McLaren and Ferrari’s 2010 cars side-by-side (Pictures)

Posted on | Author Keith Collantine

2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25
2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)

The McLaren MP4-25 has been launched today.

So now we can see how it compares to arch-rival Ferrari’s 2010 car, the F10, which was launched yesterday.

Have a look at the two cars side-by-side in these pictures to see how two of F1’s powerhouse teams have tackled the 2010 regulations.

The different zooms used on the photographs makes it difficult to compare dimensions accurately, and makes the MP4-25 look much longer than the F10.

Right

2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)
2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)

Image scaled so rear wheel sizes match

Front

2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)
2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)
2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)
2010 Ferrari F10 and McLaren MP4-25 (click to enlarge)

Images scaled so front wing sizes match

Images (C) www.mclaren.com / Ferrari spa

138 comments on “McLaren and Ferrari’s 2010 cars side-by-side (Pictures)”

  1. If the McLaren had the new Ferrari nose i think it would be perfect, but the MP4-25 is such a beaut.

    1. this years mclaren has ferraris tear drop radiators longer and thiner. is this caused by the new regulations? mclaren and ferrari are very similar the only differences are the front and rear wings and diffuser still a secret

    2. Mirros are different, in MP4-P25 looks more aerodynamic!

  2. Wow, the MP4-25 wheelbase is a lot longer, isn’t it — looks like an extra 20 cm or so on the Ferrari, which would be well over a foot longer than the MP4-24… Hope that works out.

    1. If you read what Keith wrote “The different zooms used on the photographs makes it difficult to compare dimensions accurately” you’ll realise that the two images are of slightly different size so the difference between the MP4-25 and the F10 won’t be quite so pronounced. You’re right tho, it’s a lot bigger than MP4-24.

    2. and the 2 photos were taken at slightly different perspectives.

  3. The McLaren has much squarer side pods. These 2010 cars make the 2009 cars look like babys. They look awesome.

    1. If you notice aswell the side pods on the ferrari are wider than the mclaren’s. This will mean it will punch a bigger hole in the air and in theory and will have more drag.

      1. The picture of the McLaren is taken from a much closer distance than the Ferrari. Look at the size of the noses compared to the size of the rear wings. You can also see the inside of the wheels on the McLaren.

  4. CounterStrike
    29th January 2010, 13:07

    McLaren must have been confident of the engine cooling to have such tiny sidepod openings.

    1. I think it’s just the wide angle lens and the close distance to the camera that makes it look that way. See my comment above.

  5. captain caveman
    29th January 2010, 13:08

    Interesting to see if the MP2-25 has symmetrical exhaust outlets this year. Although will only see this from a birds eye view as last year the sizes differed.

    Both cars are still beautiful, they were both last year and both off the pace at the beginning :-).. lets see how they perform in the next few weeks

    1. I taught that had to do with the KERS system

  6. Mclaren look to have really worked on that rear downforce. No KERS this year. What a fantastic season we have to look forward to.

  7. The wheels are of standard size, right? In that case one could re-zoom one of the pictures so that the wheels become identical in size, and then comparisons could be made between the two cars.

    1. I had the same idea!… had a quick go at scaling the MP425 down (to 95%) based on wheel size:

      http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2731/4313134099_0df9e445fe_o.jpg

      1. nice job hedgey, interesting how on your link pics the ferrari looks like the longer car, although it’s actually all down to the long nose.

      2. As Keith tried to explain, different zooms (technically focal lengths) were used to photograph the two cars, the Ferrari more on the telephoto type of lens, the McLaren more on the wide angle type. This results in a different apparent perspective in the two photos, the McLaren being seen as if it was much bigger. Think of it as how an ant would see the McL, or perhaps how you would see it if it were twenty meters long. As a result, its sidepod holes seem smaller (because they are farther away) and its front wings seem bigger. Remember, its only an effect of the lens being used. To be able to make a fair comparison, both cars should be photographed with the same camera and from the same point of view. Hope this makes sense

        1. This perspective effect can be seen more dramatically on the front views, but it affects the side views, too.

        2. Ah, I stand corrected. Thanks for the explanation! As hedgey’s rescaling shows, I guess we can’t know for sure which car is longer.

  8. Comparing things like the diameter of the wheels, and the length of the bottom of the front wing endplate, and the mount for the universal camera (which you would expect to be the same size on all cars) it looks like you’ve got the comparable sizes of the car pretty much accurate Keith.

    Certainly not a difference big enough to explain the much further forward front axle on the MP425 anyway. The cockpit is every so slightly further forward on the McLaren also. Could it be they’ve had to move the front wheels forward to fit in Button, who seems considerably taller than Hamilton (in the Photos anyway), not such a problem for Ferrari with Alonso & Massa.

    Love what they’ve done with the exhausts, not a big fan of Shark-fins though. Will be interesting to see how it copes around Monaco.

  9. The MP4-25 has a much more complex front wing, I’m expecting a much more complex design from Ferrari come Bahrain.

    1. Giuliano Vilela
      29th January 2010, 13:42

      I remember it being said that the front wing presented by Ferrari yesterday is the ’09 model.

  10. will those exhausts that are close to the rear tires maybe induce tyre blistering and back fire. I see temps higher than 100 degrees will cause lots of blistering

  11. When you looks at an angle from above you can see that the body gets very narrow, so in reality the exhaust will exit more in line with the back wing (I think) The side view is deceptive and looks the exhaust exits in front of the wheel.

  12. CounterStrike
    29th January 2010, 13:28

    Ok, I see a lot of you guys singing praises of the mp4-25’s beauty. I just wanna know what sets this car apart from the F10. I just don’t seem to find any “Radical” differences visually.

    I think both the cars look average, as a matter of fact all post 2008 cars.

    Its a new car agreed, but what actually makes people to think its radical? I see it as an evolution of last years car really.

    The last real Radical car ever to be designed in Formula one was a mclaren mp4-18, that never made it to the race tracks & its successor mp4-19 failed miserably.

    So plz explain why you guys sing praises of this particular car?

    BTW I am a complete Mclaren fan.

    1. engine is more to the back, they say it is driver, fueltank then engine now. very square sidepods and a strange sharkfin cooling device. the rest is evolution or stolen from other cars

    2. It may be the shark fin.

      I personnally think it looks quite agressive.

    3. I’ve been wondering the same here CounterStrike. The ‘radical’ statement really makes me trying hard to spot them visually.

    4. Ummm…errr…I guess you could describe the Front Wing endplate design on the mclaren as radical, but I think that might be reaching. Its just hard not to get caught up in the excitement and anticipation of the forthcoming season.

      On a side note I would LOVE to see these new cars with the 2007/8 front and rear wing dimensions

  13. theRoswellite
    29th January 2010, 13:29

    Keith….absolutely crazy about your comparison photos, this site takes another leap ahead.

    Beautiful creations both!

  14. Notice how the inner fairings on the Mclaren allow a bigger front wing and thus less airflow into the smaller side pods as the air is more contentrated an not diverted to the brake ducts.

  15. WANT ONE!

  16. Airflow diameter into the sidepods is the same it just misses the brake ducts thus less smaller area.

  17. Notice that the Ferrrari uses a barge ( with Santander written on it ) board to channel air into the brake duct.

    1. I saw it too, I guess they found a workaround. I can’t remember have Williams andor Force India used them too last season?

    2. the-muffin-man
      29th January 2010, 14:14

      I think thats just the camera angle from the front. If you look at the overhead shots their are no barge boards anywhere near the brake ducts.

      1. The board lies between the ferrari sign on the cockpit an the rear of the wheel, creating a pressure wave that elicites air flow throw the wheels, its all gonna add up to drag.

  18. CounterStrike
    29th January 2010, 13:43

    I actually thought I’d never see a shark-fin on McLaren. They only time they used the shark fin was during a practice session at the 2008 German Gp at Hockenheimring.

    While everyone, including Ferrari tried it out in a race, McLaren didn’t. In fact Martin Whitmarsh went to the extent of completely ridiculing the concept shark fins.

    I remember him saying that it only disturbs the aero equilibrium of the car when a sidewards wind blows & didn’t see any point in pursuing the concept further.

    What has made him change his mind?

    1. Do you notice the mushrooming of the fin as it realises into the tail, chaos Z=Z2+c

    2. Its Hammer time
      29th January 2010, 14:06

      I was thinking the me thing. It could be a distraction technique. Remember, Ferrari and Mclaren will not want RBR/ Merc/ williams et al drawing any conclusions other than confusion from any aero pieces on these two designs. Only the tub and chassis are deifnetly new pieces here, the wings, fin and front axle/ nose cone design can all be changed.

    3. The design of the shark fin does seem to be based around mitigating possible cross wind.

      It narrows around critical sections and is placed so that lateral air flow is possible from an external source. Un like last years red bull.

      So you get the influence of the team princ and the influence of another teams sucsess. Seems reasonable to me.

      1. I always thought it was to keep the vortices airflow from mixing till it hits the rear wing then the car behind. ie the air channels over the body in two halves then combines behind the car in a chaotic state. It also allows pressure differences between the lateral bodywork to exist.

        1. “It also allows pressure differences between the lateral bodywork to exist”

          – between the lateral bodywork and what?
          – what is lateral bodywork?
          – how is air pressure important?

          1. 1. Lateral as in either left or right. The fin will allow pressure differences to happen along these axis?. 2, See Above. 3, Air pressure….. did i mention said effects only occur in corners, 4, Have you checked the fin to wing coulpling.

          2. I gotta say, you might be familiar with specialised lingo, but you’re sure not too great at explaining it. Not to be mean, but your answers clarify nothing of what you’ve said.

            It also allows pressure differences between the lateral bodywork to exist … perhaps this sentence could be structured more clearly? It feels like three’s big chunks of info missing there to make it intelligible. I don’t mean to be a pain in the ***, but you sound like you have interesting analysis to offer, yet it’s impossible to understand what you’re trying to get across.

        2. It only needs a pressure difference of 1/100 lb per square inch to take effect, multiply those square inches an you get a worthwhile effect, sorry for the technobabble lol.

  19. If the Mclaren engineers can channel that airflow from the front wing an brakes through the rear wing then there onto a winner.

  20. The Ferrari looks more complete to me. But damn the Mclaren is a silver beauty.

    1. Ferrari looks significantly less developed too me, the rear is a mess, they seem to have missed the point of that nose they’ve nicked from redbull.

      Also we can’t really tell about the wings till we see them and these rumours of B spec Ferrari in the offing and numbers not adding up at Manarello point more to a disorganised ferrari than an organised one.

  21. I still don’t like those Ferrari mirrors. Seem to be too peripheral for drivers to easily use them. Look to be more about aero than safety. Just my tuppence worth.

  22. Seems like the teams have sensed that 2010 will be a memorable year and they want the cars to look extra good. The Kaiser is back in a great looking Benz, so that Fast Fred can beat him again, and now Ron has come up with this beauty and has two great drivers.

    2009 will be remebered in the future in the same sentence as 1929 and 1313 ( the year of the Black Plague in Europe).
    However 2010, at least in F1, is going to be a great year !!!
    Cheers

  23. i don’t like how the air intakes are up there, the ferrari’s looks nicer. the sidepods seem like they are sawn off not sculpted like Ferrari’s. the red’s nose seem less complex than McLaren’s, but the McMerc does look aerodynamically mature…

    we’ll have to wait till Bahrain to make up our minds on what counts… winning races

  24. CounterStrike
    29th January 2010, 14:02

    Actually the RB5’s front nose section is not novel at all. Its been incorporated before by Adrian Newey in late 90’s when he was at McLaren.

    Closely observe & you’ll notice the slight bludges around the edges. Of course its not as pronounced as the Red Bull.

    http://www.atlasf1.com/news/1999/images/99MP41401.jpg

    Such a shame that most of the teams are just copy/pasting Newey’s designs. Its a decade old people!

      1. http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2009/813/671.html

        Brawn tested that at Silverstone last year so it’s clear that they’re keen on the idea.

        Brawn has already said the nose won’t swoop, tbh I expect the Mercedes to have that F10 look of our last car with your best bits tacked on look about it.

        1. CounterStrike
          29th January 2010, 14:31

          I fail to understand why people are incorporating RB5’s design concept.

          Fact is that RB5 has spent way too less time compared to the Brawn in the wind tunnel & simulation.

          Brawn’s design was started well in advance & at one point in time Honda hired extra wind tunnels to simultaneously test the aero design.

          If people wanna copy, they better be copying the Brawn, its aerodynamically flawless.

          RB5 meanwhile is Newey’s abstract child. Most importantly itis based on a pullrod suspension concept & primarily designed to suite a Renault v8.

          Ferrari have really ridiculed by copy/pasting Newey’s designed, when they were far better off producing something of their own.

          1. Well, your clearly missing the fact that Brawn is said to be incorparating the RB5 nose.

            Clearly in their windtunnels the design has come up superior, if the team that invented this aerodynamically “flawless” design are using something else somehow this points to that design being better. hmm?

            Also the BGP01 is definately not flawless. While part of this had to do with fitting in the new engine and the flawed mid season upgrade, the fact is that car had problems heating it’s front tyres, and problems with its rear tyres as well. The rasied sharp nose is obviously more efficiant to the swooping one hence the teams seem to be going for it.

          2. Because they were fast with a crap engine.

          3. I meant to reply to :”I fail to understand why people are incorporating RB5s design concept.”

          4. Because all the rival team prinicipals had acknowledged that by the end of the year red bull had the most efective aero package of the field, despite Brawn’s head start. Thats a pretty good reason.

          5. The BGP001 was an amazing car before they stopped developing it and took a gamble on coasting home. Who knows what it would have been if they had properly updated it like the other teams did?

            Still, the RB5 was a great design. And it never really reached the potential it could have if it had started with a DDD.

  25. IMO Mclaren is looking much better than Ferrari. And if pace-wise it is as good as it looks, than Lewis is going to tear up the competition.

  26. Well I for one want to break away from this Iam a Professor of Formula One and thank Keith for this unique opportuinty to partake in a piece of F1 history. Good on you Keith long live F1 fanatic.

  27. does anyone have a pic of the mp4-24 to compare to the mp4-25?

  28. I think the Ferrari looks a lot “tidier”, but by extension of that more conservative. The McLaren looks far more “edgy”.

  29. Ferrari’s sidepods are larger than McLaren but Maclaren’s sidepods are higher. I think that Ferrari’s rear wing will work better.

    1. I think that may be the reason for the shark fin, to make up for McLaren focusing development on another area. The Shark fin will mitigate performace cuts from focusing on the diffuser,

      The middle of the MP4 25 definately shows BGP01 influence.

  30. The Macca looks way way more developed than the Ferrari. The Ferrari to me looks barely any different to the 09 car; just a worst paint scheme.

    The packaging on that Mclaren must be so tight, the sidepods are tiny, the car is so low and so narrw at the back.

    I was surprised to see the shark fin to.

    It does look like a bit of a Red Bull 2009 car but more developed.

    1. Ferrari only showed us they’re main body though.

      they’ve hidden their diffuser front wing rear wing and may even be hiding a completely different engine cover.

    2. CounterStrike
      29th January 2010, 15:29

      Well, they said the same last year :P Even the great Niki Lauda was of the opinion that Mclaren looked a class apart & ridiculed BMW,Renault & the others.

      Again, I am not basing my presumption on the fact that McLaren will perform fantastically well based on merely the visual aspects of the car.

      I firmly believe that McLaren would have learned from their 2009 blunder. That mp4-24 was simply under developed.

      Developed/under-developed is really a relative term. I’d say the Mclaren looks fine compared to Ferrari, but we are yet to see Merc,Red bull & Renault unveil theirs.

      1. Thinking about that Niki probably had a point in ridiculing the BMW and the Renault. Pair of dogs the pair of em’

        And the Ferrari, pretty much everything cept the redbull.

        An then my god that Brawn. Now that car was a class apart.

  31. do you notice the circular appendix to the end of the front wing, bet it allows toridial laminar airflow to the rear of the car then wahay its all yours lol

  32. I think this Mclaren is uglier than last year’s. The shark fin is awfull. If it goes as it looks it’s going to be another bad year for Macca. Hope no for the sake of competition. Can’t wait!

    1. I think this car is definately a splitter of opinion.

      I’ve heared people praisng it for its edgy looks and innovative styling and others critising it for being ugly and conservative.

      I’m certainly with the former but i’m more of the opinion that we’re going to have to wait untill testing to see how good it really is.

  33. The engine cover to me is the biggest difference apart from the fact that the front wings does look different.

    1. One more thing the McLaren sidepod is smaller that Ferrari,or is that my eyes!!!!

      1. CounterStrike
        29th January 2010, 15:30

        Its your eye wasi, go get them checked.

      2. I think its your eyes, the McLaren side pods look like last years Brawn while the Ferrari looks like last years Redbull.

        When you think about it that goes with both companies inherant design philosophy.

        Ferrari belives in long wheel based, massive straight line speed, high speed cornering, friendly tyre ware (vented nosecone) balanced with a car that can do some proper overtaking when asked to.

        While McLaren belives in short wheel based, it matters how fast you go round the corners and the straights will look after themselves, medium to slow cornering mastery and squeazing every last drop of downforce out of the car, sometimes compramising efficiency and dirty air performance.

        Before 2009, both teams had rather shaken this off. The idea being that McLaren wins in Montreal and Monte-Carlo and Ferrari wins at mangy Cour and Silverstone was disapearing, despite the design philosophys being radically different.

        I think the rule changes has and will see a return of this dynamic, it’ll be the Bahrains and Intergaloses that tell us whose made the better all round package.

        1. CounterStrike
          29th January 2010, 15:46

          Spot on there about the design philosophies of both Scribe. Its been nearly 10 years since Ferrari have won at Monaco, but McLaren imo seem to have found a balance between sheer straight line speed & mech grip.

          They’ve won at Monza two times in the last 5 years & would have done so last year if it wasn’t for a strategic blunder.

          This lap from Kimi’s Quali shows how heavily McLaren depended on mechanical grip back in those days. He makes up enormous time in the final two sectors:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZlpWqRhfns

          And that was a really Radical car, not the mp4-25 Scribe :)

  34. doing this for my own sanity lol. Lower relitive airflow over the inner side of the wheel creates high pressure realitive to the outside of the wheel therefore the pressure forces air from the body side of the car to the outside of the car thus helping brake cooling, phew!

    1. that was awesome.

      1. Thanks, thought Id imagined it lol.

  35. Looks great. I’m curious to know if they’ve applied pull rod suspension this time.

    Anyway, for me, it looks way more developed than the F10.

    1. Nope, in a couple of photos you can see that the rear suspension is pushrod again.

      Pullrod rear suspension would help with the packaging of the rear end but interfere with a proper double diffuser, so we’re unlikely to see pullrod suspension back in 2010.

      1. Very possible 2011 will be a pull rodingly revolutionary year.

        The most intresting suspension will be the Redbull. Somehow I think pull rod suspension will confirm a Newey masterstroke.

  36. Odd how McLaren have now gone for the shark fin when over the last few seasons they’ve been the only top team not to use one in a race.

    1. basically, the aero guys had to overule Whitmarsh who hates them.

      after that plain sailing.
      finaly, in 2010.

      It’s kinda the problem with the extreme regimental system used at McLaren.

      In Ferrari one Todt at the top can whip the entire team into line by being the schoolmaster. On the other hand it falls apart when a pushover like Domenacali get in charge.

      With McLaren its over structured nature means the opinion of the guy above you can strangle innovation.

    2. The longer car may help with that too. That should make the car more stable and Martin W’s comments of previous years about the wind effect, while still there, will probably have less of effect on the stability. The other thing that someone pointed out earlier is that this is no flat piece of material like the previous designs.

      That backend is a thing of engineering beauty. Mind you, I remember the comments about last year’s car when it was launched and they were very similar and that didn’t work out too much did it!

  37. For an excellent comparison between F2010 and F2009 go to

    http://www.marca.com/2010/01/28/multimedia/graficos/1264705371.html

  38. CounterStrike
    29th January 2010, 16:20

    Anyone notice? SAP seems to have withdrawn sponsorship.

    1. Did they mention them at the launch?
      How long have they been with Macca for?

      1. Martin Whitmarsh name-checked SAP at one point so I don’t think they’ve gone.

      2. CounterStrike
        29th January 2010, 16:43

        But it says here that they are entering a successful 13th year collaboration.

        http://www.sap.com/about/company/corporate-sponsorships/mclaren/index.epx

        But I don’t see their logos on the nose section.

        1. I’m surprised not to see Lenovo logos on the car as they are now suppliers of computing equipment for McLaren. Pretty sure most of the other technical partners have their logos on show.

  39. Nice Pictures and Comparisons Keith . Thanks.
    Looks like Newey and Brawn are going to be the inspiration for every car in 2010. So when will F1 get the Prodigy designer of the Next Generation ? RB nose is going to be standard and Brawn’s Front wings would also be widely seen I guess.

    I am now really waiting for the RB and Merc launch to see if Newey and Brawn can pull a Rabbit out of the hat. I hope these guys don’t surprise anyone with the Double Diffuser trick like last year.

  40. Just thought with horror, the Mclaren looks like it could suck 2 kilos of rubber, rubbish an leaves down them ducts.

    1. So will everyone else, brake ducts, a blessing and a curse.

      Is it feasible that leaves and rubbish at singapore could mess up the air intakes.

      1. CounterStrike
        29th January 2010, 17:15

        Or it could dump it straight into the face of the car following it

        Well there was this theory that the Red Bull car faces problems with overtaking cos its inefficient in the dirty air.

        With most of the teams on course to mimic RB5, surely they’ll have massive trouble getting past the mp4-25. Of course if the RB5-dirty air theory were to be true.

        1. I imagine the designers have devised a curious air flow from the rear of that car but the brake ducts will ingest some of the heavier detritus in the air stream not deflected by the front wing, I see a pair of men at the stops clearing the portals.

          1. I never bought the RB5 dirty air theory. I think it was just Vettle, Webber didn’t seem to have any trouble in dirty air and kept good pace and overtook.

            Vettle of course didn’t. An his army of fans took one speculative cue from Legard or Brundle and run a mile with it.

  41. The McLaren has a sense of purpose about it, whereas the Ferrari looks like they couldn’t quite make their mind up whether to do a ‘Red Bull’ or to stick to what they know. Hopefully the ‘B’ spec car they are already rumoured to be working on turns out better.

    1. CounterStrike
      29th January 2010, 17:16

      Most of you have resigned to a F10″B” even before testing has begun! Looks very promising for the Scuderia :P

    2. I’ll be more disapointed than anything else if the Ferrari isn’t a good un’.

      It’ll ruin the season to loose Alonso and Massa to the midfield. The point of this year was to be it’s extremely talented pool of drivers in competative cars, if we don’t get that it’ll be like any other year.

  42. Both are quite good looking, I’d say, compared to their ’09 predecessors. To my eye, the ferrari is a little better looking (The red/silver vodafone livery doesnt help the McLaren, thats for sure) but I sure hope this one is the quicker car. Also I really like the front wing with its dual-endplate design. It almost looks like a front wing on top of the front wing. I wonder if ferrari is hiding a wing like this too…

  43. I thought the launch Ferrari was not supposed to be a fully up to date spec of the car, with parts such as the wings not being the latest, and as most teams will have a full update by the first race it will be interesting to compare the cars at the first test and the cars at the first race.

  44. fantasticplanet
    29th January 2010, 17:53

    The deciding factor in the 2009 season was the use of double deck diffusers, correct? And since we have not seen any back shots, I think that we’ve all yet to even peek at both of the car’s potential. Personally, I prefer how the the ferrari’s front end is sculpted in addition to the suspension linkages, it seems like a marriage of last year’s car and the red bull bulges, but a bit more elegant with those knifelike linkages and the trailing edge attaching the front wing.

    Also, that is definitely the same front wing from Spain/Monaco- those tricky guys at ferrari aren’t showing their hand yet. Look it up on the formula 1 site.

    On the other side of the coin I like how narrow the sidepods taper to on the McMerc, and doth mine eyes deceive me or… is that pull rod suspension on the back? I wonder how they achieved more efficient engine cooling, maybe they’ve got secret compartments to hold dry ice- jk.

    1. This we know but the rumours of Ferrari trouble comming from Italian jurnos is a little bit more exciting no?

      1. CounterStrike
        29th January 2010, 18:22

        This was expected. Its called PSBLS.

        Post Schumacher-Brawn Loss Syndrome. Ferrari have depended way too heavily on the duo.

  45. Apparently, unbeknownst to me, we have a lot of automotive engineers and aerodynamicists on this site!!!

    Anyway, no one knows how these cars will run until Bahrain. Everyone can speculate in the comments how this part or that part will affect air flow. Did anyone writing in the comments see CFD or Wind tunnel data from Ferrari or McLaren? Didn’t think so. These posts about performance in the comments are irrelevant!

    1. fantasticplanet
      29th January 2010, 18:53

      Yeah, you’re right, it’s all gross speculation but I believe most people were commenting on aesthetic qualities of the cars anyway. I do think that all the bigwigs- namely McLaren and Ferrari, have a bit more to prove this season. Factoring in Ferrari have very deep pockets coupled with the fact that they’re racing against many former associates and partners (Brawn, Schumi, and their lead aerodynamicist), I believe they’re gonna be doing everything in their power to develop their car to the fullest and regain the WCC and Driver’s title. So speculation, at least in regard to the tension and competitive emotions of this coming season, is justified.

  46. CounterStrike
    29th January 2010, 19:11

    Even Gerhard Berger thinks that The Ferrari F10 might not be competitive, even with Alonso on board.

    “Even with [Fernando] Alonso, Ferrari’s overall package is not as strong as it once was with [Michael] Schumacher,” he told Switzerland’s Blick newspaper. “They are now missing [Jean] Todt, [Ross] Brawn and the often underestimated designer [Rory] Byrne. And without the right people, soon you are lost.”

    Link:

    http://en.espnf1.com/ferrari/motorsport/story/7644.html

    1. CounterStrike
      29th January 2010, 19:15

      Maybe they are having trouble with the weight distribution & fuel tank assembly. Cos Alonso’s been banging about re-fueling ban ever since he first visited the Ferrari factory.

      http://en.espnf1.com/ferrari/motorsport/story/7620.html

  47. Looking at the designs, I feel Ferrari are taking the airflow through an under the car, while Mclaren are through an over. If that makes sense?

  48. They both look great, but does anyone else wish we could lose the very stupid looking cameras on top ? Surely one sticking off the side of the airbox as in the Ferrari pic would suffice ? Surely that one is closer to a drivers eye view anyway.

  49. David Sherwood
    29th January 2010, 21:07

    Given that an F1 is really an upside down aircraft wing, i.e. to push down the vehicle rather than pull up, it is interesting to see the McLaren’s side pods look rather like an aircraft wing the normal way up. In other words they will create lift not downforce.

    Now I am no aerodynamisist, so I am sure the designers have got it right, but it just looks strange!

  50. The Ferrari has the nicer aerodynamic design but the McLaren has the nicer paint design.

  51. to me there are many comments posted here that are solely based on the nationality of the people who wrote them (McClaren=england people, ferrari=italians,spaniards). To be neutral in my comments, I think that the rear of the McClaren looks more developed and completed than the one in the ferrari,to me the rear of the ferrari looks very simple and that leads me to believe that that are or will work in building a better rear (gods know,they probably didn’t show all of their aces). The middle part of the ferrari looks better and more developed than the one built by McClaren. (to me the McClaren team put way more emphasis and time in building the the rear since as you might remember ,they struggle last year to develop the rear wing of their car. You can see the the ferrari’s sidepots are more aerodinamic, circular that the ones in the Mcclaren’s which look more square.Also the middle section looks or is higher than the one if the f10 and it seems that it will worked really good if the Mcclaren built a really good double diffuser,if they didn’t then I believe that the middle part of the McClaren will make more air resistance making it a slower car. Last but not least the front part/front wing of the Ferrari looks the same as last year’s car. That really makes me believe that they didn’t show the front wind that will compete in the first race or they haven’t worked on the front wind as much,they copied the nose that was used by red bull last year but they didn’t changed the front wing at all .
    It seems to me that Mcclaren worked alot in the front part of their car but I don’t think that it will work at all. That front wind has a form that resembles a shark, I remeber that it was used by Williams and by Renault last year and it didn’t work at all. I wouldn’t be surprise that McClaren will copy the redbull nose and will change the shark appearance of the front wind to make one more conventional.

    Something that noone has mentioned is that ferrari didn’t show the double diffuser, it makes me believe that they found something and that whatever they found will make them gain alot of time incomparison to other cars. It seems to me that ferrari worked and spent more of their time and resources developing the double diffuser and that will work in the rest of the car as the season progresses.
    Last but not least ,it seems that this two team copied the ideas from rd bull and mcclaren and that the evolution of the brawn and the redbull should result in better car than the two already launched.

    1. fantasticplanet
      30th January 2010, 0:46

      I disagree on the front development of the McMerc, the front looks like an amalgam of the the snowplow splitter of the FW31 under the nosecone, an intermediate nosecone combining the higher position of most teams and droop nose of the mp4-24, and the front wing from the latter races of 2009.

      Looks rather evolutionary than revolutionary- other than the shark fin.

  52. yeah i dont think fernando will do well,Massa might b faster than ever after his knock to v head!wow v new McLewis sure gets ua pumped 4 some racin.Not that Michaels gonna let anyone past.hahaha I realy want people 2 give it go but!hahaha

  53. Id like to see a rear end comparison following all of last years controversy. also that front wing on the maclaren is seriosly complex dont you think. could definately go one way or the other. i also expect it to have some wild changes depending on the nature of each circuit.

  54. yeah like v cars at least looking complex u no even if half v stuff didnt do anything 2 improve performance,they are f1 cars afterall

  55. can someone find out if they adopted what redbull had last year and NO ONE ELSE?

    a pull-rod rear suspension, which, once red bull got their double diffuser, made them the faster car…

    because of the less aero downforce, a pull rod rear suspension (as opposed to all the other teams and the standard push-rod), was thought by newey, to give better stability over medium and fast corners, and , newey was right…

    so, have any other team adopted this, and will redbull be keeping it, i think that is a big question that needs answering…

    Steven

  56. fantasticplanet
    30th January 2010, 4:53

    It looks like a pull rod system on the mcmerc- I think I mentioned that on the first page of comments it’s a bit more visible if you look at the top down view, the linkage looks to go down from the wheel.

  57. They’d look much better if they were racing eachother… :S

  58. the cooling for the mclaren comes from the sharkfin at the back aswell as the sidepods, meaning they can run tiny sidepods
    tiny sidepods worked on the brawn last year.

  59. McLaren wheelbase looks longer than Ferrari’s. Does it mean it will struggle at low/mid speed circuits as Ferrari did last year?

  60. mclaren and ferrari were late to develope there cars for last seasonas thay were bateling for the title the season before, thay dont have that problem this season,so i see no reason why thay should’t be back to top form whith cars given the time needed to be back at the front. even though ferrari gave up developing last years car early, the mclaren still looks more developed, but looks dont cont for nothink,its raw pace that counts

  61. I really like these kinds of comparative posts.

    However, the cloak and dagger nature of F1 can be very frustrating to fans, although I know its all part of the game. As a long time fan I’m just curious to know what the designers have done and why they believe it will improve performance. I know a lot is a stake but I just wish they could at least respect the fans enough to put up a full spec new car for fans to appreciate. A lot will have changed before they line up on the grid anyway. What difference does it really make with all the teams spying on each other, as another team will have replicated and tested a new part they may have seen on another car within days…

  62. ReedinValencia
    1st February 2010, 20:01

    Ferrari was quicker then the mclaren on the first test…although it’s hard to know who had what fuel. Although the mclaren was more constant with the times ferrari was a bit up n down.

    Has anyone got any clue what ferrari had on top of there car, didnt know if its to do with aero or it was just a sencer thing???

  63. Different colours, aint they?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.