Grand Prix Rejects

Simtek wrote:This may be the stupidest comment Keith Collantine's ever made

Gotta love his obsession with DRS. Once he made an article, in mid-2013 I believe, saying it had been slowly killing his passion for the sport... he's still here, though....

Simtek wrote:This may be the stupidest comment Keith Collantine's ever made

Why? Most people are inclined to like people who agree with their views.

Klon wrote:

Simtek wrote:This may be the stupidest comment Keith Collantine's ever made

Why? Most people are inclined to like people who agree with their views.

That's all fine, but deciding you definitely like someone because they dislike a certain F1 rule you do, with no other information about them, is a bit silly. Plus people here (well, two of them) are basing things on whether they think he's skilled enough anyway, not if they like him.

Although it's something more for 2017, Bernie and the FIA have suggested an engine formula of a 2.2L V6 twin-turbo engine as a low-cost alternative to the current power units. With a €6m cost cap, it offers manufacturers a way to get into the sport without putting millions in development into the other ancilliaries.

Articles suggest that this engine formula is a front for Bernie and Jean Todt to install a cost cap on the current power units, but I'd be happy to see an alternative come in, especially if it helps to increase any grid numbers.

Ataxia wrote:Although it's something more for 2017, Bernie and the FIA have suggested an engine formula of a 2.2L V6 twin-turbo engine as a low-cost alternative to the current power units. With a €6m cost cap, it offers manufacturers a way to get into the sport without putting millions in development into the other ancilliaries.

Articles suggest that this engine formula is a front for Bernie and Jean Todt to install a cost cap on the current power units, but I'd be happy to see an alternative come in, especially if it helps to increase any grid numbers.

Improving the grid numbers would be a good thing that could happen in lowering the engine cost. Unfortunately it seems to be the only positive side in dumbing down the tech in F1. First off, it possibly wouldn't attract new manufacturers. Hybrids seem the way to go and given their good showing in WEC, all those manufacturers who want to be showcasing their R&D projects will prefer that series to F1. Secondly, it looks like, at this point in time, a major strategic error by F1. If FE keeps improving its status as an all electrical green racing and Tesla ad others finally deliver on the promised batteries technological improvement and cost reduction, F1 might find itself without anywhere to go if combustion engines do happen to be replaced in the world.

One can only assume the team was contractually bound to give Palmer a promotion for next season. With Magnussen on the market, the primary factors for Lotus' 2nd driver must have been based mostly on economic factors.

This also gives cause for further concern as to the Renault deal. This to me signals the deal is dead in the water. The mumblings were that Ghosn was going to do this properly or not at all in terms of money. If they wanted a top driver in the future, Magnussen was there for the taking.

Biscione wrote:One can only assume the team was contractually bound to give Palmer a promotion for next season. With Magnussen on the market, the primary factors for Lotus' 2nd driver must have been based mostly on economic factors.

This also gives cause for further concern as to the Renault deal. This to me signals the deal is dead in the water. The mumblings were that Ghosn was going to do this properly or not at all in terms of money. If they wanted a top driver in the future, Magnussen was there for the taking.

It can go one of two ways:
1) Renault are looking to pull a BAR and leave the team running under the Lotus guise for one more year whilst Renault put all their resource into preparing for 2017. Maldonado and Palmer cover the cost of running the race team, before Renault get rid of them and put in some more...adept drivers.

2) Renault are getting cold feet, and are looking to leave altogether. Signing Palmer is similar to late-2013; at that time Lotus were bracing themselves from a non-takeover from Mansoor Ijaz's Quantum thingy, and signed Maldonado instead of Hulkenberg to make up for the cash shortfall. Thing is, this one leaves Lotus engineless; Manor have assumed the Mercedes supply that Lotus had previously, and they won't supply ANOTHER team.

EDIT: Although allegedly (and this is a big allegedly), Renault has cleared £30M of Lotus' debt...why would you spend that much if you weren't going to buy the team?

Salamander wrote:Jolyon Palmer... christ, I think the only worse GP2 champion they could've picked was Leimer, and then only barely. Maldonado will crush him.

Honestly enough if this set of mind continuing, that's similar to say that Raikkonen, Mansell, Prost, Hakkinen and many more are weak champions. And I can see the reply you will give. "Because it's top level, because the car sucks, because engine sucks". Not bad

Ataxia wrote:Thing is, this one leaves Lotus engineless; Manor have assumed the Mercedes supply that Lotus had previously, and they won't supply ANOTHER team.

That makes two, possibly three teams with a shaky engine supply for next year.

Cos-worth! Cos-worth! Cos-worth!

DanielPT wrote:

Ataxia wrote:Although it's something more for 2017, Bernie and the FIA have suggested an engine formula of a 2.2L V6 twin-turbo engine as a low-cost alternative to the current power units. With a €6m cost cap, it offers manufacturers a way to get into the sport without putting millions in development into the other ancilliaries.

Articles suggest that this engine formula is a front for Bernie and Jean Todt to install a cost cap on the current power units, but I'd be happy to see an alternative come in, especially if it helps to increase any grid numbers.

Improving the grid numbers would be a good thing that could happen in lowering the engine cost. Unfortunately it seems to be the only positive side in dumbing down the tech in F1. First off, it possibly wouldn't attract new manufacturers. Hybrids seem the way to go and given their good showing in WEC, all those manufacturers who want to be showcasing their R&D projects will prefer that series to F1. Secondly, it looks like, at this point in time, a major strategic error by F1. If FE keeps improving its status as an all electrical green racing and Tesla ad others finally deliver on the promised batteries technological improvement and cost reduction, F1 might find itself without anywhere to go if combustion engines do happen to be replaced in the world.

As mentioned before, most seem to be working on the assumption that it is a move purely aimed at forcing the manufacturers to drop their prices on the current engines, as the proposal does not appear to have been fully thought through.

Realistically, I do not think that many automotive manufacturers would be interested in joining the sport if the 2.2 litre V6 was to come in - at best, it might work to retain some of the current manufacturers by effectively offering them a way to restart their development programmes and develop a new engine from scratch if they've made a mess of their current engines (Honda comes to mind in that instance).
Maybe, depending on development costs, it might tempt one or two independent engine manufacturers - but quite a few of the larger independent efforts are in trouble, so even then it might not be hugely tempting to them either. Still, I'm not sure that such a programme would be appealing to automotive manufacturers given that it wouldn't necessarily sit with with the current zeitgeist within the automotive industry.

AxelP800 wrote:

Salamander wrote:Jolyon Palmer... christ, I think the only worse GP2 champion they could've picked was Leimer, and then only barely. Maldonado will crush him.

Honestly enough if this set of mind continuing, that's similar to say that Raikkonen, Mansell, Prost, Hakkinen and many more are weak champions. And I can see the reply you will give. "Because it's top level, because the car sucks, because engine sucks". Not bad

Everybody gets the same machinery in GP2...

AxelP800 wrote:

Salamander wrote:Jolyon Palmer... christ, I think the only worse GP2 champion they could've picked was Leimer, and then only barely. Maldonado will crush him.

Honestly enough if this set of mind continuing, that's similar to say that Raikkonen, Mansell, Prost, Hakkinen and many more are weak champions. And I can see the reply you will give. "Because it's top level, because the car sucks, because engine sucks". Not bad

As Simtek said, saying Palmer is a weak champion in GP2 is completely different from saying the same for any of those F1 drivers. Palmer's first season in GP2 saw him 28th in the standings, outscored 15-0 by a driver that retired at the end of the next season. He was behind Oliver Turvey, who turned up to only one weekend all year, and didn't even score. He was also behind such luminaries as Michael Herck, Julian Leal, Rodolfo Gonzalez, and Pal Varhaug. He was then outscored by Marcus Ericsson 124-78 in 2012, and crucially, by Felipe Nasr 154-119 while they were teammates in 2013. Until he got the dominant DAMS machinery last year, he was nothing more than an also-ran.

Now, I'm interested to hear how you will ignore all those facts in favour of your own wishy-washy opinions.

When does Keith make any good comments?


Anyway I don't believe you can judge Palmer until he has driven an F1 race or a couple. Some drivers who were meh in lower categories did alright in F1.

@Aquaman - Agree completely, Kamui Kobayashi being one example

Which means Palmer is improving while others didn't.

Now you also can't argue with the fact that Timo Glock, Hulkenberg, Grosjean have yet to win an F1 race whilst Maldonado has and he also pent 4 years in GP2. Hulk threw 2012 Brazil, Grosjean with 2013 Suzuka killer strategy, Glock well he should stay in US

AxelP800 wrote:Which means Palmer is improving while others didn't.

Kid, you're a Haryanto fan; no wonder you're defending him. You've watched a mediocre driver rise through the field purely on experience rather than any real merit.

AxelP800 wrote:Now you also can't argue with the fact that Timo Glock, Hulkenberg, Grosjean have yet to win an F1 race whilst Maldonado has and he also pent 4 years in GP2. Hulk threw 2012 Brazil, Grosjean with 2013 Suzuka killer strategy, Glock well he should stay in US

They've never really been in that position. As much as everyone talks about it, Hulkenberg never really had a shot at the win in Brazil, especially since it rained again after. Grosjean wouldn't have won Suzuka either, he just didn't have the pace that day, and Glock's never been in the position to win. Maldonado only won because his car was a lot better than he perhaps made it look, and Spain 2012 was the once-in-a-blue-moon period where he was actually clean and tidy.

Aguaman wrote:When does Keith make any good comments?


Anyway I don't believe you can judge Palmer until he has driven an F1 race or a couple. Some drivers who were meh in lower categories did alright in F1.

That's true, however, to completely ignore these results is to defeat the point of having feeder series in the first place. They are there precisely to give an idea of how good each driver is - whether or not F1 teams prefer to pay attention to their bank balances is another matter entirely.

AxelP800 wrote:Which means Palmer is improving while others didn't.

Now you also can't argue with the fact that Timo Glock, Hulkenberg, Grosjean have yet to win an F1 race whilst Maldonado has and he also pent 4 years in GP2. Hulk threw 2012 Brazil, Grosjean with 2013 Suzuka killer strategy, Glock well he should stay in US

Sorry, explain to me how being soundly beaten by Josef Kral, Marcus Ericsson, and Felipe Nasr, before winning the championship in a series which is known to reward experience more than raw talent, for a team widely considered to be by far the best in the series, constitutes "improving", especially when considering how each year he also jumped to better teams.

Your other point is certainly a fact, however, as Ataxia pointed out, you left out some important details. I'm also not entirely convinced of its relevance here - Maldonado being able to get a race-winning car to a victory proves Palmer is not terrible... how, exactly?

Remember, I don't have a specific issue with Palmer taking 4 years to win the title - it's that he was soundly beaten by his teammate every year before doing so that fuels my skepticism.

Welp why you don't point it much earlier? I thought you dislike him being 4 years in junior class.... Massive misunderstanding then

AxelP800 wrote:Welp why you don't point it much earlier? I thought you dislike him being 4 years in junior class.... Massive misunderstanding then

Look a few posts up. Ctrl+F 154-119.

Salamander wrote:

Aguaman wrote:When does Keith make any good comments?


Anyway I don't believe you can judge Palmer until he has driven an F1 race or a couple. Some drivers who were meh in lower categories did alright in F1.

That's true, however, to completely ignore these results is to defeat the point of having feeder series in the first place. They are there precisely to give an idea of how good each driver is - whether or not F1 teams prefer to pay attention to their bank balances is another matter entirely.

Yes it is important to see how good the driver is. There is more to it than results. It's like you can't judge Marc Gasol by stats, you just have to watch him to understand the skill and impact that he makes. It's basically that. You gauge the driver by how they drive. While results are important they don't tell a full story.

Aguaman wrote:Yes it is important to see how good the driver is. There is more to it than results. It's like you can't judge Marc Gasol by stats, you just have to watch him to understand the skill and impact that he makes.

I do not think most people will not be able to understand that analogy. Rest in the comfort that I did. Golden State Warriors still whooped Gasol's ass.

Personally I think we should be happy that any young driver has been given a chance in F1. Experience is a major plus point for teams these days, just look at McLaren and Ferrari.

And also, a reality check for anyone thinking a driver is in GP2 based on talent alone. When you need a budget of €2-3 million to go racing for a year, I don't think talent will get you a seat. If you don't have the bucks, you don't get the drive. Same applies for every single race series out there. I recently found out it costs £4500 for a single day test in a Porsche Carrera Cup GB car. Does anyone here have that sort of money? Well then. It's a rich man's game folks, always has been. Don't kid yourself that it's anything else.

And to the surprise of absolutelly no one, Gutierrez is confirmed at Haas

To muddy the waters re: Manor and the Prodrive takeover:

Force India set to be rebranded as Aston Martin.

Dave Richards still owns shares in Aston Martin.

Aston Martin Racing is run by Prodrive in the World Endurance Championship.

Prodrive are going to run Force India?

Backmarker wrote:To muddy the waters re: Manor and the Prodrive takeover:

Force India set to be rebranded as Aston Martin.

Dave Richards still owns shares in Aston Martin.

Aston Martin Racing is run by Prodrive in the World Endurance Championship.

Prodrive are going to run Force India?

Jordan lineage updated:
Jordan -> Midland -> Spyker -> Force India -> Aston Martin

Also, has RBR settled on engines yet?

FMecha wrote:

Backmarker wrote:Also, has RBR settled on engines yet?

No, not yet. I think they'll end up eating a truck-load of humble pie and shuffle back to Renault promising never to complain about the engine in public ever again.

On the NBC post-race show Steve Matchett seemed to think the Aston Martin takeover was a done deal, with them stealing the Johnny Walker sponsorship from Honda. Where in the hell did this come from??? I guess a top 5 in the WCC really opens some doors.

...
...And it usually does!

Wallio wrote:On the NBC post-race show Steve Matchett seemed to think the Aston Martin takeover was a done deal, with them stealing the Johnny Walker sponsorship from Honda. Where in the hell did this come from??? I guess a top 5 in the WCC really opens some doors.

The deal with Johnnie Walker seems to have come about because, in late 2012, Diageo acquired a majority stake in United Breweries due to Mallya needing to raise capital for his airliner.

Whilst he initially held onto the management of United Breweries, it seems that he has recently been forced out of that position as well after losing the support of Diageo. That has strengthened their control over United Breweries and, as the debts of Force India were secured against United Breweries, it has had the side effect of giving them leverage over the team.

Now, the main brand that Diageo has been using in F1 is Johnnie Walker, which has been associated with McLaren for a number of years. Recently, Diageo have been trying to boost their profile within the sport and tried to negotiate a title sponsorship deal with McLaren - however, those talks seem to have broken down after Ron Dennis demanded far more than Diageo were prepared to pay (and they were reportedly offering £35 million a year).

However, the recent developments with Force India effectively means that Diageo now have an avenue by which they can place the Johnnie Walker brand onto a team they indirectly control - that seems to be why Johnnie Walker will now be appearing on Force India's car once the deal with McLaren expires.

As for the deal with Aston Martin, that seems to be more of a sponsorship deal than a full takeover. The suggestion is that deal has come about because Aston Martin are currently developing closer commercial ties with Mercedes - back in 2013, Mercedes purchased a 5% stake in Aston Martin and agreed a deal to sell them their latest generation of V8 engines for Aston Martin's next cars.

It seems that Aston Martin were exploiting that commercial link with Mercedes through into F1, where they seem to have initially tried to cut a deal with Williams. However, the suggestion is that the deal with Force India would offer them greater exposure - at Williams, they would have to share advertising space with Martini, who are the current title sponsors - which seems to be why that option is being pursued more strongly instead.

So with RedBulls 2016 engine supply still none existent i have it on good authority that Fred Flintstone will be the teams lead driver next season.

mario wrote:It seems that Aston Martin were exploiting that commercial link with Mercedes through into F1, where they seem to have initially tried to cut a deal with Williams. However, the suggestion is that the deal with Force India would offer them greater exposure - at Williams, they would have to share advertising space with Martini, who are the current title sponsors - which seems to be why that option is being pursued more strongly instead.

Aston Martin at Williams alongside Martini would have given the team a bit of a James Bond theme, wouldn't it? Then the 007 logos that were being sported on the Williams wing mirrors in Mexico may have been more prominent had Aston Martin been more involved there?

I don't think the Aston Martin deal will go through. It was meant to be happening with Red Bull but was quickly killed off by the Mercedes board even before talks broke down about giving them an engine deal. I don't see why Force India are any different in this respect.

dr-baker wrote:Aston Martin at Williams alongside Martini would have given the team a bit of a James Bond theme, wouldn't it? Then the 007 logos that were being sported on the Williams wing mirrors in Mexico may have been more prominent had Aston Martin been more involved there?

Short answer: No.

Long answer: The 007 branding was initially meant to be more prominent, placed on the rear wing endplates, but the stickers supplied to Williams were considered to cause too much drag for placing on the car. At least that was the story being peddled around the paddock.

In spite of recent doubts, especially since the signing of Jolyon Palmer, it appears that the Renault deal is going ahead at Lotus as Renault personnel have started working at Enstone. It also appears that Bob Bell is returning to the Enstone team.

Simtek wrote:In spite of recent doubts, especially since the signing of Jolyon Palmer, it appears that the Renault deal is going ahead at Lotus as Renault personnel have started working at Enstone. It also appears that Bob Bell is returning to the Enstone team.

Here's hoping they bring back this sort of livery

Hey, we all miss Jordan F1

CoopsII wrote:Hey, we all miss Jordan F1

Course we do, they're my favourite F1 team of all time, but I want that livery back because of how good Renault made it, not because it reminds me of Jordan.

Come to think of it, the image I posted makes me miss Robert Kubica.

The noises are being made again that Renault will retain the Lotus name for next year, and that would partially explain why Maldonado and Palmer have the two seats. There's little gain to be made from a Renault perspective by slapping their name on a car that hasn't had the benefit of greater investment behind it, and by keeping the Lotus name they can spend their time and resources developing their car for 2017. Maldonado and Palmer bring enough money to keep the race team going for the year, further suggesting that Renault won't invest in something if it brings no real marketing value.

In short, they're all working towards 2017...I think I said this already after Palmer signed.

Sounds a bit like when they took over Benetton, didn't they wait a year that time as well? Was it 2001?

AndreaModa wrote:Sounds a bit like when they took over Benetton, didn't they wait a year that time as well? Was it 2001?

Yep. Purchased in 2000 and 2001 was the "transitional" period before they officially became Renault in 2002. The reverse happened in 2011 too when Renault scaled back their involvement to engine supplier status and Group Lotus got involved, but they still competed under the Renault name.