Grand Prix Rejects

Basetornado wrote:And in News I only just found out but others have already proberly written about or knew, apparently the new Ferrari will have its name chosen by Online poll.
Any suggestions?

HWNSNBM-mobile

Knowing how these online votes usually go, I'm looking forward to the 2014 Hitler Did Nothing Wrong.

tommykl wrote:

Basetornado wrote:And in News I only just found out but others have already proberly written about or knew, apparently the new Ferrari will have its name chosen by Online poll.
Any suggestions?

Wouldn't it be hilarious if people all went and voted to call it the MP4/29?

You would assume that Ferrari will be careful enough when dealing with the general public and ask them to pick from a pre-selected list rather than giving them free reign - otherwise we'll probably end up seeing whatever meme of the week is being chosen as the winning name.

That said, the Fiat group (of which Ferrari is part) would probably ignore the winning name, even if it was a sensible one, if they disliked it anyway - a bit like when Alfa Romeo put the name of their latest small car to a public vote, with the winning entry being "Furiosa", only to reject the name entirely and call it the "MiTo" instead (a name that wasn't even on the original shortlist).

mario wrote:That said, the Fiat group (of which Ferrari is part) would probably ignore the winning name, even if it was a sensible one, if they disliked it anyway - a bit like when Alfa Romeo put the name of their latest small car to a public vote, with the winning entry being "Furiosa", only to reject the name entirely and call it the "MiTo" instead (a name that wasn't even on the original shortlist).

...when surely it should have been the Giuliettissima?

Basetornado wrote:And in News I only just found out but others have already proberly written about or knew, apparently the new Ferrari will have its name chosen by Online poll.
Any suggestions?

VWALOL14...

Basetornado wrote:And in News I only just found out but others have already proberly written about or knew, apparently the new Ferrari will have its name chosen by Online poll.
Any suggestions?

Where does someone drop in a suggestion?

Basetornado wrote:And in News I only just found out but others have already proberly written about or knew, apparently the new Ferrari will have its name chosen by Online poll.
Any suggestions?

Clifford

Backmarker wrote:Knowing how these online votes usually go, I'm looking forward to the 2014 Hitler Did Nothing Wrong.

I don't care how horribly offensive it is, if something like that won and Ferrari honoured the deal to name it that I'd have so much respect for them XD

1EM0-1\1

A reference to past, present and future. Present : 1E because it's the 1st year with new turbo engines, Past : M as a tribute to Michael Schumacher, Future : 0-1\1 as a statement of intent that they will be beaten by no-one and finish first in drivers and constructors championships.

And not because it makes up an amusing guess on what the car will REALLY be like (and a tribute to THAT Osella model) oh no.

What was wrong with F2014? Okay, for a throwback, F2014T. Done.

I think it should be the 612t.

6 for the 6 cylinders engines. And for the sake of continuing the X12t name (Ferrari made a 512 road car).

How about the Ferrari 1606T? Thought I'd borrow the old naming convention...

Or, of course, we could have the Ferrari Massaless...

After the Ferrari F150, I think there should be a Ferrari Fiesta. Or even a Ferrari KA...

The Ferrari 2nd?

Wallio wrote:What was wrong with F2014? Okay, for a throwback, F2014T. Done.

Hell, why not F14T then? That's Fiat in 1337-speech.

I hope Ferrari enjoy the publicity of the vote, but insert their own choice and fix the results. Because most of these suggestions are horrible.

Shizuka wrote:

Wallio wrote:What was wrong with F2014? Okay, for a throwback, F2014T. Done.

Hell, why not F14T then? That's Fiat in 1337-speech.

I like that actually.

Sublime_FA11C wrote:I hope Ferrari enjoy the publicity of the vote, but insert their own choice and fix the results. Because most of these suggestions are horrible.

Which choices, the F1 Rejects forum member's choices, or the actual ones that Ferrari chose? Because I could see it either way really.

I mean, why did Ferrari call the 2013 car the F138?

go_Rubens wrote:I mean, why did Ferrari call the 2013 car the F138?

The 13 is named after the year 2013 and the 8 comes from the no. of cylinders in the engine. So this year's (I guess underwhelming ) Ferrari should be named either the F2014 or the F146.

good_Ralf wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:I mean, why did Ferrari call the 2013 car the F138?

The 13 is named after the year 2013 and the 8 comes from the no. of cylinders in the engine. So this year's (I guess underwhelming ) Ferrari should be named either the F2014 or the F146.

I guess the idea of the F146 has a slight historical value as well, possibly relating to one of Ferrari's first road cars? Or am I thinking of something else?

go_Rubens wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:I mean, why did Ferrari call the 2013 car the F138?

The 13 is named after the year 2013 and the 8 comes from the no. of cylinders in the engine. So this year's (I guess underwhelming ) Ferrari should be named either the F2014 or the F146.

I guess the idea of the F146 has a slight historical value as well, possibly relating to one of Ferrari's first road cars? Or am I thinking of something else?

The car that you are thinking of is probably the 166, which was one of Ferrari's early road/track cars - in principle, reviving that name would be consistent with Ferrari's naming policy for their race cars, which tend to derive their names from either the engine type (248 F1), the year of construction (F2012) or a combination of the two (F138). With that in mind, using something like F166 for a 1.6 litre six cylinder engine would be consistent with that strategy, unless there is some sort of significant anniversary that they want to celebrate in 2014.

mario wrote:The car that you are thinking of is probably the 166, which was one of Ferrari's early road/track cars - in principle, reviving that name would be consistent with Ferrari's naming policy for their race cars, which tend to derive their names from either the engine type (248 F1), the year of construction (F2012) or a combination of the two (F138). With that in mind, using something like F166 for a 1.6 litre six cylinder engine would be consistent with that strategy, unless there is some sort of significant anniversary that they want to celebrate in 2014.

If thaf's the case, why was the 2009 Ferrari called the F60? I can only sense that that's for an anniversary.

The F60 was for there 60th year of Ferrari being in F1.

Basetornado wrote:The F60 was for there 60th year of Ferrari being in F1.

IIRC it was more to do with 60 years since the first Ferrari.

roblomas52 wrote:

Basetornado wrote:The F60 was for there 60th year of Ferrari being in F1.

IIRC it was more to do with 60 years since the first Ferrari.

No, Basetornado is correct. 2009 was Ferrari's 60th year in Formula 1. Ferrari began building their own cars a bit earlier.

pi314159 wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:

Basetornado wrote:The F60 was for there 60th year of Ferrari being in F1.

IIRC it was more to do with 60 years since the first Ferrari.

No, Basetornado is correct. 2009 was Ferrari's 60th year in Formula 1. Ferrari began building their own cars a bit earlier.

Oh, I stand corrected.

The first Ferrari road car was their 125 S model from 1947, a car with a 1.5 L V12. It would become the first of many great road cars funding the Scuderia. It was a beaut as well.



Lovely.

2014 Merc set to be launched on January 28th.

It begins...

Has Caterham announced there drivers yet? Starting to think theyre the ones who arnt gonna make it to the grid.

Basetornado wrote:Has Caterham announced there drivers yet? Starting to think theyre the ones who arnt gonna make it to the grid.

Don't worry. Drivers are way overrated these days!

Seeing as the good Captain has disappeared for almost a year now, I think it's safe to post Joe Saward articles on the forums again.

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2014/01/07/ruminations-on-mclarens-title-sponsor/

Make of that what you will. It all seems to tie in.

pi314159 wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:

Basetornado wrote:The F60 was for there 60th year of Ferrari being in F1.

IIRC it was more to do with 60 years since the first Ferrari.

No, Basetornado is correct. 2009 was Ferrari's 60th year in Formula 1. Ferrari began building their own cars a bit earlier.

It is however true that the Ferrari Enzo, which was codenamed the Ferrari F60, was made to commemorate the 60th of Ferrari in general. Likewise the F40 and F50.


As for the Saward article, I find in amusing that he speculates that McLaren will run in their traditional orange and that Sony Computer Entertainment has an orange logo. If the base colour of the car is orange how would you distinguish the logo?

watka wrote:As for the Saward article, I find in amusing that he speculates that McLaren will run in their traditional orange and that Sony Computer Entertainment has an orange logo. If the base colour of the car is orange how would you distinguish the logo?

Black font in the logo?

DanielPT wrote:

Basetornado wrote:Has Caterham announced there drivers yet? Starting to think theyre the ones who arnt gonna make it to the grid.

Don't worry. Drivers are way overrated these days!

So... we're going to see holographic reincarnations of Gilles Villeneuve and James Hunt?

Pointrox wrote:

DanielPT wrote:

Basetornado wrote:Has Caterham announced there drivers yet? Starting to think theyre the ones who arnt gonna make it to the grid.

Don't worry. Drivers are way overrated these days!

So... we're going to see holographic reincarnations of Gilles Villeneuve and James Hunt?

Not unless they assume pay-driver status.

Anyway, there is always someone out there with some doe to spend in order to get into F1 so they have time to chose from multiple candidates. It is Caterham option to neglect this part of F1 called "drivers". And one that, in my opinion, cost them the 10th place in F1 more that than any other thing.. Don't get me wrong, there are some pay-drivers with talent. One just needs to pick them. It suffices to say that whenever they got an experienced and talented driver at the wheel they finished 10th. Marussia still goes with one talented driver for the first seat and that has generally helped them a lot (between other things, of course) after ditching the CFD-only philosophy. The fact that Charles Pic was matched later in this season by van der Garde says more about Pic, I think, than the other way around.

Wizzie wrote:2014 Merc set to be launched on January 28th.

It begins...

So it seems that most teams are moving away from the traditional big launch event and have opted to go straight into the shakedown/test sessions instead - not surprising given that they probably want to wait for as long as possible before showing their hands.

On another note, McLaren have confirmed their car launch date too - their car will be revealed during an online presentation on the 24th Jan, making their launch the earliest one at the moment. http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2014/01/07/m ... uary-24th/

mario wrote:

Wizzie wrote:2014 Merc set to be launched on January 28th.

It begins...

So it seems that most teams are moving away from the traditional big launch event and have opted to go straight into the shakedown/test sessions instead - not surprising given that they probably want to wait for as long as possible before showing their hands.

On another note, McLaren have confirmed their car launch date too - their car will be revealed during an online presentation on the 24th Jan, making their launch the earliest one at the moment. http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2014/01/07/m ... uary-24th/

I think the teams could be trying to use those weird black and white sheets like the ones on prototype road cars just to hide small features of bodywork.

Adrian Sutil wrote:"We don't want to see races where all the cars are failing and having problems everywhere. At the end of the day Formula 1 is a show and the pinnacle of motorsport and the top range of racing - it stands out for engineering power - and if that doesn't go well and all you see is cars breaking down, then that is not the image you want to see for Formula 1."

Evidently Mr Sutil didn't watch F1 in the mid-to-late 1990s, when it was more than likely that half the field would be parked at the side of the track by the time the chequered flag fell. And yet, I haven't seen any criticism of unreliability during that era...

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/28532/9105788/exclusive-adrian-sutil-excited-about-fresh-start-with-sauber

East Londoner wrote:

Adrian Sutil wrote:"We don't want to see races where all the cars are failing and having problems everywhere. At the end of the day Formula 1 is a show and the pinnacle of motorsport and the top range of racing - it stands out for engineering power - and if that doesn't go well and all you see is cars breaking down, then that is not the image you want to see for Formula 1."

Evidently Mr Sutil didn't watch F1 in the mid-to-late 1990s, when it was more than likely that half the field would be parked at the side of the track by the time the chequered flag fell. And yet, I haven't seen any criticism of unreliability during that era...

http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/28532/9105788/exclusive-adrian-sutil-excited-about-fresh-start-with-sauber

I'd love to see a bit of unreliability, it's been 6 years since we saw a race with proper attrition.