McLaren or Renault? [merged] - Page 3

f1manoz · 30 Sep 2005, 10:52 (Ref:1420769)

McLaren should win the WCC. The car seems to be reliable now so they'll wrap it up nicely, probably with a couple of 1-2s in the end just to prove a point.

Pity they've wasted Kimi's chance with so much unreliability.

TheNewBob · 30 Sep 2005, 14:32 (Ref:1420969)

Is reliability coming to them now, just as it's too late? Kimi's kept it in the race for a few now, hasn't he...?

Mr V · 6 Oct 2005, 18:12 (Ref:1425596)

Thought i'd bring this back to the front page

Speed vs reliability, who will take it?

Knowlesy · 6 Oct 2005, 18:16 (Ref:1425602)

both please.

Mr V · 6 Oct 2005, 18:19 (Ref:1425607)

You have both McLaren will take it.

Glen · 7 Oct 2005, 08:29 (Ref:1426123)

The distinctive Mercedes engine note could be heard in practice - "bang" would be a good way to describe the noise, followed by the crackle and pop of the flames. McLaren it seems just will not back off, and yet again they are paying the price. They could (presumably) knock a big chunk of performance off the car and get the reliability they need, and still have a car as quick as the Renaults - then they just duke it out with equal performance and rely on their supposedly superior drivers (according to Ron). Oversimplification, sure - but the point is they patently have not cracked this reliability issue.

Knowlesy · 7 Oct 2005, 11:43 (Ref:1426302)

For many years now.

Hein · 10 Oct 2005, 10:42 (Ref:1429406)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knowlesy

Yes Dutton, I was exaggerating.

I would truthfully say Michaels chances of finishing third are about 10%.

You can up that to about 20%

Hein · 10 Oct 2005, 10:43 (Ref:1429407)

See I have been "promoted" to a racer! Sweet.....

Mr V · 10 Oct 2005, 11:13 (Ref:1429450)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

McLaren it seems just will not back off, and yet again they are paying the price. They could (presumably) knock a big chunk of performance off the car and get the reliability they need, and still have a car as quick as the Renaults -

Well, the McLarn can still win from the back, dispite an engine penalty.

It's going to be too close to call now imo. [joke] Here's to JPM qualifying early then the rain lashing down the minute he come's in

[/joke]

Glen · 10 Oct 2005, 12:04 (Ref:1429517)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr V

Well, the McLarn can still win from the back, dispite an engine penalty.

Well, yea - but it isn't as if that would be their first choice! Just because they CAN win from the back, doesn't mean they always do - they are substantially more likely to score a 1-2 if the drivers don't have to battle through the field.

My bet is still on Renault.

Heebeegeetee · 10 Oct 2005, 18:05 (Ref:1429875)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

The distinctive Mercedes engine note could be heard in practice - "bang" would be a good way to describe the noise, followed by the crackle and pop of the flames. McLaren it seems just will not back off, and yet again they are paying the price. They could (presumably) knock a big chunk of performance off the car and get the reliability they need, and still have a car as quick as the Renaults - then they just duke it out with equal performance and rely on their supposedly superior drivers (according to Ron). Oversimplification, sure - but the point is they patently have not cracked this reliability issue.

Very good point indeed, I like it. Both Kimi and JPM are way better than Fisi, so yeah, McLaren could afford to peg it back a bit. Trouble is, Ron probably doesn't want to see his drivers embarrassed by Fernando, if it came to a straight fight.

Louis B. · 10 Oct 2005, 18:19 (Ref:1429883)

Who said JV was of no assistance helping Renault winning a championship?

It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds at the last race. I take it that McLaren would win the title if they were to end up with a tie in the points (Mc having won more GPs).

Kicking-back · 10 Oct 2005, 18:29 (Ref:1429893)

Yes they would

Knowlesy · 10 Oct 2005, 20:36 (Ref:1430046)

Well, I would have put my house on McLaren for long periods of this season.

However, I have a sneaking suspicion Renault will nab this one all of a sudden.

Incidentally, I was reading today that Kimi had a slightly too short top gear yesterday. Combined with his hard charging race on a tough circuit for engines, it wouldn't surprise me entirely if his engine went pop at some point, although I guess it will probably let go on Friday or Saturday if it does! The Merc engines lead a charmed life in races it seems!

Louis B. · 10 Oct 2005, 20:59 (Ref:1430080)

If I were a Mclaren engineer I could not refrain thinking after Suzuka that starting ten places back with a fresh engine is not so bad after all.

Knowlesy · 10 Oct 2005, 21:05 (Ref:1430089)

Yes, but it can go either way.

All it takes is a Sauber driver to start going mad for no apparent reason and one of your cars is in the boonies.

It is best to start up front.

Louis B. · 10 Oct 2005, 21:39 (Ref:1430144)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knowlesy

Yes, but it can go either way.

All it takes is a Sauber driver to start going mad for no apparent reason and one of your cars is in the boonies.

It is best to start up front.

I guess this confirms that you read what I wrote in your "driver of the race -Suzuka" thread. Actually, I take back what I wrote at post #85 of same.

Glen · 11 Oct 2005, 08:09 (Ref:1430459)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis B.

Who said JV was of no assistance helping Renault winning a championship?

Nice one Louis. Very good.
__

I think they might change Kimi's engine anyway - nice wide Tilke-ring circuit... he can surely get back ten places. Was Juan on a new engine? - it didn't do many miles in the race!

Kicking-back · 11 Oct 2005, 14:42 (Ref:1430771)

JPM wasn't on a new engine, he had his Brazil one in Japan

Glen · 11 Oct 2005, 16:52 (Ref:1430899)

Cheers for that k-b. Oddly, they seem to let go when they're new anyway - perhaps Juan should stick with that one!

Serously, it would not suprise me to see them do a precautionary change (for either or both drivers) and hope they can race their way back from there.

Dutton · 11 Oct 2005, 17:51 (Ref:1430953)

Was it JPM that had that engine change prior to Practice 1 in the other race (Brazil IIRC), and subsequently received no penalty?

Why not just do that again?

Kicking-back · 11 Oct 2005, 18:17 (Ref:1430985)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutton

Was it JPM that had that engine change prior to Practice 1 in the other race (Brazil IIRC), and subsequently received no penalty?

Why not just do that again?

That was at Spa, and the car hadn't actually run.

It had a new engine, which checks showed was suspect.

JPM will have a new engine at Shanghai anyway, and Kimi couldn't change his without penalty.

Dutton · 11 Oct 2005, 18:25 (Ref:1430995)

I realise the car hadn't run, that is what made the change possible withouyt penalty. However, beyond that, it was no penalty because the engine that was beingreplaced was in itself new and thus there was no "wear" gain?

Kicking-back · 11 Oct 2005, 18:27 (Ref:1430998)

Exactly.

Car arrives with new engine.

Some checks show it may have a fault.

Out it comes and in goes another new one.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Alonso at McLaren in 07!(merged)	Mystery	Formula One	230	28 Dec 2005 04:17
McLaren: not very good (merged)	SetikX	Formula One	49	1 May 2004 12:13
Forever McLaren, DC And Scotland! (merged)	DC Highlander	Formula One	83	10 Jun 2002 12:47
Mclaren/Mercedes (Merged)	Glen	Formula One	7	4 Nov 2001 11:11
McLaren switch to Michelin tyres (Merged)	davebreen	Formula One	35	1 Nov 2001 17:47