111 replies to this topic

[JaredS]

The car isn't bad, it doesn't lack downforce. Today was all about mechanical setup and how the car and driver use the tyres. Do we really think that the Force India has more downforce than the MP4-28? Of course not.

Jenson is simply not that good at setting up a car, especially when he doesn't have a good reference point. Sure, when he happens to be heading in the right direction he can continue tuning it to get the balance he wants, nay needs. But he's also easily led down the wrong path. I'm not trying to beat up Jenson. He has many positive qualities. But it's quite clear that he's very limited by his lack of adaptability. Remember last year when it looked like Lewis and Jenson were driving two different cars. In one instance, Jenson believed he was not getting enough heat into the tyres so they set the car up to work the tyres harder but in the race he burnt the tyres out very quickly and then later on it came to light that in fact he mistook too much heat as not enough, so instead of setting it up to work the tyres less, they went the opposite way.

There's no doubt he's a sensitive driver. His ability in drying conditions and picking the right tyres has been shown several times. But this same sensitivity can work against him too.

Pairing up with Lewis brought out the best in Jenson. For one, by looking at Lewis's telemetry he knew what the car was physically capable of so it gave him a point of reference to set the car up.

Remember after Canada 2012, when there was a massive pace discrepancy between the two drivers, and before the European GP all the McLaren engineers had Lewis's data out studying it in order to help Jenson find out where he was going wrong. After the Canada GP, Jenson proclaimed he was "confused and lost". Why? Simply because his team mate was proving there was pace in the car but which was inaccessible to Jenson. But imagine if instead of Lewis, it was Checo in the other car at Canada last year. Jenson and Checo would have been claiming that the car was crap.

So whilst this car looks terrible, based on Jenson and Checo's pace, we can't really know. There's no doubt it's a difficult car to drive, or setup, but that doesn't mean it's not potentially very fast. Even in Melbourne. Isn't that really what separates a top level driver from a merely very good one? The ability to drive a difficult but quick car to its maximum? As a car becomes easier to drive, the skill level of a driver plays a smaller part. I didn't say it plays not part, just a smaller one.

An interesting analogy is to put a decent car magazine journo in a Honda NSX, which is a very easy supercar to drive, and he will get reasonably close to a professional race car driver in lap time. Then put both of them in a Porsche 911 or a Lotus Elise, both known to be quick but difficult to drive on the limit. The journo will lap the 911 slower than the NSX whilst the professional will lap faster with the 911 than the NSX.

[button_sw]

The car isn't bad, it doesn't lack downforce. Today was all about mechanical setup and how the car and driver use the tyres. Do we really think that the Force India has more downforce than the MP4-28? Of course not.

Jenson is simply not that good at setting up a car, especially when he doesn't have a good reference point. Sure, when he happens to be heading in the right direction he can continue tuning it to get the balance he wants, nay needs. But he's also easily led down the wrong path. I'm not trying to beat up Jenson. He has many positive qualities. But it's quite clear that he's very limited by his lack of adaptability. Remember last year when it looked like Lewis and Jenson were driving two different cars. In one instance, Jenson believed he was not getting enough heat into the tyres so they set the car up to work the tyres harder but in the race he burnt the tyres out very quickly and then later on it came to light that in fact he mistook too much heat as not enough, so instead of setting it up to work the tyres less, they went the opposite way.

There's no doubt he's a sensitive driver. His ability in drying conditions and picking the right tyres has been shown several times. But this same sensitivity can work against him too.

Pairing up with Lewis brought out the best in Jenson. For one, by looking at Lewis's telemetry he knew what the car was physically capable of so it gave him a point of reference to set the car up.

Remember after Canada 2012, when there was a massive pace discrepancy between the two drivers, and before the European GP all the McLaren engineers had Lewis's data out studying it in order to help Jenson find out where he was going wrong. After the Canada GP, Jenson proclaimed he was "confused and lost". Why? Simply because his team mate was proving there was pace in the car but which was inaccessible to Jenson. But imagine if instead of Lewis, it was Checo in the other car at Canada last year. Jenson and Checo would have been claiming that the car was crap.

So whilst this car looks terrible, based on Jenson and Checo's pace, we can't really know. There's no doubt it's a difficult car to drive, or setup, but that doesn't mean it's not potentially very fast. Even in Melbourne. Isn't that really what separates a top level driver from a merely very good one? The ability to drive a difficult but quick car to its maximum? As a car becomes easier to drive, the skill level of a driver plays a smaller part. I didn't say it plays not part, just a smaller one.

An interesting analogy is to put a decent car magazine journo in a Honda NSX, which is a very easy supercar to drive, and he will get reasonably close to a professional race car driver in lap time. Then put both of them in a Porsche 911 or a Lotus Elise, both known to be quick but difficult to drive on the limit. The journo will lap the 911 slower than the NSX whilst the professional will lap faster with the 911 than the NSX.

I'm sorry but what a load of rubbish that is and just a cheap dig at Jenson and Perez. The MP4-28 is not a difficult but fast car, it's difficult AND SLOW! Period

Do you think that a car that is 2-3 seconds slower in laptime will magically be quick with an Alonso or Vettel in it? Jesus wept

[JaredS]

I'm sorry but what a load of rubbish that is and just a cheap dig at Jenson and Perez. The MP4-28 is not a difficult but fast car, it's difficult AND SLOW! Period

Do you think that a car that is 2-3 seconds slower in laptime will magically be quick with an Alonso or Vettel in it? Jesus wept

How much slower was Jenson than Lewis at Canada 2012? Jenson was lapped by Lewis, as Lewis went on to win. My point being that the car was fast that day, just not Jenson. Setup plays a significant part. Lewis got it famously wrong at Spa 2012 and was slower than Jenson. The difference though is that when Lewis gets it wrong, he's slower than the car's potential but his pace is still reasonable, if only slower than his team mate. When Jenson gets setup wrong, and he did numerous times last year, it's chalk and cheese and looks like he's driving a Torro Rosso.

Edited by JaredS, 17 March 2013 - 15:00.

[discover23]

Maclaren has a mess on their hands with Button as their reference point. Oh boy.

[tkulla]

How much slower was Jenson than Lewis at Canada 2012? Jenson was lapped by Lewis, as Lewis went on to win. My point being that the car was fast that day, just not Jenson. Setup plays a significant part. Lewis got it famously wrong at Spa 2012 and was slower than Jenson. The difference though is that when Lewis gets it wrong, he's slower than the car's potential but his pace is still reasonable, if only slower than his team mate. When Jenson gets setup wrong, and he did numerous times last year, it's chalk and cheese and looks like he's driving a Torro Rosso.

This isn't a case of not understanding the tyres like that was. This is a case of the car not doing what they thought it would do (suspension wise) on the track and the cascade effect that has caused on the aero. Blaming the drivers is complete nonsense.

[karlth]

Remember after Canada 2012, when there was a massive pace discrepancy between the two drivers, and before the European GP all the McLaren engineers had Lewis's data out studying it in order to help Jenson find out where he was going wrong. After the Canada GP, Jenson proclaimed he was "confused and lost". Why? Simply because his team mate was proving there was pace in the car but which was inaccessible to Jenson. But imagine if instead of Lewis, it was Checo in the other car at Canada last year. Jenson and Checo would have been claiming that the car was crap.

So whilst this car looks terrible, based on Jenson and Checo's pace, we can't really know.

Exactly.

[button_sw]

The car isn't bad, it doesn't lack downforce. Today was all about mechanical setup and how the car and driver use the tyres.

A quote from Perez:

Team-mate Sergio Perez finished down in 11th position in his debut with McLaren, the Mexican also struggling with his car's handling.

"We're lacking downforce, we're lacking stability. It's not only one thing," Perez said. "I think we've got a lot of problems. The car is not quick enough and this is our reality."



Easy to have a dig at Button if you don't like him or you are a Hamilton Fanboy but the car is a dog, it's very clear to see.

You also single out one race where Jenson struggled badly last season, yes he had a shocker but the guy is a World Champion and deserves a bit more credit. Do you honestly think if Hamilton was driving that car today he would have finished higher than 9th?

[rileyl]

How much slower was Jenson than Lewis at Canada 2012? Jenson was lapped by Lewis, as Lewis went on to win. My point being that the car was fast that day, just not Jenson. Setup plays a significant part. Lewis got it famously wrong at Spa 2012 and was slower than Jenson. The difference though is that when Lewis gets it wrong, he's slower than the car's potential but his pace is still reasonable, if only slower than his team mate. When Jenson gets setup wrong, and he did numerous times last year, it's chalk and cheese and looks like he's driving a Torro Rosso.

Totally agree and this is FACT.

[WitnessX]

The car isn't bad, it doesn't lack downforce. Today was all about mechanical setup and how the car and driver use the tyres. Do we really think that the Force India has more downforce than the MP4-28? Of course not.

Jenson is simply not that good at setting up a car, especially when he doesn't have a good reference point. Sure, when he happens to be heading in the right direction he can continue tuning it to get the balance he wants, nay needs. But he's also easily led down the wrong path. I'm not trying to beat up Jenson. He has many positive qualities. But it's quite clear that he's very limited by his lack of adaptability. Remember last year when it looked like Lewis and Jenson were driving two different cars. In one instance, Jenson believed he was not getting enough heat into the tyres so they set the car up to work the tyres harder but in the race he burnt the tyres out very quickly and then later on it came to light that in fact he mistook too much heat as not enough, so instead of setting it up to work the tyres less, they went the opposite way.

There's no doubt he's a sensitive driver. His ability in drying conditions and picking the right tyres has been shown several times. But this same sensitivity can work against him too.

Pairing up with Lewis brought out the best in Jenson. For one, by looking at Lewis's telemetry he knew what the car was physically capable of so it gave him a point of reference to set the car up.

Remember after Canada 2012, when there was a massive pace discrepancy between the two drivers, and before the European GP all the McLaren engineers had Lewis's data out studying it in order to help Jenson find out where he was going wrong. After the Canada GP, Jenson proclaimed he was "confused and lost". Why? Simply because his team mate was proving there was pace in the car but which was inaccessible to Jenson. But imagine if instead of Lewis, it was Checo in the other car at Canada last year. Jenson and Checo would have been claiming that the car was crap.


<blah>

Nice theory but total Codswollop.

Have you driven the car?

...105th time ...

The problem in the slump last year was the rear brake cooling was incorrect when after he switched to the carbon industry brake materials (which Lewis was using as a standard) he used starting from Barcelona through to Canada causing rear tyre overheat. It had nothing to with "his" sets-ups.

The team know the performance of car through telemetry, and to insinuate that WDC with 12 years of experience, that has previously won three of the recent Australian GP's is an insult.

[rileyl]

A quote from Perez:

Team-mate Sergio Perez finished down in 11th position in his debut with McLaren, the Mexican also struggling with his car's handling.

"We're lacking downforce, we're lacking stability. It's not only one thing," Perez said. "I think we've got a lot of problems. The car is not quick enough and this is our reality."



Easy to have a dig at Button if you don't like him or you are a Hamilton Fanboy but the car is a dog, it's very clear to see.

You also single out one race where Jenson struggled badly last season, yes he had a shocker but the guy is a World Champion and deserves a bit more credit. Do you honestly think if Hamilton was driving that car today he would have finished higher than 9th?

Yes, I think Lewis would finish higher if he is driving the 28 today. Lewis can exact the true raw pace from the car, Button couldn't unless it is perfectly set for him.

[jjcale]

This isn't a case of not understanding the tyres like that was. This is a case of the car not doing what they thought it would do (suspension wise) on the track and the cascade effect that has caused on the aero. Blaming the drivers is complete nonsense.

Now that Macca has fessed up to running outside the regs for the fast time at Jerez, I have a lot more sympathy for your view .... but c'mon - they got beaten by Force India today..... at no stage during testing did anyone think that was even possible, much less likely.

They are panicking and going backwards ... they need to chill and remember how they handled 09 i.e. the brought development forward instead of backing off and pushed the drivers to cope with it... now it seems they are actually taking performance parts off the car to "try to understand it" ... the time for doing that was testing, now they just have push like crazy in a methodical way.... JB coped OK today in the racing and SP showed his potential. They need to get over their embarrassment and just go for it.... and Whitmarsh needs to stop being so damn apologetic.

[MirNyet]

A quote from Perez:

Team-mate Sergio Perez finished down in 11th position in his debut with McLaren, the Mexican also struggling with his car's handling.

"We're lacking downforce, we're lacking stability. It's not only one thing," Perez said. "I think we've got a lot of problems. The car is not quick enough and this is our reality."



Easy to have a dig at Button if you don't like him or you are a Hamilton Fanboy but the car is a dog, it's very clear to see.

You also single out one race where Jenson struggled badly last season, yes he had a shocker but the guy is a World Champion and deserves a bit more credit. Do you honestly think if Hamilton was driving that car today he would have finished higher than 9th?

So, Perez can with authority state the cars aero behaviour at different speeds and angles?

Of course not, he is just stating the standard lines - car is difficult, needs more downforce - blah, blah, blah...

Difficult car doesn't automatically mean car without good downforce. Also, a poorly setup car may be giving similar behaviours to a lower downforce car.

[MirNyet]

This isn't a case of not understanding the tyres like that was. This is a case of the car not doing what they thought it would do (suspension wise) on the track and the cascade effect that has caused on the aero. Blaming the drivers is complete nonsense.

Mostly agree, but a pair of less balance sensitive drivers wouldn't be struggling 'as much' as this pair. Of course, a difficult car is a difficult car regardless. My driver concern is that they could hinder the solution and drag out the cars problems being sorted. Of course, this is just conjecture at this point, but it will be interesting to see what happens going forward.

[fololo]

So, Perez can with authority state the cars aero behaviour at different speeds and angles?

Of course not, he is just stating the standard lines - car is difficult, needs more downforce - blah, blah, blah...

Difficult car doesn't automatically mean car without good downforce. Also, a poorly setup car may be giving similar behaviours to a lower downforce car.

Mclaren is considering to return to mp4-27 maybe.

Motorsport total asked MW if they get back the 27, he told not in malaysa which opens speculation.

http://www.motorspor...n_13031768.html

[button_sw]

Yes, I think Lewis would finish higher if he is driving the 28 today. Lewis can exact the true raw pace from the car, Button couldn't unless it is perfectly set for him.

Where would he have finished? In front of Jenson are 2 Redbulls, 2 Ferrari's, 2 Mercs, 1 Lotus which easily won the race and 2 force India's which had good pace and led the race for a period.

McLaren have completly ballsed up this car and somehow it's the drivers fault for some of you, I'm amazed some of you think this

[Atreiu]

Their pair gives me reason to worry...

[MirNyet]

Mclaren is considering to return to mp4-27 maybe.

Motorsport total asked MW if they get back the 27, he told not in malaysa which opens speculation.

http://www.motorspor...n_13031768.html

I think Whitmarsh right now would consider painting a Fiat 500 sliver if he thought he could get better results from it

[BillBald]

The car clearly lacks consistent downforce, otherwise it wouldn't have received such a big boost from running low in Jerez.

It may be better on less bumpy tracks, but why can't McLaren learn to build a car which has a wider operating window?

[aray]

it seems many people here understand how good the MP28 is than McLaren or their drivers themselves....

[MikeTekRacing]

It may be better on less bumpy tracks, but why can't McLaren learn to build a car which has a wider operating window?

that's the whole art.... it's not like that is simple...

as for the thread...yeah, sure, this assumption is valid for all teams (bar the one winning wcc). we can only benchmark drivers against their team mates. Both drivers could do the laps of their lives to put the cars 9th and 10th or they could suck. we can simply never know, just use some common sense logic and educated guessing.

button has sometimes been clueless in very good cars and he has sometimes been way faster than his team mates. Checo is too new to study.

Personally I wouldn't have gone for this driver pairing just for this reason....but an arm chair expert's opinion on this means nothing of course.

[JaredS]

Where would he have finished? In front of Jenson are 2 Redbulls, 2 Ferrari's, 2 Mercs, 1 Lotus which easily won the race and 2 force India's which had good pace and led the race for a period.

McLaren have completly ballsed up this car and somehow it's the drivers fault for some of you, I'm amazed some of you think this

http://translate.goo...n_13031768.html

Summary, they know the MP4-28 has a "lot more downforce" than the MP4-27. It sounds like the 28 has a narrow performance window driven by a driver with a narrow performance window, a recipe for trouble.

They definitely have to widen the performance window, but as they keep saying, this will take some time. Until then Jenson has got to learn to adapt and widen his own performance window so he can collect points much the same way Seb did last year until they developed the RB8 to his liking.

[MinT]

Got to laugh at the muppets picking Canada (the worst race Button has had for a very long time) - as the yardstick - but ignoring his win in Australia last year or indeed the way he ended last year......

not entirely sure why this board has been heavily cleaned recently and placed under a much stricter moderation policy but.. a clear "lets slag a driver we dont like for the sheer hell of i"t thread has been given its on soapbox to stand on.

Edited by MinT, 17 March 2013 - 16:35.

[tkulla]

This thread is the equivalent of fly paper. I hope it works.

Let's not get confused about this "performance window" stuff. What we're talking bout is the car's ability to function on a wide range of tracks and weather conditions. It's not about whether Button or Perez's style is getting the most out of it, it's about whether the engineers can create a starting point that is predictable (so far they cant) for each track and THEN it will be whether the drivers can fine tune it to get the maximum.

[Burtros]

Takes about 2 seconds to reject the idea. The McLaren looks so bad, that its not fixable with setup alone. Over the bumps the car looks like it wants to jump of the track.

Its a shame there isnt an ignore thread function.

[F1ultimate]

Perez will improve but the question is whether Button can change to become a driver who delivers both when the car is crap and when it's good. Today's performance by Perez was rookie class and I'm sure he was succumbed by nerves and pressure. Let's not forget that since his signing last year, he's been exceptionally lacking in race craft. However he survived the first race without crashing out. Mclaren should now focus on giving him the confidence to hustle the car around which is what a top driver needs to do when performance is poor. Alonso does it, Lewis does it and Vettel does it all the time.

[discover23]

Oh please people, stop pretending it is not a known fact that Button struggles maasively when the car is not easy to drive . Everyone knows this... He's always suffered this problem throughout his entire F1 career. Other drivers can and will extract more from that car...
When the car is very good, that is another story and Button can become a contender.

Edited by discover23, 17 March 2013 - 16:52.

[fed up]

IMHO there is no way that Mclaren could make such a miscalculation with an evolutionary car that they appear to have done..

One could argue that losing one of their designers (the guy who went to Ferrari), the design team responsible for this year's car, could perhaps have had a negative effect, but my guess it is a combination of clueless drivers and a misunderstood car.

I have never know Jenson as the lead driver to develop a medocre car to a front running car, so it doesn't bode well for the rest of this season.

Good luck to them - not that I care

[Neomaster121]

Takes about 2 seconds to reject the idea. The McLaren looks so bad, that its not fixable with setup alone. Over the bumps the car looks like it wants to jump of the track.

Its a shame there isnt an ignore thread function.

Think the op has a fair opinion

whats worse is mclaren knew this to be the case and literally should have bought a guy who they thought was a very good qualifier/ good constant benchmark

[JaredS]

Got to laugh at the muppets picking Canada (the worst race Button has had for a very long time) - as the yardstick - but ignoring his win in Australia last year or indeed the way he ended last year......

not entirely sure why this board has been heavily cleaned recently and placed under a much stricter moderation policy but.. a clear "lets slag a driver we dont like for the sheer hell of i"t thread has been given its on soapbox to stand on.

I brought up Canada. Careful about the personal attacks, ok?

Yes there were many races over their 3 years together where Jenson performed better, but I can't remember any with such significant pace difference between the two where it seemed like one was driving a Red Bull and the other a Torro Rosso.

When Jenson gets it right, he gets it very right. But when he gets it wrong, he's completely all out at sea.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

Yes the drivers are bad.

One half of the bad duo has only won this GP TWICE.

[F1ultimate]

I wonder if Paddy Lowe will be called to help sort out the car.

[JaredS]

Takes about 2 seconds to reject the idea. The McLaren looks so bad, that its not fixable with setup alone. Over the bumps the car looks like it wants to jump of the track.

Its a shame there isnt an ignore thread function.

Seems like they're trying to use aero to fix wrong setup direction. Lap times aren't coming so instead of properly setting up the car, it's being lowered and stiffened to try and get the aero to work. Sounds very strange that their wind tunnel, as well pre-season aero testing using suspension loading sensors that determine aero loading, all point to a car that has "much more downforce" than the 27. Yet many here seem to believe that that reason it was beaten by a couple of Force Indias was because of aero deficiency and not poor setup.

[DanardiF1]

Yes the drivers are bad.

One half of the bad duo has only won this GP TWICE.

The other half also 'finished' (disqualified for rear wing issue) 7th here in his very first Grand Prix...

[KavB]

Yes the drivers are bad.

One half of the bad duo has only won this GP TWICE.

Three times actually!

[MadYarpen]

when some armchair expert is throwing this kind of accusations (after the first race!), which IMO suggests he knows better than JB and SP what kind of car they have, and how to setup their car... Only thing you can do is to walk away ASAP, cause it is pathetic.

[Burtros]

Think the op has a fair opinion

whats worse is mclaren knew this to be the case and literally should have bought a guy who they thought was a very good qualifier/ good constant benchmark

No he doesnt.

Its completely fair to say that the current selection of drivers are not as fast as what McLaren may be used too. It may even be fair to question if they are the best at helping McLaren find direction with improvements.

However, the McLaren car is bad at the moment, and thats categorically not the drivers fault.

Its a complete joke to assume that McLaren is even remotely competative and the fact that its not is down to the drivers.

[JaredS]

Yes the drivers are bad.

One half of the bad duo has only won this GP TWICE.

I don't think anyone is saying that Jenson is a bad driver. It's well acknowledged that when the car is to his liking, he's up there with the very best and can beat anyone on his day.

The problem is that he has a narrow performance window.

[wepmob2000]

IMHO there is no way that Mclaren could make such a miscalculation with an evolutionary car that they appear to have done..

One could argue that losing one of their designers (the guy who went to Ferrari), the design team responsible for this year's car, could perhaps have had a negative effect, but my guess it is a combination of clueless drivers and a misunderstood car.

I have never know Jenson as the lead driver to develop a medocre car to a front running car, so it doesn't bode well for the rest of this season.

Good luck to them - not that I care

I think you're overrating and exaggerating what a driver does these days. Its not the 1960's any longer, the lead driver doesn't 'develop' or set-up the car, the teams have hundreds of sensors that give a precise measurement of what is happening, not to mention CFD. At most the drivers help steer the engineers to develop a car they like more, that is all....

[kedia990]

Yes the drivers are bad.

One half of the bad duo has only won this GP TWICE.

THRICE. You wanna bring up something irrelevant, atleast do it correctly.
The point the original poster is trying to bring up is that in anything apart from a well-balanced car, Button is not able to perform very well. What has your argument got to do with this?

[button_sw]

Button was probably an average of 2-3 tenths slower than Hamilton on pace and people still think it's his fault when the car finishes 120 seconds off the lead car.

Must just be Hamilton Fanboys trolling and having a good laugh at McLarens and Buttons expense as if any genuine fan who had about 5% of knowledge of F1 will know that currently the car is awful and it's nothing to do with the drivers. Do you remember the start of 2009 when Hamilton was 2 seconds of the pace in the MP4-24? By your reckoning anyone else would be 3 or 4 seconds off the pace!

[jjcale]

The thread title is provocative .... if you look at the OP he is making a more subtle point.

Consider the relative finishing positions of FA and FM when the Ferrari was in a similar position last year to the one Macca is now ... and you might better understand what his is saying.

Edited by jjcale, 17 March 2013 - 17:36.

[MortenF1]

The opening post is a good one, raises a valid question while airing substantiated thoughts. (Shame only that one of the mods felt the need to give it that thread-title, as it doesn't exactly invite to a balanced debate.)

There will be people in the design- & engineering department at Woking wondering if this is all the car has to offer, guaranteed. Perez is an un-known to McLaren and Button as we know, can lose all performance if the car isn't atleast 90% right.

....however, I do believe there is something inherently wrong with the MP4/28. Looking at onboards from the weekend you see that this is a car that doesn't do as told. Also, the reaction from Whitmarsh and Michaels wouldn't be as it has been I think, if they didn't know they have a struggle on their hands.

[meddo]

Where is Andy Latham?

[mattferg]

The car isn't bad, it doesn't lack downforce. Today was all about mechanical setup and how the car and driver use the tyres. Do we really think that the Force India has more downforce than the MP4-28? Of course not.

Jenson is simply not that good at setting up a car, especially when he doesn't have a good reference point. Sure, when he happens to be heading in the right direction he can continue tuning it to get the balance he wants, nay needs. But he's also easily led down the wrong path. I'm not trying to beat up Jenson. He has many positive qualities. But it's quite clear that he's very limited by his lack of adaptability. Remember last year when it looked like Lewis and Jenson were driving two different cars. In one instance, Jenson believed he was not getting enough heat into the tyres so they set the car up to work the tyres harder but in the race he burnt the tyres out very quickly and then later on it came to light that in fact he mistook too much heat as not enough, so instead of setting it up to work the tyres less, they went the opposite way.

There's no doubt he's a sensitive driver. His ability in drying conditions and picking the right tyres has been shown several times. But this same sensitivity can work against him too.

Pairing up with Lewis brought out the best in Jenson. For one, by looking at Lewis's telemetry he knew what the car was physically capable of so it gave him a point of reference to set the car up.

Remember after Canada 2012, when there was a massive pace discrepancy between the two drivers, and before the European GP all the McLaren engineers had Lewis's data out studying it in order to help Jenson find out where he was going wrong. After the Canada GP, Jenson proclaimed he was "confused and lost". Why? Simply because his team mate was proving there was pace in the car but which was inaccessible to Jenson. But imagine if instead of Lewis, it was Checo in the other car at Canada last year. Jenson and Checo would have been claiming that the car was crap.

So whilst this car looks terrible, based on Jenson and Checo's pace, we can't really know. There's no doubt it's a difficult car to drive, or setup, but that doesn't mean it's not potentially very fast. Even in Melbourne. Isn't that really what separates a top level driver from a merely very good one? The ability to drive a difficult but quick car to its maximum? As a car becomes easier to drive, the skill level of a driver plays a smaller part. I didn't say it plays not part, just a smaller one.

An interesting analogy is to put a decent car magazine journo in a Honda NSX, which is a very easy supercar to drive, and he will get reasonably close to a professional race car driver in lap time. Then put both of them in a Porsche 911 or a Lotus Elise, both known to be quick but difficult to drive on the limit. The journo will lap the 911 slower than the NSX whilst the professional will lap faster with the 911 than the NSX.

Literally so many things wrong in this post it's unreal.

[Pingu Pi]

I don't think it's Jenson in is case, the cars has a problem. If Jenson had a speciality, it's Melbourne, he knows how to get a car round this track if its capable. It's just McLaren have botched themselves, they constantly struggle not in a competition with other teams, but with themselves, they feel a need to over complicate a situation just to challenge themselves. Very self destructive in recent years.

This is coming from a guy who likes a dig at Jenson, I really consider him overhyped, the Rooney of F1, could have had it when he was a kid, but now he lives on a reputation of simply being British and in a good team yet is frequently substandard.

[femi]

Where is Andy Latham?

I was wondering too...

[JaredS]

No he doesnt.

Its completely fair to say that the current selection of drivers are not as fast as what McLaren may be used too. It may even be fair to question if they are the best at helping McLaren find direction with improvements.

However, the McLaren car is bad at the moment, and thats categorically not the drivers fault.

Its a complete joke to assume that McLaren is even remotely competative and the fact that its not is down to the drivers.

I fully acknowledge it has only been one race. Of course I am merely speculating, as is everyone here.

However I don't think it is set in stone that the car is bad. If in 2012 Lewis was not sat in the other car, and we were solely looking at Jenson's times in races like Barcelona where he didn't even make it into Q3 (Lewis pole), or the next quail at Monaco where again didn't make Q3 (Lewis 4th), then next quali Canada where he qualifies 10th with 1:15.182 (Lewis 2nd with 1:14.087), next quail Europe Jenson 9th (Lewis 2nd, four tenths between them), next Silverstone where he doesn't make it out of Q1 (down six tenths on Lewis's Q1 time). Those 5 races in a row were a nightmare for Jenson and had you not had his team mate for comparison you would surely think that McLaren dropped off the development race and were a second to two seconds a lap slower than the front runners.

So whilst Melbourne GP 2013 is just one race so far, the problem is how does anyone know if the car is bad or if Jenson is going through a tyres/operating window/poor setup patch like the abovementioned 5 races in 2012? His team mate Checo is a poor comparison who was never known for his qualifying anyway.

[button_sw]

The opening post is a good one, raises a valid question while airing substantiated thoughts. (Shame only that one of the mods felt the need to give it that thread-title, as it doesn't exactly invite to a balanced debate.)

There will be people in the design- & engineering department at Woking wondering if this is all the car has to offer, guaranteed. Perez is an un-known to McLaren and Button as we know, can lose all performance if the car isn't atleast 90% right.

....however, I do believe there is something inherently wrong with the MP4/28. Looking at onboards from the weekend you see that this is a car that doesn't do as told. Also, the reaction from Whitmarsh and Michaels wouldn't be as it has been I think, if they didn't know they have a struggle on their hands.

The Opening thread is so bad:

"The car isn't bad" - The car is as terrible
"Jenson is simply not that good at setting up a car" - Can you prove this point?
"he's very limited by his lack of adaptability" - That adaptablity has won him many races
"So whilst this car looks terrible, based on Jenson and Checo's pace, we can't really know." - I think if you ask any expert in F1 they will tell you the car is terrible
"There's no doubt it's a difficult car to drive, or setup, but that doesn't mean it's not potentially very fast" - When McLaren sort it out it may well be fast but it will never be fast until that happens whoever is driving it

[JaredS]

Literally so many things wrong in this post it's unreal.

Great rebuttal

[Markn93]

The one thing that I wonder about is those weekends when Lewis was on pole and JB was struggling/failing to make Q3. Would this weekend be any different with him in the car? Who knows.

Edited by Markn93, 17 March 2013 - 17:34.