- iRacing.com Announces iRacing 2.011,367
- iRacing.com to create virtual McLaren MP4-12C GT38,016
- Scanning What’s in Store for iRacing with Tony Gardner6,034
- Dave Kaemmer Comes Clean on Dirt5,527
- Improving the Sound of iRacing4,833
- iRacing 2.0 Debuts in 2011 Season 34,765
- Preview Shots of HPD ARX-01C, Ford GT & Suzuka4,742
- Two New Cars and Two New Tracks Coming to iRacing Soon4,261
- iRacing Pro Race of Champions Gets Green Flag Wednesday3,305
- Gooden Plenty II2,943
- Towler, Wood Suspended from Upcoming iWCRR Events 66
- iRacing.com Announces iRacing 2.0 41
- FW31 Envy 27
- Dave Kaemmer Comes Clean on Dirt 27
- iRacer Profile: Sandeep Banerjee 25
- iRacing's Corvette: Good Enough is Not Good Enough 23
- 2011 iRacing.com World Championship Series Road Racing Field Set 17
- iRacing, McLaren Electronic Systems Partner in Online Racing Data Analysis 16
- Trading Paints Derek Speare Designs Race King 300 Set for June 28 14
- DeltaWing Reveals 2012 IndyCar Chassis Design 13
- iRacing.com2136
- NASCAR 1754
- Motorcycles 1711
- Formula Cars 1567
- WRC 1243
- IndyCar 1149
- Touring Cars 754
- Sports Cars 300
- Other Racing 314
Teams Scramble To Copy McLaren’s Duct Concept
March 14th, 2010

MANAMA, Bahrain — Now that McLaren’s controversial aerodynamic “duct” concept has been declared legal, rival teams will have to spend vast amounts of money to redesign their cars.
Renault’s managing director Bob Bell told the BBC: “It is fundamentally clear that the McLaren wing design is totally illegal, and they have driven a cart horse through the spirit of the rules. They have opened up another arms race; it’s going to cost everybody a lot of money. The governing body needs to be a lot stronger with these things.”
McLaren’s system basically works like this. Air enters the car in a duct on top of the nose cone and flows into the cockpit. However, if the driver uses his leg to block the hole inside the cockpit where the air enters, it is redirected, fed via a tube through the chassis and exits at the rear of the car where the engine cover shark-fin meets the rear wing. Normally, for peak aerodynamic downforce, the designers strive to avoid “air separation” and try to have the air flow up, on and over the rear wing as a whole. By feeding air between the rear wing elements, McLaren’s system causes air separation which in turn means that the rear wing “stalls” and is less efficient and produces less downforce. And less downforce on the straights means higher top-end speed.
Moveable aerodynamic devices are outlawed in F-1 with the exception of the front wing which can have two settings. Is the driver’s leg considered a movable aerodynamic device? And, as Lotus technical boss Mike Gascoyne points out, the McLaren’s rear wing has two distinctly different configurations, so is that not illegal?
The car might have an advantage on the straights, but the McLaren drivers complained of a lack of downforce in the corners. So McLaren’s rear wing is not ideal.
One major problem rival teams will face in trying to copy McLaren’s system is that to reduce costs this year the FIA mandated that major parts such as the monocoque have to be homologated at the start of the year. They can only be changed for safety or reliability reasons. Thus teams cannot suddenly design and build a new chassis with a duct hole.
This would be an ideal opportunity for the FIA to take a knee-jerk reaction and outlaw McLaren’s system immediately.



David Phillips
Chris Hall
Jameson Spies
Jason Lofing
Ray Bryden
Patrick Atherton
Tim Terry
David Allen
Allen Krier