It seems strange with all the modern technology and safety systems that one driver can have a dramatically greater failure rate with his equipment.
Vettel seems the obvious candidate at RBR, is he hard on the car ? Harder than Webber ? Can you still buzz an F1 engine ? Another driver that springs to
mind with more than his fair share of DNFs for technical reasons was Johnny Herbert. Anybody want to throw in any other
characters from history ?

Kimi at McLaren sure had a lot of engine failures. Since his move to Ferrari he hasn't had that many of them though.

Or you could say ( and don't take this too seriously) that McLaren had a lot of engine failures. Since Kimi moved to Ferrari they haven't hardly had any, though.

I know, I'll get my coat.....

Mansell if I recall correctly had a reputation for this also

Brundle briefly touched upon this on the BBC's F1 Forum while asking Christian Horner about Vettel's driving style suggesting maybe he was hard downshifting. Horner said Vettel and Webber are very similar in driving so whether there is a connect I don't know. Maybe Vettel has caught Webbers luck

Last year it was Lewis who was harder on his equipment, does this all mean we have another scapegoat?

However trustworthy the current F1 technology, however impressive the computerchips, every material in the world weakens by use. Faster is more use (in a short span of time), so that will mean more erosion and thus damage. So it will always be possible for a driver to be harder on the material than the next one. If that is the case with Vettel; I don't know. I don't think that Red Bull is ever going to release the rpm's on Vettels lap compared to Webber. I do remember (for example) the way Senna used his throttle during corners at Lotus Renault. A lot! Funny his Lotus often had problems with the engine, often in the same races that De Angelis finished in the points or higher. But Senna himself had very little problem with tyrewear and brakes....

I'm sure it isn't a coincidence that the people with the most mechanical failures are nearly always driving in Adrian Newey designed cars.

He likes to package them tightly, so there's bound to be some problems, but two in a weekend seems odd.

Well, Webber has only recently driven Newey designed cars and has arguably had his most reliable period in F1.

That's true at least in part, his Williams did have rather a bad habit of being fast but dying (sounds like a Newey car).

Especially that bloody Monaco GP

Yeah, I saw that.

He also suggested Vettel may have been harder on kerbs which affects the car too apparently.

Malaysia, Australia, and Germany as well as that bloody Monaco GP were all possible podiums that failed to eventuate due to mechanical failures.

06 was a shocking year.

Tell me about it, I really wanted Webber to do well and stay at Williams an orl.

Yeah, Williams has always been one of my favorites - they are a proper racing team. But you'd have to say that leaving them was one of the better decisions Mark has made.

Regarding Vettel’s engine going in last weekend’s race…..
I am sure a few years back, when Honda kept losing engines, they linked the failures to the drivers having made two pit stops in close/quick succession, which over heated/stressed the engine, just prior to the engines letting go.
Vettel had just completed his second stop in as many laps – so could be the reason behind
this last blow up. Doesn’t allow for any of the others however……

Wasn't so much his decision really, SFW himself told him to leave and signed up Wurz. He didn't want to hold Mark back IIRC.

that's a good point.

but - and this isn't directly related to your post - have red bull really got the two worst equipment bashers on the grid?

James Allen on TV-sets and computers worldwide

I thought the official line was Williams didnt want to take up the 3rd year option as it gave Webber a pay increase they couldnt afford, and couldnt wait around for him to get picked up or knocked back by McLaren and Renault, who were both still under the illusion Raikkonen hadnt yet put pen to paper at Ferrari.

Surely its a fact that the drivers have an effect on reliability since they are the only real difference between 2 cars? Sure sometimes its down to luck, but if we extend 'car breaking' to any driver effect that results in a non finish or points loss, including a crash (since that is pretty 'hard' on equipment) then Vettels driving in Melbourne, Malaysia, Monaco, plus his iffy engine 'luck' relative to Webber, presents a picture...

Thats because Kimi doesnt push anymore ...

Newey's Williams (1992-1997) were pretty strong. His 1999 and 2000 McLaren were pretty amazing too.

So far this thread has had "hard on" & "the equipment" in the title, and then "he likes to package them tightly..."

I knew I should have skipped this thread...

It's already had to be cleaned by the mods once

I thought the title may stimulate some debate, as indeed it has.

Hear, hear.

McLaren's reliability is astonishing since Newey is gone.

Webber never drove a Newey Williams. I guess six out of ten WCC tiles for Newey while at Williams wasn't enough?

What was Macca's reliability like prior to Newey arriving at the team. Not so good... Newey won in only his second year at Macca and then followed it up the next year. The guy is just terrible.

There's a bunch of people who always slag Newey car designs for being unreliable. I honestly dont think it's really warranted.

Every team's reliability has improved in the last few years due to the change in engine rules. You cannot attribute it to Newey leaving.