McLaren

Author
Discussion

CoolHands

11,455 posts

153 months

Monday 27th January
quotequote all
Cos it’s number 2 team? They get out the way if ferrari are in position, but don’t if it’s merc

jsf

19,273 posts

194 months

Monday 27th January
quotequote all
Ferrari need to be faster than Mercedes to make that work.

CoolHands

11,455 posts

153 months

Monday 27th January
quotequote all
But you could design a strategy to make it work eg ferrari build a faster high speed tracks car (that will be beat merc) so deny merc those points, yet haas deny them the slow speed points. If you pitched it right you could make it that the balance of power goes in Ferrari’s favour

TheDeuce

7,293 posts

24 months

Monday 27th January
quotequote all
jsf said:
CoolHands said:
Interesting point that. Why don’t ferrari gets haas to build a short course car, that will win at small, twisty tracks, purely to disrupt merc?
How would that not disrupt Ferrari?
I was wondering that.

I suppose at races that Ferrari themselves were not strong at, the HAAS car could be used to at least stop Mercedes gaining the win and the associated points.

HAAS would be come a pretty dull place to work at though, fielding a car all season for no reason other than to irritate Mercedes a couple of times year..

What about a tow car? An F1 car designed primarily to provide a near perfect tow to it's big brother every qualifying session? biggrin

Joking aside, as the cost caps take effect we probably will see teams find new ways of making use of their b-teams. Maybe not the above examples... but I think the b-teams are going to prove invaluable and the teams that have one, will have an advantage over those that do not. More so than at present.

jsf

19,273 posts

194 months

Monday 27th January
quotequote all
CoolHands said:
But you could design a strategy to make it work eg ferrari build a faster high speed tracks car (that will be beat merc) so deny merc those points, yet haas deny them the slow speed points. If you pitched it right you could make it that the balance of power goes in Ferrari’s favour
Nah

kiseca

8,270 posts

177 months

Tuesday 28th January
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
jsf said:
CoolHands said:
Interesting point that. Why don’t ferrari gets haas to build a short course car, that will win at small, twisty tracks, purely to disrupt merc?
How would that not disrupt Ferrari?
I was wondering that.

I suppose at races that Ferrari themselves were not strong at, the HAAS car could be used to at least stop Mercedes gaining the win and the associated points.

HAAS would be come a pretty dull place to work at though, fielding a car all season for no reason other than to irritate Mercedes a couple of times year..

What about a tow car? An F1 car designed primarily to provide a near perfect tow to it's big brother every qualifying session? biggrin

Joking aside, as the cost caps take effect we probably will see teams find new ways of making use of their b-teams. Maybe not the above examples... but I think the b-teams are going to prove invaluable and the teams that have one, will have an advantage over those that do not. More so than at present.
I think the problem is, it doesn't matter what the other cars are doing, if Ferrari want to beat Merc, they have to finish ahead of Merc, and that matters more than whether the Merc beats Ferrari and wins, or the Merc beats Ferrari but both finish behind a Haas. It has a small impact on the points difference between the two, but I think there are too many other factors to make it a strategy worth pursuing. Not least through the risk of the Haas can beat the Ferraris on the slower tracks but still can't beat the Mercs!

TheDeuce

7,293 posts

24 months

Tuesday 28th January
quotequote all
kiseca said:
TheDeuce said:
jsf said:
CoolHands said:
Interesting point that. Why don’t ferrari gets haas to build a short course car, that will win at small, twisty tracks, purely to disrupt merc?
How would that not disrupt Ferrari?
I was wondering that.

I suppose at races that Ferrari themselves were not strong at, the HAAS car could be used to at least stop Mercedes gaining the win and the associated points.

HAAS would be come a pretty dull place to work at though, fielding a car all season for no reason other than to irritate Mercedes a couple of times year..

What about a tow car? An F1 car designed primarily to provide a near perfect tow to it's big brother every qualifying session? biggrin

Joking aside, as the cost caps take effect we probably will see teams find new ways of making use of their b-teams. Maybe not the above examples... but I think the b-teams are going to prove invaluable and the teams that have one, will have an advantage over those that do not. More so than at present.
I think the problem is, it doesn't matter what the other cars are doing, if Ferrari want to beat Merc, they have to finish ahead of Merc, and that matters more than whether the Merc beats Ferrari and wins, or the Merc beats Ferrari but both finish behind a Haas. It has a small impact on the points difference between the two, but I think there are too many other factors to make it a strategy worth pursuing. Not least through the risk of the Haas can beat the Ferraris on the slower tracks but still can't beat the Mercs!
Not sure if it came across the right way - but I for one was never being serious about some kind of specially designed F1 car, specifically to snatch a few points from Mercedes.. That's just a terrible idea and use for an F1 team.

But I do think that with the cost caps taking real effect 2022 onwards, the b-teams will be very valuable. They can be used to test experimental aero and parts, even run higher engine modes during race distance to test real world reliability. Any team with a b-team, has an extra test bed, potentially shared R&D costs and, every now and then, also some quali or race cooperation perhaps. None of these things will in isolation make a huge difference, but together it all adds up and it adds up to an advantage that only the top teams with their b-teams will have. For that reason, 2022 onwards, I do expect to see b-teams being used a little more sacrificially than today.

An interesting aspect in this, is that Mercedes don't actually have a b-team as such.. At least, if they do, everyone involved is determined that it isn't the case. If Mercedes are to stay in the sport, I think they will need one though - their competitors already have b-teams lined up and effectively fully subservient to them.

The Vambo

4,152 posts

99 months

Tuesday 11th February
quotequote all
Damnit, now everyone knows who The Vambo really is...

The Vambo said:
Monday 27th May 2019

Until McLaren stopped giving themselves excuses, pointing fingers elsewhere and refusing to take responsibility for their situation they couldn't stop the rot never mind improve.

They had no benchmark for their chassis with Honda power so were more than happy to publicly pass the buck.

Sharing an engine with a similarly sized old hand F1 team that won't take any of your bullst was the first and most important step in McLaren's redemption in my opinion.
Ross Brawn said:
February 2020

“People say they made a big mistake getting rid of Honda," Brawn told Motorsport.com when asked about McLaren's decision.

"But I think funnily enough they almost needed to do that, to recognise what they needed to do within the team.

“They were blaming Honda all the time, and I think they would recognise now that it wasn't true," he added.

"That wasn't everything. In getting rid of Honda and getting a benchmark, they recognised they had to do something with the team."

“I don't know how they would have come to that conclusion unless they put an engine in the back of the car that somebody else was racing, and somebody else was doing well with.

"In doing that they recognised then that they have some bigger problems other than just the engine, and that they had to make some changes.

thegreenhell

7,664 posts

177 months

Tuesday 11th February
quotequote all
I don't know why they never let another team use the engine at the same time. That would have given them a benchmark and allowed accelerated development of the PU. I know they had exclusivity in the first year, and Honda didn't really have the capacity to support two teams to start with, but they could have brought in another team in years two or three. Sauber were poised to sign up at one point, IIRC.

Fortitude

484 posts

150 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
…you DO have to wonder… IF McLaren had stuck with the Honda engine… …then they would have had the ‘works engine’ that Red Bull have now got, THAT IMHO, could challenge with a potential title going to Red Bull…

Instead, they go to Renault, change again, to Mercedes, with ‘speculation’ of a potential exit rumoured… ..then to top it ALL, McLaren will have to rebuild their 2020 existing chassis, for a different power train in 2021… …taking time, money and effort away from the delayed new configuration, required due to the new F1 Regs. Due in 2021, but delayed until 2022.

I DO wonder what Ron Dennis, MUST be thinking… …Ron has kept stoically silent, when Ron could have said, “Well I did tell you, BUT you wouldn’t listen!”

Personally, I do miss Ron Dennis from the F1 paddock, Ron was part of the F1 experience… ...as I have said before some pages back, when Ron sold out of McLaren, he must have known things weren't going to go too well!!

McLaren gets permission to change its chassis
By Balazs Szabo on 27 Mar 2020, 18:00

https://www.f1technical.net/news/22373


McLaren in trouble?
March 22, 2020 · by thejudge13 · in Daily F1 News and Comment. ·

https://thejudge13.com/2020/03/22/mclaren-in-troub...

jsf

19,273 posts

194 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
tumbleweed

janesmith1950

8,423 posts

53 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
I don't believe McLaren were ever going to get the best out of the relationship with Honda. Too much criticism flowing and not enough working as one. The Japanese are very sensitive to public floggings (Alonso can't and won't get a seat with any team anything to do with Honda now, for example).

Ironically, considering the experience with Renault, Red Bull seem to have learned their lesson and have worked with a joined up public face with Honda and appear to be getting the results.

HighwayStar

3,038 posts

102 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
Fortitude said:
…you DO have to wonder… IF McLaren had stuck with the Honda engine… …then they would have had the ‘works engine’ that Red Bull have now got, THAT IMHO, could challenge with a potential title going to Red Bull…

Instead, they go to Renault, change again, to Mercedes, with ‘speculation’ of a potential exit rumoured… ..then to top it ALL, McLaren will have to rebuild their 2020 existing chassis, for a different power train in 2021… …taking time, money and effort away from the delayed new configuration, required due to the new F1 Regs. Due in 2021, but delayed until 2022.

I DO wonder what Ron Dennis, MUST be thinking… …Ron has kept stoically silent, when Ron could have said, “Well I did tell you, BUT you wouldn’t listen!”

Personally, I do miss Ron Dennis from the F1 paddock, Ron was part of the F1 experience… ...as I have said before some pages back, when Ron sold out of McLaren, he must have known things weren't going to go too well!!

McLaren gets permission to change its chassis
By Balazs Szabo on 27 Mar 2020, 18:00

https://www.f1technical.net/news/22373


McLaren in trouble?
March 22, 2020 · by thejudge13 · in Daily F1 News and Comment. ·

https://thejudge13.com/2020/03/22/mclaren-in-troub...
Ron didn’t just sell out... he didn’t want to go, he was forced out. I do agree re Honda but it went the way it went and they are way they are. I think switching to the Merc engine before the now delayed new regulations come in will be good for Mclaren. They get a years knowledge and experience with Merc before the new regs.

thegreenhell

7,664 posts

177 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
Honda have made big strides in the last couple of years, but they're still only the third best engine on the grid. They won't be winning a world title any time soon, unless Mercedes have a catastrophe. Apart from the financial implications of splitting with Honda, McLaren are better off as a Mercedes customer in every way that matters.

Bo_apex

1,140 posts

176 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
Honda have made big strides in the last couple of years, but they're still only the third best engine on the grid. They won't be winning a world title any time soon, unless Mercedes have a catastrophe. Apart from the financial implications of splitting with Honda, McLaren are better off as a Mercedes customer in every way that matters.
It doesn't seem so long ago that Honda were mighty in F1.

Third best engine makes MV's achievements in 2019 even more impressive.

There is some hope.

HustleRussell

18,466 posts

118 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
Honda have made big strides in the last couple of years, but they're still only the third best engine on the grid.
Source? Ferrari have been rumbled and lost some performance, Mercedes has some reliability issues in testing, neither the Renault nor the McLaren provide a great gauge on the Renault PU’s performance compared to the front runners, and Honda have been coming on leaps and bounds... the Red Bull is not necessarily the best chassis especially at the beginning of the season.

There’s probably a few percent in it, close enough that the competitive order between the PUs will probably vary circuit to circuit.

janesmith1950

8,423 posts

53 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
Bo_apex said:
It doesn't seem so long ago that Honda were mighty in F1.
1980s?

Their engines in the naughties weren't anything special.

TheDeuce

7,293 posts

24 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
Source? Ferrari have been rumbled and lost some performance, Mercedes has some reliability issues in testing, neither the Renault nor the McLaren provide a great gauge on the Renault PU’s performance compared to the front runners, and Honda have been coming on leaps and bounds... the Red Bull is not necessarily the best chassis especially at the beginning of the season.

There’s probably a few percent in it, close enough that the competitive order between the PUs will probably vary circuit to circuit.
I think you're right. The % gap is tiny and so easily mitigated entirely by aero philosophy.

The 'best' PU in this era is frankly the one least likely to break down. Few things in F1 impact performance as greatly as a car pulling over in a cloud of smoke! To finish first blah blah blah..

Speaking of reliability, I noticed last season at least a couple of times max was given a significant power boost for the bigger part of the race to attack/defend and the PU coped with it. Whereas the Renault PU's maintained their habit of imploding even without the driver's appearing to benefit from additional power modes at the time.

Bo_apex

1,140 posts

176 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
Bo_apex said:
It doesn't seem so long ago that Honda were mighty in F1.
1980s?

Their engines in the naughties weren't anything special.
Blimey !

Time certainly does fly by when you're having fun.

Fortitude

484 posts

150 months

Sunday 29th March
quotequote all
HighwayStar said:
Ron didn’t just sell out... he didn’t want to go, he was forced out...
I am saddened by that. Those who forced Ron Dennis out, IMHO, should be ashamed of themselves.