4044 replies to this topic

[ATM_Andy]

It's very... Different...

[chumma]

I guess that means one thing...its ugggggly!

[WitnessX]

chumma, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:14, said:

I guess that means one thing...its ugggggly!

 

Well, Jenson Button said "different... not ugly". But then if were a team I would take ugly over slow anytime. It's basically defined by aero and cooling. It would not surprise me if if they went back to something more in the direction of the the MP4-26 (clean air over diffuser).

 

He also said that they knew where not to go in "aero and mechanics" next year (as a result of the experiences from the MP4-28) so I would take that to mean they will be returning back to a more standard suspension geometry.

[sheepgobba]

Why does it have A in its name? 

[olliek88]

Mclaren always have an A in the car's name to begin with if my memory is right, at least i think they did last year but then it'll just be the 29 come testing.

[Lazy]

sheepgobba, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:58, said:

Why does it have A in its name? 

They always do.

[maverick69]

ATM_Andy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:07, said:

It's very... Different...

Come on then Andy. Don't be a tease. Give us a little crumb.......... 

[kerum gp]

the most exciting part of the year

[PayasYouRace]

ATM_Andy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:07, said:

It's very... Different...

 

Different to what we have now or different to everyone else's?

[TcAn]

Yep, we need some dirty pictures. ))

[Sestre]

ATM_Andy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:07, said:

It's very... Different...

 

Why 29A?

[katmen]

its time for new livery.....

[Kobasmashi]

Is this like how Mika's overtake on Schumi into Les Combes was "a very.... different one."?

[JRizzle86]

katmen, on 01 Dec 2013 - 12:04, said:

its time for new livery.....

The pattern of McLaren livery changes is typically set my engine major sponsor changes so it is possible, otherwise it would happen in 2015 when Honda comes in.

 

With respect to the looks of the 29A i couldn't give a monkeys how it looks as long as it is fast....and reliable. Lotus and Mercedes have proved cars that look like a dogs dinner can be fast.

 

If it is fast, reliable and beautiful then all the better. 

 

Priority 1) Outright speed, Priority 2) Reliable package, 3) Pretty car, as long as the efforts involved do not reduce the quality of priority 1 & 2

 

My 7 cents

[muramasa]

finally got the thread title right.

 

prev one > Mp4-28

correct one > MP4-28

 

[Slackbladder]

kerum gp, on 01 Dec 2013 - 10:17, said:

the most exciting part of the year

The time for hopes and dreams, only to be shattered by crushing reality next year??

[DutchQuicksilver]

I thought these threads can only be opened when there's actually some news about a new car?

[DanardiF1]

DutchQuicksilver, on 01 Dec 2013 - 12:29, said:

I thought these threads can only be opened when there's actually some news about a new car?

 

Well Andy's given us some 'news'...

[mp4x]

WitnessX, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:54, said:

It would not surprise me if if they went back to something more in the direction of the the MP4-26 (clean air over diffuser).

Actually for a while I was thinking the same. According to the possibility of using those ugly noses maybe most of the teams stick to their high noses and therefore have to use the ugly ones. But today we hear someone (Andy) say McLaren is different (maybe compared to the rest of the field). It raises the possibility of using the same concept they used in 2011 – low nose – and try to channel the air from different paths and feed the critical areas like diffuser with clean air.

Edited by mp4x, 01 December 2013 - 12:56.

[midgrid]

sheepgobba, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:58, said:

Why does it have A in its name? 

Because it's rubbish and the team already knows that an improved B-spec version is on the way for mid-season.   

[mp4x]

muramasa, on 01 Dec 2013 - 12:23, said:

finally got the thread title right.

 

prev one > Mp4-28

correct one > MP4-28

 

I'm glad I found out some other members were irritated with that one. Maybe I can convince myself I'm not obsessive about the details!

[OO7]

maverick69, on 01 Dec 2013 - 10:09, said:

Come on then Andy. Don't be a tease. Give us a little crumb.......... 

Agreed.  will it be pretty?

[Markn93]

Haha, thanks for adding the 'A' Andy.

 

Any ideas of launch date?

Edited by Markn93, 01 December 2013 - 13:34.

[nosecone]

Markn93, on 01 Dec 2013 - 13:33, said:

Haha, thanks for adding the 'A' Andy.

 

Any ideas of launch date?

 

The first test is already at 28th January. McLaren was one of the first teams that revealed their new car in recent years. I guess it will be in the week from 20th to 26th January

[Peter Perfect]

Given the recruitment of Matt Morris I'm hopeful of super-slim side pods relative to other teams (which could be an important advantage given the significantly increased cooling requirements).

[muramasa]

mp4x, on 01 Dec 2013 - 12:57, said:

 

I'm glad I found out some other members were irritated with that one. Maybe I can convince myself I'm not obsessive about the details!

 

Every time I saw that thread, it drove me mad!

[mp4x]

Team's approach to their project and the translation of the rules in the last couple of years was haphazard and they were changing constantly throughout entire season and they even didn't have a clear mind on what they were intended to do except the idea somehow to achieve maximum downforce at any cost. But I hope they made an astute move to start on the 2014 project earlier than any other team and hope it's a solid base to work on; something that can be developed and used for entire new era of Formula One.

[Lazy]

mp4x, on 01 Dec 2013 - 15:28, said:

 

Team's approach to their project and the translation of the rules in the last couple of years was haphazard and they were changing constantly throughout entire season and they even didn't have a clear mind on what they were intended to do except the idea somehow to achieve maximum downforce at any cost. But I hope they made an astute move to start on the 2014 project earlier than any other team and hope it's a solid base to work on; something that can be developed and used for entire new era of Formula One.

 

You're basing this on what?

[SealTheDiffuser]

ATM_Andy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:07, said:

It's very... Different...

 

yeah, it has the shape of a banana 

[Buttoneer]

Different?  Is this one fast then?

[kedia990]

Lazy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 15:41, said:

You're basing this on what?

 

Not taking sides or anything, but maybe basing it on the fact that they've tried something radical each year, i.e. revolution instead of evolution. Putting their eggs in the F-duct basket in 2010, U-pods (+ attempted octopus exhaust) in 2011, no stepped nose in 2012 (worked out well), and pull-rod suspension in 2013. (I think this is what is being implied, I could be completely wrong).

 

Contrary to this approach, RBR on the other hand have based their car fundamentally around the EBD concept and continued to evolve it excellently from mid-2009 till 2013.

 

Feel free to discard this post if this isn't what mp4x was referring to .

[Lemans]

muramasa, on 01 Dec 2013 - 12:23, said:

finally got the thread title right.

 

prev one > Mp4-28

correct one > MP4-28

 

 

Nice!

muramasa,

I've been a McLaren fan for a long time, so I always write it this way:  MP4/28

Edited by Lemans, 01 December 2013 - 17:10.

[mp4x]

kedia990, on 01 Dec 2013 - 16:33, said:

Not taking sides or anything, but maybe basing it on the fact that they've tried something radical each year, i.e. revolution instead of evolution. Putting their eggs in the F-duct basket in 2010, U-pods (+ attempted octopus exhaust) in 2011, no stepped nose in 2012 (worked out well), and pull-rod suspension in 2013. (I think this is what is being implied, I could be completely wrong).

 

Contrary to this approach, RBR on the other hand have based their car fundamentally around the EBD concept and continued to evolve it excellently from mid-2009 till 2013.

 

Feel free to discard this post if this isn't what mp4x was referring to .

It's exactly what I meant and couldn't put it in better words.

[mlsnoopy]

ATM_Andy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 09:07, said:

It's very... Different...

 

Mp4-26 different or 2014 rules different.  

[chumma]

I can only hope that they know what not to do, and we are wining races again. Can't have another season like this one.

[Mc_Silver]

Let's hope it will be fast as hell...

[Lazy]

mp4x, on 01 Dec 2013 - 15:28, said:

 

Team's approach to their project and the translation of the rules in the last couple of years was haphazard and they were changing constantly throughout entire season and they even didn't have a clear mind on what they were intended to do except the idea somehow to achieve maximum downforce at any cost. But I hope they made an astute move to start on the 2014 project earlier than any other team and hope it's a solid base to work on; something that can be developed and used for entire new era of Formula One.

 

Last 2 years: 2012 was a good car developed well, 2013 was a bad car developed ok.

 

Where's the haphazard and constantly changing? One bad car does not make the pattern you are implying.

 

How do you know they didn't have a clear mind? They did a very good job 2012 design and development wise, that couldn't happen if they didn't know what they were trying to do.

 

Only the first 11 words of your first sentence have any correlation to what kedia said btw.

 

The last sentence I think we can all agree on.

kedia990, on 01 Dec 2013 - 16:33, said:

Not taking sides or anything, but maybe basing it on the fact that they've tried something radical each year, i.e. revolution instead of evolution. Putting their eggs in the F-duct basket in 2010, U-pods (+ attempted octopus exhaust) in 2011, no stepped nose in 2012 (worked out well), and pull-rod suspension in 2013. (I think this is what is being implied, I could be completely wrong).

 

Contrary to this approach, RBR on the other hand have based their car fundamentally around the EBD concept and continued to evolve it excellently from mid-2009 till 2013.

 

Feel free to discard this post if this isn't what mp4x was referring to .

Valid points kedia but I think if your not winning the tendency is to try something radical, you can't expect to beat RB/Newey at their own game, you have to try something different.

[dau]

Like he's going to go into any more details than he already did.

[Peter Perfect]

Lazy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 18:46, said:

Last 2 years: 2012 was a good car developed well, 2013 was a bad car developed ok.

 

Where's the haphazard and constantly changing? One bad car does not make the pattern you are implying.

 

How do you know they didn't have a clear mind? They did a very good job 2012 design and development wise, that couldn't happen if they didn't know what they were trying to do.

 

Only the first 11 words of your first sentence have any correlation to what kedia said btw.

 

The last sentence I think we can all agree on.

Valid points kedia but I think if your not winning the tendency is to try something radical, you can't expect to beat RB/Newey at their own game, you have to try something different.

Sorry, can't remember exactly where I saw it but I'm sure I read a comment by someone senior at McLaren (MW maybe) saying that there was an issue with the development of the 2012 car which was... they didn't really understand why it was performing so well in the 2nd half of the year as, according to their wind-tunnel data, it shouldn't have been so quick.

[SophieB]

Peter Perfect, on 01 Dec 2013 - 19:05, said:

Sorry, can't remember exactly where I saw it but I'm sure I read a comment by someone senior at McLaren (MW maybe) saying that there was an issue with the development of the 2012 car which was... they didn't really understand why it was performing so well in the 2nd half of the year as, according to their wind-tunnel data, it shouldn't have been so quick.

I think you're remembering this Martin Whitmarsh interview:

Quote

"At the end of last year, some of the developments overperformed. We were actually overdelivering at the track. That was another thing that caused this: we're always looking at the correlation between full-scale windtunnel and CFD, and there's always an offset between those, and we work on that.

"That was another thing that has exacerbated this situation. The real [2012] car was actually better than the windtunnel [model]."

Source: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/109224

[Fatgadget]

ATM Andy reminds me of the dude 'inside' the Renault team -name/handle escapes  me....when Alonso won back to back championships...Was a prolific poster with insider teasing info then all of a sudden vanished.....

[Lazy]

Peter Perfect, on 01 Dec 2013 - 19:05, said:

Sorry, can't remember exactly where I saw it but I'm sure I read a comment by someone senior at McLaren (MW maybe) saying that there was an issue with the development of the 2012 car which was... they didn't really understand why it was performing so well in the 2nd half of the year as, according to their wind-tunnel data, it shouldn't have been so quick.

I think a small discrepancy between wind tunnel results and real life is very different to saying they didn't know what they were trying to do.

[mp4x]

mlsnoopy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 18:28, said:

Mp4-26 different or 2014 rules different.  

Seriously?

[study]

I don't want to be a killjoy, but the same thing is said every year "its going to be different" but then when unveiled theres not that much differences.

[Fastcake]

study, on 01 Dec 2013 - 21:43, said:

I don't want to be a killjoy, but the same thing is said every year "its going to be different" but then when unveiled theres not that much differences.

 

I imagine it's easier to tell if you're working on the car

[Risil]

Fatgadget, on 01 Dec 2013 - 19:34, said:

ATM Andy reminds me of the dude 'inside' the Renault team -name/handle escapes  me....when Alonso won back to back championships...Was a prolific poster with insider teasing info then all of a sudden vanished.....

 

Went to work for Autosport for a bit, didn't he?

[mp4x]

Lazy, on 01 Dec 2013 - 18:46, said:

Last 2 years: 2012 was a good car developed well, 2013 was a bad car developed ok.

 

Where's the haphazard and constantly changing? One bad car does not make the pattern you are implying.

 

How do you know they didn't have a clear mind? They did a very good job 2012 design and development wise, that couldn't happen if they didn't know what they were trying to do.

 

Only the first 11 words of your first sentence have any correlation to what kedia said btw.

 

The last sentence I think we can all agree on.

I think continuing this will change the thread in a very dangerous way, I mean it will bring back the never-ending discussion of last year. In 2012 the team or let me say Martin Whitmarsh decided the team must put all the resources (financial and human resources) into solving one particular problem (in this race JB had an oversteering problem, in that race he suffered from understeering therefore he had a difficult qualifying session and couldn't make the positions lost in the race; in that particular race his front tires were below optimal temperatures, the next race we found out actually he was suffering from over-heated tires, …)  and the problem was never really solved as we still could hear Button complaining about the car over and over. If they'd put that amount of resources into developing the car for both drivers they could have won the WDC not two race wins and some good races for Button. The other mistake they made in 2012 was they didn't think their brand-new design was good enough so they made their minds as soon as Monaco Grand Perix, after only five races for a new concept (or maybe sooner) as we saw they tested sight blockers for 2013 – the high nose concept. This is how I know they didn't have a clear mind and if they'd done a perfect job they would have ended RBR’s dominance.

But again let’s hope they've learnt something from that mate.

[Timstr11]

Fatgadget, on 01 Dec 2013 - 19:34, said:

ATM Andy reminds me of the dude 'inside' the Renault team -name/handle escapes  me....when Alonso won back to back championships...Was a prolific poster with insider teasing info then all of a sudden vanished.....

BPL. Check out where he works now.

 

Anyway, don't want to drag this thread further off topic.

Speaking of which, what's the topic? A ''different'' car? That goes for all 2014 cars. You've got to give us a bit more Andy?

Edited by Timstr11, 01 December 2013 - 22:40.

[bogi]

mp4x, on 01 Dec 2013 - 22:28, said:

 

In 2012 the team or let me say Martin Whitmarsh decided the team must put all the resources (financial and human resources) into solving one particular problem (in this race JB had an oversteering problem, in that race he suffered from understeering therefore he had a difficult qualifying session and couldn't make the positions lost in the race; in that particular race his front tires were below optimal temperatures, the next race we found out actually he was suffering from over-heated tires, …)

 

 

And how do you know this? Also what is the point of technical people in the team if Whitmarsh will do every job from planing next years car, new developments, drivers, fitting Hamilton tyres, choosing strategy, cleaning toilets and polishing silverware.

[mp4x]

As mentioned in my previous post we can discuss it forever but this thread is about MP4-29A so I'm not continuing it any longer. It was just my opinion on McLaren's 2012 mistakes bogi.