planetf1.com

guardiangr wrote:Podiums at the end of the year. That was the aim, I just can't remember if that was an official statement or just fans being fans and spreading false rumours around being overly optimistic. In any way, McLaren is in a dire situation atm.

Here are some other "aims":-

1) Do decent amounts of winter testing
2) Be competitive in Melbourne
3) Be regularly in the points by 3rd race
4) Make a huge jump forward in Spain

I hope you can notice the moving goalpost here.

Now the next one is

5) perform well in Monaco because it's a chassis track.

Let's see how that one goes.

Some of the rest are these:

6) Midfield by mid-season with some podiums
7) A race win in 2015, but at least they went back on that one, so at least there's SOME reality check there


MOD EDIT: this topic is a discussion that arose from another thread and split to this one

SchumieRules wrote:Also, what's with the beef with Prodromou? He's not designing the car by himself, it's not a one man show, why not Morris, Goss and Oatley? Prodromou is only billed with aiding the design.

No beef at all. I am only pointing out the fact that there's a belief that he'll do wonders in the aero dept. because he did so at Red Bull.

guardiangr wrote:

froze wrote:

guardiangr wrote:Podiums at the end of the year. That was the aim, I just can't remember if that was an official statement or just fans being fans and spreading false rumours around being overly optimistic. In any way, McLaren is in a dire situation atm.

A fluke is always possible. But I don't it's possible for them to reach that level consistently. Basically they'd have to outperform Ferrari if they intend to have "Podiums at the end of the year" in normal conditions.

Exactly that. We all remember how much fed up everyone was with those big statements from Ferrari all those years and how dissapointed their fans were when each season started and each season Ferrari was nowhere. They got it right this year, they kept expectations low and fans were most of them pleased with the plan.

That's the way McLaren should've handled it, and not with promises of podiums (if they did that, not sure) to finally admit they might be competitive at the end of 2016.

Ferrari totally re-arranged the deck AND they were nowhere close to how abysmal McLaren is this year. I can never remember any front-running team mixing it was Minardis or HRTs or Manors. McLaren already has two terrible seasons preceding this one. And let's not forget, 2014 was also a "year-long" testing season for them. So it isn't like 2015 is their first year testing a car.

Pest44 wrote:McLaren and Honda have always said this is a long term project. We're 5 races into that project and whilst it has been an appalling start lets see where they are in 2016/17. If they aren't a race winning team by that stage then I think you can say its been a disaster, 5 races in I don't think you can say that.

As for the comment about F1 teams can't plan long term what a load of BS. What about Red Bull and Merc? When Red Bull bought Jaguar they planned long term and were a race winning team within 4 years of that project and then won there first championship the following year. Same for Merc when they bought Brawn. They didn't expect to win races straight away they planned for 2014 from about 2011 and the results are plain to see. You can't expect a big new partnership to hit the ground running straight away when these hybrid engines are very complex. Again I'll say wait to at least 2016 before making judgements on the McLaren Honda project.

When one hears this "it's a long term project" it's more of a case of the team trying to justify to themselves, the shareholders, and the fans that the current car is a dog. Do you really think Alonso would've signed if Dennis had told him that they are not aiming for race wins for a couple of years (minimum) ?

They are so far behind where they should be that it's not funny. It's even worse than the embarrassment of Ferrari in the early 90's, where they were fighting Minardi's and other cellar dwellers for position.

This is not the first time McLaren have made a total meal of it, which points to some fundamental issues within the organisation. And don't get me started on that poor excuse for a boat anchor engine. Honda have lost the plot recently, and it's reflected in this piece of sh1t F1 engine.

It's not a new team full of novices we're talking about here. It's (after Ferrari) the most successful team in F1. They should not be this far off the pace.

Period

ReservoirDog wrote: Ferrari totally re-arranged the deck AND they were nowhere close to how abysmal McLaren is this year. I can never remember any front-running team mixing it was Minardis or HRTs or Manors.

Well, it's not like McLaren is mixing it with Manor either.

It's the first time in McLaren's history they've not scored a single point in the first five races of the season. So they've literally never been this bad. Reminds me a little bit of Williams' 2013 season, although IIRC they had better reliability at least.

ReservoirDog wrote:

SchumieRules wrote:Also, what's with the beef with Prodromou? He's not designing the car by himself, it's not a one man show, why not Morris, Goss and Oatley? Prodromou is only billed with aiding the design.

No beef at all. I am only pointing out the fact that there's a belief that he'll do wonders in the aero dept. because he did so at Red Bull.

You continuously bringing his name up, misspelled at that. So I was wondering what did he do to deserve this. The belief is partly because of the Dennis comment "Thank you Prodromou for this masterpiece". But he's not to blame, not alone anyway. He only aided to the design, the other three are the main contributors as I understand it.

Macca's problem is not only the aero anyway.

SchumieRules wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

SchumieRules wrote:Also, what's with the beef with Prodromou? He's not designing the car by himself, it's not a one man show, why not Morris, Goss and Oatley? Prodromou is only billed with aiding the design.

No beef at all. I am only pointing out the fact that there's a belief that he'll do wonders in the aero dept. because he did so at Red Bull.

You continuously bringing his name up, misspelled at that. So I was wondering what did he do to deserve this. The belief is partly because of the Dennis comment "Thank you Prodromou for this masterpiece". But he's not to blame, not alone anyway. He only aided to the design, the other three are the main contributors as I understand it.

Macca's problem is not only the aero anyway.

Maybe my posts are coming across wrong, so apologize for that. I am not blaming him at all. What I am trying to say is that he's viewed as a Messiah who'll produce a Red Bull-esque (title winning) chassis because of his previous work. That just won't happen, because one man isn't going to turn everything around. I am having trouble putting my point across, but let me put it on record, I am NOT blaming him. A car is much more than its aero, and the aero chief doesn't design a car. Like at RBR, Newey headed the whole thing and Peter worked with him on aero.

Juans Girl wrote:

Pest44 wrote:McLaren and Honda have always said this is a long term project. We're 5 races into that project and whilst it has been an appalling start lets see where they are in 2016/17. If they aren't a race winning team by that stage then I think you can say its been a disaster, 5 races in I don't think you can say that.

As for the comment about F1 teams can't plan long term what a load of BS. What about Red Bull and Merc? When Red Bull bought Jaguar they planned long term and were a race winning team within 4 years of that project and then won there first championship the following year. Same for Merc when they bought Brawn. They didn't expect to win races straight away they planned for 2014 from about 2011 and the results are plain to see. You can't expect a big new partnership to hit the ground running straight away when these hybrid engines are very complex. Again I'll say wait to at least 2016 before making judgements on the McLaren Honda project.

When one hears this "it's a long term project" it's more of a case of the team trying to justify to themselves, the shareholders, and the fans that the current car is a dog. Do you really think Alonso would've signed if Dennis had told him that they are not aiming for race wins for a couple of years (minimum) ?

They are so far behind where they should be that it's not funny. It's even worse than the embarrassment of Ferrari in the early 90's, where they were fighting Minardi's and other cellar dwellers for position.

This is not the first time McLaren have made a total meal of it, which points to some fundamental issues within the organisation. And don't get me started on that poor excuse for a boat anchor engine. Honda have lost the plot recently, and it's reflected in this piece of sh1t F1 engine.

It's not a new team full of novices we're talking about here. It's (after Ferrari) the most successful team in F1. They should not be this far off the pace.

Period

If you look back at my quote I clearly said its been an appalling start for the McLaren Honda relationship but they've always talked about the long term project from day one. They never said they expect instant success and will win straight away. It is shocking how far they are off the pace and it seems most of that is down to Honda although I don't think the Mclaren chassis is pace setting either. I think you have to give Honda time though. These power units are highly complex and you only have to look at Renault to see its not easy to make instant progress with them. As a McLaren fan I'm willing to wait a couple of years as I believe they will get there eventually whereas it seems other people can't accept it and want to make big changes after 5 races which I think is harsh.

Entirely agree. I had hopes for McLaren at the start of the year, and in Malaysia and China it looked as if they were actually going to spring a surprise at some point this year. But something tells me the big gains (and they have been big, they were the second-slowest team in Melbourne, no?) are going to get smaller and smaller as they get faster and faster. I wouldn't be surprised if this new project just saw them pretty much where they were in 2013, if not a little bit less competitive than that.

Why is Alonso leading Button in the standings? Both have a best finish of 11th and Button scored it first. Or is it because Alonso's 2nd best finish is better than Button's?

froze wrote:Why is Alonso leading Button in the standings? Both have a best finish of 11th and Button scored it first. Or is it because Alonso's 2nd best finish is better than Button's?

Indeed.

From the sporting regulations:

7) DEAD HEAT
7.1 Prizes and points awarded for all the positions of competitors who tie, will be added together and shared equally.
7.2 If two or more constructors or drivers finish the season with the same number of points, the higher place in the Championship (in either case) shall be awarded to :
a) The holder of the greatest number of first places.
b) If the number of first places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of second places.
c) If the number of second places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of third places and so on until a winner emerges.
d) If this procedure fails to produce a result, the FIA will nominate the winner according to such criteria as it thinks fit.

I'm hoping one day 7.2 d is called upon and I'm very much wondering what it'll be

ReservoirDog wrote:

SchumieRules wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

SchumieRules wrote:Also, what's with the beef with Prodromou? He's not designing the car by himself, it's not a one man show, why not Morris, Goss and Oatley? Prodromou is only billed with aiding the design.

No beef at all. I am only pointing out the fact that there's a belief that he'll do wonders in the aero dept. because he did so at Red Bull.

You continuously bringing his name up, misspelled at that. So I was wondering what did he do to deserve this. The belief is partly because of the Dennis comment "Thank you Prodromou for this masterpiece". But he's not to blame, not alone anyway. He only aided to the design, the other three are the main contributors as I understand it.

Macca's problem is not only the aero anyway.

Maybe my posts are coming across wrong, so apologize for that. I am not blaming him at all. What I am trying to say is that he's viewed as a Messiah who'll produce a Red Bull-esque (title winning) chassis because of his previous work. That just won't happen, because one man isn't going to turn everything around. I am having trouble putting my point across, but let me put it on record, I am NOT blaming him. A car is much more than its aero, and the aero chief doesn't design a car. Like at RBR, Newey headed the whole thing and Peter worked with him on aero.

Ok, that's how I view it too.

McLaren hyped up the car before the season started, which is something that many teams do. I remember a few times that great ideas just plainly didn't work, like the BMW "walrus" nose that was supposed to be the bees knees. So their fantastic new tight packaging that would allow the engine to run at higher temperatures just hasn't worked. Yet. I'm sure they are working like crazy in Woking and at Honda to amend this

mds wrote:

froze wrote:Why is Alonso leading Button in the standings? Both have a best finish of 11th and Button scored it first. Or is it because Alonso's 2nd best finish is better than Button's?

Indeed.

From the sporting regulations:

7) DEAD HEAT
7.1 Prizes and points awarded for all the positions of competitors who tie, will be added together and shared equally.
7.2 If two or more constructors or drivers finish the season with the same number of points, the higher place in the Championship (in either case) shall be awarded to :
a) The holder of the greatest number of first places.
b) If the number of first places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of second places.
c) If the number of second places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of third places and so on until a winner emerges.
d) If this procedure fails to produce a result, the FIA will nominate the winner according to such criteria as it thinks fit.

I'm hoping one day 7.2 d is called upon and I'm very much wondering what it'll be

Haha. That is an interesting section indeed. I thought there was an emphasis on who was the first one to score the position, but apparently not.

Pest44 wrote:

Juans Girl wrote:

Pest44 wrote:McLaren and Honda have always said this is a long term project. We're 5 races into that project and whilst it has been an appalling start lets see where they are in 2016/17. If they aren't a race winning team by that stage then I think you can say its been a disaster, 5 races in I don't think you can say that.

As for the comment about F1 teams can't plan long term what a load of BS. What about Red Bull and Merc? When Red Bull bought Jaguar they planned long term and were a race winning team within 4 years of that project and then won there first championship the following year. Same for Merc when they bought Brawn. They didn't expect to win races straight away they planned for 2014 from about 2011 and the results are plain to see. You can't expect a big new partnership to hit the ground running straight away when these hybrid engines are very complex. Again I'll say wait to at least 2016 before making judgements on the McLaren Honda project.

When one hears this "it's a long term project" it's more of a case of the team trying to justify to themselves, the shareholders, and the fans that the current car is a dog. Do you really think Alonso would've signed if Dennis had told him that they are not aiming for race wins for a couple of years (minimum) ?

They are so far behind where they should be that it's not funny. It's even worse than the embarrassment of Ferrari in the early 90's, where they were fighting Minardi's and other cellar dwellers for position.

This is not the first time McLaren have made a total meal of it, which points to some fundamental issues within the organisation. And don't get me started on that poor excuse for a boat anchor engine. Honda have lost the plot recently, and it's reflected in this piece of sh1t F1 engine.

It's not a new team full of novices we're talking about here. It's (after Ferrari) the most successful team in F1. They should not be this far off the pace.

Period

If you look back at my quote I clearly said its been an appalling start for the McLaren Honda relationship but they've always talked about the long term project from day one.

This is what I am saying. They have deluded themselves and their fans into thinking that it is all going to plan because they said from from the get-go. That's the crux of my whole argument. This has warped reality to the point that being a backmarker is "according to the plan laid out by Boullier". No team has had it so bad even at their worst.

Also, we have the tale of BMW's "checkbox" strategy. It basically went like this for each season. podiums > win > wins > title. We all know how that ended. This "long-term project" is bollox. There's no such thing. There's no long-term anything in a constantly changing sport like F1. Give me one example of a long-term F1 car project that went from a complete backmarker to frontend. It just doesn't happen. They are BSing themselves and their fans. It's like the Mansoor Ijaz check. It'll turn up any day now.

froze wrote:

mds wrote:

froze wrote:Why is Alonso leading Button in the standings? Both have a best finish of 11th and Button scored it first. Or is it because Alonso's 2nd best finish is better than Button's?

Indeed.

From the sporting regulations:

7) DEAD HEAT
7.1 Prizes and points awarded for all the positions of competitors who tie, will be added together and shared equally.
7.2 If two or more constructors or drivers finish the season with the same number of points, the higher place in the Championship (in either case) shall be awarded to :
a) The holder of the greatest number of first places.
b) If the number of first places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of second places.
c) If the number of second places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of third places and so on until a winner emerges.
d) If this procedure fails to produce a result, the FIA will nominate the winner according to such criteria as it thinks fit.

I'm hoping one day 7.2 d is called upon and I'm very much wondering what it'll be

Haha. That is an interesting section indeed. I thought there was an emphasis on who was the first one to score the position, but apparently not.

That's for quali times. If two times are equal then whoever set it first gets P1.

McLaren was always lacking something. I only ever witnessed them winning titles during 3 seasons. Mercedes will soon win as much titles on their own during their 6th season as Mercedes as with McLaren in like 15 seasons or so..

Inappropriate post removed.

Inappropriate quote removed.

mds wrote:

froze wrote:Why is Alonso leading Button in the standings? Both have a best finish of 11th and Button scored it first. Or is it because Alonso's 2nd best finish is better than Button's?

Indeed.

From the sporting regulations:

7) DEAD HEAT
7.1 Prizes and points awarded for all the positions of competitors who tie, will be added together and shared equally.
7.2 If two or more constructors or drivers finish the season with the same number of points, the higher place in the Championship (in either case) shall be awarded to :
a) The holder of the greatest number of first places.
b) If the number of first places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of second places.
c) If the number of second places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of third places and so on until a winner emerges.
d) If this procedure fails to produce a result, the FIA will nominate the winner according to such criteria as it thinks fit.

I'm hoping one day 7.2 d is called upon and I'm very much wondering what it'll be

I guess it would be like froze said the first one to get the highest finish.

They don't even have that much time for that "long-term" plan as in 2017 the rules change again. Wins by the end of 2016 according to Boullier and then what? Another long term plan? They seriously need to fix their problems as soon as possible because it's their third year as a midfield team and they are becoming the new Williams pretty fast.

guardiangr wrote:They don't even have that much time for that "long-term" plan as in 2017 the rules change again. Wins by the end of 2016 according to Boullier and then what? Another long term plan? They seriously need to fix their problems as soon as possible because it's their third year as a midfield team and they are becoming the new Williams pretty fast.

It's their plan to become the "long-term" champion. It's the trap Ferrari fell into too. They were always working on the next year's car. I don't know if many remember, but in 2013 McLaren said they are working on 2015 car and 2014 will be transitional. Look how that turned out. Now even 2016 is transitional. I am not quite sure when this transition ends.

ReservoirDog wrote: This is what I am saying. They have deluded themselves and their fans into thinking that it is all going to plan because they said from from the get-go. That's the crux of my whole argument.

Then the crux of your whole argument is flawed, since most would admit that it is NOT all going to plan, and I don't remember Dennis or other team members saying it was all going to plan either.

This has been repeated multiple times in this tyread but you keep on ignoring it.

around race two there was a thread claiming we don't know the true pace of the mclaren. i said we did, and it was bad because the first two races showed a slow, unreliable car. now we are past race five, and the car is still slow and unreliable. pretty unthinkable going into the season that they would be this lost.

sure, eventually they may turn it around, but it is ugly, really ugly for mclaren after five races.

ReservoirDog wrote:

guardiangr wrote:They don't even have that much time for that "long-term" plan as in 2017 the rules change again. Wins by the end of 2016 according to Boullier and then what? Another long term plan? They seriously need to fix their problems as soon as possible because it's their third year as a midfield team and they are becoming the new Williams pretty fast.

It's their plan to become the "long-term" champion. It's the trap Ferrari fell into too. They were always working on the next year's car. I don't know if many remember, but in 2013 McLaren said they are working on 2015 car and 2014 will be transitional. Look how that turned out. Now even 2016 is transitional. I am not quite sure when this transition ends.

Yep, it's sad. I really hope they get their act together because F1 needs a strong McLaren along with Ferrari and Mercedes.

Let's all kick McLaren while they're down!!!! Yes their performance is dismal. That does not mean their season will end dismally.

Ferrari finished so far behind Mercedes that you could consider them failures also.

McLaren have a long, rich history of failure. Why would this new project be any different? The fact that every other interview they mention Senna or the 1980s shows just how little success they've had in the last 20-30 years.

For a team of McLaren's size and supposed wealth, they've done nothing but underperform the last few years and 2015 doesn't look like it's going to be much different.

I agree with what you're saying, but they have made more progress than I thought they would. Jenson's comments are worrying though. The way he described the car makes me think that's exactly why Alonso crashed in testing.

Inappropriate post removed.

This post is in response to the OP:

I agree with much of what you're saying, however I think your conclusion that this project is hopeless is totally premature and will prove to be wrong. I think that at some point in the future, McLaren will be competitive again. Why do I believe that? Because they will keep at it until they get there. There are teams in F1 like Toyota, Red Bull and BMW that will look for the door when things get tough but Ferrari, McLaren and Williams are lifers. They'll keep throwing money at the car until it starts to go faster. That's really all there is to it.

I agree with your assessment of their current state. They are not where they wanted to be at this point. They are totally uncompetitive. You'd have to go to the first half of the 2009 season to find the last time they were this poor. In that season, however, they did end up winning races. They're not so far away that the situation should be described as hopeless.

Ultimately, engine performance is their one true issue right now. Red Bulls and Torro Rossos pull away from them on the straights. The Honda PU is the worst out there by a mile right now. I've heard a lot of people say that the engine has been turned down for reliability purposes but the bottom line is that it is just totally uncompetitive and unless there actually is a LOT more performance in it, it could be an anchor that keeps them from getting to the front.

I'm surprised no one has dug up those old threads where some people predicted that Mercedes leaving McLaren as an engine supplier would spell their doom because that is looking to be a distinct possibility. Honda have not been successful in F1 fr a very long time. All of the people who were involved with the McLaren/Honda teams of the 80s and 90s are no longer working there. This is a different group of people and thus far, they are not doing well at all. Their power unit is a joke. Again, this is the key to the team's success. That engine must improve dramatically.

McLaren do seem to be gifted at finding ways to lose. It seems that they can have great cars and great drivers and still lose in situations where other teams would win. I think of years like 2005 and 2012 where Raikkonen and Hamilton were phenomenal and the cars were super-quick but the team itself found ways to lose and reliability was poor. I look at Kimi leaving in 2007 and winning the title with Ferrari immediately. Mercedes supplying Brawn GP with an engine and watching them win a title immediately. Lewis leaving and now looking set to win multiple titles on the trot. The Mercedes team dropping them as a customer and dominating F1. I'm not a superstitious guy but McLaren seem cursed.

ReservoirDog wrote:

Pest44 wrote:

Juans Girl wrote:

Pest44 wrote:McLaren and Honda have always said this is a long term project. We're 5 races into that project and whilst it has been an appalling start lets see where they are in 2016/17. If they aren't a race winning team by that stage then I think you can say its been a disaster, 5 races in I don't think you can say that.

As for the comment about F1 teams can't plan long term what a load of BS. What about Red Bull and Merc? When Red Bull bought Jaguar they planned long term and were a race winning team within 4 years of that project and then won there first championship the following year. Same for Merc when they bought Brawn. They didn't expect to win races straight away they planned for 2014 from about 2011 and the results are plain to see. You can't expect a big new partnership to hit the ground running straight away when these hybrid engines are very complex. Again I'll say wait to at least 2016 before making judgements on the McLaren Honda project.

When one hears this "it's a long term project" it's more of a case of the team trying to justify to themselves, the shareholders, and the fans that the current car is a dog. Do you really think Alonso would've signed if Dennis had told him that they are not aiming for race wins for a couple of years (minimum) ?

They are so far behind where they should be that it's not funny. It's even worse than the embarrassment of Ferrari in the early 90's, where they were fighting Minardi's and other cellar dwellers for position.

This is not the first time McLaren have made a total meal of it, which points to some fundamental issues within the organisation. And don't get me started on that poor excuse for a boat anchor engine. Honda have lost the plot recently, and it's reflected in this piece of sh1t F1 engine.

It's not a new team full of novices we're talking about here. It's (after Ferrari) the most successful team in F1. They should not be this far off the pace.

Period

If you look back at my quote I clearly said its been an appalling start for the McLaren Honda relationship but they've always talked about the long term project from day one.

This is what I am saying. They have deluded themselves and their fans into thinking that it is all going to plan because they said from from the get-go. That's the crux of my whole argument. This has warped reality to the point that being a backmarker is "according to the plan laid out by Boullier". No team has had it so bad even at their worst.

Also, we have the tale of BMW's "checkbox" strategy. It basically went like this for each season. podiums > win > wins > title. We all know how that ended. This "long-term project" is bollox. There's no such thing. There's no long-term anything in a constantly changing sport like F1. Give me one example of a long-term F1 car project that went from a complete backmarker to frontend. It just doesn't happen. They are BSing themselves and their fans. It's like the Mansoor Ijaz check. It'll turn up any day now.

No they haven't deluded the fans to thinking that everything is going to plan. Everybody can see that being this far off the pace wasn't the plan and they've had a shocking start to the season. Some of can see though that they've bought new people to the team to try and get McLaren back to a race winning team again and challenging for titles.

A lot of these people have only recently been brought in so I don't know what you expect McLaren to do? Do you expect them to fire all these people they brought in 6 months ago and try and find a new team of people again? If you think that is the case then I don't think you understand F1. I'm willing to judge the McHonda partnership I little longer than you it looks like. All I'll say is F1 can change very quickly. Who would have thought Ferrari would the Mercs closest rivals this year after the poor season they had last year.

sandman1347 wrote:This post is in response to the OP:

I agree with much of what you're saying, however I think your conclusion that this project is hopeless is totally premature and will prove to be wrong. I think that at some point in the future, McLaren will be competitive again. Why do I believe that? Because they will keep at it until they get there. There are teams in F1 like Toyota, Red Bull and BMW that will look for the door when things get tough but Ferrari, McLaren and Williams are lifers. They'll keep throwing money at the car until it starts to go faster. That's really all there is to it.

Let me just clarify that I am only talking about this particular car and engine combo. What happens with their future "projects", nobody knows (at least not me). I am just saying that this particular car and Honda are a disaster.

Pest44 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:

Pest44 wrote:

Juans Girl wrote:

Pest44 wrote:McLaren and Honda have always said this is a long term project. We're 5 races into that project and whilst it has been an appalling start lets see where they are in 2016/17. If they aren't a race winning team by that stage then I think you can say its been a disaster, 5 races in I don't think you can say that.

As for the comment about F1 teams can't plan long term what a load of BS. What about Red Bull and Merc? When Red Bull bought Jaguar they planned long term and were a race winning team within 4 years of that project and then won there first championship the following year. Same for Merc when they bought Brawn. They didn't expect to win races straight away they planned for 2014 from about 2011 and the results are plain to see. You can't expect a big new partnership to hit the ground running straight away when these hybrid engines are very complex. Again I'll say wait to at least 2016 before making judgements on the McLaren Honda project.

When one hears this "it's a long term project" it's more of a case of the team trying to justify to themselves, the shareholders, and the fans that the current car is a dog. Do you really think Alonso would've signed if Dennis had told him that they are not aiming for race wins for a couple of years (minimum) ?

They are so far behind where they should be that it's not funny. It's even worse than the embarrassment of Ferrari in the early 90's, where they were fighting Minardi's and other cellar dwellers for position.

This is not the first time McLaren have made a total meal of it, which points to some fundamental issues within the organisation. And don't get me started on that poor excuse for a boat anchor engine. Honda have lost the plot recently, and it's reflected in this piece of sh1t F1 engine.

It's not a new team full of novices we're talking about here. It's (after Ferrari) the most successful team in F1. They should not be this far off the pace.

Period

If you look back at my quote I clearly said its been an appalling start for the McLaren Honda relationship but they've always talked about the long term project from day one.

This is what I am saying. They have deluded themselves and their fans into thinking that it is all going to plan because they said from from the get-go. That's the crux of my whole argument. This has warped reality to the point that being a backmarker is "according to the plan laid out by Boullier". No team has had it so bad even at their worst.

Also, we have the tale of BMW's "checkbox" strategy. It basically went like this for each season. podiums > win > wins > title. We all know how that ended. This "long-term project" is bollox. There's no such thing. There's no long-term anything in a constantly changing sport like F1. Give me one example of a long-term F1 car project that went from a complete backmarker to frontend. It just doesn't happen. They are BSing themselves and their fans. It's like the Mansoor Ijaz check. It'll turn up any day now.

No they haven't deluded the fans to thinking that everything is going to plan. Everybody can see that being this far off the pace wasn't the plan and they've had a shocking start to the season. Some of can see though that they've bought new people to the team to try and get McLaren back to a race winning team again and challenging for titles.

A lot of these people have only recently been brought in so I don't know what you expect McLaren to do? Do you expect them to fire all these people they brought in 6 months ago and try and find a new team of people again? If you think that is the case then I don't think you understand F1. I'm willing to judge the McHonda partnership I little longer than you it looks like. All I'll say is F1 can change very quickly. Who would have thought Ferrari would the Mercs closest rivals this year after the poor season they had last year.

Ha! And how did that happen?

They cleaned the house top to bottom. Left no stones unturned. Removed dinosaurs like Luca di. They even threw Alonso out (probably mutual though) because he was such a negative Nancy. And brought in a guy that wanted results NOW, not tomorrow, not 2016, not after some long-term project. Anyone getting in the way of progress was shown the door.

Just contrast Arrivabene with Boullier. You're just proving my point really. So I think we agree.

mds wrote:
I'm hoping one day 7.2 d is called upon and I'm very much wondering what it'll be

I wonder what they'd do? Draw straws or something pretty arbitrary or get two cars and let them go at it again?


The McLaren business. If plans are goign wrong that's one thing, but if they know they are going to be crap they should have revised down immediately. I do think this is rather damaging to both brands involved. I know F1 is generally pretty cyclical, and for every risk that brings you the WDC there is another risk that, if taken, will hamper you. But McLaren had a bit of a dog in 2009 and turned that into the best car later in the season. Too late to win the WDC/WCC but a race winning car in Hamilton's hands. At various points in 2010 and 2012 they had a car that was probably the best there. Since then they seem to get slower every season, if not in absolute terms then relative to the leader. I don't know what the problem is, I'm sure they have people smarter than me with access to much more knowledge working on it, but they seem to be doing everything wrong at this point.

I hope they find their feet. The more cars fighting for the lead, the better.

ReservoirDog wrote:Ha! And how did that happen?

They cleaned the house top to bottom. Left no stones unturned. Removed dinosaurs like Luca di. They even threw Alonso out (probably mutual though) because he was such a negative Nancy. And brought in a guy that wanted results NOW, not tomorrow, not 2016, not after some long-term project. Anyone getting in the way of progress was shown the door.

Just contrast Arrivabene with Boullier. You're just proving my point really. So I think we agree.

No I haven't just proved your point. Ferrari had a major cull only a few years ago and brought in people like Pat Fry and look at there success then. They produced the 2012 car which was a lemon and only thanks to Alonso nearly won the title some how. There 2013/14 cars weren't great either.

I'd say while Arrivabene has been a breath of fresh air he's been rather lucky that Ferrari have produced a decent car this year. Lets see how he gets on when things get tough. Bringing so many new aero parts didnt seem to work did it in spain. They had so many new parts they wasn't sure what was working and what wasn't. Anyway if you think having a mass cull every time a team doesn't produce a good car is the way forward then so be it. I think you need to give a team of people at least 3 years to get things right.

Pest44 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Ha! And how did that happen?

They cleaned the house top to bottom. Left no stones unturned. Removed dinosaurs like Luca di. They even threw Alonso out (probably mutual though) because he was such a negative Nancy. And brought in a guy that wanted results NOW, not tomorrow, not 2016, not after some long-term project. Anyone getting in the way of progress was shown the door.

Just contrast Arrivabene with Boullier. You're just proving my point really. So I think we agree.

No I haven't just proved your point. Ferrari had a major cull only a few years ago and brought in people like Pat Fry and look at there success then. They produced the 2012 car which was a lemon and only thanks to Alonso nearly won the title some how. There 2013/14 cars weren't great either.

I'd say while Arrivabene has been a breath of fresh air he's been rather lucky that Ferrari have produced a decent car this year. Lets see how he gets on when things get tough. Bringing so many new aero parts didnt seem to work did it in spain. They had so many new parts they wasn't sure what was working and what wasn't. Anyway if you think having a mass cull every time a team doesn't produce a good car is the way forward then so be it. I think you need to give a team of people at least 3 years to get things right.

Did you just seriously compare the 2012 Ferrari to 2015 McLaren? Really?

ReservoirDog wrote:

Pest44 wrote:

ReservoirDog wrote:Ha! And how did that happen?

They cleaned the house top to bottom. Left no stones unturned. Removed dinosaurs like Luca di. They even threw Alonso out (probably mutual though) because he was such a negative Nancy. And brought in a guy that wanted results NOW, not tomorrow, not 2016, not after some long-term project. Anyone getting in the way of progress was shown the door.

Just contrast Arrivabene with Boullier. You're just proving my point really. So I think we agree.

No I haven't just proved your point. Ferrari had a major cull only a few years ago and brought in people like Pat Fry and look at there success then. They produced the 2012 car which was a lemon and only thanks to Alonso nearly won the title some how. There 2013/14 cars weren't great either.

I'd say while Arrivabene has been a breath of fresh air he's been rather lucky that Ferrari have produced a decent car this year. Lets see how he gets on when things get tough. Bringing so many new aero parts didnt seem to work did it in spain. They had so many new parts they wasn't sure what was working and what wasn't. Anyway if you think having a mass cull every time a team doesn't produce a good car is the way forward then so be it. I think you need to give a team of people at least 3 years to get things right.

Did you just seriously compare the 2012 Ferrari to 2015 McLaren? Really?

Yeah and he actually called the 2012 Ferrari a lemon...That car was quite competitive most of the time.

It's really very simple...

McLaren have had a horrible start to the season, the Power Unit is terrible and the Chassis remains a mystery because of how bad the PU is. Boullier, Dennis and Co. have been telling us that things are going to get better for the last year and so far they have gone only backwards. For a team that has one of the three best driver line-ups on the grid (debate who goes where) it is completely unacceptable and no competitive sports team should accept being second let alone where McLaren currently are.

What the future holds and how quickly they can become competitive remains the only question mark. You could point to the downward spiral they have been on since 2012 for guidance on where they will go, you could cite the sort of strides that Ferrari made over the winter to point the other way, ultimately we don't know. Commenting about McLaren having little direction and not having a plan is completely speculation because no-one here is within the McLaren Team on a day to day basis. Chances are they do have some kind of plan, weither or not it is the right plan is again up for debate and speculation.

sandman1347 wrote:Yeah and he actually called the 2012 Ferrari a lemon...That car was quite competitive most of the time.

Yeah, a lemon that lost the title by a few points. Some lemon!

ReservoirDog wrote:It's their plan to become the "long-term" champion. It's the trap Ferrari fell into too. They were always working on the next year's car. I don't know if many remember, but in 2013 McLaren said they are working on 2015 car and 2014 will be transitional. Look how that turned out. Now even 2016 is transitional. I am not quite sure when this transition ends.

McLaren and Honda took a big risk in order to have a chance to have the fastest car on the grid. It's a risk. It may succeed, it may fail, but at least they are trying and I respect them for it. They have been pretty public about their plans, and I have nothing bad to say about a team that's trying to win by getting what's likely to be the most compact PU on the grid running at full-power in that "size-zero" chassis. If it works, it's going to be spectacular. But will they be able to get it to work? Who knows?

On the contrary, Ferrari for the last 6 years never had anything on paper that will give them a chance to be the fastest car on the grid. Every year the critics say they've been too conservative. Even if they had executed their plans perfectly they would only have been second best.

So I simply don't see the Ferrari comparison as being valid here.