The MP4/18A is supposed that it'll b the most powerful car in F1 with 930HP (B.M.W. 920HP,Ferrari 900HP) & it'll have a new aerodynamic package...but the F-2003 won't b slower then the F-2002....which of the cars do u think it'll b better in terms of reliability?

 

Tough call!

The F2002 while reliable was never EVER pushed to its limit. They where always so far ahead of the pack that they would crank the revs down to a safer limit and cruise onto the podium. The only time they where behind the McLaren they couldn't really strech its legs. So ultimately the F2002 was a reliable car but maybe not as reliable as we would first believe. I wonder if Ferrari ever even learnt anything from that experience. How do you fix whats not broke? What direction do you push for if there is no problem?

From what I gather McLaren have always had a superb chasis with only a lack of engine power and reliability.

The FW25 entire package really sucks. Engine, aero and chasis; I dont even see it as a worthy alternative to the FW24 forget about a sucessor.

I predicted Kimis won last race and won a sizeable wad of cash as a result but I am not sure at all about the next 3 sets of races. There is too much of an if factor.

Will Kimi just sit back or will he be totally dominant now that he had his first win?
How good is the F2003-GA really?
Will the MP4-18A be a leap from the MP4-17D or just a mild sucessor?
Will Williams fix all their problems between one race?


I dont see Williams as a contendor for the next 2 races (but you never know). Take the first two races, both JPM and baby S both had their chances to fight back up the pack if they had the package but they didn't. Both are competitive drivers so its not even a question of lack of motivation.

I really hope McLaren win the championship this year but I remain skeptical. 2004 will be a different story. They WILL be the dominant team. Brand new wind tunnel facility combnied with even more input from Mercedes to Limor will ensure them the title in 2004. Kimi needs to stay with McLaren for good. Like everyone is saying I see a certain resemblance to a certain country man of his

I would like to see what happens to DC at the end of this season he has always been a very very good driver cool and calm under pressure, it just looks like he does not have the desire to win. Nearly everything is setup for him. He has the skill, experience and backing of the one of the best teams for a very very long time now.

BTW Gea any idea what kind of HP the F2003-GA is running? I thought the 2002 ran somewhere around 890-900 ponies.

Only 6 hours till we get a clue of whats going to happen on Sunday time to get some sleep!

 

LOL dude u wrote a novel!:p .
..2 answer your question 'bout the F-2003GA...I've heard that it'll have 900HP....what u said 'bout the 890-900HP of the 2002 model I believe it is kinda not true....ppl always tend 2 "inflate" specs...from what I heard the F-2002 which is used now has 'bout 890HP (bein' an evolution of last year's model) so they're goin' 4 reliability & very good aerodynamics not power.....anyway..I'm lookin' forward 2 the MP4/18A....it'll b a beast even compared 2 last year's Williams FW-24....19.700rpm & 930HP baby!...that plus a whole new chassis (I also read it'll have a revolutionary front wing)

 

If you consider the facts that the Ferrari's of MS and RB are usually the fastest cars at any given race (Bar none), I would suspect who ever is saying the Beemer and Merc specs are higher is probably deluding themselves. I would go on to suspect that Ferrari is sandbagging their hp stats, i.e., low-balling their hp figures. If the Mercs had better chasis and more powerful engines then I would expect them to be consistently 0.5 sec faster tha the Ferraris. As it stands the Ferraris are still at least 0.5 sec faster than the Beemers and Mercs. If what we here out of Marinello re the specs of the GA being true or accurate, then Kimi's podiums in position 1 and 2 will be relegated to third for the rest of the season. Don't forget, all of MS DNFs or non podium appearances so far have been the result of race incidents, also don't forget that he was not all that slow but rather significantly faster than the guys that ended up on the podium of the first three races.

Finally, the SanMarino GP is unofficially the start of the season(First European race). MS performance at this race will bear out the performance of last years Ferrari.

 

I agree with Goggles... Mercedes Benz/McLaren haven't "Ruled" since 1999, and one or two races this year does not represent a trend, IMO. It appears that Ferrari could race with last year's car all season long and still sweep most of the races.

The ease with which the 2003 GA cruised to victory Sunday in Barcelona (rumored on reduced power for reliability its first time out) indicates that the pretenders have more work cut out for them.

Williams might as well scrap their FW25 and revert to last year's car. And McLaren's mid pack showing demonstrates they are leagues behind, if not worse... Renault shows indications of having leaped past them. The new McLaren will either have to be brilliant out of the box, or it will be a long season for Raikkonen/Coulthard.

 

I hadn't heard this. I was under the impression that the inital reliablity issue had more to do with unusual suspension pick-up points causing odd vibrations that were causing motor problems - not so much the motor itself (I wouldn't think that detuning would be a fix for a supsension-induced problem).

I believe, however, the MP4-18A will be competitive, primarily becasue it appears the McLarens work much better on Michelins than the Williams do (who I agree are screwed this year). Also, the MP4-17D hasn't exactly been a slouch so far this season (Kimi was quickest in one of the Saturday practice sessions at Spain). I think that Couthard would have likely finished fourth if Trulli hadn't punted him off at the second turn, maybe even third.

I think where McLaren really trails Ferrari isn't with the car but with their conservative strategy. At almost all of the races this year they've been running much heavier fuel loads than everyone else during qualifying - which leaves them vulnerable to being caught up in accidents (as was the case yesterday), and probably contributed to Kimi's troubles in final qualifying. It's got to be difficult to try and set a competitive qualifying time when your car is considerably heavier with fuel than everyone else.

Cheers, BT

 

Not the weekend McLaren was hoping for. DC's poor performance in qualifying was probably partly due to his last-minute switch to the T car, which had KR's settings.

The times for the first qualifying session were faster than for the second. Comparing the Q1 times for this year to the qualifying times for 2002 we find: MS 0.806 sec slower in 2003; RS 1.132 sec slower in 2003, DC only 0.398 sec slower in 2003. So one could argue that of the three, the MP4-17D is still looking pretty good.

The Bridgestones did not last well on the 2003 Ferraris. Both drivers had problems maintaining pace as the tires wore, with MS getting slower as his fuel load lightened. The Michelins on Alonso's car were more consistent, and McLaren is no doubt hoping to see this pattern repeated in Austria.

Monaco will be tactically interesting. As someone said yesterday, starting positions are going to be very important because there is virtually no chance of overtaking as DC found out last year. Getting stuck behind a slow car for the first stint would be a poor predictor for a good finish. I can imagine very fast Q1 times, with the teams trying to postpone as long as possible the decision about how much fuel to put in for Q2 and the start, but optimising the fuel load is probably complicated enough to keep the team computers humming for hours.

 

Agreed, that was my understanding too. However, the Ferrari drivers had said during the weekend that the team wanted to see the 2003GA off to a good start by "cruising" as much as possible to ensure they finished the race. To me that meant laying off stressing the whole package, not just the new suspension.

Yes, but the conservative strategy is the default position (and the accident gambles) one adopts when you must compensate for lack of power (even a little bit) by decreasing the overall time to distance by reducing the number of off-track visits to the pits. Ferrari has sufficient power that they can decide on a 1-stop, 2-stop, 3+stop strategy, almost at will. Renault is showing remarkable progress in this regard, as well. Ferrari can shred all the tires they want... as long as they are 20-24 seconds ahead before pitting, they retain the lead (reach for the No-Dose.) IMO, McLaren is using the conservative strategy because they have few other options, at the moment.

I'm not a big Ferrari fan, but I do hand it to them. The old days of fragile, hit or miss Ferraris (pre Schumacher) are over, after decades in which their performance never quite lived up to their image and hype. And they appear to be relentlessly consistent with each car replacement. Some had predicted 2003 might be the year we see the ***** in the armor, but the Barcelona performance doesn't hint at any weakness. Time will tell. They will fall from grace eventually. They all do.

In contrast, both Williams and McLaren have been spotty in this regard... It's a crap shoot whether the new McLaren will be as good as the old (sic Williams). The issue of whether it will be better comes after. No one has posited that analogy for the Ferrari, unless it was wishful thinking.

It's amazing how this element ebbs and flows over the years... there have been times in the past when McLaren (mid-late 80s) and Williams (late 80s-early 90s) were nearly bullet-proof for years, and no one even paid attention---even half serious attention---to Ferrari.

 

Sometimes, I think that Ferrari has been running 3-stop strategies in the more recent races due to the accident problems that MS had in the early races when he started further down the grid. I think Brawn decided that it's better to start from the front and go from there rather than risking trouble from guys trying to make up places at the first corner. Although, at some tracks where the pit-lane is excessivly long the 3-stop strategy might not work as well.

In the mid-80's when McLaren first came to the forefront with Lauda and Prost, the McLaren's routinely qualified in the third and fourth rows of the grid. But back then they didn't seem to have the number of first and second corner incidents that we have now.

Cheers, BT

 

I think Mclaren ought to be very worried about whether they will end up third in points this year...forget about Williams... Renault is on a charge...read DC comments lately...we need that new car NOW and it better be reliable and damn quick.


p.s. Even with the rule changes the first two corners are still the best places to pass these days...hence all the action...look at Wilson...what a riot

 

Latest info on the MP4/18A:

"The MP4-18, to air publicly with a maiden testing run at Circuit Paul Ricard next Wednesday (May 21), has been delayed until at least mid-season so it can be moulded into an 'Anti-Schumi' rocket.

Its technical director and chief aerodynamicist Adrian Newey refuses to give much away about his revolutionary silver design but hints a 'lower nose than any other car' and a new ground-effect aero system.

'It has two rolling rear wings which bring additional down force,' the Englishman further hinted.

Team tester Alex Wurz will spearhead the car's development while Kimi and David plug away with a 2002-McLaren that has, according to Coulthard, 'reached the end' of its potential.

Kimi Raikkonen, 23, adds: 'I have already seen a few pictures of the [new] car and it looks incredibly fast.'

Furthermore, under the impressive silver and black skin lies a brand-new engine penned by Mercedes-Ilmor boss Mario Illien.

The FO110P, designed specifically for the MP4-18A, is rumoured to push the barriers with a ground-breaking 19,700 rpm and 930 bhp.

Woking chief Ron Dennis said the winning, but relatively unconvincing, racing debut of Ferrari's new F2003-GA in Spain 'bodes well' for McLaren's car. "