Was John Barnard a good technical director?

To me, John Barnard was a loner who didn't like too much to work as part of a team of engineers.
He was a genius who craved for recognition but hardly got it.
That's why, I think, he changed of environment many times in his career, never feeling at home anywhere.

 

Excellent interview with him:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDLHZNmNv70[/ame]

Difficult to judge him based only on his Ferrari time as Ferrari was an organizational nightmare prior to Schumachers arrival.

 

He was very good..at Mclaren he did a steller job, starting in 82 (if i'm not mistaken) and building a great car for 84/85/86 season that broght 3 wdc in a row...he left for Ferrari and design a very good car for 87, probably the best car at the end of 87 season..the 88 car was good, but Mclaren Honda weree xcepcionel that year, so no chance..he design a great car for 89..but semiautomatic gearbox was a pain in the ass, the chassis was probably the best in the field...it certainly was next year but, by then he left leaving enrique Scalabroni in charge....he went to benetton were he design good cars, but not championship contenders, and his second stint at Ferrari wa sless stelar..

 

I think Barnard will and has gone down in History as an innovator.
first full carbon Chassis - McLaren
"Coke" bottle shape for the end of the cars - still used today
Semi Auto gear box - perfected that at Ferrari
he was also the first guy who understood full car packaging - he and Gordon Murray were artists when it came to "looks over design"... they liked things to look good.

he designed the Chapparal, McLaren cars from 1981 - 1987, Ferrari 639, 640, 641 and then the 412 & 412T ( various parts were finished by other designers)

he was English to his core - and never wanted to leave home, so while he was at Ferrari - the Italians did not like his way of work - and they schemed against him... Piero Lardi Ferrari was one of them - resulted in him being banned from the team by his Father... Alboreto was also anti Barnard & Niki Lauda did not get on well with him either.

as a designer he's in the top 5 of all time.

 

+1

 

Pretty much covers it although I think the decision to stay in the UK and setup the Guildford Technical Office or GTO was a mistake for both him and Ferrari. It fractured the design process and led to delays for the team.

Incidentally I could be worng on on this but wasn't the GTO building sold to Mclaren and the base where Gordon Murray created the F1?

 

Some good cars, some bad cars.

Probably he was a good desginer but not a good technical director, as he didn´t seem to merge into the teams he was working for. Maybe he had a reason to do that in Ferrari because he didn´t want to move to Italy; you may argue that he didn´t want to get into the politics of the team, but it´s impossible to fix a team if you just refuse to work with the people of that team. And then he kept working as an outsider for Benetton, Arrows and Prost. It looks that the guy had some issues with working within a hyerarchical structure.

 

you are correct. that is where McLaren Cars started.

 

he was a designer from the old school...he designed it, and ran the cars, when he left Prost - one person could not do that anymore.

 

+1


That's why I called him a loner.

 

In fact, it's because John Barnard had a F1 design ready for Project 4, Ron Dennis F2 outfit, that Marlboro engineered the take over of the McLaren team.

McLaren had somehow ran "out of steam" in the design department and Marlboro was worried that its sponsorship was wasted.

With the blueprints of a Barnard-designed carbon-fibre car under his arm, Ron Dennis went to solicite Marlboro backing to enter F1.

Instead, Marlboro proposed a merger of the 2 teams with Dennis at the helm; the McLaren family and other shareholders accepted.

But I think Barnard didn't get the reward he expected, so he moved on.

 

Wasn't one of the big gripes with him that he wouldn't move to Italy?

 

I've never understood Gordon Murray getting more recognition than John Barnard. Especially as the McLarens Murray designed were based on John's foundation work.

I think the main difference in their personality is John has a big mouth and has done well at telling the world how clever he (thinks he) is.
Pete

 

Murray was at his best in F1 at Brabham, where he designed the cars, decided the tactics and was also managing the drivers on track, in a role not too dissimilar to Ross Brawn at Ferrari.

I think Murray was past his best at McLaren; the environment was different and he was under Ron Dennis authority. Dennis was the boss, and Murray the employee.

I think Gordon Murray was relieved to be put in charge of designing McLaren's first road car, the F1. Dennis couldn't interfere too much; that was beyond his competence.

The F1 was really Murray's own creation and a masterpiece too.

 

I can agree with this.
Pete

 

Sorry Pete, but I disagree in some way here: the McLaren that won the 1988 title is clearly a development of Murray's "extra flat" Brabhams of 1986 and 1987. The similarity is even plain to see.

Rgds

 

William, that is obvious to the point that Murray has always said that it was his initial plan. When he discussed his hiring with Ron Dennis, he actually didn't want to draw any other Formula One, but has to compromise with Ron; they agreed that he would spent three years supervising the technical team (it is arguable that he did not design the McLaren Grand Prix cars himself, only supervised the design team) and that after three years he would be free to design the McLaren "roadcar" or "supercar", which was his initial motivation for signing with McLaren.
Rgds

“Then Elio de Angelis was killed in a testing accident at Paul Ricard. I was fed up with all the travel, and the general direction that F1 was going in, and I didn’t see it as an on-going challenge any more. I decided I should try something new.
“Just then Ron Dennis came chasing after me, because John Barnard was leaving McLaren. So I said to him, ‘I’ll come on board on one condition: three more years of Formula 1, and then that’s it. That’ll be 20 years in F1, and that’s enough.’ And he agreed to that.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/january-2008/70/lunch-gordon-murray

 

But that McLaren was designed by Mike Nichols. Murray arrived to McLaren too late to make any important contribution to it.

If Nichols got the idea from the Brabham is another question.

 

Read the article for which I have posted the reference and link above: Murray arrived at McLaren at the begining of 1987. He says that the 1987 car is not his, but he supervised the design of the 1988, 1989 and 1990 cars. The filiation between his 1986 Brabham and the 1988 McLaren is obvious, particularly when seen from the side.

Rgds

 

The 1988 McLaren looks almost identical to the 1987 ... which was not a Murray design ...

All Murray did was revise previous designs as he himself, as you quoted, was not interested anymore in F1. I have to admit that I am not a Murray fan as IMO he is too full of himself. Please note though that I have not met the real man, but have only read some of what he says via print and it all comes across as I would have done that so much better ... including the Autosport (Autocourse ?) 2001 book where he has a section, critizing old race car designs.
Pete

 

Well, I don't agree; I think his imput in the 1988 design is obvious; even if he did not design the car himself.

Rgds

 

My guess is that you probably mean "Steve Nichols", not Mike; indeed Steve Nichols is credited with the design of the 1988 MP4/4, Murray being officially technical director and suggested the lowline Brabham as inspiration. Then officially the MP4/5 of 1989 and MP4/5B of 1990 where credited to Steve Nichols and Neil Oatley, again under Murray supervision.
After that, the three years of Formula One that Murray agreed to do with Ron Dennis were over, and he was free to begin work on the road car.

Rgds

 

Again Murray is getting credit for something he had little to do with ...

So it appears Murray had very, very little to do with McLaren's F1 effort, which makes sense since he had lost interested in it and wanted to do the road car (an excellent design).
Pete

 

Well, that's of course your privilege Pete, no harm in that opinion. I guess the "other man" discussed here, John Barnard, was not an easy man to work for, and therefore, not that likeable to some either.

Rgds