Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Manor denies it can't run both cars


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#1 LORDBYRON

LORDBYRON
  • Member

  • 1,645 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 31 March 2015 - 22:36

The Manor Formula 1 team insists there is no reason why it cannot run both its cars at the same time, following speculation over Will Stevens' Malaysian Grand Prix absence

 

It seems the rumors there short on parts could well be true 

 

http://www.thechecke...Checkered Flag)

 

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/118316



Advertisement

#2 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 31 March 2015 - 22:37

Wouldn't be a surprise really.

#3 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 29,677 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 01 April 2015 - 02:44

Sounds like a bullshit rumour people start who enjoy getting the knife in.

#4 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,082 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 April 2015 - 02:47

So whatever they only have one of, they had to remove from Stevens' car really quickly, run it over to Merhi's car and then stick it on that for both practice sessions?


Edited by DanardiF1, 01 April 2015 - 02:47.


#5 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 12,037 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 01 April 2015 - 03:11

So whatever they only have one of, they had to remove from Stevens' car really quickly, run it over to Merhi's car and then stick it on that for both practice sessions?

That's about the size of it. And they did this on the down low so no one would notice...

 

Then when it came time to run quals they figured they should run the slow guy that didn't make 107% instead of the guy that could who incidentally has more F1 seat time.  Sounds like a good strategy to me.



#6 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 01 April 2015 - 04:44

McLaren can't run one car though... :(

#7 Knot

Knot
  • Member

  • 666 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 01 April 2015 - 04:49

McLaren can't run one car though... :(

 

They are good at running their pistons into low Earth orbit.



#8 D1rtyHarry

D1rtyHarry
  • Member

  • 432 posts
  • Joined: February 15

Posted 01 April 2015 - 04:58

I think it's all pretty much irrelevant whether they can or can't at this moment in time. They are 3 minutes down on race pace. I'd rather they not even enter until they get a '15 Ferrari engine to be honest but my understanding is that they need to enter to get the prize money they're entitled to from last year. What a bitch.



#9 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 April 2015 - 05:16

It would make sense if they are low on spares. My understanding is that Stevens had a fuel pressure problem which means a complete strip down and is a Mother and Father to fix. Manor's best bet is to find performance at the lowest cost. As such, if I were them, I would proceed with building the 2015 tub as they need to build spares anyway. I would stick with the 14 engine and concentrate on optimising the chassis side. The performance gain from the '15 PU is just not worth the added expenditure and Manor's business plan is based on an affordable Power Train.

#10 D1rtyHarry

D1rtyHarry
  • Member

  • 432 posts
  • Joined: February 15

Posted 01 April 2015 - 05:28

It would make sense if they are low on spares. My understanding is that Stevens had a fuel pressure problem which means a complete strip down and is a Mother and Father to fix. Manor's best bet is to find performance at the lowest cost. As such, if I were them, I would proceed with building the 2015 tub as they need to build spares anyway. I would stick with the 14 engine and concentrate on optimising the chassis side. The performance gain from the '15 PU is just not worth the added expenditure and Manor's business plan is based on an affordable Power Train.

Not sure if I read this correctly, it all sounded copacetic until you said they should stay with the '14 Ferrari engine which is an absolute dog. F1 is an engine formula these days. They will always be dead last with a '14 Ferrari engine. Despite what they may say, they'll only be in it to beat atleast someone. They're only going to beat themselves with that sorry crap plugged in the back.


Edited by D1rtyHarry, 01 April 2015 - 05:31.


#11 D1rtyHarry

D1rtyHarry
  • Member

  • 432 posts
  • Joined: February 15

Posted 01 April 2015 - 05:32

Manor F1 need to save up some money to get some honey. :lol:



#12 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 01 April 2015 - 05:33

Not sure they'd be saving money by buying a 2014 engine design anyway, it's not like Ferrari just has a bunch of old engines lying around that they are selling to them, they're still brand new engines and will cost just as much as they did last year.

 

The only reason to use the old engine design is because you don't have any money to build a 2015 chassis design that fits the 2015 Ferrari engine.



#13 Graveltrappen

Graveltrappen
  • Member

  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 01 April 2015 - 06:16

Whenever Lowden was interviewed by Sky across the weekend I always thought his replies about the problem on the car weren't in keeping with usual replies you'd see from team management who are usually pretty clued up about issues with the cars, especially when the issues are preventing the car running. He was still making out he didn't know what the problem was still on race day which struck me as a bit strange.

I hope this isn't true though as he's normally struck me as a decent guy with a passion for the sport, hope he's not turned into a puppet

#14 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 April 2015 - 06:44

AFAIK Manor are only paying $10 millions for the 14 power plant as opposed to twice that for the current 15 power train. It makes more sense to consolidate this year. They will still get a 5 engine season from the 14 unit with the regulation changes. It's just not worth bankrupting the team for 60bhp more

#15 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 6,968 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 April 2015 - 06:49

Whenever Lowden was interviewed by Sky across the weekend I always thought his replies about the problem on the car weren't in keeping with usual replies you'd see from team management who are usually pretty clued up about issues with the cars, especially when the issues are preventing the car running. He was still making out he didn't know what the problem was still on race day which struck me as a bit strange.

I hope this isn't true though as he's normally struck me as a decent guy with a passion for the sport, hope he's not turned into a puppet

Lack of man power maybe harder to trace, diagnose and fix track side problems?

 

How many tech's do you think Mercedes had to look into Mercedes problems this weekend? at the track and back at the factories?



#16 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 29,677 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 01 April 2015 - 07:29

They have a new car based around the 2015 plant no? It isnt like they can just plug the other one in to it!

#17 sergey1308

sergey1308
  • Member

  • 116 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 01 April 2015 - 07:43

Of course they deny. No matter is it true or not they don't want to have more problems with FIA or Berni.



#18 Fisico54

Fisico54
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 01 April 2015 - 09:19

What a load of rubbish

If they could only run 1 car why would they choose Merhi who wasn't sure to be accepted into the race regardless of his Q time rather than Stevens who was pretty much guaranteed into the race after FP.?

Why would they choose Merhi who is only on a short term contract rather than Stevens on a long term contract and who is providing funding to the team?



#19 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,725 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 01 April 2015 - 10:41

There is no point trying to bring logic into this thread, some posters on here have already made up their minds about the team and their motives, and will ignore anything that might suggest otherwise.

Advertisement

#20 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 April 2015 - 10:48

The racing comments forum has become a hotbed of conspiracy theories. After all why believe facts?

#21 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 4,492 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 01 April 2015 - 14:08

I think it's all pretty much irrelevant whether they can or can't at this moment in time. They are 3 minutes down on race pace. I'd rather they not even enter until they get a '15 Ferrari engine to be honest but my understanding is that they need to enter to get the prize money they're entitled to from last year. What a bitch.

They need to enter exactly two cars to get that money. That's why this story would be significant.



#22 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 01 April 2015 - 16:42

The Manor Formula 1 team insists there is no reason why it cannot run both its cars at the same time [snip]

 

I'll believe that when I see them running both their cars at the same time.



#23 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 01 April 2015 - 16:51

I'll believe that when I see them running both their cars at the same time.


Until they do, the question is a fair one.

#24 Fisico54

Fisico54
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 01 April 2015 - 17:02

No it isn't, just scurrilous rumour mongering

#25 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 01 April 2015 - 17:16

No it isn't, just scurrilous rumour mongering.


If you think so, fair enough. When, or if, they run both cars over a weekend in all sessions, then it will be proved that it is 'scurrilous rumour mongering'. Until then, the question is a fair one.

#26 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 3,449 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 01 April 2015 - 17:28

When did this forum stoop this low?



#27 LORDBYRON

LORDBYRON
  • Member

  • 1,645 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 01 April 2015 - 17:55

Not sure they'd be saving money by buying a 2014 engine design anyway, it's not like Ferrari just has a bunch of old engines lying around that they are selling to them, they're still brand new engines and will cost just as much as they did last year.

 

The only reason to use the old engine design is because you don't have any money to build a 2015 chassis design that fits the 2015 Ferrari engine.

its 10 Million verses 25 Million



#28 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 April 2015 - 20:33

Yes Lowdon puts a positive spin on the team's situation. You can't expect him to do a Ratner.

#29 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 35,982 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 01 April 2015 - 23:46

k 2014

When did this forum stoop this low?

 

Latent for many years I am sure, currently we can find.

 

1) This thread

2) Did Mercedes tank Malaysia

3) Did Vettel tank 2014

 

I am certain threads like this come and go, we may not all see them when they do, but they do. Some will post their reasoning for it being true, part of being on a discussion forum.

 

Personally I prefer to have firm opinions about facts, and strong emotions about fiction. I am aware that fiction becomes fact, and some 'facts' are actually fiction. For whatever reason the rise from the ashes of Manor GP stir strong opinions and emotions from both side of the fence so to speak.

 

:cool:



#30 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 12,037 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 02 April 2015 - 01:36

If you think so, fair enough. When, or if, they run both cars over a weekend in all sessions, then it will be proved that it is 'scurrilous rumour mongering'. Until then, the question is a fair one.

You have some sort of proof to substantiate your claims?  What parts are they sharing?  Why run Mehri and not Stevens.



#31 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 29,677 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 02 April 2015 - 02:43

This thread is a discussion of rumours in the media, not a product of someone on here's imagination. It would be strange NOT to at least discuss it.

#32 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 April 2015 - 10:23

You have some sort of proof to substantiate your claims? What parts are they sharing? Why run Mehri and not Stevens.


Do you have some sort of proof to substantiate your claim? What is your claim? Or are you just arguing against anything that isn't 100% pro-Manor?

I didn't say anything was 'my claim', merely that the question was a fair one, as until they run both cars, nobody knows. Least of all anyone on this forum.

#33 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 3,449 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 02 April 2015 - 10:35

http://www.f1reports...liberate-report  :(



#34 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 3,782 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 02 April 2015 - 10:44

The major flaw in the theory postulated in that article is that it's claiming the team deliberately chose to not run the driver who was:

1) faster
2) paying for the drive

That makes no logical sense. If they deliberately chose to only run one car, it makes far more sense to sideline Merhi.

#35 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 3,449 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 02 April 2015 - 10:49

The major flaw in the theory postulated in that article is that it's claiming the team deliberately chose to not run the driver who was:

1) faster
2) paying for the drive

That makes no logical sense. If they deliberately chose to only run one car, it makes far more sense to sideline Merhi.

That's what I thought. It would have made more sense to have run Stevens.



#36 Fisico54

Fisico54
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 02 April 2015 - 10:53

Do you have some sort of proof to substantiate your claim? What is your claim? Or are you just arguing against anything that isn't 100% pro-Manor?

I didn't say anything was 'my claim', merely that the question was a fair one, as until they run both cars, nobody knows. Least of all anyone on this forum.

FFS he isn't making a claim just asking for proof to what, as it stands, is just a scurrilous rumour. There is zero proof just conjecture, I could start a thread saying mclaren have only 1 proper car and the other is just a development chassis of spars and rejected parts that will never last a race. Obvious nonsense but tallies with the results of their cars, show me proof it isn't the case though?

I'll believe the manor rumour if anybody can provide answers to
- why run Merhi not Stevens? Stevens was guaranteed to be allowed to race without a q time as he was within 107% in FP. I was surprised when Merhi was allowed in. Why not choose the car that will definitely race?
- why Merhi not Stevens. Stevens is on a season long contract and provides ££. Merhi doesn't and is on a short deal.
- why Merhi not Stevens when Stevens is faster?
- I'd what they are doing is swapping parts between cars (somehow unseen by the plethora of cameras) why were they able to do this quickly (within 15 minutes) in FP but not quick enough to get both out seperately in q1?

#37 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 April 2015 - 11:39

FFS he isn't making a claim just asking for proof to what, as it stands, is just a scurrilous rumour. There is zero proof just conjecture, I could start a thread saying mclaren have only 1 proper car and the other is just a development chassis of spars and rejected parts that will never last a race. Obvious nonsense but tallies with the results of their cars, show me proof it isn't the case though?


Did you even read my post? I'm not claiming anything. I don't need to prove anything. He however, is claiming the rumour, started independently of this forum, is false. Simply 'because he says so' isn't proof of anything.

Now, for the umpteen millionth time, I'm quite simply saying that neither you, he, or anyone else knows and until someone provides proof either way (and the best proof is to run two cars in all sessions at the next round) then to pose the question as to whether it was a deliberate strategy by Manor is fair and reasonable.

Nothing is 'obvious' either way. This is a rumour from an outside source and is worthy of discussion, so get off your fanboy soapbox and aim your vitriol elsewhere.

'FFS'

Edited by superden, 02 April 2015 - 11:47.


#38 Fisico54

Fisico54
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 02 April 2015 - 12:15

Vitriol? Fanboy soapbox? Where is the vitriol and how is it fanboyism to want a F1 team to succeed.
A scurrilous rumour with no evidence supporting it doesn't need to be discussed just dismissed.
Frankly I pity the cynicism of people like you who are trying to drag people down by spreading or giving credence to rubbish like this.

#39 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 02 April 2015 - 12:48

So, anything you disagree with can just be dismissed?

:lol:

No cynicism on my part fella, I'm not giving credence to anything. I haven't said I think it's true or not, merely that, at this point, nobody knows. I'm not willing to blindly to accept anyone's 'word' on anything and anyone who does is a moron, especially in F1. Your opinion, or interpretation of events, without fact, does not constitute 'knowing'. My viewpoint is fairly neutral, yet you clearly saw it as a negative stance toward 'your' team. If that is an example of your interpretative prowess, I'll not be taking your position too seriously.

It is, by the way, fanboyism to deny anything negative about a team when you have no proof either way and, like it or not, you don't have any. Your response was antagonistic, one-sided and passionate, the very underpinnings of fanboy behaviour.

If you don't like the idea of discussion or debate, perhaps an internet forum isn't the place for you. As far as I'm concerned, further discussion between you and I is pointless. Feel free to carry on but I can't be bothered headbutting the proverbial intellectual brick wall.

Edited by superden, 02 April 2015 - 13:16.


Advertisement

#40 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 3,782 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:20

That's what I thought. It would have made more sense to have run Stevens.

 

I also forgot to mention that the rumour as detailed in that article is that they only had one copy of the software. That's really hard to believe, as software is pretty darn easy to copy and paste. If they'd said they only had one licence, I couldn't maybe believe it, but in doing so I'd also have to believe that Lowdon, Booth, and co are supremely stupid individuals for not buying a licence that allows them to use the software on both cars at the same time. More to the point, as others already mentioned they could have still qualified both cars if it was merely a software licence issue that kept Stephens out of qually.

 

At the end of the day, most of the time the simplest answer is the correct answer. And in this case I'd suggest the simplest answer is that the problem that sidelined Stephens is exactly the problem the team have said it was, with the fact they're on a skeleton crew from a staffing perspective making it impossible for them to strip the car, find and fix the exact fault, and rebuild the car in time. Keep in mind here that even the big teams took a large chunk of last year before they could turn around a major fault repair quickly. Even now, with the complexity of these cars it takes a lot longer to strip down and rebuild than it did prior to 2014.

 

Could further add that of the quotes used in that latest article to help give the rumour some credence, the leading one is from a man / team (Fernley / Force India) who are far from unbiased in this matter. Fernley has so far, in my opinion, done everything he can to throw roadblocks in front of Manor's comeback - because, no matter how little they'd get, they need every single pound they can get and Manor going down is a quick and easy way to get a few million extra.

 

I'm still wondering about the exact circumstances of the vote where an apparent request by "Manor" to run the 2014 car was refused. Manor have claimed they never submitted the request as they were already in possession of a letter giving them the concessions they needed. Did someone else submit it on their 'behalf' in order to be able to reject it and nullify the letter? Why did Fernley go so hard into the press putting a downer on Manor's "application" (that Manor claim to have never made) indicating it was refused because it didn't include information that at that point was still highly confidential and therefore couldn't be shared?

 

Let's face it - if a rumour surfaced tomorrow that Force India were the ones who lodged that 2014-car application, and seeded this latest rumour, then that rumour would be just as believable as the current "Manor can only run one car" rumour. It would be very, very difficult to prove or disprove.



#41 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 3,449 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:30

That would be the f1 story of the decade if it turned out to be FI feeding these rumours, creating a fake application letter etc.



#42 milestone 11

milestone 11
  • Member

  • 17,317 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:41

I'll believe the manor rumour if anybody can provide answers to
- why run Merhi not Stevens?


Haven't you already answered your question?
 

- why Merhi not Stevens. Stevens is on a season long contract and provides ££. Merhi doesn't and is on a short deal.


Edited by milestone 11, 02 April 2015 - 13:43.


#43 Fisico54

Fisico54
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:44

How does that answer the question?

#44 milestone 11

milestone 11
  • Member

  • 17,317 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:52

How does that answer the question?

Because he may not be there in China to grab the money from. Stevens is likely on a seasonal deal.

#45 SUPRAF1

SUPRAF1
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:57

Don't they still owe their suppliers millions of pounds in debt? 



#46 tormave

tormave
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 02 April 2015 - 13:59

Is there any reason to believe, that Manor has re-emerged to do anything else, but collect the TV money with minimum investment?



#47 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 3,449 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 02 April 2015 - 14:06

Is there any reason to believe, that Manor has re-emerged to do anything else, but collect the TV money with minimum investment?

 

Other than the fact that it has taken a lot more to get the team up and running than the prize money is worth  :rolleyes:



#48 milestone 11

milestone 11
  • Member

  • 17,317 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 02 April 2015 - 14:57

Other than the fact that it has taken a lot more to get the team up and running than the prize money is worth  :rolleyes:

I can't see how you can say this. They are likely, if reports are to be believed, to pick up £40m. The Company Voluntary Arrangement which they are party to, enabling their participation this year, once again if reports are to believed, requires them to pay 1.8p in the £. If their reported debt was correct at £40m, they have £720,000 to pay from that prize money leaving them £39.28m in pocket.

I had a soft spot for Marussia at one time, probably largely due to the sentimentality of the whole Bianchi thing, that has now gone. Do you truly think that Stephen Fitzpatrick has money to burn, I don't. Just take a look at this first paragraph from a Guardian article to give you a little foresight as to the sort of person we are dealing with.
 

" The boss of Ovo Energy, one of Britain's fastest-growing new power suppliers, has taken £2m out of the business for his own use at a time when the startup is struggling to break even.

Stephen Fitzpatrick cashed out through a share transaction despite the business running up less than £300,000 annual profits and having net liabilities of more than £9m for the last calendar year."

 
Just watch 'em take the money and run and some point this year.

Edited by milestone 11, 02 April 2015 - 15:55.


#49 kevinracefan

kevinracefan
  • Member

  • 2,729 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 02 April 2015 - 16:01

In other news, the guy who has been called a troll on multiple times has not commented on this..

yes, it is a fair question, but illogical..

other than that I will save my 2 cents until more facts are known...

#50 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 April 2015 - 16:45

In other news, the guy who has been called a troll on multiple times has not commented on this..

yes, it is a fair question, but illogical..

other than that I will save my 2 cents until more facts are known...

Really? I can't find multiple times of you being accused of trolling by the posters on this topic. That's despite your enduring pattern of behaviour to sew disharmony among the Manor fans. In fact it's a credit to magnanimity of Manor followers who represent genuine race fans, and have avoided rising to your provocation.
The whole subject of trolling could fill a PHD dissertation. Many such people show patterns of inner experience and behaviour that is greatly at odds with their cultural settings. IIRC this pattern is more consistent with people suffering from antisocial personality disorder from research studies but it's been a while since I did Clinical Psychology. In fact anyone minded could use internet forums to obtain the extent of personality disability/ disorder among internet forum users. The anonymous nature of the web means people are more likely to show their true character so one can clearly assess personality characteristics of Cognition, Affect, Interpersonal skills and Impulse Control.
I have digressed. I think the simplest answer to Manor's troubles is a perfect storm centred around a limited time to prepare, a shortage of parts and being afflicted by a fuel flow problem in one car. The latter requires a complete strip down and rebuild of the chassis. Not a problem for the grandee teams but an issue with a small outfit with limited resource.

Edited by Petroltorque, 02 April 2015 - 16:56.