Current McLaren

Arguably one of the big teams in Formula One but lately they don't seem to be able to get the basics right.
Some of their strategy and decisions in the last few years has left more than a few observers scratching their heads.

Just a few for starters:

• Leaving Kimi out on a badly flat-spotted tyre, resulting in it exploding on the last lap.
• Leaving Hamilton out on tyres so badly worn they were down to the canvas; Bridgestone themselves demanded that McLaren bring him in and McLaren refused, keeping him out for a few more laps. That decision arguably cost Hamilton the first rookie WDC and is one which will haunt him and McLaren for the rest of their days.
• Not sending Button and Hamilton out to get banker laps in during Q1.
• Sending Hamilton out on used tyres in Q3, with rain forecast, meaning it would be impossible to set a fast lap time on his second attempt on new tyres.

Their major updates seem to send them further down the grid, instead of challenging for pole positions and wins. As the season progresses they tend to get worse before getting better, by which time it is generally too late.

It's often said of them "write them off at your peril", but is this necessarily true?

The last time they won the WCC was in 1998 and their last WDC was 2008, before that 1999.
Their days of regularly winning championships seem to be well and truly behind them.

It's all well and good coming up with reasons why they haven't won championships.
The fact remains though, they have won just one WDC in the last 12 years.

So where to now for McLaren?

(I wrote this in rather a hurry so I will flesh it out when I have more time.)

 

[Brogan]

Looks like McLaren screwed up again in Q3 (at the Hockenheimring) by sending both drivers out too late to cross the line and get one last lap in before the session ended.

 

[racecub]

Why do they do this????

 

[RickD]

Well, looks like McLaren might have sorted their car out, now we just need a couple of dry races to see where they are at. Funny how there hasn't been any replies ont his thread since Saturday though.

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101464

McLaren are introducing more upgrades at Hungary and again at following races. Again they seem to be following the trend of the past few seasons; start relatively strongly, fall behind, develop aggressively to catch up but by the time they catch up the season ends and they're back to square one.

 

[Brogan]

I said the same here a few weeks ago: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/mclaren.3217/page-53#post-140864

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

Brogan - Hadn't seen that
Given that this approach hasn't got them any closer to winning either title since 2008, surely someone at McLaren must be questioning whether it's time to rethink this particular design/development philosophy? Surely it would be better to start aggressively and then work on minor tweaks, instead of practically overhauling the car halfway through as they have done with the nose changes.

 

[Brogan]

Indeed, you would think so.

Little and often would seem to be the way, rather than a huge glut of upgrades mid way through the season.

 

[The Pits]

There would have been a chunk of time assigned to the re design of the Jack....

 

[The Artist.....]

Herein lies the philosophy of McLaren - start the season with a fast car, build a lead in the championship, allow the competitors to catch up, then have a massive upgrade mid-season and pull away again.... However, this has not been possible in recent years - although as many have stated, had it not been for Maldo-gate, Hamilton would have been in the lead of the championship leaving Valencia.....

But this is not a new phenomenon - this has been going on at McLaren since the 1980s... Look at the 1991 campaign, for instance... Started the season with a fantastic car, won the first 4 races, then Williams overtook them, and only towards the end of the season was the car on top again....

 

[canis]

I think the problem with this season was that they got caught designing the car around something they thought was legal but it turned out it wasn't. This has forced a change in design thought around the nose, chasis ride height and how they get the most basic air flows to the rear of the car. In order to make this change has needed a whole rethink of the air flows around the car and how they are achieved such that it was a major update or nothing for them which has cost them time in the development race...

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

Canada 2012 - LH: "are you sure the other guys are pitting again?" Team: "yes, we're sure".

Hungary 2012 - Team: "we're switching to Plan B Jenson". JB: "are you sure?". Team "yes, we're sure"

 

[teabagyokel]

The Canada one is explained by the assumption that the other two guys did want to finish on the podium.

 

[racecub]

I was intrigued to hear Sam Michael credit Lewis' win to qualifying and pitstops. I agree being on pole was hugely beneficial given the limited overtaking...but the pitstops?? Didnt one of the stops nearly cost him the lead and was only saved by Lotus having an equally bad one? I'd have thought Lewis' tyre management and control of the race had more to do with the win than the pitstops?
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101654

 

[Hamberg]

Lewis got the pole so that credit is to him. They also had a storming second stop and brought him in at a very good point. You cannot discount the teams input here.

I think what really saved Lewis was track, the fact that DRS is pretty much useless, the fact that your tyres drop off in turbulent air and it's a struggle to get within 0.5 seconds.

So what's important? Getting pole, keeping at the front and making sure you stay ahead after the pit stops. So yes it was a joint effort.

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

The Canada one is explained by the assumption that the other two guys did want to finish on the podium.

Oh absolutely, but don't forget Perez and Grosjean showed that a 1-stop in Canada was entirely possible and had Hamilton not banged in quali laps after his second stop then Grosjean could have won the race (he only finished 4-secs behind Hamilton). So, on the face of it at least, it appeared to be a gamble despite them telling Hamilton how 'sure' they were. The point i'm making really is therer seems to be more hit-and-miss calls from McLaren lately, and in general a lack of consistency. Although the pit-stop issues seem to have been ironed out.

 

[racecub]

Nearly ironed out. They had 3 good ones and 2 bad ones. Lewis' first one nearly cost him the lead. Only saved by lotus doing a bad one.

 

[Bill Boddy]

The time that the McLaren drivers spent in the pit lane for their stops were (in seconds):

Button 19.408 19.083 20.355
Hamilton 20.436 19.059

Incidentally the timing for Grosjean's first stop was 22.151 seconds, against Raikonnen's 20.87 seconds, both SLOWER than Hamilton's.

There were sixteen other times of 19 seconds in the race. If you call that "bad" then maybe you should be out there showing how to do it properly.

The official FIA timing on http://184.106.145.74/fia-f1/f1-2012/hun-f1-2012-docs.htm#

 

[racecub]

Here's what Lewis said when asked "Good pitstops?"

Lewis Hamilton:
The first one wasn't spectacular but the last one was very, very quick. We had a problem in the first pit stop, I think with the left rear, but otherwise we didn't lose too much time there. But the second pit stop was fantastic.


So no, perhaps 'Bad' was the wrong word to use, I should have said problematic. Luckily Lotus' was also problematic. I was looking at the stationary time of the car rather than the whole pitlane entry and exit time,and it was plus 4seconds, as opposed to sub three seconds which the fastest times have been. That one/two seconds is all he was ahead of Grosjean so slight though the problem was it could have been very costly.
I imagine Lewis greater experience over Grosjean at getting in and out of the pits quickly could have helped counter the slow stop.

 

[The Pits]

Jensons pit stop where they got the front left wrong made more of a difference, even though this is not really obvious from the pit lane timings, it was obvious an amount of time was lost, which may have got him in front of Alonso otherwise. Maybe.

 

[Viscount]

Just watched F1 journalist Peter Windsor's post German GP show, and he claims that during the German GP a senior person at McLaren was heard saying that if Hamilton left they'd consider Romain Grosjean and Pastor Maldonado as replacements.