McLaren MP4-20

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
Irvingthien
Irvingthien
0
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 2:40 am

Post

still the same??
Well, the sidepods does look more sculpted,and check out the stunning wing mirrors.....

DaveKillens
DaveKillens
54
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:02 am

Post

x
Last edited by DaveKillens on Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Scuderia-Russ
Scuderia-Russ
0

Post

It's most likely to do with the new aero regs but i do not believe it is as aesthetically pleasing as the MP4/19. Looks almost cumbersome I.M.O.

Timstr
Timstr
9
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 11:09 am

Post

DaveKillens wrote:"I fear mcLaren may have opted for conservativism at the wrong time again."
I think you are correct, but then again, McLaren got burned big time in the last two years by taking huge risks. Meanwhile, Ferrari has been doing the evolution game, never making a radical departure from a formula that works. Of course, eventually, the Ferrari design will become obsolete. Heck, even the 356 had to give way to the 911.... evolution
I don't think you can say that the mp4-20 is conservative compared to other 2005 cars or any other car so far.
It is the most tightly packaged F1 car of them all. When I look at it I think: 'How do they cool the darn thing' .

Ciwai
Ciwai
0
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post

It still is a twin keeler. As you indicate, the pick-up points are higher. I believe this is why the strut we used to see between the two keels are now absent (improved stiffness).
I didn't notice that about the lower "keeled" attachment point. Its pretty damned hard to make anything out in those photos. Drop a plumb line down, though and its pretty obvious that space is empty.

Apparently then, all of the attachment points are raised and both upper and lower arms angled. This would make them longer than conventional horizontal arms given the same track width, and the the tendency would be to push the centerline of the car inwards on bump. (?)

The attachments mounted on or very near the tub sound like the original sauber twin keel car of '99 or '00 or thereabouts that just had short stubs for keels.

Reca
Reca
137
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 5:22 pm
Location: Monza, Italy

Post

I’m the only one having the feeling that those mirror are too low to allow the driver to actually see something (except the inside of the sidepods) behind him ?

User avatar
joseff
14
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2002 10:53 am

Post

McLaren cried wolf at the F2004's wing mirrors... well, if you can't beat 'em...

User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: London, England, UK

Post

Yeah Rory Byrne was questioned about the mirrors on the F2004...he said that they had known about the best place to put the mirrors (that is where he put them on the F2004) but that it took a long time to solve visibility issues with the drivers...as in it took time to convince the drivers it would pay off lol.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

Spencifer_Murphy wrote:Yeah Rory Byrne was questioned about the mirrors on the F2004...he said that they had known about the best place to put the mirrors (that is where he put them on the F2004) but that it took a long time to solve visibility issues with the drivers...as in it took time to convince the drivers it would pay off lol.
Hmm... perhaps this helps explain why Schumacher got himself easily overtaken by Raikkonen and Montoya at Spa2004?

KJM3
KJM3
0
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:19 pm

Post

Anonymous wrote:
Spencifer_Murphy wrote:Yeah Rory Byrne was questioned about the mirrors on the F2004...he said that they had known about the best place to put the mirrors (that is where he put them on the F2004) but that it took a long time to solve visibility issues with the drivers...as in it took time to convince the drivers it would pay off lol.
Hmm... perhaps this helps explain why Schumacher got himself easily overtaken by Raikkonen and Montoya at Spa2004?
And maybe it explains why Barichello turned into the Apex even though Takuma Sato was ALREADY there in the European Grand Prix. Rubens called Taku's move "Amateur", but I saw Michael pull a similiar move on someone else and everyone said "Wow, what move by Michael". I felt Rubens was to blame for that shunt, because he probably didn't even know Taku was there because of the poor positioning of the mirrors!

- KJ

Guest
Guest
0

Post

Has anyone noticed the way the flat bottom extends in front of the new Mac's sidepods? See: http://f1.racing-live.com/en/photos/200 ... _142.shtml & http://f1.racing-live.com/en/photos/200 ... _146.shtml

I don't know what they are looking for exactly (longer flat bottom=btter suction?), but if you add the strange shape of the radiator intakes with also no area in their lower part (see http://f1.racing-live.com/en/photos/200 ... _102.shtml & http://f1.racing-live.com/en/photos/200 ... _131.shtml) and the smallish barge boards in front of that flat bottom, you have something quite interesting. Anybody knows what that's all about ?

Guest
Guest
0

Post

I'm not sure what you're seeing, but the black areas look to me like the tops of the bargeboards in the overhead views, not the shadow plate.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

What does the "MP-4.." Stand for?

Irvingthien
Irvingthien
0
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 2:40 am

Post

What does the "MP-4.." Stand for?
McLaren Project Four.

red300zx99x
red300zx99x
0

Post

What were 1-2 and 3?