The R5 is built

[Glen]

I think you're in denial just a little, Mark Webber. The story you quote is just after the very first shakedown - a test which will reveal nothing. Sine then they have discovered things which are amiss with the design, and which need to be fixed before Melbourne.

"Chief in green Tony Purnell says there will be no quick-fix to the problems.
He told media agencies that he knows 'there are some things that are wrong. There is one aspect where we think there is a gain to be made.' "

Why is your assumption that there is no fault and htis is media twisting, when Purnell says clearly and openly that there is? An evolutionary design should be relatively free of these kinds of problems - this is the kind of thing one might expect with a brand new design.

[Mark Webber]

1st Glen I try not to assume .
But I find no other site with and breaking new on the "Jag's problem " and the F1 racing article is fauge and best . to not report a actual fault ! but other sites report the test when ok (go figure) so NO I'm not in denial at all . As Kicking back said I think Tony Purnell has indicated the Development cost money and other teams have more .As I said early I think some quote's have been taken out of contexts of course if more reports surface this my change my view . But I think you are jumping the gun why base your veiw on one report when many other F1 site's say nothing (at this stage)

[Mark Webber]

this would seem to prove me correct

http://www.pitpass.com/news2/news.cfm?newsid=8364

[Glen]

It is on more than one site - F1i has it (from where i quoted). But they all copy each other anyway. It does hve a direct quote though, which I see no reason to assume is made up. I can't see how they can be that far out of contaxt - was Tony Purnell talking about his new refridgerator or something?

I hope they don't have problems - I'd love to see a competitive and reliable mid-field. But. They have achieved very little since being formed, and have shown themselves prone to poor engineering and design errors. I'm afraid that they simply do not posess the strength and depth in engineering to progress up the grid... hope I'm wrong and all that.

[Mark Webber]

only time will tell Glen .

Yes I have had a quick site run by there all word for word nothing insightful at all execpt for pitpass

I think Tony was refering to development of the car and they have ran with problem with the car that is the context I was refering to . The R5 doing a 83 lap run on Monday so we will soon know but the lommel run had no reported problems .
IF the car is good is only going to benefit the show so figures crossed

[Glen]

In that Pitpass feature he does at least acknowledge how bad they have been in the past - the first step to getting better, but a long way to go. Toyota launch this weekend - Jaguar had better watch out for them... the Sauber looks tidy too, and they have Fisi... and BAR are an improving team with Geoff Willis in his first year proper. A hard year ahead for Jaguar for sure.

[Mark Webber]

Yes it does but I think is a more complete report and it is hardly doom and gloom but quite the opposite if anything

for sure the fight for 5th (WCC) is the going to be great and IMHO the best viewing .
I've already stated the Toyota is the dark horse (IMO) and Jag and BAR will be main rivals again this year .
Sauber well lets see a blue Ferrari testing on a Ferrari test track is not the greatest yard stick lets see how it plays in other teams backyards

[Glen]

Valencia is hardly a Ferrari test track - and if the C23 is indeed a thinly disguised F2003 the mid-field had better watch out. Don't forget, it might have been close but that Ferrari won the championship last year - Jaguar (and many others) would have to make a massive step up to get on that kind of pace.

[DaveOrama]

I reckon if we follow that line then Sauber may get the"F2003", but won't necessarily have hte cash to do much with it. Same thing year in year out for Sauber.

At least Jag, Bar, Toyota etc, have the money to develop a new / evolution car, which should (and I stress should) be at the very least match the F2003. And those teams will have more room to develope - the F2003 may be close or at the end of the developement ladder. Particularly with the new aero / engine rules.