McLaren has often been accused of “copying” engineering solutions introduced by other Formula 1 teams. However, Rob Marshall, the Woking-based squad’s chief designer, has now provided clarity on this approach, explaining in a recent interview why the team carefully studies innovations developed by its rivals.
In doing so, Marshall also pointed to a well-known example from F1 history, referencing the famous 2009 double diffuser case — a technical solution that significantly reshaped the competitive order on track and forced multiple teams to follow its development path.
With Formula 1 still at an early stage of a new regulatory cycle, teams are able to make major performance gains through upgrades, some of which quickly attract the attention of competitors. The British team, also taking advantage of a forced break in the calendar, has been heavily focused on bringing what amounts to a near-completely new MCL40 specification for the Miami and Canadian Grands Prix. Marshall had previously mentioned Ferrari, Audi, and Aston Martin as teams that had introduced concepts that sparked interest, including Ferrari’s so-called “macarena” rear wing.
Explaining in greater detail why teams invest significant time in analysing rival upgrades, Rob Marshall referenced one of the most controversial technical developments in F1 history: the double diffuser concept initially used in 2009 by Brawn, Toyota, and Williams.
Although the FIA ultimately declared it legal, Adrian Newey, then at Red Bull, had questioned the decision while designing his own interpretation of the solution. Marshall, who previously worked closely alongside Newey, later described in detail the process behind such “copying” methodologies.
“We always look at everything; some things get discarded quite quickly when you read the regulations, but other things remain on the back burner,” Marshall told the media. “Some things are somewhat constrained by architectural changes you may have made, or by what you do with the engine, but ultimately we analyse everything. Some things go all the way through to wind tunnel testing or CFD, while others are more like thought experiments we do to see whether they would be positive or negative for us.”
“The key point, though, is that we examine virtually everything the competition on the grid is doing and try to assess whether those ideas would work on our car. In F1, people often say that copying doesn’t work, that what works for one car doesn’t work for another, but that is not necessarily true. The double diffuser worked on one car and everyone copied it, so copying is simply part of Formula 1.”
The British engineer concluded his remarks by adding: “The important thing to keep in mind when copying others is that you really have to try to understand what is happening, what the other team is trying to achieve, and that is where the real trick lies, because you can copy someone but not have their understanding. If you study it properly, hopefully you develop the same kind of underlying intellectual property, so it is a sign of respect towards other teams. It is simply part of F1: some things you come up with yourself and are proud of, and others are things that get copied.”
Leave a Reply