38 replies to this topic

[HSJ]

From the Grapevine by Tom Keeble:

Of course, close followers of the sport - a surprisingly small percentage of the viewing public - appreciate that the MP4-17D is new in just about every regard, and hardly comparable with the car that started this season, let alone the one that ended last. Even through winter testing, it carried the back end being proposed for the new car, and development has been ongoing ever since. It puts it in to perspective that most teams 'new' cars have not made the progress McLaren managed by developing their old car.

[rant]

Many of you probably venture on the RC forum and have perhaps read my comments about the MP4-17D in the past and know what I think about this subject. But some of you don't know them, so let my recap:

So "close followers" (do I sense a claim of superiority? "if you don't agree with me you're ignorant" type?) "appreciate that the MP4-17D is new in just about every regard, and hardly comparable with the car that started this season, let alone the one that ended last."

I don't think so. First of all, look at a photo of a MP4-17 from last year and a photo of a current car. Yes, there are differences. You can see the new front and rear wins and barge boards. Anything else? Well, it starts to get difficult. The basic chassis is 100% the same, only the add-ons have been changed.

Secondly, look at a photo of a 17D from Melbourne this year and compare it with the 17D from Hockenheim. Any differences? Uh, can't see them really. Perhaps a tweak here or there?

So what makes the current car "hardly comparable with the car that started this season" then? Oh I see, it is all that magical stuff UNDERNEATH the covers! Right? And what evidence do we have of that? NONE! I guess that doesn't matter though, I mean what good did evidence ever do to anybody anyway.

Good God. If Tom Keeble had been actually following the reports he'd know that that the 17D has not received new parts at all since the opening races of the season, except a front suspension part from the 18 in Canada (the only part so far fitted from the new car), and supposedly some improvements in Hockenheim of which there's little or no evidence, despite of Whitmarsh raving about them before the race weekend. Mercedes was supposed to have a new engine evolution and McLaren was supposed to be able to use the new wider front Michelin tyres. There was also supposed to be something else new IIRC according to Whitmarsh. Well, I'm pretty sure they did have the engine and the tyres, but what else?

Anyway, that's still peanuts. Interlagos or Imola was the last race before Hockenheim where McLaren had any real improvements on the car. And I'm supposed to believe that the current car doesn't bear a resemblance with the one that started the season? Am I supposed to laugh now?

What about Tom's line "Even through winter testing, it carried the back end being proposed for the new car, and development has been ongoing ever since"?? It carried exactly what back end? Certainly not the back end of the MP4-18, that's for sure. The parts from the 18 don't even fit the 17, that's why they haven't been using them. I mean McLaren are not fools, they'd have used every part they could have by now. But they can't, the cars are too different.

Perhaps he means the new rear suspension. Yes, that's true, they did have a new rear (as well as front) suspension to better handle the Michelin tyres. But where's the big deal in that? So they developed the car like any team would, during winter testing or during on-season testing.

[/rant]

OK, so now you have my silly and ignorant comments. But I sure would like to have someone explain to me how a car can bear no resemblance to its older version even though even a child can see that it does. The emperor has clothes but you have to be a non-expert to see them?

All season I've followed Jenkins & Piola's analyses in Autosport, and they haven't been able to report on improvements on the 17D for most of the season, and even when there's been something new on the car it's been the usual minor improvements, the difference being that McLaren have had them a couple of times whereas the other teams have had them at almost every race. That's why it makes me mad that Keeble makes such claims without any explanation. Perhaps you smart guys at Tech Forum can inform my ignorant self as to how greatly the MP4-17D has improved during the season, and I'm sure you can back it up with evidence.

Thanks.

[HSJ]

By the way, as far as I know one of the major reasons for McLaren not to have made real improvements on the MP4-17D is very simple: they've expected to use the 18 since quite early this season so they did not have a real development program for the 17D. Also, since the 18 was introduced they've used most of their testing efforts on that car, leaving the 17D to test mostly tyres and suspension/brake/etc. configurations to be used in upcoming races, i.e. setup work.

[Supa Fly]

get over it

[Wuzak]

My understanding is that the MP4-17D was almost completely new for this season. About the only carry over part was the main tub.

The suspension is new, and better matches the Michelin tyres' needs. McLaren switched to Michelin at a late stage for the 2002 season, and it was to be expected that some areas would not match as well as desired.

The engine in the 17D is also new enough to warrant a new engine designation. It does appear to be less at a disadvantage than the unit from last year.

I believe it was Whitmarsh, or even Ron Dennis himself, that stated that keeping the MP4-17 tag for the car was a little misleading.

[Wuzak]

Michelin's boss said at the beginning of the season that McLaren's MP4-17D was over 2s quicker at that stage (pre season testing) than the old MP4-17. A lot of that was down to tyres, but by no means all of it.

Quite a bit when others are expecting maybe a 0.5s gain.

[dosco]

Originally posted by HSJ
From the Grapevine by Tom Keeble:



[rant]

I don't think so. First of all, look at a photo of a MP4-17 from last year and a photo of a current car. Yes, there are differences. You can see the new front and rear wins and barge boards. Anything else? Well, it starts to get difficult. The basic chassis is 100% the same, only the add-ons have been changed.

Secondly, look at a photo of a 17D from Melbourne this year and compare it with the 17D from Hockenheim. Any differences? Uh, can't see them really. Perhaps a tweak here or there?

So what makes the current car "hardly comparable with the car that started this season" then? Oh I see, it is all that magical stuff UNDERNEATH the covers! Right? And what evidence do we have of that? NONE! I guess that doesn't matter though, I mean what good did evidence ever do to anybody anyway.

[/rant]

OK, so now you have my silly and ignorant comments. But I sure would like to have someone explain to me how a car can bear no resemblance to its older version even though even a child can see that it does. The emperor has clothes but you have to be a non-expert to see them?

All season I've followed Jenkins & Piola's analyses in Autosport, and they haven't been able to report on improvements on the 17D for most of the season, and even when there's been something new on the car it's been the usual minor improvements, the difference being that McLaren have had them a couple of times whereas the other teams have had them at almost every race. That's why it makes me mad that Keeble makes such claims without any explanation. Perhaps you smart guys at Tech Forum can inform my ignorant self as to how greatly the MP4-17D has improved during the season, and I'm sure you can back it up with evidence.

Thanks.

Well, regarding the "rant" portion of your post, if the outside shape of the car remained unchanged, there is no way one could tell if a new engine, transmission, shocks, brakes, etc etc are installed on any given car at any given time from photographs/video coverage.

Let's assume the 'new" transmission fits in the old hole 100%. How would any observer know that a new tranny was installed? Visually, there would be no way.

So if all these new components McLaren has made fit 100% under the old bodywork, what makes you think that looking at a photo is going to tell you anything? You pretty much would have to take the team's word for it.

Now, with that said, part of the "fun" of F1 is all the politiking, chicanery, and trickery that goes on behind the scenes. Perhaps Ronster has launched a effort to obfuscate what's really going on and "scare" or mislead the competition....none of us "regular" F1 fans are going to know about it (until maybe 10 years after the fact when someone writes a book or whatever).

Now, to address the remainder of your post, I think the only true measure of a "modified" car is a change in lap time and/or race reliability. Of course, in any 1 race it is a bit more complicated than just the strict measurement of either value, since statistically speaking, strange things that are out of the norm may influence the measure of either lap times or race reliability. Without knowing how to factor out the driver, tires, atmospheric conditions, and other random variables, there is no way to truly gauge an improvement (although the team might have enough information compiled to perform a decent statistical analysis and rule out many variables).

What it boils down to is this: you, the "regular" F1 fan, have to go with what the team is telling you, while also realizing the team's statement(s) could be real or BS.

[karlth]

The MP4/18's front suspension was fitted to the MP4/17D at Hockenheim.

[Pong]

I partly agree with the earlier posts saying that the MP4-17 can evolve to a large degree without changing the visible parts. However, it must also be taken into consideration that the far largest part of the energy used by a F1 car is spend ploughing the air and making aero progress leaves visible changes. IMHO the MP4-17 is already on the very last wooden leg of it's development curve.
Another irritation I have with the MP4-18 is the massive hype. Considering the pace of the old car it can probably it is not unlikeliy that the whole MP4-18 project was no more than a PR stunt to keep McLaren in the spotlight. The MP4-18 was never intended to race!!!!!
Next year the MP4-19 will look like an evolved MP4-17 !!! This possiblity makes it possible for even a hardend Mac fan like myself to switch loyalties.

[dosco]

Originally posted by Pong
However, it must also be taken into consideration that the far largest part of the energy used by a F1 car is spend ploughing the air and making aero progress leaves visible changes.

I would generally agree, however, how would one tell if a new airfoil section is being used, but the planform remains identical?

[Rainer Nyberg]

The MP4-17D could have been called MP4-18 and there wouldn't have been any discussions about McLaren running 'a year old car'.

Some years ago Arrows renamed the A19 to A20 for the coming year without any changes at all.

After all the MP4-17 could also have gave been MP4-16B or whatever. Practically all cars today are evolved from the previous years car which was evolved from the previous car and so on...

The MP4-18 does however seem to have more radical changes to warrant a new designation.

[alexbiker]

Blah, blah, rant, rant. This has been covered, here, long ago. .

I don't give a toss what changes people can see. Tiny little visible changes have huge effects on the car - take the current Williams, which has gone from zero to hero, without gross visual changes.

You are not a widntunnel. You can't tell by looking. It's been developed. Full stop. End of discussion.

Alex

[Eau Red]

Liking Kimi Raikkonen is no reason to get offended at comments regarding the supposed age of his car.

[zfh10]

Originally posted by Wuzak
My understanding is that the MP4-17D was almost completely new for this season. About the only carry over part was the main tub.

Ron Dennis stated exactly that when he was interviewed by Bob McMurray on NZ tv at Melbourne this year.

[alexbiker]

Liking Kimi Raikkonen is no reason to get offended at comments regarding the supposed age of his car.

Nothing to do with it. It's more that I actively dislike (with a passion) illogical rants based on illogical deductions and "evidence" like "I can't see a difference, so there isn't one."

This is the technical forum. Technical reasons.

Alex

[random]

As others have said, everything on the car is different but the tub. Dennis said that other teams would have called it a new car and given it a new designation. He admitted in hindsight that it was a mistake not to rename the car at the beginning of the season.

So HSJ, you're creating something from absolutely nothing. You've been suckered into a lot of press stories that are written for slow news days.

Following your rant to it's core, the foundation of the reason you're bothered is because McLaren didn't chose to follow the standard F1 naming conventions, nothing more, nothing less.

Don't believe me? Ok, what if Dennis had made the executive decision at the beginning of the season to name their current car the "MP4/18"? Would you still have posted this? Of course not, there wouldn't have been all this press barage about it either, this whole thing is a non issue.

[desmo]

Amen random and alex. What's in a name? An MP4-17D by any other name...

[KinetiK]

Originally posted by random
Don't believe me? Ok, what if Dennis had made the executive decision at the beginning of the season to name their current car the "MP4/18"? Would you still have posted this? Of course not, there wouldn't have been all this press barage about it either, this whole thing is a non issue.

And if it was the MP/18, would it be the chassis or the engine that was blamed for yet another 3rd place season?

[random]

Originally posted by KinetiK
And if it was the MP/18, would it be the chassis or the engine that was blamed for yet another 3rd place season?

That's easy, and the answer is always the same.

The team will say it's the engine and the engine manufacturer will say it's the chassis.

[Eau Red]

Originally posted by alexbiker


Nothing to do with it. It's more that I actively dislike (with a passion) illogical rants based on illogical deductions and "evidence" like "I can't see a difference, so there isn't one."

This is the technical forum. Technical reasons.

Alex

true, but there's no psychological forum where I can question his motivation, so I had to do it here.

[alexbiker]

Technical forum, technical reasons. It doesn't matter what my motivations are, if I've got the technical data and logic to back them up, argue on that. This isn't politics - you can't sidestep the issue and go for the jugular ;)

In British (as opposed to english), that's known as playing the man and not the ball. Comes from rugby. I suppose on the rants front, we could equate it in rugby to a good stamping/shoeing.

Alex

[JOMM]

Originally posted by random

Don't believe me? Ok, what if Dennis had made the executive decision at the beginning of the season to name their current car the "MP4/18"? Would you still have posted this? Of course not, there wouldn't have been all this press barage about it either, this whole thing is a non issue.

If the car would have been called MP4-18 I'm sure that every McLaren basher would have said things like "now they are desperate, bringing a year old car and naming it as new" or "Newey has run out of ideas, he's worthless!" or "has McLaren run out of money?" Of course the good results at the beginning of the year might have silenced that a little..

But it's obvious that there hasn't been a lot if any development as of late and I bet that is due to the fact that they have poured almost all of their resources into the 18 like HSJ said. One only needs to see how Williams have progressed in relation with McLaren. And no matter how much of it is new inside, the tub is still essentially the same as last year so there's only so much you can do to develop it. Compared to Ferrari and Williams it's bulky.

[random]

Sorry, most of that is just a bunch of hearsay. Of course McLaren is developing the current car. Ask any engineer in the sport and they'll tell you that to stop developing in F1 is to fall backwards at a tremendous pace.

McLaren isn't going great guns at the moment, but they're still in with a shout for the championship. If they had at any time stopped development on the current car they would be well out of it by now.

Blame McLaren because they're not as fast as Williams? Sure, that's a fair cop. But to blame them because they're not developing the car is simply untrue.

A new tub doesn't necessarily equal a new car. What does equal a new car? Depends on who you ask. Bottom line, it's not important. In the current state of the sport, the cars have so many new and different components so frequently that in my estimation, many teams roll out a "new" car every other race.

But for posterity's sake, every now and then the teams have to choose a point in time to say "this is the new car" and so they give it a new name. When in fact, it's no more new that the car they had a few weeks ago, or will have a few weeks hence.

In this day and age, for the top teams the name of the car can mean absolutely nothing. It's a total non issue.

[JOMM]

I'm pretty sure about the development side: tyres and suspension settings. At one point they said that they only had parts for the 17D until Canada, of course this has had to be revised because the 18 cannot race. The concentration to the new car has scuppered the progress of the old and IMO that's why they've fallen so clearly behind Williams. I don't believe Williams are so much better in development but the reason being McLaren has only had little if any.

[random]

Reports estimate that Mclaren has over 1/3rd more budget than Williams. They test a whole lot more than Williams (much of it private and little reported) and McLaren have a much larger staff than Williams. McLaren could certainly develop 2 cars at once.

[JOMM]

From Turun Sanomat:

"Kimi Räikkönen ja David Coulthard ovat hyvästelleet McLarenin "Hopeadelfiiniksi" nimetyn uuden MP4-18 -kilpa-auton.
Kumpikaan ei testaa uutuusautolla enää tämän kauden aikana. Monzan testeissä molemmat keskittyvät vain nykyisen MP4-17 D -auton parannustöihin.
- Monzan kilpailuun saamme vihdoin uusia osia autoon. Niillä pitäisi tulla vauhtia lisää, Kimi huokaisee.
- Kun uutta autoa yritettiin kehittää, se vei pääosan. Tietysti olisi helpottanut nykyautoa, jos koko panostus olisi tehty siihen. Toisaalta uudesta autosta on saatu uusia ideoita ja niitä osia saamme käyttöön sitten seuraavassa kilpailussa.
- Uusi auto on sitten ensi vuoden auto, Kimi muistuttaa."

My rough translation:

Kimi Räikkönen and David Coulthard have bid farewell for MP4-18. Neither will test the new car during the remainder of this season. At testing in Monza they will both concentrate only to improve the current MP4-17D. "For the race at Monza we finally get some parts for the car. With them we should improve our speed" Kimi sighs. "When we tried to develop the new car it got the major attention from us. Of course it would have helped the current car if the whole effort would had been concentrated on it. On the other hand we have got new ideas from the new car and those parts we can use at the next race. The new car is will be the nexts years car."

[random]

And nowhere does it say they weren't developing the current car as well. And remember, Kimi is just one member of the team, and one with a non-engineering background. He's probably not the best person there to comment on engineering topics.

However, the most important quote there is:

"On the other hand we have got new ideas from the new car and those parts we can use at the next race. "

Which proves out the point I've made all along, that a lot of the developments of the (so called) Mp4/18 have actually already made their way to the track into the (so called) current car. So in fact they have been developing the current car to a great degree.

Exactly how many of these new developments need be moved to the current car before it is in effect the new car? I can't say. But I think it's possible the 17D may now be more 18 than the 18 was a few months ago...

All that matters is that the parts developed and tested by the team are put into use, and that certainly has happened.

[JOMM]

Originally posted by random
And nowhere does it say they weren't developing the current car as well. And remember, Kimi is just one member of the team, and one with a non-engineering background. He's probably not the best person there to comment on engineering topics.

However, the most important quote there is:

"On the other hand we have got new ideas from the new car and those parts we can use at the next race. "

Which proves out the point I've made all along, that a lot of the developments of the (so called) Mp4/18 have actually already made their way to the track into the (so called) current car. So in fact they have been developing the current car to a great degree.

Exactly how many of these new developments need be moved to the current car before it is in effect the new car? I can't say. But I think it's possible the 17D may now be more 18 than the 18 was a few months ago...

All that matters is that the parts developed and tested by the team are put into use, and that certainly has happened.

You think Kimi wouldn't know what new parts they put into the car? Of course he knows. He has to know because he is testing the damn thing. I think the most important quote was: "For the race at Monza we finally get some parts for the car. With them we should improve our speed". So there hasn't been any developments for 17D worth mentioning for god knows how long time and that is what I have been saying all along. And no those 18 parts have not been used yet. Luckily/hopefully the situation will now improve for the GP at Monza.

[random]

Originally posted by JOMM
So there hasn't been any developments for 17D worth mentioning for god knows how long time and that is what I have been saying all along. And no those 18 parts have not been used yet. Luckily/hopefully the situation will now improve for the GP at Monza.

You're assuming a whole lot there. And no, Kimi wouldn't know all the new parts on the car. He's the driver, not an engineer. Find a quote from an engineering or management source within the company that says there have been no updates to the 17D. You won't find one, because they've said exactly the opposite.

The 17 is the 18 and the 18 is the 17. Development is development.

[JOMM]

Originally posted by random

You're assuming a whole lot there. And no, Kimi wouldn't know all the new parts on the car. He's the driver, not an engineer. Find a quote from an engineering or management source within the company that says there have been no updates to the 17D. You won't find one, because they've said exactly the opposite.

The 17 is the 18 and the 18 is the 17. Development is development.

I haven't heard anything from the engineering or management sources, could you find a recent quote that there has been continuous development other than tyres? Of course Kimi doesn't know the finer details of what's put into the car. But if they put on for example new wings or suspension parts I'm quite sure they tell him before sending him onto the track so Kimi knows what he's testing. I don't think it's just "Well Kimi, go and drive a few laps and tell how you feel." IMO can we agree on the part that testing the whole new concept (18) has not done any good for the current car in terms of development?

[random]

Originally posted by JOMM
I haven't heard anything from the engineering or management sources, could you find a recent quote that there has been continuous development other than tyres?

IMO can we agree on the part that testing the whole new concept (18) has not done any good for the current car in terms of development?

Ron Dennis made himself available on the topic to many media outlets about a month ago.

As for the "18 as a concept", I'll plead ignorance there. Because I don't know that the 18 is a concept. It could just be a further development on the current car that has a somewhat wonky and fragile tub.

In F1 these days, I kind of think "parts is parts". Or in this case, whether they were developed and tested under the auspices of the 18 or not, as long as they make it to the current car, everything's good and the time and development wasn't wasted.

[JOMM]

Originally posted by random

As for the "18 as a concept", I'll plead ignorance there. Because I don't know that the 18 is a concept. It could just be a further development on the current car that has a somewhat wonky and fragile tub.

In F1 these days, I kind of think "parts is parts". Or in this case, whether they were developed and tested under the auspices of the 18 or not, as long as they make it to the current car, everything's good and the time and development wasn't wasted.

I meant that 18 is a totally new concept and it's clear it doesn't share almost anything with the 17D. That is also what Newey&Co said when the car was launched. That it's completely new. The problem with McLaren was that they got screwed with the 18 because they are not able to race it this season and this has drawn resources from the 17D. No doubt that without 18 and concentrating only to current car right now they would be better off. This might still pay off next season and hopefully it will but this season is already compromised.

This new info from Kimi at Hungaroring and discussed here: http://www.atlasf1.c...&threadid=60583
So there has not been any real development and Kimi confirms it.

[random]

Originally posted by JOMM
I meant that 18 is a totally new concept and it's clear it doesn't share almost anything with the 17D. That is also what Newey&Co said when the car was launched. That it's completely new.

That's where we disagree, I don't think it's at all clear. Perhaps it was at one time, perhaps not. But I wouldn't be surprised to see much of the 18's features running on the current car. Thus, making quite murky the differences between the 18 and 17.

The point being, the car running on the track right now, could have most of the 18 already in it, yet it hasn't been renamed.

[kar]

Originally posted by random
The point being, the car running on the track right now, could have most of the 18 already in it, yet it hasn't been renamed.

IIRC, one of the big improvements of the '18 when it initially broke cover was the improved aero package, which came at the expense of extremely tight packaging (leading of course to the spontaneous bodywork combustion problem in testing). Obviously, this very important aspect cannot be transferred to the '17D without those changes being visible, and we don't know about commonality or compatibility of the mechanical parts given these supposedly significant changes. Furthermore, many bits, such as the 18's trick gearbox aren't even believed to be ready yet. I don't know about the new engine.

My 2p's worth is that it doesn't matter what you call the car so long as it is fast. However, I think it is telling that with all the supposed updates, they have not even moved the version letter along one. I could envisage a situation where Mac would say "right, we've bolted on the 18's back end and front suspension, let's call it the '17E'. OTOH, if anyone remembers the Mac parts list that was posted a while back, and the way that was set out, it worked on version numbers, in the form of "17d winglet mark 1". That way, they could keep track of numerous revisions for the same spec, without giving away publicly how much development they are doing.

It's pretty much a given that the '18 in it's current form has been turned into a test hack for the 2004 car. What they will call that is an entirely new debate

[k]

[DaveDash]

The way I see it is that McLaren have two teams.

One is making developments for the 17D, the other is making developments for the 18.

The "new" parts for the 17D will be for the 17D team and not from the 18 team, and vise versa.

The 17D is just an updated version, but eventually a car runs out of things to update - otherwise teams wouldn't bring out a new car for each season now would they?

[random]

Originally posted by DaveDash
The way I see it is that McLaren have two teams.

One is making developments for the 17D, the other is making developments for the 18.

The "new" parts for the 17D will be for the 17D team and not from the 18 team, and vise versa.

The 17D is just an updated version, but eventually a car runs out of things to update - otherwise teams wouldn't bring out a new car for each season now would they?

What makes you think that? I think you're buying into a lot of naming mumbo-jumbo propogated by the F1 press. Read through a bit of the thread.

Heck, Kimi specifically admitted parts tested on the 18 were being used on the current car. How many of those parts need be moved over before the 17 is the 18?

To sum up my contention, the names mean nothing. The 17 is the 18 and vice versa.

[DaveDash]

Originally posted by random

What makes you think that? I think you're buying into a lot of naming mumbo-jumbo propogated by the F1 press. Read through a bit of the thread.

Heck, Kimi specifically admitted parts tested on the 18 were being used on the current car. How many of those parts need be moved over before the 17 is the 18?

To sum up my contention, the names mean nothing. The 17 is the 18 and vice versa.

Personally I think the 17D is this years car, the 17 was last years car, and the 18/19 will be next years car, but really, there are three parts to the car (in my mind).

1. The Aerodynamics part (wings, bargeboards, shape, sidepods, brake duct sizes, diffuser, etc)
2. The Mechanical Grip part (springs, dampers, tyre cambers, weight distribution, brake balance,etc)
3. and the Engine part of the car(for lack of a better word) (transmission, engine itself, fuel tank, gearbox).

There is only a certain amount of things you can do with an "old" car.

The old car cannot be designed around the tyres.
The old car cannot be designed around the engine.
The Aerodynamics of the old car can only go so far.
You can only do so much to balance an old car using ballasts.
The car is still going to have roughly the same frontal cross-section which effects the drag on the car, which effects your speed, which effects how much downforce you are going to need, which directly effects your race pace.
Most importantly: It is not a fresh new idea!

There are limits on parts you can put on an old car due to the overall stress and shape of the chasis.
etc

They can swap new bits in and bits out all day long if they want - but really the most important part of the car is the basic structure, as that determines how much and what can be fitted. That is why the 17D is still their "old car" despite whatever PR spin Ron and Co are going to put onto it.
It is still likely heavier, bulkier (inducing more drag), than its competitors, which leaves McLaren with less options on what they can do.

The mere fact it is still keeping up with the other cars just in my mind affirms on how good Newey is at designing superb chasis, and I put its pace down to major improvements on Mercedes behalf rather than secret new MP4-18 parts (remember the car had new rear suspension at the end of last year).

I'm not contesting it does have parts that will end up on the MP4-18, or that have been developed from the MP4-18, but my point is there is only SO MUCH they can do. The basic idea is two years/three years old and no new parts are ever going to change that.

[random]

Then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Ben]

Originally posted by random

What makes you think that? I think you're buying into a lot of naming mumbo-jumbo propogated by the F1 press. Read through a bit of the thread.

Heck, Kimi specifically admitted parts tested on the 18 were being used on the current car. How many of those parts need be moved over before the 17 is the 18?

To sum up my contention, the names mean nothing. The 17 is the 18 and vice versa.

The 17-D has the same tub as the 17. The 18 has a completely different tub. Seeing as this is one of the most fundamental parts of the car I think it is wrong to say that the 17 is the 18.

What would perhaps be more appropriate is the reality;

The 17-D is a hybrid consisting of the 2002 17 tub in conjunction with a new rear end. I have seen more decent close-up photos of both cars than you random - believe me.

It is true that some development parts taken from the 18 program appear to have been used on the 17-D but that in no way makes it the 18.

May I just ask you random, do you have any experience of building a racing car from scratch, and/or dealing with a variety of different varients of a complex engineering products in an industry environment? If the answer to either or both those questions is no, may I suggest you are being a touch simplistic in your view.

Ben

[JOMM]

Originally posted by random

That's where we disagree, I don't think it's at all clear. Perhaps it was at one time, perhaps not. But I wouldn't be surprised to see much of the 18's features running on the current car. Thus, making quite murky the differences between the 18 and 17.

The point being, the car running on the track right now, could have most of the 18 already in it, yet it hasn't been renamed.

After seeing pictures of the car Wurz drove yesterday I think now I don't need to be in disagreement on this matter anymore (at least not completely)