10 replies to this topic

[fareleiro]

Wasn't Senna responsable for Lotus downfall?
Well, putting the all team working for just one driver, having all the team resources dependant of
one driver's caprices, wasn't that too much?
And if the driver left the team? well, he did left the team, and then what?

Wouldn't it be smarter to have hire Warwick for 1986 season? that would mean more points for the team, maybe a couple of more podiums... and more money with sponsors and championship points.

Dumfries and Nakagima were only waisting Lotus money and resources. Warwick would do much better.

What a spoiled little brat Senna was...

[Barry Boor]

I think we would all like to have seen Derek at Lotus but somehow I don't think you are going to get a lot of support for your opinion of Senna.

Difficult he may have been - maybe single-minded is a better description but 'spoiled little brat'? Hmmm.....

[Ross Stonefeld]

I don't think Lotus were much different from other teams where once they slip out of that top tier they struggle to get the resources they need. Mainly thinks like factory engines. Once they lost the Honda deal they were never quite the same. And with teams like McLaren and Williams available for new/returning manufacturers, Lotus were always going to be 'just another F1 team' similar to Brabham post BMW.

[Tim Murray]

Senna is not among my favourite people, but to be fair, look at the position Lotus was in after he moved on. At the start of 1988 the team was well-funded. They had the best engine, and had just signed the reigning World Champion. Within two seasons they had become also-rans. I don't know which factors contributed most to their downfall, but I don't really think you can blame Senna.

Edited by Tim Murray, 02 January 2011 - 11:09.

[MartLgn]

Dumfries and Nakagima were only waisting Lotus money and resources. Warwick would do much better.

Agreed that the Earl was a strange choice even as a benign team mate for Senna but Nakajima came as a condition of the Honda engine deal. Getting the best engine for free at the time of the new sponsorship deal with Reynolds tobacco must have seemed like a great way to keep Senna on board for 1987. The waters are muddied somewhat by Lotus' use of Active suspension in 1987, we can only speculate what effect this had on chassis development but the 1987 car appeared to be the 1986 chassis with Honda power and that trick suspension.

[mfd]

Agreed that the Earl was a strange choice even as a benign team mate for Senna but Nakajima came as a condition of the Honda engine deal. Getting the best engine for free at the time of the new sponsorship deal with Reynolds tobacco must have seemed like a great way to keep Senna on board for 1987. The waters are muddied somewhat by Lotus' use of Active suspension in 1987, we can only speculate what effect this had on chassis development but the 1987 car appeared to be the 1986 chassis with Honda power and that trick suspension.

I know a chap who worked there from 1988 until the end and he said the Honda input in 87 was exactly the same as for Williams and the Camel money was massive for a relatively small scale team.

[MartLgn]

I know a chap who worked there from 1988 until the end and he said the Honda input in 87 was exactly the same as for Williams and the Camel money was massive for a relatively small scale team.

So it seems that the overall package wasn't as competitive as Williams or McClaren in 1987 and Senna produced 2 victories in a car which wasn't really a winner? I would venture to say that the situation was the same with Renault power in 1986 with Senna's wins in Spain and Detroit being in spite of rather than because of the pace of the Lotus.

This puts the performance of Lotus in 1988 in a very poor light, a clean sheet design powered by the best engine, Piquet phoned in most of his drives that season. If we are to lay the blame for the decline of Lotus at the door of a Brazilian driver It would not be Senna!

[Phil Rainford]

One of Senna's traits was to create a situation where the whole team was focussed on him and him alone winning

His leaving Lotus could well have taken a piece out of the jigsaw that both Piquet and Lotus could not replicate

Remember Senna in his year at Toleman demanded that the team drop Pirelli and use the far more competitive Michelin rubber…..in this scenario Senna's departure at the end of the year coincided with Michelin also leaving the Sport and Pirelli were in no mood to help out


PAR

[mfd]

So it seems that the overall package wasn't as competitive as Williams or McLaren in 1987 and Senna produced 2 victories in a car which wasn't really a winner? I would venture to say that the situation was the same with Renault power in 1986 with Senna's wins in Spain and Detroit being in spite of rather than because of the pace of the Lotus.

In a nutshell - yes

[fareleiro]

Clearly Lotus design wasn't the best, but Lotus-Renault was a reliable machine both in 85 and 86.
Senna broke so many engines thanks to his immaturity with F1 turbos. (just check how many races
De Angelis finnished!!)
But, when the team started putting De Angelis aside and concentrating all its efforts in Senna... something
was going to break...

Lotus could have a future like Toleman/Benetton. 1 or 2 victories in a season, some podiums in the next, and so on.

Remember: As soon Senna left Mclaren, so did they started to decline!

[pizzakrap]

Clearly Lotus design wasn't the best, but Lotus-Renault was a reliable machine both in 85 and 86.
Senna broke so many engines thanks to his immaturity with F1 turbos. (just check how many races
De Angelis finnished!!)
But, when the team started putting De Angelis aside and concentrating all its efforts in Senna... something
was going to break...

Lotus could have a future like Toleman/Benetton. 1 or 2 victories in a season, some podiums in the next, and so on.

Remember: As soon Senna left Mclaren, so did they started to decline!

Tge 86 lotus was a decent cat but the honda had the edge in reliabilty and more importantly fuel economy. the 87 was an all new design but priority was given to the actice ride system vs.other areas of the car. as such the car was somewhat overweight and not the most aerodymamic. For the most part the car struggled and it's telling that senna's 2 wins were at street circuits.
The 88 car was better aero wise but still overweight and the chassis was way to flexible which they were not able to fix during the season. piquet lost interest camel decided to put less into the team leaving lotus to scource it's own engine (going with judds and banking on some trick heads from tickford which never materialised). the lambo deal looked promising but again that big v12 was a hard engine to integrate and i think only lola managed to pull it off with any sucess. the car was an ill handling monster and after severell big accidents sponsers lost interest leading to collins et-al stepping in at the last minute to save the team using a converted 90 chassis for the next 2 years and then the 92 chassis albeit with updates for 2 years after that. it was always going to be an uphill battle.