2025 McLaren F1 Team

[Seanspeed]

Made the doubters (including yours truly) eat their words.

Did you think he was never gonna win another race, even with the clear fastest car on the grid? :/

specifically referring to his Q3 runs. Which have not been good enough to do justice to the car, since Australia.

I mean, similar story. Norris is not new to being on pole. Even moreso than in 2024, Mclaren have the fastest car on the grid - getting pole by a mere tenth against a clear slower car shouldn't be considered some massive rebuttal of any criticisms.

At the same time, nobody who watched 2023/2024 should be surprised that Norris can do well. Any 'critics' saying otherwise seem like they aren't worth listening to in the first place. Of course he's a good driver. And unless you believe Piastri is the next Hamilton/Schumacher or whatever, then of course you're going to accept that Norris will be plenty competitive against Piastri at times.

I think most of the criticism has come from the fact that Mclaren has a clearly superior car in basically every condition and every track, and other drivers(largely Max, let's be real) have stepped up and still made things closer or even won when Mclaren probably should be running away with things more than they have. Which is something of a continuation where Mclaren/Norris lost the WDC last year despite having the best car for the large majority of the season.

Norris has way more to do to prove doubters wrong. He needs to stamp his authority on this WDC, not just scrape by wins against inferior cars.

[Lazy]

Did you think he was never gonna win another race, even with the clear fastest car on the grid? :/

specifically referring to his Q3 runs. Which have not been good enough to do justice to the car, since Australia.

I mean, similar story. Norris is not new to being on pole. Even moreso than in 2024, Mclaren have the fastest car on the grid - getting pole by a mere tenth against a clear slower car shouldn't be considered some massive rebuttal of any criticisms.

At the same time, nobody who watched 2023/2024 should be surprised that Norris can do well. Any 'critics' saying otherwise seem like they aren't worth listening to in the first place. Of course he's a good driver. And unless you believe Piastri is the next Hamilton/Schumacher or whatever, then of course you're going to accept that Norris will be plenty competitive against Piastri at times.

I think most of the criticism has come from the fact that Mclaren has a clearly superior car in basically every condition and every track, and other drivers(largely Max, let's be real) have stepped up and still made things closer or even won when Mclaren probably should be running away with things more than they have. Which is something of a continuation where Mclaren/Norris lost the WDC last year despite having the best car for the large majority of the season.

Norris has way more to do to prove doubters wrong. He needs to stamp his authority on this WDC, not just scrape by wins against inferior cars.

You have no evidence for these claims, you just want them to be the case to suit your bias. The Ferrari was very close if not quicker this weekend. There is no evidence that the McLaren was the "clear fastest car" at this circuit.
The Mclaren started last years as very nearly the slowest, the only evidence you have for it being the best was how fast Norris was driving it.

[FittingMechanics]

Pole in Monaco was largest pole margin of the year (crazy). Norris did great.

MCL39 is fast but not dominant in qualifying.

[FittingMechanics]

I've commented in flexi wing thread, but I'll share my view here as well.

I think that the team already tested a compliant wing or the current wing is already compliant. My reasoning is that they tested rear wings a race or two before it will be used (Monaco wing was tested in Imola, etc). So it seems that they want to validate the data before they decide to fully use the wing on the car. It is very unlikely that the team did not use these 8 races to develop, bring and test a new fully compliant wing.

So it's either on the car or fully validated and ready to go onto the car. If the changes are just making the wing more rigid, they didn't need to declare it so it could have been tested a while ago. Does anyone remember McLaren using flowviz on the front wing/brakes in recent races?

[BMMR61]

Pole in Monaco was largest pole margin of the year (crazy). Norris did great.

MCL39 is fast but not dominant in qualifying.

Stella has said it, Norris has said it, Piastri has said it. Are they simply "singing from the same songbook" to cover up something? The McLaren MCL39 is said by these guys who are close to the action, to be a tricky beast when driven on the limit. Hordes of people are saying that the MCL is dominant across all conditions in contradiction to what the team says. Who do we believe, the keyboard warriors or the engineers and drivers? Or something else. I think we have seen enough that it's reasonable to conclude that qualifying is the hardest part of the MCL39 package. What isn't likely is that at every round both McLaren drivers have fallen way below their potential in qualifying because they haven't ended up 0.5 seconds faster than any other car.

[FittingMechanics]

Pole in Monaco was largest pole margin of the year (crazy). Norris did great.

MCL39 is fast but not dominant in qualifying.

Stella has said it, Norris has said it, Piastri has said it. Are they simply "singing from the same songbook" to cover up something? The McLaren MCL39 is said by these guys who are close to the action, to be a tricky beast when driven on the limit. Hordes of people are saying that the MCL is dominant across all conditions in contradiction to what the team says. Who do we believe, the keyboard warriors or the engineers and drivers? Or something else. I think we have seen enough that it's reasonable to conclude that qualifying is the hardest part of the MCL39 package. What isn't likely is that at every round both McLaren drivers have fallen way below their potential in qualifying because they haven't ended up 0.5 seconds faster than any other car.

We've seen last years that Lando is fully capable of doing great qualifying laps. He outqualified that car for years, fully dominating against Piastri and Ricciardo. Lando is not someone who lacks pace in qualifying. This car has to be tricky to drive at the limit.

Max might be able to do it (who knows), but as we've seen in Red Bull, it's hard to find drivers who can master a tricky car like Max.

[Darth-Piekus]

Its not that simple. Red Bull's car has a fundamental problem to the point noone is able to drive it apart from their star driver. Its set up like this and the second car is left to it's own demise. People finally start to understand that it's the Mclaren drivers that are making the difference and not the car.

[bauc]

I've commented in flexi wing thread, but I'll share my view here as well.

I think that the team already tested a compliant wing or the current wing is already compliant. My reasoning is that they tested rear wings a race or two before it will be used (Monaco wing was tested in Imola, etc). So it seems that they want to validate the data before they decide to fully use the wing on the car. It is very unlikely that the team did not use these 8 races to develop, bring and test a new fully compliant wing.

So it's either on the car or fully validated and ready to go onto the car. If the changes are just making the wing more rigid, they didn't need to declare it so it could have been tested a while ago. Does anyone remember McLaren using flowviz on the front wing/brakes in recent races?

Dont forget about the speculations that Mclaren was the team reach out to FIA during the winter on this ''issue'' wanting to outplay RBR.... and that might just happen afterall.

[_cerber1]

I'm a little concerned about the reliability of the MB power units. Do we have any details on what exactly caused the failure?

[BMMR61]

I'm a little concerned about the reliability of the MB power units. Do we have any details on what exactly caused the failure?

Yeah, I've wondered with the recent spate of failures if McLaren may fall victim after a trouble free run. While we're talking about it, nobody seems to be talking about McLaren's incredible reliability with Lando's Austria crash being the only blip in 23 GPs plus 6 sprints times 2 cars.

[Farnborough]

I'm a little concerned about the reliability of the MB power units. Do we have any details on what exactly caused the failure?

Yeah, I've wondered with the recent spate of failures if McLaren may fall victim after a trouble free run. While we're talking about it, nobody seems to be talking about McLaren's incredible reliability with Lando's Austria crash being the only blip in 23 GPs plus 6 sprints times 2 cars.

In similar direction, was there any radio comms about reducing heat exposure from following too close here ? In discussion (locally to me) there's view that this was happening possibly here, McL and across the other MB Pu locations too.

I can't readily find anything to substantiate that though.

It's interesting in face of the discussion on here about McL venting outlet size/topography as the PU will be outputting at more or less the same rate for torque output across chassis, but could more "efficient" cooling system firstly extract at that rate, secondly it would still have to disperse total volume to external however tge internal was arranged.

"Efficiency" can obviously be looked at from two aspect, in performance of system just in heat terms, or balanced against aero drag of course to give a different balance in best getting to the end of a race however marginal it became.

Some time ago in MB successful years, there was open discussion about PU protection "mode" coming in to cap torque usage on the fly in mitigation of critical rise in PU core temperature limits during races. For example in extensive follow type situation for drivers. In other words, MB strategy of expected running at front of field vs back in pack.

[geogate]

Mclaren have absolutely nailed engine management, and have done for a good few years now. Was it 2023 where everyone was expecting Lando to take a penalty that never happened?
They have efficient cooling and fantastic use management. Its no coincident that they are the least affected by reliability issues

[mwillems]

I'm a little concerned about the reliability of the MB power units. Do we have any details on what exactly caused the failure?

Yeah, I've wondered with the recent spate of failures if McLaren may fall victim after a trouble free run. While we're talking about it, nobody seems to be talking about McLaren's incredible reliability with Lando's Austria crash being the only blip in 23 GPs plus 6 sprints times 2 cars.

In similar direction, was there any radio comms about reducing heat exposure from following too close here ? In discussion (locally to me) there's view that this was happening possibly here, McL and across the other MB Pu locations too.

I can't readily find anything to substantiate that though.

It's interesting in face of the discussion on here about McL venting outlet size/topography as the PU will be outputting at more or less the same rate for torque output across chassis, but could more "efficient" cooling system firstly extract at that rate, secondly it would still have to disperse total volume to external however tge internal was arranged.

"Efficiency" can obviously be looked at from two aspect, in performance of system just in heat terms, or balanced against aero drag of course to give a different balance in best getting to the end of a race however marginal it became.

Some time ago in MB successful years, there was open discussion about PU protection "mode" coming in to cap torque usage on the fly in mitigation of critical rise in PU core temperature limits during races. For example in extensive follow type situation for drivers. In other words, MB strategy of expected running at front of field vs back in pack.

I suspect this was a part of the reason that Lando kept a distance from Max, as well as tyres. Leclerc seemed to have no issues though. But then the PUs werent being pushed massively for most drivers.

[Macklaren]

So it's either on the car or fully validated and ready to go onto the car. If the changes are just making the wing more rigid, they didn't need to declare it so it could have been tested a while ago. Does anyone remember McLaren using flowviz on the front wing/brakes in recent races?

Won't it be hilarious if 9 teams bring a new front wing this weekend and only McLaren don't?

[Seanspeed]

specifically referring to his Q3 runs. Which have not been good enough to do justice to the car, since Australia.

I mean, similar story. Norris is not new to being on pole. Even moreso than in 2024, Mclaren have the fastest car on the grid - getting pole by a mere tenth against a clear slower car shouldn't be considered some massive rebuttal of any criticisms.

At the same time, nobody who watched 2023/2024 should be surprised that Norris can do well. Any 'critics' saying otherwise seem like they aren't worth listening to in the first place. Of course he's a good driver. And unless you believe Piastri is the next Hamilton/Schumacher or whatever, then of course you're going to accept that Norris will be plenty competitive against Piastri at times.

I think most of the criticism has come from the fact that Mclaren has a clearly superior car in basically every condition and every track, and other drivers(largely Max, let's be real) have stepped up and still made things closer or even won when Mclaren probably should be running away with things more than they have. Which is something of a continuation where Mclaren/Norris lost the WDC last year despite having the best car for the large majority of the season.

Norris has way more to do to prove doubters wrong. He needs to stamp his authority on this WDC, not just scrape by wins against inferior cars.

You have no evidence for these claims, you just want them to be the case to suit your bias. The Ferrari was very close if not quicker this weekend. There is no evidence that the McLaren was the "clear fastest car" at this circuit.
The Mclaren started last years as very nearly the slowest, the only evidence you have for it being the best was how fast Norris was driving it.

Leclerc being exceptional here was the only reason the Ferrari ever looked to have a real chance. But it was clear that in the end, when Q3 rolled around and everybody showed everything they had, the Mclaren was still quicker. Norris who didn't even have that good a lap still got pole by a tenth. Norris effortlessly putting in fastest lap on the last lap of the race is further proof. Mclaren was also likely fastest here last year and only got foiled by again, the same reason - Leclerc punching above his weight. Not to say the Ferrari wasn't more competitive than usual, just still wasn't quite on equal terms with Mclaren.

And it's hilarious for you to question my claims when you say something objectively nonsense in that Mclaren started last year as 'nearly the slowest'. No, they were still up near the front, just right behind Ferrari(heck, Mclaren were even faster than Ferrari in China before the Imola update). If you're willing to distort reality that much, I'm not surprised you're not going to accept anything I say.