F1technical.net

It could be those but Slow corners seems to be one of the McLaren's Strengths. I've said this before, still think it's cause they run so little downforce. They do that cause of lack of power. In my opinion the easiest way to see that is by looking at how little rear wing they run. They only team that comes close to running as little rear wing is STR.

mclaren are running a pretty steepy rear wing after they introduced this after barcelona test, and its the only team running monkey wing along with other mercedes team. both redbull and TR not running them. i respect you opinion but i feel mclaren should infact take some wing off in power circuit like TR and redbull, only in baku, where mclaren ran a low DF configuration and was confirmed by eric and honda boss.

diffuser wrote: It could be those but Slow corners seems to be one of the McLaren's Strengths. I've said this before, still think it's cause they run so little downforce. They do that cause of lack of power. In my opinion the easiest way to see that is by looking at how little rear wing they run. They only team that comes close to running as little rear wing is STR.

Wait, because they have so little downforce, they are faster in slow speed corners?

zac510 wrote:

diffuser wrote: It could be those but Slow corners seems to be one of the McLaren's Strengths. I've said this before, still think it's cause they run so little downforce. They do that cause of lack of power. In my opinion the easiest way to see that is by looking at how little rear wing they run. They only team that comes close to running as little rear wing is STR.

Wait, because they have so little downforce, they are faster in slow speed corners?

Slow corners are more about chassis ability.

hemichromis wrote:

zac510 wrote:

diffuser wrote: It could be those but Slow corners seems to be one of the McLaren's Strengths. I've said this before, still think it's cause they run so little downforce. They do that cause of lack of power. In my opinion the easiest way to see that is by looking at how little rear wing they run. They only team that comes close to running as little rear wing is STR.

Wait, because they have so little downforce, they are faster in slow speed corners?

Slow corners are more about chassis ability.

Sure, but he said "[be]cause they run so little downforce." He's implying causailty between lower downforce and being faster in slow corners. This is a relationship I'm not familiar with.

I apologize, my wife was after me and I hit "submit" and I really hadn't completed my thought nor had I reread what I wrote...

I was trying to say that traction out of slow corners isn't the problem. In Monaco , that is full of slow corners, both Fernando and Button said the problem was oversteer, they lacked the confidence in the front end.

Fernando -> "I didn’t have a perfect feeling with it, and I wasn’t therefore confident enough to really attack the corners."

Button -> "On my final run in Q2 I had front-locking into Turn Three, locked the front-left and overheated the tyre, which meant I lost front-end grip after that."


I read Button say that they tried to adjust for it but that just caused other issues. Since Monaco, I think McLaren have made a couple of tweaks on the front wing, brakes and brake ducts to correct the front end issues they had.


McLaren use the Monkey seat because it gives good DF with little drag.
They don't use the whole bottom part of the rear wing, the front lip of the bottom part of the rear wing is almost horizontal to the rear lip, so it doesn't grab much of air. Compare that to RBR who's front lip of the bottom part of the rear wing is about 3" lower. Yet they're still faster at the speed trap.

I think you run less rear wing to compensate for lack of power. If you look @ STR, the 2015 Ferrari seems to be struggling more than the Honda in McLaren. They Clearly have a better chassis than McLaren. Everyone else is running more rear wing.

I guess we can say whatever we want it's really hard to find evidence to prove any of it. I mean you're right if the car has more drag it will be slower...I just find it hard to believe that the Manor is 10km faster @ the speed trap cause it has less drag than the McLaren.

It would be nice if the FIA tested all the PUs and gave us power numbers at what RPM. Tested the ERS and told us how long the ERS-K could run off the ERS-H. Supplied us DF numbers and fuel efficiency numbers.

F1 is the opposite to baseball when it comes to stats. In baseball you have access to all kinds of stats for free. In f1 we pay for stats and they're not really good, they're just the basics.

possible engine upgrade on silverstone....

alonso 4 races engine button 2

maybe only 1 PU for alonso its realistic button have only 2 races with his 4th PU and if honda its not ready for 2 cars

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/honda ... de-795575/

This was interesting

Hasegawa also pointed out that improvements were also necessary because Honda had had to make some compromises with the Montreal turbo changes.

"To create enough power, we spent a little of the engine power for the exhaust, and we sacrifice some engine power with the new turbine," he said.

diffuser wrote:I was trying to say that traction out of slow corners isn't the problem. In Monaco , that is full of slow corners, both Fernando and Button said the problem was oversteer, they lacked the confidence in the front end.

Im struggling to follow you here. You are using references to oversteer problems as evidence of good rear traction?

Typically the monkey seat is referred to as an inefficient source of downforce and tends to be used at the lower speed high downforce tracks.

The Manor could quite easily be running a lower drag setup than Mclaren, Manor have been high up in the speed traps recently. Of course they are also lacking in downforce. The lower teams are quite good at very high downforce setups and also low drag setups the best teams win races with all the areas in between.

godlameroso wrote:This was interesting

Hasegawa also pointed out that improvements were also necessary because Honda had had to make some compromises with the Montreal turbo changes.

"To create enough power, we spent a little of the engine power for the exhaust, and we sacrifice some engine power with the new turbine," he said.

This is what i mean, the ICE loses more power in the turbine, compared to others. So at the moment they are down on power during self sustaining mode (and down on total efficiency because the lack of jet-like-ignition combustion)

mrluke wrote:

diffuser wrote:I was trying to say that traction out of slow corners isn't the problem. In Monaco , that is full of slow corners, both Fernando and Button said the problem was oversteer, they lacked the confidence in the front end.

Im struggling to follow you here. You are using references to oversteer problems as evidence of good rear traction?

Typically the monkey seat is referred to as an inefficient source of downforce and tends to be used at the lower speed high downforce tracks.



The Manor could quite easily be running a lower drag setup than Mclaren, Manor have been high up in the speed traps recently. Of course they are also lacking in downforce. The lower teams are quite good at very high downforce setups and also low drag setups the best teams win races with all the areas in between.

It might be a stretch agreed but yeah. I can clearly remember quotes from Fernando with Renault and Ferrari complaining about traction out of slow corners in Monaco. So yeah, if he didn't complain about it I'll presume it's good. I've also read quotes from him (I think it was Spain when talking about S3) saying the traction out of slow corners is good.

Quoting the Wikipedia Aero expert "With the 2014 technical regulations banning the cars' lower rear wing elements and introducing a mandatory central exhaust position the monkey seat is now increasingly designed and positioned to use the flow from the exhaust to increase the efficiency and consistency of the main rear wing element above it in addition to generating its own downforce."

ok... I didn't see it that way..Maybe I'm wrong. For me, drag isn't voluntary. You vary the downforce, drag generally increases as you increase downforce. The better the Aero design, the lower the drag to downforce ratio. When they say McLaren is "Draggy", I understand that to mean that it generates a higher drag to downforce ratio that most cars. I'm of the opinion that McLaren runs less downforce, on average, than most teams. Well downforce... I have no clue how much downforce they run. I mean less rear wing I make the jump that they're running less downforce cause they're running less rear wing and the car needs to be balanced to function.

Also, at Austria anyway, Manor was running plenty of rear wing.

i think mclaren are running more drag, and not efficient donwforce like mercedes and redbull, They should try to achieve the downforce through the floor section while reducing the rear wing, only time mclaren went for a low DF setup wing was baku and that monkey wing need to go , just like redbull and TR are doing. its just creating drag. . Anyway when all the manufacturer get tested by FIA for the power index and equalized, we will trully know which are the most efficient chassis out there. till then the debate goes no.

Just to point out, this is not the chassis / car thread.

While Alonso has never driven an actual Merc PU, they do have it in sim and he can look at data from their 2014 year to get an idea.

He should have some pretty clear telemetry to extrapolate from.

20HP they say....

http://www.laf1.es/noticias/honda-esper ... ora-922627

20Bhp under which mode?