diffuser wrote:Macklaren wrote: My interpretation of what Arai was saying is, on a track like Hungry that takes the PU power out of the equation, if you're not doing well, it's on the car(as a whole). So if McLaren had a better chassis/aero they would have finished higher up in Quali, it wasn't cause of a lack of grunt. RBR do have a better chassis/aero and they did fare better.
On the other hand the Hungry Honda PU doesn't have enough grunt to get you where you want to be on a track like SPA.
If that is indeed what Arai intended to say, then he is either delusional or has a very short memory. Both cars had technical problems in qualifying (granted neither was really the engine 's fault - for a change) that crippled them at critical times and led to the utter embarrassment of Alonso pushing his car into the pits. Qualifying was no standard to measure the chassis by... The final result, while somewhat flattering, proved that the car had top-10 speed despite a weak engine.
YEah not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that.... The point I was trying make was that the only thing that makes sense to me with regards to what Arai was trying to say is ...at a track like hungry the PU wasn't the limiting factor in lap time, the chassis/aero was.
With regards to the final results, take the points and forget it. They don't mean anything. They we're 13th after the 3ird corner and I don't think they could have qualified higher than that/
True, it was mostly (if not exclusively) luck that got them there, and as much as you tell me that luck acted against them on a number of occasions(to which I don't agree), they can't count on luck if their objective is to get a world title.
For me Spa will be the real thermometer, the performance they achieve there will probably carry on to the rest of the season.
