kals wrote: ↑5 years ago
The MP4/8 was a good car but the clear third fastest in 1993. The only reason it did well was thanks to Senna. Considering the resources of McLaren that’s a pretty poor show. More often than not in 1993, Senna was overtaken and beaten by Schumacher and McLaren were outperformed by the works Ford team. Aesthetics and feelings shouldn’t matter in this ranking.
If the 1992 MP4/7 is going to rank low, then the MP4/8 should be just above in the list.
But Aesthetics and Feelings have been shaping the list so far. There is no way the Loti or the Tolemans are better cars than any of the McLarens technically, but aesthetics and feelings have counted and they are ranked higher than they should (can't argue with Black n Gold JPS colors, now can you? )
But back on the main point, the MP4/8 was only beaten by the Benetton because they had a better Ford engine with 40+ HP advantage (and an up & coming Schumacher). It's a better car than the MP4/7 because it handled well and Senna exploited it to that end. Andretti could not compete in F1 in 1993 (partly due to circumstances) and this skews the results for the team. Had Berger continued on, I'm sure the results would have been stronger. Even with only Senna's results in 1993, they still finished 2nd in WCC points. It was a good car and deserves to be higher than the Lotus or Toleman.
@PTRacer I'm good with the list in your post above. Let's move on to the meat of the McLaren might.
XcraigX wrote: ↑5 years agoBut Aesthetics and Feelings have been shaping the list so far. There is no way the Loti or the Tolemans are better cars than any of the McLarens technically, but aesthetics and feelings have counted and they are ranked higher than they should (can't argue with Black n Gold JPS colors, now can you? )
I actually prefer the yellow Camel over the Black and Gold JPS. Nostalgia, aesthetics and feelings have no real bearing because rose tinted glasses aren't an objective way to compare and contrast.
XcraigX wrote: ↑5 years agoBut back on the main point, the MP4/8 was only beaten by the Benetton because they had a better Ford engine with 40+ HP advantage (and an up & coming Schumacher). It's a better car than the MP4/7 because it handled well and Senna exploited it to that end. Andretti could not compete in F1 in 1993 (partly due to circumstances) and this skews the results for the team. Had Berger continued on, I'm sure the results would have been stronger. Even with only Senna's results in 1993, they still finished 2nd in WCC points. It was a good car and deserves to be higher than the Lotus or Toleman.
Fair point on Berger. Same goes for Hakkinen in the final three races of the year. I disagree with Benetton having such an advantage. Benetton actually had to use the Ford engines as they were given to them. As the works team they were given preference developments and upgrades, but could not tinker or tweak the engines. Because McLaren were a customer, they were allowed to do almost whatever they wanted with the engines. So they could develop the engine around the chassis. That was a source of great frustration to Benetton and it's drivers, who felt they were at a disadvantage to McLaren.
kals wrote: ↑5 years ago
Benetton actually had to use the Ford engines as they were given to them. As the works team they were given preference developments and upgrades, but could not tinker or tweak the engines. Because McLaren were a customer, they were allowed to do almost whatever they wanted with the engines. So they could develop the engine around the chassis. That was a source of great frustration to Benetton and it's drivers, who felt they were at a disadvantage to McLaren.
Interesting point. I've not heard that perspective before.
However, I read that there was an actual clause in the Benetton contract that gave them the top spec Ford engine and McLaren had to use the previous evolution. I would imagine this gap closed toward the end of the year as Benetton got a revised engine and McLaren got the spec Benetton used earlier in the year. But also the results started getting better for McLaren toward the end of the year (Senna won the last two races of '93).
This is sorta confirmed by Wikipedia (if you trust it) that McLaren started with the HBE7 and Benetton with the HBA7. They ended the year both on the HBA8 (after the British GP for McLaren). And it states only a 20 HP difference between the E and A.
Do you have anything that leads us to believe McLaren modified their own Ford engines?
kals wrote: ↑5 years ago
Benetton actually had to use the Ford engines as they were given to them. As the works team they were given preference developments and upgrades, but could not tinker or tweak the engines. Because McLaren were a customer, they were allowed to do almost whatever they wanted with the engines. So they could develop the engine around the chassis. That was a source of great frustration to Benetton and it's drivers, who felt they were at a disadvantage to McLaren.
Interesting point. I've not heard that perspective before.
However, I read that there was an actual clause in the Benetton contract that gave them the top spec Ford engine and McLaren had to use the previous evolution. I would imagine this gap closed toward the end of the year as Benetton got a revised engine and McLaren got the spec Benetton used earlier in the year. But also the results started getting better for McLaren toward the end of the year (Senna won the last two races of '93).
This is sorta confirmed by Wikipedia (if you trust it) that McLaren started with the HBE7 and Benetton with the HBA7. They ended the year both on the HBA8 (after the British GP for McLaren). And it states only a 20 HP difference between the E and A.
Do you have anything that leads us to believe McLaren modified their own Ford engines?
The highlighted section is correct and as I'd written. Benetton were the works team, McLaren were a Ford customer.
In response your question, the information came from Benetton and Allan McNish back in 1993. I was a frequent visitor to Silverstone and went to many test days. During these sessions I spent time talking with team individuals and drivers.
XcraigX wrote: ↑5 years ago
Do you have anything that leads us to believe McLaren modified their own Ford engines?
It was mostly on the electronics front they modified the engines. Benetton had to use Ford supplied ECUs while Mclaren was free to toy around with their own. Also there was nothing preventing a team from modifying engines in those days as long as it didn't fall out of the engine regs.
XcraigX wrote: ↑5 years ago
However, I read that there was an actual clause in the Benetton contract that gave them the top spec Ford engine and McLaren had to use the previous evolution.
The highlighted section is correct and as I'd written. Benetton were the works team, McLaren were a Ford customer.
The point I was getting at, that you may be missing, is that McLaren had the 4th best engine in 1993, but still finished 2nd in the WCC. It was a good car and the results support it. So "feels", plus aesthetics (design nice-ity), plus data (results) makes the MP4/8 higher rated than the Lotus and much higher rated than the MP4/7. I think the list is almost right at this time (still think it goes above 98T).
XcraigX wrote: ↑5 years agoThe point I was getting at, that you may be missing, is that McLaren had the 4th best engine in 1993, but still finished 2nd in the WCC. It was a good car and the results support it. So "feels", plus aesthetics (design nice-ity), plus data (results) makes the MP4/8 higher rated than the Lotus and much higher rated than the MP4/7. I think the list is almost right at this time (still think it goes above 98T).
I get what you’re saying, we just don’t agree. McLaren’s only true competition that year was Benetton, a team who had much fewer resources. Yes McLaren won more races at 5-1 but we should remember that the majority of those big results were thanks Senna’s brilliance plus a lot of circumstance... which I’d already written about. Luck more than judgement would be a better way of putting it. Benetton from Monaco through to Portugal were more often than not outperforming McLaren.
I’m not saying the car was bad, but when you look at resources versus output and then factor in how results were achieved, it is a disappointing car versus others on the list.
Looking only at the results instead of how the results were achieved misses important context. And as for aesthetics, well that would place the 1993 car high on the list and the 1992 at the bottom.
The problem with ranking the 93 car is that there is difficulty measuring the discrepancy of how much of the car's results was down to Senna's driving. Had you thrown Prost or Schumacher in the other MP4/8, their performance might give an indication of this. Regarding the engine, it still has to be part of the consideration, even if the chassis was excellent, and the customer engine was at a disadvantage at times, that's part of the game in F1. If it wasn't, there would be spec engines.
Sorry delayed posting my last comment. The aura and the results kind of don't leave much choice at the top. The argument could be made of the talent driving it playing a role, but barring Schlesser's mistake at Monza the car was just too good.
RealTeeceezy wrote: ↑5 years agoRegarding the engine, it still has to be part of the consideration, even if the chassis was excellent, and the customer engine was at a disadvantage at times, that's part of the game in F1. If it wasn't, there would be spec engines.
Yes, the engine, the chassis, reliability, the electronics, the car's significance to his career etc., can all have a bearing on the result if you want it to.
Everso Biggyballies wrote: ↑5 years ago
It would be strange for it not to be there I think, in all honesty, given its 1988 results with both Prost and Senna.
XcraigX wrote: ↑5 years agoOf course, the MP4/4 has to be at the top.
Michkov wrote: ↑5 years ago
Was the MP4/4s position ever in question?
Well, it seemed obvious from the beginning until John posted this earlier in the thread, which made me think someone would question it:
John wrote: ↑5 years ago
If we're just going to go by outright wins and points we might as well stick the 1988 car on the top of the list and be done with it.
-------------------------------
BEFORE we talk about the FW16, let's just talk about the McLarens. If we assume the 1988 car is at the top, then we only have the championship-winning 1989, 1990 and 1991 cars left to go. Would you want to put them above all of the Lotuses, the Tolemans?
)
2019 GTP Accuracy Champion 
