|
2002 Teams Review
An in-depth look at the past season, team by team and driver by driver |
||||
| Back to 2002 Season Review | Back to Reject CENTRALE | Go to Text-Only Version | ||
|
||||
| 1. Ferrari | ||||||
|
Let's talk about the good things first. The Ferrari F2002 was arguably the best F1 car ever, with tightly-packaged aerodynamics, an engine on par with the best, a fabulous titanium gearbox and rear-end assembly, tailor-made Bridgestone tyres and near-perfect reliability. From 29 starts, the F2002 failed to get off the dummy grid twice, and that was it in terms of retirements. The F2002 had been a giant leap forward from the already-superb F2001. Piloted by a hungry Michael Schumacher and a confident Rubens Barrichello, the domination was complete, with only one 'lucky' win out of 15.
Ross Brawn could still be relied upon to come up with daring pit strategies, and the Ferrari crew were as faultless as ever. The team spirit was undeniable. But where they fell in most people's eyes was the way in which they turned Formula One, notionally a sport, into a cold-blooded numbers game. Not satisfied with the inevitability of their final placings, they had to ruthlessly set out to contrive results, thumbing their noses at fans and authorities alike, arrogantly flaunting their superiority in a distinctly selfish and unsporting manner. What made it worse, for a team otherwise so astute, was the ridiculously clumsy way in which they tried to explain and atone for farces like Austria and Indianapolis by podium antics and constantly talking about 'teamwork', skirting around the fact that they had undermined the value of a Grand Prix win. Add to that Jean Todt's broken promise that the Ferraris would race once Schumi's title was sealed; further team orders were subsequently used to guarantee Rubens 2nd overall. It was all such a tragically unnecessary taint on what should otherwise have been the perfect season. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 2. Williams-BMW | ||||||
|
If the atmosphere within McLaren was good, then the same could not be said of Williams. Having matched Ferrari for speed but not reliability in 2001, it would have been bitterly disappointing for Sir Frank Williams and Patrick Head to find that the FW24 was certainly reliable enough, but just nowhere near the Ferrari's race pace. Not that there was anything wrong with the car's speed over one lap. All 34 times they started in the top 6 (even Ferrari didn't manage that), and Juan-Pablo Montoya took 7 poles, but Sunday after Sunday it was a case of unfulfilled potential.
The car was pretty much bulletproof, and the engine more so than it was last year, and still just about the most powerful. But Williams paid dearly for conservative aerodynamics that demanded the use of Michelin's harder tyres and then wore them out with alarming regularity. So often the Williams drivers would find their lap times exploding as they struggled for grip and the car became as difficult to handle as a rodeo bull on caffeine. Often, their difficulties were magnified by the way in which the McLarens were making their softer rubber last longer. The frustration grew, and it showed. It didn't help matters when they seemed unable to get both drivers on peak form for a whole race weekend at the same time, and by year's end there was once again animosity between JPM and Ralf Schumacher. They had touched at the Nurburgring, almost done so at Monza, and finally tangled at Indy. Strategically, Sam Michael is talented but not as dynamic as Ross Brawn, and at times he seemed uneasily caught between the drivers' wishes and Head's iron-fisted determination. Williams shade McLaren for 2nd in our rankings, only by virtue of a marginally more rounded package. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 3. McLaren-Mercedes | ||||||
|
Third place in the constructors' title with 'only' 65 points meant that 2002 was the first time since 1997 that McLaren has been out of the top two. That would no doubt have been galling by Ron Dennis' usual standards, but in truth the major problems were fairly easy to pin-point and there was still a lot to be positive about. Their big Achilles Heel, of course, was the breathless Mercedes engine, which was not only down on power but also unreliable (with 7 blow-ups in races during the year). Commendably, McLaren refused to criticise Mercedes in public, but it was clearly the one thing that held them back all year.
Being new to the Michelins, and without the raw speed of the Williams, McLaren found themselves as the French tyre-maker's number 2 team. They could have done with more support in using Michelin's softer tyres. Whereas Williams often wore out the standard tyre, the McLaren often managed to make the softer tyre last, which was a tribute to Adrian Newey's beautifully-handling MP4/17. Its ease on tyres was noticeable at the Nurburgring, Magny-Cours and the Hungaroring, which in turn allowed for longer stints. Finishing 4th and 5th in Hungary having started 10th and 11th was a case in point. The brilliance of the aerodynamics came out especially in Monaco, France and Belgium, and it was an awful shame that the engine couldn't do the car justice. One other thing that stood out was the general ambience within the team. David Coulthard was happy to finally have Newey in his corner, and worked well with Pat Fry. The team helped Kimi Raikkonen fit in quickly, and any expected post-Hakkinen unease never eventuated. Their new motorhome, or Communication Centre, was more a symbol of strength and unity than brashness. These were ominous signs for the rest of the field. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 4. Renault | ||||||
|
In some respects, considering Benetton's upward spiral towards the end of 2001, Renault didn't improve too much throughout 2002 and could thus be said to have been a touch disappointing. But they earn fourth in our rankings largely by default. 4th in the constructors' championship with 23 points, scored over 10 separate races no less, was testimony to their relative upper-midfield consistency. Having said that, they started the year challenging the McLarens; by season's end, the McLarens were off challenging the Williams, and Renault had not been able to keep up the pace of development.
They were admittedly still hampered by their radical 111-degree engine, now in its second year but with the jury still out as to its effectiveness. It was apparently down some 75 horsepower on the best, and actually blew up seven times in races. That they managed to score as many points as they did was thanks firstly to their brilliant launch control system, far and away the best in the field, capable of catapulting both cars up a number of places at the start of each race, and what must have been some mightily effective aerodynamics on the R202 under the guidance of Mike Gascoyne. Having said that, there were races such as Austria, Canada and Italy where the yellow and blues (easily the ugliest paint job of the year) just couldn't get a set-up, and yet Monza was the only time both cars finished in the points. That was due to an audacious pit strategy of an early one-stop tactic, which was repeated at Indianapolis and was a credit to the team's brains trust. Less impressive, though, was the way in which Jenson Button was shut out as soon as it was clear that he was on the move for 2003. But that's always been Flavio Briatore's way - and if he gets results, then who are we to criticise? Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 5. Toyota | ||||||
|
During some races in 2002, it was easy to forget that Toyota were in their debut season, and sometimes the red and whites were so unobtrusive you hardly knew they were there at all. While for teams like Sauber that sort of thing may have indicated rather unsatisfactory stagnancy, for Toyota that was actually a compliment. Unlike recent debut flops like BAR and Jaguar, Ove Andersson's team set modest targets, were determined to learn, and didn't take points (or even qualifying for races) for granted. In the end they scored two points, and came 10th overall, behind Minardi only on count-back.
As such, they achieved their goals, set a platform for future progress, and could be said to have been impressive. Mika Salo scored on the team's debut in Australia and again in Brazil, and should have scored in Italy, likewise Allan McNish in Malaysia. The engine was superb and strong, but Gustav Brunner's nimble but conservative chassis came in for more criticism. Yet while it was generally true that Toyota performed better on high-speed tracks, the only time both cars qualified in the top 10 was in Monaco. In fact, Toyotas started in the top 10 nine times, more than Jordan. Not that everything was a bed of roses. Thirteen times a Toyota started below 16th on the grid, and 14 times they retired, five due to gearbox or transmission problems. But after Salo suffered a mid-season run of six straight DNFs, he managed to finish the last six events, showing that the team was able to successfully cure reliability issues. It showed that the team was moving up the learning curve, helping to create a positive impression overall. But one wonders if it was wise to let go of both their drivers at the end of the year instead of opting for some level of continuity. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 6. Sauber-Petronas | ||||||
|
In our season review last year, we questioned if Sauber could maintain their 'best of the rest' form, and we were not alone in doing so. In the end, the doubters were proven correct. Sauber still came 5th in the constructors' title and scored 11 points, but all but one of them came in the first 10 races. It seemed as though the Swiss team were resuming normal service and returning to their previous party tricks, producing a bulletproof car that would run solidly in midfield, but with hardly any development to speak of as the season wore on.
The C21 was an evolution of the pioneering twin-keel C20 from 2001, but without a designer of note, one wondered just how far the design philosophy could be stretched. It was worth pointing out that the C20 started off with vertical plates joining the nose to the front wing, and ended the season with diagonal ones. The C21 started with diagonal plates and ended up with vertical ones. It was as though they were going around in circles. There were noticeable occasions when the car didn't work, such as at Monaco, Spa and Monza, but there seemed no pattern that the engineers could understand. That wasn't really good enough for a team using last year's championship-winning engines. Only a handful of mechanical retirements all year meant that Sauber's reliability record was bettered only by Williams and Ferrari, allowing both cars to finish in the points in Malaysia and Spain. Otherwise the team didn't manage to strike gold with Felipe Massa. They ought to share some of the blame for the Brazilian failing to temper his over-driving style, but from their use of team orders at Hockenheim it was clear that the rookie was out of favour with the team as early as the mid-season. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 7. Jaguar-Cosworth | ||||||
|
Another unhappy season overall for Jaguar, but one in which at least they showed signs of being able to solve problems and make genuine improvement. Despite the constant question marks over Ford's enthusiasm, and scepticism about the Blue Oval's affirmations of support, the fact is that from the time Steve Nichols got the chop for the inherently horrible R3, there were no more big-name sackings until the end of the season. For the first time Jaguar could be said to have had some stability, and it worked wonders, considering the fact that they started the season languishing amongst the Minardis, and ended the season as 'best of the rest' in a couple of races.
These results were thanks to a genuine step forward via the R3B, ameliorating some of the major front-end aerodynamic issues. The R3B seemed particularly effective in low-downforce configuration, qualifying in the top 10 at Spa and Monza and potentially in the top 6 at Indianapolis if only they had made their Michelins work. Although weaknesses remained in terms of high-downforce set-up, the fact is that Eddie Irvine's 3rd place at Monza was the only one scored by a team outside the 'big 3', and that was a tribute to the work Jaguar engineers had put in. But there could be no excuses about how bad the car was at the start, nor about their awful unreliability, with 19 retirements throughout 2002, 5 due to hydraulic failures. The driveshaft, transmission and suspension were also weak, and it was a suspension failure that caused James Courtney's testing crash at Monza, the biggest F1 accident of the year. Also, the ambience between Irvine and Pedro de la Rosa was not good, but with both now put out to pasture, this won't be an issue in 2003. Instead they will have to cope with a lack of F1 racing experience behind the wheel of both cars. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 8. Jordan-Honda | ||||||
|
Eddie Jordan had reason to be disappointed with how 2002 went. Their tally of 9 points was their lowest since 1993, and the lowest for a 6th-placed team since 1992. In truth, the yellow cars were not consistently competitive, hamstrung by their gutless Honda engines and the fact that the man responsible for the EJ12 chassis, the highly-regarded Eghbal Hamidy, was very quickly not on the scene to help develop it, replaced by Gary Anderson, now back in favour, and Henri Durand. Like fellow Honda users BAR, it seemed as though they were quickly looking forward to 2003 long before 2002 was over.
As such, there seemed to be minimal improvement as the year progressed, although a more gently-sloping front wing replaced the original split-level design. One area where they did address early-season weaknesses, though, was in terms of their finishing record. In the first five races, Jordans retired 7 times, and in Malaysia, where both cars saw the flag, they had collided with each other during the event. Although the Honda engines continued to explode, ironically affecting number one driver Giancarlo Fisichella more, at least Jordan itself ironed out their early hydraulic and gearbox woes. Still, there was a shortage of car speed, and they only qualified in the top 10 eight times. And of those eight, only three times did it result in a points finish. Jordan did have the advantage of a big fuel tank though, which allowed Fisichella in particular to run long, climb up the order, get some clear air, make use of the durable Bridgestones, and then come in for a lightning stop. The yellow cars could make up some places this way, but if they were depending on this then they were clutching at straws. EJ eventually got his customer Ford Cosworth deal, and was quickly pinning his 2003 hopes on that. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 9. Minardi-Asiatech | ||||||
|
In 2002, Minardi (officially KL Minardi) scored 2 points and came 9th in the constructors' title, beating Toyota and Arrows. But in truth, their performance did not quite match expectations, and by season's end they were relatively less competitive than they were at the end of 2001. Without Gustav Brunner's input, the average chassis underwent very little development, and Asiatech seemed more interested in making grandiose but ultimately thwarted plans to become a constructor in its own right rather than improve its engine. In the end, Asiatech rather embarrassingly pulled out of F1 altogether.
In this era of megabucks manufacturer involvement in the face of general economic downturn, money was Minardi's problem yet again. The backing from Malaysia was not as much as expected, and it came with the lamentable Alex Yoong. Stoddart was forced to take on a raft of paying test drivers, such as Slovakian Jirko Malcharek, but it wasn't as though they had enough money to test anyway, which contributed to the lack of development. Parts were probably still being utilised beyond their use-by date, contributing to their conspicuous unreliability in the latter half of the year. Stoddart had planned for Minardi to move into the midfield, but they were still mired at the back, and in truth they were looking expendable as participants. The ongoing saga over the Prost TV money showed that. Stoddart kept trying to pull the 'we will go bankrupt soon' line, but by year's end that was starting to become wearing. He did not seem to realise that he had neither the resources nor the political grunt to get the big deal that would propel his team up the grid, but his ambitions remained unfettered even if somewhat unrealistic the way F1 is these days. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 10. BAR-Honda | ||||||
|
A generally disappointing performance from BAR in 2002, but not entirely unexpected, and not without hope for the future. Geoff Willis was a good acquisition at the end of 2001, but the designer could not be expected to have any major impact until the design of the BAR 05 for 2003. More importantly, David Richards was the right man to bring on board to steer the team in the right direction, except that by the time he joined it was too late to do anything about their 2002 program, and before this season began Richards was already looking forward to next season.
As it was, 2002 was a season to be endured rather than enjoyed. Richards slashed the workforce, dumping designer Malcolm Oastler whose 04 chassis underwhelmed yet again. He used the media to try to get Jacques Villeneuve to accept lower pay and to fire up the Canadian, and from the fact that Villeneuve was staying with the team for 2003 and seemingly driving with more purpose at season's end, Richards' ploy may well have worked. He was quick to snaffle up Jenson Button, and he managed to convince Honda to shed Jordan to commit to BAR alone in the years to come. That all points to a bright 2003. But this review is about 2002, and this season Honda was certainly a liability, their engine powerless and in terms of reliability a bit like a hand grenade with loose pins, although not all of BAR's woeful finishing record could be attributed to the motor. The 04 only worked from time to time, rarely in qualifying trim, and aerodynamic development was less than vigorous. The double points finish at Silverstone was rather flukey, and 8th in the constructors' title with only 7 points was their worst performance since their infamous 1999. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
| 11. Arrows-Cosworth | ||||||
|
The seeming demise of the Arrows team from Grand Prix racing towards the end of 2002, and their efforts to disguise their financial problems and avoid the wrath of the FIA, was one of the sadder stories of 2002. Their A23 chassis was late and readied only at the eleventh hour before the season began; their Cosworths were the fourth different engine they had had in as many seasons, and costly too; their sponsors were wavering, their creditors hostile, and there were takeover bids left, right and centre. By year's end, the future of the team was in complete limbo.
Since taking over the team in 1996, Tom Walkinshaw has lurched from one unsuccessful deal to the next in trying to live up to his promise of taking Arrows to the top. It all came back to bite the Scot in 2002. His undermining of Paul Stoddart's attempt to acquire Prost's assets, and his involvement in Phoenix/DART, in hindsight obviously an attempt to save his own team, was too duplicitious for us to accept. In the end, we had the farce of their deliberate non-qualification in France, their on-off appearances, and eventually their no-show in the last few rounds. Which was a pity for all involved. Sergio Rinland had produced a nimble if unorthodox A23 that was initially making better use of the Cosworths than Jaguar. It had allowed both drivers to mix it competitively in the midfield, with Heinz-Harald Frentzen knocking on the door of the top 10 in qualifying and finishing a brilliant 6th in Spain. But with the car arriving so late, reliability was always going to be a problem, and the sight of both orange cars stalled at the start of the parade lap in Melbourne, and eventually disqualified from the race, rather summed up their season. Back to the top. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Some images used here are Copyright © DailyF1.com, © Formula1.com and © F1Racing.net. For enlarged versions, please visit their sites! |
||||||
| |||
| Back to 2003 Season Review | |||
| Main Page | Drivers Index | Reject Teams | Hall of Shame | |||
|
Featured Rejects Reject Statistics Submit-a-Reject FAQ / Copyright |
Reject CENTRALE • Latest GP Review • Other Articles • Links / Banner |
Sign Guestbook Read Guestbook Current Poll Previous Polls |
|
|
|
|||
| All original content Copyright © 1999-2003 Formula One Rejects. | |||