
Ferrari car reliable?
Started by
selena
, Jul 02 2000 21:16
13 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:16
Ever since the hydraulic leaks suffered by Rubens earlier this year, I have always thought the Ferrari to be not very reliable and that McLaren is still the better car. What is the opinion of those of you who are fans of Ferrari?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:23
huh?
this was ferrari's first engine failure this season...
this was ferrari's first engine failure this season...
#3
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:26
First, yes. But it looks like it will not only be the first one and only. I am talking about the whole car package.
#4
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:28
And why would you think that ?

#5
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:32
and I think the moon is made of cheeeeze...



#6
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:35
Why would I think that? I do not know really. I know you are not going to believe this but to me the car all along does not 'look' reliable. The key word is 'look'. It does not look too good to me. In fact it looks a bit 'flimsy'. In fact, before the race, I had a bad feeling that one of the red cars would break down, only am not sure which one, though.
#7
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:39
I don't know what flimsy is, but that Ferrari is the best car since MS joined the team and if you look at the track coming up, I thing this car will bring MS the title.
#8
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:53
I more or less agree, selena. Although I think you will agree that MS wasn't exactly 'pushing too hard' today, yet the car still broke down. Rubens has had two terminal failures this year, as has MS now. The myth of superior Ferrari reliability is now just that - a myth. McLaren have been the more reliable car for the past couple of races. Merc and Ron Dennis got their act together after early-season jitters and have come good in a hurry, just as I thought they would.
#9
Posted 02 July 2000 - 21:57
That is right, Rich. What I meant by flimsy is that it does not look reliable. And now it is proven that it is not reliable. Seeing is believing. They had better buck up.
#10
Posted 02 July 2000 - 22:08
I never thought the reliability of Ferrari was superior to McLaren's, but I think this car is finally good enough to bring the title to Ferrari.
#11
Posted 02 July 2000 - 22:13
Not if Ron Dennis can help it. The Maclaren is back on track and Ferrari will have to work some to finish the season in front of the Maclaren.
#12
Posted 02 July 2000 - 22:17
Yeah, I know. After the last couple of races I'd like to see DC win the championship, but I don't think Ferrari will let it pass again...
#13
Posted 02 July 2000 - 23:24
That F1 2000 they're runnin around in is a piece of s***. I mean, just look at it ---> it's RED!!!:drunk:That can't help aerodynamics. And another thing, why can't they build a sprint engine to go the distance. I mean, it only has to last for two stressed 19,000 rpm hours!:lol:What a joke of a car.;)
#14
Posted 02 July 2000 - 23:36
Maybe Ferrari is now at a similar position than McLaren in 1998-99. They may have pushed the limit of the car so that it is faster but less reliable than before. Whether they can sort it out and give MS a car with which he can win the WDC is the big question. I think that I understand selena. If you remember, right from pre-season, the car was definitely fast but was plaged with little problems. I seem to recall that the F1 2000 intro was delayed due to those problems, but I may be wrong. Anyway, my concern now is that there seems to be a new gremlin every race, be it small or terminal. I hope that this stops soon. Twenty one years without a WDC is more than enough!