scarbs wrote:The MP4-25 follows more of Brawns lead than the expected Red Bull philosophy. Following brawns lead last year with a relatively low nose, even placing their steering rack down inline with the lower wishbones. but then taking a cue from the Williams by having a snow plough under the nose. Although Brawn did have their own take on this device mounted above their splitter. Surprisingly there’s no Newey “V” nose.
The front wing was based on the one seen in testing late last year, with some added fences between the mandatory neutral central section and the four element ‘downforce’ producing outer portions.
The sidepods follow McLaren’s recent practice with inlets mounted high above a deep undercut, this year the inlets are rectangular section. The sidepods then drop sharply exposing the vast curvaceous fuel tank.
McLaren has shrunken the sidepods by raising the exhaust system into its own bulge and exiting high above the gearbox, this area probably also vents some of the hot radiator air, allowing the rear portion of the coke bottle shape to be extra thin. A shark fin has been added so a little Red Bull influence does exist.
I too am shocked they didnt go with the V-nose design, what may be any disadvantages to it?
Moving more of the cooling requirements centrally(through the airbox) away from the sidepods are a smart solution to make both the sidepods and their openings smaller as opposed to the huge ones on the F10.
The splitter under the nose(and incorperating the camara mounts into it) looks very effective.
With 15kg of extra ballast and the removal of KERS it is easy to see how they may have lowered the CG even while raising the exhaust headers.
I would have expected the drivers to be moved even further forward than they are, but it seems McL did not pay so much attention to shortening the wheelbase.
The new front tires look almost unchanged.
Even with the Super DDD's I'm still surprised that nobody has gone rear pullrod, although since getting more air to the more DF/drag efficient DDD, is more a priority than the less so effiecient rear bridgewing. They may easily be producing more than enough rear DF especially with the smaller front tires... dont want too much understeer.