Michael Andretti, 2015

F1 is “way, way too expensive” – Andretti

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Michael Andretti, 2015In the round-up: IndyCar team owner and former F1 driver Michael Andretti says F1 has lost its way.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Michael Andretti: 'Formula One is a mess right now' (Top Gear)

"They’ve made these things way too expensive. With this new engine, they’ve basically doubled the leases for what it costs customer teams to run these things. It’s stupid money, and for what?"

Formula 1 and DTM driving techniques with Gary Paffett (Autocar)

"The cars this year aren’t anywhere near as physically hard to drive as the old V10s, with their massive amounts of downforce. They were really, really tough."

Valentino Rossi offers Lewis Hamilton a test on Yamaha Moto GP bike (James Allen on F1)

"He needs a bit of experience before trying a Moto GP bike. But our bike is very easy, so we will try to kill a little bit of power we’ll tune a little of the power out and then, if he wants to go out and have some fun..."

Former Formula 1 world champion Jacques Villeneuve joins Venturi Formula E team (Venturi)

"This is the first time in several years that I will participate in a full championship."

Massa exceeding team's expectations (Autosport)

"(Massa and Bottas) slug it out against each other. There is nothing to choose between them."

Fangio's body exhumed to settle paternity claims (Reuters)

"Formula One great Juan Manuel Fangio’s body was exhumed on Friday to try to resolve paternity cases brought by two men claiming to be the five-times world champion’s son."

Kimi breaks the ice at home says Minttu (F1i)

"When he meets someone, Kimi always wonders if the person is sincere or just interested in gaining some sort of advantage."

Sauber more stable than it was a year ago - Monisha Kaltenborn (ESPN)

"Already towards the end of last year we were looking step-by-step better, even if it was very small steps it was going in the right direction."


Comment of the day

Daniel Ricciardo, Red Bull, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015Yoshisune felt strongly that Daniel Ricciardo as placed too highly in the mid-season Driver Rankings:

I think we can all agree that so far he’s been marginally quicker than Kvyat, yet he’s finished behind him more often than not. Bad starts, a lot of accidents in wheel to wheel racing and sometimes he even lacked the pace. He’s been a bit clumsy so far in my opinion. He showed flashes of 2014 brilliance, but just flashes and to be honest Kvyat has delivered the big results this year.
Yoshisune (@yobo01)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

No F1 Fanatic birthdays today

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Happy birthday to 1992 world champion Nigel Mansell who is 62 today!

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 83 comments on “F1 is “way, way too expensive” – Andretti”

    1. Shocking news about Villeneuve replacing Heidfeld at Venturi. As I just mentioned on the forum, I can only think this is to generate headlines about a former F1 World Champion racing in Formula E, because on performance there’s no way that should have happened. Nick was very unlucky in many races last season but his underlying pace was there throughout and he deserved more than what he ended up with. The other teams should be queuing to get him on board!

      1. Nick could have won 3 races last year. I don’t want to see him leave FE! He’s one of the best drives of the series.

        1. Agreed. I would consider it a loss of talent for the series.

        2. Absolutely true!

          1. What a great add for FE. The first former World Champion in the series. As one who hasn’t paid much attention to FE, I am now stoked about it.

            1. Great add for FE. Shame if nick has to go but that isn’t JV fault.

              JV was and I’m sure still is a great talent. Many have forgotten or weren’t old enough to remember how good he was.

              I have noticed on Twitter he gets a lot of abuse from fans 20 and younger…. well 20 years ago he was winning the Indy championship & 500 then testing for Williams. So as they were in nappies at the time I’m not sure how they can accurately comment on him.

      2. Will they replace the background music with Jacque Villeneuve Sings?

    2. I don’t agree with the COTD but I do wonder if Ricciardo’s starts will be much better from SPA going forward. This year’s race may be the best in years just because we will be able to finally see some of the old school driving skill instead of 0101101 skill. m this year.The starts really hurts Daniel’s performance so ban on the start aids (I hope) may be the best thing what happened to him.

      1. @toxic How can you not agree with facts. I still believe Ricciardo’s driving style is the best in f12015. I hope he does better on the starts as well. His start of 2015 reminds me of Jules start of 2014. Jules was overagressive, perhaps frustrated by seeing himself at the back of the field. Obviously Jules then delivered in Monaco. Hungary might as well be the turning point for Ricc’s season.

        1. @ peartree I guess it all comes down to the interpretation of these facts. Just looking at the amount of problems this team have with their engines and during the races and the way Dan drives, it impresses me hugely that you can still find him fighting Williams and Ferrari. He is the kind of a driver I want to see in F1 not the likes of ball-less Rosbergs. Every time we see Ricciardo having more speed than the driver in front, you can be 100% sure that he will go for it and do everything to get ahead usually with very clean and exciting moves. I just said that I don’t agree with the opinion in COTD but it doesn’t mean that I am right :)

          1. Ric is like Kamui but with better pace and cosistency, love the way he drives.

          2. If he’s still fighting Williams and Ferrari it’s because his car is fast enough to do that. Why are you acting like he’s doing something super human? In 3 races so far they were as fast as Ferrari, so as a result they were fighting with them. What was he supposed to do then? Just race around Force India? You have fairly low standards and expectations from Ricciardo if his current season excites you. Or you have selective memory and only remember some of the races.

      2. @toxic If he’s struggling with a perfect launch map, it’ll probably be worse with less help.. Webber got even worse starts back in the day!

        1. Exactly, Webber’s starts during his Red Bull days were actually better than what it was in his previous teams.

          The start control systems do not replace driver skill but augment it (probably bridging the gap). So, without that, it is quite likely that Ricciardo suffers more.

        2. @fastiesty facts or not I do believe in what I see and I can’t see any more motivated driver than Dan, hence I do think that he deserves a very high position in this ranking.
          The problem with drivers and their launch maps is that some drivers just can’t master the way you need to approach it. that’s why I want all of these artificial help removed. It’s because of that the cars are so easy to drive that even 17 year boys can do it.
          Will the removal of the start aids help Dan? Like I said, I hope that it will. Will it or not, at least we will know that it’s him that’s not doing good enough job not some system.

          1. You should already know that he’s the one not doing good enough job. They are not as automatic as you imagine I guess, drivers still have a big affect on how their starts go. And this new regulation won’t be removing start system.

    3. I can’t help but feel that Williams, for the past two years, has thrown an incredible amount of good results and points away. They have had a huge mix of bad pit calls, misfortune, clearly underperforming at many tracks (potentially due to their drivers), bad setups, etc., and I think that if they get these issues sorted out they could be on the podium a lot more, and challenge for the occasional win when Mercedes slip up. I do wonder what the results would be like if they had a driver like Alonso or Hamilton in the car.

      1. @strontium It’s safe to say that Alonso would have won at Austria 2014 at the very least.

        1. I’ve felt the same…Alonso should have been in a Williams. Even this year the team has proved it has forgotten how to win. A real shame considering its heritage…I think they want to keep Massa happy, or clearly Bottas should have been let through at Silverstone.

      2. @strontium, to some extent I agree. You have to give it to them for improving though. In 2012 they trew like half (if not more) of their potential points away. Maldonado obviously taking that win, but performing terribly the rest of the season. Senna was consistent, but just not aggressive and quick enough. But yes, there is still room for improvement at Williams.

    4. Not being nasty but I can’t make heads or tails of the writing in Keith’s tweet. I’m actually interested to know what it says

      1. @burkenheim Looks like the driver rankings’ extended notes to me.

        1. Dr. @keithcollantine is writing antidepressant prescription to regulate brain circuits that affect emotions from all F1F member negative comment about his F1 driver ranking.
          :) @burkenheim @davidnotcoulthard

          1. @ruliemaulana Writing something that if put in the KUHP will scare corrupt officials more than death :)

            One can always hope :)

      2. @burkenheim I write these aide-memoires on each driver while working out the rankings. Drivers’ names are initials, races are shortened to three letters. So ‘AUS passed MV +NH (x2) for P5’ refers to Bottas: ‘Austria, passed Max Verstappen and Nico Hulkenberg (twice) for fifth’.

        1. I think in another life you may have been a doctor

      3. I see MON (just under MAL) so I am assuming Montoya is rightly featuring in this year’s top 20 ;)


    5. I just cannot understand why people keep putting the current F1 engine down!

      If we didnt switch to this engine, apart from Ferrari, the big manufacturers that the sport craves, would leave, or not come in. These engines are engineering marvels, and needs to be appreciated more.

      The real mess is F1’s stupid commercial and governance model. Its already proven to be riddled with pitfalls everywhere you look. The restrictive rule book doesnt help matters. There is nothing wrong with the engine, its the other aspects of the sport that needs to be considered. There is so much untapped potential in the current formula, and if people in the sport are genuinely interested in growing it, it can be done. However, the issue, which has been well documented, is that the people who have a say are only concerned about their best interest, and they will never reach an agreement.

      What else can you expect if you allow the top teams themselves to decide the future direction of the sport?

      1. @jaymenon10, those who want to put down the new engines are those who have lost out the most under the new engine format – most notably Red Bull, but also to a lesser extent at Sauber (although it is notable that Sauber are complaining slightly less now that they are higher up in the WCC than last year).

        Bernie, in turn, will be coming under pressure from Red Bull to change the regulations to make them competitive again, whilst in turn Bernie will know that there is a section of the F1 fanbase that, having been raised on the idea of high revving normally aspirated engines, will therefore automatically reject any move away from what they believe to be “the” format for the sport.

        1. @anon, it’s not only the “losers” under the regulation who complain. Also teams like Force India (PU to expensive) media, fans etc. In this case i think @jaymenon10 refered to Andretti’s comments about the engines.

      2. @Jay Menon “I just cannot understand why people keep putting the current F1 engine down!”

        Because they are hybrid “power units,” and they are not engines. Even the FIA is very clear and unambiguous on this distinction. There is not one single “engine” in the current field of Formula H(ybrid).

        “These engines are engineering marvels, and needs to be appreciated more.”

        So what? Rocket engines are engineering marvels. So are Formula E “power units.” And so is the CERN Hadron Collider an engineering marvel. What does any of that have to do with Formula 1? (Answer: nothing whatsoever).

        Transmuting the marvelous and awesome motorsport engineering of Formula 1 to the insipid autopiloted, telemetrized, costly and expensive “fuel saving” and “sustainable” “power units” of Formula H(ybrid) was not only a demonstrably horrible idea, but has turned out to be a monstrously deceptive and unsatisfying experience for fans. Even the FIA predicted the impacts. But as all lemmings must do, they continued straight off the edge of the cliff and are now in free fall.

        What will restore Formula H(ybrid) to Formula 1 is a complete and total rejection of the *requirement* that teams use hybrid engines, as is done in WEC, IMSA, and other series.

        I have nothing at all against KERS (MGU) hybrids, but the Formula H(ybrid) formula must absolutely be ditched to ensure a return to Formula 1 glory.
        The heart of the problem isn’t Bernie or the teams or the costs or the tires. It’s the preposterous formula of Formula H(ybrid).

        1. @Geeyore so what do you propose? Going back to a V10 or V8 non-Hybrid formula that is of no interest to the engine manufacturer’s that have to supply them?

          I’d also point to the 2 recent fan survey’s which suggested that there is nowhere near the mass fan dissatisfaction with the engine formula that many like to say there is & that the split was such that there is no reason to ditch the formula.

          What will restore Formula H(ybrid) to Formula 1 is a complete and total rejection of the *requirement* that teams use hybrid engines, as is done in WEC

          In WEC its true there is no requirement to run hybrids, However you stand no chance of been competitive at the very front or been able to go for an overall LMP1 win without a hybrid.

          1. The fact is there is indeed an engine in the current cars as one component of the power units. And the regs can be tweaked to extract more from them. They may be more expensive but with so much money in F1 they are only a sensible decision or two away from that not being an obstacle, namely better distribution of the billions of dollars F1 does generate, as has been talked about ad infinitum. And change is in the works starting with the 2017 cars. Personally my main concern right now is fake DRS and tires that shouldn’t be in F1, especially now that we are experiencing processions in spite of them. If we must have processions (again, which may change for 2017, or even 2016 depending on the tires) then why not at least get rid of DRS. Bottom line for me, a lot of the issues and opinions people have with F1 would quieten down if the product on the track was more enthralling. Closer racing is what all seem to agree should be F1’s main goal. And that won’t come with more aero dependence, nor would a change in what powers the cars change that.

            1. The fact is there is indeed an engine in the current cars as one component of the power units. And the regs can be tweaked to extract more from them. They may be more expensive but with so much money in F1 they are only a sensible decision or two away from that not being an obstacle, namely better distribution of the billions of dollars F1 does generate, as has been talked about ad infinitum. And change is in the works starting with the 2017 cars. Personally my main concern right now is fake DRS and tires that shouldn’t be in F1, especially now that we are experiencing processions in spite of them. If we must have processions (again, which may change for 2017, or even 2016 depending on the tires) then why not at least get rid of DRS. Bottom line for me, a lot of the issues and opinions people have with F1 would quieten down if the product on the track was more enthralling. Closer racing is what all seem to agree should be F1’s main goal

              Amen @robbie. The cut and thrust of it in a nutshell.

            2. Whoops meant to copy from “bottom line” onwards

    6. Hamilton to test a MotoGP bike? Yes please! I hope in my lifetime that someone will ‘do a Surtees’ and switch disciplines (I know it won’t be Hamilton, it’s just something I’d like to see).

      1. @f1bobby Valentino Rossi genuinely could have done that, he was a karting champion before moving to bikes to have a viable career, and tested for Ferrari, but they went with Kimi/Massa and then Alonso/Massa instead. Would have been interesting, Schumi/Rossi!

        1. I was one of those who was hoping that Rossi would switch!

          Max Biaggi and Mick Doohan were other notable riders who tried their hand at F1. Michael Schumacher was pretty good hand on bikes. I remember how some years back he got on Casey Stoner’s bike and put in some pretty decent lap times.

          Rossi would have been great for F1.

          1. Rossi was very fast but compared to F1 drivers he was no where. He was running with a V10 engine and faster tyres against V8 cars after lots of testing and was still a few seconds off the pace. I remember Alonso and Webber saying though he did well that final 10% would of been out of his reach.

            From what i remember at the time Max Biaggi did a better job in his limited tests for Ferrari and Spyker. They said he was a natural, and looking how he rides a bike(super smooth) then its not a surprise he could translate that to a car.

      2. It would have to be another Surtees, a i.e. a motorcycle rider switching to F1. I can’t ever foresee an F1 driver switching to bikes and getting anywhere near the top guys in Moto GP.

        1. Agree. The urge to preserve ourselves gets stronger as we get older so moving to bikes from a full career in cars would definitely be going against the grain.

          1. The whole thing is nearly impossible because of the high professionalism that exist in big modern sports.
            In Surtees days being an F1 driver was just another activity. This guys were racing everything and they weren’t specifically focusing on getting every single milliliter of performance from their F1 car. They didn’t have physios etc and tons of data to work every detail of their F1 driving.
            Now they do and that makes the chances of a guy who wasn’t focusing on F1 but in something else really really hard.

    7. Hell ya, Massa is kicking ass. I recall when he first got injured, I thought I was being overly optimistic to think he could return to top form. Well, he has returned, and he is battling Bottas for every fraction. Go Massa!

      1. I don’t think he’s every gotten slower tbh. It’s just that there is no Alonso in his team.

        1. ..yeah but Ferrari were purposely making Massa look slow against Alonso, in order to cushion the latter’s ego…remember?..I think it was in his contract to do so.

          1. ColdFly F1 (@)
            8th August 2015, 11:02

            I think it was in his contract to do so.

            Sometimes it’s better not to think, or at least keep those thoughts to yourself.

            1. LOL
              Maybe it was sarcasm? No?

            2. ColdFly F1 (@)
              8th August 2015, 13:13

              If it was sarcasm then I totally missed it and my sincere apologies to @jaymenon10.

            3. Well @coldfly given how Ferrari let Alonso turn his engine up to catch up the 3.0s trigger gap that the team had agreed after Australia (where there were cars ahead to be chased), the sarcasm was easily missed!

              For me Williams, tho they have blundered a bit, are proving what Ron always said, that the big downside to having a No1 is the effect on the No2.

              Not that I’m a fan of Massa, but it’s good to see him set free.

            4. Yeah I felt the same upon hearing of FM going to Williams. Great for him and the team. Got FM out from under the one-rooster unwritten, and sometimes written rule at Ferrari. Personally I’m convinced that MS had his teammates under contract to be subservient, of which FM was one once, but otherwise for FM at Ferrari it was implied, not necessarily written. The other big downside for me is the effect having a designated 1 and 2 has on the racing, the series, and the fans, due to the effect it has on the 2.

    8. Maybe a little off topic here, but what does the phrase “Lighting Up The Rear Tyres” mean?


      1. Spinning the rear tyres, normally to heat them up.
        Next time you watch the cars coming to the grid at the end of the parade lap you will see the drivers slow down, rev the engine and accelerate quickly with a lot of wheel spin – that is them “lighting up the rears”.
        You can also do it by mistake coming out of the corners, which generally results in you oversteering out of the exit and onto the straight.

    9. The (autocar)link to the interview with Gary Paffet is wrong, use this link instead:

      1. And Thanks again, turned out to quite a good read!

    10. Bottas is probably higher than Dan but surely, Rosberg is in the top 3. He’s won 3 races and in Spain and Austria he completely blitzed the field. In, Monaco lady luck was by his side but 6 1-2s in 10 races shows he hasn’t been a slouch.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        8th August 2015, 9:05

        6 1-2s in 10 races shows he hasn’t been a slouch

        I don’t think he is a slouch, but when driving by far the quickest car we should analyse why he missed 4 times a 1-2 position! @mim5
        There are probably 11 drivers who could have been third but been dealt a bad hand by lady luck or sir misjudgement.

        1. @coldfly in those 6 1-2s Lewis has led Nico home in 4 of them(Australia+1.360s, China+0.714s, Canada+2.285s, Silverstone+10.956s) with Nico leading Lewis in 2(Spain+17.551s, Austria+8.800s)

          we should analyse why he missed 4 times a 1-2 position!

          Well, Hamilton also missed some 1-2s.
          In, Bahrain Hamiltons 5th win Rosberg was 3rd *BBW issues.
          In Monaco, Rosbergs 3rd win, Lewis was 3rd *pitstop strategy issues.
          In Malaysia 1.Vettel , 2.Hamilton , 3.Rosberg
          In Hungary 1.Vettel , 6.Hamilton , 8.Rosberg

          I don’t know what this tells you but what it says to me is that Nico isn’t that far off matching Hamilton and with Hamilton 2nd it makes no sense to have Rosberg 12th. and lets not forget that hes competing at the sharp end of the grid with the likes of Hamilton , Vettel.

    11. Ron Brooks (@)
      8th August 2015, 8:03

      Glad to see no one has bothered reacting to Michael Andretti’s comments about F1. He may technically be a “former F1 driver”, but ISTR his F1 experience lasted less than a full season, involving a number of crashes.

      If his father Mario has something to say about F1, I’d seriously consider it. Michael should stick to racing he knows something about.

    12. Sorry but I can’t Andretti seriously. Its the normal bash F1 because “I have a personal agenda” routine.

      McLarens struggles are predominately engine related, but Andretti’s INDYCAR team is powered by Honda so he can’t bad mouth his supplier. Instead he hints that it’s perhaps the McLaren chassis that’s the problem.

      Not true because the drivers including Alonso have stated that the chassis is great and has good balance. They are just unable to reliably use the Honda’s full potential.

      The problem is once the engine is sorted, it will naturally change the chassis dynamics. Chassis might feel great at low power and totally unmanageable at full power.

      Seems like lately all the INDCAR races are decided by random full course caution(safety car). INDYCAR has its own problems to deal with also.

      Only difference is they work on them in background instead of having everything turned into a daily news article about doom and gloom…everything is wrong.

      1. @sudd

        Seems like lately all the INDCAR races are decided by random full course caution(safety car).

        As has always been the case & it can be the same when we have safety cars in F1… Look at Hungary for example the SC had a major impact on the final results.

        1. @PeterG,

          Indycars use of the safety car and its pit lane closure procedures are totally different from F1.

          SC comes out for the lamest of reasons. Oh, you stalled, crashed, or lost power? Lets stop the race so we can get the stalled car fired up and back in the race.

          The whole system is easily manipulated by teams and race control whenever they want to “spice” up the race.

          I love the local yellow system in F1. F1 avoids full SC periods whereas Indycar actively looks for them. Ironically, the races still end up being decided by who can stretch their fuel mileage or avoid being caught out by the SC. Easily manipulated when you have teams with six cars on track that can be given orders and must comply.

          When F1 has a SC 9/10 its legitimate. There is always that possibility of losing it all if you’re the leader and the SC comes out. However, you have to admit its usage is grossly exploited in Indycar. Majority of F1 races are run w/o SC, as they should. Indycar is the total opposite. SC periods are part of the race strategy, FOR EVERY RACE! Makes the racing look like a farce if you ask me.

          1. Ron Brooks (@)
            8th August 2015, 21:54

            Totally agree.

            Indycar is still way too Indy-centric. Ovals for me are about as exciting as watching paint dry. I simply can’t stay awake.

            I attended my first Indycar race many years ago, when they first branched onto road courses. One drop of rain would stop the race.

            I think the F1 Virtual Safety Car is brilliant. But they should also consider CART’s jet engine, which blew the track clean.

    13. I feel that Andretti should focus on his team’s lack of performance as opposed to a series which he failed in over 20 years ago.

      1. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
        8th August 2015, 11:28

        Spot on @craig-o

      2. @craig-o Michael Andretti is an intelligent guy, a team owner in a major series and someone from a family with a rich history in motorsport including F1. The fact that he didn’t himself succeed in his time in F1 doesn’t detract from that.

        He raises some real issues which have been voiced by other knowledgable people in the F1 world (Patrick Head, Gary Anderson and Martin Whitmarsh included).

        I always assume that when someone plays the man rather the ball, it’s because they don’t can’t or don’t want to address the issues raised.

        Then again, how can anyone explain how doubling engine costs, when teams at the bottom half of the grid are struggling for their survival, is good for the sport?

        1. @tdog Keeping engine suppliers supplying and F1 at the bleeding edge?

        2. @tdog

          Then again, how can anyone explain how doubling engine costs, when teams at the bottom half of the grid are struggling for their survival, is good for the sport?

          The cost of the current V6’s seems like its gone up so much because the cost of the V8’s was kept artificially low thanks to FIA subsidies.

          Without going back & checking I think the actual cost of the V8’s was something like $15m reduced to around $8m thanks to the FIA subsidiaries. The current V6’s cost something like $20m I think (Most of the cost is due to the hybrid systems).

          Looking at Indycar there engine cost’s are also heavily subsidized & the engine manufacturer’s (Honda & Chevrolet) have been making a significant loss on each unit sold as a result. It has also been reported that the subsidies & amount engine suppliers are/would lose as a result of them is a key reason no other engine suppliers have shown any interest in joining Indycar.

          1. And don’t forget the expensive aero kits introduced this year.

          2. The engines aren’t sold, they’re leased.

        3. Ron Brooks (@)
          8th August 2015, 21:30

          I don’t find your “play the man” analogy particularly apt. You would have us pay as much attention to say, Donald Trump’s utterings, as to President Obama’s. I think not.

    14. I can’t believe all the negative comments I’m reading about Michael Andretti! He is one of the legends of motor sport and is undeserving of all these harsh comments.

      He is very well placed to make comments about driving since he is third on the all time Indycar win list (42 wins). Although his F1 season in 1993 wasn’t the most successful F1 season in history, he was one of the most respected drivers of his time.

      However I feel that his achievements as a team owner almost eclipse his great driving achievements. He has won the Indy 500, the Indycar championship, entered successful teams in GRC, Mazda Road to Indy, A1GP and Formula E, alongside running a promotions business ASM. This year he has been very vocal in opposition to the “Aero kits” as something which add (in his opinion) unnecessary expense and burden to his team, with minimal addition to the racing product. As a team owner in multiple series, I find him to be a credible input into the debate of costs in F1.

      1. @georgeod, Michael Andretti did begin as a respected driver in F1, but the problem is that he then proceeded to alienate much of the team around him.

        It is true that, during his career, he had a lot of mechanical and electronic problems with his car, but at the same time his attitude towards the team was also quite poor – he showed no interest in trying to integrate himself into the team, choosing to stay in the US and then fly in for each race and not showing any real inclination to try and work with the engineers or to learn about new developments.

        Furthermore, that attitude was not helped by the fact that his father discouraging him from testing – his attitude was that Michael only needed to do one or two tests, and that the test drivers should do the rest of the work for him – which not only made it harder for him to learn both the car and the tracks he’d compete at, but also gave the team the impression that he didn’t care about his performance issues. When you consider that, at the same time, Hakkinen had relocated to Woking, put in a considerable amount of effort as a test driver and showed considerably more enthusiasm in development work and in working with the team, it is not surprising that, in the longer term, McLaren felt that Hakkinen was a far better bet for them.

        As others have also suggested, Andretti’s criticism of the “Aero kits” is not exactly being made from a neutral standpoint either – the Honda aero kits are, in most circumstances, considered to be inferior to the Chevrolet aero kits, so getting rid of them would also serve to improve the competitiveness of his team.

        1. Michael’s problem was that he wanted to do things the way Mario had in the 70s.

          Mario never moved to the UK/Europe when he was racing in F1 was Michael felt that he didn’t need to. Mario didn’t do that much F1 testing (As he was also racing other categories) so Michael felt that he didn’t need to. Mario used to show up & drive without much time to prepare so Michael felt he could do the same.

          To be honest I think any season prior he’d have probably been able to get away with doing that, But the cars in 1993 were so advanced & so different to what he was used to thanks to all the electronics with the active ride & other systems that not doing that much testing just saw him put at a much bigger disadvantage because it was taking him longer to figure out the different way you had to drive those cars compared to what he was used to.

          I always felt it was kind of a shame he didn’t stay on in F1 into 1994 as I think he’d have been much better that year, Not just because he woudl have had a year of F1 experience but also because I think those non-active, less technology packed cars would have suited him better.

    15. Love that interview with Paffett, some very honest answers in there.

      “It was pretty embarrassing at the time, as one day I turned up at the test, put the helmet on, fired it up and there was no clutch paddle. So I got on the radio and yelled, ‘There’s no clutch paddle!’ and the team said, ‘Oh yeah, sorry. It’s now a button’.”


      1. yes, very nice read

    16. If I ever needed a reason never to watch Formula E again, Jacques Villeneuve just handed one to me on a plate. Taking all bets on how many days he’ll race before complaining about something.

      1. i feel just the opposite. i’m not a villeneuve hater. i’m a fan and look forward to the new formula e season. some people dislike jacques and don’t even have a reason. he’s outspoken and tells the truth in a business full of “spin”. granted, some of the comments he has made concerning some f1 drivers has been inflammatory, but he’s been part of sky italia and that’s what the media does. it’s called speculation. i for one am excited to be able to watch jacques compete in a series for a full season.

        1. As I said at the top of the page, I haven’t paid much attention to FE, and now I am stoked about it. This is a great add for the series.

    17. If Bottas leaves for Ferrari, can Alonso end up at Williams? How awsome would that be.

    Comments are closed.