Cheers Owen.
I think he means the amount of redesigning rev bull have done on their exhaust, they hav had a new solution every race
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: Tim Goss (Director of Engineering), Paddy Lowe (TD), Neil Oatley (DRD), Martin Whitmarsh (TP), Jonathan Neale (MD), Sam Michael (SD)
Drivers: Jenson Button (3), Lewis Hamilton (4)
Team name: Vodafone McLaren Mercedes
What floor?? I didnt know that McLaren had a floor that was deemed illegal?Coefficient wrote:The car is suffering because their trick floor was taken away. They can't run the same rake they used to as a result and therefore the whole package is compromised. The higher nose would allow them to experiment with more rake again and if they don't try it they might as well resign themselves to having a bad season and start on next years car. The loss of the floor has had a domino effect because they are now struggling to produce enough rear downforce which is having a knock on effect on tyre wear. The extra flow under the car that the higher nose would provide would definately give them something to work with with a view to improving other areas of the car whereas at the moment they've hit a development cul de sac.
Holm86 wrote:What floor?? I didnt know that McLaren had a floor that was deemed illegal?Coefficient wrote:The car is suffering because their trick floor was taken away. They can't run the same rake they used to as a result and therefore the whole package is compromised. The higher nose would allow them to experiment with more rake again and if they don't try it they might as well resign themselves to having a bad season and start on next years car. The loss of the floor has had a domino effect because they are now struggling to produce enough rear downforce which is having a knock on effect on tyre wear. The extra flow under the car that the higher nose would provide would definately give them something to work with with a view to improving other areas of the car whereas at the moment they've hit a development cul de sac.
which looking back now to the release of the mp4-27 was what mclaren meant by some people may find our car illegal - this was itCoefficient wrote:Holm86 wrote:Coefficient wrote:
Didnt know that. Do you have a source? Havent seen this being discussed here before??Coefficient wrote:Holm86 wrote:What floor?? I didnt know that McLaren had a floor that was deemed illegal?Coefficient wrote:The car is suffering because their trick floor was taken away. They can't run the same rake they used to as a result and therefore the whole package is compromised. The higher nose would allow them to experiment with more rake again and if they don't try it they might as well resign themselves to having a bad season and start on next years car. The loss of the floor has had a domino effect because they are now struggling to produce enough rear downforce which is having a knock on effect on tyre wear. The extra flow under the car that the higher nose would provide would definately give them something to work with with a view to improving other areas of the car whereas at the moment they've hit a development cul de sac.
Yep, I’m afraid they did and they were told to change it earlier in the season.
As it is very difficult to manufacture a perfectly flat floor the technical regulations allow for up to 3mm worth of imperfections to account for manufacturing issues. Mclaren started the year with a floor that was deliberately designed to take advantage of the 3mm tolerance within the regulations. The floor essentially began to angle upwards 60cm back from the front lip of the bib splitter effectively enlarging the diffuser and creating rake without rake if you take my meaning. The team argued the floor was within the 3mm tolerance and was therefore legal whereas Charlie argued they were taking the urine and made them modify the car. The team were clearly aware of the contentious nature of the trick floor because they had a flat one ready to bolt on immediately should it be challenged.
China i believeCjC wrote:Yep coefficient Is spot on about the floor, wasn't it in Bahrain when it had to be taken off?
Owen.C93 wrote:I'm not sure why he says that RB did a large redesign for it though.
It's the same thing. The suspension is set to allow the bib to run flat/parallel to the floor therefore the V shaped floor increases in height rearwards. The floor allowed Mclaren to achieve the effect of rake without the compromises in suspension geometry assosciated with simply jacking up the rear ride height and lowering the front. It was a double win in that respect and this is also why we see them introducing revised rear suspension components because they too were compromised with the technical clarification.hammarby88 wrote:I was under the impression that the floor was angled upwards in the front? Thus meaning that they could run with more rake but still have a very low ride height since the front of the floor was bent up slightly.
Here: http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/new ... me-undone-Coefficient wrote:Holm86 wrote:What floor?? I didnt know that McLaren had a floor that was deemed illegal?Coefficient wrote:The car is suffering because their trick floor was taken away. They can't run the same rake they used to as a result and therefore the whole package is compromised. The higher nose would allow them to experiment with more rake again and if they don't try it they might as well resign themselves to having a bad season and start on next years car. The loss of the floor has had a domino effect because they are now struggling to produce enough rear downforce which is having a knock on effect on tyre wear. The extra flow under the car that the higher nose would provide would definately give them something to work with with a view to improving other areas of the car whereas at the moment they've hit a development cul de sac.
Yep, I’m afraid they did and they were told to change it earlier in the season.
As it is very difficult to manufacture a perfectly flat floor the technical regulations allow for up to 3mm worth of imperfections to account for manufacturing issues. Mclaren started the year with a floor that was deliberately designed to take advantage of the 3mm tolerance within the regulations. The floor essentially began to angle upwards 60cm back from the front lip of the bib splitter effectively enlarging the diffuser and creating rake without rake if you take my meaning. The team argued the floor was within the 3mm tolerance and was therefore legal whereas Charlie argued they were taking the urine and made them modify the car. The team were clearly aware of the contentious nature of the trick floor because they had a flat one ready to bolt on immediately should it be challenged.
Ferrari have ran it since 2011 and haven't been dominant and redbull were stronger in the last race without it so I wouldn't say it's a must have type of deal.kalinka wrote:Owen.C93 wrote:I'm not sure why he says that RB did a large redesign for it though.
From article on the fron page on this site > "Red Bull adopts Helmholz exhaust chamber" >
"To make room for the exhaust chamber that Ferrari debuted in F1 through 2011, RBR redesigned the entire exhaust of the RB8. While it previously ran close to the car's engine heat cover and then curved downward with a 180° turn, the final turn is now curved upwards, similar to Williams' exhaust layout."
It's just suspicious for me , that the currently strongest two designs all incorporate that type of exhaust. So it must be a true benefit , especially seeing that RB had to do quite a lot of redesign. So I wonder is it possible to do that on the Merc enginge too - and is it any possibility that we could see that in Germany already on the McLarens ?