What do you mean how much to cover? How much performance?Darth-Piekus wrote:I would say not super 4th clear but overall the 4th best team. So how much must we cover to be able to go for the big prize and how much more so we can dominate?
I agree with you conpletely. As the football coach José Mourinho says: “when the fans no longer boo at you after you draw or lose, you are no longer a top team”.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑03 Nov 2019, 23:33I don’t think that it is wrong to be critical of the team... The fact that you may be a fan doesn’t meant that you have to be blind to the areas of improvement / opportunity that are there for the team, sometimes unrelated to even the car concept.
The team needs to improve their pit stops, need to continue to develop their strategy among others... Recognizing that this are issues that have to be addressed if they really want to join the top 3 at some point is key.
I’m amazed at the improvement of the team from year on year in regards to their performance, still a long way to go and happy to watch their journey... But, they need to address those nagging issues that on paper, should be easier to address than a change of concept of the car
Agreed. Think the next step should be to try to beat the straggler from the top 6 now and again.Ground Effect wrote: ↑03 Nov 2019, 23:11That’s a near impossible target in the short to medium term. But I think they’ll need to make a net gain of 1.2-1.5secs with the way things currently stand, to challenge the top 3Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑03 Nov 2019, 23:00So question. How much must we cover in order to be able to challenge for the championship against the Mercedes?
I thought mclaren had one of the best chassis but why are still struggling to get at least a podium?That’s a near impossible target in the short to medium term. But I think they’ll need to make a net gain of 1.2-1.5secs with the way things currently stand, to challenge the top 3
Engine... but they are doing better than the works team so you may have something there with the chassisgokarter wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 04:17I thought mclaren had one of the best chassis but why are still struggling to get at least a podium?That’s a near impossible target in the short to medium term. But I think they’ll need to make a net gain of 1.2-1.5secs with the way things currently stand, to challenge the top 3
With the financial regulations and payout structure changing post 2020/21, I guess it's possible to run a good 4th/5th placed customer team (McL, RP) in a cost neutral way. How much they front-load expenses next year (before 175M cap comes in) will be a good indicator if they really want to be a top 3 team. In comparison to RP which I think will shoot for a sustainable 4/5th place.
Pretty sure none of those 2 teams or the teams below them are at 175 M.nzjrs wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 12:05With the financial regulations and payout structure changing post 2020/21, I guess it's possible to run a good 4th/5th placed customer team (McL, RP) in a cost neutral way. How much they front-load expenses next year (before 175M cap comes in) will be a good indicator if they really want to be a top 3 team. In comparison to RP which I think will shoot for a sustainable 4/5th place.
It's not a PU problem. Its the chassis.subcritical71 wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 04:24Engine... but they are doing better than the works team so you may have something there with the chassisgokarter wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 04:17I thought mclaren had one of the best chassis but why are still struggling to get at least a podium?That’s a near impossible target in the short to medium term. But I think they’ll need to make a net gain of 1.2-1.5secs with the way things currently stand, to challenge the top 3
Yes, but I wonder what the sustainable equilibrium is for a customer team once the cost cap is in, and the money re-distribution is a bit more equal. 2020 will say a lot about MCLs intentions I believe.diffuser wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 12:18Pretty sure none of those 2 teams or the teams below them are at 175 M.nzjrs wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 12:05With the financial regulations and payout structure changing post 2020/21, I guess it's possible to run a good 4th/5th placed customer team (McL, RP) in a cost neutral way. How much they front-load expenses next year (before 175M cap comes in) will be a good indicator if they really want to be a top 3 team. In comparison to RP which I think will shoot for a sustainable 4/5th place.
Carlos also had damage to the front of the bottom, the video showed an uneven clearance under the chassis.SmallSoldier wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 00:48Damage to both cars in the same area
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201911 ... 1117ec.jpg
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Because of Mercedes engine switch ?RonDennis wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 15:31Petrobras is officially gone.
https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-t ... e-results/
nzjrs wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 12:43Yes, but I wonder what the sustainable equilibrium is for a customer team once the cost cap is in, and the money re-distribution is a bit more equal. 2020 will say a lot about MCLs intentions I believe.diffuser wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 12:18Pretty sure none of those 2 teams or the teams below them are at 175 M.nzjrs wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 12:05
With the financial regulations and payout structure changing post 2020/21, I guess it's possible to run a good 4th/5th placed customer team (McL, RP) in a cost neutral way. How much they front-load expenses next year (before 175M cap comes in) will be a good indicator if they really want to be a top 3 team. In comparison to RP which I think will shoot for a sustainable 4/5th place.
