Search Results

Aww come on. Just because his cars didn't have a shot at WDC those years doesn't mean they were slow. In 2002 McLaren was new to Michelin. In 2004 they had some problems with the famous MP4/19. They still won at least one race those years. In 2006 they weren't very good, but hadn't Räikkönen crashed it in Hungary it could have been a winning car too. In 2007 and 2008 nobody seriously expected a winning car considering the competition. Still in Fuji 07 it was very close to victory only to be ruined by Vettel. And in 08 the car won in Monza...

By the way, the MP4/21 is considered a Newey-design, but he wasn't with the team anymore when the season was on.

I believe most other designers would be happy about such a record in their CVs.

Now we are talking semantics. No F1 car is slow, as they all could run rings around any supercar you can find on the street. Regardless, compared to the top contenders of those years, overall the cars of the aforementioned years were slow by F1 standards.

MP4-19 didn't win any races, that was the MP4-19B which was a totally revised new version. MP4-19 was slow.

Aww come on. Just because his cars didn't have a shot at WDC those years doesn't mean they were slow. In 2002 McLaren was new to Michelin. In 2004 they had some problems with the famous MP4/19. They still won at least one race those years. In 2006 they weren't very good, but hadn't Räikkönen crashed it in Hungary it could have been a winning car too. In 2007 and 2008 nobody seriously expected a winning car considering the competition. Still in Fuji 07 it was very close to victory only to be ruined by Vettel. And in 08 the car won in Monza...

By the way, the MP4/21 is considered a Newey-design, but he wasn't with the team anymore when the season was on.

I believe most other designers would be happy about such a record in their CVs.

The Torro Rosso is also made by the hands of Newey?

Ehh... 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008?

Aww come on. Just because his cars didn't have a shot at WDC those years doesn't mean they were slow. In 2002 McLaren was new to Michelin. In 2004 they had some problems with the famous MP4/19. They still won at least one race those years. In 2006 they weren't very good, but hadn't Räikkönen crashed it in Hungary it could have been a winning car too. In 2007 and 2008 nobody seriously expected a winning car considering the competition. Still in Fuji 07 it was very close to victory only to be ruined by Vettel. And in 08 the car won in Monza...

By the way, the MP4/21 is considered a Newey-design, but he wasn't with the team anymore when the season was on.

I believe most other designers would be happy about such a record in their CVs.

Bizarre to think that his first race win in F1 was 1991, an astounding 30 years ago, his longevity far surpasses any tech director in the sports history and his car is still fighting for a title this year. Imagine if a designer from 1950 was leading the title fight in 1980! it's  mind numbing. It also answers the 90's favourite debate of Newey Vs Shuey rather decisively.

 

Almost more amazing is that in 30 years of racing his cars have only gone 4 seasons without a race win and 2 of those were spent building Red Bull up from the back of the grid.

 

 

This is certainly an impressive list of F1 machines and an even more impressive list of victories. Having said this, I'd argue his record is even more impressive if you consider the 2007-2009 Toro Rosso cars to be Adrian Newey designs. If you include the STR2, STR3 and STR4, then Vettel's win at Monza in 2008 in the STR3 (I believe based on the same design as the RB4) not only adds yet another victory to this tally but also means that only three Newey designs from 1991 onwards have failed to win a grand prix (MP4/21, RB3/STR2 and RB11). Also, I think McLaren won 7 races in 2000 (4 for Mika Hakkinen and 3 for David Coulthard).

 

I find it interesting that he seemed to experience something of a lean spell in the mid-to-late 2000s, in the seven seasons from 2002 to 2008 his cars scored just five wins in this period if you exclude the MP4/20 (the 2005 McLaren won twice as many races as his other designs from those seasons put together). I do wonder whether McLaren benefitted from the single tyre rule in 2005, even more so than the other Michelin teams such as Renault, as they did much better that season than they did in either 2004 or 2006, with the exact opposite being true for Bridgestone-shod Ferrari. It's ironic that the only other Newey car from 2002 to 2008 to win multiple GPs was the MP4/17D in 2003, which was only used that season due to the issues with the MP4/18, yet Kimi Raikkonen was able to finish just two points short of Michael Schumacher in it.

This is certainly an impressive list of F1 machines and an even more impressive list of victories. Having said this, I'd argue his record is even more impressive if you consider the 2007-2009 Toro Rosso cars to be Adrian Newey designs. If you include the STR2, STR3 and STR4, then Vettel's win at Monza in 2008 in the STR3 (I believe based on the same design as the RB4) not only adds yet another victory to this tally but also means that only three Newey designs from 1991 onwards have failed to win a grand prix (MP4/21, RB3/STR2 and RB11). Also, I think McLaren won 7 races in 2000 (4 for Mika Hakkinen and 3 for David Coulthard).

I find it interesting that he seemed to experience something of a lean spell in the mid-to-late 2000s, in the seven seasons from 2002 to 2008 his cars scored just five wins in this period if you exclude the MP4/20 (the 2005 McLaren won twice as many races as his other designs from those seasons put together). I do wonder whether McLaren benefitted from the single tyre rule in 2005, even more so than the other Michelin teams such as Renault, as they did much better that season than they did in either 2004 or 2006, with the exact opposite being true for Bridgestone-shod Ferrari. It's ironic that the only other Newey car from 2002 to 2008 to win multiple GPs was the MP4/17D in 2003, which was only used that season due to the issues with the MP4/18, yet Kimi Raikkonen was able to finish just two points short of Michael Schumacher in it.

2005 McLaren for sure benefitted from single tyre rule/Michelins. Back then Michelin did bring different kind of tyres for the teams to the tests and teams could choose the best suited tyres for them to use (said by Kimi, last year).
At Monaco 2005 Mclaren was able to use softer tyres than Renault, due to them being gentle to the tyres and we all know Kimi being one of the most gentle driver to the tyres as well.

2011 would suggest otherwise. Likewise the end of 2010, some elements of 2009 (awesome season for lewis despite result!) and 2008 suggest Lewis has improved little since 2007.

He got his Mclaren seat because he was quick from the word go. He wasn't just quick, he was only 1-2 tenths slower than the reigning two time champ at the time! Lewis was a MEGA rookie. No other rookie will ever achieve what he has. Jacques and Lewis were special in that respect. Lewis found his form quickly and was leading the title for most of the season!

In 2008 he certainly made a few mistakes he should not have, and even on occasion looked rather... so-so. He limped over the line to take his title after his rival dominated the race.

In 2009 he got every bit of the car's performance and used it! He used the Mclarens low speed grip to amazing effect and arguably out performed drivers in better cars! Still he made errors you would not expect from a driver of his ability. Monaco is the big one for me, and of course Monza. But Monaco was a killer mistake and I have never before, or even since been so disappointed in him. It was a race where he had the chance to show the world just how mega he could be. Instead he stuffed it in the wall and we were left to wonder.

2010. Epic start and mid season. He again got the max out of the car 100% of the time. Then once again in classic Lewis style, he lost it when it mattered the most.

2011. What do you want me to say about this season? It was perhaps his worst in F1.

2012. Similar to 2010 IMO. Getting 100% out of the car 100% of the time... so far.

Let me put it this way. I do not believe it is possible for Lewis to improve in terms of pace or ability. I believe he has NOT improved his race craft, or ability to read a race or even read a season. I think he is rash with decisions and sometimes shows to be a little too eager. He needs to learn when to stop, and when he has lost.

Ultimately this is going to come down to you, proving to me that he has improved. Based on your idea, Rubens should have been the best F1 driver ever. DC should have got better rather than turn to sh*t. And Jenson should be blitzing Lewis.

What seems to hurt Lewis is that we have Vettel who seems to learn from his mistakes and be a better driver because of it. With Vettel, Lewis can not rely on his talent or pure speed because Vettel is as quick, if not quicker. When was the last time Vettel was involved in a tangle with another driver? Or even when he made a mistake in qualifying or a race? I can't remember so it would be great if you could tell me?

You can't get do a season getting 100% out of the car 100% of the time. Take 2010 example, he had to rag that car to the edge, thats why in middle of the season he made to 2 misjudgements 2 races in a row, Italy and Singapore - he had to be opportunistic as thats what get him there in the first place.
I don't think you go on improving forever in sport as you age as sportsmen/humans have their peak. For F1 I'd say its around age 31, after this you won't gain anymore from your experiance.
As for Vettel, its been too easy for him when he has such a rocketship of a car. You can't separate his abilities from that of his car. With a dominant car you can easily give the perception of absolutely thrashing the field.

One thing that has never helped Hamilton in this regard is that even for a half a season he's never been fortunate enough to take it easy and rackup wins the easy way, and that goes a long way to ones perception of a driver.
Vettel is quick but how quick? is it the car? It's 4-4 this year in quali between him and webber. And in 2010 it needed the #1 driver love and support from Dr Marko, Horner and Newey to hug him and take off parts off webbers car and put it on his. How much is that support worth? That arrangement was everything for Schumacher and Alonso. Again Hamilton hasn't had this luxury, he has had to graft it the hard way with 2 world championship teamates. Schumacher, Alonso, Vettel never had world championship teamates to beat in the same car.

I declare that Vettel is the quickest driver because he still extracted more from the RB6 compared to his teammate and remember during the summer the German driver raced with a damaged chassis which allowed Webber to be quicker and win. Also he is achieving numbers only reached by the greats of this sport. How good he is will take time to assess but out of all the top drivers he is still the least experienced.

For me the inkling we had just how good he was, was at Monza in 2008. The greatest qualifying performance for me since Schumacher was Q3 at Suzuka 2009. Phenomenal. I share Bernie's idea of the current f1 dream team: Alonso and Vettel. of course it would be an impossible sitation for any team

relax, man. i didn`t react at your previous posts, but now it`s too much.
tell me, please, how you rank bourdais performance in the other torro rosso, with more fuel on board, that day. i remind you the guy was 4th on the grid.
don`t you think that this might have had something in common with some adrien newey`s participation in upgrading 2008 torro rosso cars, that were, by the way, very quick in wet conditions even without it?

now, after 2010 rbr title saga, i`m sure that it was also pr project to back in the second half of 2008 torro rosso instead of rb main team with 2, let`s say, "retired" drivers in order to promote the young gun, "baby schumi", to elevate the selling numbers of some energy drink.
who is better advertising platform vettel or maybe webber?
the answer is easy.

and this talk about broken chasis is just pathetic, vettel admited he had had problems with throttle operating until some changes were made in engine electronics.
that`s right, he was fractionaly faster, mainly in qualifying, but he also enjoyed last run advantage most of the time, you must admit. and we all know qualifying is all today,.
so i would recommend you to wait a while with comparing him to senna.