13 replies to this topic

[Disgrace]

1. Red Bull - operationally perfect, no in-house unreliability and great development = two world titles.
2. Ferrari - great development from a hopeless start, operationally/strategically slick but not quick enough.
3. Williams - undid all the damage of 2011 with a race-winning car only squandered by the drivers.
4. Lotus - produced a genuine race-winning car but couldn't consistently challenge the big boys.
5. Sauber - best Sauber since BMW but inconsistent; better strategy in Malaysia would have delivered a win.
6. Force India - good development from a slow start but ultimately didn't build a quick enough car.
7. Marussia - built a chassis competitive with Caterham despite no KERS; on balance deserved 10th.
8. Toro Rosso - in a class of their own, car not quick enough making it difficult to judge drivers.
9. Caterham - haven't produced any points; only just nabbed 10th despite KERS boost.
10. HRT - did all they could, had to run brakes beyond natural life; looks like it's over.
11. McLaren - shambolic pitstops/unreliability, inconsistent development, lost Hamilton and wasted the fastest car over the season.
12. Mercedes - unreliability from past eras, hopeless development and their one party trick hurt them more than it helped.

Yours?

Edited by Disgrace, 25 November 2012 - 20:09.

[DutchQuicksilver]

1. Ferrari - Only had the fourth fastest car for most part of the season and Alonso managed to get 2nd in the championship. Very well done.
2. Red Bull - Good comeback, though helped by Red Bull favoured tracks near the end of the season. Nevertheless, Vettel beat Webber comfortabely.
3. McLaren - Fastest car overall, but wasted by unreliability. Losing Hamilton will hurt them bad next season.
4. Lotus - Great season compared to 2011. Deserved win in Abu Dhabi and steady overall pace. Shame about Grosjean's mishaps
5. Williams - Fast car at some tracks. With this car they could have used someone like Barrichello.
6. Sauber - Fast car as well, but same issue as Williams. Inconsistent drivers who didn't get most out of the car.
7. Force India - Great development rate as always, Hulkenberg is a true gem, too bad McLaren didn't pick him up.
8. Marussia - Good recovery and nearly beat Caterham. Hopefully they can continue this in 2013.
9. Toro Rosso - Not much to say, were racing amongst themselves most of the time. Could use more help from Red Bull.
10. Caterham - Bad season, slow development rate. Nearly lost out to Marussia, hope that's a wake up call.
11. Mercedes - Shame on you. Fastest car in the first few races, very slow car in the last few races and with that budget..
12. HRT - Unworthy of F1, nothing else to say.

[Jackmancer]

ehh, there is a team ranking, it's fairly straightforward;
http://www.formula1.com/results/team/

[Disgrace]

Do you think McLaren did the third best job this year? That's no fun.

[Lelouch]

1. Red Bull - operationally perfect, no in-house unreliability and great development = two world titles.
2. Ferrari - great development from a hopeless start, operationally/strategically slick but not quick enough.
3. Williams - undid all the damage of 2011 with a race-winning car only squandered by the drivers.
4. Lotus - produced a genuine race-winning car but couldn't consistently challenge the big boys.
5. Sauber - best Sauber since BMW but inconsistent; better strategy in Malaysia would have delivered a win.
6. Force India - good development from a slow start but ultimately didn't build a quick enough car.
7. Marussia - built a chassis competitive with Caterham despite no KERS; on balance deserved 10th.
8. Toro Rosso - in a class of their own, car not quick enough making it difficult to judge drivers.
9. Caterham - haven't produced any points; only just nabbed 10th despite KERS boost.
10. HRT - did all they could, had to run brakes beyond natural life; looks like it's over.
11. McLaren - shambolic pitstops/unreliability, inconsistent development, lost Hamilton and wasted the fastest car over the season.
12. Mercedes - unreliability from past eras, hopeless development and their one party trick hurt them more than it helped.

Yours?

Exactly the same in all honesty.

[Tenmantaylor]

Was hoping for a thread to discuss this. McLaren really dropped the ball this year, especially for Lewis, but they deserve to be higher than HRT if only for doing 2.4s pitstops!

Anyone care to put team budgets next to finishing positions and see who achieved most bang for buck?

http://www.formula1.com/results/

McLaren won 7 races this year, same as Red bull. They finished 3rd in the WCC and their drivers came 4th and 5th in the WDC. Worse than 2005?

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 25 November 2012 - 23:59.

[mich]

1.Redbull:fast pitstop, good strategy but a little poor reliability.
2.Ferrari:perfect reliability and fastest pitstop.
3.McLaren:fast pitstop, good strategy but increasing troubles
4.Lotus:not but about all
5.FI:becoming faster and little mistake of pitstops and strategy
6.Williams: team was good but drivers was too rubbish
7.Sauber:good cars but too rubbish pitstops and strategy
8.STR:
9.Marussia:
10.Caterham
11.HRT
12.Mercedes:

[Kyo]

Do you think McLaren did the third best job this year? That's no fun.

well, thats certainly better than think McLaren and Mercedes did a worse job than HRT. As a driver you would certainly choose HRT instead of McLaren since McLaren are such a bad team...

1 Red Bull Racing-Renault
2 Ferrari
3 McLaren-Mercedes
4 Lotus-Renault
5 Mercedes
6 Sauber-Ferrari
7 Williams-Renault
8 Force India-Mercedes
9 STR-Ferrari
10 Caterham-Renault
11 Marussia-Cosworth
12 HRT-Cosworth

[Disgrace]

well, thats certainly better than think McLaren and Mercedes did a worse job than HRT. As a driver you would certainly choose HRT instead of McLaren since McLaren are such a bad team...

Obviously, but I'm not a driver as I am an armchair expert using a different set of criteria to judge and make my silly list.

I think McLaren did a worse job than HRT as a team due to the vast differences in resources, and crucially, what they did with them. HRT achieved all they could with their resources and barely finished the season; McLaren achieved (with two WDC drivers and the fastest car over the season) third in the WCC and the best of fourth in the WDC. The nature of the errors is likewise one of my criteria, fundamental in-house reliability issues and operational failings such as race-losing pitstops and pole position-losing underfuelling that you didn't see from... well, HRT.

HRT are right where they should be whereas McLaren (and Mercedes) aren't.

Edited by Disgrace, 26 November 2012 - 01:12.

[Kyo]

Obviously, but I'm not a driver as I am an armchair expert using a different set of criteria to judge and make my silly list.

I think McLaren did a worse job than HRT as a team due to the vast differences in resources, and crucially, what they did with them. HRT achieved all they could with their resources and barely finished the season; McLaren achieved (with two WDC drivers and the fastest car over the season) third in the WCC and the best of fourth in the WDC. The nature of the errors is likewise one of my criteria, fundamental in-house reliability issues and operational failings such as race-losing pitstops and pole position-losing underfuelling that you didn't see from... well, HRT.

HRT are right where they should be whereas McLaren (and Mercedes) aren't.

so you should have asked for a budged performance rank and not criticize someones list because he didn't use the same criteria as yours.

I did see position-losing due underfuelling, reliability issues and poor pit-stops in Red Bull, but you still called then perfect. Building the fastest car and having the fastest pit-stops is duo to the team so they deserve the credit just like they deserve the bash duo the poor reliability or some pit-stop that went wrong. the reality is that they could very well still finished second if not for the incidents with Maldonado and Hulkenberg and I don't think they have a bigger budged than Ferrari.

[Lelouch]

I think if you count how many points each team has lost due to fault of their own Mclaren will come on top with Mercedes second. I'm referring to team mistakes rather than driver mistakes and both Mclaren and Mercedes embarrassed themselves in 2012. So in terms of team performance considering what they had at their disposal they were the 2 worst performing teams indeed imo, Mercedes being dead last for doing almost everything wrong and making a car that looked fast at first, dead slow.

Mclaren had the fastest car this year but arguably the 3rd best due to reliability and they disappointed their drivers in numerous ways with bad strategies, bad pit stops etc. Managing to get both Lewis and Jenson on the podium only twice this season tells the story for me. Other teams with much lower budget did a better job than them and their main antagonists outclassed them.

[JRizzle86]

1. Red Bull - operationally perfect, no in-house unreliability and great development = two world titles.
2. Ferrari - great development from a hopeless start, operationally/strategically slick but not quick enough.
3. Williams - undid all the damage of 2011 with a race-winning car only squandered by the drivers.
4. Lotus - produced a genuine race-winning car but couldn't consistently challenge the big boys.
5. Sauber - best Sauber since BMW but inconsistent; better strategy in Malaysia would have delivered a win.
6. Force India - good development from a slow start but ultimately didn't build a quick enough car.
7. Marussia - built a chassis competitive with Caterham despite no KERS; on balance deserved 10th.
8. Toro Rosso - in a class of their own, car not quick enough making it difficult to judge drivers.
9. Caterham - haven't produced any points; only just nabbed 10th despite KERS boost.
10. HRT - did all they could, had to run brakes beyond natural life; looks like it's over.
11. McLaren - shambolic pitstops/unreliability, inconsistent development, lost Hamilton and wasted the fastest car over the season.
12. Mercedes - unreliability from past eras, hopeless development and their one party trick hurt them more than it helped.

Yours?

Surely the constructors settles this argument. McLaren have had an average season but at worst they have ranked third in any terms.

[sopa]

Perhaps a decent way to look at it would be making a points/per budget list or something like that.

[F1ultimate]

1. Red Bull - operationally perfect, no in-house unreliability and great development = two world titles.
2. Ferrari - great development from a hopeless start, operationally/strategically slick but not quick enough.
3. Williams - undid all the damage of 2011 with a race-winning car only squandered by the drivers.
4. Lotus - produced a genuine race-winning car but couldn't consistently challenge the big boys.
5. Sauber - best Sauber since BMW but inconsistent; better strategy in Malaysia would have delivered a win.
6. Force India - good development from a slow start but ultimately didn't build a quick enough car.
7. Marussia - built a chassis competitive with Caterham despite no KERS; on balance deserved 10th.
8. Toro Rosso - in a class of their own, car not quick enough making it difficult to judge drivers.
9. Caterham - haven't produced any points; only just nabbed 10th despite KERS boost.
10. HRT - did all they could, had to run brakes beyond natural life; looks like it's over.
11. McLaren - shambolic pitstops/unreliability, inconsistent development, lost Hamilton and wasted the fastest car over the season.
12. Mercedes - unreliability from past eras, hopeless development and their one party trick hurt them more than it helped.

Yours?

I very much agree with that, and this is coming from a Mclaren fan. We should have won at-least one of the titles this year.