- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
How can anyone answer that question?Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 18:43Ben out of curiosity. How much did that rule change cost to Mclaren in terms of time?
Despite languishing at the bottom of the constructors’ standings, a position the team last held halfway through the 2017 season, Stella was positive about the pace of the McLaren MCL60 on Sunday.
“I think the most positive element today is that without the issues, Lando would have been a strong contender for points,” he said.
“The pace of the car in the race was almost beyond expectation. I think in the race we see some reward of the work we did over the winter in trying to improve the interaction between the car and the tyres. This was certainly a strong position on Lando’s side.
“But also Oscar actually was having good degradation in the first stint. He overtook cars, it was a very tight race, so we could have been in the points with two cars. That’s the most positive outcome of this event.”
Norris agreed the performance of the McLaren MCL60 was “not as bad as everyone was expecting before the test and before the race.” He said the car’s pace “was actually okay-ish today as well, and I think we could have scored a point today at least. So a shame we had the problems that we did.”
I agree, if you compare Lando's stints to drivers on relative stints (same tyres and age), his lap times were very competitive, obviously with caveat we didn't see a deep stint, 15-16 laps... but even last year against mercs and ferrari's it didn't matter how old the tyres were on the cars in front they continued to pulled after 1-2 laps, this time Lando kept relative or faster pace in 2 occasions with Leclerc and Lewis. I watched the entire onboard for the race, car looked far more balanced in the race than in qualifying conditions. If anything we should be optimistic for the upcoming development...(the way Stella says the car looks 'alive' in the tunnel sounds excitingMostlyeels wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 19:56https://www.racefans.net/2023/03/06/mcl ... ms-stella/
Despite languishing at the bottom of the constructors’ standings, a position the team last held halfway through the 2017 season, Stella was positive about the pace of the McLaren MCL60 on Sunday.
“I think the most positive element today is that without the issues, Lando would have been a strong contender for points,” he said.
“The pace of the car in the race was almost beyond expectation. I think in the race we see some reward of the work we did over the winter in trying to improve the interaction between the car and the tyres. This was certainly a strong position on Lando’s side.
“But also Oscar actually was having good degradation in the first stint. He overtook cars, it was a very tight race, so we could have been in the points with two cars. That’s the most positive outcome of this event.”
Norris agreed the performance of the McLaren MCL60 was “not as bad as everyone was expecting before the test and before the race.” He said the car’s pace “was actually okay-ish today as well, and I think we could have scored a point today at least. So a shame we had the problems that we did.”
)
Yeah the optimism drawn from Lando's stints are unfounded unfortunately.continuum16 wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 17:31Macklaren wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 15:15To those who say that NOR only kept up with HAM/ALO/STR/RUS because he was on fresher rubber....do you think McLaren had 6 sets of new tires?? He was used tires most of the time and one of his new sets was a Medium, which was rubbish on this track. Yes, he could push more since he was on 11-lap stints but the problem also caused performance issues.
...
For clarity and objectivity purposes:
He completed 55 laps:
18 of them on used softs (most likely from qualifying, so max. 3 laps, albeit at least one at full push)
37 on new rubber, various compounds
He was actually not on used rubber most of the race. They had 4 sets of new tires. If the last stint was the one where he kept up with the leaders (I think it was), it was on an 8-lap stint on used softs (presumably not more than 3 laps old when they put them on), compared to ~25 lap stint on hards from those in front.
F1 said publically that it was worth 5 tenths. So if Mclaren are saying it hit them harder than expected, then safe to say it was more than 5 tenths.Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 18:43Ben out of curiosity. How much did that rule change cost to Mclaren in terms of time?
Why does there needs to be someone to blame? A blame culture isn’t a positive one… That doesn’t promote a Team environment nor innovation, you don’t want people wasting time trying to cover their @#$ instead of finding ways to improve the situation.
We're not part of the organization. Someone has to take responsibility. You can't blame Merc for this. These issues are a McLaren short coming. 2nd year in a row that they start the year on the back foot. They need to figure out why these issues are falling through the cracks. Last year they said they had a engineering shortage. They hired more engineers.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑07 Mar 2023, 07:39Why does there needs to be someone to blame? A blame culture isn’t a positive one… That doesn’t promote a Team environment nor innovation, you don’t want people wasting time trying to cover their @#$ instead of finding ways to improve the situation.
Don't really blame anyone. Parts giving way on cars can happen. Unless someone did sonething deliberately to cause it, which I'd be surprised about.
The better question would be "who is responsible then?" And the obvious answer is the team.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑07 Mar 2023, 07:39Why does there needs to be someone to blame? A blame culture isn’t a positive one… That doesn’t promote a Team environment nor innovation, you don’t want people wasting time trying to cover their @#$ instead of finding ways to improve the situation.
