When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
They're saying it was just an issue with the wheel nut, "No big deal." I certainly hope that's the case ... (and not something related to the suspension).
To my eye, Kimi's car looked the most settled of the bunch.
Also, halos should not be brightly colored because they stick out too much at speed. Should be dark colors or black (as on the MCL, RBR, MBZ, Renault, Haas, etc.), not red (SF), white (Sauber, Williams) or pink (Force India). Ugh.
Cannot believe how bad the graphics and colors are on the McLaren.
Looks more like a local amatuer Formula Ford racing outfit than a teams that's won 182 grand prix.
I don't get the hate for the McLaren. Compared to last year's McLaren, this car looks good. People have been asking for an orange McLaren for years, and now we have it. I'm not sold on the blue fin, but otherwise it looks fine to me. I think the jarring thing is that it has no sponsorship on it, which from an aesthetics standpoint, is not a bad thing.
I don't get the hate for the McLaren. Compared to last year's McLaren, this car looks good. People have been asking for an orange McLaren for years, and now we have it. I'm not sold on the blue fin, but otherwise it looks fine to me. I think the jarring thing is that it has no sponsorship on it, which from an aesthetics standpoint, is not a bad thing.
I have no hate for McLaren (I'd love to see them and Williams at the front again). It's just McLaren had some iconic cars in terms of sponsorship and graphics as to see what they have now seems so amateur.
Something I see currently on Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes, but lost on many other teams
I have no hate for McLaren (I'd love to see them and Williams at the front again). It's just McLaren had some iconic cars in terms of sponsorship and graphics as to see what they have now seems so amateur.
Something I see currently on Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes, but lost on many other teams
But that's just like saying the Ferrari is amateurish because it's just a red car. McLaren is just using its historic colours right now, same as how Ferrari is. A really poor scheme is what McLaren did last year with orange, black, and white. There are no coherent flow to the design and it was a mess. The new McLaren is not.
But that's just like saying the Ferrari is amateurish because it's just a red car. McLaren is just using its historic colours right now, same as how Ferrari is. A really poor scheme is what McLaren did last year with orange, black, and white. There are no coherent flow to the design and it was a mess. The new McLaren is not.
It's not the just the color, it's the graphics, colors, contrast, position (angle, rotation), font, working with the car's flow and shapes, coordination with other sponsors,......
To each his own, but IMO the McLaren looks very amatuer from the side view.
I don't get the hate for the McLaren. Compared to last year's McLaren, this car looks good. People have been asking for an orange McLaren for years, and now we have it. I'm not sold on the blue fin, but otherwise it looks fine to me. I think the jarring thing is that it has no sponsorship on it, which from an aesthetics standpoint, is not a bad thing.
From a straight on view from the front I think the car looks really good. However, from the side it is just a huge bland orange blob. They need something else going on. Not just sponsors or anything. Some graphics of some sort.
It's not the just the color, it's the graphics, colors, contrast, position (angle, rotation), font, working with the car's flow and shapes, coordination with other sponsors,......
To each his own, but IMO the McLaren looks very amatuer from the side view.
This is the perfect contrast to my point. If you remove all of the sponsors from the Ferrari, it's essentially the same design as the McLaren. And I'd argue that as it currently stands, the McLaren is much more pleasing to the eye. The Ferrari is awash in logos, and there is no coherent design philosophy, it's just a cramming of as many logos as possible based on what space is available. And don't get me even started on the Ferrari/Marlboro logo. It does not flow with the rest of the car at all. Obviously it's good for Ferrari's bottom line, but it looks very messy.
F-C does have a point. I think it's just the blank canvas on the MCL that makes it look odd. Remove the sponsorship from the SF & it's quite similar.
Add a large title sponsor to the MCL & it would likely look better, IMO.
This is the perfect contrast to my point. If you remove all of the sponsors from the Ferrari, it's essentially the same design as the McLaren. And I'd argue that as it currently stands, the McLaren is much more pleasing to the eye. The Ferrari is awash in logos, and there is no coherent design philosophy, it's just a cramming of as many logos as possible based on what space is available. And don't get me even started on the Ferrari/Marlboro logo. It does not flow with the rest of the car at all. Obviously it's good for Ferrari's bottom line, but it looks very messy.
That's not a Marlboro logo, Philip Morris has not sponsored Ferrari since 2010. I do agree the cars do look very similar, mostly due to the rules and trying to get the most aero/downforce out of the chassis.
As for the logos and design philosophy, the best phrase is "to each his own".
I think the Ferrari looks gorgeous, similar to the Mercedes Benz and Red Bull.
The graphics, logos, colors and fonts flow very well (especially the RayBan flowing over the sidepod).
There's a great design art to getting it right like that. Peter Windsor used to work for Williams before he became a writer and journalist.
He was involved with marketing and sponsorship at Williams.
One of his responsibilities was getting all those logo's on the car appropriately and making sure all the sponsors were pleased and satisfied.
So like that Ferrari, it probably took weeks of lots of graphic artists getting all those logo's on there including the bottom sidepod banner strip which often include many car component vendors (SKF, Marelli Magnetti, NGK, Brembo).
Windsor in some YouTube interview said the FW14 took almost the entire off season before 1991 to get Labatt's, Camel, Group Bull, Renault/ELF, and Canon on the FW14 which was only slightly altered for the 1992 season as the FW14B
The results IMO were beautiful, people still remember the colorful Williams and the sponsors were happy that their insignia was unique and individual on the graphics.
I guessing but most race fans remember the best graphical cars the most whether they be McLaren Marlboro, Lotus JPS,.....
The 2018 McLaren with it's uninspired graphics looks like some back fo the grid Formula Ford racer. And last but most importantly, there is no right or wrong here, just personal preference/
That's not a Marlboro logo, Philip Morris has not sponsored Ferrari since 2010. I do agree the cars do look very similar, mostly due to the rules and trying to get the most aero/downforce out of the chassis.
As for the logos and design philosophy, the best phrase is "to each his own".
I think the Ferrari looks gorgeous, similar to the Mercedes Benz and Red Bull.
The graphics, logos, colors and fonts flow very well (especially the RayBan flowing over the sidepod).
There's a great design art to getting it right like that. Peter Windsor used to work for Williams before he became a writer and journalist.
He was involved with marketing and sponsorship at Williams.
One of his responsibilities was getting all those logo's on the car appropriately and making sure all the sponsors were pleased and satisfied.
So like that Ferrari, it probably took weeks of lots of graphic artists getting all those logo's on there including the bottom sidepod banner strip which often include many car component vendors (SKF, Marelli Magnetti, NGK, Brembo).
Windsor in some YouTube interview said the FW14 took almost the entire off season before 1991 to get Labatt's, Camel, Group Bull, Renault/ELF, and Canon on the FW14 which was only slightly altered for the 1992 season as the FW14B
The results IMO were beautiful, people still remember the colorful Williams and the sponsors were happy that their insignia was unique and individual on the graphics.
I guessing but most race fans remember the best graphical cars the most whether they be McLaren Marlboro, Lotus JPS,.....
The 2018 McLaren with it's uninspired graphics looks like some back fo the grid Formula Ford racer. And last but most importantly, there is no right or wrong here, just personal preference/
Just one final comment. Back in the day, cars only had one color and there were no sponsorship. Recall the silver arrows, the blue Bugattis, the red Alfas, or even the orange McLaren. When sponsorship were first introduced, fans were outraged because it made the cars look "unclean". So we are so conditioned with multi colored sponsored cars that a pure orange car seems almost uninspired. Ironic?
Regarding the Ferrari-Marlboro logo, it actually is still a sponsorship from Marlboro. Hard to believe, but true. That's why the logo appears the way it does, similar to the Marlboro chevron, but different enough for legal reasons. I can't remember for sure, but I think Marlboro sponsors almost the whole car, and the other sponsors on the car actually pay Marlboro, and not Ferrari. Almost like paying a sublease for the rent.
Just one final comment. Back in the day, cars only had one color and there were no sponsorship. Recall the silver arrows, the blue Bugattis, the red Alfas, or even the orange McLaren. When sponsorship were first introduced, fans were outraged because it made the cars look "unclean". So we are so conditioned with multi colored sponsored cars that a pure orange car seems almost uninspired. Ironic?
Regarding the Ferrari-Marlboro logo, it actually is still a sponsorship from Marlboro. Hard to believe, but true. That's why the logo appears the way it does, similar to the Marlboro chevron, but different enough for legal reasons. I can't remember for sure, but I think Marlboro sponsors almost the whole car, and the other sponsors on the car actually pay Marlboro, and not Ferrari. Almost like paying a sublease for the rent.
As for the overall sponsorship, although some fans didn't like it some did.
It made it far easier to distinguish the cars once they became colorful with graphics/logo/words.
And many have become iconic with their association with the team/car/driver (i.e. Mario Andretti and his black & gold JPS Special Lotus 79).
Sponsorship also made it possible for small teams to succeed in F1.
Ken Tyrrell was able to get money from Ford/Elf/Dunlap in order to compete in F1 with Jackie Stewart after their breakaway from Mantra.
Costs were starting to rise in the late 60's and sponsorship money worked with F1 to advance the sport in many ways.
And for the last some totally useless trivia for Thursday.
When McLaren signed Keke Rosberg (Nico's father) for 1986, Marlboro also had to approve it (contract formality since John Hogan the Marlboro exec rarely disagreed).
Hogan was perfectly fine with Rosberg since Marlboro already sponsored him privately as a driver and as a bonus Rosberg smoked Marlboro's.
While signing the contract with Ron Dennis, Hogan said his new McLaren contract didn't have a "all you can smoke clause" but Philip Morris would still send Keke all the cartons of Marlboro's he wanted.
02-26-2018, 08:54 AM
Here's hoping. IMO, it's worse than the "GP2 Liveried" Sauber C35. Which I didn't think really looked all that bad. 
I was not aware of the Marlboro/Ferrari sponsorship. 
