#F1 Forensics: Singapore 2014 vs 2015 Part II; McLaren & Drivers that changed teams


How the mighty have fallen. We all know things are bad at Mclaren, so bad in fact that neither car managed to even finish the race this year, but it’s worse than that:

Fernando’s Q2 time in the Mclaren this year was EXACTLY the same as his time in the Ferrari in 2014.

Buttons Q2 time this year with a Honda PU, was actually 0.076 sec SLOWER than 2014 with the Mercedes PU.

Since Fernando didn’t finish this year, we only have a handful of Race laps to compare. Laps 1-9, Fernando averaged 0.138 sec a lap slower that 2014 in the Ferrari. After that first stint, a plethora of Safety Car and VSC laps, plus pitting, and a different tyre strategy make it difficult to compare, but a quick glance over the graph shows us that at BEST, Fernando was running equal times in each year, but in reality he was a little bit slower in 2015.

That’s how bad things are at McLaren. Their car is at Best equal to last years Ferrari. Ouch.


Click Here to see Mclaren FP1 times in full screen.

Mclaren Qualifying:

Click Here to see Jenson Button’s times fullscreen.

Click Here to see Fernando Alonso’s times fullscreen.


Sebastian Vettel


Sebastian obviously switched teams and now drives for Ferrari, taking Fernando’s seat. There is not much to make of these times but it is interesting to see.

Click Here to see Sebastian’s times full screen.


Dani Kvyat

Again, Kvyat switched teams, so his times don’t tell us much, but he clearly become more consistent. In 2014 Dani is noticeably fluctuating his lap times by over a second, often dropping off more than that. In 2015, however, he is such more consistent, though you will notice a slight fluctuation every other lap. This could be part of Renaults Energy Recovery Problem, forcing the drivers to alternate “hot” laps so they can charge the battery.

Click Here to see Kvyat’s times full screen.




2 responses to “#F1 Forensics: Singapore 2014 vs 2015 Part II; McLaren & Drivers that changed teams

  1. Notwithstanding the fact that development tokens have been used by all engine makers, the fact that Honda are producing the same times as last year’s cars shows that being one year behind developing a live running PU in F1 is disadvantageous. With only one engine in this situation (Honda), we can’t draw absolute conclusions but the question is whether manufacturers introducing new engines will always be lagging in the development cycle with these power units. What does this tell potential future entrants? Is it worth the time, money and a hit on their reputation? I’d so ‘no’!

  2. Well, Honda are choosing to develop their PU 100% in-house rather than try to take short-cuts by head-hunting their rivals employees by offering 5 times the money or something. If Honda maintain that line of operation, yes, chances are that they will be remaining behind their rivals because it’s not like Ferrari and Mercedes are standing still.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.