New Cat a Dog or Foxing?

Meroo · 23 Jan 2004, 00:53 (Ref:847696)

Street talk and early test times aren't real positive, even though it's early days. Just hope they are "Foxing".

Anyone have a ray of hope, or is this a lost cause again for 2004?

twig · 23 Jan 2004, 00:57 (Ref:847697)

It would be nice to remember how well the R4 went in testing in early 2003, because that car turned out to be relatively good.

But this car..... it isnt really showing a lot of promise is it?

Is it actually quicker? I spose it is hard to tell, but then again, it is early days.

Is it naturally slow, or has it just been having issues..... or BOTH?

I wonder if Jag will consider doing the same thing as they considered doing in 2002....using the car from the year before.

But then again, testing is testing. But there seems to be issues, and i just hope they have a large enough budget and good enough personnel to fix the issues.

bumpsteer · 23 Jan 2004, 08:48 (Ref:847914)

Is this the next episode of the Jag fiasco?

DriverT · 23 Jan 2004, 09:41 (Ref:847959)

Yes, I think it has some indications of it. The car is 2.5s off the pace from recent testing data. I know you cannot get that much from testing times alone, particularly if you are just "bedding in" an engine, but I think the writing is on the wall. Hey I'm a Jaguar fan and eternally optimistic ( with a sense of humour

) but I cannot help but be dismayed at this.

BootsOntheSide · 23 Jan 2004, 10:04 (Ref:847996)

Jaguar seemed to have a lot of teething problems in 2002, and they got the car competitive by the end of that season, although the fluke 4th in Australia soemwhat flattered them. Webber is renowned for his development skill, so perhaps something can be done. Using the 2003 chassis in the interim seems like a smart move, as reliability will be a big deal in the early races.

DaveOrama · 23 Jan 2004, 21:38 (Ref:848728)

Thank god they do have MW - he really can develop the car.
Who actually designed this car, and how much input did Malcolm Oastler have ?

MO was very good when Reynard were a going concern, but hasn't done well in F1. Look at the older BAR cars (not very good) and if this is his first go at a Jag.....

Thank god for MW.

dangeradam · 23 Jan 2004, 22:41 (Ref:848780)

you never can really read much into testing, one team will run a qualifying setup for a trophy time and another team may be testing electrics.

Mark Webber · 24 Jan 2004, 02:59 (Ref:848954)

way to early to tell . lets wait and see

Mark Webber · 24 Jan 2004, 03:10 (Ref:848959)

the silly thing is Mark has only completed a hand full of laps in the R5 as Klien has been using the car the most .
Mark has done the lion share of laps in the R4 . IF and I mean IF their is a concren with the R5 Mark should be in it to sort it out .

So lets just wait and see

nafe! · 24 Jan 2004, 03:51 (Ref:848972)

Definately off the pace...with both Klien and Webber producing laps well below that of there competition.

It was never a good omen to have the car brake down at its launch...

senna12 · 24 Jan 2004, 04:20 (Ref:848981)

I would be questioning the wind tunnel data right about now. Just how state of the art is their facility, anyway? The Jaguar site is no help in that regard. It certainly appears that something fundamental is amiss. The last several cars have been dogs from the start.

Mark Webber · 24 Jan 2004, 04:31 (Ref:848984)

its about understanding the windtunnel as well . as they can differ

Scott75 · 24 Jan 2004, 06:23 (Ref:849032)

I wouldn't be worried just yet as Webber has only driven about 10 laps in it so far. Klein has done all the testing. Klein doing all the testing in the new car and not Webber is very strange though. I find that very puzzling as usually the number 1 driver would start with it. It says 2 things to me.
A)Having Klein do the testing 1st is just bedding things in and Webber in the R4 still trying different things for the R5. As he would have a better understanding for development and would be able to give better feedback.
B)The R5 is not very good and Webber is setting up the R4 to use in the first half of the year until the R5 is up to speed.
I hope (A) is right and not (B).

jetsetter · 24 Jan 2004, 11:59 (Ref:849240)

It's not looking good but it is early & all we can hope for is that they are either foxing or they find some improvements & fast.

Wrex · 24 Jan 2004, 12:16 (Ref:849250)

IMO, the car is a dog so far. They are'nt holding back, its just slow.

However that does'nt mean it's terminal. A problem with the car does'nt have to be a time and money consuming fix. But it sells more papers to use words like "major aerodynamic problem" when in reality, the people writing the articles have no more information than we do.

Until Melbourne, I wont be backing anyone, or writing them off.

Mark Webber · 24 Jan 2004, 21:18 (Ref:849593)

I suppose on the up side Mark was doing 1.17's IN THE R4 .
so there maybe so underlying good here .

But I've notice that the press are ready to kill off Jag at the drop of the hat