Hey, I was looking at this pic of the F1, and it shows the air entering through the front intakes, through the radiators, and then it just exits on to the front wheels. Is this how the F1's radiator air flow works?

right now photbucket isnt letting me upload it, so I guess I'll have to find it, but It looks like a diagram with blue arrows representing high pressure air and red arrows representing low pressure air flowing across the F1. I think it might've been in some Japanese McLaren F1 Review movie. Its black and white, like a drawing of the F1 with arrows. I'm sure you guys've definetly seen it

Essentially, yes, the air from the radiators passes through the front wheel well, and exits through those long vents that are built into the doors. However, I think the primary function of these two vents is to keep high pressure air from building up on the rear edge of the wheel wells (big hole = no blocking of the air) There's also a secondary air path next to the radiator, that is ducted directly to the brake disk to keep it cool.

And, on certain models with louvers on the front wheel arches, there's also airflow through them going up, as can be seen in this diagram:

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7439/mclarenf1airflow8xu.th.jpg (http://img132.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mclarenf1airflow8xu.jpg)

yea thats the pic. But wouldn't throwing all the air from the radiator onto the front wheels kind of upset the stability? or is it better for aerodynamics? because Ferrari did it with the F40, 360, and F430.

The wheel well is a convenient exit for the hot air. Most wheel wells experience no real airflow anyway, so all the air moving through them keeps the pressure down, and can actually help negate lift. The cars with louvers on the wheel arches have even more downforce.

The original design appears to show that all F1s were planned to have an air exit vent at the top of the headlight, but this design was scrapped before the first production car was built. It does appear on the GTRs and longtail road cars, as well as a few special F1 road cars, but that air exit is further back on the fender than is seen in that diagram.

>8^)
ER

oo, do you have any pics with the front bumper off, so that you could see the radiators and their ducting cleary?

I have pics with the whole front end off, but they might not show exactly what you are hoping for.

Here's one in particular:

http://www.bmwm5.com/photo/data/512/444.jpg

>8^)
ER

On the 1997 GTRs, the air from the radiators exited up through the louvers. The wheels wells seem fairly isolated from airflow. The brakes appear to be cooled by the center hole on the nose:

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1442/suz9736lc4xa.th.jpg (http://img95.imageshack.us/my.php?image=suz9736lc4xa.jpg)

On the 1997 GTRs, the air from the radiators exited up through the louvers. The wheels wells seem fairly isolated from airflow. The brakes appear to be cooled by the center hole on the nose:

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1442/suz9736lc4xa.th.jpg (http://img95.imageshack.us/my.php?image=suz9736lc4xa.jpg)


Just as an aside, the cooling system is one of the weak points of the F1. Sustained hard driving causes the car to overheat, and it shouldn't.

oo thanks, but why would they isolate the wheel wells if it would promote downforce? Also could the overheating problem be due to lack of oncoming airflow? btw do you have any pics of just the chassis?:D

The 97 GTR radiator cooling is a little more complex than Amanichen has stated. Working from memory, the outlet duct covered the upper two thirds of the radiator. Allowing some air flow into the wheel well, The floor each side of the crash box,(under the radiators) has three channel diffuser's to promote the front downforce. There was blanking plates for the diffuser's to tune the front downforce for different circuits. All GTR'S had larger capacity radiator's than the road F1, Larger in section from front to back.

F1 overheating is mainly due to an enclosed engine bay, with very little direct cooling air coming in. A problem with most mid engined cars.

Just as an aside, the cooling system is one of the weak points of the F1. Sustained hard driving causes the car to overheat, and it shouldn't.At least on the road versions, maybe not the GTRs, considering they competed in LeMans.

Just as an aside, the cooling system is one of the weak points of the F1. Sustained hard driving causes the car to overheat, and it shouldn't.True of the original cooling system, depending of course on the temp of the environment in which the car is being driven.
This is remedied by an upgraded cooling system that the factory offer as a retrofittable modification.

True of the original cooling system, depending of course on the temp of the environment in which the car is being driven.
This is remedied by an upgraded cooling system that the factory offer as a retrofittable modification.

Actually it doesn't remedy it. It helps only marginally, unfortuantely, and as you can imagine it is a very expensive upgrade. The basic system is fundamentally inadequate for the power the car makes.

Actually it doesn't remedy it. It helps only marginally, unfortuantely, and as you can imagine it is a very expensive upgrade. I can promise you that it remedies it for some people, my friend.

oo, yea because almost every super car has openings in the wheel well for air flow. Also, now that I think about it the road version only has like one major intake opening which is the roof scoop for the engine. They probably did that to keep drag down to a minimum. But didn't Gordon Murray say that he really didn't care for top speed, and that the ridiculous speed was simply a coincidence?

I can promise you that it remedies it for some people, my friend.

And the ones that are garage queens don't need it at all. I'm sure for some it has solved their overheating problems, but don't be so naive as to assume all cars are driven under the same conditions. I have driven the car both pre and post rad upgrade. It helps somewhat, but I assure you I can get the car to overheat under extended full throttle application. The car is similar to my 700 hp LeMans car in that under relatively low speed/high power applications there simply isn't enough airflow. When you get into these power levels there are usually compromises, and the F1 is no exception. It is still my favorite car though.
If you were spending the day on the autobahn at 180 mph I'm sure the new rads would be fine, and probably the old ones. If you are on a winding mountain road with lots of heavy braking combined with extended full throttle it will overheat. I stand by my statement that the basic system is inadequate, and the upgrade doesn't completely solve the problem. Oh, and the brakes fade too.

...don't be so naive as to assume all cars are driven under the same conditions.Really?

Really?

Really, my friend.

Really, my friend.Holy cow. That is amazing.
And here we were, naively assuming that all cars are driven under the same conditions.
Thanks for setting us straight.

Btw, how feasible would you say it is to drive an F1 "on a winding mountain road with lots of heavy braking combined with extended full throttle"?

Holy cow. That is amazing.
And here we were, naively assuming that all cars are driven under the same conditions.
Thanks for setting us straight.

Btw, how feasible would you say it is to drive an F1 "on a winding mountain road with lots of heavy braking combined with extended full throttle"?

I didn't mean for this to turn into a pissing match with you so this will be my last response to you as I see nothing positive in it. You obviously missed the sarcasm in my comment about your being naive and took it too literally. Sorry you didn't get it. I was merely responding to your acerbic first response to me.
As to the feasiblity question, it is 100 percent feasible as I have done it, and the car overheated even with the upgraded rad kit.
I'm sorry you are so personally offended by the fact that I pointed out the McLaren cooling system is not 100 percent adequate. I can't imagine your response if I told you that in my opinion the F1's turn-in and steering response is not nearly as nice as the Ferrari Modena's. Oh well.....bye to you.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a pissing match with you so this will be my last response to you as I see nothing positive in it. You obviously missed the sarcasm in my comment about your being naive and took it too literally. Sorry you didn't get it. I was merely responding to your acerbic first response to me.
As to the feasiblity question, it is 100 percent feasible as I have done it, and the car overheated even with the upgraded rad kit.
I'm sorry you are so personally offended by the fact that I pointed out the McLaren cooling system is not 100 percent adequate. I can't imagine your response if I told you that in my opinion the F1's turn-in and steering response is not nearly as nice as the Ferrari Modena's. Oh well.....bye to you.Sorry if my first response seemed acerbic, as it was just meant as a factual comment.

The sarcasm wasn't missed - it was obvious. It just seemed rude, although we all have our own ways of interpreting things.

Back to cars:

I'm not personally offended by any criticism of the McLaren. Your other points about the car are quite right.
The brakes do fade under hard use, although not in road use.
As you can't imagine my response if you said that the F1's turn-in and steering response are not nearly as nice as the Modena's, I'll offer it, even though you may not read it.

We could call a cooling issue a 'weakness' that the engineers either overlooked or failed to overcome. On the other hand, the turn-in issue is the result of conscious choices, such as lack of PAS, camber and caster choices, and wheelbase. The high-profile tyres also contribute to it, and they too were a conscious choice.
One might well wish that the F1's turn-in and steering response were different, but they aren't the way they are because nobody at McLaren could figure out how to do them differently. You certainly could argue that McLaren's choice of trade-offs should have been different - perhaps you feel that way.

Agreed that the 360's turn-in and steering response are more satisfying than the F1's are. At the same time, the F1 has more steering feel than the 360 does.

Re our disagreement about cooling, I obviously can't know the conditions under which you say that you experienced a problem. What I can say is that at least one F1 with the cooling upgrade was driven hard in low 80s weather at the Nordschliefe, and there was never an engine cooling problem.

With respect, I am still sceptical that anybody can drive the car on a winding mountain road with lots of heavy braking and extended full throttle.
I am reminded of the number of times that I, and many other people I know, have been sure that we went through such-and-such a turn flat, only for the telemetry to show that we hadn't.
The car's power-to-weight asserts itself so fiercely that it's not that often on any public road that you can put and keep your foot literally to the floor. If it's in an environment that is winding and mountainous, so much so that it requires lots of heavy braking, the prospect of a full throttle for an extended period seems rather optimistic.

Sorry if my first response seemed acerbic, as it was just meant as a factual comment.

The sarcasm wasn't missed - it was obvious. It just seemed rude, although we all have our own ways of interpreting things.

Back to cars:

I'm not personally offended by any criticism of the McLaren. Your other points about the car are quite right.
The brakes do fade under hard use, although not in road use.
As you can't imagine my response if you said that the F1's turn-in and steering response are not nearly as nice as the Modena's, I'll offer it, even though you may not read it.

We could call a cooling issue a 'weakness' that the engineers either overlooked or failed to overcome. On the other hand, the turn-in issue is the result of conscious choices, such as lack of PAS, camber and caster choices, and wheelbase. The high-profile tyres also contribute to it, and they too were a conscious choice.
One might well wish that the F1's turn-in and steering response were different, but they aren't the way they are because nobody at McLaren could figure out how to do them differently. You certainly could argue that McLaren's choice of trade-offs should have been different - perhaps you feel that way.

Agreed that the 360's turn-in and steering response are more satisfying than the F1's are. At the same time, the F1 has more steering feel than the 360 does.

Re our disagreement about cooling, I obviously can't know the conditions under which you say that you experienced a problem. What I can say is that at least one F1 with the cooling upgrade was driven hard in low 80s weather at the Nordschliefe, and there was never an engine cooling problem.

With respect, I am still sceptical that anybody can drive the car on a winding mountain road with lots of heavy braking and extended full throttle.
I am reminded of the number of times that I, and many other people I know, have been sure that we went through such-and-such a turn flat, only for the telemetry to show that we hadn't.
The car's power-to-weight asserts itself so fiercely that it's not that often on any public road that you can put and keep your foot literally to the floor. If it's in an environment that is winding and mountainous, so much so that it requires lots of heavy braking, the prospect of a full throttle for an extended period seems rather optimistic.

My apologies to you too. I must clarify after re-reading my post that when I stated the brakes fade, it was merely an added comment. I have not gotten them to fade on the road, only the track.
The Nordschliefe is a fast track and I'm sure that helps with the cooling.
I have driven on those winding mountainous roads where the speed doesn't go much over 100 mph, but you still use full throttle and heavy braking. If you do this for more than just a few minutes the car will overheat.
My friend (who owns the car) experiences the same problems, and was told by the traveling McLaren technician that he drives his car harder on the road than any other owner he's ever experienced. Maybe some of us just drive harder than others!

My apologies to you too. I must clarify after re-reading my post that when I stated the brakes fade, it was merely an added comment. I have not gotten them to fade on the road, only the track.
The Nordschliefe is a fast track and I'm sure that helps with the cooling.
I have driven on those winding mountainous roads where the speed doesn't go much over 100 mph, but you still use full throttle and heavy braking. If you do this for more than just a few minutes the car will overheat.
My friend (who owns the car) experiences the same problems, and was told by the traveling McLaren technician that he drives his car harder on the road than any other owner he's ever experienced. Maybe some of us just drive harder than others!Interesting what the technician told your friend about his hard driving. They have said the same thing to (at least) two other owners, although perhaps your friend was told that either quite recently or quite a while ago.
Just curious - do you recall if the outside temp was particularly warm when you had the cooling problems? Also, was there a subtantial elevation gain, so that the engine was working harder to achieve a given road speed than it would have done on the flat? Isn't it also true that the higher the elevation, the less effective the cooling system is?
It must be very frustrating for your friend when that happens. He needs to go to the Nordschleife (but, then again, we all do).

Interesting what the technician told your friend about his hard driving. They have said the same thing to (at least) two other owners, although perhaps your friend was told that either quite recently or quite a while ago.
Just curious - do you recall if the outside temp was particularly warm when you had the cooling problems? Also, was there a subtantial elevation gain, so that the engine was working harder to achieve a given road speed than it would have done on the flat? Isn't it also true that the higher the elevation, the less effective the cooling system is?
It must be very frustrating for your friend when that happens. He needs to go to the Nordschleife (but, then again, we all do).


Recently, as in December.

Here is part of an email I sent to him then:

I think you are possibly having a density altitude problem also.
Where you are is fairly high altitude, almost 4,000 feet . That raises the density altitude, which directly affects the cooling ability of the radiator. It has been warm, probably around 80 degrees. Higher temperatures raise the density altitude besides just adding heat.
Also I would guess the humidity has been high, which also raises density altitude.
The higher the density altitude, the less efficient the radiators are. Mclaren can not just consider the temperature when they are talking to you about this problem. They must consider the altitude, temperature and the relative humidity (which together allow you to calculate the density altitude). The higher the density altitude the harder it is for the radiators to cool the car.
(The barometric pressure could have been lower too, if a storm was on its way because of a low pressure condition, that would also make the cooling issue worse).
I would guess given your typical summer conditions you could see density altitudes over 6,000 feet regularly.( This not only affects cooling, it affects horsepower and racecar aerodynamics too.)

Recently, as in December.

Here is part of an email I sent to him then:

I think you are possibly having a density altitude problem also.
Where you are is fairly high altitude, almost 4,000 feet . That raises the density altitude, which directly affects the cooling ability of the radiator. It has been warm, probably around 80 degrees. Higher temperatures raise the density altitude besides just adding heat.
Also I would guess the humidity has been high, which also raises density altitude.
The higher the density altitude, the less efficient the radiators are. Mclaren can not just consider the temperature when they are talking to you about this problem. They must consider the altitude, temperature and the relative humidity (which together allow you to calculate the density altitude). The higher the density altitude the harder it is for the radiators to cool the car.
(The barometric pressure could have been lower too, if a storm was on its way because of a low pressure condition, that would also make the cooling issue worse).
I would guess given your typical summer conditions you could see density altitudes over 6,000 feet regularly.( This not only affects cooling, it affects horsepower and racecar aerodynamics too.)Got it. Thanks for the explanation. It seems that there were a few factors that all put greater demands on the cooling system and together would have tipped the balance.
The Nordshchleife is 2000' above sea level at its highest point. As I said, in the case of that car there were no engine cooling problems, although the gearbox temp warning came on - another weakness!
Relative to normal road car manufacturers, McLaren wouldn't have done much testing and development on the car, certainly not including much high altitude and extreme weather stuff.

But didn't Gordon Murray say that he really didn't care for top speed, and that the ridiculous speed was simply a coincidence?He asked BMW for an engine of a certain weight with 550bhp. BMW's engine ended up being heavier, but produced 627bhp. Since weight has little effect on top speed, the F1 ended up being faster than it would have been if BMW had delivered a lighter engine.

true, an extra 70 hp would've done the trick