Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Player(1)

Alonso Is Credited With Mclaren's Upturn In Form.

Recommended Posts


And what does Hungary, Monaco and flexible wings prove then?

The flexible wings were illegal, and Ferrari put them on anyway.

The mass dampers, were suddenly deemed illegal; due to an exploitation in an unlcear technicality. Monaco, was blatent cheating and couldn't go unpunished. In Hungary, Renault protested, and what Michael did was against the letter of the law.

The blocking incident was absolute balls, and the mass damper situation was conspicuous in it's timing. That effectively slashed the pace of the Renault

Ascari, Fangio, Brabham, Prost, Senna, Schumacher, Senna off the top of my head, there might be one or two others. I ocnsider 3 titles a far greater achievement though.

Naturally, and I guess you'd consider four titles even greater an achievement. Your point here is what?

I'll give you the point about Kimi, I edspise his 'don't give a damn' attitude too. And I think it is directly related to his limitations as a driver. However I don't have any more regard for Alonso's behaviour towards his team and teammate as we saw last year.

Alonso's attitude towards his team and teammate, please, give me a few examples of what you mean? I'm very interested in seeing what you can make-up.

You say that after you pass judgement on Kimi? I have heard, read and seen enough.

Ahh but sir, I've met them both.

Testing session at Silverstone, Alonso stopped, signed and chatted with us. Kimi ignored us. Similarly, Montoya was an ar*e as well.

Are you going to be like the other Alonso fans here, or can we keep this civilized? Entirely upto you.

It's hard to be civil with the clinically irrational.

I'll try though.

Irrelevant. Mclaren had a car capable of challenging for the championship two years ago, arguably, was it not for Kimi's and Montoya's mistakes they would have won. That is enough to negate your assertion that they came out of nowhere this year and that the situation was in any way comparable to Ferrari's situation in 1996.

Irrelevant?

Kimi retired from the lead in SM, had numerous engine failures throughout the season hampering qualifying; I seem to remember it happening in Silverstone amongst other places. Fernando's brilliant early advantage, allowed him to keep his Championship lead on his own conservative terms, and Kimi had to push.

The only mistake I recall from Kimi was at Nurby, and Montoya was just rubbish. The mistakes were made by McLaren, because they're inadequate internal stuctures, somewhere along the line were causing critical failures. Likewise, the same was happening Ferrari's with thier general management. By 1996, the team (Todt) had a plan, it would take time but we saw the end results.

I'm not saying they were identical situations, as no situation is ever identical, but I am saying that we can draw some comparisons, as most people would agree.

If we look at every McLaren season since the year 2002; we see a pretty interesting pattern;

2002: Reliability woes

2003: Lack of real pace

2004: Most unreliable supposed front running car of it's day.

2005: Car was chronically unreliable

2006: Lack of Pace

Personally, I blame Newey in the main, he can't build a reliable car. Paddy Lowe and his team seem to have got the balance right, whereas we have to look at the Red Bull's dismal reliability record thus far, to analyse Newey's expertise in that area.

It is well known, that Adrian designs car to go quickly, and not much else.

Superficial incidental ones.

Your sure?

Your absolutey sure on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's hard to be civil with the clinically irrational.

So be it, I won't bother responding then. We've suddenly got an influx of zealots who can't debate without getting personal, I hope it passes. It is driving the site into the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So be it, I won't bother responding then. We've suddenly got an influx of zealots who can't debate without getting personal, I hope it passes. It is driving the site into the ground.

Your clinically irrational even if someone dosent personally attack you...

Unless your personally attacked you seem to have no reason to stop posting your dribble again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your clinically irrational even if someone dosent personally attack you...

Unless your personally attacked you seem to have no reason to stop posting your dribble again.

I can't see what Cavallino is saying, but I am assuming he is trying to pin the blame on us, despite the fact that it is actually he who sets out to create as many arguments as he can. Pretty amusing really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that Lewis prefers a car that is pointy and loose at the rear (like Michael did) whereas Fernando is more of a neutral balance driver (ultimately leaning on understeer). I wonder how much set-up sharing goes on and if so how that translates to their respective styles (if i have judged their styles accurately that is)?

I've yet to see alot of Lewis' style. An onboard will greatly help here. From what I can see, Lewis is, as you say, a classic oversteer driver, but we need to see his throttle input at apex to properly compare him to Michael.

Fernando, as I've repeatedly posted here, uses an aggressive turn-in to invoke oversteer. Martin Brundle and Peter Windsor are the biggest culprits in erroneously saying Fernando creates understeer with his turn-ins. Go try an experiment: Take your road car to 40 mph and, without braking, turn it hard. Now take it up to 100 mph and turn it hard. I'd wager you wouldn't understeer at 100 mph and likewise Alonso doesn't with his aggressive turn-in.

I have posted further proof of this a while ago when I qouted Rindt telling Emmo that in order to cope with the car's understeer, he needed to throw it into the corner more aggressively. The same principles apply.

But smoothness is normally attributed with drivers who prefer neutral balance, like Jenson. Lewis seems to be the one to me who throws his car into a corner, gets the nose into the apex and doesn't worry about upsetting the rear but collecting it on the exit.

Lewis does indeed do this, but his turn-in isn't as aggressive as Fernando's.

And by the way how on earth would any of us know who was better as McLaren test driver between Pedro & Wurz???

By team quotes and by looking at the progression of the cars they are testing/refining. Of course it's not the whole equation, but a good tester will know how to refine any given car.

Personally, I blame Newey in the main, he can't build a reliable car. Paddy Lowe and his team seem to have got the balance right, whereas we have to look at the Red Bull's dismal reliability record thus far, to analyse Newey's expertise in that area.

It is well known, that Adrian designs car to go quickly, and not much else.

True. Many people will incorrectly attribute to me the stance of 'Kimi was the cause of all McLaren's technical woes'. Kimi's flaw, as I see it, was in NOT realizing how fragile his car was and driving like the machine was bullet-proof. One can say 'McLaren and Newey built shoddy cars' and say 'Kimi drove those cars too hard' and be consistent.

Welcome, Martin, and please forgive my using your quote to yet again clarify my stance on Kimi. I have found the need to do this every so often because those that don't agree with me on it tend to misrepresent me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True. Many people will incorrectly attribute to me the stance of 'Kimi was the cause of all McLaren's technical woes'. Kimi's flaw, as I see it, was in NOT realizing how fragile his car was and driving like the machine was bullet-proof. One can say 'McLaren and Newey built shoddy cars' and say 'Kimi drove those cars too hard' and be consistent.

Welcome, Martin, and please forgive my using your quote to yet again clarify my stance on Kimi. I have found the need to do this every so often because those that don't agree with me on it tend to misrepresent me.

That's something I'd agree with, you have my support on that view. I think that's another discussion though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right on. There is nothing wrong with Alonso's attitude, but the ignorant Ferrari sheep just choose to listen to the annual bull$hit that the press spew out. Everyone knows it is rubbish, but the ferrari sheep choose to believe it, because it gives them a reason to validate their hatred, while the real crux of the matter is they just cannot hack that he took the title out of Ferrari's hands. Oh and I would imagine Fangio also won back to back WDC's.

Oh and don't pay attention to Cavallino, causing arguments is about his only skill. Most of the members accept the fact that he is an ignoramus.

Don't pigeon hole the Ferrari brigade Shane. You will create an unnecessary segregation and resentment. Also, don't lower yourself to personal insult. You are WAY above that and only give ammuntion to others. You crave 'fact'. Stating that a member is factually an 'ignoramus' is foolish and untrue, only opinion.

I've yet to see alot of Lewis' style. An onboard will greatly help here. From what I can see, Lewis is, as you say, a classic oversteer driver, but we need to see his throttle input at apex to properly compare him to Michael.

Fernando, as I've repeatedly posted here, uses an aggressive turn-in to invoke oversteer. Martin Brundle and Peter Windsor are the biggest culprits in erroneously saying Fernando creates understeer with his turn-ins. Go try an experiment: Take your road car to 40 mph and, without braking, turn it hard. Now take it up to 100 mph and turn it hard. I'd wager you wouldn't understeer at 100 mph and likewise Alonso doesn't with his aggressive turn-in.

I have posted further proof of this a while ago when I qouted Rindt telling Emmo that in order to cope with the car's understeer, he needed to throw it into the corner more aggressively. The same principles apply.

Lewis does indeed do this, but his turn-in isn't as aggressive as Fernando's.

By team quotes and by looking at the progression of the cars they are testing/refining. Of course it's not the whole equation, but a good tester will know how to refine any given car.

True. Many people will incorrectly attribute to me the stance of 'Kimi was the cause of all McLaren's technical woes'. Kimi's flaw, as I see it, was in NOT realizing how fragile his car was and driving like the machine was bullet-proof. One can say 'McLaren and Newey built shoddy cars' and say 'Kimi drove those cars too hard' and be consistent.

Welcome, Martin, and please forgive my using your quote to yet again clarify my stance on Kimi. I have found the need to do this every so often because those that don't agree with me on it tend to misrepresent me.

Great post Mike, thanks for explaining your take on things. With respect though, i do find it hard to accept that your opinon on Alonso's style is of a higher authority than Windsor's or Brundle's. Also it is not realistic to compare the tendancies of a road car to a racing car as in the main a road car is specifically designed to understeer for safety reasons. I have seen Alonso turn into a fast corner with low agression and have the nose run wide. To me, this was a sign that he preferred a set up which leaned on understeer. Conversely though of course, we have all seen him turn in agressively, as you say, to provoke oversteer. Maybe he likes both styles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great post Mike, thanks for explaining your take on things. With respect though, i do find it hard to accept that your opinon on Alonso's style is of a higher authority than Windsor's or Brundle's.

Thanks. My opinions on Alonso's style are based upon my own knowledge of the traction circle and weight-transfer at high speeds. Peter Windsor was management at Williams some years back, and he took a spin in a Ferrari or something at one time, but he's no driver. He gets his opinions on driver's styles from other drivers or from his own observations. Windsor is no more, or less, qualified to anal-yze styles than you or me. Martin Brundle was/is a driver but something you should keep in mind about drivers is that there are two different 'schools' of driving: Oversteer and understeer; and as such drivers from one school tend not to understand drivers of the other school. Brundle is an understeer driver trying to interpret an oversteer driver's approach.

Take the brief documentary on MS' driving style. Hill is a borderline oversteer driver and he understood what MS was doing. Herbert, a borderline understeer driver, was saying how MS' style 'wasn't that special'....and we all know that's a crap assessment. This goes to prove how one 'school' doesn't really understand the other 'school'.

Also it is not realistic to compare the tendancies of a road car to a racing car as in the main a road car is specifically designed to understeer for safety reasons.

True, but that inherent understeer of a road car is very similar to the inherent understeer the FIA regulations have brought about in F1. You deal with understeer at entry by doing one of two things, either you slow down so your fronts bite more or you turn in aggressively to force the back to swing around. I can post quotes by Rindt, McLaren and, at the other end of the spectrum, Kubica, to back this up if you'd like.

I have seen Alonso turn into a fast corner with low agression and have the nose run wide. To me, this was a sign that he preferred a set up which leaned on understeer. Conversely though of course, we have all seen him turn in agressively, as you say, to provoke oversteer. Maybe he likes both styles.

It's excellent that you've noticed that. Also take note at what corner he turns aggressively into. It will be a corner at the end of a straight. He does this to keep his speed up. If he's just turned onto a short straight, and is still in, say, 3rd gear, he'll take a smoother entry into the next corner because at lower speeds an aggressive turn-in would be slower than a more 'conventional' approach, generally. It's all based on the track, but he indeed does both. Look at his onboards and when he does his aggressive turn-ins, you'll notice he's countersteering right at the apex; this is because he's just induced oversteer at entry and is correcting for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True, but that inherent understeer of a road car is very similar to the inherent understeer the FIA regulations have brought about in F1[b/]. You deal with understeer at entry by doing one of two things, either you slow down so your fronts bite more or you turn in aggressively to force the back to swing around. I can post quotes by Rindt, McLaren and, at the other end of the spectrum, Kubica, to back this up if you'd like.

I fully understand the theory on how to deal with understeer but the quotes are always nice anyway! I still maintain that a road car comparison is unrealistic. Especially when you factor in the fact that most oversteer behaviour in road cars is a consequence of lifting off the power, an action that tranfers the weight to the front axle thus making the rear lighter, not something a stiffly sprung F1 car suffers from.

(Re: bold) You could go to the extremes on a set up to provoke oversteer (ie stiffer rear ARB, less rear down force, less rear negative camber). What, in your opinion in the current regulations means that the cars naturally understeer? I had not heard this before.

*Can't get the type face to go bold, you can see where i mean though*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fully understand the theory on how to deal with understeer but the quotes are always nice anyway! I still maintain that a road car comparison is unrealistic. Especially when you factor in the fact that most oversteer behaviour in road cars is a consequence of lifting off the power, an action that tranfers the weight to the front axle thus making the rear lighter, not something a stiffly sprung F1 car suffers from.

(Re: bold) You could go to the extremes on a set up to provoke oversteer (ie stiffer rear ARB, less rear down force, less rear negative camber). What, in your opinion in the current regulations means that the cars naturally understeer? I had not heard this before.

*Can't get the type face to go bold, you can see where i mean though*.

I'll find the quotes after work.

The raising of the front wing has created the current understeer.

I'll admit that any comparison between a road car and an F1 car are rough at best.

The theory still holds that when you turn sharply into a corner at high speeds you create turn-in oversteer without having to adopt an extreme set-up. This has potential gains at other parts of the track. For instance, one way to get the fronts to bite more is to run more front wing. This will hurt you on the straights, however. Running less rear downforce will help generate turn-in oversteer, but will also generate oversteer on exit; something that will slow you down. Stiffer rear ARBs' (and possibly softer front suspension) will help but will also have the negative effect of being optimal only for one kind of corner. Each set-up solution has a negative to go along with it. Alonso's solution (according to me) gets him turn-in oversteer without the negatives. He can run a set-up optimized for a neutral exit, fast straights, and a compromise for various corners while still getting the benefit of turn-in oversteer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McLaren hail Alonso off-track contribution

By Jonathan Noble Thursday, April 26th 2007, 11:00 GMT

McLaren believe that Fernando Alonso's off-track contribution to the team has been as impressive as his on-track efforts this year, as he gears up for his home Grand Prix in Spain as joint-leader of the world championship.

Alonso's strong performances in the first three races of the year mean he is now tied with Kimi Raikkonen and Lewis Hamilton at the head of the title chase.

But despite being impressed with his efforts in the races, McLaren's F1 CEO Martin Whitmarsh believe that it is Alonso's hard work away from the spotlight that has really made a difference this year.

"Fernando's performance is inevitably judged on what has happened on the three Sunday afternoons we have had so far this season, which sees him as joint leader of the drivers' championship," Whitmarsh told the official McLaren website.

"But the reality is his performance from a team perspective is also judged by how he contributes to the team, how he contributes to the technical development of the car, how he helps focus and motivate the organisation.

"He has been tremendously focused on working with the team and helping us to make improvements in what we do."

He added: "Whilst it is difficult to analytically quantify in the way that we seek to do with our engineering developments, there is no doubt that Fernando has made a very significant and worthwhile contribution to our programme.

"It is his honesty, clarity, sincerity. He happens to be an extremely nice human being, but one who is very focused and intent on winning races and world championships.

"It is the way that he goes about that. He quietly but insistently puts across his point of view, which has enormous credibility and credence within the team."

Whitmarsh also believes that Hamilton must take all of the credit for his sensational start to the campaign - which has seen him finish on the podium in all three races so far.

"With Lewis everyone is rightly proud of their achievements," explained Whitmarsh. "But in reality the primary credit for what has occurred lies with Lewis, who has been very dedicated, focused and calm in the way in which he has approached his debut.

"In many ways probably his start in Malaysia, the way in which he dealt with the pressure from Felipe Massa at the beginning of the race and then resist great pressure from Kimi Raikkonen at the end was a particular highlight."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McLaren hail Alonso off-track contribution

By Jonathan Noble Thursday, April 26th 2007, 11:00 GMT

McLaren believe that Fernando Alonso's off-track contribution to the team has been as impressive as his on-track efforts this year, as he gears up for his home Grand Prix in Spain as joint-leader of the world championship.

Alonso's strong performances in the first three races of the year mean he is now tied with Kimi Raikkonen and Lewis Hamilton at the head of the title chase.

But despite being impressed with his efforts in the races, McLaren's F1 CEO Martin Whitmarsh believe that it is Alonso's hard work away from the spotlight that has really made a difference this year.

"Fernando's performance is inevitably judged on what has happened on the three Sunday afternoons we have had so far this season, which sees him as joint leader of the drivers' championship," Whitmarsh told the official McLaren website.

"But the reality is his performance from a team perspective is also judged by how he contributes to the team, how he contributes to the technical development of the car, how he helps focus and motivate the organisation.

"He has been tremendously focused on working with the team and helping us to make improvements in what we do."

He added: "Whilst it is difficult to analytically quantify in the way that we seek to do with our engineering developments, there is no doubt that Fernando has made a very significant and worthwhile contribution to our programme.

"It is his honesty, clarity, sincerity. He happens to be an extremely nice human being, but one who is very focused and intent on winning races and world championships.

"It is the way that he goes about that. He quietly but insistently puts across his point of view, which has enormous credibility and credence within the team."

Whitmarsh also believes that Hamilton must take all of the credit for his sensational start to the campaign - which has seen him finish on the podium in all three races so far.

"With Lewis everyone is rightly proud of their achievements," explained Whitmarsh. "But in reality the primary credit for what has occurred lies with Lewis, who has been very dedicated, focused and calm in the way in which he has approached his debut.

"In many ways probably his start in Malaysia, the way in which he dealt with the pressure from Felipe Massa at the beginning of the race and then resist great pressure from Kimi Raikkonen at the end was a particular highlight."

Are you trying to tell us something by posting this. :naughty: Have'nt this been debated over and over, have'nt certain points been clarified, it's starting to sound like a stuck esquival cd put on repeat forever. Don't you guys learn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does anyone want to revise their views, especially the person who said that Alonso is single handedly responsible for pulling Mclaren out of the midfield and for Renault droppping back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So does anyone want to revise their views, especially the person who said that Alonso is single handedly responsible for pulling Mclaren out of the midfield and for Renault droppping back?

I think it's still too early to make a judgement. Fernando is being battered a little at the moment, for sure, but that shouldn't undermine his potential ability to develop a car, nor does it change the fact that a double world champion arriving at a team gives it a lift.

I'm sure that rather than now question Fernando's credibility, most at Mclaren are just revelling in the fact that they have two great drivers. It doesn't really matter where the points come from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's still too early to make a judgement. Fernando is being battered a little at the moment, for sure, but that shouldn't undermine his potential ability to develop a car, nor does it change the fact that a double world champion arriving at a team gives it a lift.

Well look at Mike's claim earlier on for example, he said that if Alonso was driving for Renault today, it would be renault leading the WCC and Mclaren in the midfield where Renault is right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well look at Mike's claim earlier on for example, he said that if Alonso was driving for Renault today, it would be renault leading the WCC and Mclaren in the midfield where Renault is right now.

Point taken, clearly that wouldn't be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...