Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 6 votes

McLaren Technical Thread (MCL34)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
4323 replies to this topic

#651 OSX

OSX
  • Member

  • 4,840 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 12 February 2019 - 11:55

No going back to those days! 

Says you!



Advertisement

#652 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,259 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 February 2019 - 12:00

I agree with you on a lot of subjects Clatter, but not this one!

F1 races in countries with very poor human rights records, receives sponsorship from energy drinks and alcohol drinks brands that, potentially, cause a great deal of harm to humans, is itself promoting the automotive industry and the burning of fuels which negatively and vastly impacts our global climate which compromises us all, whilst glorifying driving fast... and on more than one occasion teams and races have been, ahem, rumoured to be financed by fraudulent activity, most recently Force India with, allegedly stolen funds. All these examples seem to get a free pass, everyone looks the other way, whilst tobacco and now modern tobacco heating products seem to be the go to outrage. It just feels like a bit of a herd mentality to me, I'm not sure people are applying the same standard of acceptability to other issues in comparison to e tobacco. Over and above this, consider the alternative, there are so many myths about vaping. Cancer UK say there are NO deaths attributed to vaping, vaping does not contain any tar or carbon monoxide the two standout dangers of smoking and there are no risks to the public as only aerosol is exhaled. This is all on the UK government website heath matters. Frankly being against alternative tobacco promotion is like being against electric vehicles non-alcoholic beer advertising.

I'll also add, I consider this post very much on topic as the reputation and value of the McLaren brand is very much key to its success on track and obviously the divisive nature of their latest avenue of income has the potential to compromise that status. I fully expect McLaren will have examined all of the advantages and disadvantages and trust their judgement. Ultimately they have secured funding from a source that is currently not banned and I do not think McLaren should be expected to self-regulate, otherwise Ferrari, in this case, have an advantage worth $100m which you could argue is worth 0.5 seconds per lap in some sort of a back of a fag packet calculation about performance per $ of development resource.

I will fully admit that part of my objection is that I just hate the look of it, but I still don't like walking into fog exhaled by someone vaping. And let's not pretend these companies are doing something noble for the public good. They are simply changing the method of getting people addicted to their product.

As far as deaths or illnesses go, vaping may not be as dangerous, but it also has not been around long enough for long term effects to become noticeable, and there are not the same level of medical studies yet.

If it were only advertised and used as a means of quitting smoking it would have merit, but that's simply not the case.

Edited by Clatter, 12 February 2019 - 12:00.


#653 f1rules

f1rules
  • Member

  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 12 February 2019 - 12:21

Thank you! that is interesting

 

 

 

Yes it's in the march 2019 issue https://www.chelseam...igital-edition/

Some of the interesting parts:

 

 

 

 

 



#654 Nicktendo86

Nicktendo86
  • Member

  • 2,124 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 12 February 2019 - 12:47

So, what are the honest hopes for this car? I don't seem to read any rumours at all, will Fry have had much influence? Hoping for something interesting with the front wing, Prod led the field with his aero on the previous front wing regs so hope he could find something there.

#655 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 4,898 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:00

 

Yes it's in the march 2019 issue https://www.chelseam...igital-edition/

Some of the interesting parts:

 

 

Thanks! I went and bought the entire magazine so I could read the full article but there wasn't that much more to be honest.

 

To summarise:

  • Overall it was a car that was less than a sum of it's parts.
  • Main issue was wake from the front tyres through the corners not being what they designed for.
  • Main reason they avoided large inlets around the roll-hoop was because of the effects on weight distribution. (I wouldn't be surprised if they have to bite that bullet this year though)
  • The good race pace relative to quali wasn't because they optimised for that intentionally but more because some of the good parts of the car paid off over a race stint. (Probably tyre management but could also be the stability/predictability of the car as the amount of fuel changes).
  • Poor cost-effectiveness (ROI): too much time/effort/money spent on trying to find the last few 10ths in minor areas rather than the "big picture". Team re-org focuses on this a lot - more back to basics and more open approach
  • The winter testing issues did hurt them for real. There was a cascade effect on upgrades etc.
  • 6th place in the constructors was better than the car actually deserved

 

There was no mention I saw of drag btw. Overall, it seems they're mostly happy with things like the suspension so that'll probably be an evolution this year.



#656 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,259 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:00

So, what are the honest hopes for this car? I don't seem to read any rumours at all, will Fry have had much influence? Hoping for something interesting with the front wing, Prod led the field with his aero on the previous front wing regs so hope he could find something there.

I hope they have learnt lessons from last year and corrected their mistakes. Consistently in Q3 and scoring points.

#657 TheGoldenStoffel

TheGoldenStoffel
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: November 18

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:15

Thanks! I went and bought the entire magazine so I could read the full article but there wasn't that much more to be honest.

 

To summarise:

  • Overall it was a car that was less than a sum of it's parts.
  • Main issue was wake from the front tyres through the corners not being what they designed for.
  • Main reason they avoided large inlets around the roll-hoop was because of the effects on weight distribution. (I wouldn't be surprised if they have to bite that bullet this year though)
  • The good race pace relative to quali wasn't because they optimised for that intentionally but more because some of the good parts of the car paid off over a race stint. (Probably tyre management but could also be the stability/predictability of the car as the amount of fuel changes).
  • Poor cost-effectiveness (ROI): too much time/effort/money spent on trying to find the last few 10ths in minor areas rather than the "big picture". Team re-org focuses on this a lot - more back to basics and more open approach
  • The winter testing issues did hurt them for real. There was a cascade effect on upgrades etc.
  • 6th place in the constructors was better than the car actually deserved

 

There was no mention I saw of drag btw. Overall, it seems they're mostly happy with things like the suspension so that'll probably be an evolution this year.

 

 

Don't think the car was particularly draggy but that they simply had to bolt on lots of dirty downforce to compensate for their front tyre wake issue leading to not having enough downforce through the corners.



#658 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 4,898 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:21

So, what are the honest hopes for this car? I don't seem to read any rumours at all, will Fry have had much influence? Hoping for something interesting with the front wing, Prod led the field with his aero on the previous front wing regs so hope he could find something there.

 

For the FW itself, it's very close to being "spec" - the regs are very tight. Any innovations are likely to be in the nose (like last year) rather than the FW.

 

Fry should be having an effect already.

 

Not going to state expectations per say but I certainly expect them to run more reliably in winter testing. With them playing catch-up might well see them being more competitive during the second half of the year than the first. I'd be quite happy with a scenario where Renault and McLaren are "best of the rest" and fighting each other closely through the year.



#659 Oblivion

Oblivion
  • Member

  • 851 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:23

So, what are the honest hopes for this car? I don't seem to read any rumours at all, will Fry have had much influence? Hoping for something interesting with the front wing, Prod led the field with his aero on the previous front wing regs so hope he could find something there.

 

My first honest hope - no burnt marks on the car on the second day of testing. That's for the start...



Advertisement

#660 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 4,898 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:37

Don't think the car was particularly draggy but that they simply had to bolt on lots of dirty downforce to compensate for their front tyre wake issue leading to not having enough downforce through the corners.

 

Yup. I seem to remember them saying they had to run higher DF setups than they would have otherwise preferred. I did post a lot last year saying that I thought the drag issues were relatively minor and were talked about much more than was truly justified. Given that it didn't come up in the article I feel my analysis wasn't too far off the mark.

 

To repeat a point I made last year: if drag was such an issue then their race pace would have been worse than their quali pace but instead it was the other way around.



#661 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 4,898 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:41

Regarding this year's Renault PU:
https://www.motorspo...engine/4336211/
 

"No figure - but it is substantial," he said, when asked by Motorsport.com about the scale of the power step made. "The furthest I will go is that it is the biggest we have ever done since the V6 introduction."

 

Hope so! Hope it's reliable too.

 

(Smokey engine with BAT sponsorship might not be the best combination, heh)



#662 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 4,176 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:01

The grapevine suggests Renault have found 35kw (46bhp) gain in qualifying trim and 20kw (27bhp) in the race. If so, this would put them close to the level Mercedes and Ferrari were at in 2018, although no-one thinks the top two won't find more performance over the winter.


https://www.bbc.com/...rmula1/47210981

Let's hope it's true. I know Ferrari and. Mercedes won't stand still but they have less scope for improvement than Renault and Honda.

#663 Oblivion

Oblivion
  • Member

  • 851 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:04

DzNLdqYWsAAhN3a.jpg



#664 kumo7

kumo7
  • Member

  • 1,886 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:08

33?



#665 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 4,176 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:11

DzNLdqYWsAAhN3a.jpg


This is from last year.

#666 kumo7

kumo7
  • Member

  • 1,886 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:12

Thanks! I went and bought the entire magazine so I could read the full article but there wasn't that much more to be honest.

 

To summarise:

  • Overall it was a car that was less than a sum of it's parts.
  • Main issue was wake from the front tyres through the corners not being what they designed for.
  • Main reason they avoided large inlets around the roll-hoop was because of the effects on weight distribution. (I wouldn't be surprised if they have to bite that bullet this year though)
  • The good race pace relative to quali wasn't because they optimised for that intentionally but more because some of the good parts of the car paid off over a race stint. (Probably tyre management but could also be the stability/predictability of the car as the amount of fuel changes).
  • Poor cost-effectiveness (ROI): too much time/effort/money spent on trying to find the last few 10ths in minor areas rather than the "big picture". Team re-org focuses on this a lot - more back to basics and more open approach
  • The winter testing issues did hurt them for real. There was a cascade effect on upgrades etc.
  • 6th place in the constructors was better than the car actually deserved

 

There was no mention I saw of drag btw. Overall, it seems they're mostly happy with things like the suspension so that'll probably be an evolution this year.

 

 I kind of like the parts where Robert mentions that the suspension was fine but mechanical, even though the team played with hydraulic system, by which there was some trade offs.

 

It is invisible, but it in one way or the other give answer to the install car behavior in the corner. 

 

Guess the team changed it, as well as its air intake but which we will see change.



#667 Oblivion

Oblivion
  • Member

  • 851 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:26

This is from last year.

https://twitter.com/...5567608833?s=19

 

That was twittet by the Team today. :confused:



#668 Enkei

Enkei
  • Member

  • 5,851 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:28

This is from last year.

 

Looks fa.. ehm *never mind*  ;)



#669 BertoC

BertoC
  • Member

  • 496 posts
  • Joined: August 17

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:38

I don't get that tweet lol looks like the MP4-30

 

Edit: Probably using it as a placeholder for some preparations.


Edited by BertoC, 12 February 2019 - 14:43.


#670 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 1,147 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:39

So now papaya makes sense

 

BAT_RA_Image_12618.jpg



#671 CPR

CPR
  • Member

  • 4,898 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:40

Perhaps the team are doing what others are and showing a re-skinned 2018 car to the press.

 

I'm pretty sure that car is illegal according to the 2019 regs. Even if we ignore the missing halo.



#672 ar1

ar1
  • Member

  • 184 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:42

No Fin and no Sponsors either?



#673 TheGoldenStoffel

TheGoldenStoffel
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: November 18

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:44

So now papaya makes sense

 

BAT_RA_Image_12618.jpg

 

I like that it's a Lucky Strike circle and the products are placed as bowling pins  :p



#674 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 1,147 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:47

I like that it's a Lucky Strike circle and the products are placed as bowling pins  :p

 

 

I also found this (a BAT brand)

 

180px-NewportRedCigarettes.jpg


Edited by RA2, 12 February 2019 - 14:49.


#675 Pumpkinz

Pumpkinz
  • Member

  • 339 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:47

Just look at that high Rear Wing, that is clearly a pre 2017 Car.



#676 ar1

ar1
  • Member

  • 184 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:50

Just look at that high Rear Wing, that is clearly a pre 2017 Car.

 Of course, they'll be practising with a show car



#677 kumo7

kumo7
  • Member

  • 1,886 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:50

But 2017 car had that black livery,... so 2018 car?



#678 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 4,176 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:54

But 2017 car had that black livery,... so 2018 car?


2017 car with 2018 livery with 2019 launch event? 😂

#679 TheGoldenStoffel

TheGoldenStoffel
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: November 18

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:58

Just look at that high Rear Wing, that is clearly a pre 2017 Car.

 

Exactly, it's the 2016 car painted orange. They've probably just put it up there to set up the lighting and stuff.



Advertisement

#680 Joseki

Joseki
  • Member

  • 3,162 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:00

It's a MP4-31 with a 2018 livery, likely used as a dummy to test the lights.

#681 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 300 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:03

Exactly, it's the 2016 car painted orange. They've probably just put it up there to set up the lighting and stuff.

 

And to generate chatter which it seems to have done :)



#682 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,568 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:05

I will fully admit that part of my objection is that I just hate the look of it, but I still don't like walking into fog exhaled by someone vaping. And let's not pretend these companies are doing something noble for the public good. They are simply changing the method of getting people addicted to their product.

As far as deaths or illnesses go, vaping may not be as dangerous, but it also has not been around long enough for long term effects to become noticeable, and there are not the same level of medical studies yet.

If it were only advertised and used as a means of quitting smoking it would have merit, but that's simply not the case.

 

I have to say I'm quite disappointed by McLaren's choice of sponsor and I also think the launch could have been handled differently.  

 

The headlines were always going to be about British American TOBACCO re-entering the sport and this could have ramifications for McLaren and other teams looking for sponsorship if it looks like they are trying to advertise cigarettes in an underhanded way.  Plenty of sponsors don't want to be tarnished with links to tobacco and F1 is unique in that there is a lot of scope for cross-promotion of your brand with another, ie BAT logos on a McLaren will inevitably show on on promotional material used by other sponsors of the team.  It would be difficult for sponsors of another team to ensure they don't get cross-coverage with BAT logos on a passing McLaren too.

 

It looks like BAT like PMI wants to advertise their new vaping products but this isn't clearly stated in the press release except as a Ron-speak oblique reference to potentially risk reduced products.

 

Like PMI BAT should have set up a specific sub-brand to promote their non-cigarette products and McLaren could then have presented this differently.  A deal with SuperVape (owned by BAT) sounds very different to a deal with BAT to promote potentially risk reduced products.


Edited by Talisman, 12 February 2019 - 15:06.


#683 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 13,468 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:33

Still sticking pins in your Mcvoodoo-doll Talisman? Considering all these brands have been in the same play pen with the PMI funded (and obscurely branded) Ferrari over the years, we should definitely blame McLaren now. Or they could sponsor a team using a Honda engine which would reduce the chances of them being anywhere near any tobacco related sponsorship... (ouch)! 



#684 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,568 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:39

Still sticking pins in your Mcvoodoo-doll Talisman? Considering all these brands have been in the same play pen with the PMI funded (and obscurely branded) Ferrari over the years, we should definitely blame McLaren now. Or they could sponsor a team using a Honda engine which would reduce the chances of them being anywhere near any tobacco related sponsorship... (ouch)!


I’ve never been happy with PMI’s continued involvement in the sport which was also contrary to a gentlemen’s agreement among the cigarette makers that lead to BAT leaving the sport previously.

You could actually try addressing the point I raised instead of your usual personal attacks. You made some interesting points on the same topic so I know you can do it if you try.

#685 Christophe77

Christophe77
  • Member

  • 889 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 February 2019 - 16:11

I'm expectng some big Vype logo's on the car on Thursday... 

 

vype-logo-B03A44C2B3-seeklogo.com.png



#686 FordFiesta

FordFiesta
  • Member

  • 224 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted 12 February 2019 - 16:25

DzNLdqYWsAAhN3a.jpg


Reminds me a little bit of the "War Room" in "Dr. Strangelove"...

#687 Maustinsj

Maustinsj
  • Member

  • 4,350 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 16:27

Reminds me a little bit of the "War Room" in "Dr. Strangelove"...

 

I read somewhere that George W Bush asked to see the War Room when he took office...

 

You can imagine Ron saying "You can't let the public in here - they'll see everything! They'll see the big board!"

 

23f408c7f7eb426bbfd52f058b657f9e.jpg


Edited by Maustinsj, 12 February 2019 - 16:30.


#688 Hamm

Hamm
  • Member

  • 430 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 12 February 2019 - 16:30

I'm expectng some big Vype logo's on the car on Thursday...

vype-logo-B03A44C2B3-seeklogo.com.png

Will be
“A Better Tomorrow”
As a global partner of the McLaren Formula One team, BAT will have on-car and off-car presence throughout the season, at all times in line with applicable regulation and legislation. BAT’s new-to-world and thought-leading “A Better Tomorrow” platform will be introduced at McLaren’s 2019 car launch on 14 February.
http://bat.com/group...ebLive/DOB9ADGX

#689 FordFiesta

FordFiesta
  • Member

  • 224 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted 12 February 2019 - 16:30

That sentence is so genius in the film: "Gentlemen. You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!"

#690 pup

pup
  • Member

  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 12 February 2019 - 16:35

I’ve never been happy with PMI’s continued involvement in the sport which was also contrary to a gentlemen’s agreement among the cigarette makers that lead to BAT leaving the sport previously.

I'm laughing at the idea that BAT would think a gentlemen's agreement among tobacco companies would be any more successful than a gentlemen's agreement among F1 teams.  Having said that, it's still not clear to me how effective PMI's 'subliminal' sponsorship of Ferrari has been.  I've just never seen how the color red and a bar code translates to "I want to buy some cigarettes".  But I guess BAT must suspect some success or they wouldn't be back.  Perhaps they have a different trick up their sleeve.

 

mclaren-mcl33-aleron-trasero-f1-soymotor

 

Works everywhere but Hungary.


Edited by pup, 12 February 2019 - 16:41.


#691 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 2,338 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 12 February 2019 - 17:39

https://twitter.com/...5567608833?s=19

 

That was twittet by the Team today. :confused:

 

If you read down, McLaren clarifies that it's a showcar used to test the lighting.



#692 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,568 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 12 February 2019 - 17:54

I'm laughing at the idea that BAT would think a gentlemen's agreement among tobacco companies would be any more successful than a gentlemen's agreement among F1 teams. Having said that, it's still not clear to me how effective PMI's 'subliminal' sponsorship of Ferrari has been. I've just never seen how the color red and a bar code translates to "I want to buy some cigarettes". But I guess BAT must suspect some success or they wouldn't be back. Perhaps they have a different trick up their sleeve.

mclaren-mcl33-aleron-trasero-f1-soymotor

Works everywhere but Hungary.


E-cigarettes aren’t (yet) subjected to the same advertising bans as normal tobacco so I can see why BAT are interested in using F1 to promote them. My point is why both BAT and McLaren are making the deal more about BAT rather than their e cigarette sub brands. It’s clumsy by both companies.

That said I don’t think PMI is doing any better. I have no idea what Mission Winnow stands for except for putting a prominent M onto Ferrari’s. And it seems to have gotten them into trouble in Australia at least.

#693 Oblivion

Oblivion
  • Member

  • 851 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 12 February 2019 - 18:03

If you read down, McLaren clarifies that it's a showcar used to test the lighting.

 

I thought the picture is from last year. Just a misunderstanding.



#694 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 4,865 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 February 2019 - 19:15

My point is why both BAT and McLaren are making the deal more about BAT rather than their e cigarette sub brands. It’s clumsy by both companies.
 

 

You read a lot into day 1.  If they are name dropping at Grand Prix's, I'd get your point.  This is a press release... Why is BAT barred from using their own companies name?  Do they have a brand of cigs called 'British American Tobacco'? Why wouldn't BAT want to ensure their customers know these new sub-brands are BAT products? It would be totally useless for BAT to do their best to pretend like these aren't their products when trying to convert tobacco smokers to vapers.


Edited by Nathan, 12 February 2019 - 19:20.


#695 sniper80

sniper80
  • Member

  • 901 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 20:10

I'm impressed with McLaren to be honest.

They've had very bad seasons, enough to kill of the team. I think the Honda money kept them alive in the first bad seasons....

Now they have the prospect of a great team manager, a very good designer is coming & Tobacco money (let's be honest, have there ever been richer sponsors in F1 then the Tobacco brands?)

2019 will be a building year, does anyone know how long the Renault contract runs?


Edited by sniper80, 12 February 2019 - 20:11.


#696 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 4,176 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 12 February 2019 - 20:16

I'm impressed with McLaren to be honest.
They've had very bad seasons, enough to kill of the team. I think the Honda money kept them alive in the first bad seasons....
Now they have the prospect of a great team manager, a very good designer is coming & Tobacco money (let's be honest, have there ever been richer sponsors in F1 then the Tobacco brands?)
2019 will be a building year, does anyone know how long the Renault contract runs?


AFAIK it runs until 2021.

#697 f1rules

f1rules
  • Member

  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 13 February 2019 - 06:06

This underlines how much a td is needed,  when you have neerdy people living in their own bubble, hopefully they partly solved it this year with the organisational changes with fry and stella now clear responsible. 

 

 

Thanks! I went and bought the entire magazine so I could read the full article but there wasn't that much more to be honest.

 

To summarise:

  • Overall it was a car that was less than a sum of it's parts.
  • Main issue was wake from the front tyres through the corners not being what they designed for.
  • Main reason they avoided large inlets around the roll-hoop was because of the effects on weight distribution. (I wouldn't be surprised if they have to bite that bullet this year though)
  • The good race pace relative to quali wasn't because they optimised for that intentionally but more because some of the good parts of the car paid off over a race stint. (Probably tyre management but could also be the stability/predictability of the car as the amount of fuel changes).
  • Poor cost-effectiveness (ROI): too much time/effort/money spent on trying to find the last few 10ths in minor areas rather than the "big picture". Team re-org focuses on this a lot - more back to basics and more open approach
  • The winter testing issues did hurt them for real. There was a cascade effect on upgrades etc.
  • 6th place in the constructors was better than the car actually deserved

 

There was no mention I saw of drag btw. Overall, it seems they're mostly happy with things like the suspension so that'll probably be an evolution this year.


Edited by f1rules, 13 February 2019 - 06:17.


#698 f1rules

f1rules
  • Member

  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 13 February 2019 - 06:27

well cant wait, i really hope for a decent step, with fry working all last year on discovering the root cause of their problems and bringing that knowledge into this years car, the wake problem alone caused a number of additional problems/disadvantages, just solving that would have a huge positive impact all downstream the car, together with hopefully a much better pu, and a far better pu integration, and better cooling layout the scope for improvement should be decent, or so i hope :-) and is much needed offcourse


Edited by f1rules, 13 February 2019 - 06:35.


#699 Quickshifter

Quickshifter
  • Member

  • 4,259 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 13 February 2019 - 06:52

Priorities and allocation of resources appropriately is massively important and no better example than Force India in the last few years. A team should always know which areas will reap maximum dividends with respect to the resources allocated.

F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport. Here one wrong decision can wreck you season and render it unrecoverable. Yes the top three have the largest resources but Mclaren simple aren't so far off financially to be languishing 2 seconds off pace. The restructure is not because of lack of effort or poor engineering rather cos of poor decision making and ambiguous role assignment without clear accountability and responsibility.

Seidl, Fry, Stella, Key and Prodromou make a solid structure and Seidl has rich f1 and motorsport experience both technically and management wise. If 2018 hadn't happened things may just have meandered aimlessly. 2018 showed them the scale at which they were underachieving with respect to their resources.

Externally they may try to say they have a 5 year plan but i am sure they will have aggressive internal targets cos that is the only way to progress.

Edited by Quickshifter, 13 February 2019 - 06:54.


Advertisement

#700 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 13,468 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 13 February 2019 - 09:09

I’ve never been happy with PMI’s continued involvement in the sport which was also contrary to a gentlemen’s agreement among the cigarette makers that lead to BAT leaving the sport previously.

You could actually try addressing the point I raised instead of your usual personal attacks. You made some interesting points on the same topic so I know you can do it if you try.

Just tickling your tummy Talisman, no offence intended. 

 

Edit, on an earlier point, rather than this announcement looking clumsy and taking focus away from the launch, perhaps its intended to get the marmite out of the way now, before the car launch? I doubt the car will have BAT or Vype logos, I suspect the branding will be an obscure/subliminal Mission Winnow type thing, or perhaps "Puretech" the name of their proprietary e technology. 


Edited by Rinehart, 13 February 2019 - 09:20.