What do Ferrari have that McLaren don't?

[Vaud]

KevinCamaroSS said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Surely his blog about fuel being "performance critical" is wrong? My understanding is that F1 regulations define fuel incredibly tightly so that the chance of one team getting more energy per kg than another is very small indeed.

Lubricants can make a huge difference too.

It's still pretty broad. Page 70 onwards of the technical regulations. The spirit is, "[The rules are] intended to ensure the use of fuels that are composed of compounds normally found in commercial fuels and to prohibit the use of specific power-boosting chemical compounds. "

So not pump fuel.

[red_slr]

I don't think either team are doing that great! Ferrari have had their off seasons too. McLaren had great results in the 80s and 90s. Ferrari in the 00s and Red Bull into the 10s. We are now seeing Merc taking their turn and if they turn up in Oz next year with another 1 to 1.5 seconds in their pocket they will probably dominate for another 2-3 seasons. I suspect Ferrari and McLaren and Williams are doing everything to prevent that though but engines will still play a big part and until Honda or Ferrari can bring something special its likely that Merc will dominate again IMHO. The dark horse for me is Red Bull. If they want they can throw a lot of money at their own engine but it looks like they will stick with Renault for now. They are also bringing Mr Aero back big time who can probably find them that second if needed.

[bobbo89]

red_slr said:

The dark horse for me is Red Bull. If they want they can throw a lot of money at their own engine but it looks like they will stick with Renault for now.

Do you reckon they're capable of developing their own engine? Being a customer to what is now a works team might become a problem for them over the next couple of seasons, much like it did for McLaren.

[Vaud]

bobbo89 said:

Do you reckon they're capable of developing their own engine? Being a customer to what is now a works team might become a problem for them over the next couple of seasons, much like it did for McLaren.

IIRC then Renault never had an issue with customer teams beating them, as long as "Renault" were winning?

[red_slr]

bobbo89 said:

red_slr said:

The dark horse for me is Red Bull. If they want they can throw a lot of money at their own engine but it looks like they will stick with Renault for now.

Do you reckon they're capable of developing their own engine? Being a customer to what is now a works team might become a problem for them over the next couple of seasons, much like it did for McLaren.

100% they could do it. They have the money, that's all it takes. Would it be good... who knows.
As for the works team, I think there is a long way to go yet and there could be some interesting developments along the way.

[thegreenhell]

red_slr said:

100% they could do it. They have the money, that's all it takes. Would it be good... who knows.

They might have the cash to do it, but I doubt they have the stomach to spend a billion dollars and three years developing a competitive engine, especially when the current regulations are only fixed until 2020. They only way I could see them going it alone is if there's a major rules change after 2020, which would give them enough time to start the new formula on even footings with everyone else.

If they had been more cooperative and less petulant in their relationship with Renault over the previous couple of years then they could have remained the de facto works team, and perhaps Renault wouldn't have been inclined to buy back the Enstone team.

[RYH64E]

red_slr said:

100% they could do it. They have the money, that's all it takes. Would it be good... who knows.

But why would they? Red Bull are in F1 to sell fizzy drinks, Mercedes are in F1 to sell cars, spending huge amounts of money developing a winning hybrid engine maybe makes sense to Mercedes as there will be reputational benefits that reflect well on their engineering prowess (even if there's no link between the F1 and road car divisions). But who cares if a fizzy drinks company can make a good engine or not? Doesn't make the crap taste any better.

[red_slr]

I am not saying they will. They probably wont. But they sure can afford it and if DM decided to do it just "because" then it would be interesting. There have been plenty of "because I can" men in F1 before. I think the issue DM has is age. If he was 40 it would be a different discussion. I think for now they put all their hopes on Adrian.

[RYH64E]

red_slr said:

I am not saying they will. They probably wont. But they sure can afford it and if DM decided to do it just "because" then it would be interesting. There have been plenty of "because I can" men in F1 before. I think the issue DM has is age. If he was 40 it would be a different discussion. I think for now they put all their hopes on Adrian.

F1 today isn't like it was in the days when Frank Williams and Ron Dennis built their teams, today it's more business and much less passion for the sport. For the people who matter, F1 is no more than another tool for their marketing department to sell more product.

[Trabi601]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Smollet said:

According to Joe Saward it looks as though BP are going to be the title sponsor of Maclaren.
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2016/10/25/mclaren...

Surely his blog about fuel being "performance critical" is wrong? My understanding is that F1 regulations define fuel incredibly tightly so that the chance of one team getting more energy per kg than another is very small indeed.

In 2015, 40% of Ferrari's in-season power gains came from the Shell fuel development.