muramasa wrote: ↑
Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:32 pm
> Brazil 2017 (November 2017)
FP2 speed trap [PU in FP mode] : 336kmph
Quali speed trap [PU in Quali mode]: 311kmph
Race: FA 8th, stuck behind Massa til checkered flag
"The car carries too much downforce. For sure you can gain overall laptime that way, but in the race condition you cannot overtake, also you are risking your defense. Mexico was good example, we were within DRS range of a car in front, hence we did not get passed easily, even by Hamilton. Also we were able to close the gap rapidly towards Kevin Magnussen. But with such heavy df setting, you cannot overtake on the straight even if being within DRS range. Not possible to overtake even if you are faster by 1sec/lap, I suppose."
"In the progress from spec 3.5 to 3.8, the PU contributed to the laptime gain of about 0.4sec/lap on average. The relative improvement in straight end speed is exactly where the time gain comes from, I reckon."
"Of course we discussed, many times. We proposed going lighter on downforce over and over. Sure it is McLaren who determine the setting, but even then we kept making the proposal. But we were not listened/accepted. The team prioritizes the one that should yield faster comprehensive lap time, also the amount of downforce affects the car stability. Let's say, even at/in such places/condition where the drivers of Vettel and Hamilton caliber are spinning, we never spin. Not that I'm criticizing the team, it's just that that's what the team's direction is, but it's the philosophy of "lead and finish" so to speak, so there is no problem that way as long as you can get pole position.."
An ANONYMOUS Honda engineer quoted
"I do not consider that's the best compromise point to be the fastest possible. This time, even Mercedes and Ferrari are spinning and going off track, right? On the other hand McLaren is solid and never goes off track. Then at one point on Friday we took off some df and Stoffel spun on T2, then it went like "see, it's undriveable this way as expected". Even top teams are pushing aggressively and shedding downforce to the limit like that, but McLaren is putting good downforce to make the car friendly for drivers."
"McLaren is a team that has such engineering policy traditionally. Fulfill and respond to drivers' demands/complaints no matter what, that's how their policy is like. As a result of that, you end up with "car that's cozy to drive", instead of "car that's tricky but fast". It's a team that cannot tell to drivers "this setting is faster and that's the best we can give, so the rest you do your best on track". "
f1fokuho brazil '17 (print)
https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... /index.php
(translation by me)
> January/February 2018
"So much of producing a great F1 car these days is giving the driver a car that they can exploit,"
"There is no point in giving them a car with very peaky performance."
"What we are trying to do is give the driver something that operates very well over a broad operating envelope."
"So our approach these days is very much about giving the driver something they can trust and work with, and peaky load is in our view not the way to produce a quick aerodynamic package for the driver, or vehicle dynamics change."
"Even trimming a bit of downforce off the car and trimming to a lower wing level, we were still not going to get our car to the point where we have that raceability in a straight line,"
"So our approach has been to always go for the quickest laptime and our tactics coming to a race weekend were to qualify as well as we can, and then aim to defend that position based on laptime. In some races that was extremely difficult.
"Rather than put sticking plasters to try to cope with the fact that we had an underpowered engine, what we really wanted to do is develop the best car and assume the engine is going to come."
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... r-1001974/