QUOTE (Anssi @ Dec 14 2009, 14:33) 
Congratulations for having an excellent driver pairing.
+1
2 race winners!
Full Version: Lotus F1 Racing (merged)
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
+1
2 race winners!
QUOTE (Nustang70 @ Dec 14 2009, 14:50)
I've always thought that heavy green paint story was fishy. If Jaguar were going that far to save weight, then they must have either had an awesome car or were using diversionary tactics.
2009 Ferrari's Rosso Perlato was chosen because, as alleged by Ferrari, it saves weight compared to last year red. That measure would have being adopted because of the KERS system.
So they have a proper logo now, the car will be green and they've spent their limited budget wisely on solid drivers rather than unwisely on a flashy web site and expensive branding consultants.
Can this new thread be merged with the "Lotus get 13th entry" thread and the "do they have a right to use the name?" poll, because this new thread is looking like going over the same ground again.
Can this new thread be merged with the "Lotus get 13th entry" thread and the "do they have a right to use the name?" poll, because this new thread is looking like going over the same ground again.
I have no problem with them calling themselves Lotus, they are entitled to as the parent companys owns on of Colins companys, Lotus cars, they havn't called themselves team lotus so whats the issue?
There might be a small connection, but there is a connection.
There might be a small connection, but there is a connection.
I prefer Faux-tus.
QUOTE (ensign14 @ Dec 14 2009, 18:37)
I prefer Faux-tus.
I have nothing against the new Lotus, or their choice of name. Very little do they have in common with the old Lotus, but no less, really, than Brackley-based former Brawn/Honda/BAR/Tyrrell, who use Brixworth-built engines from a factory that was previously known as Ilmor, with the Silver Arrows of the 50's and before...
Rather than Lotus-badge the thing that annoys me is this 1Malaysia concept.
Rather than Lotus-badge the thing that annoys me is this 1Malaysia concept.
QUOTE (fer312t @ Dec 14 2009, 18:39)
That is a significantly better effort, whoever did that
QUOTE (fer312t @ Dec 14 2009, 13:39)
I like it, but Nike wouldn't.
QUOTE (fer312t @ Dec 14 2009, 19:39)
looks silly...
QUOTE (Nustang70 @ Dec 14 2009, 16:50)
I've always thought that heavy green paint story was fishy. If Jaguar were going that far to save weight, then they must have either had an awesome car or were using diversionary tactics.
The metallic green also looked better on TV which is another reason why they chose it.
QUOTE
I've always thought that heavy green paint story was fishy
I think that was more applicable to Stewart GP (and perhaps a carryover to Jaguar) wasn't it?...traditionally thier bright white/pearl would requiring comparatively more paint to achive the finish they wanted - so they had to research new/special paints to keep the weight down etc...
Dunno about the logo, it's a nice idea and it does look fast buI read the damn thing"LLotus" (or even worse: LOL-tus) when I see it. They should erease the regular L letter and put the yellow styled one in its place.
QUOTE (wingwalker @ Dec 14 2009, 20:00)
Dunno about the logo, it's a nice idea and it does look fast buI read the damn thing"LLotus" (or even worse: LOL-tus) when I see it. They should erease the regular L letter and put the yellow styled one in its place.
I think that is a fan-made logo. The official logo is at the top of this thread, or on the official website, http://www.lotusf1racing.my/
British Racing Green on a Malaysian bootlegged version of Lotus. Hmmm. Ok.
QUOTE (fer312t @ Dec 14 2009, 18:39)
Inspired by this?
What an awful logo, fails all the rules of typography, doesn't even read well. It's an insult to the Real Lotus F1. Why bother bringing the name back only to make such a hatchet job. It was just a way to get into F1. Looks like the routes of Lotus will be dropped very quickly. No British drivers just two flawed has beens. As a lifelong Lotus fan I was excited at their return but this is just a joke
QUOTE (Jackmancer @ Dec 14 2009, 23:14)
I think it's 2009 spec. Look at the rear wing, it's as high as the upper air intake of the car. No chimneys or other rear bodywork stuff either.
If it were a 2009 wing, it wouldn't be that wide.
Why are you guys arguing over the year of a 2d livery template? 
I don't see the issue with the official logo, I really like the retro feel of it.
I don't see the issue with the official logo, I really like the retro feel of it.
QUOTE
What an awful logo, fails all the rules of typography, doesn't even read well
As I'm curious, which 'rules of typography' are being broken?
I certainly don't care for it - the stroked 'F1', and especially the outlined quadrilaterals look arbitrary...
If they name themselves Lotus, What I should like to see is ONLY ONE LOGO, The Logo of Lotus....
QUOTE (One @ Dec 15 2009, 10:16)
If they name themselves Lotus, What I should like to see is ONLY ONE LOGO, The Logo of Lotus....
They're not trying to be Lotus, and any use of the Lotus car logo would just show themselves to be pretenders.
The Lotus of old was a racing team run by the car manufacturer. The new Lotus seems to be that same racing team, but without ties to the manufacturer (even though Proton have the rights to it).
New logo looks dated already, won't surprise me if it's replaced within a year if they are still around. Why are they banging on about Malaysia all the time? It so stupid, last time I checked Lotus (cars, F1, whatever) was a British brand. Yes I know it's owned by Proton of Malaysia, but you don't see Tata saying Jaguar or Land Rover are Indian do you?
It will send out the wrong message about Lotus Cars, that they are not British sports cars.
It will send out the wrong message about Lotus Cars, that they are not British sports cars.
The Malaysians are fronting the money for the Lotus team. It's likely that Malaysian companies like Petronas and AirAsia will be their spnosors. The team is being owned and operated by Malaysians. And the company has nothing to do with Lotus Cars. They are reviving the Lotus Racing name, not Lotus Cars. A subtle, but important difference.
So why should they start trying to be British when they plainly aren't? You're going to be very red-faced if Lotus pull through and find success, aren't you?
So why should they start trying to be British when they plainly aren't? You're going to be very red-faced if Lotus pull through and find success, aren't you?
QUOTE (Jackmancer @ Dec 14 2009, 04:14)
I think it's 2009 spec. Look at the rear wing, it's as high as the upper air intake of the car. No chimneys or other rear bodywork stuff either.
You guys are taking that model too seriously. It's just a presentation model for the Malaysian PM. It's has nothing to do with what the car is going to look like (shape or colours).
I suspect the team's decision to design a new logo has more to do with legality than anything.
It make Lotus F1 less susceptible to being sued by David Hunt. Using the traditional Lotus logo in an F1 environment is a direct infringement of the commercial rights held by Hunt.
It make Lotus F1 less susceptible to being sued by David Hunt. Using the traditional Lotus logo in an F1 environment is a direct infringement of the commercial rights held by Hunt.
I take it then that those of you saying Lotus are pretenders etc are similarly annoyed that McLaren continue to use the name of a team they aren't?
QUOTE
I take it then that those of you saying Lotus are pretenders etc are similarly annoyed that McLaren continue to use the name of a team they aren't?
Not too much of a comparison really...Mclaren merged with Project Four, and even though Mayer/Alexander were bought out completely a couple season later, many of the same people and places remained. Dennis has always done well (for the most part) to keep this heritage alive...
Not that I am am against new Lotus, but obviously a very different scenario - reviving a name 15+ years later with absolutely no links to the original race team...
QUOTE (fer312t @ Dec 15 2009, 18:45)
Not too much of a comparison really...Mclaren merged with Project Four, and even though Mayer/Alexander were bought out completely a couple season later, many of the same people and places remained. Dennis has always done well (for the most part) to keep this heritage alive...
Not that I am am against new Lotus, but obviously a very different scenario - reviving a name 15+ years later with absolutely no links to the original race team...
Not that I am am against new Lotus, but obviously a very different scenario - reviving a name 15+ years later with absolutely no links to the original race team...
For the record, I have no issues with McLaren as far as their corporate history goes, but the fact remains that Ron Dennis bought McLaren for the name, not for "the team".
If the original Team Lotus had survived then there might be something worth arguing, but if no one else gave a shit enough to rescue the Lotus name except Proton, and then they decide to start an F1 team and use the name, then what's the problem?
It's not as far from the McLaren situation as you think it is.
QUOTE (ferruccio @ Dec 15 2009, 06:58)
I suspect the team's decision to design a new logo has more to do with legality than anything.
It make Lotus F1 less susceptible to being sued by David Hunt. Using the traditional Lotus logo in an F1 environment is a direct infringement of the commercial rights held by Hunt.
It make Lotus F1 less susceptible to being sued by David Hunt. Using the traditional Lotus logo in an F1 environment is a direct infringement of the commercial rights held by Hunt.
But they do use the traditional logo too:
I hope they have a big traditional logo in the car too.
Ferrari use 2 logos, the F1 Team has their own logo and the road car division has it's own logo, so there's no reason Lotus isn't the same.
Lotus F1 Racing is the F1 team of Lotus Cars and has it's own logo, whilst the parent company uses the traditional logo.
Lotus F1 Racing is the F1 team of Lotus Cars and has it's own logo, whilst the parent company uses the traditional logo.
QUOTE (JForce @ Dec 15 2009, 08:29)
Ferrari use 2 logos, the F1 Team has their own logo and the road car division has it's own logo, so there's no reason Lotus isn't the same.
Lotus F1 Racing is the F1 team of Lotus Cars and has it's own logo, whilst the parent company uses the traditional logo.
Lotus F1 Racing is the F1 team of Lotus Cars and has it's own logo, whilst the parent company uses the traditional logo.
Exactly. Just like Renault F1 logo and the traditional Renault diamond.
QUOTE (Pikku Pakkanen @ Dec 15 2009, 07:24)
I hope they have a big traditional logo in the car too.
Don't be too surpised if they replace all the black/white Lotus logo with the new one soon. It would be the logical thing to do. It's already gone from their website etc. Their CI is still being finalized
QUOTE (RSR @ Dec 15 2009, 04:24)
You guys are taking that model too seriously. It's just a presentation model for the Malaysian PM. It's has nothing to do with what the car is going to look like (shape or colours).
It's the principle
QUOTE (JForce @ Dec 15 2009, 00:29)
Ferrari use 2 logos, the F1 Team has their own logo and the road car division has it's own logo, so there's no reason Lotus isn't the same.
Lotus F1 Racing is the F1 team of Lotus Cars and has it's own logo, whilst the parent company uses the traditional logo.
Lotus F1 Racing is the F1 team of Lotus Cars and has it's own logo, whilst the parent company uses the traditional logo.
Of course there is a reason, They have NOTHING to do one with the other!
Think of it, it'd be like Tata bringing a Jag team and trying to claim "all indian effort"
QUOTE (ferruccio @ Dec 15 2009, 05:58)
I suspect the team's decision to design a new logo has more to do with legality than anything.
It make Lotus F1 less susceptible to being sued by David Hunt. Using the traditional Lotus logo in an F1 environment is a direct infringement of the commercial rights held by Hunt.
It make Lotus F1 less susceptible to being sued by David Hunt. Using the traditional Lotus logo in an F1 environment is a direct infringement of the commercial rights held by Hunt.
Hunt leased or sold the rights to Litespeed, which evidently own a 10% stake in the Lotus F1 project. So no problem there.
QUOTE (Nustang70 @ Dec 15 2009, 17:52)
Hunt leased or sold the rights to Litespeed, which evidently own a 10% stake in the Lotus F1 project. So no problem there.
I don't understand the issue with the name cropping up when Lotus Group deal was agreed; maybe continuing to use the Team Lotus name would have caused issues with the licensing deal they agreed with Group Lotus, or maybe the committee that advises them on the Lotus heritage recommended they separate the new team from Team Lotus by not using the name. There's a lot of questions surrounding the behind the scenes deals in the run-up to their entry being accepted; maybe Mike and Tony will write a book one day!
I hope they didn't pay a lot for the new logo, because it is student work at best. They said they worked "long and hard" on the design, but from a professional perspective, it is all amateur hour to me.
QUOTE (Jones Foyer @ Dec 15 2009, 19:17)
I hope they didn't pay a lot for the new logo, because it is student work at best. They said they worked "long and hard" on the design, but from a professional perspective, it is all amateur hour to me.
I am with you...it seems as it had been designed in the mid 80´s and looks a bit obsolete.
Anyway I think they did not pay a lot for its design....perhaps they spent more money than stated in signing Kovalainen for the team and now they must save money
QUOTE (Jones Foyer @ Dec 15 2009, 18:17)
I hope they didn't pay a lot for the new logo, because it is student work at best. They said they worked "long and hard" on the design, but from a professional perspective, it is all amateur hour to me.
That's not being fair to the average student who would have failed typography with that logo!
QUOTE (gd2 @ Dec 15 2009, 21:21)
That's not being fair to the average student who would have failed typography with that logo!
Shouldn't they be learning something useful in science or humanities, and quit hanging around the university bar or coffee shop talking about typefaces
QUOTE (Anssi @ Dec 14 2009, 15:38)
Of course without them the team wouldn't have been born at all so they are supposed to have a lot of say in where the factory is located at if they really insist on moving it elsewhere from the UK. But I think also the Malaysians need to think about this very carefully - should they really insist on moving the factory to Malaysia? Will that give them better chances at success than having the factory in the UK? That's the key question. Would they just be making it more difficult for themselves to achieve success by moving a factory, which has just been started up and has perhaps just started functioning well, to Malaysia? That's a huge risk right there for the whole operation and they need to be absolutely sure they want to do it before committing themselves into actually doing it. I think once they sit down after all the nice PR talk during the first few months they will actually also agree that they should not just jump and do it just because they thought it would be nice to have it in Malaysia.
Exactly.
They are a Malaysian team
, they are based in UK as Malaysia would be impractical.Hoorary for the Malaysian anthem to ring out when Heikki secures a shock win
Lotus is now Malaysian, either it's Malaysian Lotus or NO Lotus for the Brits to digest
Needs more comic sans for complete failure.
QUOTE (Jones Foyer @ Dec 15 2009, 18:17)
I hope they didn't pay a lot for the new logo, because it is student work at best. They said they worked "long and hard" on the design, but from a professional perspective, it is all amateur hour to me.
There are two separate ways to assess the quality of a logo - from the point of view of the "design professional", using a narrow, arbitrary, taught set of "typographic rules", and from the point of view of the logo's intended audience, which in most cases consists of the general public or the commercial world, but hardly ever consists of "design professionals". Both points of views are equally likely to be correct, but as the second fits much better with the purpose of most logos, it is usually much more relevant. From that perspective I quite like the logo.
I also quite like the fact that this is a Malaysian organisation. Lotus is after all a very asian word. I know there's lots of possible explanations why it was used for the name of the car company, but when you think about it, it's a strange name for a British company. Imagine if a Malaysian car company called "Bulldog Cars" had started up in the 60s, and had now been bought out by a British company. It would seem right somehow.
QUOTE (Jones Foyer @ Dec 15 2009, 21:39)
Needs more comic sans for complete failure.
The font equivalent of Flavio's thong.
QUOTE (Jones Foyer @ Dec 15 2009, 18:17)
I hope they didn't pay a lot for the new logo, because it is student work at best. They said they worked "long and hard" on the design, but from a professional perspective, it is all amateur hour to me.
You just sound jealous. Are you some kind of design guru? If so then you sound jealous through and through. You couldn't have done better. Stop it.
If you are not a design guru... then please STFU! The design looks brilliant!
Just stop your nonsense.
QUOTE (JForce @ Dec 15 2009, 05:53)
For the record, I have no issues with McLaren as far as their corporate history goes, but the fact remains that Ron Dennis bought McLaren for the name, not for "the team".
If the original Team Lotus had survived then there might be something worth arguing, but if no one else gave a shit enough to rescue the Lotus name except Proton, and then they decide to start an F1 team and use the name, then what's the problem?
It's not as far from the McLaren situation as you think it is.
If the original Team Lotus had survived then there might be something worth arguing, but if no one else gave a shit enough to rescue the Lotus name except Proton, and then they decide to start an F1 team and use the name, then what's the problem?
It's not as far from the McLaren situation as you think it is.
Well said that man!
Who are they paying for using the lotus name ? Lotus Cars ? Proton ?
QUOTE (shonguiz @ Dec 16 2009, 03:21)
Who are they paying for using the lotus name ? Lotus Cars ? Proton ?
I think they should get paid for giving the market place...
QUOTE (NineOneSeven @ Dec 15 2009, 23:16)
You just sound jealous. Are you some kind of design guru? If so then you sound jealous through and through. You couldn't have done better. Stop it.
If you are not a design guru... then please STFU! The design looks brilliant!
Just stop your nonsense.
If you are not a design guru... then please STFU! The design looks brilliant!
Just stop your nonsense.
As a designer who has worked for F1 teams it is crap.
Given that it is Lotus F1 Racing why did someone hit the return after F1, read as
Lotus F1
Racing!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.