Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 3 votes

McLaren MP4-29- Part II


  • Please log in to reply
2860 replies to this topic

#1 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 2,167 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 20 April 2014 - 19:57

First thread had more than 4000 posts, so we can continue from here. 

 

Let's hope this new thread will bring luck to McLaren  who are seem to be in serious trouble with Mp4-29  :|


Edited by Mc_Silver, 20 April 2014 - 20:02.


Advertisement

#2 ballow

ballow
  • Member

  • 270 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 20 April 2014 - 20:02

New thread new B spec car hopefully :)

#3 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,117 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 20 April 2014 - 20:11

They should revert back to Melbourne spec. It is clear what they have thrown at the car since then has not worked. Sometimes you have to go back to go forwards.

I was also always a strong believer that if they used the 2012 car in 2013 with up to date spec they wouldnt have been so embarrased like they were. IIRC Newey saying the 2013 Red Bull was a mild evolution of the 2012 car.

Someone called it ignorant arrogance on the part of Mclaren

#4 Grundle

Grundle
  • Member

  • 696 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 April 2014 - 20:22

McLaren are naive.
Every season they make some kind of car flaw. Must be frustrating for the fans.
Also, the front wing is pathetic.

#5 Christophe77

Christophe77
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 20 April 2014 - 21:39

Pathetic.... Tim Goss to be fired

Edited by Christophe77, 20 April 2014 - 21:40.


#6 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 361 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 20 April 2014 - 21:53

Not another bathtub with wheels please!

'Second quickest' bathtub on the grid...

#7 Xeriks

Xeriks
  • Member

  • 874 posts
  • Joined: February 13

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:09

 

The post you responded to may or may not have been daft, but it's certainly stupid to claim that drivers make very little difference to performance like you just did.

 
Drivers obviously can make a difference, but when the car is really bad I don't see Hamilton doing that much better with the car, yeah he would probably qualify higher up the grid, but what about in the race? the car clearly lacks downforce, how would Hamilton make up for that? 
 
If he was driving the MP4-29 he would also struggle to look after his tyres and have to pit early just like Button had to.
 
I just don't think the problem with Mclaren at the moment is a driver issue, it's clearly just a bad car and unless they make massive improvements, they may as well switch their resources to 2015 asap.

 



#8 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:22

Given the quality of the Mercedes engine you really have to worry about where McLaren would be with either the Ferrari or Renault lumps.

 

The reality is that McLaren appear to have lost their way far worse than we ever realised. You have to hope McLaren knew more than us and are taking steps to address it. Mind you, if you look at the Merc example and how they have gone about moving their team to the front of the grid, theres no reason to expect a return to form before 2016, if even then.

 

The 2nd half of 2012 seems a lifetime ago.

 

 

I don't even like Button but this is absurd, Hamilton doesn't add any extra downforce to the car, so I don't see how he would be doing much better than either of the current Mclaren drivers.

 

Please don't fill this thread with posts like this!

 

 

blaming the drivers or saying the team lacks leadership when it comes to setup is a silly argument, and not even worth responding too IMHO. Its very clear once again this year the problems are far deeper routed than that.


Edited by Burtros, 20 April 2014 - 22:23.


#9 bogi

bogi
  • Member

  • 3,089 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:23

There is no point in switching resources if you dont knowwthere and how to put them. They were the first team to abandon 2013 and look what happnened.

#10 ElDictatore

ElDictatore
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:25

Seeing that Budkowski got dropped as head of aero and Fallows was expected to join in march - it might very well be a reason among others why they're lacking updates. I think people need to realize that most teams have an aero-team count not even in the double-digits. And they're still recruiting or just have recruited some other guys.

Obviously that doesn't destract from the very poor result today - I'm more baffled by the lack of visible updates. It makes you worry if the change of management came at a bad time and wasn't really thought out that well.

 

Let's see what the updates bring in Spain.



#11 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:26

I never liked starting with this clean design every year since 2009, i never understood how every design had reached its development dead end especially when Redbull had being refining mostly the same design in all that time.



#12 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,491 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:33

Pathetic.... Tim Goss to be fired


Oh, Goss the scapegoat now? First it was Fry, people were relived he left, 2009 car all his fault. Then Lowe, people celebrated his departure, 2013 car all his fault. Then the useless head of aero. And Whitmarsh too. Except in amongst all that these guys have been responsible for some fantastic cars.

Did McLaren ever solve the correlation issues that led to them miscalculating the pace they would derive from the 2012 developments and resulted in them needlessly changing concept for 2013? It really doesn't seem that they have. They can't even turn up at circuit with a decent base setup.

#13 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:54

Oh, Goss the scapegoat now? First it was Fry, people were relived he left, 2009 car all his fault. Then Lowe, people celebrated his departure, 2013 car all his fault. Then the useless head of aero. And Whitmarsh too. Except in amongst all that these guys have been responsible for some fantastic cars.
 

 

 

Where does it say Goss is going to be fired? I've not seen it anywhere except for a post up above.

 

I didn't think Fry left due to any design faults or anything to do with that, I thought it was to do with a mobile phone....



#14 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,491 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 20 April 2014 - 22:59

Where does it say Goss is going to be fired? I've not seen it anywhere except for a post up above.
 
I didn't think Fry left due to any design faults or anything to do with that, I thought it was to do with a mobile phone....


I was taking it as an opinion of Christophe77- not an actual statement based on real news.

#15 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 20 April 2014 - 23:07

Well, this is probably where Pedro De La Rosa would have come in handy, he was a very experienced development driver but he's gone now and they are relaying on button alone, Perez and Mags both were too inexperienced.



#16 Lemans

Lemans
  • Member

  • 1,348 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 20 April 2014 - 23:15

McLaren are naive.
Every season they make some kind of car flaw. Must be frustrating for the fans.
Also, the front wing is pathetic.

 

Interesting. Can you point out in detail exactly what part of the front wing is "pathetic"? Also, can you post some screenshots of your CFD analysis? I'd love to see them and I'm sure McLaren would, too.


Edited by Lemans, 20 April 2014 - 23:16.


#17 charly0418

charly0418
  • Member

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 20 April 2014 - 23:43

This is an exact replica of last years car thread, only difference is we're not calling for Whitmarsh head. I guess it'll be Tim Goss soon



#18 nosecone

nosecone
  • Member

  • 825 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 20 April 2014 - 23:57

Interesting. Can you point out in detail exactly what part of the front wing is "pathetic"? Also, can you post some screenshots of your CFD analysis? I'd love to see them and I'm sure McLaren would, too.

 

It hasn't got 1001 slots and flaps so it must be rubbish!

 

(sarcasm)



#19 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,675 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 21 April 2014 - 00:04

It hasn't got 1001 slots and flaps so it must be rubbish!

 

(sarcasm)

 

More to the point, Jenson said they turned it up to the max, and it still didn't give enough downforce.



Advertisement

#20 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,675 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 21 April 2014 - 00:44

Well, this is probably where Pedro De La Rosa would have come in handy, he was a very experienced development driver but he's gone now and they are relaying on button alone, Perez and Mags both were too inexperienced.

 

McLaren don't seem to want to rely on driver feedback, that's been clear for a few years now.

 

They normally have the test drivers rather than the race drivers at in-season testing. When Kevin did the testing the other week at Bahrain, this was very much an exception, and a last-minute change of plan, probably to help him sort out problems he'd had in the race.



#21 HamiltonFanboy

HamiltonFanboy
  • Member

  • 101 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 21 April 2014 - 04:04

It's unbelievable how bad this car is. They went from having the best car in high speed corners at the end of 2012 to an absolute disaster this year. I guess it confirms the suspicion that they really did have no idea how they got the MP4-27 to be so fast and they improved it through blind luck. It's really sad to see McLaren being beaten on merit by Force India, Williams and even Toro Rosso who have a far inferior engine.

 

Something is really wrong and they need to change their whole philosophy on producing cars. It is just not working. Over the last 5 years they have seemingly lost everything that made them competitive. The extremely strong front end of the 2010 car, gone. The mechanical grip and wet weather performance of the 2011 car, gone. The excellent aerodynamic base of the 2012 car, gone. Most worryingly of all is how they have lost the instant tyre temperature and cold/wet weather performance that gave them the ability to win so many GPs since 2007. That was built into the DNA of every McLaren since 2007 and I dont know how they have lost it.

 

Right now they have an average base car with horrendous aero performance and no ability to work the tyres. Being the worst of 4 Mercedes teams is not good enough for McLaren and I can only hope Ron is making significant changes as we speak. I really dont know what they are doing at the moment and it pains me as a McLaren fan.



#22 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,496 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 21 April 2014 - 06:04

I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with the car, it looked very good at the 1st test and got a good result in Oz. The team just seems to have ground to a halt since the TP and head of aero were sacked.



#23 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,954 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 21 April 2014 - 06:28

 

 
 
Drivers obviously can make a difference, but when the car is really bad I don't see Hamilton doing that much better with the car, yeah he would probably qualify higher up the grid, but what about in the race? the car clearly lacks downforce, how would Hamilton make up for that? 
 
If he was driving the MP4-29 he would also struggle to look after his tyres and have to pit early just like Button had to.
 
I just don't think the problem with Mclaren at the moment is a driver issue, it's clearly just a bad car and unless they make massive improvements, they may as well switch their resources to 2015 asap.

 

Well, it really depends, in China the MP4-29 had severe graining at the front, that's why they trashed their tyres, they can't get them to operating temp. so they just slide around till all rubber is gone.

Here a driver potentially can make a difference, you just have to look at Ferrari this weekend/year and in some ways at 2012 and the MP4-27.

Turning on the tyres can mean +1sec per lap, not to mention tyre life over a stint.

 

Before anyone accuses me of trashing JB, I'm not, these are facts and we can see them up and down the grid.

 

It is fairly obvious that the aero work came to a halt, they've abandoned their philosophy of bringing updates every weekend.

I just hope they are saving it all for Spain, because if not, god help them, especially in Spain...



#24 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,254 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 21 April 2014 - 06:39

More to the point, Jenson said they turned it up to the max, and it still didn't give enough downforce.

 

Looking at the data and reading the reports it looks more like "teething problems" on a new aero design.

It appears that they had more rear wing than other cars, possibly to compensate for the natural lack in flowing corners as a result of the Malaysia experience.To compensate the extra rear (wing) downforce they maxed out the front wing (which efficiency wise doesn't help).

It looks  like they needed more front-end aero downforce and to compensate mechanically for the balance ..maybe the old front nose would have been a better choice?


Edited by WitnessX, 21 April 2014 - 06:42.


#25 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 277 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:04

Boullier is quoted in several places saying, "...I can promise you that if you look at the data, you can see that McLaren are coming back, and that's what is most important".  What does that mean?



#26 Paul Parker

Paul Parker
  • Member

  • 1,721 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:04

They should revert back to Melbourne spec. It is clear what they have thrown at the car since then has not worked. Sometimes you have to go back to go forwards.

I was also always a strong believer that if they used the 2012 car in 2013 with up to date spec they wouldnt have been so embarrased like they were. IIRC Newey saying the 2013 Red Bull was a mild evolution of the 2012 car.

Someone called it ignorant arrogance on the part of Mclaren

 

According to my informed source, McLaren management were told by their own people working on the 2013 car that it was a dud early on, but they refused to to reinstate the 2012 car.



#27 HamiltonFanboy

HamiltonFanboy
  • Member

  • 101 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:18

I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with the car, it looked very good at the 1st test and got a good result in Oz. The team just seems to have ground to a halt since the TP and head of aero were sacked.

How would you judge a bad car? So far this car has shown to have very poor downforce, poor wet weather performance and average traction. They were flattered in the tests and possibly Melbourne because of the Renault and Ferrari engines coming out wrong and since then its been downhill. I keep hearing from Jenson and people on this forum that the base car is good but I just dont see it. If it was a good base car that just needed tweaking the trajectory would of been upwards, instead they are just falling back. They just got lapped by a car with the same power unit. That is appalling for a team of McLaren's size.

 

I honestly think that this years start is worse than last year. They have a massive advantage with the power unit that didn't exist last year yet they can do nothing with it. Last year they were +35 seconds from the winner at China. This year over a lap down. Terrible.



#28 MikeMM

MikeMM
  • Member

  • 159 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:25

Pathetic.... Tim Goss to be fired

He shouldn’t be fired.

McLaren needs qualified engineers.

But I think he should return on his previous position and McLaren must pick Bob Bell as TD.



#29 Nicktendo86

Nicktendo86
  • Member

  • 391 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:30

I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with the car, it looked very good at the 1st test and got a good result in Oz. The team just seems to have ground to a halt since the TP and head of aero were sacked.


I disagree. Remember when Ricciardo overtook Button on the outside in Bahrain testing? Everyone said that showed RB have godly aero. I think that is partly right, but mostly due to how bad MP4-29 is. That really should have been our first clue as to how shitty this car is.

Oz was a one off, a,fluke. We didn't get those positions on merit, we were lucky due to retirements, competition having issues and it being a street circuit.

#30 HamiltonFanboy

HamiltonFanboy
  • Member

  • 101 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:33

Australia masks a lot of a cars problems. It is mostly a very stop and start lap with very short corners and a lack of high speed. It's an anomaly, sort of like how Canada and Monaco are anomalies. The form guide gets written at the proper circuits like Sepang and Shanghai and so far McLaren have shown nothing.



#31 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,991 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 21 April 2014 - 08:14

Barcelona usually shows where the car is. I think, if they don't suddenly find a goldmine somewhere behind the main designers sofa, it will show the car to be rather crap.

#32 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,532 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 21 April 2014 - 09:31

I just think that the Mclaren command structure has been in a mess for a long time and that includes the aero department. Now they are trying to sort it out but a key recruitment has betrayed them.

 

There has been so little aero upgrade since the start of testing it's depressing. They've have to give Whitmarsh $10m and they have no CEO. They have no title sponsor.

 

Sadly I think this will be a transition year to get things in place for Honda and I don't think they will be throwing much cash at this car.

 

We have to get PP asap, appoint a decent CEO and start getting the MP4 30 concept going.



#33 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,254 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 21 April 2014 - 11:32

Barcelona usually shows where the car is. I think, if they don't suddenly find a goldmine somewhere behind the main designers sofa, it will show the car to be rather crap.

 

If so, it might be a good omen for next year:

 

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/107373

 

Point is an underdeveloped car may not be inherently crap. It may just need development.



#34 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 277 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 21 April 2014 - 11:39

At least in one respect McLaren are in a good position:

 

https://twitter.com/...6972032/photo/1



#35 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 12:39

some interesting tit-bits from DC's article on BBC web

 

http://www.bbc.com/s...rmula1/27101735

 

 

McLaren are the slowest of all the Mercedes teams and it's possible they have a deficit on fuel performance, as McLaren use a different supplier from the other Mercedes-powered teams. That's the word on the street, anyway.

 

McLaren have a unique rear suspension design that uses the wishbones as downforce-producing wings. But when other teams have investigated that concept, they see the downforce it produces, but also the huge amounts of drag, so they have not adopted it.

 

although not a technical expert like our beloved Gary A ( :p) i think he is talking from his experience with RBR connection about the butterfly suspension. though i'm not certain about the credibility of Fuel issue. doen't Exxon Mobil supply mclaren???



#36 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 12:42

also, on the subject of fuel and lubricants, 

 

Honda has traditionaly used Nippon oil as official fuel during their factory effort with ENEOS brand lubes and transmission oil. will mclaren keep Exxon MObil as their official partner or will they switch??? any rumors on that???

 

sorry for the OT 



#37 MikeMM

MikeMM
  • Member

  • 159 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 21 April 2014 - 12:43

IMHO McLaren needs strong driver to push team even more. Ferrari have produced dogs in previous years, but it would be much worse if Alonso wasn't on board. Kudos to Jenson and Kevin, but they are just not kind of drivers who can push team (and car) like some others. Kevin might be that in the future, but they need someone ruthless behind the wheel now. Ron Dennis kind of person probably :)

They need strong TD and CEO to push development of the car.



#38 Nicktendo86

Nicktendo86
  • Member

  • 391 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 21 April 2014 - 13:59

some interesting tit-bits from DC's article on BBC web

http://www.bbc.com/s...rmula1/27101735


although not a technical expert like our beloved Gary A ( :p) i think he is talking from his experience with RBR connection about the butterfly suspension. though i'm not certain about the credibility of Fuel issue. doen't Exxon Mobil supply mclaren???


The suspension isn't really acting as wings though, is it? I though it was blocking air to create low pressure for the diffuser, is is DC just simplifying it for readers?

What I don't understand is if it is creating down force but adds drag, how comes we are still missing lots of down force and are waaay down on top speed but still stick with it?

#39 damager21

damager21
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:02

No wonder McLaren still does not have a main sponsor. It will get even more difficult after their performance in China. Over the next 3 weeks I hope they come of with upgrades which work on track. Unfortunately, everyone else will be doing the same.



Advertisement

#40 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:12

The suspension isn't really acting as wings though, is it? I though it was blocking air to create low pressure for the diffuser, is is DC just simplifying it for readers?

What I don't understand is if it is creating down force but adds drag, how comes we are still missing lots of down force and are waaay down on top speed but still stick with it?

i think the whole concept was created to compensate for the removal of beam wings. now, beam wing was fixed and it was positioned above the diffuser. the butterly suspension on the other hand is a movable device with slot gaps varying with the bumps and also the speed of the car.

 

in a normal wing, you get DF+drag. here, you are blocking air to create a -ve zone for the diffuser to work harder, not necessarily producing any DF from the suspensions themselves. but i think, the circuits we've been so far, bar melbourne, all of them had significant straights. at certain points, like back straight in china or double stright in sepang. the gain from these suspensions doesn't equate to the drag penalties concurred. 

 

but i think, mclaren are stuck with these till they introduce major updates come european leg. most probably they'll ditch them. i dunno. but i think butterfly suspensions are least of mclaren's problems right now. their cars are very pitch sensitive (since forever i think) which is why they run low and stiff. they really need to purue a different philosophy in that regard. all cars this year are running much softer to compensate for the massive torque, specially at the rear. 



#41 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:16

McLaren always seem to seek little tricks rather then a overall cohesive design.



#42 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:32

McLaren always seem to seek little tricks rather then a overall cohesive design.

all teams do. but somehow, mclaren seems to hit development ceiling faster than other teams since 2012. they do need a complete new philosophy in vehicle dynamics and suspension setup.



#43 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,496 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:37

all teams do. but somehow, mclaren seems to hit development ceiling faster than other teams since 2012. they do need a complete new philosophy in vehicle dynamics and suspension setup.

Since 2012? So you mean like last year?



#44 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,117 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:38

According to my informed source, McLaren management were told by their own people working on the 2013 car that it was a dud early on, but they refused to to reinstate the 2012 car.

 

And there lies some of the problems. Not admitting they are wrong when it stares them in the face.

 

I do think they have a decent base car  - ala Williams - but it may be more sensitive to set up changes. Button does not drive well if the car lacks balance. Kevin is too inexperienced and there is something wrong in the tech department I feel too.

 

When they had someone like Dela Rosa as a development driver they were very strong and consistent



#45 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:39

all teams do. but somehow, mclaren seems to hit development ceiling faster than other teams since 2012. they do need a complete new philosophy in vehicle dynamics and suspension setup.

 

Either that or their designers lack imagination, its amazing they've got themselves into such a rut and slipping further and further back.

 

If you go back couple of years, if someone had said McLaren would be getting beat by Force India, Williams and Toro Rosso you'd have laughed at them.



#46 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:41

Since 2012? So you mean like last year?

put it this way, 2012 car according to their own admission hit the development cliff.

 

2013 car was a dud. 

 

so, they didn't really have a reference for 2014 car. they'd obviously have to use data's from 2012 car, but that was a dead end (again according to their own info)

 

so we are stuck in a circle of development hell i suppose.


Edited by eronrules, 21 April 2014 - 14:42.


#47 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:41

all teams do. but somehow, mclaren seems to hit development ceiling faster than other teams since 2012. they do need a complete new philosophy in vehicle dynamics and suspension setup.

 

It was before 2012

 

Count all the years they've abandoned a new design and started fresh

 

2009 - Complete new design for new regs

2010 - New design Shark Fin F-duct

2011 - Upside down side pods

2012 - New design. This one was actually good!

2013 - Lets get rid of the working design and come up with something new!

2014 - New regulations



#48 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 14:55

It was before 2012

 

Count all the years they've abandoned a new design and started fresh

 

2009 - Complete new design for new regs

2010 - New design Shark Fin F-duct

2011 - Upside down side pods

2012 - New design. This one was actually good!

2013 - Lets get rid of the working design and come up with something new!

2014 - New regulations

which again points to the fact that they don't have a base design philosophy. they try to shoot darts in the dark hoping to hit the bulls eye. look at RBR, their cars have always maintaind a steady progression interms of design since 2009.



#49 mclarensmps

mclarensmps
  • Member

  • 3,805 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 21 April 2014 - 15:07

Well that result was pretty bleak, to say the least. 

 

Lets see what the upgrades for Europe have in store, because it seems like others have better ideas in terms of development than McLaren do at the moment. It seems like Kevin is a little bit flustered when racing in the pack as well. I really hope he sorts out the nerves sooner rather than later. 



#50 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 361 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 21 April 2014 - 16:58

McLaren always seem to seek little tricks rather then a overall cohesive design.

 

I agree, they've excluded themselves from the big picture and had become the ultraspecialized distal phalanges surgeon kind of team... Last year front suspension change was the perfect example, why did they thought that Ferrari engineers couldn't find a solution to their front suspension in almost two years and they could?

 

Laughable at best...