Honda Missing Jacques? - Page 2

steve_r · 3 Feb 2005, 11:18 (Ref:1216345)

Well, it looks like he may have his work cut out with the Sauber this year, it the other thread is to be believed.

neilap · 3 Feb 2005, 15:22 (Ref:1216614)

This is such a pointless story. There is absolutely no good that can come out of it. JV is now at Sauber trying to end his F1 career with some decent races. I dont see anyone picking him up after his stint there. BARH has 4 racers driving and testing their cars. If they cant get enough input from them then they have bigger issues than missing JV.

Ant, was quoted as saying they cant match Renaults pace right now. That to me is a story.

This quote was reportedly taken from Autosport.com.

“Bloody hell they are so fast,” Davidson told autosport.com. “I couldn't keep up with them. I thought they were in the low fuel zone but in fact they were doing 25 lap runs.”

ralf fan · 3 Feb 2005, 16:19 (Ref:1216654)

Hmm.... theyve had their best season...yet they miss Jv? i dont think so...

RWC · 3 Feb 2005, 16:53 (Ref:1216683)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

Honda engineer: "What kind of bang did it make that time Jacques?"

Ooooooooh,man (takes breath),you kill me

Harves · 3 Feb 2005, 23:45 (Ref:1217004)

Straight off the bat, I'm a big JV fan and JB for that matter but I think whom ever the guy is at Honda that was able to stop the pins from falling out of the grenades, should take all the credit for BAR success.... is third considered successful these days?

Is that a can of worms I hear?

Irv the Swerve · 4 Feb 2005, 07:55 (Ref:1217189)

Rubbish article IMO.

RWC · 4 Feb 2005, 13:11 (Ref:1217396)

[QUOTE=Dixie Flatline]I'm a huge fan of JV, but as far as I can recall, nobody before has ever sung his praises in relation to car development.

Furthermore, his different driving style would seem to me to logically work against car development because of his own requirements - QUOTE]

Good points there Dixie.Pretty much what i was thinking but was too lazy to put into words

ASCII Man · 4 Feb 2005, 13:30 (Ref:1217412)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wrex

I have always found this rather funny from the Pro-JV camp. You expect us to give JV credit for success the team had after he was no longer with the team, but free him of any responsibilty of the constant failure every year he was there?

I don't expect anything, really...
Please refrain from generalising, I don't do that to Ferrari/MS fans either, barring the occasional joke here and there...

°patiently waits for Wrex to dig up old quotes°

Glen · 4 Feb 2005, 13:49 (Ref:1217419)

I can't see how it can be denied it when it is patently true - if one is to accept that JV's input was important in the technical directon of BAR, and that by extension the success that they have enjoyed of late is therefore partly thanks to Jacques, one surely has to also accept that the very poor record of that team up to that point must also be in part due to JV. Or is it the case that BAR never listened to Jacques and the car was therefore bad, but once he had left they decided that he might have been right all along and the car became better?

ASCII Man · 4 Feb 2005, 14:11 (Ref:1217436)

Could be...

Jordi · 4 Feb 2005, 14:30 (Ref:1217445)

Off the top of my head, I seem to remember (from reading reports and press and speeds) that Honda had quite a good, driveable engine for 2000, then it kind of went stable, not the most powerful but not the slowest, but breaking down, especially in 2002. In 2003 they stepped it up. The engine was one of the most powerful and by the end of the season BAR were regularly in the points, while still suffering failures. And in 2004 it was probably only behind the Ferrari in terms of power. It still blew up, though...

Bottom line is, only the Honda engineers know how much each driver has devoted his time (or has been made to devote his time) to engine testing.
I could see all putting more effort in 2003, when the car seemed competitive for the first time since maybe 2000.

Glen · 4 Feb 2005, 14:41 (Ref:1217451)

Tell you what, I'd like to know JV's opinion of the Ferrari (Petronas) engine, compared directly against what he knows of the Honda and Renault.

Jordi · 4 Feb 2005, 14:44 (Ref:1217453)

On paper, the Ferrari should be better, innit? It's after all made by the world champions...

steve_r · 4 Feb 2005, 15:23 (Ref:1217486)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordi

On paper, the Ferrari should be better, innit? It's after all made by the world champions...

Yeah on paper. But then the Sauber / Ferrari engines combo hasn't exactly set the world alight, apart from a few decent runs last season. Are they the exact same units as in the red cars?

Ferrari engines didn't exactly do Lola much good, back in the 90's!

Kirk · 4 Feb 2005, 15:38 (Ref:1217494)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

Tell you what, I'd like to know JV's opinion of the Ferrari (Petronas) engine, compared directly against what he knows of the Honda and Renault.

As would I Glen. I think that in late 2003, JV was getting a taste of what was to be in 2004. Reliability as we all know was the big issue but I'd venture to say that that motor, when it stayed in one piece, had the most grunt. Renault would likely be 3rd, but the torque likely impressed JV, especially after the time off.

Glen · 4 Feb 2005, 15:52 (Ref:1217500)

On the Sauber with Ferrari engines point: When one sees how well Renault have been able to go with a properly developed and tested car but with 50 or 60 bhp less than the opposition one can understand how it is possible that Sauber are only able to get so close to Ferrari despite having the same engine. In other words, the additional speed of the Ferraris is down to a much better, more polished and developed, car - and not because they give their engine-customer less power. A quick car is much more than horsepower.

Kirk · 4 Feb 2005, 16:23 (Ref:1217512)

Agreed. Sauber did show some signs of quickness towards the tail end of last year (attributed to their new wind tunnel). I hope they can keep up that momentum.

JohnSSC · 4 Feb 2005, 17:32 (Ref:1217562)

If I may.

I have been reading this thread and the point is now being made that the Sauber last year had the Ferrari engine. The statement is made that it did not exactly set the world on fire. According to Sauber's own website last season, they were using a current iteration Ferrari engine.

Here is why I think it did not (set the world afire): First and foremost the Ferrari engine is made to fit in the Ferrari chassis. Both components are integral to how the car "works." Structural rigidity, etc are all very much part of the equation. If the package allows you to improve cornering speed AND mechanical traction coming out of the corner, then you can take full advantage of whatever the power output of the engine is (a la Renault).

The Sauber chassis is not the same as Ferrari's. Even though the engine "fits" the package is not as efficient. The Sauber therefore could not take full advantage of the Ferrari engine's power and so we did not see the car streaking along. Had we been able to see the same car at the same track with say a Cosssie in it, then we would have seen a marked difference in performance.

Simply dropping a Ferrari engine into a chassis does not guarantee instantaneous competitiveness just as dropping the Toyota into the Jordan will not.

Jordi · 4 Feb 2005, 22:08 (Ref:1217791)

It's always been like that actually. Remember Prost having the Ferrari engine, or Ligier having a Renault.
Which now makes me think: Will we ever see again the two top teams powered by the same engine, as it was in 1995-97?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Aren't we missing something?	macdaddy	ChampCar World Series	15	6 Apr 2005 14:53
Hayden to Honda GP, B Bostrom to US Honda - Confirmed	racer69	Bike Racing	6	16 Sep 2002 04:24
West Surrey Racing, and the Mysterious Case of the Missing Honda bodyshell	Sparky	Touring Car Racing	2	29 Jul 2000 21:42