McLaren-Mercedes, 1995-97.

[Pierce89]

So with 160 million in the pot every year and 200 million sat in the bank, why is mercedes going to be worried on f1 spending? If they are going above 160m it cannot be by much.

The 200 million from selling up to Macca would've gone half to buying Brawn, surely Daimler didn't buy BGP and then give the team all the money from selling up to Mclaren. I also disagree that they couldn't go much over 160 million a year. I figure more like 200-225 million.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Is that so Pierce?

Lets have a look shall we?

Now please dont get me started on the chris sylt/pitpass accuracy of reporting, but nontheless these figures are available to the Times and other news media.

http://www.pitpass.com/45291-Mercedes-c ... 40-in-2010

Then you factor in that Mercedes(nee Daimler) own 60% of the team and Aabar investments(those guys throwing cash around at Manchester City) the rest.
So Mercedes exposure to spend is almost half that of what it should be.


Make of it what you will but we are not in the era of spending 220million plus anymore.

Interesting also that Mclaren made a 90 million profit in 2009 and forewent any dividend payout knowing that Mercedes would receive 30 million odd from said payout. Business eh?

[Pierce89]

Is that so Pierce?

Lets have a look shall we?

Now please dont get me started on the chris sylt/pitpass accuracy of reporting, but nontheless these figures are available to the Times and other news media.

http://www.pitpass.com/45291-Mercedes-c ... 40-in-2010

Then you factor in that Mercedes(nee Daimler) own 60% of the team and Aabar investments(those guys throwing cash around at Manchester City) the rest.
So Mercedes exposure to spend is almost half that of what it should be.


Make of it what you will but we are not in the era of spending 220million plus anymore.

Interesting also that Mclaren made a 90 million profit in 2009 and forewent any dividend payout knowing that Mercedes would receive 30 million odd from said payout. Business eh?

Nice reading but even Brawn himself said they've been understaffed. With all the new BIG names, do you honestly belive these numbers would hold true for 2011 forward. I don't.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

It won't be far off pierce.

There were a few hirings and firings last year and this. Team numbers didn't really get beyond the 450 they set themselves.
That was until the assesment was made by Bell that mercedes needed more people to get that extra performance.
Yes it will cost money, but as you can see from 2010 levels... It will be far less than 225 million.

There is no exact correlation between this and McLaren in 1995-1997. Because McLaren didn't have a resource restriction to cap their spend. Nor was there an initiative to cap teams in any way, enforced or otherwise.
They did go out and bag Newey in 97 after all.

I couldn't care if mercedes matches beats or loses out in this comparison. What I want to see is a tangible improvement that will mean mercedes stays in f1

[Raptor22]

How is this discussion on the RRA relevant to McLaren Mercede 95-97 era?

All i see is the same people grandstadign and generally just striking up antagonistic discussion

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

The whole raison' detre of this thread was so as to compare mercedes gp to McLaren during the initial years. This was so as not to sully the mercedes thread.

Points on either side have been made. Fine.

But to compare 1995-97 to 2010-11 is not constructive other than if you look where they finished.
There were less limitations in place back then than there are now, and there are also more competitive teams to beat. You can plot
McLarens chart exactly to that of mercedes in their first 2 seasons...4th and 4th.

And myself and pierce where having a cordial discussion. No sensibilities were harmed in the making of either posts. If yours were(lord knows why) then I apologies for that, but really? Come now, this is a discussions board raptor, not a love fest.

[Raptor22]

I ask a question and somehow it is assumed that sensibilities have been harmed...?

These are really two completely different F1 teams being compared.

McLaren International and its F1 group have been at F1 since the 60's.
Mercedes Gp, formerly known as Honda, formerly known as BAR, Formerly known as Tyrell has also been around for a long time.

the differenc eis continuity of leadership and personell.
McLaren is an older and much more expereinced company because of that very fact.
Mercede Benz GP is in effect a start up concern that had purchased assetts and had some personel carry over.

McllAren switching engine supply harldy compares to Mercedes Benz GP buying out Brawn GP.
To compare you need to go back to he end of 1980 when McLaren International was merged with Project 4 to create the McLaren Int we have today.
It took McLaren till 1984 to get up to winning speed and they did so with an engine they co-designed and subcontracted to Porsche, paid or by TAG.
SO Mercedes GP is effectively now where McLaren was at the end of 1982.

i think if you research it you will see the parallel.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Indeed raptor,

The conversation was a continuation of this. It's not a good comparison by any means.

[Pierce89]

Indeed raptor,

The conversation was a continuation of this. It's not a good comparison by any means.

conversation is conversation. If it's in the wrong thread then oh well.

[Andi76]

The McLaren chassis of those years were not as bad as one might think, in 1994 with the so bad-mouthed Peugeot engine, they still scored eight podiums, even without Ayrton Senna?

The '94 chassis was quite good. Hakkinen was running second at Aida and took second place on the grid at Monaco. This despite the fact that the engine was very much underpowered at the start of the season.

Anything else is purely academic, although the Peugeot engines did seem to lack power from what I remember. Why McLaren didn't give the relationship the time it needed I don't know, but McLaren probably thought Mercedes would give them more commercial opportunities as well as a decent engine. They were right on both counts.

Probably the biggest reason was that Ron Dennis couldn't stand Jean-Pierre Jabouille (who was in charge of the engine department). Also the fact that the engine was very fragile and lacked power didn't exactly help. Long time ago i read somewhere that Dennis got the feeling that Peugeot weren't as serious about their F1 program as he would have wanted. Sure the Peugeot engine developed quite well towards the end of the season (and was very competitive in the following years), but the damage was already done and McLaren were looking elsewhere. And there was mutual interest because Mercedes wanted to get a more competitive partner than what Sauber was.

But on the topic, i still think it was mostly the mediocre McLaren chassis that resulted to poor results in 1995 and 1996. McLaren were kind of lost with their raised nose consept, and didn't get it work until 1997. Then Newey came along and perfected the design.

Quite old thread, but i have to comment it - the McLarens of the years 94, 95 and 96 were horrible for several reasons. McLaren did not use anti-dive and anti-squad geometries. This of course had a big negative impact on their aerodynamics, which was in general inferior to the more advanced aerodynamics of Williams and Benetton. In short words - their aerodynamics were bad and their suspension design, after the ban of active suspension, was also pretty bad. So - McLarens chassis were not good at all in these years and it was Steve Nichols who was responsible for continuing improvements beginning in 1996. Because of ever changing engine suppliers, they also had a big disadvantage in terms of the integration of the engine. The Mercedes engine was actually one average in 1994, pretty good in 1995 and almost closed the gap to Renault in 1996, becoming the best engine with the "F"-version in Barcelona 1997 when they introduced their first Beryllium Version.

[McG]

This thread does not look good for some people Probably a good reminder to sit back and watch F1 unfold rather than making long term assumptions.