Mclaren MP4-25

[Tension_36th]

Just like I predicted, infact this was very obvious to those who know the field that mclaren was going with a T shaped sidepod when viewed head on.

The car is a radical departure from last year's car. But how good is it on paper? Stay tuned for that while I get better pictures for analysis.

The car has a very BMW style raised nose and very unorthodox exhaust system




No more pictures in here. Those will be in the car launch sections. Only technical discussions and technical related media in here.

[falmark]

Dont like the rear wing's they are too smal just dont look like a propper F1 car without the big wide rear wing

[Tension_36th]

(01-30-2010 07:11 PM)falmark Wrote:  Dont like the rear wing's they are too smal just dont look like a propper F1 car without the big wide rear wing

You mean the 2009 style in general or Mclaren in particular? Because the Mclaren and any other team's rear wings are of the same proportions by regulations they can only reduce or increase to a very small margin of error.

[falmark]

(01-30-2010 07:18 PM)Tension_36th Wrote:  

(01-30-2010 07:11 PM)falmark Wrote:  Dont like the rear wing's they are too smal just dont look like a propper F1 car without the big wide rear wing

You mean the 2009 style in general or Mclaren in particular? Because the Mclaren and any other team's rear wings are of the same proportions by regulations they can only reduce or increase to a very small margin of error.

I do mean the 2009 style in general. I know they have to be that way because of the regulations I have to say like cousin's 6 year old of woud say when he does not get to do what wants stupid rules!!!!!!!!

[Tension_36th]

Yeah I hear ya, the cars rear wings don't look pretty.

For me though I likes it when they removed all those body work appendages in 2009, because the 2008 and 2007 cars were already getting awful to look at. Like they have 'horns' all over the place. Its great for that last ounce of performance but there is no elegance to it.

[Tension_36th]

Ok the car that everyone is harping about as being radical. Many are saying it because it looks different, while many others are saying it because it may seem stylish to them (its 'alternative', to them alteast) While a few others who actually know what they are looking at will agree the car really is technically radical and its not a dud, at-least in 'concept'.

The 2009 MP4-24 was a pile of shit, it was too high on the cross-section increasing drag and too deficient of downforce. They spent a lot of time removing drag before they could work on downforce. They relied a lot on KERS to make up places and use strategy to make it work if some cars where out the race.

Well they have learnt their lesson well, And I say really well.

They knew the length increase was inevitable for them and so will the body work bulk inside. But they wanted to keep their cross section the same as 2009 atleast or if possible make it smaller at most parts of the car.

They have what they call the extreme diffuser, read that as probably a large 2nd channel wit possibly even a 3rd channel somewhere in there. They have been trying out 2nd decked diffusers, but the extremes they are talking will be known today.

The other websites which have done comparisons are either poorly base referenced or completely wrong in scale (in some cases both).

Again please disregard all the frontal comparisons made by other wedsites as they are all rubbish. Becuase the distance at which those headon photos where shot are different. Not to mention the longer wheel base increases the distance of the rear wing from the photographer.

Side view

1. I have used the yellow marker at the engine airbox inlet as the reference point once again, and as you can see the length at the front of the car has not changed (some parallax errors maybe present), the wheelbase length increase is obviously at the back
2. The start of the floor under the nose has been referenced by the purple marker. This is just for another reference.
3. The blue patch shown on both cars are to show that in the MP4-24 the nose raises up and then swoops downwards, but in the MP4-25 is leveled and droops down gradually. This is different to the redbull concept where the nose raises up before a short fall off. But the under side of the MP4-25 nose is highly raised. Much like the BMWs in 2009. This is to aid airflow around the sidepods and into the back for the diffuser.
4. There is a sculpted V shape diversion under the nose just like a ship's top part of the bow. This is to further channel air around the sides and into the back of the car.
5. Both cars have the small vertical splitters, under the nose right at the tip where the floor starts
6. Notice the the blue streak of continuous flowing line I have drawn on the surface of the side body work above the sidepods?. In the MP4-24 it was almost leveled and high, it was not tappered down like the redbulls to reduce cross section and mold airflow. In the MP4-25 they knew size due to larger fuel tank was inevitable, but they had to reduce and tapper the rear end much more than the MP4-24 atleast, for better airflow and downforce profile. They moved some of the cooling elements into the centerline of the car under the engine covers. Its tight but its also clever. It allowed them to save lots of pace right behind the surface of the sidepods. Look at the angle of decent on that MP4-25, very well lowered and reduces drag from that zone onwards. But the astute will point out in that angle the sidepod's top will generate lift becuase that surface is longer than the flat floor underneath. But in this case the velocity under neath the car's floor is still higher thanks to the nose profile. So that ensures there is no lift being generated.
7. The sideods are well sculpted, the raditator inlets are made rectangular. This may look like a odd choice but its not because the size is smaller making more room for further undercut sidepods. The reduction in cross section is also another aerodynamic improvement on drag reduction. Though this should reduce cooling effect in the radiators. But what we see right under the airbox is yet another possible channel. That could explain their choice to reduce the inlet size and make them rectangular. The presence of what seems to be 3rd channel under the airbox is not confirmed as we dont have much detailed pictures as close ups.
8. Notice Figure 2 to see the possible 3rd channel. But in my opinion there maybe no 3rd channel in there rather the long exhaust pipes will abosrb the heat and act as a sink to cool off the radiators faster with reduce airflow, also if the internal packaging is such that there is a tunnel being formed that is well channeled it can be enough to make the airlfow good enough to exit right out the main engine cover vent at the back as you'll see in the picture below. The other reason why a 3rd channel in that place makes little sense is due to the airbox funnel having a rigid shape and having air rush around its sides is counter productive and will not result in improved cooling. It is doubtful if here is much space for air to really make an impact on cooling.
9. The head-on shot of the MP4-25 shows you the T shaped profile of the sidepod inlets I speculated about before the launch, judging from the sneak peak pictures of the monocoque.
10. The front wings have retained most of the 2009 sub-plane splitters and other features developed late into the 2009 season. This wing though is definitely not going to be anything like this come bahrain 2010, they are obviously hiding the real wings like most teams do. In their case to truly mate their radical rear end with the front end, they need a new front wing.
11. The exhuasts on the F10 are set wide apart. In the MP4-24 it was closer to the centerline. This aids in balance as having the weight more to the centerline improves handling into corners. Which is one reason why the MP4-24 was competitive on twisty street circuits apart from the suspension characterisitcs that favored the MP4-24 on such tracks. In the MP4-25 this is taken to further extreme, by fusing it to the tail of the engine-body cover itself. This reduces the profile and drag further. The hot exhaust gases have lower density. You dont want those gases interfearing with your rear aerodynamics too much, so in this case the exhausts have minimal degradation on the rear wing. Infact it would go over the beamwing under the Rear wings and give that much small downforce for whatever its worth. Not much though but better to have it go off with some use rather than wasting that potential.
12. Then there is the obvious and striking sharkfin. this has cons and pros. The pro is that it offers the best channeling of airflow to the rear wing, the con being it will be a problem in a crosswind. Much like a boat's sail getting pushed strongly in a wind rush. But since they have tried to move their weights to the centerline, the effects from the crosswinds can be minimized. Again clever thinking, only thing is that there shouldn't be a windy day at silverstone for example, that can upset the car a bit. Especially when under low fuel loads.
13. The front suspension has been altered due to the slighly lower top section of the nose at that point even if the underside is highly raised. This makes the front suspension less aggressive for heating up the front tyres but since the surface area is smaller and the front wings will have more downforce creating elements, heating up tyres will not be a big concern.
14. The bargeboards are now toyota style bridging with the tip of the floor, at the front.
15. The wheelbase is obviously longer
16. The suspension configuration on the rear is push-rod
    
    
    Overhead view
    
    
17. In the over head shot (not in correct scale, do not use for size comparisons), notice the white patches I have made. Notice how much space they have created right behind the sidepods even after factoring in that the wheelbase has increased. I have highlighted the surface of the sidepods with blue to show the plane that is going down steeply. In a way they tried to mimic redbull's extremely low rear end without the need for a pull-rod setup
    
    
    
    Other aspects
18. Mclaren is quoting 20Kgs less than what Ferrari claimed for their "fully loaded' fuel tanks!, now that is hard to believe since Mercedes wasnt that efficient in 2009 like the Renault, unless they have detuned the engine and arrived closer to that value since they had the power advantage to play with. This could be a little gamesmanship but we will soon find out if this has any truth in it.
    
    
19. Pictured above, the rear side has a channel right above the beamwing above the crash structure. This can be confuded as if its connected to the diffuser, but its not. Its just the engine cover plus body work's vent hole with a slight profile to give it a mini diffuser effect as it vents out hot air. Again its these small details that add up to the impressive list of refinements to the car.
    

Right now having looked at the BMW C29, Ferrari F10, Williams FW32 and Renault R30, the Mclaren MP4-25 is currently the most developed in "concept". But we will soon see the Mercedes car and then later on Redbull. The Williams FW-32 though is also quite impressive for a Redbull+Brawn inspired design, with what seems to be no increase to the wheelbase.

Jenni is working on the R30 and C29 reviews, we are in discussion on the final details.

[harrisv48]

Mclaren Diffuser

[Tension_36th]

Yes that folks is the best developed diffuser seen to date. Certainly does gets close to the word 'extreme'. Thanks for the pics harrisv48

[Tension_36th]

I just got hold of a very good picture of the diffuser. The upper level I have highlighted in the cross section is not really connected to the channel below and as such doesnt form part of the diffuser. This area is like a large surface wing plane curved up to be a large 2nd channel. This part is using some of the airflow around the sidepds to the rear for the downforce generation

It also has vanes in it for flow diversion which gives it a false diffuser channel appearance.

Clever piece of engineering. And obviously that is just is lots of length in the right angle to produce downforce.

The wake behind this car will be absolutely terrible. Not a place to be stuck behind, trying to overtake.

Mercedes have done something very similar but a more extreme.

[harrisv48]

Mclaren MP4-25 previews engine airflow




Mclaren MP4-25 new engine airflow

[Tension_36th]

Yes you can also notice a small opening on the left side of the nose (to your visual right) cooling for electronics. The top engine cover cooling sub-channel is for the cooling elements they moved into the centerline of the car.

[Tension_36th]

The Mclaren has been updated. as if the 3rd day of testing at Barcelona, they changed the cooling capacity for the exhausts in anticipation of the higher levels of temperature that they will face at Bahrain. This maybe a track to track thing, since this will undoubtedly decrease aerodynamic efficiency as a result form increase in drag profile.

We must also remember they have placed most of their movable cooling elements along the center-line so exhaust cooling was to be marginalized.

Picture below shows how it was at launch time and uptil the upgrades were introduced. Notice the region i have highlighted in yellow.



Now look at the new wider bodywork to facilitate increased exhaust cooling.



Now comes the controversial aspects that have been talked about in the press, i was about to post a piece on it, but I was busy.

The story is that Mclarne have found a way to stall the engine to gain top end speeds on the straights and at the same time reduce drag and there b improve fuel economy.

You can see them testing the effectiveness of the system show below. Notice the yellow highlights that shows the pitot sensors to sense air flow off the trailing edges on the surfaces above and below the rear wing.



Read all about the working and the controversy surrounding the innovation ---->here<---

[Tension_36th]

Mclaren have dumped the blown diffuser concept for the Silvertone/British GP after facing handling issues with the new upgrades in friday practice.

Another case of trying to bolt on something without really having a clue what makes RB6 such a fantastic car. Atleast Ferrari didnt go backwards when they copied it, but Mclaren and Mercedes have shown backward progression trying to copy something that's not tailored to their designs. Besides when it really works its not worth much. Just hyped by the idiotic press and some teams trying to find excuses for their lack of pace.

More here