BETTER THAN WE THOUGHT IT WAS? The Story of the McLaren MP4/8 (1993)
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 04. 2024
- I don't know if it's Senna tax, Mandela Effect, or anything like "The FW15C was utterly god-tier", but there's a thing that the McLaren MP4/8 was a bucket of bolts that had to be dragged to the top step of a podium by Senna.
But was it?
Because it had most, if not all of the things the Williams had, and a driver that could lob it around, which is how those cars needed to be driven. It was actually really good around tighter tracks.
Power tracks? Yeah... It wasn't that good... It needed more power.
So what was this thing then? Let's have a look.
Enjoy! And remember to like and subscribe for more!
AFFILIATES:
F1 Store: f1.pxf.io/n19my9
Mick's Garage: www.micksgarage.com/home?ref=...
-----
Wikipedia images used under the following CC Licenses:
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Flickr images used under the following CC Licenses:
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
------
Business enquiries: amsimracing@gmail.com
Patreon: www.patreon.com/aidanmillward
Discord: / discord
Instagram: amillward67
Twitter: Aidan_Millward
Steam: AdmiralLaWind
----
CPU: Ryzen 5 5600 @3.7gHz
Motherboard: MSI B450 Mortar Micro ATX
RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x 8gb @ 3000mHz
GPU: nVidia GeForce RTX 3060
Editing Software: Sony Vegas 14 Steam Edition
Wheel: Simucube 2 Pro - Cube Controls Formula Pro Rim/DIY Ascher D Shape Rim
Pedals: Heusinkveld Sprints - Sport
Chinese GP and Miami GP stuff on the F1 Store! Get it while it's lukewarm! Use affiliate link in description and I get some Greggs money!
Hi Aiden, very good synopsis by you of the MP4/8. I was fortunate to be the engineer that integrated the same system into the Footwork car, we bought the system from McL for the '93 season. The active systems at this time were very different, the Willams was "fully active", by that it was purely a hydraulic ram, goverened by sensors that dicated the ride height, bumps, everthing! The McL system was similar, inputs regarding ride height, etc, but the McL system used coil springs to support the car, but had active spring seats that raised/lowered each corner and also passive ARB. the McL system acted/responded to a 5Hz input, meaning that all the bumps, curbs, etc were managed by the springs, this was also linked into "circuit dependancy" where the car knew where it was on the circuit at any time, dump the arse on the straights, lower the car through corners, etc. The biggest difference between the Williams and the McL systems were that the Williams system was "entirely active". The ride height sensors, everything had a hystrisis, meaning a delay, from sensor input, raise/lower, and this made the car very spooky to drive. Where as the McL system would have responded to the driver inputs passive/immediately.
Fantastic comment. Love the insight!
This explains a lot about Patrese's lack of 'comfort' with the active system, but also interesting to know that the McLaren system had DRS also, I've only previously heard it to be mentioned at Williams & Benetton in 93. It was a somewhat crazy investment by Footwork in '93 though, all things considered regarding the driver aids bans.
I appreciated the 787B jab. Fun fact - the 1991 LeMans win was the only win that car ever achieved anywhere. It never won in its domestic series.
*sad brap brap noises*
@@CyanRooper There was an active suspension prototype of it though than ran briefly in the JSPC. Hard to find info on it…
@@CyanRooper There was also a 767 that ran a Cosworth in the JSPC in 1992.
@@palm92 That sounds kinda wrong. That would be like replacing the V12 in a Ferrari with an LS V8.
@@CyanRooper It was even less successful than the other privateer 767Bs and 787s.
I’ve long appreciated the Frank Williams opinion that no one factor makes a championship worthy car. He described it as being 25% chassis, 25% engine, 25% tyres (as in tyre war era specifically) and 25% driver. Having a big advantage in one of those areas isn’t enough to overcome weakness in any of the other 3.
I tend to agree with that assessment.
Well, McLaren was adamant that it was their best car to date. Senna apparently loved driving it. They just needed more engine power.
I think its just one of those times that you make a great job but someone else just makes a better one by the slightest of margins.
I do think 1993 was a far closer season than we realize.
it wasn't far closer, mclaren had a great car, Williams did better, Williams and Prost walked to the world title despite Senna's best efforts
Agreed. Prost only won the title with 2 races to go. If only it had rained at the real power circuits where Williams were untouchable, it could have been a different story.
@@detectivepayne3773 I'd recommend you actually watch the 1993 season
I wonder what the '94 season would've looked like if McLaren made the deal with Lamborghini instead of Peugeot... That engine may not have been much more reliable than the Peugeot, but I wonder if Senna would have stayed with McLaren if Ron had agreed to use Lambo... Oh well, we'll never know.
@@MrSkeleton131I've watched the 93 season. Only Prosts mistakes and poor wet weather driving was the only reason it got to Estoril. Plus he would've won if in Monza if it werent for the late engine failure. So yeah the Williams was far clear of the Mclaren.
Spot on. People tend to merge 92 and 93 into 1 year where everything was "the same", which hurts the mp4/8. As if the Malboro backed McLaren would see the tech advancements and go "well, there's nothing we can do about that"
Yeah the MP4/7 was a pretty middling chassis.
I believe Ron Dennis has said that out of all the cars, he is proudest of the MP4/8.
Honda. The Power of Running for the Door.
Pulling out then running an F1 prototype throughout 1993 as a side project.
@@palm92 there’s pics of it on wiki commons.
@@AidanMillward TY.
What else did they need to prove? At this point, they were looking at entering CART for 94.
@@palm92 well, to be fair, that prototype was something that Honda engineers (from the mass production side, not the racing side) decided to build in their own time, with money given to them for side projects to boost morale. It wasn't an actual attempt for Honda to re-enter the sport.
Honda's actual attempt to re-enter F1 as a constructor came in '98-'99, with the RA099. Aidan has an excellent video about it.
Nimble chassis with electronics that easily rivalled Williams' by the end of the year, all it lacked was the sheer horsepower. Senna was brilliant, no question about that but people get too romantic about the idea that he could drag anything anywhere, he had a fantastic little car at his disposal.
Calling it fantastic is overstatement of the century.
@@theiceman7590 Senna loved it himself when he first tested it.
@@McLarenMercedes Well Frentzen called the Jordan EJ11 the best car he ever drove. Doesnt mean much.
Having watched "a team a season with McLaren" at the end of 1993 had a general idea that McLaren had active suspension and engine modes to play with.
Fantastic documentary. DTS by comparison shows how far we have fallen
Brazilians like to say that Senna in 93 made miracles in a shitty car, me I study deeper and this video makes me happy because it really was a great car
Senna Widows someone referred to them as in a previous video on stuff he did.
@@AidanMillward it's a common say in Portuguese or Brazil as well in general... 🤣 Hardcore Santos FC fans are known as Pele's widows since 1970s... But Senna is sacred, only Piquet fans say anything unholy about Ayrton
Brazilians take the term fan-boy to extreme levels.
As an brazilian F1 fan, here's an advice: always take these Senna widows stories with a grain of salt.
Although Senna was a special talent, there's so much myth and absurd narratives around him that I consider him overrated in general. The typical Senna widow barely knows anything about Formula 1, all they know are twisted narratives to always portray Senna as a hero and to inflate his status in some way or another.
The Mclaren was nowhere near the Williams
i recall sitting in a post race meeting at what was TAG Electronics at the time. Udo Zucker was very pleased with the publicity we were getting. He recalls while watching the race, after Senna had got a stoppingly good start, the commentator said that it appeared Mclaren was winning the electronics war. Udo was very pleased about this, as he told us that during the start of the race, Senna wasnt even using traction control. He added, "our Traction Control was Ayrton Senna".
Cant recall what race that was, may even have been the 7A in 92 to be fair, but an anecdote worth telling all the same.
If McLaren had started Hakkinen in the other car for the whole season instead of Andretti, I think it would have been a much closer battle with Williams and between the 2 McLarens themselves but Senna had 4 retirements to Prost's 1 (Prost and Senna each had one non-scoring finish). Hill also had 4 retirements and one non-points score, same as Senna and he was in his first full year in the sport, which speaks again as to the quality of the car that he finished only 4 points off Senna in the Championship. The MP4/8 was a very good car, but the FW15C was more reliable over the season, with fewer driver errors too - Hakkinen outqualified Senna at Portugal and then crashed from a very promising position in the race and his brakes failed in Australia and Andretti crashed out of quite a few races, including at Kyalami and Interlagos.
Senna had 6 retirements but you say 4 because of wikipedia.
And the Williams drivers made tons of mistakes. Prost spun in Brazil, made a meal in Donington, stalled in Monaco. The only reason Senna led the championship after Monaco was because of errors from the Williams drivers. Senna only made an error in Monza.
Except Andretti was Senna's replacement. The expectation was Andretti & Hakkinen, only later did Senna's capriciousness & $1m per race keep him in Hakkinen's seat. So not that McLaren kept Andretti on, he was absolutely supposed to be a leading driver. Nobody expected him to be as poor as he was.
That Jonathan Frakes' Beyond Belief cameo caught me off-guard. I remember when I was nee high watching that series on television back in early 2000s.Creeps the heck out of me every single time.
Relevant to the 787 propaganda tho.
My absolute favourite McLaren. I’ve got a photo of me standing next to one during a secret late night tour of the MTC 🤫
Was it a secret tour or did you just break in 🤔
The MP4/8 is in the Automobilista 2 Formula Hi-tech pack if you want to try driving it in a sim.
I don't own AMS2. I probably should get it at some point but since everything I 'need' is in AC and rF2 I might as well carry on using those.
@@AidanMillward, you definitely should. They even have the manual diffuser stall programmed in for the '93 cars. They also have the option to add a programmable "second brake" that functions correctly on the MP4-12.
ASR made a mod for it in rf2 but then there became an official one
ASR also made on for AC and it is probably their best work yet
@@adammodan8030 ah ASR.
Had a meltdown when a CZcams mate of mine said the cars were too fast and shouldn’t be able to take copse flat out at 190mph and threatened him.
But changed it when I said the same thing. 🤔
@@AidanMillward thats an interesting moment, but not that surprising considering half of their cars handle completely differently to the other half
Steve matchett said that Benetton couldn’t run the traction control system that McLaren used because FORD wouldn’t allow the spark plug activated unit that McLaren used due to reliability concerns and McLaren was warned that using the system would incur them with charges for motors that were damaged. McLaren said they would take the chance and foot the repair bill for any motors that blew up
McLaren could do whatever they wanted with their engines because they were paying for them. I believe they ran their own TAG engine management system on their Ford HBs in 93.
@@ElectoneGuyyes. They didn’t receive the air valve engine until later in the year
1993 was the first season I followed F1 religiously. A few thoughts:
1) Most definitely, I think the consensus at the time was that the McLaren was the second best car on the grid primarily hampered by the customer Ford engine. McLaren was one of only four teams to start the season with active suspension (Williams, Ferrari and Lotus were the other ones, later joined by Benetton).
2) McLaren clearly wasn't helped by having Michael Andretti in the second car. Andretti was overall poorly prepared for the more technically demanding F1 cars. When Hakkinen took over his seat, you could immediately see that the MP4/8 was indeed competitive. It's quite possible that Hakkinen could have won a race in that car had he started the season with them.
3) I would argue that Williams didn't have the strongest driver pairing in 1993. Prost in 1993 was somewhat past his peak. From Portugal onwards, he was certainly taking the foot off the gas and even before that, he didn't really have any stand out performances. Likewise, Hill was an inexperienced rookie. Prost relaxing at the end of the year and Hill just being a rookie allowed Senna and Schumacher to overcome the inherent deficits of their cars.
4) I think Ron Dennis really bungled the engine supplier situation and that ultimately really cost them any chance at the championship. If he wasn't able to convince Honda to stay another year and if the Renault engines weren't available due to Williams/Elf contract, perhaps a deal with Mugen to at least keep the Honda V10 or V12 engine for another year would have been the better choice.
Patrese could have stayed for 93, but he left for with Benetton because Prost had signed in 92 and he had no clue Mansell would leave. He was offered the ride when Mansell left, but respected his Benetton contract. I'm wondering if Riccardo could have taken the bull by the horns and out-driven Prost in a team he had been with for 5 seasons.
@@ElectoneGuy No chance! Patrese had a decent season in 91, but in 92, he was thoroughly schooled by Mansell and likewise by Schumacher in 93 at Benetton.
@@dpause10 If having a "decent" season means finishing second in the championship, then that's an understatement. Riccardo was "schooled" in 92 because he had difficulty adapting his driving style to the active suspension. He thoroughly schooled Nigel for the first half of 91 with the passive car.
It might've been the third best car on the grid. Schumacher made a couple of blunders too.
@@ElectoneGuy I said that Patrese had a decent season in 91! He was quite a bit closer to Mansell in the passive suspension Williams.
Fascinating story on that McLaren. Adian, you gotta do a deep dive on the Toyota Eagle Mk. III. Maybe the best prototype that Toyota ever made and dominated IMSA in 1992 and 93.
I love the RA106 for its different front wing design approach (other teams went with the stacked front wing). It was such an elegant design visually.
Also I think it had the nicest BAR livery out of all of them
i think i read in Richard Williams "The Death of Ayrton Senna" many years ago, that Senna likened the 93 car to his nimble old FF2000 cars and was more than happy to throw it into corners
This car had no chance against williams. Senna absolutely drove the hell out of it. However it is an absolutely gorgeous car, one of the prettiest ever.
And thats part of the myth of the Donington lap from Senna... Williams setup was so extreme that didt work fine in wet weather conditions, noticeable the whole year, and Senna has been beated previously in wet tracks... Spain 1991 for example (and that Williams was not active at all).
Williams was still better in the wet. Prost just had a stinker in wet races.
@@theiceman7590 No and No.
@@Holanduzo Yes it was as commentators rightfully pointed out. Prost spun out in Brazil when it started raining while Senna eased to a win.
@@Holanduzo And Prost had a history of stinkers in the wet. If you cant find a good setup for wet conditions then thats Prosts fault and maybe he isnt the setup king we thought he was.
Type in on CZcams '1993 on boards Silverstone f1' and you'll see how crazy fast these are, with the Benetton hitting 193 down the hanger straight!! Mansell could only do 182 during qualifying in 1992!!!
Great video with a unique perspective.
As far as wet weather performances I was always impressed with Rosberg 1.0 at Monaco in ‘83 - really brilliant and he had the flu!
Would love to see a video of Andretti at McLaren from you!
Mansell's 95 mclaren run wouldn't take long......
When you think about the difference between the personal computers of now and then *, it's surprising how good the on-board computing was back in the'90s. How quickly "decisions" could be made (edit: by the car's "brain") and acted on, especially when you needed floppy disks to carry the programs you needed for your PC! That particular part of the tech "boom" in F1 has always impressed me. Thanks for the story, Aidan, yet another top job!
* Re typical personal computers, we had a near top-of-the-range PC with a ROM of 512 _K_ bought in '91; it cost nearly £1,000!
Our next one bought in 2000 had 4GB ROM & 64MB RAM, again, on buying it, it was _close_ to being top-of-the-range (although what TOTR was changed pretty much monthly at that point), and which cost less than half the previous PC's price (c. £400).
My latest laptop, about 6 years old (may be older; time flies) and still going strong, and which was nowhere near so high-end compared to others but was, compared to our PCs, outstanding in its specs, came from Tesco's for less than £250 - Moore's Law reigned supreme back then!
This is just to give the youngsters here some idea of how computing power has changed. IIRC I heard that today's F1 cars produce something stupid like a _million_ points of data _per second_ (I clearly stand to be corrected), most, if not all of which, gets beamed back not only to the pit wall but the strategy team back at base! It fries my brain to think about that! Somehow it is turned into potentially race-winning strategic decisions that maybe hadn't even been considered before the race weekend!
I’ve never heard the ‘93 McLaren referred to as a “bag of bolts”. I was always of the impression that it was a good car that did not have enough power to match first Benetton, then the Renault engine in the Williams. I was of the understanding that Williams’ head start with electronic aids in 1992 meant that it took some time before the ‘93 McLaren car was at the same level electronically. I would assume that it would take time to understand and maximise the electronics on a car too, so surely Williams had a head start in ‘93 either way.
12:00 "...does that leave the door open..." - Dangerous to do that, given the subject matter/persons...
Especially if there's not even a gap / door in sight.....
I always wondered why McLaren didn't use Mugen engines for 1993.
That Williams was so good, it really should have won more than 10 out of 16 races. Crazy how much unreliability there was back then.
Aidan thank you for it all. I love your story of perseverance.
Congrats for 100K and cheers for 200K subs.
Out of curiosity is this now your full time job
It’s been my full time job for five years.
Senna ranked his Estoril '85 wet weather drive above Donington '93 because it was in a passive car.
Two very different cars underneath really... Williams' was a pure hydraulic three-legged-stool system (one for the front and two for the rear) with hydraulics taking care of both ride height control AND road compliance. The Mclaren was completely different in that all four wheels had independent hydraulics for ride height control but road compliance was handled by conventional springs and dampers. This made the MP 4/8 more fiddly and time consuming to set up and repair.
Senna was a great driver no doubt and I think that makes people forget that while at McLaren he was driving some of the best cars on the grid every year he was there
A last minute offer was given to Mansell to partner Prost for 1993 but by then it was too late & he decided to leave. It's a shame because it would have been nice to see red one & I think Mansell would have wiped the floor with Prost for the reason of the active cars suiting his aggresive style.
That would have been great!
It wasn't 'too late' as such, but Mansell simply refused to be teammates with Prost after their 89-90 experience at Ferrari, so although Williams did up their salary offer, they had already signed Prost.
Didn't even watched it yet, but so curious about this McLaren because here in Brazil there's this legend that like Ayrton Senna's car barely have a working steering wheel against the mighty all technological Williams, and Senna would still win (yeah, some exaggeration, but for some here, Senna would still be champion even if he was driving a VW Bettle)
Yeah, that's probably Senna tax. The car was as advanced as the Williams was and better around tighter tracks. It's that it was underpowered.
@@AidanMillward The TAG electronics too had issues all year working with the Cosworth - the car did have a bunch of weird electronic issues with the Active Suspension at certain tracks, and even in one instance affecting the gear change in one of the cars.
As is almost always the case, the truth sits somewhere in the middle. Senna's abilities shaved off those extra few tenths in machinery that wasn't THE best but still very good. Senna hardcores would point out that he destroyed his team mate, I'd respectfully argue that anybody who saw Michael Andretti in F1 would hardly be surprised. 😂 Hakkinen would have done much more in the other car.
@@azapro911 Hakkinen out qualified him first chance he got.
@@AidanMillwardYep, in hindsight the even more irritating thing about the Andretti experiment is that we could have had veteran Senna vs. young Hakkinen for a full season. 😔
enjoyed this episode ... the inner engineer in me likes the fact that driver and car have to form a symbiotic relationship to be successful ..
Just watched the re-runs of Sprint Quali of Chinese GP (because it was broadcasted when I was at work) and was going to look for the analysis of why Lando’s super pole lap was reinstated. Not that I mind it though, I support McLaren but I was curious.
Then stumbled across this which was uploaded just ‘1 hour ago’. Alright then, stopping by here first 😂
My thought is that it was reinstated because it wasn't deliberate, and there was no performance gain, kind of common sense vs regulations. I'm sure there is a conspiracy floating around though...
@@astonwards7236 yep, his S1 & S2 time were down compared to the lap he went off. That could be a strong reasoning for reinstating the lap. Makes me wonder how much the gap would have been had he not gone off on penultimate lap.
And unfortunately the sprint was Sochi 2021 all over again for him at turn 1. And again he was fighting Hamilton 😅
Here in Brazil people still think that Senna only drove bad cars, especially the MP4/8, some even say that this car didn’t had any eletronic assists which is insane. I love these videos that “humanize” Senna, he was an epic and relentless driver, no doubt, but he was no miracle worker.
As you said, definitely by the end of the season the McLaren was in great form, as Senna won both in Suzuka and in Adelaide on merit (okay, you might argue that Prost might've checked out mentally by then, but still).
The MP4/8 abides by the rule of 'If it looks right, it is right.'
Everything about this car was right.
I really enjoyed this video. I attended the Montreal GP working with one of the teams and got to see Senna drive this McLaren. This video brings back some good memories for me. I really liked the look of the MP4/8 and it was fascinating for me to see it up close in the pit lane back in the day.
Honestly if it was at all feasible, McLaren should've tried to run the Honda RA122E/B from the 1992 car. A quick google suggests that engine had a good 20hp over the next most powerful engine in the 1993 grid, with a max quoted power of 800hp. The V8 was a significant step backwards in my eyes.
Thanks for this one A! Love to have a video on Andretti’s efforts from ‘93 also.
There was no effort, so that's a pretty concise video!😂
Just because you have the best car doesn’t mean you win every race. When your brakes fail on lap 2, for example.
Congrats on 100k
1999 Honda RA099 by Harvey Postlethwaite please.
Hello Aidan: Thank you very much for this. I have genuinely learned something. Up until now, I always thought that the FW15c was the ultimate F1 car. Have a good day.
Next to all the stuff presented in the video, the MP4/8 was a BEAUTY!!!!!
excelent video
I was researching about this car only yesterday!
top 3 fav car for me!
5 wins, all on street circuits or in wet races, advert for Senna's skill and McLaren's chassis design. The mid-season was all about power circuits (Silverstone, old Hockenheim, Spa, Monza) and a V8, not even the best one, was going to win. McLaren going several races without a podium definitely hurt them, suggesting the Benetton was sometimes 'best of the rest', even with engine levelling.
At the time it was regarded as a great chassis.
The belief is certainly held nowadays that the MP4-8 was better than the FW15C, however I don’t think McLaren would’ve won with the Lambo engine, the reliability of that engine was pretty dire in the hands of other teams, still it’s a fascinating case of what if….
Keep in mind too the TAG electronics cause no end of issues with the Cossie - I imagine it would have been just as problematic with the Lambo.
The engine straight blew up on Hakkinen in one of the tests. So I think it would make no actual difference, as it would retire as much or more than winning. Then we would be talking about "If Mclaren hadn't gone for the Lambo engine, Senna would've won more with the Ford." - Alternate reality type shit.
@@rigel8755 Apparently the engine that Lamborghini-Chrysler provided for that test was much improved power wise though - much better than the units in the Larrousse cars.
@@palm92 They tweaked the engine. Senna had influence on that, he convinced Mauro Forghieri to change it a bit.
@@rigel8755 Chrysler’s CEO was really keen on getting the McLaren deal for some reason (odd as they would sell Lamborghini within a year of this or so.)
I suspect that Honda's move to a V12 was a backward step. The V10 came back in later iterations and proved surprisingly competitive in second tier cars. Then there was the full-on comeback that yielded Jordan's brief golden age.
lol. I referenced your Mazda 787B video in the comments of another video about that car recently that came out not too long ago. I think the Group C cars were going over Jaguar 250 mph on the Mulsanne Straight according to Derek Daly when I met him before a Motorsports engineering class. So yeah...
Good video
1:40 not naming Steve Nichols, blasphemy!
Did all that in the MP4/4 video.
Been wait for this one
if you really want to stir up some drama, make a video on the F2012. I'm an Alonso fan, but I refuse to believe a car with 3 wins 15 podiums and 2 poles was the absolute tractor people keep saying it was.
What about the Ferrari F310B in 1997? Some peeps claim its the 3rd or 4th best car lol
Massa was terrible around this time tbh
There's always the unanswerable question, what if those cars had been around longer, and drivers really learned how to wring the most from them. What would could they have done once they learned "Oh I can get that deep into the corner" and stuff like that.
Best looking F1 car ever.
Honda F1 engines of that period sure had the pixie dust sprinkled on them, and needed a clan of magicians to keep them running
I tape recorded the entire 93 season way back then. I can tell you that it was well-known that the MP4/8 had the most sophisticated active suspension system on the grid, but they were hamstrung due to not getting the very latest Ford HB engine because Benetton was the official factory sponsored team. Ron Dennis lobbied hard the entire year to get parity of equipment with Benetton.
So when McLaren got the same Ford engine as Benetton at Silverstone and we’re 1.6 secs slower in qualifying than Benetton with the same engine how were they hamstrung?
They had parity early season as Benetton were running the HB-VI in their modified B192 early on. Only after Donington did McLaren become aware they weren't going to get the upgrade to the VII as contractually they had to be a step behind Benetton (as the works team). It wasn't Dennis, but Ecclestone who lobbied Cosworth to give McLaren the updates, as Senna was leading the championship after Donington & Bernie was desperate to stop yet another dominant championship decided early as had been seen in 92.
Briatore agreed on the condition that Benetton/Cosworth got TAG's assistance with traction control (ironically cost Schumacher a win at Monaco) with McLaren only being behind Benetton engine spec between Imola & Magny Cours.
Also a reason Senna didn't turn up at Imola until Dennis agreed his 1m per race contract and had to be fetched from Monaco by Berger's personal pilot on Friday morning JUST in time to sign in for the weekend.
Another what if...What if McLaren sacked Andretti way earlier and allowed Häkkinen to race more during the '93 season? I think Häkkinen might have stolen more points from Prost and made the championship closer. Probably not enough for Senna to win but closer still...
I like these “cars” storytime :) , I believe McLaren had the best chassis that year..
Hey Aidan which sites do you use to look up power figures?
I ask because some sites list the Honda V12 as being the most powerful engine by late-1992 with around 780HP, Wiki says 805HP which…sounds wrong to me. In any case I think it was a mistake for Honda to go to a V12 - their V10 was class of the field by a huge margin.
The power figures are all off depending on where you go. That’s why I put the note in the figures slide.
The Honda probably was the most powerful in 1992. Ferrari even got a hold on some Honda tech and some personnel to improve their V12
I wonder how close it would have been to the Williams fw13c if it had some POWAAAHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My favorite car ever
100K subs!!!
It would have been interesting to see if Senna would have stayed if he won the championship and if Ford would be favoring McLaren more instead of Benetton for 1994. That is also assuming Ron did not sign the deal with either Peugeot or Chrysler and held off until the championship was won. The McLambo would have gotten Senna to stay but if they won the championship and Ford gave them the engines Benetton inevitably got, it would be interesting if Senna would have also won 1994, assuming that with his input, the 1994 McLaren would have been better or on par with the Williams or Benetton.
1993 is one of those seasons Senna proved to be one of the GOATs. With a not so good car he did wonderful performances. He came stronger from 1992 wich is probably his worst season.
But, that's the whole point of this video--to show that the MP4/8 was actually a very good car and that Senna's wins were hardly surprising. Idk, for me, '93 was not his most impressive season.
@@flyingphoenix113 The car was down in power and technologically outdated, he did wonderful drives in Donington and Brazil for example. And those results were archived thanks to driver's skill, nothing about the car.
@@mindujiman The MP4/8 was not technologically outdated.
@@mindujiman In the video, At Donnington the Williams were “surfing” on the wet track because of their low ride height. And Brazil Prost retired.
@@mindujiman Did you even watch the video?
My understanding of the deal Bennetton had with Ford was that Ford could supply other teams but the engines had to be two versions before. Simply put, if Bennetton had version 7, McLaren had to have version 5.
I wonder if the legend of Senna's performances in this car would've been as great if he were partnered by Hakkinen all year, who would've been a much more even match than Andretti.
My understanding is 8:30 is not correct. In “The Life of Senna” (Rubython, 2004) it is stated that the engine deal was still in place, merely they had managed to get two upgrades. So Benetton went to South Africa with a Series VII and McLaren with a Series V. By Silverstone, McLaren got a Series VII… but Benetton had a Series IX.
I’m more impressed by the Harvard referencing in a CZcams comment
11:27 Believe is a way better word for that
My first F1 season was 2003--LATE 2003, two races to go in fact--and here in the States that meant Speed Channel and, of course, Formula One Decade, an hour-long program where the commentators looked back on the highlight reel of the upcoming round's equivalent ten years prior. The advertisement was something, something, "Epic battles! Senna! Prost!" with still shots of their cars that year. Having just learned that McLarens were white and black and Williams was HP-stickered white and blue, guess who didn't recognize either of those cars? I was also kind of horrified by those nose cones. They still look terrible, but given the gizmo wizardry underneath them, I can see why they need to be so bulbous.
I also recall hearing David Hobbs and Steve Matchett taking swipes at McLaren's underperformance, despite the advertisements selling us wheel-to-wheel action between Senna and Prost as a given. This would be shameful if I could just remember whether or not those comments were given of the 1993 car or the 1994...
Good ol’ Formula One Decade on Speed Channel. I remember setting up reminders and recordings of this show to watch. Too bad this only lasted until 2005.
Postulate?
I think claim is fine though. I think we all like you because you use approachable language. Congrats on 100k
Going to bringb out the story from Donington where Senna said something about switching cars, and Prost was absolutely silent on it which makes me wonder what Le Prof thought about the MP4/8
Imagine if the Zetec-R arrived a year earlier and McLaren had it in this car 🤔
Do the 94 ,95 and 96 mclarens please
I still can't fathom how Senna got 5 wins from that season. Only he could have pulled that off.
Yes! Squashed hedgehog time! 🦔
Many say the McLaren had better systems then the Williams especially the active suspension pretty sure I remember even Patty Lowe saying as much also. Power was the only drawback.
that's the first time i've heard "loose wheel nut @ monaco". story time?
If McLaren had run the Lambo V12 from race 1, they would have had less success. The Lambo was pretty unreliable compared to the Ford HB. The same thing happened to Tyrrell when they went from the light-but-underpowered DFR V8 in 1990 to the heavier Honda V10 in 1991: the handling of the nimble 019 chassis was ruined.
So ruined that they scored double points at Phoenix, 2nd in Canada and a front row start in Monaco...?
And that's with a ruined car... Not buying it.
I am not sure that the McLaren active suspension was better than the Williams'.
According to Paddy Lowe, the Williams system was a reactive system, whereas the McLaren's was pre-programmed to define where the car was on track and then would change attitude 4 times per corner, or at least so was the case at the beginning of the season.
So, in other words, the Williams car would continuously adjust its suspension, come what may, throughout the lap. The McLaren, on the other hand, had a memory chip on the onboard computer which was programmed before hand. If a driver wasn't happy with some preset attitude adjustment, the memory would have to be changed in the garage.
At least this is the information that I gathered over the years. I could, of course, be partially correct or completely wrong.
Another difference is that the Williams used gas springs do deal with high frequency bumps while the McLaren still used coil springs to deal with high and mid frequencies.
Regardless, the MP4/8 was still a good chassis. We can see that from the way the car behaved on track. It wasn't at all a bad design.
Nice work, I almost enjoy motor racing technology rather motor racing.
How many times has Honda "left" Formula 1?
11:44 so the 2016 red bull?
Another outing for the pointless Courtaulds logo (it's the one depicting a man attacking the back of a Morris Minor convertible with a Stanley knife).
We all know the 787b was banned for sounding too damn good 😉 The only things that could sound better is the 90's - 00's V12 / V10 F1 Ferraris, 5 Rotors, I5T's, the M3 GTR from Most Wanted '05 (TVR Cerbera Sample) or the GMA T.50 to name a few. So much noiseporn has been created with internal combustion, good grief. 👌🏻👌🏻
This McLaren and the 1994 Benetton (Regardless of what one thinks of cheating allegations!) were definitely the last bow of the Ford V8. I never understood why McLaren and Lotus did not stick with the Ford in 1994. Might have been better for them.
Lotus had the choice of Mugen or bankruptcy.... McLaren were never going to stick as a customer with a works deal available with the absolute best WSC engine being available. (See also Honda Vs Mercedes, 2013... Mansell 1995... Ron Dennis was not nearly as smart as Ron Dennis thought Ron Dennis was...)
The McLaren MP4/8 was only a match for the Williams Fw15c in the last 2 races of the season after Williams had stopped developing their car,the rest of the season it was a long way off ,for example Senna was 2.9 seconds slower and 1.6 slower than Schumacher’s Benetton with the same engine at the British Grand Prix,even on a much slower track the Hungaroring it was 1.8 seconds off the Williams and 1.2 slower than Schumacher’s Benetton.
Senna and McLaren were flattered in the 1st half of the season by Williams making mistakes and races which it rained.from Canada until Suzuka Senna never finished on the podium.
Some viewers here have never watched a second of the 1993 season. The MP4/8 was the slowest Mclaren since 1980. Well off the pace. James Hunt and John Watson were stunned when they saw Senna pull off what he did in what they declared as a clearly inferior. Yet today zoomers claim it was somehow a great car.
👍
Mandela effect?! LOL!
Andretti was a horrible teamate that year that car was awesome he just couldnt drive in F1
if it had the lamborghini engine, it would've been a serious challenge for the williams
For about ten laps, before erupting.
@@azapro911 During the test, Senna supposedly asked the engineers to make changes to the engine (I remember it being something about giving it a "fatter mid range torque curve") and when the McLaren engineers made the changes the engine ended up making slightly more power and it didn't explode unlike when it was in Hakkinen's car (it really did straight up explode in Mika's car and he saw nuts and bolts fly past him). There is a good chance that it could have worked but one of the reasons why they never used the Lamborghini engine was because Chrysler (who owned Lamborghini at the time) didn't actually have the resources to support such a serious endeavour (that's why the Lamborghini engines were mostly used by backmarker teams).
Still, it's quite the "what if?" scenario especially since the argument between Senna and Dennis regarding the engine was one of the reasons why Senna left McLaren for Williams in 1994.
It would have been a smoke show - the Lambos were unreliable.
But that was a year later. The test was at the end of 93, when the choice was Chrysler or Peugeot rather than Chrysler, Cosworth or Mugen.
Bad car doesn't win 5 races, its a no-brainer