75 replies to this topic

[mariner]

new Adrian Newey book.

 

Posted on the racing comments forum

 

http://forums.autosp...a-car-new-book/

 

Glad he has done book and it should be very interesting as he maybe the last of the "natural" designers but I suspect some of us here might disagree with the cover quote form the Sunday Times

 

Espiecally in Norfolk !

[EDWARD FITZGERALD]

Gordon Murray was interviewed by Peter Windsor on Motorsport TV a few days ago , and he said he does his initial concepts on the drawing board ,so the skill is still being used by those at the top

[AJCee]

Indeed, the cover quote is typical media hyperbole. Let's leave the futile comparison of eras to those who so desperately seem to need to hang a caprine label on an all-time best.

[Nick Planas]

Well I personally loved this book; read in one (day's) sitting - I'm so sociable over the Christmas period. It's a uniquely written book, which doesn't look like an autobiography but is in fact a brilliant one.

 

There was only one small annoyance... he kept talking about when he "span off" (that old chestnut again). The following day I read another autobiography, this time Marc Priestley's book about his time at McLaren. Again, another fabulous book, but again the same issue talking about drivers who "span off". Grrr. I couldn't find the blood pressure thread any more to post in...

 

Aside from that, I thoroughly recommend both books!

[Dick Willis]

I'm with you Nick, read it in just over a day and was thoroughly engrossed, as Adrian finally commented, the avenues for him to exploit an advantage  these days are virtually non existent. And as for "span off " not sure where that originated.

[john aston]

Same place as 'spun up' (wheels ) and 'roll on ' acceleration I guess...

[Dipster]

I greatly enjoyed Newey's book. Certainly worth reading. 

[kayemod]

I'm with you Nick, read it in just over a day and was thoroughly engrossed, as Adrian finally commented, the avenues for him to exploit an advantage  these days are virtually non existent. And as for "span off " not sure where that originated.

 

According to my dictionary, the big Collins, the use of span as the past tense of spin is either "archaic or dialect".

 

Adrian Newey was either brought up in a very backward rural community, (they must have used very racy farm carts), or possibly be several hundred years old.

[Charlieman]

I understand how easy it might be to read this book in a single sitting, but it is one to be savoured. The book covers three areas: Newey's life outside F1, the world of F1 in the last 25 years or so, and Newey's contributions as designer and race engineer. On the latter two, he writes more of interest than anyone else from a technical background in ages. 

 

The technical content is a strong indictment of the F1 rule making process -- not just now but ever since the ground effects Lotus designs. He writes about design processes and outcomes well. Newey is more informative about aerodynamic tweaks than most articles I've read about barge boards, wing end plates and sculpted wishbones. I suppose its because he knows what he is writing about. The feeling remains, however, that Newey spends much of his career applying finesse to irrelevant technology and picking holes in regulations; Newey implies that he could be doing something more interesting, perhaps relevant beyond F1, with his time.

 

I'll finish off the last 60 pages this evening and know that when I read it again there'll be a few nuggets that I missed first time.

 

Negative points: Annoying typos which should have been caught during proof reading. Its a chunky book so not one for holiday luggage. The illustrations are well considered but too small, especially given the amount of white space in the book.

[La Sarthe]

I picked up a copy in Waterstones on Saturday. It's going for half price - £10!! - an absolute bargain. I agree with the reviewers that it's very 'not-put-down-able'. Many fascinating and amusing tales, such as Ron Dennis' reaction to Newey having his office anything other than grey......

[Bloggsworth]

My Hoover washing machine just span the washing - I'm both happy with the wash and the word - It certainly hasn't spinned the washing...

Edited by Bloggsworth, 08 January 2018 - 13:58.

[Jack-the-Lad]

According to my dictionary, the big Collins, the use of span as the past tense of spin is either "archaic or dialect".
 
Adrian Newey was either brought up in a very backward rural community, (they must have used very racy farm carts), or possibly be several hundred years old.

Or possibly an affectation.....

[Charlieman]

I picked up a copy in Waterstones on Saturday. It's going for half price - £10!! - an absolute bargain. 

£10 or so is the normal price. 

 

The publishers, HarperCollins without a space, have flogged this book cheaply and widely. It is a good book, an excellent book. I don't understand their economics but they reckon that flogging this book cheaply will sell other HarperCollins books to me and you. Yeah, but.

 

Adrian Newley's book is a good read and HarperCollins economics make it as cheap as chips. Everyone should have an opinion about it. 

[pacificquay]

My Hoover washing machine just span the washing - I'm both happy with the wash and the word - It certainly hasn't spinned the washing...

 

Spun. SPUN. SPUN!

[Tim Murray]

‘When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?’

[kayemod]

‘When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?’

 

Like the dictionary definition I quoted, archaic. The book you found that in is a 638 year old work of fiction.

[Tim Murray]

Indeed.

[Charlieman]

What about other language foul ups?

 

Chronic? Epic? 

 

Uninterested or disinterested? 

 

Some usage makes me squirm.

[Eric Dunsdon]

I had a browse through this in Waterstones today. Listed as half price at a tenner. Actually it looks quite good, if a tad 'modern' for my tastes.

[kayemod]

I had a browse through this in Waterstones today. Listed as half price at a tenner. Actually it looks quite good, if a tad 'modern' for my tastes.

 

Not good news. Mrs K was in Poole today, ostensibly performing wifely duties, though in reality almost certainly shopping for yet more clothes. I'd asked her to go into Waterstone's to pick up a copy of the Newey book at the price they advertise on their site, £10.00. The sad reality was that after a search assisted by one of their staff, she found a single copy in stock, marked as "£20.00, reduced by £4.00, so £16.00". Being of good frugal northern stock, and with my instructions ringing in her ears, she declined of course. Not all bad though, as I had a quick look on Amazon and bought a copy for £8.00 post free, ( I'm of good frugal northern stock as well).

[PRD]

£10 or so is the normal price. 

 

The publishers, HarperCollins without a space, have flogged this book cheaply and widely. It is a good book, an excellent book. I don't understand their economics but they reckon that flogging this book cheaply will sell other HarperCollins books to me and you. Yeah, but.

 

Adrian Newley's book is a good read and HarperCollins economics make it as cheap as chips. Everyone should have an opinion about it. 

 

It was £20 in Waterstones in Exeter before Christmas, Amazon had it and Marc Presley's book at £10 and £8 respectively last week, so I indulged myself seeing that my wish list had been ignored this year

[Nick Planas]

Even if I'd paid £20 for it I would have said it was excellent value for money. But seeing as I have four grown up (allegedly) daughters, and between them they supplied most of my reading matter this Xmas, I don't give a McHonda's misfire about the cost... However, my initial comments about the use of the sp*n word should not be taken as a sign of serious discontent with either book - I think Adrian Newey's novel approach to writing an autobiography should be applauded. It was packed full of previously unknown facts, both technical and personal, and a smidge of juicy gossip too.

 

Marc Priestley's book is worth it too, even if it had only included the bit about 'getting' Kimi when he left McLaren, and the inevitable backlash from that - not to mention Kimi's revenge   :rotfl:For those among us who think that it was only the Mike Hawthorns of this world who did outrageous things away from the tracks (in the good old days) this will be an eye opener.

[kayemod]

Even if I'd paid £20 for it I would have said it was excellent value for money. But seeing as I have four grown up (allegedly) daughters, and between them they supplied most of my reading matter this Xmas, I don't give a McHonda's misfire about the cost... However, my initial comments about the use of the sp*n word should not be taken as a sign of serious discontent with either book - I think Adrian Newey's novel approach to writing an autobiography should be applauded. It was packed full of previously unknown facts, both technical and personal, and a smidge of juicy gossip too.

 

Marc Priestley's book is worth it too, even if it had only included the bit about 'getting' Kimi when he left McLaren, and the inevitable backlash from that - not to mention Kimi's revenge   :rotfl:For those among us who think that it was only the Mike Hawthorns of this world who did outrageous things away from the tracks (in the good old days) this will be an eye opener.

 

I have Adrian Newey's book on the way, most seem to agree with your opinions, but I'm slightly surprised by what you say about the Priestley book. Have you seen the Amazon reviews, they're not at all good. The general view seems to be that it's not well written, and appears to be transcribes of interviews with a ghostwriter. The factual content doesn't sound too brilliant either, much of it being descriptions of bad post race behaviour, mostly involving excessive alcohol consumption. I wouldn't place huge reliance of the critical faculties of unknown Amazon reviewers, but what do you think as a fellow TNF?

 

It sounds similar to a work by ex-Benetton mechanic Steve Matchett some years ago, an amateurish and self aggrandising effort that I wouldn't recommend to anyone. In his opinion it seems, mechanics are the real heroes, drivers just sit there and turn the wheel, races are really won by designers and men behind the scenes like him.

[Nick Planas]

I have Adrian Newey's book on the way, most seem to agree with your opinions, but I'm slightly surprised by what you say about the Priestley book. Have you seen the Amazon reviews, they're not at all good. The general view seems to be that it's not well written, and appears to be transcribes of interviews with a ghostwriter. The factual content doesn't sound too brilliant either, much of it being descriptions of bad post race behaviour, mostly involving excessive alcohol consumption. I wouldn't place huge reliance of the critical faculties of unknown Amazon reviewers, but what do you think as a fellow TNF?

Well several of my neighbours & one or two parents of my music students are current F1 mechanics, and I have always picked up on the gap between the image carefully portrayed by team press releases, etc, and the reality of what goes on when these guys get a chance to let their hair down! Marc Priestley's book was a little more open about what happened behind the scenes, which we obviously don't see or hear about on TV! It was also interesting to read the contrasting opinions between Adrian Newey, and the teams' mechanics when describing the trials, tribulations, qualities or otherwise of the cars e.g. the M18 which never saw a race start. Both my books are out on loan at the moment so I can't confirm details, but mechanics don't take kindly to a car which is seen by them to be overly complicated (unless it's a winner, of course!) All the way through the book I was conscious that he would not have been allowed to say or write any of those things whilst working for the team, so it was an interesting perspective. I wasn't expecting or seeking a brilliantly written literary masterpiece.

 

"It sounds similar to a work by ex-Benetton mechanic Steve Matchett some years ago, an amateurish and self aggrandising effort that I wouldn't recommend to anyone."

 

I found Priestley's book more interesting than Steve Matchett's, possibly less egotistical, but hey, these guys are operating in a high pressure environment - why shouldn't they be allowed to have an ego!

 

"In his opinion it seems, mechanics are the real heroes, drivers just sit there and turn the wheel, races are really won by designers and men behind the scenes like him."

 

Less so with Priestley. However, I've noticed a great similarity between the respect or otherwise that mechanics may have for their drivers, and the respect or otherwise that orchestral musicians may have for a conductor, and it's often the first impressions that create the mould. You get conductors who think that orchestral players are just barely-skilled minions (and treat them like children), and players who think some conductors are just sadists and/or failed players themselves. But then often you get players who think their conductors are the most amazing musicians on the planet - and they will play out of their skins for them. It was interesting to hear Priestley's thoughts on Lewis's first year - how they liked, then dislliked, his attitude. He won them back round again in the end, but it goes to show that nothing escaped their notice. He has a high regard for Kimi, who always treated his team at the end of a season.

[john aston]

The attitude of  'we're the real heroes , the driver is just a prima donna' has a counterpart in many other contexts - I am sure Nick is absolutely right about conductors and I have seen it with engineers and labourers , aircraft technicians and pilots and barristers and their clerks . But none of them can actually do what  the 'prima donna 'can ...and who cares if the driver cross threads  nuts if trusted with a spanner ...

[PayasYouRace]

I've just completed the On The Grid section. Getting well into it. I'm curious about his statement that Mario Andretti believes that Colin Chapman faked his death and went into hiding in Brazil. I've never heard that one before, at least, the bit about Mario believing it.

[kayemod]

I've just completed the On The Grid section. Getting well into it. I'm curious about his statement that Mario Andretti believes that Colin Chapman faked his death and went into hiding in Brazil. I've never heard that one before, at least, the bit about Mario believing it.

 

In his own way, from working with him and knowing him a little, Colin Chapman was probably the cleverest man I've ever met, but I don't think even he was clever enough to fake his own death, make it to Brazil and remain undetected. I wonder if Mario also believes that the Earth is flat, and the Moon is made from cheese?

[D-Type]

Mario foes have a sense of humour.  He may have said it - but did he mean it?

[AAGR]

Can you really believe that Colin Chapman, who liked his (usually self-promoted) public image to be well-known, to 'disappear' to Brazil or anywhere else, then never be heard of again ?

 

No, thought not.

[2F-001]

The Chapman/Brazil story has been floating around for some time, I think.

However, I photographed him in the museum at Pegasus Bridge in the early 2000s; and he had quite obviously found a cure for aging too, since he looked pretty much as he did in the late 70s...

 

Just bought the Newey book; hadn't planned to, but the hardback was so cheap it was hard to resist...

[kayemod]

 

...I photographed him in the museum at Pegasus Bridge in the early 2000s; and he had quite obviously found a cure for aging too, since he looked pretty much as he did in the late 70s...

 

 

Well spotted!

 

Colin was always a bit of a hypochondriac, slightly paranoid about his weight, no-one at Lotus ever dared to utter the nickname "Chunky" in his hearing, and he was also sensitive about his height, he often wore slightly built-up shoes, and greying hair, he went through a faintly embarrassing period of having it dyed red, until someone, possibly Hazel, talked him out of it. He also suffered from hay fever and a few other even more unpleasant afflictions. I'm a lifelong admirer of his engineering and design skills, but I have to confess that he went down ever so slightly in my estimation after I once spotted an inflatable ring cushion on his office chair.

[2F-001]

Strange him being sensitive about his, er, 'modest' height - wasn't he the ideal height for a racing driver?

[Jack-the-Lad]

In his own way, from working with him and knowing him a little, Colin Chapman was probably the cleverest man I've ever met, but I don't think even he was clever enough to fake his own death, make it to Brazil and remain undetected. I wonder if Mario also believes that the Earth is flat, and the Moon is made from cheese?

And I wonder if Andretti ever actually said that, except as a joking reference to Chapman's nature.....

Edited by Jack-the-Lad, 13 January 2018 - 19:59.

[2F-001]

Have just had my first flick through the Newey book; on the first page I stopped on:

"With the introduction of a very large rear wing by Jim Hall of Chaparral in 1967, ..."

then down the page:

"With this blindingly simple solution established, wings on racing cars became a common feature of the 1970s..."

Well, yes, I suppose they did, but the implication here is that they hadn't done so before.

 

Am I being overly critical? Was it just unfortunate that this was the first page I looked at?

Edited by 2F-001, 13 January 2018 - 20:23.

[PayasYouRace]

That's page 32 right?

 

It makes perfect sense and is a fair summary of the situation. Given that that part of the book is Adrian setting the scene for his career and not giving a complete history of the sport, I think you're being overly critical.

[2F-001]

Fair enough - but it was the 1967 bit that got me, to be honest.

[guiporsche]

No, I don't think 2F-001 is being overly critical. His remark calls attention to two points. The first is that that's what editors and reviewers are there for, particularly because as Newey himself admits, his ghost writer had no knowledge of motorsports whatsoever. This is a book written by a racing car designer, which will be bought mainly by racing fans... Right in the first page, per instance, there is a basic mistake, in which he names Kowalski's ride in Vanishing Point as a Charger, rather than a Challenger. 

 

Secondly, despite all the praise Newey's book has received, examples like that one show that historians/researchers should approach some of his points with care. There are some major gaps in his narrative, like the MP4-18 and its saga. Of course, the common reader might not care, but this is the TNF, after all. 

[Jack-the-Lad]

 
Am I being overly critical?

I don't think so. Most of us read non-fiction to learn something about people, events and subjects that interest us. If we identify obvious errors, omissions or misstatements, then how is the reader to have confidence in the most important things, those of which he has no prior knowledge?

[john aston]

Somebody doing work on my Seven, an ex Team Lotus mechanic, blithely told me that he had seen Chapman holding court in the Brands  Hatch bar (Kentagon was it ?) years after ACBC's  death. So I told him I'd seen Lord Lucan riding Shergar just the other day ...    

Edited by john aston, 14 January 2018 - 07:23.

[PayasYouRace]

No, I don't think 2F-001 is being overly critical. His remark calls attention to two points. The first is that that's what editors and reviewers are there for, particularly because as Newey himself admits, his ghost writer had no knowledge of motorsports whatsoever. This is a book written by a racing car designer, which will be bought mainly by racing fans... Right in the first page, per instance, there is a basic mistake, in which he names Kowalski's ride in Vanishing Point as a Charger, rather than a Challenger. 

 

Secondly, despite all the praise Newey's book has received, examples like that one show that historians/researchers should approach some of his points with care. There are some major gaps in his narrative, like the MP4-18 and its saga. Of course, the common reader might not care, but this is the TNF, after all. 

 

What is so wrong about Adrian's comments? Wings became common in the 1970s. They had been introduced before but hadn't caught on yet.

 

What about the MP4-18? I haven't got to his McLaren years yet, but surely this is Adrian's book, so he's including what he feels is important to him. If people only wrote about what everyone thought was important, everyone's books would be the same.

[2F-001]

Well, they would certainly be said to have caught on 'big-time' by the end of '68. Over the winter of '68-'69, even a few F3s were trying out the idea of strut-mounted wings, front and rear, (for example, Schenken's Brabham).

Once the 1970 season was underway, we were already almost a year beyond a major revision to the rules governing wings, such was the level to which they'd 'caught on'.

And he, or his ghostwriter or editor, seems to have dismissed 1966, the really important year for the successful deployment of such devices (tall, large, articulated and unsprung-mounted) in a high-profile series.

As Jack-the-Lad has said, this is a fairly standard way of assessing the factual content of books (etc) - which I've used, whether for personal purposes or for reviews I've had to do professionally: start with the stuff you do know about and see what they made of that. If that seems ok, you're more likely to trust the other stuff.

 

I agree that it's up to the author what's included - or omitted, and that's fine (unless, of course, such omissions leave a misleading impression of what actually happened).

Edited by 2F-001, 14 January 2018 - 09:44.

[Collombin]

It's not uncommon for a book to have mistakes in the "scene setting" parts in which the author may not be an absolute expert - a couple of examples being the recent book about the 1964 Indy 500 and Steve Olvey's Rapid Response, both of which are chock full of countless embarrassing errors in areas where the author is straying away from his comfort zone. But you have to assume that the remainder of the book is on much firmer ground. I doubt Olvey's book had many errors relating to medical procedure, and I doubt Newey's has many relating to the design process of his cars.

[cpbell]

What about other language foul ups?

 

Chronic? Epic? 

 

Uninterested or disinterested? 

 

Some usage makes me squirm.

As I understand it, uninterested is used to express the idea of not finding something diverting or fascinating, while disinterested suggests that the person concerned is neither financially or emotionally invested in something, or has no interest in any particular outcome.  I could accurately state that I am uninterested in Association Football and disinterested in the share price of all FTSE 100 companies, for example.

Edited by cpbell, 17 January 2018 - 18:00.

[john aston]

Wings were commonplace before 1970 and had 'caught on ' in both F1 and  F 2 as well as sports racing cars .

 

Anyway, continuing with my pedantry , whilst I am enjoying the Newey book immensely , even in the sixty odd pages I have read so far there are a number of errors which a good sub editor would have remedied . Some typos as well as such clunkers as describing Messrs Ganley and  Schenken as a couple of Aussies. Half right, Adrian .... 

[Charlieman]

As I understand it, uninterested is used to express the idea of not finding something diverting or fascinating, while disinterested suggests that the person concerned is neither financially or emotionally invested in something, or has no interest in any particular outcome.  I could accurately state that I am uninterested in Association Football and disinterested in the share price of all FTSE 100 companies, for example.

Spot on. Ta, as we say in some parts of England, with a tweak for Scandinavia,

[Charlieman]

WAnyway, continuing with my pedantry , whilst I am enjoying the Newey book immensely , even in the sixty odd pages I have read so far there are a number of errors which a good sub editor would have remedied . Some typos as well as such clunkers as describing Messrs Ganley and  Schenken as a couple of Aussies. Half right, Adrian .... 

Me too about the typos and errors -- except I was too bored to count errors. It is a good book. It is worth reading.

 

Messrs Ganley and  Schengen are not treated badly as incidental characters. If they disagree, I  am sure that we will hear.

[opplock]

But you have to assume that the remainder of the book is on much firmer ground.

 

 

Why? A few minutes spent on the internet can prevent errors such as saying Howden Ganley is an Aussie. If the scene setting sections of a book are riddled with this sort of error I would conclude that the author is not concerned about accuracy. Mr Newey surely could afford to pay a researcher to do some fact checking if lacking the time to do it himself. 

 

Call me pedantic but I object to spending money on books that are "chock full of countless embarrassing errors". These supposedly non-fiction works seem to contravene the Sale of Goods Act criteria of "Fit for Purpose and of Merchantable Quality" that I was taught around the time that Niki Lauda won his first Grand Prix. 

[Collombin]

I used to expect error free perfection from books, but it simply doesn't exist. Every motorsport book I own has errors in it, it's just a question of how many. In the particular parts of a book that are the precise expert area of the author however, I would presume that few or no such errors exist. Annoyingly though, they would be the least likely ones to be able to spot.

[Charlieman]

Why? A few minutes spent on the internet can prevent errors such as saying Howden Ganley is an Aussie. If the scene setting sections of a book are riddled with this sort of error I would conclude that the author is not concerned about accuracy. 

I think that Howden has lived as a Kiwi mistaken as Oz for much of his life. 

[PayasYouRace]

Well if it makes you feel better the aero engineering is spot on, as you might expect from a book by an engineer.

I’m really enjoying it. Yeah the errors can be a bit jarring but I see it as Adrian talking to me about his life through print.