Jump to content


Photo

What constitutes a new team?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Racer.Demon

Racer.Demon
  • Member

  • 1,705 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 08 October 2000 - 09:28

The Politoys/Iso-Marlboro/Williams/Hesketh thread again brought to light a classic GP historian's dilemma:

What constitutes a new team?

Opinion seems to vary on the subject, as cases are dealt with individually and certainly not consistently - if that's altogether possible. It might be a thankless task but it's still interesting to dwell upon the subject.

For instance, we all agree that the Williams history comprises its privateer years, the De Tomaso year, the Politoys, the Iso-Marlboros, the taken-over Heskeths, the Wolf days and the "regular" Williams years.

In the same fashion, Arrows/Footwork and March/Leyton House are seen as one.

Yet why is Benetton usually separated from Toleman, is Prost not the continuing Ligier story (on form it is...), is Jaguar seen as a fresh start from Stewart (ho-hum) and has BAR nothing to do with Tyrrell? (The last one seems obvious but I put that one in to try and make things clear.)

It's not got to do with change of ownership, as Arrows and March also changed hands during their temporary rechristening. Also, these "new" teams profited from their predecessor's championship ranking to get the FIA travel compensation.

Similarly, the Hesketh 308C/Williams FW05 throws up the question of how to deal with take-overs such as Theodore taking over Ensign (and its N183, after also having taken over Shadow!), Ferrari taking over Lancia and its D50, Merzario taking over Kauhsen (and redubbing the WK into the A4), Fittipaldi taking over Wolf (and turning the WR7/8 into the F7), or Prost fielding a "Prost" JS45 in its first year - which makes a strong case for regarding Ligier/Prost as a continuum, just as we did with the 1981-'82 Talbot interval.

Apart from that are the numerous "new" cars based on others. From the sixties Emeryson-turned-ENB and ATS-turned-Derrington-Francis are good examples. And within the Williams history: Apollon and McGuire. What about the Tec-Mec?

And there are lots of other cases with name changes and take-overs linking and/or separating them: Osella/Fondmetal, Coloni/Andrea Moda, Onyx/Monteverdi, etc.

Plus there's the issue about teams and constructors with some modern examples being Lola/Larrousse/Venturi or BMS Scuderia Italia/Dallara/Lola.

So what is a new team? What is a new car? And what is a constructor?

I would like to hear your views on this. What are your clear-cut choices - if you have any...


Advertisement

#2 Don Capps

Don Capps
  • Member

  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: May 99

Posted 08 October 2000 - 12:34

Well, I have always been in the minority on the Toleman/ Benneton issue since I thought it silly to pretend that they were really separate entities.

Actually, the truth boils down to the ugly reality that there are no hard and fast rules on this!

Oh, shouldn't we add the Rob Walker team into the history of the Surtees stable while we are muddying the waters? Think about it for a minute....

No ever said this was supposed to be simple...

;)

...otherwise, some of us would have lots of time on our hands!

#3 Megatron

Megatron
  • Member

  • 3,688 posts
  • Joined: January 99

Posted 08 October 2000 - 12:56

I remember the farcial Andrea Moda team was in a dispute with the stewards of the South African GP in 1992 over wether they had to pay a new team entry fee. Despite being nothing more than a 1991 Coloni with black paint and a Judd engine, some people tried to consider them a "new" team.

I always laugh when Niel Ressler talks about the Jaguar team being a "new era". It is so obvious that it is nothing more than a Stewart with green paint.

#4 AyePirate

AyePirate
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 11 October 2000 - 17:39

Unfortunately for Jaguar, they didn'tpaint last years Stewart green. Instead they unsuccessfully tried to clone a McLaren.

#5 Dennis David

Dennis David
  • Member

  • 2,448 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 11 October 2000 - 19:26

Is McLaren the same team as the one that Bruce ran. Or to be even more brutal is Ferrari still Ferrari or now simply Team Schumacher?

#6 Don Capps

Don Capps
  • Member

  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: May 99

Posted 11 October 2000 - 19:41

Actually, when Ron Dennis & Project 4 took over and showed Teddy Mayer & Tyler Alexander and others to their new seats, that could be construed as the establishment of a new team. Essentially, while the name remained "McLaren" that was about it.

#7 Barry Lake

Barry Lake
  • Member

  • 2,169 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 11 October 2000 - 23:10

Don
I can't find the thread where you asked the question - did you ever answer your question as to what MP4 stands for?

#8 MattFoster

MattFoster
  • Member

  • 4,771 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 11 October 2000 - 23:56

Barry,

I understand that it used to stand for Marlboro Project 4 and now it stands for Mclaren Project 4 when Marlboro left Mclaren for Ferrari.

Project 4 racing run by Ron Dennis ran a F2 in 1980 for Andrea de Cesaris and they won 1 round of the F2 championship in that year. Ron took over control of Mclaren in 1981 taking Andrea with them into the team. It would be an extreme understatement that it was with mixed results.

Cheers
Matt

#9 Don Capps

Don Capps
  • Member

  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: May 99

Posted 12 October 2000 - 01:12

Matt is pretty much on target. Dennis left the meaning of the "M" somewhat ambiguous although the Marlboro press flacks naturally said it stood for "Marlboro" something which Dennis also did not deny at the time.

#10 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 53,837 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 12 October 2000 - 01:21

Why would he with the money they poured into his pockets?

#11 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 12 October 2000 - 01:25

Don, this is really OT, but I've been looking forward to last installment on '61 saga, which you (I hope) you've postponed until next RVM. Yet, as usual, your this weeks RVM is a great read, and congratulations for your work. Keep 'em comming, you can't write as much as I can read:).
Dennis, you aren't really serious about that Team Schumacher, they're Ferrarri wit or without him. All things aside (which is not the issue here, but anyway) they should dump him (the development he is supposed to have contributed) is going to stay with them, and he is too much of a character (and of dubios reputation) not to eventually cast a few darker clouds upon Scuderia (IMHO, of course, I do not pretend to be expert on any subject).
All I can say teams evolve, and they're bound to change hands- sooner or later. Yet, it doesn't feel right, especially having Jag/Stewart in mind, when someone flashes somebody elses car under his flag. Only tim, I guess, can show what becomes of those teams (I wrote this not fully grasping the meaning of it- it must be deep:rolleyes: thougth:lol:).

#12 Don Capps

Don Capps
  • Member

  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: May 99

Posted 12 October 2000 - 01:44

Wolfie,

OT: There are TWO installments left in the 1961 series. One deals strictly with the USGP and the last with the rest of the races. I just took a break this week. Just a change of pace. Also, the next one is on the 1966-1967-1968 seasons, but with a twist after every two chapters: I will also be doing several parallel series as well. I really need to stop re-reading my papers on mid-19th century literature... If you are familiar with the period, you see what I mean...;)

#13 Barry Lake

Barry Lake
  • Member

  • 2,169 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 October 2000 - 15:09

Does that mean I won The Great One Question Trivia Quiz?

#14 Dennis David

Dennis David
  • Member

  • 2,448 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 October 2000 - 18:36

I guess I led my personal feelings intrude as I find the whole team including marketing taken over by this one man. In the past the drivers were left to fend for themselves. I guess I miss that.