McLaren in 2019: Sainz and Norris, sponsors, management, rumour and scuttlebutt from the MTC

One day Max will be title contender and I hope Sainz, Vettel and others will remember how he treated them on the track. 

One day Max will be title contender and I hope Sainz, Vettel and others will remember how he treated them on the track.

Why didn't Norris finish the race ?
was it mechanical or because of Kvyat  in the first corner?

That they can install a new gearbox.

I've seen this "incident" between Sainz and Raikkonen where Carlos appeared to veer towards Raikkonen in free practice.

Is it possible that Carlos just wanted to make sure that Kimi saw him coming in the mirrors? We all know visibility out of these cars behind is terrible. It looks like Carlos possibly just wanted to make sure he was in Kimi's mirrors so that Kimi didn't unexpectedly return to the racing line.  (And maybe Sainz thought it was Giovinazzi...who has been garbage at getting out the way so far this season).

I doubt there was bad intent on Carlos mind...Kimi being a bit dramatic..

Video: https://twitter.com/...916458989260800

Edited by ARTGP, 16 April 2019 - 21:25.

I've seen this "incident" between Sainz and Raikkonen where Carlos appeared to veer towards Raikkonen in free practice.

 

Is it possible that Carlos just wanted to make sure that Kimi saw him coming in the mirrors? We all know visibility out of these cars behind is terrible. It looks like Carlos possibly just wanted to make sure he was in Kimi's mirrors so that Kimi didn't unexpectedly return to the racing line.  (And maybe Sainz thought it was Giovinazzi...who has been garbage at getting out the way so far this season).

 

I doubt there was bad intent on Carlos mind...Kimi being a bit dramatic..

 

Video: https://twitter.com/...916458989260800

It was a weird thing for Carlos to do. Kimi was on the left side of the circuit between two left-hand bends and as far off the racing line as it was possible to be. The closing speed between Carlos and him must have been 100 mph. If Kimi had drifted slightly right Carlos would have had no chance. By strafing Kimi, Carlos himself went off the racing line. Not obvious why he would have done that unless earlier in the session Kimi (or, as you say, GIO) had chopped him and he was trying to send the Alfa driver a message. In any case, it's hard to justify or even explain what Carlos did.

Edited by New Britain, 16 April 2019 - 21:34.

Nice behind the scenes vid:

https://www.youtube....?v=495TWyp6XEc#

Nice behind the scenes vid:

https://www.youtube....?v=495TWyp6XEc#

Thanks! Nice to see Carlos looking so comfortable and happy behind the scenes.

Looks as though he could take care of business if things got rough with Verstappen.

Nice behind the scenes vid:

https://www.youtube....?v=495TWyp6XEc#

I really like these minimalistic videos. Nice to see Carlos saying at the end what we thought - that the car's race pace was right up there with the best of the midfield... on a track that didn't suit it so well.

I really like these minimalistic videos. Nice to see Carlos saying at the end what we thought - that the car's race pace was right up there with the best of the midfield... on a track that didn't suit it so well.

The pace was indeed impressive despite the massive damage to the bargeboards and the front of the floor. Let's see how Bahrain is. We need a clean weekend. It's getting frustrating now. 

While it's close in the midfield, McLaren could and should easily be 4th in the constructors championship right now. They have a better driver line-up than Alfa and Racing Point, better reliability than Renault, and better racepace than Haas.

However so far it feels like one huge lost opportunity, mainly through unnecessary accidents. They should have scored massively in Bahrain, they were so competitive there. Sainz IMO dropped the ball there, he was in a great position and could have overtaken Max on the outside there but he misjudged the situation. Even coming from far back Norris still finished high. It felt to me like a McLaren could've ended up 5th that race with how things turned out. Maybe in Alonso's hands.

China was an unfortunate racing incident, but that does mean the McLaren drivers could've done more to avoid it. Norris was running very wide and the way he came back on track sliding over the curb was dangerous, and Sainz could see that and was risking a lot putting his nose there while knowing someone was most likely going to appear on the other side of him as well since he himself didn't have the inside line. It's nitpicking though and again, I don't necessarily think either of them caused it, but it could have been avoided. The car looked impressive even with the damage afterwards and I'm sure at least one of them would've made it into the points without that first lap accident.

Both drivers show a lot of potential but they should really do more to maximize the results. Otherwise they're wasting what could be the best McLaren in 5 years.

Nope, every single driver needs to adopt a policy of ALWAYS making Max hit them if he wants to. He can not be allowed to get free passes because 'well everyone knows he is a nutter'.

Exactly. If everyone would take this approach with bully drivers, they'd change their behavior pretty quickly.

Am I the only one starting to see Zak Brown's success?

Two years in we have a number of good hires, cleaned the closet full of 80's wear out, numerous blue chip sponsors, vastly more fan friendly and more interesting as a whole.  I understand ultimate success is found in the points standings, but things are much better otherwise 2 years later.

For sure we are finally seeing Zak's views being adopted into the team, if they are going to be a success it's still too early to tell I think.

Come talk about success when they are getting podiums.. this is Mclaren.

Is success in F1 just track results though?

I should bloody well hope so

Exactly. If everyone would take this approach with bully drivers, they'd change their behavior pretty quickly.

Are you saying that Max's standard "bank shot off the opponent's car and scream bloody murder for good measure" is not acceptable in F1?

Starting to see, YES, have seen NO.

Exactly. If everyone would take this approach with bully drivers, they'd change their behavior pretty quickly.

Most times it's best to steer clear of bully boys and let the law deal with them. Bullies have the  gonads to stamp their authority and they don't care the consequences...Senna was a bully boy.He didn't care the outcome should someone challenge him.

Most times it's best to steer clear of bully boys and let the law deal with them. Bullies have the  gonads to stamp their authority and they don't care the consequences...Senna was a bully boy.He didn't care the outcome should someone challenge him.

My experience with bullies is the opposite. They bully people out of a sense of personal inadequacy and an imagined need to take anti-social steps in order to position themselves above others. As soon as another person stands up to them, however, the sense of inadequacy reasserts itself and they collapse like a house of cards.

I wouldn't know whether the above necessarily applies to Senna, who was a very complex guy, but in general people bully others out of weakness, not strength.

Another new sponsor

https://t.co/neG7YXOU0B

Going to do mainly Indy branding but some "activations" at the US and Mexico GPs

Can't fault the procession of big brands appearing on the cars at the moment!

Another new sponsor

 

https://t.co/neG7YXOU0B

 

Going to do mainly Indy branding but some "activations" at the US and Mexico GPs

 

Can't fault the procession of big brands appearing on the cars at the moment!

Fascinating. Considering Alonso's Spanish origins, can't help but wonder if it's more to do with Alonso and Sainz than anything.

Estrella Gallicia (Spanish beer) followed Sainz from Renault to McLaren.  Jack and Jones (Danish menswear) followed KMags (Dane) from Renault to Haas.

Edited by ARTGP, 24 April 2019 - 15:45.

And another one,

https://www.mclaren....00-partnership/

There is an investor update today with the financial results for 2018. Should be interesting.

I love these sponsor announcements... they're so full of BS and co-corporate speak. Still, good to see that Mclaren have added another one and hopefully the extra $$$ will help.  

There is an investor update today with the financial results for 2018. Should be interesting.

Financial statements here:

https://investors.mc...n.com/investors

For FY 2018, Racing Division's income was down by £77m, or almost exactly $100m.

Overall, the Group lost £61m, a £4m improvement over 2017.

If ever there was a sign of an impending McLaren IPO, that link is it.

If ever there was a sign of an impending McLaren IPO, that link is it.

Well, still years away based on what they've said publicly.

Anyway, 84% of revenue from the Automotive division. From 0 to over £1Bn/year in under 10 years. That's some acceleration!

If ever there was a sign of an impending McLaren IPO, that link is it.

That was the shareholders' original game plan, but after what has happened to the Aston flotation I don't see it.

Having gone public less than 7 months ago, Aston's shares have fallen 47%, and were as low as 52%, below the flotation price. (During the same period, relevant equity indices and individual share prices such as Ferrari and Mercedes have gone up.) Investors would be looking directly at AML when considering an investment in McLaren.

Apart from AML's terrible market performance, there is the strategic issue of whether a medium-size but global car-maker can survive, given the enormous market and regulatory pressures on the industry.

I think it is much more likely that McLaren will merge with (be bought by) a larger car manufacturer that has economies of scale, an established OEM and dealer network, and financial muscle, but lacks the technological and image strengths that McLaren could bring to it.

Edited by New Britain, 25 April 2019 - 16:54.

https://www.racefans...er-honda-split/

Edited by dn12005, 25 April 2019 - 19:46.

That was the shareholders' original game plan, but after what has happened to the Aston flotation I don't see it.

Having gone public less than 7 months ago, Aston's shares have fallen 47%, and were as low as 52%, below the flotation price. (During the same period, relevant equity indices and individual share prices such as Ferrari and Mercedes have gone up.) Investors would be looking directly at AML when considering an investment in McLaren.

Apart from AML's terrible market performance, there is the strategic issue of whether a medium-size but global car-maker can survive, given the enormous market and regulatory pressures on the industry.

I think it is much more likely that McLaren will merge with (be bought by) a larger car manufacturer that has economies of scale, an established OEM and dealer network, and financial muscle, but lacks the technological and image strengths that McLaren could bring to it.

Why?  McLaren is low-medium volume, exclusively carbon-fiber tub cars (no platform sharing), and all hand built. That is unlike any "large volume" manufacturer. McLaren have very little in common with any large car manufacturer other than maybe the engine support and electrification.  

I sure hope they don't merge with anyone. 

Edited by ARTGP, 26 April 2019 - 00:30.

Why?  McLaren is low-medium volume, exclusively carbon-fiber tub cars (no platform sharing), and all hand built. That is unlike any "large volume" manufacturer. McLaren have very little in common with any large car manufacturer other than maybe the engine support and electrification.  

 

I sure hope they don't merge with anyone. 

Because, as I wrote, McLaren do not have any economies of scale, such as in marketing, OEM suppliers or distribution, and they are inadequately funded. In all those areas McLaren would benefit by being part of a much larger company. At the same time, there are several large car-makers that would be improved by having access to McLaren's specialised technical expertise, the attractiveness of the McLaren brand (not least in motor sport), and the halo effect that McLaren road cars could bring to otherwise bland product lines, and for those larger car-makers the $3b that it would cost to buy all of McLaren (including MTC) would be peanuts.

I hope they won't have to merge with anyone, but the risks inherent in remaining independent are substantial. Just look at what happened to McLaren Racing since they broke up with their long-time engine supplier, and compare that with how the engine supplier has done on its own.

Edited by New Britain, 26 April 2019 - 02:09.

Because, as I wrote, McLaren do not have any economies of scale, such as in marketing, OEM suppliers or distribution, and they are inadequately funded. In all those areas McLaren would benefit by being part of a much larger company. At the same time, there are several large car-makers that would be improved by having access to McLaren's specialised technical expertise, the attractiveness of the McLaren brand (not least in motor sport), and the halo effect that McLaren road cars could bring to otherwise bland product lines, and for those larger car-makers the $3b that it would cost to buy all of McLaren (including MTC) would be peanuts.

I hope they won't have to merge with anyone, but the risks inherent in remaining independent are substantial. Just look at what happened to McLaren Racing since they broke up with their long-time engine supplier, and compare that with how the engine supplier has done on its own.

Now that you mention it. A tie-in with BMW would be fascinating (ala Mclaren F1 V12). About the only thing I could swallow.  And then the possiblity of a BMW F1 engine, even more fascinating.

Mclaren-BMW and Williams-BMW 2021!! That would make me quite happy. I really hope these engine rules attract new manufacturers. Atleast it eases the awkward nature of the Mclaren-Renault relationship...

Edited by ARTGP, 26 April 2019 - 03:02.

Now that you mention it. A tie-in with BMW would be fascinating (ala Mclaren F1 V12). About the only thing I could swallow.  And then the possiblity of a BMW F1 engine, even more fascinating.

 

Mclaren-BMW and Williams-BMW 2021!! That would make me quite happy. I really hope these engine rules attract new manufacturers. Atleast it eases the awkward nature of the Mclaren-Renault relationship...

I think the expectation is that the PU regs will for the most part be continued, ensuring that the four current PU suppliers have an edge over any potential new suppliers. That being the case, it seems unlikely that there will be new suppliers.

Given the size and shape of McLaren's assets, I would expect a deal to be centred around the road car business, with racing being more of a marketing activity (as it is for Mercedes and Renault). If McLaren are bought, although the idea of VAG or BMW might be the most appealing, I expect the buyer would be from Asia.

P4 and P7 in FP1!   

Given that Ferrari - perhaps the closest comparator to Mclaren - was recently spun OUT of the FIAT-Chrysler group, why would Mclaren go the other way?

One thing that the TV broadcast totally failed to pick on (as far as I can tell) is that Lando hit the wall quite hard near the end. This was reported on McLaren Live as well. Wasn't a minor hit either:

https://twitter.com/...509511187677187

Lando did mention it in at least some post race interviews:

https://www.gpblog.c...h-big-hit-.html

Nice little post race comments from the drivers too:

https://twitter.com/...571193020833792

Has anything been said about why McLaren pitted Norris first (lap 9) despite Sainz being right in front of him? Sainz then pitted 3 laps later and of course fell behind Norris and looked to stay there until McLaren took a gamble with Norris under the VSC. Thankfully this gamble then restored the internal natural order at the finish. However I also feel like McLaren would have had a better chance undercutting Perez with Sainz than with Norris, so that feels like a wasted opportunity for 6th place.

Had something like this happened at Mercedes or Ferrari then this forum would be on fire.

Edited by Lights, 30 April 2019 - 05:04.

Has anything been said about why McLaren pitted Norris first (lap 9) despite Sainz being right in front of him? Sainz then pitted 3 laps later and of course fell behind Norris and looked to stay there until McLaren took a gamble with Norris under the VSC. Thankfully this gamble then restored the internal natural order at the finish. However I also feel like McLaren would have had a better chance undercutting Perez with Sainz than with Norris, so that feels like a wasted opportunity for 6th place.

 

Had something like this happened at Mercedes or Ferrari then this forum would be on fire.

I've only read second hand comments that Carlos opted to stay out while Lando wanted to pit, but I agree that Sainz should have at least been pitted to cover off Perez, I think this cost us a spot infront of him

A overcut was expected to be better (both in terms of pace and SC probability), although it became quickly apparent that it isnt I assume that if Sainz wanted to stay out longer it was because of that.

I think they were concerned about how long the Medium tyre would last as well. McLaren repeatedly told both drivers to conserve their tyres. They were also concerned about whether they could get the Medium tyres back up to temperature if there was a SC/VSC.

Hindsight is 20/20 but yeah they could have pitted earlier. But there was also the problem of other cars being in their pit window. IIRC Lando came right out behind the Williams which cost him some time.

Interesting article:

https://www.forbes.c...ue-for-mclaren/

While it's close in the midfield, McLaren could and should easily be 4th in the constructors championship right now. They have a better driver line-up than Alfa and Racing Point, better reliability than Renault, and better racepace than Haas.

 

However so far it feels like one huge lost opportunity, mainly through unnecessary accidents.

Interesting thoughts. Do you think McLaren is a bit like 2018 Haas? And drivers are a bit of a questionmark due to inconsistency?

While it's close in the midfield, McLaren could and should easily be 4th in the constructors championship right now. They have a better driver line-up than Alfa and Racing Point, better reliability than Renault, and better racepace than Haas.

 

Are Sainz and Norris better than Kimi and Gio? Well that's marginal because Alfa reliability has been questionable so far in so many ways.  McLaren can't have better reliability than Renault...They literally have the same unreliable power unit. In fact, McLaren have broken the McLaren gearboxes this year. In contrast to Renault who just dump power units that they both share. If Haas can outqualify McLaren 3 races in a row, then Haas should be the ones that are 4th, only they aren't because of the tire temp issues in the race. A slow car, doesn't mysteriously make Q3 for 3 straight races. It's obvious where the Haas problem is and I feel Haas is the one that should be sitting 4th in no mans land ahead and is massively underperforming due to tyre issues.  That car didn't go unnoticed in Barcelona.

Edited by ARTGP, 02 May 2019 - 14:27.

Interesting thoughts. Do you think McLaren is a bit like 2018 Haas? And drivers are a bit of a questionmark due to inconsistency?

You're quoting a rather old post of mine (pre-Baku) but yes, I still stand by what I said there and I probably agree it is a bit like Haas 2018.

I think both Sainz and Norris are good drivers with a lot of potential, but they didn't show it in those first 3 races and this hid the fact that the Mclaren is a great midfield car. They don't really have any downside, whereas all their competitors do.

McLaren should have probably beaten Perez in Baku as well with an optimal strategy, but that was more the teams fault than either of the drivers.

Are Sainz and Norris better than Kimi and Gio? Well that's marginal because Alfa reliability has been questionable so far in so many ways.  McLaren can't have better reliability than Renault...They literally have the same unreliable power unit. In fact, McLaren have broken the McLaren gearboxes this year. In contrast to Renault who just dump power units that they both share. If Haas can outqualify McLaren 3 races in a row, then Haas should be the ones that are 4th, only they aren't because of the tire temp issues in the race. A slow car, doesn't mysteriously make Q3 for 3 straight races. It's obvious where the Haas problem is and I feel Haas is the one that should be sitting 4th in no mans land ahead and is massively underperforming due to tyre issues.  That car didn't go unnoticed in Barcelona.

Okay, but isn't that like saying in 2018 that the McLaren "should have been" much faster, except for the fundamental aero problem with the original design?

Designing the car around the properties of the tyres is as important as designing the car around the properties of the airflow: it's part of the deal.

Are Sainz and Norris better than Kimi and Gio? Well that's marginal because Alfa reliability has been questionable so far in so many ways. McLaren can't have better reliability than Renault...They literally have the same unreliable power unit. In fact, McLaren have broken the McLaren gearboxes this year. In contrast to Renault who just dump power units that they both share. If Haas can outqualify McLaren 3 races in a row, then Haas should be the ones that are 4th, only they aren't because of the tire temp issues in the race. A slow car, doesn't mysteriously make Q3 for 3 straight races. It's obvious where the Haas problem is and I feel Haas is the one that should be sitting 4th in no mans land ahead and is massively underperforming due to tyre issues. That car didn't go unnoticed in Barcelona.