'Gordon Murray’s living in a parallel universe’ — McLaren designers hit back over MP4/4 claims

Whilst Nichols’s car is based on an older period of McLaren’s history, he still leans heavily on his ‘80s McLaren experience to market his rarefied product.

“Having headed the design team at McLaren during arguably their most successful period ever, I’m a McLaren man through and through,” he says on his website. “With the Nichols N1A I’ve gone back to the very first McLaren for inspiration, combining elements of its classic lines with modern engineering for a car of extraordinary performance and presence.”

Murray’s reputation was already sky-high when he left Brabham at the end of 1986 after producing two drivers’ championship-winning cars, and innovations that included the infamous fan car, as well as the tilted engine of the troublesome BT55.

He joined McLaren to replace John Barnard and was appointed technical director with wide-ranging responsibility for the Formula 1 team, but what that actually meant in terms of involvement is where recollections differ.

Nichols said that he was tasked with the car that would go on to deliver Ayrton Senna his first championship — said to have been confirmed in a memo that was sent round to senior staff.

“Ron [Dennis] asked me to take on the ’88 car [MP4/4] so that [newly appointed] Neil Oatley could focus on the ’89 [MP4/5] car,” says Nichols.

“Gordon wrote some job descriptions, he didn’t interfere with the designing of the F1 car” Nichols

“Gordon wrote some job descriptions, he didn’t interfere with the designing of the F1 car and backed up the fact that Ron had appointed me as the chief designer.”

Nichols says the relative lack of input from Murray was actually what the McLaren design team desired.

“We’d been under John’s strict rule, and I think we all used this as an opportunity to break out a little bit, to do some of the things that we wanted to do. It was a well-oiled team, we respected each other and we thought in the same way. Things just rolled out in a coordinated sort of way, because there weren’t a lot of ego.”

“Gordon had the Brabham BT55, which was by any standard a terrible car. He’s got that blot on his copy book. So now I think he feels the need to claim credit for the MP4/4, to expunge the BT55 off his record. You can see what he’s trying to do there.”

Jeffreys says he has had similar experiences to Nichols with regards to threatened legal action, including one such incident involving the McLaren MP4/4 Owners’ Workshop Manual written by Steve Rendle.

The book is an exhaustive look at the grand prix car, interviewing all 17 members of the design team, as well as senior figures such as Dennis and Murray, who corroborated the views of Jeffreys and Nichols, at least for a certain period.

“Steve and I did a talk at Brooklands on the MP4/4,” Jefferys remembers. “We became aware Gordon had turned up and was in the back of the room. He didn’t say a word throughout the talk.

“At the end came along and presented us with two letters threatening us with the kind of stuff he said in your interview, to cease saying all these lies we said in the Haynes book, which we found surprising because the letters could have been written by us and given to him!”

“Part of our problem is that when the legendary and mighty Gordon Murray says something, people listen, us less so because we’re not ‘legendary’ in the public eyes.

Murray often cites the problematic BT55, which scored two points and racked up 19 retirements – as the initial inspiration behind the MP4/4, but both Nichols and Jeffreys refute this, explaining why any association is superficial, as well as citing the illegality of copying another car.

“None of us were looking at BT55 drawings and we wouldn’t have wanted to be either – it was a disaster,” says Jeffreys. “Why would we want a McLaren to have copied a car that had huge problems and was also two years old?

“If you also look at the MP4/3 [also designed by Nichols] and MP4/4 you can one is a development of the other – the backend is virtually identical.”

“Gordon says ‘Compare the two cars [BT55 and MP4/4] together, you’ll see they’re almost exactly the same,’ adds Nichols. “When you look at those two cars, they’re nothing alike.

“It was the ultimate expression of teamwork” Nichols

“The only similarity is that they were both low. But if you look at anything else – the rules were different [and therefore] the fuel tank size was different, the drivetrain was different, different engine, different gearbox – everything.”

Despite the wrangling, Nichols still enthuses on that period of McLaren’s history. “It was just so rewarding,” he says. “The idea of teamwork worked so well. Everybody was so good on every level, not just the drawing office and engineers.

“The manufacturing, the guys doing the laminating, the guys doing the fabricating, the marketing. It was such a blessing to be involved in that. You went in on a Saturday and everyone was in, donating their time – and there was nowhere they’d rather be. It was the ultimate expression of teamwork.”

Gordon Murray did not take up the opportunity to add to his earlier comments.