BMW looking good...

Sodemo · 18 Jan 2003, 18:42 (Ref:478343)

It has to be said that the new P83 is looking like a 'mean machine'. Its reputably very powerful, and has done several race distances without any problems.

Not like last year with the P82 when they had tens of blow - ups pre season testing.

Logrence · 19 Jan 2003, 02:42 (Ref:478702)

I'd like to see a few blow-ups - it means they're pushing it as hard as possible

twig · 19 Jan 2003, 09:29 (Ref:478807)

How much more improved do you think the Illmor and Ferrari engines will be?

Do you think the P82 could have been such a force they could race it in 2003 like the F2001 was?

Sodemo · 19 Jan 2003, 13:53 (Ref:478989)

Well I suppose they can just "turn up the wick" on the P83 and get more power / less reliablity like they did in 2001 with their 'monster' of an engine.

neilap · 19 Jan 2003, 14:28 (Ref:479008)

If JPM and the media are to be believed the BMW last year made "about 900 hp"! If that is the case I dont think a power increase should be the main focus. Their motor still is not up to championship standards by todays standards. BMW would have to have had a perfect season last year to beat MS. They still have a lot of work to do. However I would think it is easier to work on one thing, reliability, as opposed to Honda who has to improve power and reliability.

NiceGuyEddie · 19 Jan 2003, 16:19 (Ref:479068)

The BMW have proved its worth in qualifying. Both in the hands of JPM and Ralf it was a worthy opponent to the F2002. Races were lost purely on tyrewear which seemed to cut the Williams short on the larger distance. Somehow McLaren didnt have that kind of trouble.

Logrence · 19 Jan 2003, 16:36 (Ref:479089)

Purely on tyre wear?

BMW.Williams lost out to Ferrari simply because Ferrari were better

Mr V · 19 Jan 2003, 16:39 (Ref:479096)

Quote:

Originally posted by Logrence
I'd like to see a few blow-ups - it means they're pushing it as hard as possible

are you saying that Ferrari weren't pushing as hard as possible last year, esp with Michaels's car?

Mr V · 19 Jan 2003, 16:42 (Ref:479100)

Quote:

Originally posted by Logrence
Purely on tyre wear?

BMW.Williams lost out to Ferrari simply because Ferrari were better

Ferrari were better, of course, however, having the tyre designed for one team (and as Max Mosley put it, around one driver) is the biggest contributing factor there is.

NiceGuyEddie · 19 Jan 2003, 16:43 (Ref:479102)

Quote:

Originally posted by Logrence
Purely on tyre wear?

BMW.Williams lost out to Ferrari simply because Ferrari were better

Perhaps, but the Williams' weren't that much behind in sheer speed. On raceday they simply couldnt maintain that pace and Ferrari could. And I believe that that is down to tyrewear and the characteristic of the back of the car. Sure, there will be other nuances to it, but tyrewear is -as far as a i can judge it- one of the bigger factors.

Logrence · 19 Jan 2003, 16:46 (Ref:479106)

Being able to maintain that pace IS your speed. Like it or not, tyres are part of the package.

Logrence · 19 Jan 2003, 16:47 (Ref:479108)

Quote:

Originally posted by mr v
are you saying that Ferrari weren't pushing as hard as possible last year, esp with Michaels's car?

They were - they had quite a few blow-ups on the private test tracks and in practice sessions, but they were red hot where it mattered.

Mr V · 19 Jan 2003, 16:49 (Ref:479110)

Quote:

Originally posted by Logrence
Being able to maintain that pace IS your speed. Like it or not, tyres are part of the package.

So, is it easier to maintain your speed with tyres that are shot to bits or when they are in good condition?

I think i know what your saying, that the Ferrari handled its tyres better, and if thats what your saying then yes, your right, but it's easier to make the tyres handle better/last longer when the team is "in bed" with the tyre manufacturer.

NiceGuyEddie · 19 Jan 2003, 16:51 (Ref:479113)

Quote:

Originally posted by Logrence
Being able to maintain that pace IS your speed. Like it or not, tyres are part of the package.

And Im saying that the tyres are the weakest link. So why disagree?

Logrence · 19 Jan 2003, 16:52 (Ref:479114)

If the car can't handle the tyres then it has no speed.

If Einstein doesn't have a pencil and bit of paper, it doesn't mean he isn't a genius, I'll admit, but no-one gets to see any of it.

NiceGuyEddie · 19 Jan 2003, 16:57 (Ref:479117)

The BMW certainly wasn't the cause for Williams' lack of pace in the race and this thread is about BMW. So if anyone asks whether or not the BMW is a good engine, Im likely to say it is. In fact, it may well be the most powerful one. The fact that the tyres cut Williams short isn't very relevant in this discussion, nor is the fact that the backend of the car had the tendency to eat its reartyres.

Sodemo · 19 Jan 2003, 16:57 (Ref:479118)

Well lets hope that Michelin can produce a decent tyre for us all.

neilap · 19 Jan 2003, 17:29 (Ref:479149)

BMW had the most powerful but not most reliable motor. If they are able to replicate what Ferrari did last season then I will say the have the best!

Most of the teams are looking good right now because not many of them are pushing the cars to the limit yet. Wait till the middle of February.

avsfan733 · 19 Jan 2003, 18:31 (Ref:479213)

neilap i think you nailed it!

no team is going to push an push and end up with a blown engine or a crash at the launch. We need to wait for theseason to start to really see where all of the teams are at (I mean at the track not back at the factory as in the threat from the manufacturers)

Sharky · 20 Jan 2003, 02:53 (Ref:479633)

I don't think that the engine is what's keeping JPM, Ralf, Frank and Patrick turning in their beds. True, the engine wasn't that reliable but if you take into account the reliability leap that they made from 2001 to 2002 then a similar progress will pretty much solve Williams engine concerns.

What williams needs is a "pole vault" leap in terms of chassis as last year's chassis was close to disastrous. And although Michelin tyres were no match for the Ferrari's.....eh....I mean, the bridgestones

, they were particularly awful in the williams chassis and the one to blame was the chassis itself. Remember Magny Cours where Williams used a 2 stop strategy and went out with a hard compound while Mclaren went out with a one stop strategy and medium compound but while the Mclarens almost won the race the Williams couldn't do 10 laps without eating up the tyres and making the car undrivable in the process.

I would go as far as to say that power-wise the BMW was a great deal better than the Ferrari engine but there's no use having a hell of an engine if you're going to use it in a dreadful chassis.

Mr V · 20 Jan 2003, 11:13 (Ref:479826)

Quote:

Originally posted by Sharky

I would go as far as to say that power-wise the BMW was a great deal better than the Ferrari engine but there's no use having a hell of an engine if you're going to use it in a dreadful chassis.

Good point, although an Engine that doesn't blow up once in a race (michaels Ferrari engine) is better, no matter if it's slightly lacking on horse power.

We all ways hear about the BMW being the fastest, but is it as "driveable" as the Ferrari?

neilap · 20 Jan 2003, 14:28 (Ref:479992)

Its for these reasons that I say BMW's concerns may not be on power but instead releability. This year should be a turning point for Williams. BMW seem to be getting frustrated with Williams as much as when BMW was the main reason for the team not finishing races. Ferraris performance was proof IMO that their motor was not at its limit. They knew the tires and chassis mated so well that all they needed was a fast start to the race so they could cruise around while everyone else slid all over the track.

Williams will need to get in really well with Mitchelin if they want to compete with Ferrari. Williams MUST produce an excellent chassis this year. It will have to be better than Ferrari just to come close to matching it over a race distance.

Sharky · 20 Jan 2003, 14:50 (Ref:480004)

I would guess that the BMW engine is drivable. I haven't heard any comments regarding that issue from the drivers. Besides, the poles at different circuits (including winding circuits such as Monaco) would suggest that the engine is drivable.

And indeed, BMW is quite upset. I recall an interview with Berger when BMW and Williams announced their partnership for the upcoming season and he said that they had a 3 year plan which meant that during the 3rd year they should be fighting for the championship. And while the first 2 years went according to plan the third was way off. That's why BMW threatened Williams with pulling out and making their own team. Because if the had wanted to become champions in 5-6 years they might as well had started their own team.

neilap · 20 Jan 2003, 16:09 (Ref:480073)

It sounds to me like BMW is has no long term plans in F1. After they win a title it seems they will take another hiatus.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Being a good development driver vs a good "racer"?	Mattracer	Formula One	9	7 Jun 2004 11:07
Craig Pollock - Good Salesman (Talker) ! or Good Owner??	sgjb	ChampCar World Series	21	29 Jul 2003 07:50
Have a good one :)	marcus	IRL Indycar Series	8	26 Dec 2002 07:00
Good Karter=Good car racer?????	Morcilman	Kart Racing	14	15 Oct 2002 21:20
A Good End to a Good Year	Liz	ChampCar World Series	5	6 Nov 2001 09:29