Originally posted by Timstr11
Their current performance demonstrates that even McLaren does not have unlimited resources.
Although they tried to tell us the opposite, that they could work on both last year's and this year's car without sacrificing one for the other.
Last year's title fight has simply compromised the 2009 project.
I tend to agree Timstr11. If this is the case though, what confuses me is that we were always told there was a twin design team structure with one team for the current car and one team for next year's one. Did the other team just lose focus or were they dragged into the assault for the 08 championship as well?
Well, there`s only one windtunnel and a limited amount of CFD power.
Originally posted by Nuvol
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news...313090839.shtml
Haug admits new McLaren 'far too slow'
Unofficial word from the Woking-based team at the end of the test is that the car's problem has been identified and can be fixed in the run to Melbourne.
They outsourced the design of the B-version to Jim Bamber Ltd.
whatto999
Mar 13 2009, 09:19
Originally posted by Owen
I tend to agree Timstr11. If this is the case though, what confuses me is that we were always told there was a twin design team structure with one team for the current car and one team for next year's one. Did the other team just lose focus or were they dragged into the assault for the 08 championship as well?
McLaren is way too serious team for something like that. '08 title was brutally important to them, but there is no chance that they would compromise '09 project in this way.
undersquare
Mar 13 2009, 09:20
Originally posted by argiriano
I don`t understand one thing, why McLaren didn't try to run the car without KERS, and to use balast in different combination of weight distribution, to understand if that was the problem? And if that was the problem, as many speculate, they just have to decide not to run KERS in Melbourne. I know that sounds a bit ridiculous, but championship is more important, than to run KERS just because they invested to much in it... likewise they will have more time to adjust (develop) the car, and to run KERS later in the season. 
If anything it looks like they've overdone it and got the weight too far forward, that's the classic cause of poor traction. And in the photos of Lewis' car being lifted it looked rather nose-down (not conclusive I know). It has all the space and layout compromises for kers, so if they take it out they'll end up with the worst of both worlds.
argiriano
Mar 13 2009, 09:40
Originally posted by undersquare
If anything it looks like they've overdone it and got the weight too far forward, that's the classic cause of poor traction. And in the photos of Lewis' car being lifted it looked rather nose-down (not conclusive I know). It has all the space and layout compromises for kers, so if they take it out they'll end up with the worst of both worlds.
Yes I'm aware of that, byt we didn't know, whether isn't it possible to move some weight from the front to the rear if they removed KERS, in case they still have some balast in front of course. If they don't have, then it doesn't really matter to do that.
Timstr11
Mar 13 2009, 09:41
Originally posted by whatto999
McLaren is way too serious team for something like that. '08 title was brutally important to them, but there is no chance that they would compromise '09 project in this way.
It's not about being serious. They had no choice because it would mean taking engineering resources away from the 2008 project and put it towards the 2009 project. Remember that the McLaren car was not dominant last year so they did not have a performance margin which allowed them to relax and have more people work on the 2009 project. They really had to keep up the development pace to remain with the Ferrari until the last races. Otherwise they would've lost the all important drivers title.
Ferrari came out several times saying that they had big problems balancing the demands for 2009, with that of the 2008 car.
Timstr11
Mar 13 2009, 09:49
Originally posted by undersquare
If anything it looks like they've overdone it and got the weight too far forward, that's the classic cause of poor traction. And in the photos of Lewis' car being lifted it looked rather nose-down (not conclusive I know). It has all the space and layout compromises for kers, so if they take it out they'll end up with the worst of both worlds.
I thought that for a good balance, if the aerodynamic centre of pressure moves rearward, the weight distribution is also moved more rearward to match the aero centre of pressure.
Now if they are lacking rear downforce, I assume the car has more weight to the back, which they now cannot match with higher rear downforce.
Rinehart
Mar 13 2009, 09:54
Originally posted by dabrasco
Hamilton faster
16:05 - Hamilton appears at the end of the day to see how fast the McLaren is a little fuel on board. The Briton has improved his time of 1:21.045 to 1:20.869.
Your saying McLaren took all the fuel out of the car, set it up for a Q2 sim and they achieved an improvement of 0.2 of a second?
Seriously, go back to school.
Rinehart
Mar 13 2009, 09:57
Originally posted by Lazarus II
Massa says otherwise.
And there's no such thing as sandbagging, so what he says must be true!
dabrasco
Mar 13 2009, 10:01
Originally posted by dabrasco
lol this is the full quote
Hamilton faster
16:05 - Hamilton appears at the end of the day to see how fast the McLaren is a little fuel on board. The Briton has improved his time of 1:21.045 to 1:20.869. This is the team no longer ondraan the list, but on the seventh position. This week, the McLaren is still no quick time. Perhaps the team with a heavy car tested, but it is also likely that the team wants to know how the car reacts when the tank is nearly empty. The McLaren team seem to have problems with the downward pressure on the back and stability. It is interesting to see if Hamilton or his car this afternoon with an empty tank later in time lists can get.
like i said, haters/fans will spin whatever info they get to suit em....
@ rinehart...wtf:down:
this is the full post,
thats was google translation of a text from the dutch f1 website, not my remarks....to make the same point bout fuel difference
atleast understand whats going on b4 launchin personal attacks
Rinehart
Mar 13 2009, 10:06
Originally posted by dabrasco
@ rinehart...wtf:down:
this is the full post,
thats was google translation of a text from the dutch f1 website, not my remarks....to make the same point bout fuel difference
atleast understand whats going on b4 launchin personal attacks
If your posting something you don't believe, fair enough, but that seems to be a complete waste of everyones time, including yours. It would help if you'd made that clear at least. How am I supposed to detect that your posting some tripe if you aren't commenting on it?
Madras
Mar 13 2009, 10:12
Originally posted by Rinehart
If your posting something you don't believe, fair enough, but that seems to be a complete waste of everyones time, including yours. It would help if you'd made that clear at least. How am I supposed to detect that your posting some tripe if you aren't commenting on it?
He did comment on it: "like i said, haters/fans will spin whatever info they get to suit em.... "
Jeez...
Slowinfastout
Mar 13 2009, 10:13
Originally posted by dabrasco
It is interesting to see if Hamilton or his car this afternoon with an empty tank later in time lists can get.
So, how far did Lewis went with his empty tank? That guys seems to know about the McMerc testing strategy(
)
Gilles4Ever
Mar 13 2009, 10:16
Originally posted by Rinehart
Your saying McLaren took all the fuel out of the car, set it up for a Q2 sim and they achieved an improvement of 0.2 of a second?
Seriously, go back to school.
What makes you think that the first time was done with full tanks/race simulation? How many laps did each stint comprise of? Just because they said the second run was low fuel doesn't mean that the previous laps weren't also done with low fuel.
You are making a hell of a lot of assumption to go attacking other people.
dabrasco
Mar 13 2009, 10:19
Originally posted by Rinehart
If your posting something you don't believe, fair enough, but that seems to be a complete waste of everyones time, including yours. It would help if you'd made that clear at least. How am I supposed to detect that your posting some tripe if you aren't commenting on it?
jeez, read the post above the original post...someone took something from the website as fact n i just posted the full thing so pple could make whatever they wanted to make from the text.
by the way, the website seemed to just be speculating in general about fuel levels in the mclaren
bankoq
Mar 13 2009, 10:20
Originally posted by Rinehart
Your saying McLaren took all the fuel out of the car, set it up for a Q2 sim and they achieved an improvement of 0.2 of a second?
Seriously, go back to school.
Maybe Hamilton screwed up his lap. We don't know that.
Originally posted by peroa
Sooo ....
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73695
Lager, please! Ahhh, and a double "jack" on the rocks ...
I think that FINALLY confirms what we all suspected. It's a dud. Official.
Now, let's hope the recovery plan is swift and decisive.
Q. Will MP4-24's problems be fixed in time for the Australian Grand Prix?
Whitmarsh: "Next week we will be testing at Jerez, which many of our rivals will not be. We aim to continue to develop the car, and the result should be measurable on the stopwatch. Will MP4-24 be as quick as we want it to be by March 29 [the date of the Australian Grand Prix]? Perhaps not. Will it be quicker than it has been this week at the Barcelona test? Yes. Will it improve as we develop its aero and thereby address its problems in the coming weeks and months? Most certainly."
Martin Whitmarsh:
"Many times in Formula 1 history have successful teams started off with a car that was not working as well as they had hoped it would, and many times have those successful teams engineered their way back to the front of the grid in impressively short order. That is what we aim to do. In fact, that is what we are already doing."
See, you are all wrong, it is actually a very positive thing.
whatto999
Mar 13 2009, 10:27
Originally posted by Timstr11
It's not about being serious. They had no choice because it would mean taking engineering resources away from the 2008 project and put it towards the 2009 project. Remember that the McLaren car was not dominant last year so they did not have a performance margin which allowed them to relax and have more people work on the 2009 project. They really had to keep up the development pace to remain with the Ferrari until the last races. Otherwise they would've lost the all important drivers title.
Ferrari came out several times saying that they had big problems balancing the demands for 2009, with that of the 2008 car.
Well, i think it's about being serious, that is, knowing limits of '08 development. All serious teams started with '09 design at the end of '07 coz they knew massive amount of research is need in order to be competetive. Through the season McLaren and Ferrari were forced to keep a bit more resources on '08 but not drastically.
Can I just say it's a refreshing change to have the team admit to the deficiency.
Respect to them for admitting problems at least.
Martin is even harder to read than Ron.
I think there is major cockup in wind tunell>
undersquare
Mar 13 2009, 10:30
Originally posted by Timstr11
I thought that for a good balance, if the aerodynamic centre of pressure moves rearward, the weight distribution is also moved more rearward to match the aero centre of pressure.
Now if they are lacking rear downforce, I assume the car has more weight to the back, which they now cannot match with higher rear downforce.
I think they lack traction
and rear df don't they? I'd have thought if they were heavy at the back they'd at least start and get out of slow corners well. Two problems could explain why they've struggeld to fix it. I wonder if they worried too much about rear tyre wear, perhaps started off with their tyre simulator and let that drive the project a bit too much.
Originally posted by Rinehart
And there's no such thing as sandbagging, so what he says must be true!
Sandbagging, eh?
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73695
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73696
Unless you still think those press releases are also part of the cunning sandbaggers plan...
wingwalker
Mar 13 2009, 10:32
Haha I sort of switched fronts without changing my opinion. Back in early February I had to explain myself at lenght why I think Mclaren are in troubles and most likely not in the place when they wanted to be, which made me one of the biggest sceptics here. Currently the general feel of the thread turned by 180 degrees, Mclaren are made backmarkers so all of the sudden I look like an optimist, as in my opinion they will start in midfield (upper midfield, even) and improve drastically during the season.
Slowinfastout
Mar 13 2009, 10:33
When they say there's nothing wrong the car, its a turd.. and when they say the car is a turd it's a turd, that's how you win championships folks ;)
Originally posted by Owen
Can I just say it's a refreshing change to have the team admit to the deficiency.
Respect to them for admitting problems at least.
Indeed.
And I think it will serve them well, now that they did go public with that honest assessment, every improvement will be regarded as the success it is.
Some painful Oz mornings ahead of us, there are. Hmmmmmm.
:\
Originally posted by Slowinfastout
When they say there's nothing wrong the car, its a turd.. and when they say the car is a turd it's a turd, that's how you win championships folks ;)
Over the years I've come to the conclusion that those who talk least about their car (good or bad) are the ones that will achieve the most.
undersquare
Mar 13 2009, 10:39
"it is a car's aero aspect that confers the greatest pluses and minuses to its overall performance package, and that would appear to be the case with MP4-24."
Whitmarsh.
And Norby says "it will take time to improve".
So it's something fairly fundamental, but they know what it is, sort of. Well it could make for an interesting season, at least :\ .
Gilles4Ever
Mar 13 2009, 10:39
Originally posted by Owen
Can I just say it's a refreshing change to have the team admit to the deficiency.
Respect to them for admitting problems at least.
Oh come on, they have been lying for over a fortnight, its like they have only admitted there is a problem because its now impossible to say there isnt. Hardly deserve respect for that.
Originally posted by undersquare
"it is a car's aero aspect that confers the greatest pluses and minuses to its overall performance package, and that would appear to be the case with MP4-24."
Whitmarsh.
And Norby says "it will take time to improve".
So it's something fairly fundamental, but they know what it is, sort of. Well it could make for an interesting season, at least :\ .
"B" version on it's way, that's how it sounds to me.
Thx God engine and car ballance is OK.
Initial testing of MP4-24, which first ran with an interim aero package, went in accordance with our early developmental expectations. This week the car has run in Barcelona with an updated aero package, as we had always planned it would, and a performance shortfall has been identified that we are now working hard to resolve.
You can change aero much easier than chassis balance or engine.
SchuOz
Mar 13 2009, 10:40
Originally posted by as65p
Over the years I've come to the conclusion that those who talk least about their car (good or bad) are the ones that will achieve the most.
Yep BMW...watch out for them.
Nobody
Mar 13 2009, 10:42
Nobody fights harder when they're down like McLaren.
Hope they can bring that car back to the front where it belongs!
We've been through worse, and the season has not even started. If this is how it is now, who knows how it will be after 3 rounds.
I'm bloody excited about it actually.
Madras
Mar 13 2009, 10:43
Originally posted by bogi
Thx God engine and car ballance is OK.
You can change aero much easier than chassis balance or engine.
The aero could be linked to the chassis design.
Kevin Taylor
Mar 13 2009, 10:44
But Lewis is the reigning world champion, and he became world champion in one of our cars.
"So anything less than success at that level is naturally regarded as unsatisfactory by us, by our partners, by the media and by the fans. Having said that, McLaren has started 648 grands prix. We have won 162 of them and have recorded 431 podium finishes.
"We are proud of our record and have faith in our engineers' ability to work hard to get MP4-24 into a position to add to that record. They are already engaged in doing exactly that."
The situation MUST BE hopeless if Whitmarsh has to say about the team's successful history. But I'm convinced that they will be on pace soon, but now they have to face big issues.
Originally posted by Gilles4Ever
Oh come on, they have been lying for over a fortnight, its like they have only admitted there is a problem because its now impossible to say there isnt. Hardly deserve respect for that.
Well, I personally don't blame them for first trying to quick-fix it before admitting defeat. That's what I would try too.
And I don't thinkk they outright lied... more a case of being slightly economical with the truth
. As they all are at times.
Originally posted by Kevin Taylor
But Lewis is the reigning world champion, and he became world champion in one of our cars.
"So anything less than success at that level is naturally regarded as unsatisfactory by us, by our partners, by the media and by the fans. Having said that, McLaren has started 648 grands prix. We have won 162 of them and have recorded 431 podium finishes.
"We are proud of our record and have faith in our engineers' ability to work hard to get MP4-24 into a position to add to that record. They are already engaged in doing exactly that."
[B]The situation MUST BE hopeless if Whitmarsh has to say about the team's successful history. But I'm convinced that they will be on pace soon, but now they have to face big issues. [/B]
Haha true
Usually Nobby comes up with those statistics when they´re in trouble, now even Martin starts with that...
dabrasco
Mar 13 2009, 10:46
Originally posted by Kevin Taylor
But Lewis is the reigning world champion, and he became world champion in one of our cars.
"So anything less than success at that level is naturally regarded as unsatisfactory by us, by our partners, by the media and by the fans. Having said that, McLaren has started 648 grands prix. We have won 162 of them and have recorded 431 podium finishes.
"We are proud of our record and have faith in our engineers' ability to work hard to get MP4-24 into a position to add to that record. They are already engaged in doing exactly that."
The situation MUST BE hopeless if Whitmarsh has to say about the team's successful history. But I'm convinced that they will be on pace soon, but now they have to face big issues.
yea that history part was quite disturbing, maybe im reading too much into.....wuteva
it would be a bit surreal to see Lewis struggling to get to Q2
Slartibartfast
Mar 13 2009, 10:46
Originally posted by peroa
Sooo ....
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73696
Lager, please! Ahhh, and a double "jack" on the rocks ...
Martin Whitmarsh is clearly fluent in 'Ronspeak'. Fortunately Norbert Haug was there to translate.
http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news/20...m_09031307.html
Frage: "Ist der MP4-24 schnell genug?"
Haug: "Derzeit nicht. Wir haben noch viel Arbeit vor uns und müssen unser technisches Paket deutlich verbessern. Dieser Prozess benötigt Zeit - er kann bis zum Beginn der Europasaison dauern, vielleicht sogar länger."
So McLaren might not be competitive untill we come back to Europe again, maybe even longer.
A bit later he says ''possibly the first third of the season.''
Pharazon
Mar 13 2009, 10:56
so it's offical..
McLaren have acutally built a dog...
it had to happen at some point
This is what topteams feared for: building a bad car not being up there and having gone the wrong way interpreting the new regulations, or someone (like Brawn GP) having hit the nail absolutely right on the head being a second faster than everyone else. In both cases it's very hard to catch up with the ban on testing...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.