Grand Prix Rejects

watka wrote:What if Mansell had won the 1986 Spanish GP, i.e. the one he lost by 0.014 seconds to Senna?

Simtek wrote:What if?

I'm tired...

watka wrote:What if Mansell had won the 1986 Spanish GP, i.e. the one he lost by 0.014 seconds to Senna?

gnrpoison wrote:What if F1 had been able to maintain 26 - 30 entrants from 1995 - 2010. Who would the extra teams have been and how could it have been achieved? Removing that stupid 50 million entry fee may have helped as would a Concorde Agreement giving prize money to more teams.

Dj_bereta wrote:

watka wrote:What if Mansell had won the 1986 Spanish GP, i.e. the one he lost by 0.014 seconds to Senna?

Mansell two times champion or maybe three, because with the 86 title, he would fared better in the following season.

So, Senna, Prost, Piquet and Mansell tied with three championships.

gnrpoison wrote:What if F1 had been able to maintain 26 - 30 entrants from 1995 - 2010. Who would the extra teams have been and how could it have been achieved? Removing that stupid 50 million entry fee may have helped as would a Concorde Agreement giving prize money to more teams.

Simtek, Pacific and Forti fighting in a pre-qualify. Maybe drivers like Rosset remained in F1 a little longer with a larger grid.

gnrpoison wrote:What if F1 had been able to maintain 26 - 30 entrants from 1995 - 2010. Who would the extra teams have been and how could it have been achieved? Removing that stupid 50 million entry fee may have helped as would a Concorde Agreement giving prize money to more teams.

tBone wrote:

gnrpoison wrote:What if F1 had been able to maintain 26 - 30 entrants from 1995 - 2010. Who would the extra teams have been and how could it have been achieved? Removing that stupid 50 million entry fee may have helped as would a Concorde Agreement giving prize money to more teams.

In addition to those extra teams, would we still have more engine suppliers? With more low-budget teams, the demand for cheaper engines would be larger. What about a Brawn-Mugen Honda in 2009, or a Marussia-Hart a couple of years ago?

gnrpoison wrote:

tBone wrote:

gnrpoison wrote:What if F1 had been able to maintain 26 - 30 entrants from 1995 - 2010. Who would the extra teams have been and how could it have been achieved? Removing that stupid 50 million entry fee may have helped as would a Concorde Agreement giving prize money to more teams.

In addition to those extra teams, would we still have more engine suppliers? With more low-budget teams, the demand for cheaper engines would be larger. What about a Brawn-Mugen Honda in 2009, or a Marussia-Hart a couple of years ago?

I wonder if the V8 customer Ford option would have remained open when switches to V10 was announced. So a mix of V10s and V8s in the late 90s. Hart, Mugen, Supertec, Asiatech probably would have stayed longer.

Regarding modern day F1, if they would have allowed the 2.4 V8s alongside the new hybrid units, could that have helped Caterham/Marussia more and encouraged some new teams to join?

(Also 200th post)

mario wrote:
With regards to the V8's from the 1990's, technically those engines were still legal right up until 1999 - it was only in 2000 that the FIA announced that the only engine format permitted would be the V10, much to Toyota's frustration given they'd spent a not inconsiderable sum of money on developing a prototype V12 engine.

As for allowing the 2.4 litre V8's to run alongside the current engines, I think that the problem there is that the old V8's would not be competitive enough for that to be viable.
The fuel consumption issue would be one problem - the V8's were typically using 130-140kg of fuel per race, so you might also have to allow those teams to have a higher fuel allocation, at which point they'd probably be a second a lap off the pace at the start of a race due to the higher fuel weight.

Equally, I doubt that the cost of the engines would have made that much of a difference to Marussia or Caterham given both of those teams were rapidly losing money under the V8 engine format (Marussia only survived for so long because Formenko had written off around $200 million in debts that Marussia had accrued up to 2014).

We'd already seen HRT collapse, whilst Sauber, Force India and Lotus have lead a somewhat precarious existence even with the V8 engines - when the budgets of most teams are still heavily dominated by aerodynamic research, the engine prices are not necessarily the biggest factor in the demise of those teams.

gnrpoison wrote:

mario wrote:
With regards to the V8's from the 1990's, technically those engines were still legal right up until 1999 - it was only in 2000 that the FIA announced that the only engine format permitted would be the V10, much to Toyota's frustration given they'd spent a not inconsiderable sum of money on developing a prototype V12 engine.

As for allowing the 2.4 litre V8's to run alongside the current engines, I think that the problem there is that the old V8's would not be competitive enough for that to be viable.
The fuel consumption issue would be one problem - the V8's were typically using 130-140kg of fuel per race, so you might also have to allow those teams to have a higher fuel allocation, at which point they'd probably be a second a lap off the pace at the start of a race due to the higher fuel weight.

Equally, I doubt that the cost of the engines would have made that much of a difference to Marussia or Caterham given both of those teams were rapidly losing money under the V8 engine format (Marussia only survived for so long because Formenko had written off around $200 million in debts that Marussia had accrued up to 2014).

We'd already seen HRT collapse, whilst Sauber, Force India and Lotus have lead a somewhat precarious existence even with the V8 engines - when the budgets of most teams are still heavily dominated by aerodynamic research, the engine prices are not necessarily the biggest factor in the demise of those teams.

Some interesting things there, I guess with modern F1, the big problem is CVC taking so much out of the sport and not enough money being redistributed to the teams. I hope this gets addressed soon as it is crazy Bernie charges so much for races, yet the teams do not recieve much of that. I still find it amazing that Lotus/Caterham, HRT and Virgin/Marussia/Manor managed to last as long as they did for such little reward.

Rob Dylan wrote:So Paul di Resta takes a shock pole position in the rain at the 2013 Belgian Grand Prix. His fellow countryman Lewis Hamilton sits beside him on the front row, with Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel behind him in 3rd. What happens next?

Rob Dylan wrote:So Paul di Resta takes a shock pole position in the rain at the 2013 Belgian Grand Prix. His fellow countryman Lewis Hamilton sits beside him on the front row, with Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel behind him in 3rd. What happens next?

Rob Dylan wrote:You guys are no fun!

Rob Dylan wrote:So Paul di Resta takes a shock pole position in the rain at the 2013 Belgian Grand Prix. His fellow countryman Lewis Hamilton sits beside him on the front row, with Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel behind him in 3rd. What happens next?

At last. Welcome, Max. As you no doubt have guessed, I am He Whose Name Shall Not Be Mentioned.

It's an honour to meet you.

No, the honour is mine. Please, come, sit. I imagine that right now you're feeling a bit like Ide. Tumbling down the rabbit-hole, hmm?

You could say that.

I can see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts how he drives because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, this is not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Max?

No.

Why not?

Because I don't like the idea that I'm not in control of my driving.

I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You felt it your entire career, that there's something wrong with F1, you don't know what it is, but it's there like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that's brought you to me. Do you know what I'm talking about?

Capricorn?

Do you want to know what it is? Capricorn is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now in this very motorhome. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you get in the car, when you're out on track, when you look at your telemetry. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

What truth?

That you are a slave, Max. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind. Unfortunately, no one can be told what Capricorn is. You have to see it for yourself. This is your last chance. After this there is no turning back. You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe what you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay at the back, and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes. Remember, all I'm offering is the truth, nothing more.

Klon wrote:The only people still allowed to make Matrix references these days are people who understood the Architect scene the first time they watched it. Are you one of those individuals?

Simtek wrote: Anyway, that was just a very pale imitation of Jocke1. I do miss his posts.

dr-baker wrote:

Simtek wrote: Anyway, that was just a very pale imitation of Jocke1. I do miss his posts.

It was brilliant. And all the better for not including the numbers 10, 49 or 1049...

Simtek wrote:...di Resta's crushing 10 lap victory at Interlagos...

Simtek wrote:

Klon wrote:The only people still allowed to make Matrix references these days are people who understood the Architect scene the first time they watched it. Are you one of those individuals?

Well, the first time I watched it I was about 9 years old, so no, I can't say I did. Now that I have the brain of an adult I understand it perfectly if that's worth anything. I also consider myself a movie fanatic. Anyway, that was just a very pale imitation of Jocke1. I do miss his posts.

FMecha wrote:

Simtek wrote:

Klon wrote:The only people still allowed to make Matrix references these days are people who understood the Architect scene the first time they watched it. Are you one of those individuals?

Well, the first time I watched it I was about 9 years old, so no, I can't say I did. Now that I have the brain of an adult I understand it perfectly if that's worth anything. I also consider myself a movie fanatic. Anyway, that was just a very pale imitation of Jocke1. I do miss his posts.

Jocke occasionally posts cryptic statuses in GTPlanet (his username is JockeP22) though.

James1978 wrote:A completely different question - I've been watching the 2010 review the last couple of days, and just been reminded or how consistently great Kubica in the Renault was that year - has it been asked before what if he didn't have his rally crash? Where would he be now and would he be world champion?

I have him most likely replacing Massa at Ferrari for either 2012, or failing that 2013, but haven't really figured out other knock-on effects like does Kimi come back or does Alonso leave Ferrari earlier?

James1978 wrote:Maybe Massa goes to Williams two years early instead of Senna?

Rob Dylan wrote:

James1978 wrote:Maybe Massa goes to Williams two years early instead of Senna?

Imagine Massa's instead of Maldonado's shock win at Spain in 2012 that would have shut up the haters

Rob Smedley wrote:Felipe, Pastor is faster than you.

tBone wrote:

Rob Dylan wrote:

James1978 wrote:Maybe Massa goes to Williams two years early instead of Senna?

Imagine Massa's instead of Maldonado's shock win at Spain in 2012 that would have shut up the haters

Rob Smedley wrote:Felipe, Pastor is faster than you.

Backmarker wrote:

ibsey wrote:One more to ask…

What if Ronnie Peterson hadn’t been killed at Monza 1978 what could he have done at Mclaren in 1979 & beyond?

If Peterson had gone on to drive for McLaren he would have had three difficult seasons where he struggled to win or even finish on the podium. If he had still been racing in 1982 he could have won the championship, but I think it would have still been tight.

Faustus wrote:

James1978 wrote:A completely different question - I've been watching the 2010 review the last couple of days, and just been reminded or how consistently great Kubica in the Renault was that year - has it been asked before what if he didn't have his rally crash? Where would he be now and would he be world champion?

I have him most likely replacing Massa at Ferrari for either 2012, or failing that 2013, but haven't really figured out other knock-on effects like does Kimi come back or does Alonso leave Ferrari earlier?

Considering that Petrov and Heidfeld somehow managed to get a podium each in 2011, I daresay that Kubica would have at least matched that and even possibly won a race. Kubica goes to Ferrai in 2012 as you suggested, Raikkonen still comes back in 2012 with Lotus and leaves Lotus and Formula 1 at the end of 2014 after a crap season.
Petrov would have disappeared into obscurity sooner and we would have been spared the return of Heidfeld. Senna would probably not have had a chance to return in 2011 and might not have been in a Williams in 2012.

mario wrote:I suppose the main question is whether Lotus would have persisted with their flawed front exiting exhausts that year, which saw them initially start out strong but tumble back down the field as the year went on.

Now, after he tested a modified version of the car with a conventional blown exhaust, Heidfeld was adamant that the team should change over to that design immediately - however, the team overrode his suggestions, even though they later admitted it was a mistake to do so. However, given that Kubica had more authority within the team, if he had been there and had advocated the same change, might he have been able to persuade Lotus to change tack that year?

AndreaModa wrote:One I pondered recently, which is only tangentially related to F1, was this - what if fossil fuels had run out around 1950?

Would we have a society heavily reliant on nuclear power? And what would it have done to private transport, and thus by extension, motor racing? Would electric cars have come to the fore sooner, albeit in a more primitive state? And would the need for a replacement have produced alternate innovations we haven't had the opportunity to witness today?

Francis23 wrote:Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but what if Barrichello's spring at Hungary 09 bounced a foot further to the left?

Dj_bereta wrote:

Francis23 wrote:Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but what if Barrichello's spring at Hungary 09 bounced a foot further to the left?

Do you mean, "what if Massa had died or what if Massa had suffered severe injuries, forcing him to retire from F1"?

First thing that I imagine is GPDA pressuring FIA for closed cockpits or at least a solution to avoid an object hitting the driver's head, for the next season and Brawn GP facing a tough investigation, but being absolved in the end.

Talking about Massa replacement for the next season, I believe Fisichella probably had another season, before being replaced by someone after 2010. I think Kubica still had suffered his crash that forced him to retire from F1, so, I imagine someone like Button or Webber in the seat, alongside with Alonso.

tommykl wrote:

Dj_bereta wrote:

Francis23 wrote:Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but what if Barrichello's spring at Hungary 09 bounced a foot further to the left?

Do you mean, "what if Massa had died or what if Massa had suffered severe injuries, forcing him to retire from F1"?

First thing that I imagine is GPDA pressuring FIA for closed cockpits or at least a solution to avoid an object hitting the driver's head, for the next season and Brawn GP facing a tough investigation, but being absolved in the end.

Talking about Massa replacement for the next season, I believe Fisichella probably had another season, before being replaced by someone after 2010. I think Kubica still had suffered his crash that forced him to retire from F1, so, I imagine someone like Button or Webber in the seat, alongside with Alonso.

Actually, I think he means "What if Barrichello's spring hadn't hit Massa at all"