More Questions than Answers

Atlas F1

More Questions than Answers

Roger Horton, Singapore

The start of the 1998 Grand Prix season is now less than two months away. Although that may be still a long way off for avid fans of Formula One, it must seem just like tomorrow for the teams as they work round the clock to prepare for the new season.

This year the rule changes present some unique technical challenges and take the teams into uncharted territory. Practically no one can remember the last time F1 cars ran with anything other than slicks on a dry track.

It has usually been the case that rule changes favor the established bigger budget teams. They have the resources to simulate the technical changes and come up with solutions faster than the "lesser" teams. It's hard for the up and comers to change the established order, though it is nevertheless an opportunity for them to try.

Another crucial area that acts as a form guide is the "continuity test". It is hard enough to win in F1 without the additional burden of developing a new package.

Williams, as always, must start as favorites to retain their constructors title. The organization is an almost a perfect example of a team using brain power to repeatedly win in F1. Frank Williams has often stressed the word "Engineering" in the William's company's name of Williams Grand Prix Engineering and for good reason. The partnership between himself and the hard nosed Patrick Head has mostly produced the fastest car throughout the Nineties.

In tandem with this philosophy, they were assisted by having the continued use of, arguably, the best engine in F1 during the last decade: The Renault V10. However, another team has had the use of the same engine for a number of years to considerably less effect.

It is worth recording just how this long period of dominance came about, and the lessons for all who seek to defeat them.

Williams last "low point" was the 1988 season. After two years at the top in 1986/7, the Honda engine deal was lost to arch rivals McLaren. The team was forced to use the Judd 3.5 litre normally aspirated engine. This was the year that McLaren, with Senna and Prost as drivers, swept to victory in 15 out of 16 races. Honda, despite it being the last year with turbo power, spent whatever was necessary to win. Williams persevered with active suspension for half the season in a desperate attempt to claw back their enormous power deficit, but the under developed system caused the team and the drivers nothing but grief.

The arrival of Renault power in 1989 brought some relief,but how to defeat the juggernaut that was McLaren? The two best drivers in the world, Honda power, Marlboro money, and the considerable management and organizational ability of Ron Dennis.

Simple. Build a faster car!

Now, obviously, isn't that what everyone is trying to do?

But, the Williams team made the conscious decision to invest in the long term programs to make their car faster. They had the budget required, but under Head they also had the team of designers and engineers to master the fast emerging technologies that paid off with speed on the track. They reasoned that if McLaren was forced to play "catch up" then the cracks would start to appear.

So, the first signs of the changing order came in 1991. Williams released their car late. It was fast, but unreliable. While Senna in his McLaren won the first four races, Williams and Mansell had just one second place to their name after Monaco. By mid-season, the Williams was dominant and all long term developments by McLaren were shelved as they made desperate attempts to catch up. McLaren eventually won the 1991 war with both Championships but the writing was on the wall.

In 1992 Williams reintroduced their now perfected Active suspension and swept all before them in both 1992 and 1993. With other technological goodies about to be introduced, the FIA cried enough and banned the so called driver aids, eliminating much of the Williams advantages.

That they have continued to produce a winning "conventional" car has been down to the combination of the aerodynamic brilliance of Adrian Newey and the successful evolution of a great original design and the continuity of the Renault power.

However, 1998 comes with crucial parts of the package missing. The departure of Adrian Newey is not only a net loss to Williams, but a gain for perhaps their major rival in McLaren. The Renault engine has now become a "Mecachrome" and whether they can maintain their engine development throughout the year must be something of a question mark. In their favor, they probably have more miles on their interim 1998 car than any other team. The amount of effort put into this new car almost cost them the 1997 titles. All things considered, they are still this writers pick for the constructors title at least. The drivers title is another matter.

With the FIA further tightening the rules regarding anything resembling "driver aids", the task of anyone beating Williams through the "brain power" technique is even more remote.

So, if Williams deserve favoritism for the constructors title who will be their closest challenger?

On the basis of the "continuity test" it has to be McLaren. Apart from the rule changes common to all teams, their package has only been strengthened by the recruitment of Newey. The Ilmor Mercedes engine was showing signs of consistently providing the most power in the latter half of 1997. Should the Bridgestone prove to be significantly better than the Goodyears and the Ilmor engine reliable, then McLaren could dominate.

Ferrari is the other possible contender for the major team prize. This writer does not have red spectacles, and has never been in love with the "mystic" of Ferrari. If there was a prize for the team that squandered the most money and consistently invented new ways to lose, then they would win nearly every year.

The policy of gradually bringing in proven winners who have a track record of working together is now surely complete. With the combined talents of Ross Brawn and Rory Byrne lately of Benetton, reunited with Schumacher under the overall organizational direction of Todt, they have all the components of a winning team. Put simply, they HAVE to win. If they do not provide Schumacher with a winning car, he has already signaled his intention to seek new pasture. And, who could replace Schumacher?

The weak link in their bid for the constructor's title is undoubtedly Irvine. Or perhaps a fairer comment would be Irvine's ability to handle the Ferrari designed by Byrne for Schumacher's driving style. So far, no other teammate has ever come close, and Irvine has yet to show (Argentina and Suzuka 1997 apart) anything special.

Benetton is still hanging on to its "big four" label but for how much longer? The arrival of Richards from Prodrive to replace Briatore should bring to the team some much needed stability. Unlike Briatore, Richards really understands motor racing and racing drivers. When you are running a F1 team, that can only help.

They have recently invested heavily in a new wind tunnel which, as aerodynamics plays such an important part in overall performance, may yet yield dividends.

During the two "glory years" of 1994 and 1995, Benetton had a combination of Byrne, Brawn, Walkinshaw and Schumacher. The team has clearly lost its way since. One wonders whether the replacement of Alesi and Berger with two relatively inexperienced drivers will pay off in 1998. "Investing in youth" is a great line, but also a recipe for a tough year when teamed together. If in doubt, ask Eddie Jordan.

So who can challenge the top teams and perhaps cause an upset? The best placed on continuity is Stewart. The teams retains all its major players, but that also means its under performing Cosworth Ford engine. Since 1994 when Cosworth surprised the F1 world with its compact, fuel efficient, powerful V8 Zetec-R engine, their V10 engines have disappointed. Although the Stewart team has been as diplomatic as one would expect from someone as professional as Jackie Stewart, he well knows that the team cannot progress until the engine does. It is unlikely to improve enough in 1998 to trouble the top teams.

We are then left with Jordan and Prost as the last of the "top team" hopefuls. Both teams suffer in the continuity test as they have effectively swapped engines. Both teams showed in 1997 that they could challenge for wins on occasions. It would appear to me that on balance Jordan are better placed to gain a permanent top four berth as they have invested their Benson and Hedges money wisely on additional technical resources and on the services of Damon Hill. In a year when teams will have to learn some new lessons fast (with regards to the new tire rules), Hill's development experience will be a great asset.

Arrows remain something of an unknown quantity. Tom Walkinshaw and John Barnard are two of the heaviest hitters in the paddock, and as this will be the first car totally designed by Barnard in an "English environment" for a while. It will be interesting to see if he can break new ground. As previously mentioned, the rule changes give an opportunity for some lateral thought, and at Arrows they also have the technology to exploit this. The engine, as in 1997, remains the weak link.

The rest will make up the numbers.

I would be very happy if the Saubers were to prove me wrong on occasions. In modern F1, using a "second hand" engine is never going to be good enough.

So what of the drivers?

Realistically, I believe that only three teams can offer their drivers the opportunity to mount a Championship challenge. Ferrari, Williams and McLaren. It would be a major surprise should he drive for any other team.

This logically means that only the following drivers are in the frame. Schumacher, Coulthard, Hakkinnen, Villeneuve and Frentzen.

The 1998 tire rules have introduced a huge area of unknowns for the drivers. All the testing feedback so far has shown that a very different driving style is going to be needed to win in 98 and I get the impression that the drivers comments on the new rules rather mirrors their confidence in coping with the new driving styles required.

Michael Schumacher is head and shoulders above any other driver currently racing in F1. With a totally level playing field and equal reliability it would be virtually no contest. He was able to take the 97 World Championship fight down to the wire given his Ferrari's lack performance in relation to the Williams speaks volumes for his ability.

In 1998, he has another and perhaps crucial advantage. Both Williams and McLaren run on the "no number one driver" policy until at least one of their drivers can no longer mathematically win the championship. Schumacher on the other hand can rely totally on Irvine's full support. In a tight points battle, this could be decisive. Given a reasonably competitive and reliable Ferrari, he should take his third title.

Who will challenge him?

Coulthard certainly has the ability to mount a serious challenge, now into his 4th full year in F1 he also has the experience. He has previously been rather error prone with a slightly worrying tendency to look elsewhere for the blame. Like all drivers, he feels the pressure and this was showing in the mid season when his drive was under threat. He has always been slightly on the outer at McLaren and his confidence can't have been helped knowing that if Hill had taken up the McLaren offer,it would have been he who faced the sack!

His teammate Hakkinen is now into his 8th year driving at the top level. The fact that he has just won his first race, and then in somewhat controversial circumstances, means that to win the 6 or 7 required to grab the 1998 title would require a quantum leap in consistency and year-long speed.

In short, the McLaren drivers are almost sure to take enough points away from each other in the first half of the season to damage both their chances. Their ability appears to be so closely matched that neither can lay claim to team leadership support. If they cannot dominate each other, what chance of dominating Schumacher?

The situation in the Williams team by contrast is much more clear cut. In 1997, Villeneuve clearly dominated Frentzen and must do so again. The pressure on Frentzen in 1998 will be enormous. Though as a Williams driver he has a theoretical chance of winning the title, the reality is that he will be battling to keep his drive. Unless he delivers in the first half of the season, he is finished as a "big four" driver... and he knows it. With BMW safely signed up for 2000, Frank no longer needs him as bait. To replace a driver with 8 wins for a driver who wins 1 was clearly a major error which the Williams team is unlikely to repeat. He reminded me of Thierry Boutsen in 1990 as the season progressed last year.

What are the chances of Villeneuve successfully defending his title?

Given that Villeneuve made very heavy weather of winning in 1997, even with such a massive car advantage, does not bode well for 1998 when the playing field is likely to be more levelled. He is unlikely to emerge victorious if he continues to make the same number of driving errors as in last years campaign. Throw in a few wet races and his chances recede further. It could be that his third year in F1 will lift his game. This has to be the case when it comes to driving against Schumacher.

Where else should we look for race winners?

Damon Hill is a proven winner. Provided the Jordan can supply him with a reliable and competitive package, he should score the teams first win -- or even two -- if Gary Anderson and his team has got their sums right. Ralf Schumacher could well benefit from Hill's technical direction and put behind him what was a very disappointing first year. He clearly suffered from several cases of "brain fade" in 1997 and these lapses are unlikely to be forgiven in his second year.

Fisichella is another driver who has shown flashes of promise, though his late season form tapered off somewhat. The form shown by Wurz in just three races was extremely impressive and with his greater experience with the Benetton team, it would not surprise me if he emerges from the '98 season the dominant driver of the two (and perhaps even a race winner). The team may suffer unless the one or both of these drivers show that they can assist the team with its technical direction.

It appears that the sun has finally set on Jean Alesi's "big four" career. Although the family atmosphere at Sauber will make him comfortable, I have a feeling that he must be burdened with thoughts of "what might have been". I have seldom observed a driver with such an abundance of natural talent produce so little in the form of hard results given the quality of the equipment at his disposal.

The tussle between Panis and Trulli in the Prost team will be interesting to watch. Trulli was clearly out of his depth at times in 1997, but given his lack of experience and a team leader, he coped very well and emerged as an extremely exciting prospect attracting the attention of Frank Williams.

Panis showed at times just prior to his accident that he was becoming a challenger for race wins, though just how much was down to Bridgestone was hard to tell.

Salo has an opportunity to show whether he has a future at the top level of Formula One. Driving for Tyrrell has always meant that not too much was expected of him and he has never been exposed to the pressure that he will now face at Arrows, where Tom Walkinshaw will expect him to lead the team. He may well find that Diniz, comfortable and focused within the team, and with the benefit of continuity a tougher teammate to beat than he imagines.

So, as always, prior to the start of the season there are more questions than answers, which of course is the way it should be.

Roll on March the 8th.


Roger Horton
Send comments to: rmhorton@pacific.net.sg