Should Mclaren have signed Raikkonen or Heidfeld?

[F1Babe 0]

I've gone for Nick.

He's matured alot within the past year and has proved he's got real talent. He's also very consistant.

[jagman 0]

I chose Kimi, only because I would really love to see what his potential is and because i think one of the reasons McLaren chose him is becuase he is finnish, to keep all the finnish supporters they have gained over the past years with Hakkinen happy.

[TotalF1 SamB 0]

Raikkonen is an arrogant little s##t and Heidfeld has talent.

McLaren want publicity. Get's them sponsors. Keeps them people like Finlandia Vodka.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

I put in Kimi (obviously), but I think it was one #### of a choice for Mclaren. I could not have made the decision, and would probably have signed Kimi on to Mclaren (to keep Ferrari away from him) but let him race another year at Sauber to let him mature.

You cant say anything about sponsors, because Nick Heidfeld's German presence would have been beneficial to Mercedes, but still Kimi is the one with the contract. Neither driver has much sponsor backing outside of their own respective countries (Kimi has dNa, a Finnish mobile phone service).

Heidfeld is more mature than Kimi and though maybe the SLIGHEST ever bit slower, he is more consistent. Raikkonen is a great qualifier, and once he matures some more over the winter he will be a great consistent racer as well. I think though that once DC leaves mclaren Heidfeld will be a shoe-in for the seat. Or well then again you cant forget Hakkinen, who's even more of a shoe-in due to Ron Dennis...