but it's bulkier than Ferrari overall, hence I stick with JLO quote.....

Sorry if this has already been discussed but i've been comparing a few pics of the MP4-23 v MP4-24 and it seems as tho the wheelbase of the MP4-24 is shorter than the MP4-23. This seems interesting after all the tyre wear issues they had last year. Any idea's why they might have done this?

Fair enough.

Obi

The wheelbase isn't really that important. I mean, it is important but not compared to weight distribution, centre of aero pressure, corner weights and downforce/drag ratios... Can I see these comparison photos please?

The slicks probably behave completly differently...

Certainly with the slicks change and the total rethinking of the aero philosophy, things like wheelbase shouldn't be compared to last year because they will have to be different to accomodate the new rules and optimize the package...

Its interesting to take note of how the MP4-24 and F60 deal with the hot cooling air exhaust. The F60 appears to exhaust the cooling air ahead of the lower rear wing, as well as between the rear wing supports a little higher up. The Mclaren exhausts cooling air between the lower rear wing and the roof of the diffuser. My initial thought is that there maybe some negative interation between the hot, turbulent exhaust air and the lower rear wing on the F60, more so than on the Mclaren. Pehaps this is the downside to what is an impressively undercut car. Any thoughts?

Obi

id say its like comparing J.Lopez to V.beckham
http://img166.imagevenue.com/img.php?image..._122_1036lo.jpg
http://img16.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=...3_122_673lo.jpg

I know its not that accurate but I compared wheel diameter to wheelbase ratio's of the two to get an idea of which one had the larger wheelbase.

Can you explain a bit about why the wheelbase of the car doesnt really have an effect on the car?

I also can imagine that the new McLaren will be quite understeery. Several factors point to it.

So?

Who profits from it?

agree. ferrari's solution for cooling air outlet is more traditional approach, while macca's one seems very unique and new. macca made rear-end as narrow as possible to make more space between tyre and body, letting more clean air flow into upper side of the defuser. on the other hand, it seems ferrari prioritized smooth air flow. in addition, ferrari's sidepods look longer than macca's. ferrari's is tighter than macca's, but right, macca's is not "bulky" actually. the two teams took very different approach in that area alone, which is very interesting.

Well, it does. I'll show you why - imagine a long thin pole. When you push it longitudinally it is very stable, and will continue in that direction pretty accurately. However, try to turn it in this state and it is very difficult. However, turn that pole 90 degrees, and now you can spin the thing easily... however, if you had to push the thing (imagine it is suddenly square so it doesn't roll) then it wouldn't be very stable - it would be very easy to change the angle of attack. However these are extremes...

This applies to cars too, though. However, the difference in wheelbase is very low, and to be honest, there are so many more factors which are more crucial - suspension geometry I didn't mention, steering angle, downforce... all sorts of things which affect the handling more than the wheelbase will.

You obviously didn't read his comment. He said that the car was fat, so it must understeer. Apart from having no relevance to the nature of a car's cornering ability, he also seemingly posted this with no evidence and as a one-liner - clearly someone just posting for the sake of having an extra post.

Sorry, I missed it probably.

Anyways, I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion. Aero and weight balance aren't forced on the teams by the rules, but almost exclusively by the tires. Imagine we'd had the same rules for the chassis but front tires were narrower and rear wheels wider. Certainly the balance would be completely different although the rules for any wing were identical.

muramasa, I don't know about you, but personally I think the F60, MP4-24 and the interim Williams cars all look better in profile than their 08 variants.

Obi

I cannot imagine the teams running huge rear wings with huge drag, causing a lower top speed - especially since they would probably also trim back the front wing, losing downforce (especially since the front wing has a relatively low drag/downforce ratio, which is why they still run lots of front wing even at Monza, whereas the rear wing is trimmed right down). Therefore, they would move the weight and aero bias forwards to compensate so that the drag isn't too high, and as I mentioned before, the front wheels having a proportionally greater contact patch than with the grooves when compared to the new slick rears, then this also means a more forward bias.

BS. Not everyone has your technical knowledge.

Sorry I've been trying to keep track of this thread aswell as some other forums but it's growing so fast that its been quite difficult so i dont know if this has already been brought up, but what are your idea's on Mclaren's front suspension. Seems a bit radical.

moving the steering arm off the upper wishbone to mid waw between the wishbones seems odd, i think it must be done for DF reasons...

It could be something as simple as packaging concerns - the system was structually weaker when in the upper wishbone? This is something I don't know about. I doubt its for downforce reasons though - interrupting the airflow in this crucial area is bad enough, but made even more so since the suspension elements aren't allowed to be shaped to produce downforce... it has to be a practical rather than performance-based decision.

Hang on, you are defending someone who earlier in the thread said "well spotted" as a reply to something that was incorrect anyway? The incorrect observation, by the way, was the fact that Mclaren are the team to have a rear wing supported by two pillars, which is rubbish since both Toyota and Ferrari have this, and basically every team last year, if not every team, had this solution.
This is someone who out of the blue, posted something he knew nothing about in a clear continuation of his one-liners. If he wants to learn, all he has to do is read several threads about the subject of aerodynamics, or understeer, or whatever.

I don't think so. Afaik suspension parts may not be used as aero foils. The teams are allowed to shape them in a way such that they cause as few as possible drag. But that's it.

well the more i look at the rear, the more i think there is something going on, the wholes in the back of the engine cover, arent where the exhauste pipes exit. They are to far away from were the engine is mounted, the pipes would be far to long. If you look at the toyota and F60 you can get an idea how long they will need to be. Besides the outlets are made off carbon, and the bodywork around are painted as opposed to the normal black which they normally use in heated areas. I cant let the thought go, that perhaps they are letting the exhaust gasses out through or in conjunction with the diff. Another solution, perhaps this engine cover was only meant to be used at this presentation

Or that that exit you talk about is for both the exhaust and the hot air...? This is part of the Ferrari solution, in my opinion, as well as the suspiciously large suspension apertures on the F60, which look like they may also be an exit point for heat... all complete rubbish though, if, as you say, the engine cover/sidepods are a launch-specific part, although I doubt even Mclaren would waste the money required to make such an item...

Can you even see those exit holes on the overhead shot? They appear just before the rear wheels on the side on shot but if you look at the overhead shot, before the rear wheels is just solid bodywork? Or is it just the angle that is hiding them?

interesting interview
Pat Fry
"The main factor driving our early discussions in 2007 was the kinetic energy recovery system (KERS) and how to fit it around the engine and gearbox. They require long lead times to design and build, and affect the overall packaging and weight distribution of the car.

It’s a major juggling act because everything is interlinked. At the start of the project, you don’t exactly know the downforce level and characteristic that we will achieve, or how the new slick tyres will behave and, as such, what mechanical, aerodynamic and weight distribution that we need to be targetting.

Designing with so little information, means you develop a package that is as flexible as possible, rather than for the ultimate potential of the rules. As such, we’ve tried to give ourselves more tuning range for MP4-24 than MP4-23, even though we’re compensating for the introduction of the KERS system, which will be a heavy component."

EDIT
More

"The regulations for 2009 have also evolved during the course of 2008. Changing the engine revs in December, for example, means we can make the radiators smaller. We will incorporate that change before Melbourne."



http://www.mclaren.com/f1season/2009/launch/rl-countdown.php

To me it looks like the TF107, but slightly less bulky.
http://www.f1technical.net/gallery/v/Toyot...ea79e5bf3f2c59f
http://premium.f1-live.com/f1/photos-hires...a/diapo_141.jpg

I think their designer (Vasellon?) once said it is a very complex design and interferes with the aero balance too much....but don't take my word for it.

Hi f1rules.

A similar thought crossed my mind, but its difficult to comment about the exhaust pipe exits. Looking at the following image,.......

the Mclaren has rear biased exhaust exits, the Toyota is forward biased and the Ferrari is in between the two, figuratively and literally.

Obi

Is that any reason to reply the way you did? I personally think not. And I personally don't think we're in any position to say what his intentions were. I honestly didn't see anything offensive in his post (regarding understeer) that was bad enough to warrant a reply in the manner you did, that's all.

Simon Lacey

The Ferrari has the exhausts of the last couple of Mclarens, and the Toyota last years Ferrari solution.

Thanks Peroa.

I must say from these pictures ferari looks more pretty and mclaren looks menacing What suprised me more is those front suspensions and i think there is more to them than meets the eye.

This is the first pic of Simon that I found on the net. Judging by the whole txt it will be good, lets hope

This new Mclaren suspension seems as though its going to restrict its turning circle.

What are others peoples views?

http://www.mclaren.com/f1season/2009/launch/rl-countdown.php

That's the reason for weird looking suspension.

The new front suspension is designed that way to (hopefully) work the tires better for grip and temperature range.

yes i agree, what it cant understand, the trend for the past many years, has been to go for the thinner more narrow sidepode design, and then leave the exhaust pipes out in the open so to say, now mclaren has gone in a totally different direction. Further you cant just wrap carbon aroud the exhaust there needs to be space between because they are so hot, that means you need a lot off space underneath the bodywork, instead of just making a whole like ferrari where the exhaust pipes exit, and then you can have a tight bodywork
looking at this picture you can see the carbon and that there are no exhaust, but i agree the exhaust pipes can be pointed in that direction. Offcourse what i dont know is which solution produces more drag

yeah it's very interesting. 2 teams, 2 quite different idea.

F60's cooling air exhaust is conventional way, simply to make opening at the body end. hot air coming from the opening certainly affects flow at lower wing/difuser negatively, but smooth overall shape of the body must compensate it.

MP4/24 can let more clean air into the space between rear tyre and body, then lower wing and diffuser, but such a steep squeezed shape alone must cause the air flow to detach. however, look at cockpit area, another remarkable part of MP4/24. it gathers alot of air and lets it under the cockpit through to the sidepod. then there's a small fence fitted on the underpanel, which works to compress/confine the air then release it into the difuser/rear wing. if this works well, it neutralizes the negative effect caused by squeezed rear end. of course this pod-venturi idea is nothing new, but MP4/24's undercut around cockpit area is more significant than any other previous cars.
how they positioned hot air outlet is very new and intriguing.
it's interesting to see how, or if, those airflows - sidepod air, hot air from outlet and exhaust air - work well together, because it's brand-new approach.

and, Toyota looks somewhere between Mclaren and Ferrari.

Good read, thanks, much appreciated.

Diffusor exhaust, brings back old memories:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1tEk11ZrGuI

Old Hock'ring

stoopid tilk...

The sound, mika, the sound.

The screaming, the howling.
Those days nothing sounded like this.

yes but i didnt know that model had it, i think its a newey idea, he tried it numerous times, best known on the mp4-18. and it didnt work. In order for it to work there can be no drop in rews when you shift gear, apparently that was the problem at that time. When the drivers shifted in the corners, the rews went down and the diff would loose some of its low pressure, or how is it called in english.
Ok then there were the overheating problems, the flexy chassis and the crappy mc merc engine, good god thoose times are over

it looks like this exhaust cover can be replaced easily. but i too wonder if tehy waste money purely for launch purpose, using carbon... if they race like that tho, it's difinitely remarkable.
btw longer exhaust pipes makes sense, because by doing so you can get some extra hp.

ok, i didnt know that about the exhaust pipes,
i dont think they made a cover just for launch purpose either, and yes it looks like the rear shield can easely be taken off and traded for a different version, hopefully we will get some pictures tomorrow, from the shakedown, but i dont think we will, but then monday is going to be extremely interesting

So for one thing, the cooling on the launch car is for 19,000 rpm.

here the video, when nobby is interviewed you can see a bit more of the back, and it looks like its just normal exhaust and hot air outlets

http://www.motorsport-total.com/videos/f1/1177

are those awful nose camera's mandated now? every new car has them

How much difference would the revs make?