Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
Sway said:
If I'm ever in a position, I'll be buying a F1 - it's my absolute pinnacle dream. I'll only do so if Flemke is still willing to share his mods (if I recall, he mentioned he'd do so for a respectable charitable donation?). Otherwise - it might as well stay a dream, as I'd be too scared to drive (and probably destroy!) it.
Ah, but if you were in the position to buy a F1 nowadays, you would presumably have the means to spend the same effort/expense as flemke to get the handling sorted to your satisfaction too plus have the further option of using much more modern tyres say like a Cup2 as well as the latest fancy ohlins or multimatic racing dampers which would have to be an improvement over the Enzo tyres/kw's on his car! 
isaldiri said:
Sway said:
If I'm ever in a position, I'll be buying a F1 - it's my absolute pinnacle dream. I'll only do so if Flemke is still willing to share his mods (if I recall, he mentioned he'd do so for a respectable charitable donation?). Otherwise - it might as well stay a dream, as I'd be too scared to drive (and probably destroy!) it.
Ah, but if you were in the position to buy a F1 nowadays, you would presumably have the means to spend the same effort/expense as flemke to get the handling sorted to your satisfaction too plus have the further option of using much more modern tyres say like a Cup2 as well as the latest fancy ohlins or multimatic racing dampers which would have to be an improvement over the Enzo tyres/kw's on his car! 
I did help design the custom damper curves with Black Art Designs for the shiny dampers I fitted to my (sadly missed - had to sell last year) 98 MX5 though!
Sway said:
If I'm ever in a position, I'll be buying a F1 - it's my absolute pinnacle dream. I'll only do so if Flemke is still willing to share his mods (if I recall, he mentioned he'd do so for a respectable charitable donation?). Otherwise - it might as well stay a dream, as I'd be too scared to drive (and probably destroy!) it.
Considering F1 prices now and in the foreseeable future, I'm beginning to think it would be possible to develop a similar car of your own liking and specifically to your own taste for a similar amount of money as buying one used F1.PAUL500 said:
At the time I thought the fine given to Mclaren was totally ridiculous and Ron was surprisingly naive to think that certain individuals would not capitalise on the matter when he went to the FIA so openly with the facts at hand.
Life tends to even things out over time and others had their come uppence in the end.
However to blame Ferrari for the incident and then miss out on owning some great cars as a result seems odd, they did not commence the process which resulted in the FIA handing out such punishment, and were the innocent, effected party at the start, sure they made capital of it afterwards, but F1 is a business after all and its dog eat dog, but each to their own.
Same with Leno and his boycott of the brand because the US agent was not very nice to him years ago, such that he loves the F40 but wont take ownership of one even though Ferrari would gain nothing by him running a second hand product of theirs.
Re Ferrari's not commencing the process (of the 2007 Mosley-Ferrari Scandal), it depends on how one thinks it commenced. Life tends to even things out over time and others had their come uppence in the end.
However to blame Ferrari for the incident and then miss out on owning some great cars as a result seems odd, they did not commence the process which resulted in the FIA handing out such punishment, and were the innocent, effected party at the start, sure they made capital of it afterwards, but F1 is a business after all and its dog eat dog, but each to their own.
Same with Leno and his boycott of the brand because the US agent was not very nice to him years ago, such that he loves the F40 but wont take ownership of one even though Ferrari would gain nothing by him running a second hand product of theirs.
The starting point for me was that Ferrari was running an illegal car, to which the FIA was turning a blind eye. With that car they won the first race of the 2007 season, in Australia, and it was regarding the illegality of that car that Stepney had first contacted and informed Coughlan. That first contact was followed by many others, culminating in the handing over of the dossier, but however one slices it the mess started with Ferrari's running an illegal car.
This was nothing new. Amazingly, a couple of years ago Bernie Ecclestone openly admitted that the FIA always favoured Ferrari, because of that team's importance in terms of money and prestige.
Not long after 2007, I was having a private chat with a very senior person at a very successful F1 team. He told me that it was uncanny - for years, whenever his team would submit a good idea to the FIA for approval, if the FIA approved, a few weeks after his team had submitted it, by sheer coincidence the same good idea would show up on the Ferraris.
If Jean Todt had done what was apparently impossible for him and been a good sportsman, he would have made a bunch of noise, then recognised that there was actually zero evidence that McLaren had used any of the information provided by Stepney (with the possible exception of the timing of one pit-stop), and moved on. Instead he got the Italian delegate to the FIA to make an official protest of the ruling of the first hearing (that McLaren had no case to answer) and it deteriorated from there.
For the team that over the years plainly got the most favourable treatment by the regulator and that, as a matter of course, ran illegal devices whenever they could, to try to inflate by a factor of probably 50 the seriousness of a tort suffered by Ferrari and to accept if not endorse the prospect of their biggest rival being put out of business permanently was inexcusable.
We have to remember that the alleged smoking gun evidence that more people at McLaren than only Mike Coughlan knew about his relationship with Stepney was that two drivers knew about it. Drivers!
These guys had absolutely zero to do with designing the cars! When prior to the first hearing McLaren did their extensive internal investigation to see whether any of Coughlan's information was passed on to anyone else within McLaren, that investigation was limited to the team's engineers and managers, for the perfectly sensible reason that only they had any input in how the car might be designed. The drivers were no more relevant to the cars' engineering design than the canteen staff were. Yet Mosley used the fact that the completely irrelevant de la Rosa and Alonso knew that there were communications between Stepney and Coughlan as a pretext for calling the "spying" "systematic" and the team "corrupt". Did Ferrari object to any of this? Absolutely not. Instead, they demanded that their own people be allowed to cross-examine McLaren employees at the second FIA hearing.
Mosley tried to put McLaren out of business, but over in the Peanut Gallery Ferrari were applauding and egging him on every inch of the way.
isaldiri said:
Sway said:
If I'm ever in a position, I'll be buying a F1 - it's my absolute pinnacle dream. I'll only do so if Flemke is still willing to share his mods (if I recall, he mentioned he'd do so for a respectable charitable donation?). Otherwise - it might as well stay a dream, as I'd be too scared to drive (and probably destroy!) it.
Ah, but if you were in the position to buy a F1 nowadays, you would presumably have the means to spend the same effort/expense as flemke to get the handling sorted to your satisfaction too plus have the further option of using much more modern tyres say like a Cup2 as well as the latest fancy ohlins or multimatic racing dampers which would have to be an improvement over the Enzo tyres/kw's on his car! Second, Cup tyres are great at doing exactly what you don't need to do in an F1 - go around a track.
Re dampers, at least for the moment I have gone back to using the Bilstein adjustables that they used on the 1995 GTRs. There are actually not many companies that make adjustable dampers that will fit on the F1. The issue is that at the front the entire damper body goes inside the coil spring which is tucked up under the leading edge of the windscreen. You cannot get at the body to adjust anything, so the adjustment has to be on a remote reservoir. Most damper companies do not make that design, although Bilstein and KW do.
Just seen on reddit that Lewis Hamilton has chassis #44, sold a couple of years ago. Pretty cool.
https://redd.it/eskg6n
https://redd.it/eskg6n
Brainpox said:
Just seen on reddit that Lewis Hamilton has chassis #44, sold a couple of years ago. Pretty cool.
https://redd.it/eskg6n
wash he crying because of all the pollution his car was making?https://redd.it/eskg6n
t into this thread.flemke said:
I would say it would be a big mistake to go to Cup 2s. First, they have a lower aspect ratio, which would look like rubbish on the car.
Second, Cup tyres are great at doing exactly what you don't need to do in an F1 - go around a track.
Opinions might differ here I realise but personally I like the feel of Cup tyres on a sports car compared to the relatively softer feel of a more 'normal' road tyre (say PS4S/Supersport vs Cup2) and would always put any sports car I have on Cups if possible, especially as I think the modern Cup2 has a pretty amazing breadth of usability even in the cold and wet unlike the older Cup1 (like on the CSL). And luckily a cm or 2 of sidewall doesn't bother me aesthetically too much so my (purely imaginary sadly!) F1 would be going on 345/30/20 Cup2s pronto! Second, Cup tyres are great at doing exactly what you don't need to do in an F1 - go around a track.
flemke said:
Re dampers, at least for the moment I have gone back to using the Bilstein adjustables that they used on the 1995 GTRs. There are actually not many companies that make adjustable dampers that will fit on the F1. The issue is that at the front the entire damper body goes inside the coil spring which is tucked up under the leading edge of the windscreen. You cannot get at the body to adjust anything, so the adjustment has to be on a remote reservoir. Most damper companies do not make that design, although Bilstein and KW do.
Ah didn't realise you had gone back to the GTR Bilsteins, interesting that.Would it not be possible to do without the adjustment and just setup the damper for it's imain ntended use and therefore not have to bother with messing around with various clicks? The carrera gt/996 gt3s all had afaik non adjustable dampers for example and I have to admit 3-4 way adjustables go way over my head and sometimes simplicity has it's own elegance....
Something is only illegal if deemed such by the powers that manage the rules, what is is they also say in F1, its only illegal if you get caught! so I still do not agree that Ferrari started the process.
They were all at it, bending the rules beyond their elastic limit, look at Benetton, they just hid it better technically.
If Mosley wanted to collapse Mclaren, all he had to do was ban them for a 12 months, game over, even if they had managed to keep their head above water during that time then all the best staff would have moved on anyway by the next season.
If anyone is to blame then it was the FIA not Ferrari, Mclaren and Ferrari have always had beef, look at the 76 season as an example. I am saying this as a huge Mclaren fan, my first poster was of an M23 purchased with my pocket money at Silverstone in that 76 season.
No one has to justify a reason for how they feel about a brand, but a good British saying is quite apt, "its like cutting off your nose to spite your face"
They were all at it, bending the rules beyond their elastic limit, look at Benetton, they just hid it better technically.
If Mosley wanted to collapse Mclaren, all he had to do was ban them for a 12 months, game over, even if they had managed to keep their head above water during that time then all the best staff would have moved on anyway by the next season.
If anyone is to blame then it was the FIA not Ferrari, Mclaren and Ferrari have always had beef, look at the 76 season as an example. I am saying this as a huge Mclaren fan, my first poster was of an M23 purchased with my pocket money at Silverstone in that 76 season.
No one has to justify a reason for how they feel about a brand, but a good British saying is quite apt, "its like cutting off your nose to spite your face"
isaldiri said:
flemke said:
I would say it would be a big mistake to go to Cup 2s. First, they have a lower aspect ratio, which would look like rubbish on the car.
Second, Cup tyres are great at doing exactly what you don't need to do in an F1 - go around a track.
Opinions might differ here I realise but personally I like the feel of Cup tyres on a sports car compared to the relatively softer feel of a more 'normal' road tyre (say PS4S/Supersport vs Cup2) and would always put any sports car I have on Cups if possible, especially as I think the modern Cup2 has a pretty amazing breadth of usability even in the cold and wet unlike the older Cup1 (like on the CSL). And luckily a cm or 2 of sidewall doesn't bother me aesthetically too much so my (purely imaginary sadly!) F1 would be going on 345/30/20 Cup2s pronto! Second, Cup tyres are great at doing exactly what you don't need to do in an F1 - go around a track.
flemke said:
Re dampers, at least for the moment I have gone back to using the Bilstein adjustables that they used on the 1995 GTRs. There are actually not many companies that make adjustable dampers that will fit on the F1. The issue is that at the front the entire damper body goes inside the coil spring which is tucked up under the leading edge of the windscreen. You cannot get at the body to adjust anything, so the adjustment has to be on a remote reservoir. Most damper companies do not make that design, although Bilstein and KW do.
Ah didn't realise you had gone back to the GTR Bilsteins, interesting that.Would it not be possible to do without the adjustment and just setup the damper for it's imain ntended use and therefore not have to bother with messing around with various clicks? The carrera gt/996 gt3s all had afaik non adjustable dampers for example and I have to admit 3-4 way adjustables go way over my head and sometimes simplicity has it's own elegance....
PAUL500 said:
Something is only illegal if deemed such by the powers that manage the rules, what is is they also say in F1, its only illegal if you get caught! so I still do not agree that Ferrari started the process.
They were all at it, bending the rules beyond their elastic limit, look at Benetton, they just hid it better technically.
If Mosley wanted to collapse Mclaren, all he had to do was ban them for a 12 months, game over, even if they had managed to keep their head above water during that time then all the best staff would have moved on anyway by the next season.
If anyone is to blame then it was the FIA not Ferrari, Mclaren and Ferrari have always had beef, look at the 76 season as an example. I am saying this as a huge Mclaren fan, my first poster was of an M23 purchased with my pocket money at Silverstone in that 76 season.
No one has to justify a reason for how they feel about a brand, but a good British saying is quite apt, "its like cutting off your nose to spite your face"
Re the concept that something is illegal only if so deemed by the powers managing the rules: yes, that is the way it is meant to work in honest regimes. In the case of corrupt regimes, however, that theoretical principle cannot be expected to function. They were all at it, bending the rules beyond their elastic limit, look at Benetton, they just hid it better technically.
If Mosley wanted to collapse Mclaren, all he had to do was ban them for a 12 months, game over, even if they had managed to keep their head above water during that time then all the best staff would have moved on anyway by the next season.
If anyone is to blame then it was the FIA not Ferrari, Mclaren and Ferrari have always had beef, look at the 76 season as an example. I am saying this as a huge Mclaren fan, my first poster was of an M23 purchased with my pocket money at Silverstone in that 76 season.
No one has to justify a reason for how they feel about a brand, but a good British saying is quite apt, "its like cutting off your nose to spite your face"
Everybody knows (again, as Bernie himself admitted when he no longer had skin in the game) that the FIA systematically favoured Ferrari over the other teams. Beyond that general pattern, however, we had the specific facts in this case: as soon as McLaren formally asked the FIA if they could use the system that Ferrari had been using, the FIA said, "No, that is outside the regulations." They subsequently changed their own testing protocol, but they would not have had to do that if the device had been legal in the first place. Ergo, the Ferrari device had been illegal all along; there was a question of whether the FIA had known about the device all along, but that was academic. Ferrari had been using it, it was illegal when they used it, and furthermore - which is rarely mentioned - it was used by Kimi Raikkonen to win the first race of that season, and the points from that win enabled him to be the 2007 WDC. If the FIA had been doing its job properly, the Ferrari would have been banned from that race and Hamilton would have been WDC.
As to your point that, if Mosley had wanted to collapse McLaren all he would have had to do was to ban them for 12 months, you may recall that that - a 12 months' ban - was precisely what Mosley did want to do. The only reason it did not happen was that, at the crucial WMSC September meeting, Bernie talked him out of it!
Yes, the FIA in the disreputable person of Max Mosley was more to blame than Ferrari were, but Ferrari were co-conspirators pursuing at every opportunity their own short-term interests at the expense of elementary fairness, decency and the best interests of the sport that has served them so well. Ferrari may not have fired the gun, but they loaded it and handed it to the sniper.
I guess like all good debates we have to agree to disagree 
F1 has always been akin to a corrupt African state, did anyone ever check the FIA books to see where the fine was actually spent? I guess Mercedes rather than Ron paid it? or did it all just get brushed under the carpet once the dust had settled? and a rather large I.O.U is stored away in the safe in Paris.
I could never understand how a cool, round, utterly stupid number like that was justified.
I like both companies but there are only two of their actual products I would aspire to own, an LM from one, and an LM from the other!
F1 has always been akin to a corrupt African state, did anyone ever check the FIA books to see where the fine was actually spent? I guess Mercedes rather than Ron paid it? or did it all just get brushed under the carpet once the dust had settled? and a rather large I.O.U is stored away in the safe in Paris.
I could never understand how a cool, round, utterly stupid number like that was justified.
I like both companies but there are only two of their actual products I would aspire to own, an LM from one, and an LM from the other!
PAUL500 said:
I guess like all good debates we have to agree to disagree
F1 has always been akin to a corrupt African state, did anyone ever check the FIA books to see where the fine was actually spent? I guess Mercedes rather than Ron paid it? or did it all just get brushed under the carpet once the dust had settled? and a rather large I.O.U is stored away in the safe in Paris.
I could never understand how a cool, round, utterly stupid number like that was justified.
I like both companies but there are only two of their actual products I would aspire to own, an LM from one, and an LM from the other!
The $100m was supposedly given to the FIA Foundation. I would be astonished if Mosley had let them get away with not paying.F1 has always been akin to a corrupt African state, did anyone ever check the FIA books to see where the fine was actually spent? I guess Mercedes rather than Ron paid it? or did it all just get brushed under the carpet once the dust had settled? and a rather large I.O.U is stored away in the safe in Paris.
I could never understand how a cool, round, utterly stupid number like that was justified.
I like both companies but there are only two of their actual products I would aspire to own, an LM from one, and an LM from the other!
AFAIK, (although I have never seen formal confirmation) the money was paid by the McLaren Group, and therefore the cost to each party was proportionate to its shareholding (40% M B, 30% Mumtalakat, 15% each RD and MO). Remember that roughly half the money was what McLaren Racing were due to be paid by the Commercial Rights Holder for what should have been their WCC position, and therefore the effective out-of-pocket figure was about half of the headline number.
I'd expect all the parties involved were knowledgeable enough of the various actors in F1 and where loyalties lay. Not to mention, back when all this was happening, I was firmly in the McLaren camp and found the FIA and Ferrari'sbehaviour abhorrent (I still reel from the barge boards ask those years ago).
In hindsight, considering how well they all knew both one another and the machinations in the sport, perhaps McLaren, by their continued presence, accepted that and the risks that go with it.
Ferrari have never wanted a level playing field in competition and what happened in 2007 doesn't seem to be an emergence of new behaviours, merely the victim on that occasion was both overt and McLaren.
In the event I were in a position to buy a new supercar (or whatever terminology you want to give it), I'd not rule out a Ferrari on the basis they behave and have behaved like the spoiled, vindictive brat we know they always have been. Perversely, depriving myself of something I'd otherwise want on the above basis, is possibly letting 'them' win!
Ironically, having said all of that, I find myself thinking that with Ross Brawn and Napoleon at the helm of the sport, and Ferrari with their current magic straight line speed, history is repeating!
In hindsight, considering how well they all knew both one another and the machinations in the sport, perhaps McLaren, by their continued presence, accepted that and the risks that go with it.
Ferrari have never wanted a level playing field in competition and what happened in 2007 doesn't seem to be an emergence of new behaviours, merely the victim on that occasion was both overt and McLaren.
In the event I were in a position to buy a new supercar (or whatever terminology you want to give it), I'd not rule out a Ferrari on the basis they behave and have behaved like the spoiled, vindictive brat we know they always have been. Perversely, depriving myself of something I'd otherwise want on the above basis, is possibly letting 'them' win!
Ironically, having said all of that, I find myself thinking that with Ross Brawn and Napoleon at the helm of the sport, and Ferrari with their current magic straight line speed, history is repeating!
Brainpox said:
Just seen on reddit that Lewis Hamilton has chassis #44, sold a couple of years ago. Pretty cool.
https://redd.it/eskg6n
Front end looks a bit low in that video? https://redd.it/eskg6n
I wonder how it would have played out in a court of law if Mclaren had simply delayed, then finally refused to pay the fine.
The FIA are not a legal or state body, they are a self governing entity of a commercial process, so if they unilaterally decide to slap a player of their game with a huge fine, with no justification of how it was commercially calculated then would they have a leg to stand on in law if payment was not made?
I imagine their only recourse would simply be to then prevent Mclaren playing the game at some point?
The FIA was not owed the money, they had no commercial loss as a result of all the fuss.
Once Mosley felt he had won the game, maybe Bernie just convinced him to let the matter slide away quietly.
Reason I say this is that there are not many companies that could take a one off, unforeseen 100 million dollar dent in their annual turnover and simply still carry on.
I wonder what the Mclaren groups typical annual turnover was back then? maybe a bit of digging at companies house would unearth some figures if they are in fact registered in the UK.
You would have thought the journalists at the time would have followed it up or delved back in time after Max's antics later on.
The FIA are not a legal or state body, they are a self governing entity of a commercial process, so if they unilaterally decide to slap a player of their game with a huge fine, with no justification of how it was commercially calculated then would they have a leg to stand on in law if payment was not made?
I imagine their only recourse would simply be to then prevent Mclaren playing the game at some point?
The FIA was not owed the money, they had no commercial loss as a result of all the fuss.
Once Mosley felt he had won the game, maybe Bernie just convinced him to let the matter slide away quietly.
Reason I say this is that there are not many companies that could take a one off, unforeseen 100 million dollar dent in their annual turnover and simply still carry on.
I wonder what the Mclaren groups typical annual turnover was back then? maybe a bit of digging at companies house would unearth some figures if they are in fact registered in the UK.
You would have thought the journalists at the time would have followed it up or delved back in time after Max's antics later on.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff