You'll Definitely Spot It!

The first thing you notice about the new Renault R30 is the colour scheme - it's bold to say the least. However, looking a little closer gives cause to be mildly optimistic.

Make no mistake; I don't think that this new Renault will be a world champion. It's a little harsh to write something off before it has even racked up one lap but it doesn't LOOK as quick as either the McLaren MP4-25 or Ferrari F10. Having said that, it does look (aerodynamically at least) better than last year's car.

In my opinion, the R29 never looked like it could win races and so it was proved - this car, I think could be the first dark horse of the new season.

As with the Sauber, I think that this car is a lot less developed than the Ferrari and McLaren but it is smooth and neat. There are obvious changes to the nose of this car when compared to its predecessor and these changes make the whole package seem much more aesthetically pleasing on the eye. As with the McLaren and Sauber, Renault have added a shark fin on the engine cover and the sidepods seem sleek like the Ferrari's.

There are no other notable aerodynamic features to this car but another reason to be optimistic came from (technical director) Bob Bell when he said that this car often beats the targets set for it in the wind tunnel. Maybe Renault has found something?

I'm struggling to predict how well this car will do but let's hope that its performance shouts louder than its colours and that Robert Kubica and (new signing) Vitaly Petrov are fighting at the front of the midfield.

P.s. Petrov was runner-up in the GP2 series last year. He becomes the first Russian F1 driver and apparently brings sponsorship money with him to Renault.

Sauber - The Colour Scheme Says it All.

This was probably the lowest key car launch I have seen for a long time. Nonetheless, introducing the (BMW-in name alone) Sauber C29.

Peter Sauber could never really hope to emulate the success Brawn had last year, but when BMW announced that they would be leaving the sport, he moved hell and high water to ensure that his team lived on. The trouble is that, unlike Honda, BMWs exit became clear at a much earlier part of car development than with last year's Brawn car. The problem with this is that it means that the whole development of this year's Sauber slowed at a very early stage - at least it didn't stop entirely. The lack of development tells though.

This team is the proud owner of possibly 'the' most advanced wind tunnel in F1 (this is why BMW took it over in the first place) and to that end, any car they produce should be very efficient aerodynamically. However, with no sponsor (Peter Sauber had been hoping for the Petronas sponsorship that went to Mercedes) the team simply cannot afford to run the wind tunnel as much as they need. Add to this the fact that last year's BMW wasn't the best - and it becomes evident that most of the budget would have been spent understanding what was wrong with the previous car rather than finding innovative solutions for this year's.

All of this has led to a car which can be best described as minimalist. It echoes the Ferrari in the way that the sidepods are as small as possible but it doesn't have the sleek, efficient look of the Red car. There is a shark fin over the engine cover but it doesn't have the intricate complexities of the McLaren. The nose overhangs the front wing by quite a way but it is wide and unrefined rather than pointy and purposeful (like the Ferrari) or aggressive and advanced (like the McLaren). It is definitely way behind with its paint job too.

Overall, this car is probably a solid base and reflects how I imagine the first iterations of most 2010 cars looked in the design phase. The problem is that I think that all of the major constructors will be ahead when they hit the testing tracks in the next couple of weeks and if Renault, Williams and Force India have made gains over the off season then it could be a difficult year for the Swiss team. On the plus side, the Ferrari engine should stand them in good stead against the unproven Cosworth and underpowered Renault.

I see this car being in the lower end of the points, particularly at the start of the year, but with no investment it could be difficult to keep up with the development race and could find itself in the lower mid-field by the end.

Maybe survival and attracting a new partner for 2011 would be a success this year.

McLaren Stick With Tradition and Go 'Radical'

The MP4-25 is one of the cars that I have been looking forward to seeing the most; not just because it is the car on which national hopes sit (with Lewis and Jenson as drivers), but because McLaren are ALWAYS aggressive in their car design. They haven't disappointed.

Where Ferrari produced a car that could best be described as neat and efficient, the McLaren looks like something that Q could have invented for James Bond - striking and attractive but riddled with gadgets primed to take out the enemy. From front to back, I get the feeling that this car is at the limits of the rulebook and that could be a good omen for the Woking team.

The front wing shows delicate and intricate engineering - extra levels on the wing that you know will be effective at levelling the ratio of grip between the front and rear tyres (remember that the extra weight over the rear from the bigger fuel tank could otherwise unbalance the car). The nose appears to be a hybrid of last year's McLaren and Red Bull; aggressive and yet not the most striking part of the car. The sidepods are the polar opposite to the Ferrari's - these are small but not sleek; rather they drop off as soon as they can so that the engine cover makes up the remainder of the rear shell. Then there is the most advance 'shark fin' that I have seen. This gives the appearance of a very short car but I'm sure that the rear stability gained from attaching the fin to the rear wing is the bigger driving force for the design.

Then there is the stuff you can't see - (team boss) Martin Whitmarsh eluded to how there have been big changes to the new diffuser but, like Ferrari yesterday, McLaren kept it covered. This will be where the teams that missed out last year will make up most ground and you could find that the diffuser is as big an issue this year as last.

My verdict?

McLaren has stuck with its philosophy of being at the limit of the rules and it is clear that with no KERS to distract them they have made great strides aerodynamically this year. Make no mistake, this car could well be the most developed straight out of the box - and if it's not then you wouldn't bet against it being the most developed by the time that Bahrain comes around.

From what I have seen (not to mention the rumours that Ferrari are already considering the need for a B-spec car; they don't seem confident) I would have to predict that this McLaren would be better than the F10 from yesterday. Only time will tell but I would now put the McLaren drivers as favourite for the title.

A New Start...

You get the feeling that 2008 took quite a lot out of Ferrari; losing the driver's championship at the last turn of the last race must have hurt badly. Then came 2009, a car burdened by a simple lack of time put into it - Ferrari didn't spot the double diffuser loophole. Then came Massa's accident and the ill-fated Badoer incident, the removal of Raikkonen and the 'treason' of Michael Schumacher.

The win in Belgium may have spared blushes but the report card for the season would have read: C, distinctly average - must do better.

So, to 2010. This morning, the worlds press got to see the new F10 in all its glory.

At first glance, the new car doesn't seem as radical a departure from its predecessor as I expected. However, the more I look at it, the more I can see just how refined this car appears to be. The sidepods are neater, smoother and tighter. The nose is sleek and elegant but yet purposeful. The wheelbase is longer, of course, but this is to accommodate the bigger fuel tank required this year. There are humps on top of the nose - emulating the design of last year's Red Bull and the overriding impression is efficient.

The colour scheme is that of all Ferraris; red - but there has been thought given as to how best to advertise (new sponsor) Santander and the final look is that of a car which is maybe more grown up than the 2009 model.

How do I think it will run?

It certainly seems that this year Ferrari have concentrated on what they want the car to do. They won't have been sidetracked by KERS and the double diffuser should be bigger and better integrated into the design of the car (rather than just an add on). It is not the most beautiful car I have ever seen and I doubt that it will be the cleverest design out there this year. This may be a good thing though - remember, at the end of last year the gap between the top and bottom teams was tiny (roughly 1 second). If Ferrari have made a car as efficient as it looks then it should be very drivable for Alonso and Massa - not to mention easy to set up. This bodes well for the races.

So, my overall impression is that of optimism (if you are a Ferrari fan); I can see this car winning races and being in the hunt but I'm not sure whether it is exciting enough to be the overall champion. This car is a very sensible revolution for the Ferrari team; a good base to improve upon but 'sensible' isn't very Italian - where is the passion. True racing is all about passion.

On Your Marks...

I feel like a kid; for me the season starts tomorrow. I know that the first race isn't until 14th March but when the covers come off of 2010s first car in the morning it will seem like the racing has already begun.

Mercedes provided a nice warm up at their PR event on Monday when they launched the new team in their new colours but there was no new car (the car in the pictures is last year's Brawn with a new paint job). For that we have to wait until testing begins on the 1st Feb.

Tomorrow we'll see the car Ferrari hope will launch them and their new star Fernando Alonso back to the top of the tables. If rumours are to be believed it will look very similar to last year's Red Bull.

From then on, the weekend will reveal what McLaren, Sauber, Williams, Renault, Toro Rosso and Mercedes are bringing to the party this season and Monday will be the first test of 2010.

I'll put my thoughts and pictures up here as soon as I can after each launch.

In other news, it seems that the money behind the De La Rosa move was funded by Santander (who also sponsor McLaren and Ferrari - it seems that one bank wasn't too badly affected by the recession!).

Also, USF1 have confirmed that ex-GP2 winner Jose Maria Lopez will drive for them in 2010 although they are yet to confirm when they will first run their new car. Lopez comes with a nice paycheck from the Argentinean government who want to create a new icon in their country. This might be a good move - the way things are going I'm not sure how fruitful the FIFA world cup is going to be for their team this year...

Further changes to the tyre and points regulations have been proposed. I'll have more on them when they are confirmed.

Finally, Bahrain has added an extra loop to the layout of its circuit increasing the length of the track by 1.2Km (0.75miles) - I hope the new section is good.

The Magic Number

Just something curious I stumbled upon today; Michael Schumacher is trying to get the number of his car changed from 4 to 3 because he 'likes odd numbers.'

The numbering system used in F1 is as follows:

-The previous year's champion is the only person who can have the number 1 on his car (for 2010 Jenson Button). His team mate has number 2.

- The order then continues in order of the previous year's constructors' championship (i.e. Mercedes/Brawn has 3 & 4; Red Bull has 5 & 6 etc.).

- If the Driver's champion is no longer driving in F1 the reigning constructor has the numbers 0 & 2 - No one has number 1 (see Damon Hill 1994 as an example).

- The number 13 is not used.

- If teams are keeping the same driver line-up then the driver who finished higher in the previous championship gets the lower number.

- If teams are changing one of their drivers, the new driver gets the higher number.

- If teams are changing both of their drivers, it is the one accepted onto the official FIA entry list first that gets the lower number. If they are both announced at the same time then the team can decide.

This last point is what has ruffled Schumi. He wasn't announced by Merc until a long time after the official FIA entry list was released but Rosberg (his team mate) was. By rights this means that Rosberg gets car 3 and Schumi car 4. Drivers are superstitious though - Schumi has never won a title with an even number on his car and in fact car 4 has only won 7 races in the last decade! Moreover, we all know how Michael likes to be the 'number 1' within a team and he could be playing mind games - to show Rosberg that he is already favoured.

Rosberg might let it go, Button didn't mind letting Barrichello have (his lucky) number 11 in 2006 and Mansell was always associated with the 'red 5' on his car. The fact that the number 13 isn't used is proof enough of the superstition that fills the paddock.

Will it make a difference if Schumi gets his number changed? Probably not - the reason he has never won with an even number is that for most of the time he won back to back titles and so just had the number 1.

I am however surprised that Michael isn't going for another record - a car bearing the number 4 has NEVER won the title. Schumi will be gutted if Nico shocks us all and does just that next year.

What Has Pedro Got?

Peter Sauber has signed the (very) experienced Pedro de la Rosa as team mate to young star Kamui Kobayashi but is this a wise move by Sauber or are we staring another Badoer situation in the face?

Since he (reluctantly) purchased the Sauber team from BMW to ensure that all the employees at Hinwil kept their jobs, Peter Sauber has been trying to find the most experienced man he could as his second driver. He flirted with the possibilities of Trulli, Fisichella and Heidfeld so how did he end up with someone who hasn't driven in anger since 2006?

I was surprised when Kobayashi got the drive at Sauber; I thought that with no Toyota he had very little chance of getting another attempt at F1. This would have been unfair as his debut drives were miraculous when you consider how the other rookies did in 2009. However, I get the feeling that Sauber wants to find a buyer for his team who can guarantee its financial security (something that he is struggling to do) so if he has a rookie with the potential to be something of a star then it keeps the media on his team. More media interest, more interest full stop. This includes buyers. Moreover, maybe Sauber is playing the long game; maybe he thinks that as the recession passes over (optimistically in the next few years) and we head back into the boom half of the cycle, then having someone Japanese leading your team could attract certain car manufacturers.

However, with a rookie comes a gamble - it is only after a few more races that we will get to know the level Kobayashi can operate at. As a backup experience is needed. This should ensure that points are scored next year and it should also help keep the pace of car development up. Also, the young protégée could learn from his team mate too.

I think that Peter Sauber wanted Trulli initially, and he is known to be a Heidfeld fan - both of these would have been very savvy signings but a spanner was put in the works when Mercedes 'stole' long-term sponsor Petronas from the team. The lack of funding caused by this meant that Sauber couldn't afford to pay his drivers top dollar and he really wanted a driver that could bring some money to the team. This was a problem for both Trulli and Heidfeld and so this seemingly left the door open for Fisichella (who would have brought a serious reduction -25%- to the £6mill wage bill for Ferrari engines this year). This is the case because Fisi is Ferrari's third driver and so they would pay to keep him 'race ready' in case there is another incident like the one with Massa last year.

So how did de la Rosa get the gig? The last time he drove in a Grand Prix was when he was filling in for Juan Pablo Montoya at the end of 2006. He had a reasonable but not spectacular time alongside Kimi Raikkonen at McLaren but this doesn't compare well to Fisichella who did very well at Force India and ok at Ferrari LAST YEAR.

I think that there are two reasons for the choice of de la Rosa. The first is that I believe that Pedro might just bring some sponsorship from (Spanish fuel company) Repsol. If Fisi was saving £1.5mill then Repsol must be footing at least that. Of course, this way Sauber don't owe Ferrari anything.

The second reason is, in my opinion, bigger. Pedro de la Rosa has been the test driver behind the great McLarens of the last decade. He knows how to improve a car and brings much more technical ability for his money than Fisi does.

Whilst I think that Fisi may have been quicker out of the box, I think that (given a few tests) Pedro is never going to be as bad as Badoer was last year. Moreover, if Pedro's development skills ensure that Sauber punch above their weight - and Kobayashi continues his good form then de la Rosa could prove to be a very smart signing indeed.

There will be another driver on the grid next year who hasn't raced since 2006 and nobody doubts him... let's not write off Pedro either.

Renault's Regeneration Starts to Take Shape

After the loss of Honda, BMW and Toyota it was with much relief that the investment of Gerard Lopez's Genii Capital group saved the Renault name last month. Today the new look team gained a new figurehead in new team Principal Eric Boullier.

Flavio Briatore had led the Renault team since the days when they were Benetton. He was a maverick, not afraid to speak his mind. In a way he was almost too irresponsible to be the leader of an F1 team; too likely to follow his heart over his head; too unruly; too Italian. And yet people followed him. He was greatly respected within the paddock and despite his Latin flare, he was very clever and a friend of Bernie. This made him very successful.

Yet there was one decision which failed him. Nelson Piquet Jnr. Nelson had the unlucky fortune to be teamed up against arguably the best driver on the grid (Fernando Alonso) in seasons where the Renaults were never the best cars. 2008 wasn't as bad as 2009 but for a rookie it was still a tough car to start your F1 career in. Experience counted; Alonso hammered Piquet throughout 2008 and this is why the decision was made to let Nelson crash in Singapore to help their star driver to victory.

As we all know, Piquet blew the whistle on this scandal once he had been relieved of his position within the team and there is no doubt that the bad publicity which came along with this (not to mention '09s even poorer performances) led to Renault selling 75% of the team. On top of all this, Alonso moved to Ferrari and Briatore and (technical director) Pat Symonds were banned. Ironically, Briatore today got his ban overturned (although the FIA are set to appeal). Briatore has always claimed that he was an innocent party in the whole Crashgate affair but I, for one, am sceptical.  

But where there is a car to be raced, there are people who will race it (just ask Ross Brawn and Jenson Button) and so when the team was purchased in December it was a good news story for the sport.

Eric Boullier headed up Gerard Lopez's driver management company which is how he knows the new owners, but he has racing pedigree too. He has worked with France's AIGP team and the DAMS GP2 team. More than this though, he is the opposite of the ageing Briatore; he is more clean cut and restrained and thusly personifies the youthful regeneration that the whole team is now undergoing. With new star Robert Kubica now firmly on board, all that remains is to find a driver for the second seat. Boullier has claimed that "the second driver must score points and challenge Kubica" and although some people have linked young gun Bertrand Baguette (World Series by Renault champion) to the drive, I personally feel that a driver with more experience would be more likely to score the necessary points.

Who do we know who is out of contract, is possibly the safest pair of hands on the grid, gets on with Kubica and is almost as fast as him too? Don't be surprised if a certain Nick Heidfeld turns up at Renault's Enstone base sometime soon (especially as the Sauber drive seems certain to go to either Fisichella or De La Rosa).

Will the Rule Changes Make a Difference? Part 3

My final installment assessing the new rules for next year looks into the most extreme change; NO refuelling.

Refuelling was only introduced in 1994 to improve the racing; it was found that cars were becoming 'strung out' and there was minimum overtaking. Adding both the human element of refuelling and the strategic element cars pitting at different times was meant to increase interest and improve the spectacle.

For 2010 the FIA has decided that returning to the days of no refuelling is what is now needed to improve the racing. The FIA argue that having cars that are filled to the brim at the start and empty at the end will improve the racing because the cars will get quicker and quicker throughout the race. This might be true and it might also be true that the driver who protects his tyres the best throughout the race will prevail in the end but there is a certain aspect which now says that whoever is on pole should win. The reason for this is that part three of qualifying (where drivers had been qualifying with race fuel on board in '09) will now be held with minimum fuel and as such the fastest car/driver package will almost always be on pole. If the fastest is starting on pole and then starts the race full to the brim then we could see a lot of processional races where no one overtakes because the extra fuel is making the car too hard to drive.

The upside to the new rule is the very same thing; having a larger amount of fuel makes it harder for the driver. Overtaking at the start will be harder but defending positions will also be harder - think about it, the cars will be harder on the breaks due to the increased weight that is going to require stopping. Simply pulling away from the starting positions will be harder and anyone with clutch problems could struggle. However, the biggest factor will be tyre management. Drivers who are kind to their tyres (like Button, Trulli & Schumacher) will find it easier for the first half of the race because they will still be able to extract performance from the tyres for the whole stint and therefore should be able to deliver more consistent lap times for this part of the race. On the flip side to this is the fact that drivers who are more agressive and like oversteer in the car (Hamilton, Alonso & Kubica) will come into their own when the car gets lighter.

Logically, the cars will start the race very prone to understeer; the fuel tank is positioned towards the rear of the car and will therefore lower the likelihood of the rear sliding. However, they could end the race completely the opposite when the tank is nearly empty (and the tyres are nearly worn out) because there will be relatively little rear grip and the cars could slide a lot. This could make things very interesting for the last 10 laps when everyone's car is performing differently - expect to see most of the overtaking in this phase of the race.

So will this rule change improve the racing? I personally doubt that it will have as much effect as the FIA want because the engineering in F1 is so good. For example let's look at McLaren. Button likes understeer and so the car would be set up with a very neutral weight distribution when no fuel is in the car so that when fuel is added the car becomes more understeery. Simply, he would start the race with understeer balance and finish it (in theory) with neutral balance. On the other side of the garage is Hamilton, who likes oversteer. He would set the car up so that most of the ballast is at the front of the car. This would neutralise the effect of adding fuel for the first part of the race (and therefore minimise understeer) and as the fuel burns the car would become more and more oversteery. If this proves to be the case, and actually the drivers are all really close to each other then the person on pole will win - this could actually make the races more boring.

I hope that this rule change makes some kind of improvement to the racing and doesn't dumb down the spectacle but I am sceptical. I feel that this could go the way of the no tyre change rule for 2005 where it is in place for a year and then removed for the following year. At the very least, this change will force some design alterations (to fit in the larger fuel tank and to make the car as soft as possible on its tyres - an aspect which could hamper Red Bull) and whenever there are design changes the pecking order could be changed.
 

p.s. I will miss the odd pitstop fire now and then.