Mclaren release 2005 car

[Counterfit]

I didn't say he was always in the fight for the title

But think pre Silverstone '99

Then think Schumachers comeback

Without Schumacher pre Silverstone and Post Malaysia the season would've been a piece of p*ss for Mika with that McLaren.

Irvine was gifted Hock and Malaysia... he didn't take it down to the wire.

SSHH!! They don't need to know that

 

[Sol]

A car worthy of Montoya

I really hope this is the car that Juan Pablo Montoya drives all the way to the championship. He was robbed at the end of 2003 thanks to the sport's double standards with Ferrari (driving into a Ferrari deserves a penalti but if a Ferrari drives into anyone then it is OK).

As for the 2004 season, I thought that nothing could be more boring than 2002 but I was proven wrong.

 

[iGav]

He was robbed at the end of 2003

How was he robbed in 2003??? he drove into Rubens from behind and took him off, he deserved the penalty.

Anyway, he wouldn't have won the World Championship because he retired at Suzuka.

It's the same nonsense spouted that Kimi should've won the World Championship because 'had it not been for Schumacher being pushed back onto the track at the European GP, then he would've won the Championship' Completely ignoring of course what the rules are, and ignoring something like say Kimi at Barcelona.

2003 was artificially close for 1 reason and 1 reason only, they changed the points system to disadvantage Ferrari, otherwise the Championship would never have gone down to the last race at all.

thanks to the sport's double standards with Ferrari (driving into a Ferrari deserves a penalti but if a Ferrari drives into anyone then it is OK).

OMG! I can't believe I keep having this conversation with people...

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Schumacher and Ferrari get a drive through for hitting Trulli in Malaysia that very same year??? yep thought so. Or what about about Silverstone 1998?? yep I thought so too... or Estoril 1989??.... the list is long and distinguished.

It's utter crap to suggest that Ferrari don't get handed penalties when they quite clearly do.

 

[VincentVega]

How was he robbed in 2003??? he drove into Rubens from behind and took him off, he deserved the penalty.

Err, it was a racing incident. Even Rubens said the penalty was unfair and shouldn't have been meted out.

You're quite the conspiracy theorist, aren't you? Everyone's out to get Ferrari, Schumacher must be stopped at all costs, all the rule changes are designed to hurt Ferrari (despite them ignoring the testing agreement, having a massive budget, the best driver pairing, the best strategy, the most downforce, the best pitcrew) blah blah blah.

Estoril 1989? What's that got to do with Schumacher? He wasn't even in F1. Then Ferrari driver Berger won the race and Mansell got black flagged for reversing in the pits (illegal) and then crashed into Senna before he could serve the penalty. Doesn't sound like any fiendish, immoral action against Ferrari. Berger won and Mansell screwed up.

If they'd stayed with the 2002 points system in 2003, MS would have won in the USA, one whole race earlier than he did. One whole race! Shocking!

The non-Ferrari teams recently handed to Mosley a statement (22 pages in length) setting out their view of the FIA's bias (perceived or otherwise) to Ferrari. This must mean there's something there. Ferrari are hardly saints themselves and it's disingenuous to claim otherwise.

As for the proposed rule changes, they're terrible. Max should have quit a long time ago. Kill the downforce, bring back slicks, ban refuelling, bring back manual gearboxes and turbos, ban winglets/barge boards/etc and stop changing the rules every five minutes. Oh, and put qualifying back to how it was in 2002. That'll do.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

As for the proposed rule changes, they're terrible. Max should have quit a long time ago. Kill the downforce, bring back slicks, ban refuelling, bring back manual gearboxes and turbos, ban winglets/barge boards/etc and stop changing the rules every five minutes. Oh, and put qualifying back to how it was in 2002. That'll do.

I would LOVE to see turbos allowed again, those old 1.8 liter BMWs are my favorite. It would be cool to see some cars with 4 cylinder turbos, others with bigger normally aspirated V8s or V10s.

Montoya's my man, I'm excited about him at McLaren and I still think he could be champ someday. I like his brash seat of the pants right-up-your-a** driving style. It irritates Schuey. Kimi's more likely but with this driver pairing if McLaren doesn't do some damage this season they only have themselves to blame, especially if the car pays what it is promising.

I have to say that a lot of on-track mishaps seem to fall in Ferrari's favor, but as of yet nothing solid has surfaced as far as bias goes, so for me innocent until proven guilty.

 

[iGav]

Err, it was a racing incident. Even Rubens said the penalty was unfair and shouldn't have been meted out.

That's up for debate isn't it. The stewards deemed it as a mistake by Montoya and he was punished. It matters nothing what Montoya or Barrichello or you or I think.

Montoya was punished exactly the same way Schumacher was punished at Malaysia earlier in the year when he crashed in to Trulli. Yet people still claim that Ferrari and or Schumacher are not treated the same as the other teams/drivers and are singled out for preferential treatment, when they clearly are not.

It's academic anyway. Montoya retired at Suzuka.

You're quite the conspiracy theorist, aren't you? Everyone's out to get Ferrari, Schumacher must be stopped at all costs, all the rule changes are designed to hurt Ferrari (despite them ignoring the testing agreement, having a massive budget, the best driver pairing, the best strategy, the most downforce, the best pitcrew) blah blah blah.

blah blah blah indeed.

So I take it that you obviously don't agree, that the points system that was bought in, in 2003 by the FIA was to help create a tighter championship after Ferrari's 2002 romp??

Are everyone out to get Ferrari? I think the actions of 9 teams in Brazil answers that. Whether you agree or not is up to you.

Estoril 1989? What's that got to do with Schumacher? He wasn't even in F1. Then Ferrari driver Berger won the race and Mansell got black flagged for reversing in the pits (illegal) and then crashed into Senna before he could serve the penalty. Doesn't sound like any fiendish, immoral action against Ferrari. Berger won and Mansell screwed up.

I never said Estoril had anything to do with Schumacher, read it again before you open your mouth.

I was replying to a nonsense statement which suggested that

driving into a Ferrari deserves a penalti but if a Ferrari drives into anyone then it is OK.

and listed a couple of incidents off the top of my mind when a Ferrari has been punished or penalised, when according to some Ferrari are never penalised (which is untrue, because they are).

I never suggested it was 'fiendish' or 'immoral' I agree with what happened to them, I want to see the rules consistantly applied. What I don't agree with is when people make stupid and inaccurate statements that aren't true.

If they'd stayed with the 2002 points system in 2003, MS would have won in the USA, one whole race earlier than he did. One whole race! Shocking!

I know, that's why I said it would never have gone down to the last race. Anything wrong with my original statement?? didn't f**king think so.

The non-Ferrari teams recently handed to Mosley a statement (22 pages in length) setting out their view of the FIA's bias (perceived or otherwise) to Ferrari. This must mean there's something there. Ferrari are hardly saints themselves and it's disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Of course there must be something there... because it's the 9 other teams that have suggested so, the same 9 teams who have completely failed to provide consistant and competitive competition over the last few years, except when rules changes are made to artificially help them.

Are the FIA biased??? Yeah of course they are... they want Ferrari to keep winning eveything in sight don't they? because it's such a good spectacle at the moment.

I've never claimed Ferrari to be saints by the way.

As for the proposed rule changes, they're terrible. Max should have quit a long time ago. Kill the downforce, bring back slicks, ban refuelling, bring back manual gearboxes and turbos, ban winglets/barge boards/etc and stop changing the rules every five minutes. Oh, and put qualifying back to how it was in 2002. That'll do.

Not sure about the Turbo's, remember when they were in their prime the domination was just as bad as it now, anything Honda powered was pretty much untouchable and I don't see what bringing them back would do to help the racing spectacle. Races suffered because reliability was so bad and many a race was ruined by fuel consumption issues that stopped drivers racing so they could just make the finish (something that worries me with the new tyre rules).

I do like the idea of being able to turn up the boost to overtake though... so maybe an electronically governed system that limits the rpm normally but allows the driver a number of times they can temporarily raise the rpm to allow them to overtake, say something like 10 x 10 second 2000rpm increases to allow them to overtake, this could then be governed by the FIA.

I do wish they'd bring back slicks to increase mechanical grip though, they also need to reduce the aero dependence, which they are doing but have ignored the need to increase mechanical grip.

Agreed that barge boards, winglets etc need to go, there's little elegance and simplicity in the current F1 cars.

It's strange, they know what needs to be done to bring back the racing spectacle, as we've had it in the past. But for some reason they're too intent on bringing in stupid half arsed rules or the other extreme turn F1 into a control formula and remove the very essence of F1.

Of course it would also help if teams like McLaren spent more time designing a decent car rather than focus their time and money on building that spaceship motorhome, an insanely expensive HQ, McMerc SLR roadcars, and then trying to develop the 17D, 18, 19A, 19B in the space of a couple of seasons.

 

[Sol]

Better dead than red

The only reason why Ferrari dominate in Formula 1 is not Schumacher, or lack of worthy competition. Ferrari simply spend more money than other teams in Formula 1.

And they also have Barichello, the biggest sell-out in modern sports, who is all too willing to bend over for Schumacher any time Jean Todd asks him to.

And stewards always seem to scritinise anyone who bumps into a Ferrari more than the Ferraris that bump on to others all the time. You Ferrari fans can delude yourselves all you like, but your team does get preferential treatment and this has put off many Formula 1 fans in recent years.

Give Montoya and Schumacher identical cars on a track other than Monza and you know who would win that race. The only way Montoya could lose that race would be if Schumacher resorts to his old tricks and drives into him like he did to Damon Hill and Jaques Villeneuve.

 

[iGav]

The only reason why Ferrari dominate in Formula 1 is not Schumacher, or lack of worthy competition. Ferrari simply spend more money than other teams in Formula 1.

That's up for debate, Toyota are rumoured to have the largest budget But who knows for sure unless you've seen their books.

Anyway Ferrari's budget is not much greater than McLaren or Williams, and soon BAR once Honda take full control sometime in the not too distant future and their budget will likely overtake all except Toyota.

But we should remember that Ferrari until 1999 hadn't won a championship since 1983, proof that a big budget doesn't guarantee success. Don't believe me?? look at Toyota since they entered F1 and look at McLaren last season. Then look at the job Sauber did.

And they also have Barichello, the biggest sell-out in modern sports, who is all too willing to bend over for Schumacher any time Jean Todd asks him to.

He's only asked to move out of the way when one driver is fighting for and is in a stronger position for the championship.

All this number 1 and number 2 driver status at Ferrari is bollocks. At the start of the season they're free to race, as soon as one driver is in a stronger position, then team orders come in. Ferrari are NO different to McLaren or Williams or any other team in that respect. See Jerez '97 and Australia '98 for starters... the former was plain bad, the latter a disgrace.

Remember Schumacher has done his fair share of moving out of the way should his teammate be fighting for the championship. Remember Malaysia 1999, he spent the entire race moving out of the way for Irvine.

F1 is a TEAM SPORT, always has been, always will be.

And stewards always seem to scritinise anyone who bumps into a Ferrari more than the Ferraris that bump on to others all the time. You Ferrari fans can delude yourselves all you like, but your team does get preferential treatment and this has put off many Formula 1 fans in recent years.

You mean like when Montoya was a lap down and took off the race leader, in a non racing incident because they weren't under racing conditions??

If I could be bothered I'd go through the years when when Ferrari or its drivers were handed penalties for similar offences to the other teams and drivers, I'm not going to though because you'll believe what you want to believe, and that's fine.

Give Montoya and Schumacher identical cars on a track other than Monza and you know who would win that race. The only way Montoya could lose that race would be if Schumacher resorts to his old tricks and drives into him like he did to Damon Hill and Jaques Villeneuve.

We are talking about the same Montoya who made incredibly hard work of beating Schumacher Jr. when they were together at Williams aren't we??

Whilst I have no doubt that Montoya is an incredible natural talent, he lacks the technical knowledge to set up a car, even his own team bosses at Williams have said that. Patrick Head is reported as saying that if the car is difficult to drive, Montoya is faster, however if the car is set up properly then Ralf is able to get it closer to it's limits. Witness Montoya's spectacular drop off in form when Ralf was out injured last season. Yet when Ralf returns, he finishes 2nd at Suzuka and Montoya wins in Brazil. Ralf is better at setting up a car and that helped Montoya. Just ask Sam Michael.

If you think Montoya is a better driver than Schumacher, then that's great, that's your opinion. But the results don't suggest that he is, he didn't comprehensively beat Ralf during their time together, Ralf scored more wins for a start.

Personally I'm expecting Montoya to be handed his arse next season.

Oooh, and as for Hill '94 and JV '97.... I'm sure that I read that Hill admitted he was atleast at as much fault as Scumacher in 1994 going for a space that wasn't there.

But I totally agree that Schumacher was completely in the wrong at Jerez in '97, and he was duly punished for it. Unlike Senna of course in 1990 when he took off Prost (in a Ferrari) to win the WDC, but of course Ferrari get preferential treatment don't they.

Actually why wasn't Prost stripped of his WDC placing in '89 either?? Why is it only Schumacher who was punished??

 

[anonymous161]

Ferrari's domination owes a lot to money, that can't be denied. But, as said above, it is well known that Toyota throw more money at the sport than anyone and I believe that McLaren's little "b" spec overhaul this year cost them a pretty penny. The truth is that throughout their history but in particular since Jean Todt took over, Ferrari come to the races to race. They started as a race shop and only sold cars to pay the bills in the days before sponsorships. They work harder and longer than anyone else regardless of their budget because I really think it means more to them. Of course, Ferrari own two test tracks and at least two wind tunnels, but I am sure that the 900 million that McLaren spent on their new home could have built a half way decent track (or two), hell they could have bought Silverstone. Why didn't they? Because they didn't want to. They would rather spent it on some technorgasm that on the sport. But I guess Ferrari are evil for wanting to win.

 

[iGav]

but I am sure that the 900 million that McLaren spent on their new home could have built a half way decent track (or two), hell they could have bought Silverstone. Why didn't they? Because they didn't want to.

McLaren do actually own their own track. Lydden Hill. They just chose not to develop it up to the required standard, instead like you say deciding that money would be better spent on the new Paragon HQ, as well as that intergalactic motorhome, and developing atleast 4 cars in 2 years.

I've never understood the fuss non-Ferrari fans make about Fiorano. BMW have their own testing track, Toyota have a lease on Paul Ricard in France and own Fuji Speedway in Japan, and Jordan have an agreement with Silverstone (which is right across the road from the Jordan factory as close as Ferrari is to Fiorano). Even with their own circuit though, last year Ferrari didn't do the most test miles either.

All I want to see this season is something like 1990 or 2000 when the 2 best drivers were in equal enough equipement to create an outstanding season, and unless the other teams step up to take the fight to Ferrari, we'll see another year exactly like '01, '02 or '04 and even as a Ferrari fan, that isn't good.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Whilst I have no doubt that Montoya is an incredible natural talent, he lacks the technical knowledge to set up a car, even his own team bosses at Williams have said that. Patrick Head is reported as saying that if the car is difficult to drive, Montoya is faster, however if the car is set up properly then Ralf is able to get it closer to it's limits. Witness Montoya's spectacular drop off in form when Ralf was out injured last season. Yet when Ralf returns, he finishes 2nd at Suzuka and Montoya wins in Brazil. Ralf is better at setting up a car and that helped Montoya. Just ask Sam Michael.

If you think Montoya is a better driver than Schumacher, then that's great, that's your opinion. But the results don't suggest that he is, he didn't comprehensively beat Ralf during their time together, Ralf scored more wins for a start.

Personally I'm expecting Montoya to be handed his arse next season.

You're right about Montoya, but I hope you're wrong about next season.

Montoya has a lot of natural talent, but does not have the technical polish that many less talented drivers have.

 

[anonymous161]

Anyone seen any good pictures of the Renault R25, I know they have been testing it in Valencia for 3 days but I haven't seen pictures. Do they have an official launch that they are waiting on?

 

[iGav]

Anyone seen any good pictures of the Renault R25, I know they have been testing it in Valencia for 3 days but I haven't seen pictures. Do they have an official launch that they are waiting on?

Renaults official launch is next Tuesday 1st Feb.

Some images on the R25 can be found here

Has anyone else seen the new nose from the F2004M??? All's good at Barcelona though, the F2004M is only fractionally slower than the F2004B.

 

[anonymous161]

Thanks iGav, you're my hero. The F2004M's nose is much like the one they used earlier last season (three individual planes) but the extra "chin" underneath is wicked. It seems to that all of those planes would dirty up the airflow but I guess the arsenal of barge boards will help clean it up some. Its funny because when I looked at the picture you posted here the wing looked asymmetrical but since then I have seen otherwise. When did the F2004B come into service? I wasn't aware of a b spec but then again I live the US where F1 is "that racing like Indy cars with all those foreign guys right?" and real drivers are jimmy johnson and "Lil' E"

 

[anonymous161]

I am surprised, the R25 at first glance appears to be rather conservative, much like the Toyota, but aerodynamically the R24 was a decent car so maybe they didn't have far to go. And as Ferrari demonstrated this year, subtle changes can make all the difference and balance is the most important thing in modern F1. Speaking of balance, I hope Honda can keep their engines going this year, they have lost 3 already in testing, which isn't necessarily a true reflection of their program but it's not something I would want the press to see.

 

[iGav]

Its funny because when I looked at the picture you posted here the wing looked asymmetrical but since then I have seen otherwise. When did the F2004B come into service?

I thought it was asymmetrical at first as well (which I suppose isn't that odd considering McLaren's asymmetrical chimneys on the new MP4-20), not the most elegant of solutions, but certainly a little radical in it's execution.

The F2004M was debuted for the first time today with Schumacher at the wheel, although it has been doing straightline tests last week, and earlier this week I think.

I am surprised, the R25 at first glance appears to be rather conservative, much like the Toyota, but aerodynamically the R24 was a decent car so maybe they didn't have far to go. And as Ferrari demonstrated this year, subtle changes can make all the difference and balance is the most important thing in modern F1.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the R25 looked different come launch day, but as Ferrari have proved conservative can work and work well, being radical is all good and well if it works, but as Williams found out last season it sometimes doesn't but you have to admire them for trying.

I doubt any of the new cars will be radical though, even the new McLaren is quite restrained, if beautifully detailed. The Sauber is beautiful, they've incorporated some incredible detail in their design especially around the side pods. BAR has an interesting and original front nose, and tightly packed... err rear . I think Toyota have played safe, maybe too safe but they need to make inroads this season and a solid, stable car is what you need to build on.

I was just reading about Honda... that's a bit worrying so close to the new season though. Always seems to happen to Sato though...?

 

[anonymous161]

I think the double front wing design I have seen Sauber testing is interesting and almost as visually dramatic as BAR's chin dip. Even though they have said otherwise, I think the engine problems have to at least be exacerbated by Sato's driving style, I know you can't blow a shift per se, but I would think that repetitive slight over -reving would be hard on the engine, especially as tightly packed as the Honda is in the BAR. I have also noticed BAR are still going without any of the forward gills or chimneys that most of the other teams have been using.
Any idea if anyone other than BAR are using carbon gearboxes? As far as that goes, are all of the internals carbon based as well, or just the casing? I don't really know how capable carbon fiber technology is.

 

[Counterfit]

Ferrari's domination owes a lot to money, that can't be denied. But, as said above, it is well known that Toyota throw more money at the sport than anyone and I believe that McLaren's little "b" spec overhaul this year cost them a pretty penny. The truth is that throughout their history but in particular since Jean Todt took over, Ferrari come to the races to race. They started as a race shop and only sold cars to pay the bills in the days before sponsorships. They work harder and longer than anyone else regardless of their budget because I really think it means more to them.

I believe it was David Hobbs (former F1 driver and current kick-ass commentator for Speed Channel's F1 coverage) that noticed during a GP this season, that Ferrari's garage doors are the last ones to close at night.

 

[iGav]

Any idea if anyone other than BAR are using carbon gearboxes? As far as that goes, are all of the internals carbon based as well, or just the casing? I don't really know how capable carbon fiber technology is.

As far as I know, and from what I've read, Ferrari use a carbon fibre and titanium gearbox... not sure about the others. Although I do remember reading something about McLaren running a carbon fibre gearbox last season, but such was the heat problems associated with the MP4-19 that the gearbox was prone to de-laminate, although that's not gospel and purely from memory.

As for the BAR gearbox (now I'm not an engineer and don't profess to be be) but my understanding from reading up on the subject is that the BAR gearbox casing is constructed from carbon fibre, but still uses internal metal bulkheads to help distribute and transfer loads more equally into the composite.

The rest of the internals, gears, shafts, bearings etc will no doubt be produced from a variety of exotic metals and alloys.

There's an interesting article here about the gearbox and it's significance within the overall design of the car.

 

[Platform]

Ferrari > *

Yes Ferrari is the best but now at least McLaren has a chance

 

[iGav]

Looks like McLaren are starting to add more bits onto their car now...

They really need to ban all this sh*t they really do.

 

[Don't panic]

Looks like McLaren are starting to add more bits onto their car now...

They really need to ban all this sh*t they really do.

agree. F1s are starting to look like the hotwheels cars my 4 ys old loves

 

[Counterfit]

Looks like McLaren are starting to add more bits onto their car now...

They really need to ban all this sh*t they really do.

Okay, that one's just freaky. It reminds me of the winglets from '98 (seen on Ferrari's I think, and definitely a Tyrrel or two), and also a bit of the small wing mounted high in front of the driver that some teams (Jordan, and I think Sauber) tried one year at Monaco. Banned for "safety reasons", but I bet it was because they just lacked class!