Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 5 votes

McLaren MP4-29- Part II


  • Please log in to reply
3535 replies to this topic

#801 MikeMM

MikeMM
  • Member

  • 346 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 May 2014 - 07:34

I don't think they're developing - more solving their problems.  There was inevitably going to be a period where the teams that were in trouble at the beginning of the season caught up.  

However Lotus did lose TD in the middle of preparation for this season, they also lost a lot of engineers afterwards and they never had a lot of money. And still they either designed better car than Mclaren or outdeveloping them.

My personal opinion based on results of two last years is that Tim Goss is mediocre TD. He was good at his previous position but back then his work was controlled by Paddy Lowe.


Edited by MikeMM, 15 May 2014 - 07:39.


Advertisement

#802 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 15 May 2014 - 07:36

I don't think that was the best he could say.  The best he could say was all the upgrades bar one worked, and that comment about the car not being worse only applied to one upgrade in high speed corners.  I'd say that's pretty good progress.

Sorry.  I've been a bit unclear.  To quote:

 

"Following our data analysis, all the upgrades worked, except one part in high speed corners, to be totally fair, but the car was not worse."

 

Overall, he's clearly said that the car is better.


Edited by Waffle, 15 May 2014 - 08:15.


#803 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:08

However Lotus did lose TD in the middle of preparation for this season, they also lost a lot of engineers afterwards and they never had a lot of money. And still they either designed better car than Mclaren or outdeveloping them.

My personal opinion based on results of two last years is that Tim Goss is mediocre TD. He was good at his previous position but back then his work was controlled by Paddy Lowe.

Oversimplifying oversimplifying ovesrimplifying.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Lotus built almost as good a car for 2012. SIGNIFICANTLY better car for 2013. What makes you think that they suddenly designed a car that is 4 seconds off the pace for 2014 season and managed to claw back 3 of those 4 seconds in 2 months? If they are THAT good at developing the car, then they should lap the Mercs by Silverstone. Much more reasonable view is that they had a solid sound car, that wasn't completed in time and all intended simply wasn't working properly.

And the Paddy Lowe/Tim Goss thing. Paddy Lowe was the man responsible for the worst McLaren car in 30 years. And wasn't responsible for Merc car this year, so it's kinda, well  again post hoc ergo propter hoc situation. Tim Goss designed the 2012 McLaren.

 



#804 MikeMM

MikeMM
  • Member

  • 346 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 May 2014 - 11:56

Oversimplifying oversimplifying ovesrimplifying.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Lotus built almost as good a car for 2012. SIGNIFICANTLY better car for 2013. What makes you think that they suddenly designed a car that is 4 seconds off the pace for 2014 season and managed to claw back 3 of those 4 seconds in 2 months? If they are THAT good at developing the car, then they should lap the Mercs by Silverstone. Much more reasonable view is that they had a solid sound car, that wasn't completed in time and all intended simply wasn't working properly.

And the Paddy Lowe/Tim Goss thing. Paddy Lowe was the man responsible for the worst McLaren car in 30 years. And wasn't responsible for Merc car this year, so it's kinda, well  again post hoc ergo propter hoc situation. Tim Goss designed the 2012 McLaren.

 

 

Why then Mclaren wasnt able to build more solid car than Lotus?(Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari, Williams, FI, Torro Rosso).

 

MP4-28 wasnt that bad at the start of the season. Button could have scored podium in Malasya if not for problems on pit-stop and grabbed 5th place in China.

At those races Mclaren had almost the same speed as Mercedes.

The main problem was that since Paddy left Tim Goss wasnt capable of improving that car until last race in Brasil.


Edited by MikeMM, 15 May 2014 - 12:08.


#805 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,859 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 15 May 2014 - 12:31

Why then Mclaren wasnt able to build more solid car than Lotus?(Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari, Williams, FI, Torro Rosso).

 

MP4-28 wasnt that bad at the start of the season. Button could have scored podium in Malasya if not for problems on pit-stop and grabbed 5th place in China.

At those races Mclaren had almost the same speed as Mercedes.

The main problem was that since Paddy left Tim Goss wasnt capable of improving that car until last race in Brasil.

 

I think the problem is that, in the early part of 2013, they went into panic mode and produced lots of updates which predictably failed, since they didn't understand the car.

 

They then decided to stop development to concentrate on 2014. So there was no point in 2013 when they were developing the car in a way which you could reasonably expect to lead to good progress.

 

Hopefully under EB, they are not making the same mistakes.



#806 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 15 May 2014 - 14:42

Why then Mclaren wasnt able to build more solid car than Lotus?(Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari, Williams, FI, Torro Rosso).

Thats's an absurd question that comes from similarly absurd notion that McLaren is somehow ENTITLED to build a better car than it's competitors. Why wasn't Sauber able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why wasn't Williams able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why hasn't Ferrari won a championship since 2004 when they where class of the field? Why didn't Renault build as good an engine as Mercedes? Why hasn't Dan Fallows left Red Bull? Why is Martin Whitmarsh not giving interviews? Why does my washing machine eat socks?



#807 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,859 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 15 May 2014 - 14:44

Thats's an absurd question that comes from similarly absurd notion that McLaren is somehow ENTITLED to build a better car than it's competitors. Why wasn't Sauber able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why wasn't Williams able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why hasn't Ferrari won a championship since 2004 when they where class of the field? Why didn't Renault build as good an engine as Mercedes? Why hasn't Dan Fallows left Red Bull? Why is Martin Whitmarsh not giving interviews? Why does my washing machine eat socks?

 

You can buy a little bag to put them all in.



#808 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 15 May 2014 - 14:46

You can buy a little bag to put them all in.

What if it eats the whole bag then? Right now I can at least match different pairs of socks in case they are all black. What if with the bag I'd have no more socks?!?



#809 Nicktendo86

Nicktendo86
  • Member

  • 471 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 15 May 2014 - 15:43

Thats's an absurd question that comes from similarly absurd notion that McLaren is somehow ENTITLED to build a better car than it's competitors. Why wasn't Sauber able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why wasn't Williams able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why hasn't Ferrari won a championship since 2004 when they where class of the field? Why didn't Renault build as good an engine as Mercedes? Why hasn't Dan Fallows left Red Bull? Why is Martin Whitmarsh not giving interviews? Why does my washing machine eat socks?

I would have thought McLaren would be able to build a better car than most of the field as they have a history of winning and a much bigger budget than most of the midfield. Or, failing that, at least a car they can understand.

 

Yes there are ifs and buts and no team can win every single year but to be beaten by a team who couldn't even get their car to run without blowing up in pre-season, losing their TP and key staff and nearly going bust  is strange at best.



#810 MikeMM

MikeMM
  • Member

  • 346 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 May 2014 - 15:55

Thats's an absurd question that comes from similarly absurd notion that McLaren is somehow ENTITLED to build a better car than it's competitors. Why wasn't Sauber able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why wasn't Williams able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why hasn't Ferrari won a championship since 2004 when they where class of the field? Why didn't Renault build as good an engine as Mercedes? Why hasn't Dan Fallows left Red Bull? Why is Martin Whitmarsh not giving interviews? Why does my washing machine eat socks?

 

That question comes with Mclaren (as Whitmarsh has stated previously many times ) winning 25% of races they participated in.

Why they have forgotten how to build fast cars?


Edited by MikeMM, 15 May 2014 - 15:56.


#811 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 15 May 2014 - 15:56

I would have thought McLaren would be able to build a better car than most of the field as they have a history of winning and a much bigger budget than most of the midfield. Or, failing that, at least a car they can understand.

They usually do. It has been 3 races this season they have built a better car than most teams and 3 races they are somewhere in the middle.
 

Yes there are ifs and buts and no team can win every single year but to be beaten by a team who couldn't even get their car to run without blowing up in pre-season, losing their TP and key staff and nearly going bust  is strange at best.

That same team also built a race winning car 2 years in a row with literally no budget. Apparently they are good.

I understand that the season isn't great, I feel it. But flapping about, moaning aimlessly and asking rhetorical questions isn't going to make it any better. The only guy on earth I'd let lead a team with that particular methodology would be Flavio.

#812 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 15 May 2014 - 15:58

That question comes with Mclaren (as Whitmarsh has stated previously many times ) winning 25% or races they participated in.
Why they have forgotten how to build fast cars?

Why are the cars not red and white anymore? Why is tobacco sponsorship not allowed? Why is the earth elliptical? Why are there more people speaking Chinese than Japanese? Why am I asking those rhetorical questions time and again?

#813 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,232 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 15 May 2014 - 16:36

Why are the cars not red and white anymore? Why is tobacco sponsorship not allowed? Why is the earth elliptical? Why are there more people speaking Chinese than Japanese? Why am I asking those rhetorical questions time and again?

 

https://www.youtube....O5wfu8Yl_I#t=48


Edited by eronrules, 15 May 2014 - 16:36.


#814 Maustinsj

Maustinsj
  • Member

  • 910 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 15 May 2014 - 17:06

Why are the cars not red and white anymore? Why is tobacco sponsorship not allowed? Why is the earth elliptical? Why are there more people speaking Chinese than Japanese? Why am I asking those rhetorical questions time and again?

 

It's an oblate spheroid. :up:



#815 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,535 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 15 May 2014 - 17:37

McLaren's 2012 car was a front runner.

 

So, in 2013 McLaren built a car that they said would have a "high development ceiling". They started positively by saying the car was complex and they needed to learn how to unlock its potential. But by mid-season it was admitted that the car was irreparably flawed and so McLaren's astonishing capability to out-develop in-season was a redundant promise.

 

In 2014 we have heard that they have built a car with a strong baseline that they just need to add "working upgrades too".  Now they're finding its vices are temperature sensitivity and lacking downforce. The upgrades aren't delivering quite the improvements they hope so they're going to stick at it until Silverstone and if nothing works they may go "radical". I'm not optimistic.

 

 

Given that even under the new 2014 regulations, most of the top cars share direct lineage on design philosophy since 2009-13 (Merc, RBR, Lotus in particular), would it be too radical even at this stage, to remind themselves of what they knew in 2012...



#816 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,925 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 15 May 2014 - 17:47

McLaren's 2012 car was a front runner.

 

So, in 2013 McLaren built a car that they said would have a "high development ceiling". They started positively by saying the car was complex and they needed to learn how to unlock its potential. But by mid-season it was admitted that the car was irreparably flawed and so McLaren's astonishing capability to out-develop in-season was a redundant promise.

 

In 2014 we have heard that they have built a car with a strong baseline that they just need to add "working upgrades too".  Now they're finding its vices are temperature sensitivity and lacking downforce. The upgrades aren't delivering quite the improvements they hope so they're going to stick at it until Silverstone and if nothing works they may go "radical". I'm not optimistic.

 

 

Given that even under the new 2014 regulations, most of the top cars share direct lineage on design philosophy since 2009-13 (Merc, RBR, Lotus in particular), would it be too radical even at this stage, to remind themselves of what they knew in 2012...

 

I thought that was part of the problem in 2012, they didn't know why they were quick. They had a fast car on track but that behaviour wasn't expected from the wind-tunnel results. 



#817 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,859 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 15 May 2014 - 17:48

What if it eats the whole bag then? Right now I can at least match different pairs of socks in case they are all black. What if with the bag I'd have no more socks?!?

 

Like Macca, you can go for a risky strategy which might bring a great result, or might fail completely.



#818 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,338 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 15 May 2014 - 19:11

McLaren's 2012 car was a front runner.

 

So, in 2013 McLaren built a car that they said would have a "high development ceiling". They started positively by saying the car was complex and they needed to learn how to unlock its potential. But by mid-season it was admitted that the car was irreparably flawed and so McLaren's astonishing capability to out-develop in-season was a redundant promise.

 

In 2014 we have heard that they have built a car with a strong baseline that they just need to add "working upgrades too".  Now they're finding its vices are temperature sensitivity and lacking downforce. The upgrades aren't delivering quite the improvements they hope so they're going to stick at it until Silverstone and if nothing works they may go "radical". I'm not optimistic.

 

Given that even under the new 2014 regulations, most of the top cars share direct lineage on design philosophy since 2009-13 (Merc, RBR, Lotus in particular), would it be too radical even at this stage, to remind themselves of what they knew in 2012...

 

The temperature sensitivity is a result of the lack of downforce, both the way it helps the tyres and also masking the lack of grip.

The other teams also temperature sensitivity. As an example we saw on Sunday on their last stints the Mercedes had different tyre types, the medium (low working range) was fine, the hard (high temp. range) was graining (ie. too cold).

As I see it the only thing that is missing is (efficient) downforce. There is no exhaust blowing so that simplifies the aero in the wind-tunnel, which is why there is good chance that the wind-tunnel figures should transfer to the track. The only problem is that the wind-tunnel is limited 180 km/h so that long corner downforce has to be verified at a track.

Eric said that "We have seen very, very significant progress in the wind tunnel in the last few weeks..." .. even if you cut the "very,very" to just "very" even that would give a good step in performance.


Edited by WitnessX, 15 May 2014 - 19:13.


#819 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 15 May 2014 - 19:44

The temperature sensitivity is a result of the lack of downforce, both the way it helps the tyres and also masking the lack of grip.

The other teams also temperature sensitivity. As an example we saw on Sunday on their last stints the Mercedes had different tyre types, the medium (low working range) was fine, the hard (high temp. range) was graining (ie. too cold).

As I see it the only thing that is missing is (efficient) downforce. There is no exhaust blowing so that simplifies the aero in the wind-tunnel, which is why there is good chance that the wind-tunnel figures should transfer to the track. The only problem is that the wind-tunnel is limited 180 km/h so that long corner downforce has to be verified at a track.

Eric said that "We have seen very, very significant progress in the wind tunnel in the last few weeks..." .. even if you cut the "very,very" to just "very" even that would give a good step in performance.

 

We speculate the sensitivity is the result of a lack of downforce. Downforce is not a panacea. 

 

No question though, if the team can get on top of the tyre issues and be consistently as fast as it has shown in brief glimpses, plus take a nice step forward due to a little extra aero, the season might not be a write-off.

 

But it's a big if. 



Advertisement

#820 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,985 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 15 May 2014 - 19:52

McLaren's 2012 car was a front runner.

 

So, in 2013 McLaren built a car that they said would have a "high development ceiling". They started positively by saying the car was complex and they needed to learn how to unlock its potential. But by mid-season it was admitted that the car was irreparably flawed and so McLaren's astonishing capability to out-develop in-season was a redundant promise.

 

In 2014 we have heard that they have built a car with a strong baseline that they just need to add "working upgrades too".  Now they're finding its vices are temperature sensitivity and lacking downforce. The upgrades aren't delivering quite the improvements they hope so they're going to stick at it until Silverstone and if nothing works they may go "radical". I'm not optimistic.

 

 

Given that even under the new 2014 regulations, most of the top cars share direct lineage on design philosophy since 2009-13 (Merc, RBR, Lotus in particular), would it be too radical even at this stage, to remind themselves of what they knew in 2012...

They did, see the similarities of the 2012 and 2014 machine, especially the front end, but a lot of water has passed from 2012 and it seems that their aerodynamics lack some 2 years behind the top teams.

On the other hand, in the seasons before playing around with DDD's and EBD's they were always lacking some (rear)downforce compared to the others.
 



#821 understeer

understeer
  • Member

  • 204 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 16 May 2014 - 00:35

To be fair, I don't think JB is 'whining'.  He answered a question in the only sensible and honest way he could - two experienced drivers are better than one.  Common sense, really.  He wasn't complaining or blaming anyone.

I like JB. But after 250 gps you would expect him to find the limits of the car and direction of setup irrespective of who is in the other side of the garage. In fact I feel for Magnussen for not able to have a proper benchmark to look up to. Hamilton had Alonso to compare.



#822 ElDictatore

ElDictatore
  • Member

  • 927 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 16 May 2014 - 01:14

 

Am I the only one thinking that this might be what the MTC looks like right now on the inside? Dexter = Head of Aero?



#823 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,338 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 16 May 2014 - 06:21

We speculate the sensitivity is the result of a lack of downforce. Downforce is not a panacea. 

 

No question though, if the team can get on top of the tyre issues and be consistently as fast as it has shown in brief glimpses, plus take a nice step forward due to a little extra aero, the season might not be a write-off.

 

But it's a big if. 

Of course we don't know if the wind-tunnel numbers will transfer to track or what affect it will have on the car. No doubt the car will have to be "re-tuned" because of the changes.

However it makes sense that the extra downforce helps reduce rear tyre slip and sliding which can overheat. With the front tyre they have a good amount of control balancing the heating and cooling effects and also the contact patch and how the tyre is worked and is solvable.

It's "grip" that gives you lap time, so the best solution = tyre-working + downforce.

But of course they have to be careful that they add efficient downforce. They changed the sidepods on the '28 for more downforce, but at the same time they added drag and it pulled to one side or the other down the straights.

No doubt they will have several ways (ideas/directions) to get that extra downforce and they need to check them out and come up with the "best". We know they are re-building their aero department and with the limited wind-tunnel/cfd resources defined by FIA  this will take time.



#824 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 16 May 2014 - 08:10

Of course we don't know if the wind-tunnel numbers will transfer to track or what affect it will have on the car. No doubt the car will have to be "re-tuned" because of the changes.

However it makes sense that the extra downforce helps reduce rear tyre slip and sliding which can overheat. With the front tyre they have a good amount of control balancing the heating and cooling effects and also the contact patch and how the tyre is worked and is solvable.

It's "grip" that gives you lap time, so the best solution = tyre-working + downforce.

But of course they have to be careful that they add efficient downforce. They changed the sidepods on the '28 for more downforce, but at the same time they added drag and it pulled to one side or the other down the straights.

No doubt they will have several ways (ideas/directions) to get that extra downforce and they need to check them out and come up with the "best". We know they are re-building their aero department and with the limited wind-tunnel/cfd resources defined by FIA  this will take time.

 

Well I tend to agree, I would only add that a car can not use its tyres properly for many reasons, and adding downforce won't cure all of them. So we aren't guaranteed to be rid of this issue. There is a massive upside, though, if we can get the tyres working - we saw how fast JB was in Barca P1 when his tyres were 'in the window'. 

 

I hadn't heard about the pulling to the side on the straights on the '28. With the risk of being the tiniest bit off topic, maybe you can explain that a little more? Is there anywhere I can read more about that? I followed the '28 thread quite closely: do you recall if it was discussed in there? 



#825 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,535 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 16 May 2014 - 08:47

I'm not sure what to think, but I keep coming back to the idea that downforce IS the panacea - McLaren know this and it explains the consequential issues on performance (grip, range, balance, etc) over the years and its simply a case that McLaren just won't admit it publicly as it would be damaging to their "brand" in the same way that participating engine suppliers are renowned for their inability to discuss the white elephant in the room regarding performance or failures. 

 

It would certainly explain the frankly unbelievable idea that McLaren haven't understood their car for 3 years now.



#826 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,338 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 16 May 2014 - 08:55

Well I tend to agree, I would only add that a car can not use its tyres properly for many reasons, and adding downforce won't cure all of them. So we aren't guaranteed to be rid of this issue. There is a massive upside, though, if we can get the tyres working - we saw how fast JB was in Barca P1 when his tyres were 'in the window'. 

 

I hadn't heard about the pulling to the side on the straights on the '28. With the risk of being the tiniest bit off topic, maybe you can explain that a little more? Is there anywhere I can read more about that? I followed the '28 thread quite closely: do you recall if it was discussed in there? 

This is one source:

 

http://www1.skysport...cedes-are-ahead

 

Asked how difference the 2014 car felt to last year's troubled MP4-28, Button replied: "It's a great base, it really is. You can't really compare it to last year. The car goes in a straight line on the straights, it doesn't bounce up and down, you can see where you're going when you get to the corner - so it's a big difference!

 

There were a couple of reports with a bit more detail where he said that you could get a good lap in the '28 if you "bounced it in the right place in the corner".  But I'm not sure I can find those again.



#827 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 16 May 2014 - 11:11

I'm not sure what to think, but I keep coming back to the idea that downforce IS the panacea - McLaren know this and it explains the consequential issues on performance (grip, range, balance, etc) over the years and its simply a case that McLaren just won't admit it publicly as it would be damaging to their "brand" in the same way that participating engine suppliers are renowned for their inability to discuss the white elephant in the room regarding performance or failures. 

 

It would certainly explain the frankly unbelievable idea that McLaren haven't understood their car for 3 years now.

 

 I think it's more than that. Since they pioneered the blown exhaust concept they have been absolutely nowhere without it, as Silverstone 2011 proved. They were the biggest loser of the top teams when it was banned for one race and everyone thought it would kill Red Bull.
Perhaps they lucked into simulating the blown exhaust better than others and at the same time were really not doing traditional body shape derived aerodynamics that well at all.



#828 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,859 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 16 May 2014 - 11:18

I like JB. But after 250 gps you would expect him to find the limits of the car and direction of setup irrespective of who is in the other side of the garage. In fact I feel for Magnussen for not able to have a proper benchmark to look up to. Hamilton had Alonso to compare.

 

You think Kevin would be doing better with Alonso as a team mate?

 

Interesting.



#829 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,687 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 16 May 2014 - 13:07

Yeah, Fred certainly did Felipe loads of good and he's got Ferrari winning again, oh wait.



#830 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 16 May 2014 - 13:29

I like JB. But after 250 gps you would expect him to find the limits of the car and direction of setup irrespective of who is in the other side of the garage. In fact I feel for Magnussen for not able to have a proper benchmark to look up to. Hamilton had Alonso to compare.

 

All Button's said is that it was better for setting up the car to have Hamilton in the other car - a statement of the obvious, I would have thought. No driver could have 100% success rate in changes to the car.  (If that were possible, the drivers would be able to set up their cars sitting at their desks.)  I'd be very surprised if Kevin's success rate matched Lewis's at the moment, however.



#831 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,237 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 16 May 2014 - 13:59

I like JB.

Indeed. One of those particular fans.



#832 mclarensmps

mclarensmps
  • Member

  • 3,897 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 16 May 2014 - 14:00

All Button's said is that it was better for setting up the car to have Hamilton in the other car - a statement of the obvious, I would have thought. No driver could have 100% success rate in changes to the car.  (If that were possible, the drivers would be able to set up their cars sitting at their desks.)  I'd be very surprised if Kevin's success rate matched Lewis's at the moment, however.

 

This statement makes me smile because it is a stark contrast to the popular belief on the forums, throughout Lewis' McLaren tenure. 



#833 understeer

understeer
  • Member

  • 204 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 16 May 2014 - 18:15

You think Kevin would be doing better with Alonso as a team mate?

 

Interesting.

 

From the point of a rookie to learn from experienced team mate, Yes.



#834 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,687 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 17 May 2014 - 07:19

https://uk.eurosport...651989--f1.html

 

Fuel could be more of a problem than we thought.



#835 ermo

ermo
  • Member

  • 173 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 May 2014 - 16:43

This is one source:
 
http://www1.skysport...cedes-are-ahead
 

Asked how difference the 2014 car felt to last year's troubled MP4-28, Button replied: "It's a great base, it really is. You can't really compare it to last year. The car goes in a straight line on the straights, it doesn't bounce up and down, you can see where you're going when you get to the corner - so it's a big difference!

 
There were a couple of reports with a bit more detail where he said that you could get a good lap in the '28 if you "bounced it in the right place in the corner".  But I'm not sure I can find those again.


Just to add a hopefully pertinent tidbit of information:

Former Minardi F1 driver Nicolas Kiesa (who is now employed as a technical pundit on danish F1 coverage) once noted that the physiological effects of having a stiffly sprung car on a bumpy circuit can be so severe that the driver's vision literally blurs because the driver's eyes and brain are not physically capable of sufficiently stabilizing the image due to the violence and frequency of the bumps.

It's bad enough to not physically be able to breathe during braking and cornering due to the deceleration and cornering loads, but not being able to see where you're going as you arrive at the corner? Quite scary when you stop to think about it.

Small wonder Jenson and Sergio weren't all that thrilled with driving last year's car...

Edited by ermo, 17 May 2014 - 17:04.


#836 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,630 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 17 May 2014 - 18:39

https://uk.eurosport...651989--f1.html

 

Fuel could be more of a problem than we thought.

 

How much do you imagine they might be keeping this quiet to please the fuel manufacturer and are blaming it on downforce? If at all.

 

It is plainly a big factor but they never mention it.


Edited by Rocket73, 17 May 2014 - 18:40.


#837 Exb

Exb
  • Member

  • 1,705 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 May 2014 - 20:16

How much do you imagine they might be keeping this quiet to please the fuel manufacturer and are blaming it on downforce? If at all.
 It is plainly a big factor but they never mention it.


There was a small discussion about this a few weeks ago and I kind of mentioned this then but I'm still not sure if its a factor as I know nothing about how fuel is developed but is the fact McLaren are not the works partner hindering their fuel development (especially as they are moving to Honda next year), is it possible Mercedes aren't giving them enough information about the engine to enable them to develop the most efficient fuel?

#838 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 18 May 2014 - 08:10

How much do you imagine they might be keeping this quiet to please the fuel manufacturer and are blaming it on downforce? If at all.

 

It is plainly a big factor but they never mention it.

 

I agree. I don't know who Newey would have been talking to. We know Mac were slower in a straight line at Barca that the other teams; we also know their fuel consumption seems to look worse than the other teams'. Also we know they are the only work team to use different fuel. I'd be willing to be there is at least a significant (might only be a couple of tenths, still) difference in this. Mac will never criticise Exxon given how much money flows from Irving to Woking. 

 

There was a small discussion about this a few weeks ago and I kind of mentioned this then but I'm still not sure if its a factor as I know nothing about how fuel is developed but is the fact McLaren are not the works partner hindering their fuel development (especially as they are moving to Honda next year), is it possible Mercedes aren't giving them enough information about the engine to enable them to develop the most efficient fuel?

 

Well, if Mac don't even have access to an engine between races, I'm sure there is sod all Exxon can do to make progress on this. 



#839 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,630 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 18 May 2014 - 15:35

Damn that points to serious disadvantage then. We need some DF asap.



Advertisement

#840 winas

winas
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 18 May 2014 - 20:05

Well, if Mac don't even have access to an engine between races, I'm sure there is sod all Exxon can do to make progress on this. 

 

They shoud have enough data from the races, quali, free practices and test sessions.

And if they identified something wrong with the fuel, i would expect from Mclaren and Exxon to have fixed it already

Problems cannot come from that!!


Edited by winas, 18 May 2014 - 20:07.


#841 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 3,767 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 19 May 2014 - 04:19

Mercedes would of also allowed them to fix the issue - it serves them NO purpose to see the car so bad considering it still wears the pointy badge.



#842 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 May 2014 - 05:10

They shoud have enough data from the races, quali, free practices and test sessions.

And if they identified something wrong with the fuel, i would expect from Mclaren and Exxon to have fixed it already

Problems cannot come from that!!

What makes you think it's so easy? How do you know that they can get the data that they need from running the car?  It seems to be that they would need info like temperatures, pressures, and tolerances which could be obtained in much greater detail by the engine builder.

 

Besides that, Petronas have a head start.  They'll continue developing, so you can't just click your fingers and catch up, even if you did now have the information.


Edited by Waffle, 19 May 2014 - 05:14.


#843 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 May 2014 - 05:12

Mercedes would of also allowed them to fix the issue - it serves them NO purpose to see the car so bad considering it still wears the pointy badge.

Well, I think the public watching the races will look at a Mercedes-built, Mercedes-engined car winning every race by a country mile and come to the conclusion that the problem is not with Mercedes.



#844 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 3,767 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 19 May 2014 - 05:48

Yes, but a McLaren taking points off a Red Bull that has even a slight potential of coming good and getting into the mix later in the season is not a bad thing.



#845 Waffle

Waffle
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 May 2014 - 06:00

Fair point, but I have my doubts that it would make much difference to their calculations.  They have such a points advantage already that the championship's all but won. Add to that their reluctance to supply data because of the Honda thing, and I think cooperation from Mercedes this year will be strictly according to contract. 



#846 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,630 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 19 May 2014 - 06:34

Exxon may be working on a fuel for the Honda engine.

#847 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,535 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 19 May 2014 - 08:19

I suspect one of the main disadvantages to McLaren of Mercedes fencing off engine data this year, would be their inability to effectively develop performance fuel/oil.



#848 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 19 May 2014 - 10:01

They shoud have enough data from the races, quali, free practices and test sessions.

And if they identified something wrong with the fuel, i would expect from Mclaren and Exxon to have fixed it already

Problems cannot come from that!!

 

Disagree. I highly doubt they test the fuel in practise etc, they would test it on the bench. And AFAIK Mac have very restricted access to bench / dyno testing with the Merc engine. 

 

Plus it's not correct to say there is something 'wrong' with the fuel, it is a spectrum of 'rightness' and Petronas, with access to the engine and specs and test rigs for many months in advance of Exxon, presumably are father along the 'rightness' spectrum. 

 

Exxon are a top company in this area, obviously, so we can expect this kind of difference to be equalised next year (I speculate). 



#849 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,769 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 19 May 2014 - 12:21

Team Preview

http://www.mclaren.c...d-prix-preview/

 

JB

“I’m up for the challenge, and the whole team is doing a great job of staying strong and working flat-out to bring updates to every race – and Monaco is no exception.”

 

KM

"I’m happier with the car, not just in terms of my own driving, but also with the way I work with my engineers to set it up. We haven’t totally cracked it, but things are going in the right direction."

 

EB

“The last three race weekends have been difficult for us, but the entire team is working flat-out to improve things."



#850 CrucialXtreme

CrucialXtreme
  • Member

  • 4,207 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 19 May 2014 - 12:36

Thats's an absurd question that comes from similarly absurd notion that McLaren is somehow ENTITLED to build a better car than it's competitors. Why wasn't Sauber able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why wasn't Williams able to build a more solid car than Lotus? Why hasn't Ferrari won a championship since 2004 when they where class of the field? Why didn't Renault build as good an engine as Mercedes? Why hasn't Dan Fallows left Red Bull? Why is Martin Whitmarsh not giving interviews? Why does my washing machine eat socks?

?? They have, a couple as a matter of fact.

 

 

Back to the MP4-29, it's a tough year for McLaren, more so than any other team IMHO. They can't spend too much time working on the PU, ERS or maps for instance because most of the knowledge/data they acquire will be useless next year. There's no point in committing lots of resources to better something you won't use the following year. I think the best thing is to concentrate on the chassis and aerodynamics of the car in preparation for next season.

It sucks for them but next year McLaren is basically going to be starting from scratch whereas everyone else will have a year with the new formula under their belt.