F1 engineers better than the drivers
Discussion
The mythology around him sure is interesting Derek, like what did he do and how did he get all that money between when he raced himself then disappeared only to come back a few years later with the money to buy into a team. Maybe just asking this question is perpetuating another Ecclestone myth, if anything though it appears he loves having a bit of mystery about him.
I worked for Bernie in the early 70s and he certainly had a secondhand car business then. I believe it was in Bexleyheath if my memory serves me correctly. He arranged a car for me to borrow when returning from race meetings on several occasions and I visited the showroom to collect or return them. I also have a friend who bought a Triumph Spitfire from him about that time. All of the cars were literally like new. I asked the showroom manager how they managed to make them look so good. Whilst not giving anything away, he told me Bernie was fastidious about presentation of both the cars and the showroom.
JP4 said:
I worked for Bernie in the early 70s and he certainly had a secondhand car business then. I believe it was in Bexleyheath if my memory serves me correctly. He arranged a car for me to borrow when returning from race meetings on several occasions and I visited the showroom to collect or return them. I also have a friend who bought a Triumph Spitfire from him about that time. All of the cars were literally like new. I asked the showroom manager how they managed to make them look so good. Whilst not giving anything away, he told me Bernie was fastidious about presentation of both the cars and the showroom.
Of course you are totally accurate. He honed his skills in the West End cleaning cars with my father's best friend. Both went on to be very successful car dealers. One went on to run F1, the other became a successful restauranteur.Bullett said:
It's all about context isn't it.
The difference between the best and worst F1 driver might be a few 10ths. But between the worst F1 driver and me would be a lot more.
Indeed and the context would be in this case if 10ths separate the drivers then Toto could put any of them in the 2016 Merc and they'd win or come 2nd. The difference between the best and worst F1 driver might be a few 10ths. But between the worst F1 driver and me would be a lot more.
But he knows full well the reason this is possible is because of the actual car which was created by engineers.
Nico or Lewis in the McLaren would not of won a race let alone a WDC....
I'm glad Toto didn't play the game, he blows enough smoke up the drivers bums, but in this answer he simply spoke the truth.
It's like the chicken and egg: a car is as good as its driver and conversely the car is as good as the team producing and developing it.
If you think about it what does slashed budget entail? Reduced budget from the Merc board? Running a lesser team? Budget cap rules?
Hate to say it but the team comes first.
I think it shows the ideal scenario is having at least a marquee driver or upcoming marquee driver (eg. Michael Schumacher's Benetton career) who can push the limits of the car. Look at Williams and how they dealt with Mansell and Hill - Frank Williams has used the argument that drivers were premadonnas and that the team came first.
I think there is a truth to this. Drivers can come and go often seeking better teams. The same can be said of technical personnel but more likely to stay longer than drivers if they are non-senior level. I think a core nucleus of talented staff is the back bone of a team and I always think Lotus/Renualt and the likes of Nick Chester and Alan Permaine who've had long careers their and being invigorated by James Allison.
People will disagree with what I said. Fair enough. The intricate dynamics of motorsport is what makes it so fascinating and such a great sport.
Perhaps Michael Schumacher should have the final say - after all he was desperate for Ross Brawn and Rory Bryne to join him at Ferrari...
If you think about it what does slashed budget entail? Reduced budget from the Merc board? Running a lesser team? Budget cap rules?
Hate to say it but the team comes first.
tommunster10 said:
Come on the proof of this in action is clear to see. If nothing else and if your new to F1 just take Alonso and Button at McLaren as a good clear example...
And shortly when we see Bottas on the podium every race bar a mechanical fault.
Is it really a good example? Ron was desperate to get rid of JB for cheaper alternatives like Kevin Magnussen and Stoffel Vandoorne. And shortly when we see Bottas on the podium every race bar a mechanical fault.
I think it shows the ideal scenario is having at least a marquee driver or upcoming marquee driver (eg. Michael Schumacher's Benetton career) who can push the limits of the car. Look at Williams and how they dealt with Mansell and Hill - Frank Williams has used the argument that drivers were premadonnas and that the team came first.
I think there is a truth to this. Drivers can come and go often seeking better teams. The same can be said of technical personnel but more likely to stay longer than drivers if they are non-senior level. I think a core nucleus of talented staff is the back bone of a team and I always think Lotus/Renualt and the likes of Nick Chester and Alan Permaine who've had long careers their and being invigorated by James Allison.
People will disagree with what I said. Fair enough. The intricate dynamics of motorsport is what makes it so fascinating and such a great sport.
Perhaps Michael Schumacher should have the final say - after all he was desperate for Ross Brawn and Rory Bryne to join him at Ferrari...
entropy said:
It's like the chicken and egg: a car is as good as its driver and conversely the car is as good as the team producing and developing it.
If you think about it what does slashed budget entail? Reduced budget from the Merc board? Running a lesser team? Budget cap rules?
Hate to say it but the team comes first.
I think it shows the ideal scenario is having at least a marquee driver or upcoming marquee driver (eg. Michael Schumacher's Benetton career) who can push the limits of the car. Look at Williams and how they dealt with Mansell and Hill - Frank Williams has used the argument that drivers were premadonnas and that the team came first.
I think there is a truth to this. Drivers can come and go often seeking better teams. The same can be said of technical personnel but more likely to stay longer than drivers if they are non-senior level. I think a core nucleus of talented staff is the back bone of a team and I always think Lotus/Renualt and the likes of Nick Chester and Alan Permaine who've had long careers their and being invigorated by James Allison.
People will disagree with what I said. Fair enough. The intricate dynamics of motorsport is what makes it so fascinating and such a great sport.
Perhaps Michael Schumacher should have the final say - after all he was desperate for Ross Brawn and Rory Bryne to join him at Ferrari...
I'm on your side! I am saying Alonso and Button 2 former WDC no less couldn't get a podium let alone win a race in the McLaren. Put either in the Merc and they could of been WDC again..... So yes, they are a good example.If you think about it what does slashed budget entail? Reduced budget from the Merc board? Running a lesser team? Budget cap rules?
Hate to say it but the team comes first.
tommunster10 said:
Come on the proof of this in action is clear to see. If nothing else and if your new to F1 just take Alonso and Button at McLaren as a good clear example...
And shortly when we see Bottas on the podium every race bar a mechanical fault.
Is it really a good example? Ron was desperate to get rid of JB for cheaper alternatives like Kevin Magnussen and Stoffel Vandoorne. And shortly when we see Bottas on the podium every race bar a mechanical fault.
I think it shows the ideal scenario is having at least a marquee driver or upcoming marquee driver (eg. Michael Schumacher's Benetton career) who can push the limits of the car. Look at Williams and how they dealt with Mansell and Hill - Frank Williams has used the argument that drivers were premadonnas and that the team came first.
I think there is a truth to this. Drivers can come and go often seeking better teams. The same can be said of technical personnel but more likely to stay longer than drivers if they are non-senior level. I think a core nucleus of talented staff is the back bone of a team and I always think Lotus/Renualt and the likes of Nick Chester and Alan Permaine who've had long careers their and being invigorated by James Allison.
People will disagree with what I said. Fair enough. The intricate dynamics of motorsport is what makes it so fascinating and such a great sport.
Perhaps Michael Schumacher should have the final say - after all he was desperate for Ross Brawn and Rory Bryne to join him at Ferrari...
NJH said:
A more interesting question and its one the team principles must debate is which is better, hiring another 50 engineers back at the base and doing data analysis or finding a Newey?
That is a good question! Re: the OP, everyone is paid according to the supply demand of their labour. If you need a driver that is faster than Hamilton, there are only a few in the entire world with a CV that will fit. If you need an engineer to design a light but strong component, the pool is larger and the salary lower. Then you can factor in marketing value, too.
Didn't Ron Dennis bring this up with Senna when he would complain about the car? IE- if you'd like a better car, maybe you could forgo a million and we'll get some more brains in!
glazbagun said:
NJH said:
A more interesting question and its one the team principles must debate is which is better, hiring another 50 engineers back at the base and doing data analysis or finding a Newey?
That is a good question! Re: the OP, everyone is paid according to the supply demand of their labour. If you need a driver that is faster than Hamilton, there are only a few in the entire world with a CV that will fit. If you need an engineer to design a light but strong component, the pool is larger and the salary lower. Then you can factor in marketing value, too.
Didn't Ron Dennis bring this up with Senna when he would complain about the car? IE- if you'd like a better car, maybe you could forgo a million and we'll get some more brains in!
The car is all important in F1 and that's always been the case. Of course the exceptional drivers can make a difference in difficult conditions (Senna at Donington in 1993, Schumacher at Barcelona in 1996) but in normal dry race conditions they can't overcome a significant deficiency in the performance of the car. After all, McLaren was relatively competitive in 1993 but, despite finishing second in the championship, Senna was still desperate to negotiate his way into a Williams for the following year; he knew as well as anyone that without the best car he was only going to win occasionally and not be fighting for the championship.
Schumacher was in some respects quite brave when he made the switch to Ferrari as they had been under-performing for years; however, I wonder if he'd have made the move if people like Ross Brawn and Rory Byrne weren't also guaranteed to be part of the team?
So I completely get Toto Wolff's comments; a top driver isn't going to win anything if his car's a second a lap slower than the best (just ask Fernando Alonso!).
Schumacher was in some respects quite brave when he made the switch to Ferrari as they had been under-performing for years; however, I wonder if he'd have made the move if people like Ross Brawn and Rory Byrne weren't also guaranteed to be part of the team?
So I completely get Toto Wolff's comments; a top driver isn't going to win anything if his car's a second a lap slower than the best (just ask Fernando Alonso!).
With hamiltons wages, marketing value must surely come in to it, he's pretty much the face of F1 at the minute, at least in this country, that's got to be worth something for the teams in terms of money back. Out right speed over the course of the year might only be a couple of tenths, however at Monaco for example, Mercedes well paid driver only got them 7th whereas the better paid one managed to win Mercedes the marquee race of the year.
You'd also like to think a driver like Alonso at a struggling team would drive on and better develop a car than someone more average, like palmer or massa.
You'd also like to think a driver like Alonso at a struggling team would drive on and better develop a car than someone more average, like palmer or massa.
C2996 said:
With hamiltons wages, marketing value must surely come in to it, he's pretty much the face of F1 at the minute, at least in this country, that's got to be worth something for the teams in terms of money back. Out right speed over the course of the year might only be a couple of tenths, however at Monaco for example, Mercedes well paid driver only got them 7th whereas the better paid one managed to win Mercedes the marquee race of the year.
You'd also like to think a driver like Alonso at a struggling team would drive on and better develop a car than someone more average, like palmer or massa.
Well the fact you call Massa average makes the point nicely, as Massa came within 1 point of a WDC. If average can do that then pretty much any of them could in the best car by a mile as in Mercs case.You'd also like to think a driver like Alonso at a struggling team would drive on and better develop a car than someone more average, like palmer or massa.
Of course marketing comes into it, but then that's not driver talent or speed etc that's because they 'look' right. Sad state of affairs but thats showbiz folks..
The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.
Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
NJH said:
The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.
Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
Thing is with Newey is that he's a known quantity and has the CV. FI have done great with not very much money so some of their team must be very talented and worth stealing, especially if you're Williams! Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
Honestly I think one of the issues is the teams have got to big, they are pretty much akin to the R&D department of a big engineering or technology company. I worked for such a company 20 years ago that had about 900 staff in the Research and Technology part of the business, much the same as the top F1 teams. Pretty much impossible for someone young and talented to really standout in such big organisations because your never allowed to do more than a tiny bit of the end product.
One can of course see the impact of these organisations being so big, the announcements are again much akin to those of big industrial companies where many of the key movements are director or senior management people not so much superstar designers as was key in the past. Perhaps the age of the superstar race car designer has passed?
One can of course see the impact of these organisations being so big, the announcements are again much akin to those of big industrial companies where many of the key movements are director or senior management people not so much superstar designers as was key in the past. Perhaps the age of the superstar race car designer has passed?
NJH said:
The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.
Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
Because they aren't fast enough.Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
jsf said:
NJH said:
The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.
Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
Because they aren't fast enough.Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.
Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.
tommunster10 said:
jsf said:
NJH said:
The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.
Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
Because they aren't fast enough.Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.
Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff