Fernando Alonso

[TheDeuce]

Wombat3 said:

He might not be quite as quick on the limit as before but I suspect he'll be just as relentless , metronomic and ruthless as ever. If the car has the potential he will win in it.

To a significant extent the car will be this years Renault... So if he's still got it, he could see a podium if circumstances allow. Same as DR in the Renault last GP pretty much.

That's the measure of success. The measure of failure would be to not draw out a significant points lead above his team mate I suppose?

[thegreenhell]

TheDeuce said:

That's a different way of looking at it!!

I'm going to have to think on that view point... You 'might' be making a good point in terms of how it all sort of ended out for the best.. I'm just not convinced that's a good reason to be to warm towards a guy that does such damage in the first place. It can't be assumed it will always somehow work out well can it?

Honda could have simply packed their bags and sodded off.

And I didn't suggest that you should. Merely that he somehow caused some good things to happen which perhaps otherwise would not have.

[TheDeuce]

thegreenhell said:

TheDeuce said:

That's a different way of looking at it!!

I'm going to have to think on that view point... You 'might' be making a good point in terms of how it all sort of ended out for the best.. I'm just not convinced that's a good reason to be to warm towards a guy that does such damage in the first place. It can't be assumed it will always somehow work out well can it?

Honda could have simply packed their bags and sodded off.

And I didn't suggest that you should. Merely that he somehow caused some good things to happen which perhaps otherwise would not have.

Agreed. It basically comes down to whether we judge on the infraction or the fallout...

I guess I can be happy with how it turned out and still not consider him a particularly admirable bloke..

[tight fart]

thegreenhell said:

Without Alonso, Honda would be leaving F1 without any wins in this era of F1. The engine just isn't good enough to win in anything less than a Red Bull, and it would never have found its way into that car without the McLaren divorce. The McLaren was no where near being up to par, and it was only after they fitted the Renault, and gave themselves a true benchmark to other teams, that they were able to steer a course towards their current recovery.

I'm not suggesting he was a positive influence, but he said what needed to be said, and he precipitated what, in hindsight, were the best possible outcomes for all parties, except perhaps himself.

I totally disagree with that, but a mate who works at McLaren say’s the same as you,so you maybe right. (They needed to dump Honda to realise it was the chassis)

[thegreenhell]

TheDeuce said:

Agreed. It basically comes down to whether we judge on the infraction or the fallout...

I guess I can be happy with how it turned out and still not consider him a particularly admirable bloke..

I wasn't making a judgement on him, or trying to change anybody else's judgement of him. He brings drama and that can turn toxic. No argument there.

The argument I was making was with the point that he ruined something that could have been good, when in actual fact he simply put an early end to something that allowed both McLaren and Honda to prosper separately, arguably more than they would have been able to do together. He wasn't the only bad influence in that whole relationship, and it was only by breaking it apart that everyone could see and move on in a positive manner. But that's all hindsight.

[TheDeuce]

thegreenhell said:

TheDeuce said:

Agreed. It basically comes down to whether we judge on the infraction or the fallout...

I guess I can be happy with how it turned out and still not consider him a particularly admirable bloke..

I wasn't making a judgement on him, or trying to change anybody else's judgement of him. He brings drama and that can turn toxic. No argument there.

The argument I was making was with the point that he ruined something that could have been good, when in actual fact he simply put an early end to something that allowed both McLaren and Honda to prosper separately, arguably more than they would have been able to do together. He wasn't the only bad influence in that whole relationship, and it was only by breaking it apart that everyone could see and move on in a positive manner. But that's all hindsight.

Ok, I agree. With the caveat we will never 100% know what could have been McLaren & Honda if things had gone differently - although even on that point, I accept you're likely right still, it wasn't going well even before Alonso went on the attack. The partnership formed between RB and Honda was stronger and clearly learned from the McLaren episode.

[anonymous-user]

TheDeuce said:

To a significant extent the car will be this years Renault... So if he's still got it, he could see a podium if circumstances allow. Same as DR in the Renault last GP pretty much.

That's the measure of success. The measure of failure would be to not draw out a significant points lead above his team mate I suppose?

10% drop in aero is significant, it will affect the teams significantly. Those still developing this years car at the expense of next year will lose out.

[TheDeuce]

jsf said:

TheDeuce said:

To a significant extent the car will be this years Renault... So if he's still got it, he could see a podium if circumstances allow. Same as DR in the Renault last GP pretty much.

That's the measure of success. The measure of failure would be to not draw out a significant points lead above his team mate I suppose?

10% drop in aero is significant, it will affect the teams significantly. Those still developing this years car at the expense of next year will lose out.

I think it's too early to factor that aspect in to predictions. This '10%' figure is a bit vague anyway. It was an estimate based on the cars being knocked back to closer to 2019 downforce levels... But clearly different teams have evolved at different rates since then, and some have found new aero advantages in areas the incoming regs won't effect.

If the headline figure is 10% what's the betting that all balanced out the net loss will be more like 4%? And in many cases wiped out in terms of pace by a subsequent PU update for next year?

I stand to be corrected but I'm not sure that this time next year we'll remember the 2021 tweaks with any relevance at all..

[anonymous-user]

TheDeuce said:

jsf said:

TheDeuce said:

To a significant extent the car will be this years Renault... So if he's still got it, he could see a podium if circumstances allow. Same as DR in the Renault last GP pretty much.

That's the measure of success. The measure of failure would be to not draw out a significant points lead above his team mate I suppose?

10% drop in aero is significant, it will affect the teams significantly. Those still developing this years car at the expense of next year will lose out.

I think it's too early to factor that aspect in to predictions. This '10%' figure is a bit vague anyway. It was an estimate based on the cars being knocked back to closer to 2019 downforce levels... But clearly different teams have evolved at different rates since then, and some have found new aero advantages in areas the incoming regs won't effect.

If the headline figure is 10% what's the betting that all balanced out the net loss will be more like 4%? And in many cases wiped out in terms of pace by a subsequent PU update for next year?

I stand to be corrected but I'm not sure that this time next year we'll remember the 2021 tweaks with any relevance at all..

I had a look at the revised rules after your post, they aren't changing what I thought they were. It will make very little difference after dev work, they might even have more downforce than they have now but with slightly more drag. Oh dear Ferrari.

[TheDeuce]

jsf said:

TheDeuce said:

jsf said:

TheDeuce said:

To a significant extent the car will be this years Renault... So if he's still got it, he could see a podium if circumstances allow. Same as DR in the Renault last GP pretty much.

That's the measure of success. The measure of failure would be to not draw out a significant points lead above his team mate I suppose?

10% drop in aero is significant, it will affect the teams significantly. Those still developing this years car at the expense of next year will lose out.

I think it's too early to factor that aspect in to predictions. This '10%' figure is a bit vague anyway. It was an estimate based on the cars being knocked back to closer to 2019 downforce levels... But clearly different teams have evolved at different rates since then, and some have found new aero advantages in areas the incoming regs won't effect.

If the headline figure is 10% what's the betting that all balanced out the net loss will be more like 4%? And in many cases wiped out in terms of pace by a subsequent PU update for next year?

I stand to be corrected but I'm not sure that this time next year we'll remember the 2021 tweaks with any relevance at all..

I had a look at the revised rules after your post, they aren't changing what I thought they were. It will make very little difference after dev work, they might even have more downforce than they have now but with slightly more drag. Oh dear Ferrari.

So much has changed this year I had to look this particular change up again myself

I'm pretty sure they were judged to hold the cars back approx as much as they would move forward this year, one way or the other. As it's turned out I think a few teams have made leaps forward in aero above what was predicted and could well remain firmly ahead inspite of the rule tweaks.

I've long been of the view that Ferrari are behind the times in terms of aero so God knows how reliant they are on the techniques the updated regs were designed to hobble. Their aero has been questionable for a good while - hard to say how long as we don't know how long they were cheating the extra power to mask it...

Either way, Ferrari next season will be roughly as this season I expect. Their entire development roadmap is in tatters following their undoing and the limitations on development that have followed. No hopers until 2022.

[Exige77]

Aerodynamics is for people who can’t game the PU rules.

[TheDeuce]

Exige77 said:

Aerodynamics is for people who can’t game the PU rules.

That old quote of Enzo is awkward these days - Ferrari having demonstrated that they actually can't (legally) build a competitive PU.

I'm sure they'll get on top of it at some point but Ferrari having the weakest PU on the grid is pretty embarrassing in the mean time..

[M5-911]

TheDeuce said:

That old quote of Enzo is awkward these days - Ferrari having demonstrated that they actually can't (legally) build a competitive PU.

I'm sure they'll get on top of it at some point but Ferrari having the weakest PU on the grid is pretty embarrassing in the mean time..

Interesting that if you look at their road cars, they are pretty much the weakest amongst the fast GTs and supercars as well. Ferrari is making money on it's legacy.

[TheDeuce]

M5-911 said:

TheDeuce said:

That old quote of Enzo is awkward these days - Ferrari having demonstrated that they actually can't (legally) build a competitive PU.

I'm sure they'll get on top of it at some point but Ferrari having the weakest PU on the grid is pretty embarrassing in the mean time..

Interesting that if you look at their road cars, they are pretty much the weakest amongst the fast GTs and supercars as well. Ferrari is making money on it's legacy.

They are all said and done a tiny car company, up against road cars produced by others, Mercedes as an example, they simply don't have the size to invest in such advanced manufacturing capabilities.Back in the day with some ingenuity Ferrari could produce an engine that was 'better' than just about anyone else because mainstream manufacturers weren't particularly interested in extreme performance variants of their bulk selling cars. These days.. they are. They all want a halo car and they put in their own power plants that will match Ferrari power output (often purposefully) and exceed it in terms of reliability, economy, emissions.

Ferrari are no longer benefiting from occupying a niche area of of automotive engineering, the bigger fish can do it all faster and better if they desire to. The cars and brand are still niche and wonderful on many other levels of course, and the heritage will always be there. I do wonder how long F1 can work to 'show off' their engineering prowess though. Currently it's doing more to highlight that Ferrari power and aero are both questionable - which can't be a good thing.

Having typed all that I'm starting to appreciate why they decided cheating was a good plan!

[thegreenhell]

Poor little Ferrari, only making a billion dollars company profit each year...

[M5-911]

TheDeuce said:

They are all said and done a tiny car company, up against road cars produced by others, Mercedes as an example, they simply don't have the size to invest in such advanced manufacturing capabilities.Back in the day with some ingenuity Ferrari could produce an engine that was 'better' than just about anyone else because mainstream manufacturers weren't particularly interested in extreme performance variants of their bulk selling cars. These days.. they are. They all want a halo car and they put in their own power plants that will match Ferrari power output (often purposefully) and exceed it in terms of reliability, economy, emissions.

Ferrari are no longer benefiting from occupying a niche area of of automotive engineering, the bigger fish can do it all faster and better if they desire to. The cars and brand are still niche and wonderful on many other levels of course, and the heritage will always be there. I do wonder how long F1 can work to 'show off' their engineering prowess though. Currently it's doing more to highlight that Ferrari power and aero are both questionable - which can't be a good thing.

Having typed all that I'm starting to appreciate why they decided cheating was a good plan!

Totally agree.

[rev-erend]

M5-911 said:

Interesting that if you look at their road cars, they are pretty much the weakest amongst the fast GTs and supercars as well. Ferrari is making money on it's legacy.

Not sure that I would agree with that and I'm not even a Ferrari fan boy.

SF-90 and others are right up there with the best.

[TheDeuce]

rev-erend said:

M5-911 said:

Interesting that if you look at their road cars, they are pretty much the weakest amongst the fast GTs and supercars as well. Ferrari is making money on it's legacy.

Not sure that I would agree with that and I'm not even a Ferrari fan boy.

SF-90 and others are right up there with the best.

VAG alone have 4 cars that are quicker off the line, to 100mph etc and Ferrari seem keen not to have the FS-90 set official times at circuits where it could directly be compared to competitors..

It's a very impressive car for sure, but part of that is 'because Ferrari', I think if it were compared directly to others at a few select circuits it would be apparent that others are ahead in terms of outright performance. 911 GT2 RS and Aventador SVJ spring to mind.

Anyway, back to F1 - a global competition that allows Ferrari to show off their abilities vs other manufacturers. How are they doing..?

[Bo_apex]

TheDeuce said:

rev-erend said:

M5-911 said:

Interesting that if you look at their road cars, they are pretty much the weakest amongst the fast GTs and supercars as well. Ferrari is making money on it's legacy.

Not sure that I would agree with that and I'm not even a Ferrari fan boy.

SF-90 and others are right up there with the best.

VAG alone have 4 cars that are quicker off the line, to 100mph etc and Ferrari seem keen not to have the FS-90 set official times at circuits where it could directly be compared to competitors..

It's a very impressive car for sure, but part of that is 'because Ferrari', I think if it were compared directly to others at a few select circuits it would be apparent that others are ahead in terms of outright performance. 911 GT2 RS and Aventador SVJ spring to mind.

Anyway, back to F1 - a global competition that allows Ferrari to show off their abilities vs other manufacturers. How are they doing..?

Ferrari doesn't need F1.

They should walk away and just produce exotic street cars and a bit of Le Mans.

But - F1 would be less interesting without their Tele Nova !

[TheDeuce]

Bo_apex said:

Ferrari doesn't need F1.

They should walk away and just produce exotic street cars and a bit of Le Mans.

But - F1 would be less interesting without their Tele Nova !

I'd say you're probably right. I think Ferrari probably would do fine without F1. I don't think many of their customers really think they're buying the pinnacle of performance due to seeing them racing in F1... They buy the cars because a) It's a Ferrari. b) heritage and image, they're a thoroughbred sports car c) it's a Ferrari. I also think F1 would miss Ferrari but would get on with it.

All hypothetical though, neither F1 or Ferrari are in any rush to find out for sure just in case... !