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

Posted on

| Written by

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.


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


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) / Ferrari spa

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

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:

      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 !!!

  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.

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


        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.