but slower than it in slow ones.

RB7 was clearly superior as chassis, tyre management, overall grip, weight distribution ...

MP4-26 have had some tricks, and the most efficient exhaust system, this led them to win some races but their handicappated chassis (U-pods and high gearbox) finally costed them the title.

If two cars are of the same quality, the best in slow corners wins

If your claim is that the RB7 was better in the slow corners, how was the McLaren making up 0.7 seconds in the last sector at Barcelona last year, but loosing it over the high speed portion of the lap?[/quote]

You cant just use one race as your example...they were faster that race because they were the only team who could get the extremely hard prime to work, they destroyed mclaren in every sector in qually
I still think the rb was the all round superior car, monaco pole, singapore poll by large amounts etc....there were certain tracks where mclaren were at laeast as good in the slow stuff though.

As for the updates coming, i remember paddy lowe mentioning a new front wing and rear wing, can probably expect a new diffuser to, jensons comments are intresting though...it must be a mechanical change.

[Pup]

What we could actually be discussing here is the result of converging performance due to relative rule stability...

Rule stability favors the established order and established teams, since performance advances come primarily through iterating existing ideas. So the already quick teams just get quicker and of course the established teams have better resources for fine tuning and eking out small performance gains.

[Pierce89]

What we could actually be discussing here is the result of converging performance due to relative rule stability...

Rule stability favors the established order and established teams, since performance advances come primarily through iterating existing ideas. So the already quick teams just get quicker and of course the established teams have better resources for fine tuning and eking out small performance gains.

and then after their designs are optimized for the rules and start to stagnate, slower teams catch up. Look at 2008. Everybody had a good car.

On topic: I think this car has great peak downforce, maybe even higher than RB8. However, I also have little doubt that the RB8 averages more DF over the whole of the aero map(i.e. less pitch or roll sensitivity etc.), which would dovetail nicely with Mclaren's belief that they're stronger in fast corners but Red Bull are stronger in medium and slow corners.

[beelsebob]

What we could actually be discussing here is the result of converging performance due to relative rule stability...

Rule stability favors the established order and established teams, since performance advances come primarily through iterating existing ideas. So the already quick teams just get quicker and of course the established teams have better resources for fine tuning and eking out small performance gains.

No, rule stability favours the further behind teams because they are further from the optimum design and can make bigger improvements as they get towards it.

[Pup]

Yeah, that's a good point. Not to stay off topic for too long, but I'd argue though that the smaller teams are able to get to a certain level and then the cost to performance ratio is just too much for them.

[n smikle]

Hate to be a jerk, but it seems this site is a blog magnet - that's the very same stuff posted on here - just regurgitated, splashed over in illustrator and hastily re-posted on some other site.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Hate to be a jerk, but it seems this site is a blog magnet - that's the very same stuff posted on here - just regurgitated, splashed over in illustrator and hastily re-posted on some other site.

I'm not a frequent visitor of that site. However now that you mention it, I agree. I mainly posted for the pictures. It gives some a better idea of what's actually happening.

[richard_leeds]

General chat about McLaren moved here from the car thread

[Gridlock]

A) McLaren want to emulate RBR's "stick it on pole and drive away from the field" strategy.
B) DRS is (a much overlooked, IMO) qualifying tool more than it is an overtaking tool.

Therefore, I do expect that McLaren could well start this years' arms race with some of qualifying-focused DRS that might even be almost ineffective during a race (ie not allow easy straight line overtakes) but which delivers stunning one-lap times in Q3, because it is not Vmax that is the design objective but early and smooth downforce shifts mid-corner.

Heck, maybe this is exactly what RBR did last year and everyone just focused on their front wing. Distraction being the most effective part of magic

[Javert]

A) McLaren want to emulate RBR's "stick it on pole and drive away from the field" strategy.
B) DRS is (a much overlooked, IMO) qualifying tool more than it is an overtaking tool.

Therefore, I do expect that McLaren could well start this years' arms race with some of qualifying-focused DRS that might even be almost ineffective during a race (ie not allow easy straight line overtakes) but which delivers stunning one-lap times in Q3, because it is not Vmax that is the design objective but early and smooth downforce shifts mid-corner.

I think it was the opposite Some declarations time ago said McL had something revolutionary in their RW, but it was more a race-winner design than qual, in a way "we don't care about qualifying, we care about winning races"

[kalinka]

I'm sure they keep in mind qualy performance. It was essential on slow/hard to overtake tracks. Remember, after first few races everyone thought qualy will be less important, but the whole season proved the other way.
On faster tracks it's not enough, they need to turn on their tyres faster, in order to get out of DRS zone. Later they could manage tyre degradation and fuel consumption in front.

[SiLo]

I'm gonna hedge my bets and say that it's simply going to be an odd shape, if it does appear that is. Bending of the wing would be interesting though.

[WilliamsF1]

Would it be McLaren without it being analy complicated.

Must be tough for them to work with Hamiltons and raikkonens

[KingHamilton]

"Jenson Button mentioned at the last test that McLaren would have a major upgrade prior to the first race, and they will be adding new parts to the car throughout this test. McLaren tell us the focus for the first two days is race simulation work, while the final two days 'will be more exclusively devoted to learning about the new upgrades'."

This will answer people`s queries on McLaren upgrades.