McLaren could revert to 2012 car

[AC]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns24996.html

Wow. That has to be a massive disaster if they do. I wonder what those
critical of Lewis leaving have to say now.

What do "we" reckon? Revert or stick with it and develop? Or write it
all off and concentrate on 2014?

--
AC

[Noj]

AC wrote ...

In hindsight....

[John Briggs]

They already have written it off and concentrated on 2014. But the
immediate question is whether to revert to the 2012 car or not. To which
the obvious answer has to be "Yes, revert." It like what Honda did to
Jenson in 2007 - except that the 2007 Honda was a good car which they
couldn't revert to because they had sold it (although they couild have
bought it back in 2008), whereas the 2012 car was a bit of a lemon
(although still available, and presumably capable of being developed.)
--
John Briggs

[John Briggs]

On 17/03/2013 18:03, AC wrote:

> http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns24996.html
>
> Wow. That has to be a massive disaster if they do. I wonder what those
> critical of Lewis leaving have to say now.

For Lewis to leave was a "no-brainer", as our American cousins say. But
I really that that would spur McLaren into getting their act together -
but obviously not.
--
John Briggs

[CatharticF1]

Stick with it, there might be issues but they won't get back to the front with last year's car. I'm sure there are man improvements in the new one likely masked by some aspects of the design either under-performing or interfering with others.

[Bobster]

Sometimes teams take a while to understand a new car. See Williams in
'91 - it took them a while to get the best out of that car, but when
they did it lived up to Senna's pre-season judgement that it was
fundamentally a very fast car.

The trouble for Williams was that whilst they were getting the bugs
out of that car Senna won four races on the trot. Williams ended up
with the best car, but McLaren had a big head start.

It maybe that the speed is in the car, but McLaren have to figure out
how to unlock it. Which may vindicate certain decisions but seems
unlikely to gain them a championship.

It's not unprecedented. Newey famously built the car that never raced
at McLaren. At least they figured out pre-season that they couldn't
work with the car and thus updated the previous year's car and raced
that.

In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon and set
about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.

In '94 Williams struggled early on and did major work on that year's
car to make it competitive. Which worked, but without Schumacher being
suspended for two races and being DQed from another they probably
would have not have made up the gap.

IMO McLaren need to make an early call on this. If they dither too
long then the gap between them and the front-runners gets too big.
With the current points system I think the gaps do not grow as big
early on as the other seasons that I've offered as precedents, so it
may be a little easier to recover. I doubt there's much they can do
for the next race.

[Bobster]

On Mar 17, 8:03 pm, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:

They need to learn to fit parts incorrectly.

If this is true
http://www.pitpass.com/48629-McLaren-rules-out-return-to-2012-car
Then "a suspension component had been fitted incorrectly at the first
pre-season test, a mistake which gave a false impression of the
MP4-28's pace."

[Sir Tim]

A "no-brainer"? Maybe to you (with the benefit of hindsight) but not to us
ordinary mortals.

--
Henry Birkin, Bt.

[AC]

Bobster wrote:
> On Mar 17, 8:03 pm, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>> http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns24996.html
>>
>> Wow. That has to be a massive disaster if they do. I wonder what those
>> critical of Lewis leaving have to say now.
>>
>> What do "we" reckon? Revert or stick with it and develop? Or write it
>> all off and concentrate on 2014?
>
> Sometimes teams take a while to understand a new car. See Williams in
> '91 - it took them a while to get the best out of that car, but when
> they did it lived up to Senna's pre-season judgement that it was
> fundamentally a very fast car.
>
> The trouble for Williams was that whilst they were getting the bugs
> out of that car Senna won four races on the trot. Williams ended up
> with the best car, but McLaren had a big head start.
>
> It maybe that the speed is in the car, but McLaren have to figure out
> how to unlock it. Which may vindicate certain decisions but seems
> unlikely to gain them a championship.
>
> It's not unprecedented. Newey famously built the car that never raced
> at McLaren. At least they figured out pre-season that they couldn't
> work with the car and thus updated the previous year's car and raced
> that.
>
> In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon and set
> about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.

Is that possible now? Especially with the fundamental changes of 2014
coming.

>
> In '94 Williams struggled early on and did major work on that year's
> car to make it competitive. Which worked, but without Schumacher being
> suspended for two races and being DQed from another they probably
> would have not have made up the gap.
>
> IMO McLaren need to make an early call on this. If they dither too
> long then the gap between them and the front-runners gets too big.
> With the current points system I think the gaps do not grow as big
> early on as the other seasons that I've offered as precedents, so it
> may be a little easier to recover. I doubt there's much they can do
> for the next race.
>

Totally agree that they need to decide one way or the other and stick to
it. Although, their decision making process doesn't seem that sharp
these days.

Clearly I don't know what they know, but I think if I were them, based
on what little we know, I'd write the season off, and develop for next
season. But somewhere their operations, or what ever, have gone very wrong.

--
AC

[AC]

Yeah, read that. Fair enough to stick with the new car, but that
mistake. Dear oh dear.

--
AC

[Mark]

Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> They need to learn to fit parts incorrectly.
>
> If this is true
> http://www.pitpass.com/48629-McLaren-rules-out-return-to-2012-car
> Then "a suspension component had been fitted incorrectly at the first
> pre-season test, a mistake which gave a false impression of the
> MP4-28's pace."

Unless (and assuming this report is true) the incorrect fitting meant
that the car wasn't conformant with regulations (and, obviously, wasn't
picked up by scrutineering)...

[AC]

Well, if they are fitting bit(s) the wrong way round, and then testing
or running like that, then hopefully they will, given Bob's link saying
that they will stick with the car, be able to better understand what is
going on.

But, unless that yields quick decent benefits, I still reckon the best
move is to now concentrate on 2014, regardless of what car they run or
how they run it this season.

--
AC

[Noj]

Mark wrote ...

No scrutineering at testing is there !

[John Briggs]

I can't be arsed to look up my posts (a real pain because I've had a
disk crash since) but I said so at the time. Where I was wrong was
thinking (and posting) that it would spur McLaren into getting their act
together.
--
John Briggs

[John Briggs]

On 18/03/2013 08:18, Sir Tim wrote:

What do *you* think ius McLaren's problem? The conventional wisdom last
year was that they were trying to set up the car for drivers with
incompatible driving styles. Well, with Lewis out of the way, what is
the problem now?

And what is your prescription? I'm not sitting on the fence - I'm saying
revert to the 2012 car.
--
John Briggs

[News]

Dare I say it will be reinstalled, oops, wrong in Malaysia...

[Mark]

Of course. I'm just saying it's possible for issues not to be picked
up. Unless you're saying that every car is examined down to _every_
regulation at _every_ test... ;-)

[Bobster]

On Mar 18, 10:52 am, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Bobster wrote:
<snip>

> > In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon and set
> > about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.
>
> Is that possible now? Especially with the fundamental changes of 2014
> coming.

Not ruled out of bounds that I can see, though they wouldn't be able
to redesign the gearbox. But the front-running teams will, as you
note, already be stretched with resources devoted to the 2014 car.

>
>
<snip>

> Totally agree that they need to decide one way or the other and stick to
> it. Although, their decision making process doesn't seem that sharp
> these days.
>
> Clearly I don't know what they know, but I think if I were them, based
> on what little we know, I'd write the season off, and develop for next
> season. But somewhere their operations, or what ever, have gone very wrong.

It's not an operational issue, it's a design issue. They've built bum
cars before, and so have other teams. I think too much is being made
of this. Not that I think it's good or anything, but it happens, has
happened before and will happen again.

[Bobster]

On Mar 18, 10:59 am, Mark <mpco...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, that's possible.

[tony...@gmail.com]

There wasn't anything to suggest that leaving McLaren was a big mistake.

[AC]

Bobster wrote:
> On Mar 18, 10:52 am, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>> Bobster wrote:
> <snip>
>>> In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon and set
>>> about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.
>>
>> Is that possible now? Especially with the fundamental changes of 2014
>> coming.
>
> Not ruled out of bounds that I can see, though they wouldn't be able
> to redesign the gearbox. But the front-running teams will, as you
> note, already be stretched with resources devoted to the 2014 car.

Yeah, exactly. "Legally", sure, but very impractical. Resource agreement
might make it harder too. Plus, 23 years on the cars are a bit more
complex.

>
>>
>>
> <snip>
>> Totally agree that they need to decide one way or the other and stick to
>> it. Although, their decision making process doesn't seem that sharp
>> these days.
>>
>> Clearly I don't know what they know, but I think if I were them, based
>> on what little we know, I'd write the season off, and develop for next
>> season. But somewhere their operations, or what ever, have gone very wrong.
>
> It's not an operational issue, it's a design issue. They've built bum
> cars before, and so have other teams. I think too much is being made
> of this. Not that I think it's good or anything, but it happens, has
> happened before and will happen again.
>

Its operational when you put parts on the wrong way round.

It made a lot of because its another unnecessary cock up at McLaren. It
it were in isolation, then fine, but its not.

--
AC

[Bobster]

On Mar 18, 5:54 pm, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
<snip>

> > It's not an operational issue, it's a design issue. They've built bum
> > cars before, and so have other teams. I think too much is being made
> > of this. Not that I think it's good or anything, but it happens, has
> > happened before and will happen again.
>
> Its operational when you put parts on the wrong way round.

Yep.

>
> It made a lot of because its another unnecessary cock up at McLaren. It
> it were in isolation, then fine, but its not.

Sure, but teams have strong spells and not so strong. Mclaren won 7
championships in 8 years in the 80s and early 90s. Then they had an
also-ran year and then a year in which Senna beat the odds. THEN they
went three seasons with out a win. Benetton had two hot years then
several in the doldrums until Fred hit his straps. Then two more hot
years. Then not so much. Etc. It goes on. Even Newey doesn't always
get it right.

[Sir Tim]

John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 18/03/2013 08:18, Sir Tim wrote:
>> John Briggs <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>> On 17/03/2013 18:03, AC wrote:
>>>> http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns24996.html
>>>>
>>>> Wow. That has to be a massive disaster if they do. I wonder what those
>>>> critical of Lewis leaving have to say now.
>>>
>>> For Lewis to leave was a "no-brainer", as our American cousins say. But I
>>> really that that would spur McLaren into getting their act together - but obviously not.
>>
>> A "no-brainer"? Maybe to you (with the benefit of hindsight) but not to us
>> ordinary mortals.
>
> What do *you* think ius McLaren's problem?

How would I know when several hundred highly trained engineers at McLaren
apparently don't?

> The conventional wisdom last year was that they were trying to set up the
> car for drivers with incompatible driving >styles. Well, with Lewis out
> of the way, what is the problem now?

It seems odd to me that, with its vast resources, McLaren could not design
a car with sufficient flexibility to accommodate two completely different
setups. I suspect there were more complicated reasons for the team's lack
of success.

> And what is your prescription? I'm not sitting on the fence - I'm saying
> revert to the 2012 car.

That would be my instinct too. But then my instinct would have been to
spend the winter developing last year's car as most other teams did.
McLaren are now stuck between a rock and a hard place: stay with the
current car and it may take them half a dozen races before they are
competitive or revert to last year's car and still be way behind in the
development race. I suspect they will stick with the new car and hope that
with its greater development potential they can turn it into a race winner
by mid-season.

--
Henry Birkin, Bt.

[John Briggs]

On the contrary, it was the only way for both he and McLaren to move
forward. Which one party hasn't :-)
--
John Briggs

[John Briggs]

On 18/03/2013 08:52, AC wrote:

> Bobster wrote:
>>
>> In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon and set
>> about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.
>
> Is that possible now? Especially with the fundamental changes of 2014
> coming.

No - it takes over a year to design a new car. (Which makes it mildly
suspicicious that McLaren have a 'new' car with similar problem to the
old one...) Jenson has been here before: the 2007 Honda was a complete
lemon, which they didn't discover until the first race. There was only
time left to just develop it for 2008 (it was still a lemon!) The new
car wasn't ready until 2009.
--
John Briggs

[Bigbird]

John Briggs wrote:

> On 18/03/2013 08:52, AC wrote:
> > Bobster wrote:
> > >
> > > In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon
> > > and set about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.
> >
> > Is that possible now? Especially with the fundamental changes of
> > 2014 coming.
>
> No - it takes over a year to design a new car.

That they may already have the next car on the drawing board does not
mean the critical path is anything like a year.

[John Briggs]

On 19/03/2013 11:49, Bigbird wrote:
> John Briggs wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2013 08:52, AC wrote:
>>> Bobster wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In '91 (again) Ferrari realised early on that they had a lemon
>>>> and set about designing a new car which they deployed mid-season.
>>>
>>> Is that possible now? Especially with the fundamental changes of
>>> 2014 coming.
>>
>> No - it takes over a year to design a new car.
>
> That they may already have the next car on the drawing board does not
> mean the critical path is anything like a year.

Right - so you can easily explain why the successor to the 2007 Honda
didn't appear until 2009? Everyone agrees that work started on that in 2007.
--
John Briggs

[Noj]

John Briggs wrote ...

FFS use another example.

That whole BAT/Honda?Brawn team was and perhaps still is, a load of
shit. From the day Craig Pollock opened the factory it's been a failure
and only won in 2009 because of jiggery pokery. Despite the huge sums
of money they had in the Honda years, the factory has never had the pace
to keep up with the rest of the field during the season.

One of the major components of a current F1 car isn't even designed
until 3 or 4 months before the season starts. The type of tyres being
used this year are not the same as last years. The teams are making
their cars around the tyres. HTF can they do that a year in advance?

Then we have rule changes. This year the exhausts have been moved
again. They are being used to help downforce. If the teams don't know
what rules are going to be imposed, HTF can they design the chassis and
it's aero?

Jeez.

[Bigbird]

Why say 'right' when you clearly don't comprehend the preceding
statement and have failed to support your contradiction.

[AC]

Still waiting for Williams to have another strong spell.....

--
AC