About FORUMula1.com
F1 and Motorsport Forums
F1 and Motorsport Forums
McLaren Fan wrote:Oh so you mean the current Ferrari crew that were at Benneton in 1994 and cheating then are the same ones who cried the loudest now......ferraribird wrote:Coming out of the era when all the cars were driven by computers!What does that matter? For 1994 all electronic gizmos were banned so there should have been none on any team's car. Thus, having them in some form or other is a big advantage. Launch control ensures a good getaway and traction control is a big help through slower speed corners.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point. 
darwin_dali wrote:I said a while ago in a different thread that there might be some movement coming up re. ECU's if McLaren get penalized for spying.I do not the intricate details of the contract, however, I'll say this anyway. Just dropping the programme could cost a lot of money. McLaren and TAG should not be forced to pick up the bill for this. If the teams and authorities agree to a rule change which basically takes the task away from McLaren and TAG they should be compensated for any development costs and what have you. Personally, I would like to see McLaren wash their hands of the issue in light of the spy scandal.
Sure, there are contracts and pre-manufactured lots. That's no reason not to drop them, change the regs for 2008 in an emergency meeting by unanimous vote (could be interesting how McLaren would vote or maybe they'll have to abstain) and everybody run their own ECU's for one more year.
I hope this will happen so that there won't be constant allegations in the paddock. McLaren may feel the same way and actually offer such a solution in a preemptive move to get out of potential hot water.

aboldero wrote:94 and 95 - much as I remember - Benetton had brilliant Renault engine, absolutelly the best engine in that generation. I don't know if they had the best car, but they were among the best cars for sure - only one competing with them was Williams with - what do you know? - same engine.Would MS be a champ if Ferrari failed to have best car on the track? It actually did take MS, what? 5 years in Ferrari before his first title. And you can't say that at that dark times Ferrari was small team with even smaller budget.
At the end of a day, almost any driver can be really good with gained experience over the years - but what put one among the best is not just his tehnique but his resolve, his killer instincts; he needs to be blood-thirsdy for every point, every victory. And ready to slain his opponents in every possible way.
Because of that same qualities that make champ material also produce SOB kind of guy. Let's face it, much as I don't like FA's human side right now... I never liked MS's as well. Nor did I find Prost, Senna... human qualities appealing.
Would MS be champ without best car??? lest see...
94 and 95 at benetton.. certainly not best car either year..
98 at Ferrari, was in contention... not best car
99 at Ferrari, was in running, until accident put him out for 4 races... not best car..
Ok, MS seemed a bit bloodthirsty (oz 94, Jerez 97), but in 94, Hill said himself he should have waited, and MS turned in at the same point he did every lap.. Jerez 97, ok, not good, but nothing that hasn't been done before.. ie. Senna Japan 89 & 90... but everyone loved Senna for his Win At All Costs approach..
The Difference between MS and FA, i that although MS could be a bit nasty on track at times, he was always 100% supportive of his team, and he was (contrary to popular opinion) a really caring guy off track (Italy 01, marshal died, he found out marshals wife, and made sure she was financially secure for the rest of her life..) you tell me another driver who'd give a moments thought to that...??? He has given hundreds of hours, unpaid to charity and road saftey work throughout his career.. AND he never insulted his engineers and mechanics by basically telling them that he thought they were not giving 100% (FA, offering £700 per race to help him win!!!) MS KNEW they were doing their best, and he rewarded them after the season for their help EVERY YEAR, irrespective of championship position. MS wlked into his garage every morning, and greeted EVERY member of his crew with a smile and handshake BEFORE getting into the car, and thanked them for their efforts before leaving the circuit every night, irrespective of how the day had gone. FA walks into the garage, chats with the engineer, gets in car, and then leaves at the end of the day... that's it.... no recognition of the efforst of his crew..
So please, nikon133, if you're going to try and tar other drivers with FA's brush, please get the facts first..
Lewisfan wrote:I really hate Alonso, Alonso winning for the third year is a big nightmare!!!!!!muhahahahahahahahahahahaha
McLaren Fan wrote:There is no doubt that Alonso is pretty gifted. I don't think he is the fastest driver, however, I think is pretty clued-up. It was seen when be was at Minardi. However, what people are complaining about his who conduct which is entirely legitimate. Alonso has shown himself to be a poor champion, and to be honest, the year's he won the championships he was not the best driver. Alonso is a good driver, worthy to be champion, but he's no Senna.keep taking the medication
pit_babe wrote:ARTICO wrote:Sincerely, I believe that you do not understand much of formula one. Alonso is champion for own proper merits, has beaten all in the trackhe's not done a bad job at scewing up off thetrack either. Time he was out of F1
McLaren Fan wrote:grooooooan......dont start getting technical if you dont know faferraribird wrote:Coming out of the era when all the cars were driven by computers!What does that matter? For 1994 all electronic gizmos were banned so there should have been none on any team's car. Thus, having them in some form or other is a big advantage. Launch control ensures a good getaway and traction control is a big help through slower speed corners.
Phil.T.Ho wrote: grooooooan......dont start getting technical if you dont know faWell, Mr Ho, that's an enlightening contribution to the body of cumulative wisdom displayed on this forum. Your usual sorry contributions, on the other hand, which are inevitably so badly punctuated and misspelled as to be unreadable, represent nothing other than an irritating reason to press the scroll button. I can understand that your lack of expressive skills inevitably requires the artificial prop of such punctuation and spelling travesties, including the liberal use of emoticons, but that does not mean that anyone bothers to read anything you write.
Marco wrote:if my auntie had nuts she would be my uncle!ARTICO wrote:Not, the champion of the world two consecutive seasons ... and what staysOnly due to the fact the competition didn't have either a reliable or competitive enough car. Had Raikkonen and Schumacher had the same reliability as Alonso, he would never have been World Champion.
ArtHowe wrote:what?Phil.T.Ho wrote: grooooooan......dont start getting technical if you dont know faWell, Mr Ho, that's an enlightening contribution to the body of cumulative wisdom displayed on this forum. Your usual sorry contributions, on the other hand, which are inevitably so badly punctuated and misspelled as to be unreadable, represent nothing other than an irritating reason to press the scroll button. I can understand that your lack of expressive skills inevitably requires the artificial prop of such punctuation and spelling travesties, including the liberal use of emoticons, but that does not mean that anyone bothers to read anything you write.
Kimi has done it! The youngest ever F1 champion. A[…]
Swap-in out addons, use only what you really need!