McLaren surpassed even its own pre-season expectations in 2024, taking its first Formula 1 constructors’ championship title for 26 years.
Whilst the team clearly had a couple of major waypoints in its development cycle that improved the general operating envelope of the MCL38, a standout feature of its campaign was how it honed its car to the varying circuit characteristics.
These updates largely centered around the beam wing and rear wing, with a significant proportion of its development budget expended there.
This resulted in the team having eight different rear wing solutions, whilst its beam wing options extended out further, with 14 different iterations put into play.
To give some context to these numbers, Red Bull introduced just five different rear wing solutions and had four beam wing variants, Mercedes had five different beam wing and rear wing designs (albeit not introduced in tandem), whilst Ferrari matched its rival with the number of rear wing updates but had just eight beam wing options at its disposal too.
Breaking that down further, while Ferrari is the closest in terms of the amount of options declared in the FIA car presentation documents, the ‘updates’ it set forth for Suzuka and Monza were not actually new and were in fact carried over from 2023 instead.
Furthermore, the update Ferrari introduced in Imola was an overall efficiency change, with the tip section revised, rather than there being a new mainplane and upper flap (above).
This brings the number of new solutions aimed at improving the car for different circuit characteristics down to seven, which is still more than Red Bull and Mercedes but not quite on the same level as McLaren.
Made to fit
From a numbers point of view, it is clear that teams have to use the same solutions at multiple venues, with only a few outliers designed and built to handle specific tasks.
However, one area that has been improved with this generation of regulations is the reintroduction of the beam wing.
The ability to use one or two elements within the allowable box region has given designers a multitude of options in terms of design.
They can load or unload the elements across their span and provide a more cost-effective method of tuning the downforce and drag generated by the upper rear wing elements.
So, let’s take a look at the various solutions that McLaren used during the course of 2024, given that there were more races than specifications at its disposal, with some races clearly not as fully optimised as others.
Variant 1 rear wing and beam wing were used in Bahrain, with the team having already collected data on them during the pre-season test at the same venue. The rear wing seems typical for this generation with a deeper central section for the mainplane that extrudes upwards as it reaches the endplate.
This spoon-shaped mainplane was complemented by a similarly crafted upper flap, whilst the designers employed a semi-detached tip section that rolls over on the end to match the criteria of its endplate cutout in the upper rear quarter.
The beam wing was a single-element solution but with a much deeper central section that’s unloaded toward the tips.
The introduction of Variant 2 came in Saudi Arabia, where the beam and rear wings are clearly from the same family of solutions, with similar features to the wing seen in Bahrain.
However, the wing profiles take up less space within the allowable box regions, while there is a more circular notch used in the centre of the upper, rather than the V-shaped one used with Variant 1.
The Australian Grand Prix saw the team utilise Variant 2 once again, although there’s a crucial difference that showed how the team was building in adaptability for the various circuit characteristics.
In this instance, the tip section was trimmed across its corner (dotted yellow line, Saudi Arabia inset), which has an impact on the tip vortex and alters the downforce and drag generated by the assembly.
It’s clear that this was always a plan when the design was conceived, as there’s a metal insert used in the corner of the tip section that allows it to be trimmed without exposing the inner core of the component.
Given that this rear wing wasn’t considered new in the car presentation documents but had a significant amendment, we’ll refer to it as Variant 2.5 from now on.
It was back to Variant 1 for McLaren in Japan and China, with the team needing some more downforce for the challenges posed by Suzuka and Shanghai.
Miami saw the arrival of McLaren’s first big update package of the season, with significant changes made to the bodywork front to rear, along with another new beam wing arriving. This featured a more offloaded approach at its tips, whilst Variant 2.5 was used in terms of the rear wing.
New, high-downforce rear and beam wings were noted in the car presentation document ahead of the Emilia Romagna Grand Prix (Variant 3) but the rear wing was only briefly installed on Oscar Piastri’s MCL38 to collect some data before being exchanged for the Variant 2 solution that both drivers raced.
The new beam wing (V4) stayed on the car and offered a bi-plane style arrangement, rather than the single elements used up until this point.
As expected, McLaren installed the highest-downforce beam and rear wing arrangement that it had developed in Monaco (Variant 4), with the mainplane taking up much more of the allowable box region right across its span.
Meanwhile, the tip section featured a much more squared-off outer profile than the other wings in its pool, following a trend already set by some of its rivals.
Variant 1 reappeared for both the Canadian and Austrian grands prix, as the team looked to balance the car for the needs of both circuits.
The unraced Variant 3 rear wing from the Emilia Romagna Grand Prix made a return for the Spanish Grand Prix, as more load was needed to deal with the demands of the Circuit de Catalunya but not enough to warrant the Variant 4 that was used at Monaco.
These two wings could be considered to be in the same family as one another though, as they share similar design features, with the lower shape of the mainplane and transition alike.
Several new variants arrived at the British Grand Prix, with a new rear wing (V4) and three new beam wings being deployed (V5-7). The team noted that the latter would be used as a means to trim the new rear wing according to the level of downforce and drag required.
However, these solutions weren't raced at Silverstone, with Variant 2 favoured instead, as the new solution would make its race debut a few races later.
To match the downforce requirements of the Hungaroring, McLaren installed Variant 4, last seen at the Monaco Grand Prix, and paired it with the suitably high-downforce bi-plane beam wing arrangement.
McLaren listed another new low-downforce beam and rear wing solution in the car presentation document ahead of the Belgian Grand Prix but enlisted the solution that was introduced but was unused at the British Grand Prix (V4).
The fifth rear wing variant and eighth beam wing variant would later emerge as candidates for the Italian Grand Prix but weren’t actually raced until Las Vegas.
The sixth rear wing and ninth beam wing variants arrived at the Dutch Grand Prix and had all the hallmarks of the other wings on the higher end of the downforce and drag spectrum, albeit with a little less load than their counterparts.
The fourth rear wing variant, last seen in Belgium, was used once again in Azerbaijan and was thrown under the spotlight after the race, as onboard footage had revealed that the corners of the upper flap were flexing upward on the straights.
The feature was quickly dubbed “mini-DRS”, as the flexion was allowing the slot gap to open up in that region and was likely providing a straightline speed boost, even when DRS wasn’t deployed.
The Variant 7 rear wing could be found on the car for both the Singapore and United States Grand Prix, with new bi-plane-style beam wing solutions, both of which were trimmed to better suit the demands of each circuit.
In a surprising move given that teams have historically used their most loaded rear wing solution in Mexico due to the altitude, Variant 7 was favoured once more.
It would also feature once more, in Qatar, as the team took advantage of the wing’s characteristics and the array of beam wing options at its disposal.
Another new rear wing variant (V8) and two more beam wing solutions (V13/14). The rear wing had a more deltoid-shaped leading edge than previous specification wings in this range, whilst the two beam wing options sat at either end of the spectrum to allow some freedom within their set-up.
The team used this new arrangement for the sprint but opted to switch to Variant 7 for qualifying and the race, given the impending change in weather conditions.
McLaren initially prepared the car with a higher-downforce arrangement but rolled the dice in Las Vegas with the lowest-downforce option at its disposal.
Rear wing Variant 6 had been in the pool of options since the Belgian Grand Prix and had only seen the light of day briefly at Monza before being swapped out for a higher-downforce arrangement.
But, given the demands of the street circuit, the team opted to pair it with a suitably low-drag beam wing.
The eighth variant rear wing was used at the season finale in Abu Dhabi and was paired with the single-element beam wing, rather than the higher-downforce bi-plane-style beam wing arrangement used in Brazil.
Header
As you can see, McLaren clearly retired some of its earlier designs as it moved through the season, with new variants of its medium-high and medium-low downforce solutions coming on stream during the tail end of the season.
However, the team also had more outlier solutions at its disposal too, which allowed it to be a little more selective at each venue. Different arrangements were tested during free practice sessions before decisions were ultimately made about which variants provided the best balance between qualifying and the race.
The wide array of options at the team's disposal also provided more breathing room when it came to finding the right balance for the other factors in play, including the effect that altitude has on the car’s behaviour.
The outfit's ability to design, test and manufacture this wide array of beam wing and rear wing solutions was in part due to its position in the standings going into 2024 and its progress during the season.
This saw the squad ease its way through each Aerodynamic Testing Period (ATP) and reposition itself against the wind tunnel and CFD testing limits as it climbed from fourth to first in the constructors' championship.
It will now be interesting to see how McLaren approaches 2025, as it will have, at least for the first ATP period, the least wind tunnel and CFD runs of any team. This is also significant when we consider how the team has to balance the development of its 2026 car, which all squads can begin work on from 1 January.
But the early word from McLaren is that it is not planning just an evolutionary step for 2025 as it guns for both titles.
Speaking at the Autosprint Golden Helmets celebrations on Thursday night, McLaren team boss Andrea Stella said: “No, we are taking risks in the design choices.
“The approach to the next championship will be courageous because we will focus on innovation.
“During the summer, when we approached the 2025 car, we decided that we needed to make a leap in quality if the ambition is to also aim for the drivers’ title.
“We would like to make the championship a bit more boring and maybe not be as close as it was this year.
“In reality I think the challenge will still be very exciting with four teams battling.”
Additional reporting by Franco Nugnes
