22 replies to this topic

[Mellon]

I'm out on a limb here. Feel free to cut it off.

I was pondering the McLaren problems. Many say that the lack of front end grip that caused the McLarens to run more wings than the other teams costing them so much speed on the straights.

To me it seemed (I don't have the figures) like the Macs, Häkkinen in particular, were almost as fast as the other cars at the end of the long straights, having lost lots of ground under acceleration. As aero downforce isn't very big (relativly speaking) coming out of slow corners this would suggest that the problems were not (all) aero-related.

During qualifying the Hakkinen and Coulthard had the slowest speeds at the end of the second split. This was coming out of a fairly long righthand sweeper suggesting the (front) anti-rollbars were not doing their job.

In the race Hakkinen was flying through this corner visibly gaining ground on Verstappen / Ralf Schumacher. Could it be that McLaren had gone very soft on the front suspension/rollbars and stiffened the rear to get the car drivable at this section, at the same time giving the car massive traction problems under heavy acceleration?

If I'm right this would suggest a mechanical problem, one that could be, at least partially, solved by traction control once they get to Europe. Häkkinen said in a Finnish interview that the team knew what the problem was and that they were unable to fix it during the fly-aways.

[palmas]

I agree they had enough top speed, and their times in the 2nd and slowest sector beter than in other sectors, but with the lowest top speed. You can be right about theire needing traction control, but my feeling is the whole aero package is not working with the suspention. They have the power for top speed, they go very well around the bends but cannot accelerate after the curves. I think the front weels do not behave properly in acceleration and braking.

[Rainer Nyberg]

It has been suggested that the ban on using beryllium alloys in the engines for this year has affected the Mercedes engine the most.

[palmas]

That would mean less power (less rpm) or heavier and bigger engine?

[Greg L]

I suspect that it has to do more with the engine. In off-season testing, the new engine was a grenade: VERY powerful but VERY likely to explode. I suspect that Ron Dennis (given McLaren's early season performance last season) had the engine toned down a bit to gain some reliability. As they do more testing and the engine becomes more reliable, I suspect that we'll see the true potential of the Mercedes. If testing has been any indication (and it may not be) then I'd guess McLaren will be very strong as the season goes on. I've also heard on Speedvision that McLaren have developed an AMAZING TC setup for Spain (please, no illegial TC comments;)). This all points to a McLaren resurgance in the coming races. Will it be too little, too late?

[DangerMouse]

Mercedes have stuck with a fairly narrow angle to optimise performance rather than packaging. However, I think looking at the abysmal traction McLaren we getting at Malaysia downforce cannot have been too high, which suggests the power output isn’t too impressive. Also you could see with your own eyes the amount of under-steer DC and Mika were dealing with – far worse than any other team. This would suggest that the Macs front wing isn’t too hot.

Also Williams and Ferrari had those weird winglets hanging off the endplates – McLaren have not, I suspect this is where McLaren are losing out.

[Crazy Canuck]

Being a paranoid skeptic [like my good freind H.H.F.] I think the problem is that McLaren [and Jordan too] are not using TC but Ferrari, Arrows, and Williams are. Low speed traction on the McLaren and the Jordan was total crap compared to the three teams I just mentioned. It is proobly not an aero problem as the cars are only going about 50-60 mph at the Sepang [?] hairpin. That's my take on the situation.

[Rainer Nyberg]

Beryllium is a superlight metal, and it is very durable.
It can stand very high temperatures. It is used as heatshields on spacecraft, for their re-entry into the earths atmosphere.
Trademarks include Lockalloy and Matex.

All these features was put to good use in a Formula One engine.

Backsides of the coin is that it is expensive and highly toxic.

[Richard Border]

Airborn rubber seems to be the most "toxic" thing in F1 nowdays:(

[DangerMouse]

Being a paranoid skeptic [like my good freind H.H.F.] I think the problem is that McLaren [and Jordan too] are not using TC but Ferrari, Arrows, and Williams are.

You are joking about Williams aren't you? Did you see JPM in Melbourne and RS in Malaysia? they were power sliding everywhere with visible excessive wheelspin! Williams are not running TC! I suspected them at Suzuka last year, but the first two races of the season have definately put my mind to rest on that count!!

I agree Ferrari are suspicious, they were overtaking off the dry line on inters through puddles and still out accelerating everything - dodgy.

Arrows looked suspiciously good as well - but at least they were running wets!

[BRG]

Watching the Sepang race. it was clear that Mclaren had a big problem especially out of the last corner. I thought they had a balance problem and a lack of mechancial grip. The cars were washing out around the final 180 degree bend and the drivers couldn't get on the power until the car was completely out of the bend. So the others ran away from them down the straight. To counteract this, I think they had cranked on more downforce, so they were very fast through the high speed bends, but lost out in terminal speed on the long straights. Hence their inability to stay close enough to the Arrows or Williams to be able to challenge them into the corners, even when Ralfie's Williams was visibly suffering brake problems.

On engine power, it looks like the others have all closed up a lot this season. Now BMW and Honda are clearly as powerful (if not more) than Ferrari and Mercedes. So the chassis will make the main difference. I have always felt that Mclaren have a very conservative design ethic for chassises, preferring gradual evolution to radical change. This is fine whilst you have the best engine but leaves you in trouble when you don't. They should have learnt this lesson from the past - it has happened to them before!

[brum]

I am surprised that this hasn't been picked up by anyone else, if it has I've missed it.

We all know that Adrain Newey is the best Aerodynamicists in F1, he has designed the best cars for the last 7-10 years or so.

This year the FIA has reduced the influence of aerodynamics on a F1 car and therefore reducing Adrian's advantage.

Adrian can still perform his magic on the aerodynamics but the proportion of the cars' speed down to aerodynamics has been reduced therefore his advantage is smaller. Combined that with the other areas in which Ferrari are better than McLaren results in MH being 0.76% behind MS, compared to 0.04% last year.


Also, Once traction control is introduced I would have thought that you need large amount of power which can be then be controlled by traction control rather than drivable engine which seems to have been the norm in the past few seasons. If this is the case I think Williams BMW will have an advantage which could see them getting poles and wins and you never know challenging for the championships.

[SpamJet]

I'm a bit new to technical stuff, so exuse me if im being dumb.

Is it possible that the Mclaren is optimised to use TC, and since it's not legal yet are the performance problems were seeing now because of a missing TC system?

Also what formula did you use to work out that the mac has only 0.76 the performance of the ferrari?

Spam

[palmas]

FIA has reduced what you can do on a F1 car aerodynamics, not it's influence. Aerodinamics is an experimental science, specialy in F1, and the quantity of work in our days is huge. So Adrina's limitation will be his own team.
I believe BRG hit the nail.

[Engineguy]

Originally posted by SpamJet
Also what formula did you use to work out that the mac has only 0.76 the performance of the ferrari?

I don't know what formula he used but note that he said 0.76% behind MS... as in 100.00-0.76= 99.24% vs. 100.00-0.04= 99.96% last year.

I assumed he just pulled these numbers out of thin air to make his point that such a small % change can appear pretty dramatic on track.

[palmas]

Article in Planet F1

"McLaren: Time to get a grip?

March 20: Lack of downforce is the main problem facing McLaren as they attempt to stay in the hunt with Ferrari.
Ron Dennis is not a happy man, indeed over the course of the Malaysian GP weekend the McLaren boss looked as though he was chewing a lemon.

However, as Ferrari celebrate their second win of the season – and a nineteen point lead over the silver cars – Dennis denies that there’s a crisis.

“We are finding it difficult to accommodate a handling characteristic,” he tells British newspaper The Independent. “But it is a short-lived problem and things will get progressively better over the next few races.”

The main problem with the MP4-16 is a serious lack of ‘front-end’ grip, necessitating a whole new aerodynamic package.

“We find that we have a handling imbalance on new tyres,” adds the McLaren supremo.

The McLarens had a difficult time in Malaysia, with massive understeer being the root of the team’s problems.

Although this week’s Barcelona test will enable the Woking based outfit to make a start on closing the gap to Ferrari, major modifications to the MP4-16’s aerodynamics won’t begin until the GP ‘circus’ returns to Europe after the Brazilian race. "



So They agree with my former opinion. Maybe we are right!

[DangerMouse]

The problem McLaren are suffering from; under-steer, is the last thing they want with TC coming along. TC always induces more understeer as you get back on the power sometime even before the apex. Causing gradually worsening under-steer through the bend. They have to get a handle on that and quick – I suspect a new front wing with the endplate “scrolls” along the lines of Williams and Ferrari will fix that.

As for Newey being the best – I doubt it, Byrne is as good if not better.
Newey worked for Williams – the finest engineers in F1, then McLaren Just as a McLaren resurgence was already in progress (check out their pace in 1997) Newey is very, very over rated.

[Oho]

Ave !!

Spam indeed, in Atlas grapevine article quite recently it was suggested that McLaren designed the car with TC in mind and find it difficult to live with the current rules. Danger Mouse I partially have to disagree with you. Perhaps TC may induce under steer but on the flip side engine power becomes much more manageable, providing ofcorse that they are not running TC now which seems likely. Now given the fact that power comes on easier McLaren may no longer have to worry so extensively about rear end stability and presto, at least some of their problems vanish into thin air. Part of Mika's problems last year were attributed stricter engine management rules.

- Oho -

[brum]

I originally said 'MH being 0.76% behind MS, compared to 0.04% last year.'

This has been calculated by looking at the qualifying time difference between MS and MH e.g Australia it was 0.569 sec per lap * 100 divided by the MS time (86.892 sec) = 0.65%. Similarly the difference in Malaysia was 0.86% giving an average for this season of 0.76%. The average differnce for 2000 was worked out in the same way.

Percentages are used as the pole times at different circuits vary and each qualifying effort should have the same influence on the season average.

Trust me, I am a proffesional statistician.

[SpamJet]

Oho

McLaren have started intensive testing today, so I dont think the problem is just engine management. Ron said they need a whole new aero package. Maybe this is only for the next two races until TC kicks in. Not sure. Whats the deal with the engine being 'toned down', have Ilmor limited maximum revs so that the engine doesnt explode. Can it reach 20,000rpm? Anyway thanks for th info.

Brum

I believe you.


Spam

[Greg L]

Originally posted by SpamJet
Whats the deal with the engine being 'toned down', have Ilmor limited maximum revs so that the engine doesnt explode. Can it reach 20,000rpm?

Aside from limiting revs, I'm not sure how else an engine could be "toned down." My guess of a "toning down" has to do with the fact that in preseason testing, the car was very fast but could only do about 20 laps before suffering an engine problem. At Melbourne and now Sepang, the car is slow but there have been no engine problems. The only thing I can figure is a reduction in the revs (and a corresponding loss of power) for the sake of reliability until more testing can take place.

As for the comments by SpamJet that the car may be designed to take advantage of TC, it would make some sense. Everyone at McLaren keeps saying "Just wait until Europe, just wait until Europe, then we will be fine." If the car was set up around TC, it stands to reason that it will be fairly slow in the early rounds, only to come alive in Spain after TC returns. My technical knowledge is too limited to provide an explaination for this, but it seems to make quite a bit of sense. I hope that McLaren DO find that speed in Spain, or it's going to be a long year for us "non-tifosi."

[Oho]

Ave !!!

Well another altrenative I came to think about are tyre properties that took McLaren by surprise. Perhaps the rears are offering much more grip than estimated by the McLaren design team when laying down the design guidelines for this years car, hence massive understeer, and it takes them quite a long time to redesign some of te crucial bits, either aerodynamics or suspenssion geometry. Anyway the grapewine made again intresting reading reagrding Bridgestone, and this is not the first time Bridgestones intergrity has been cast under shadow.

- Oho -

[SpamJet]

Greg L + Oho

Along with turning down revs you can also put in tougher but slower components into the engine. I think that is what happens with a qualifying engine, also they crank up the revs during qualifying.

If what mclaren are saying about bridgestone not revealing useful data, then I think they should move over to Michelins. I think michelin are going to own brigestones ass. It looks like mclaren are not going to win a championship this year, so moving tyre supplier this year probably wont hurt them.

As for the rear tyres taking them by suprise, i dont think that would be the case because they have had plenty of chances to test with them and iron out potential problems. I think it goes back to not having TC. Newey delayed bring out the new car because he found something radical, i wonder if that only works with TC. I wish i new what that was!


oO Spam Oo