Williams & Judd in 1988 - a good decision?
#1
Posted 27 December 2001 - 08:45
Wasn't there anything else out there? I would assume if Ligier could get Megatrons after the season started in, then Williams could also get them in 1988. Ford Cosworth customer engines might have been as quick as the Judd but proabably more reliable.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 27 December 2001 - 09:02
The Megatron engine's best result was a third at Monza. And that on a pure turbo track after both McLaren's had retired. Mansell's 2nd in Spain and Capelli's 2nd in Estoril were both earned on merit.
#3
Posted 27 December 2001 - 11:10
"When you look at our straight line speed and then see how close we are in time you realise how much the car is making up round the corners - it's hard work. We came here testing and had problems, the team have reacted, the FW12 is a fantastic car
#4
Posted 20 July 2013 - 19:53
#5
Posted 21 July 2013 - 08:07
I always thought that the 1988 Williams was a good car, but with a very lousy engine. The fact that Mansell sometimes qualified in the top four and finished second twice backs that up. However, did Williams call to go with Judds steem from the fact that their 1982 Ford Cosworths had been tweeked by Judd?
Wasn't there anything else out there? I would assume if Ligier could get Megatrons after the season started in, then Williams could also get them in 1988.
AS FW has often been quoted assumptions are the mothers of all *four letter expleitive* ups.
As I remember it Williams failure to deliver championships (driver and manufacturer) to Honda in '86, and in particular failure to hold Mansell back from taking points off team mate Piquet, led to Honda changing it's partners to McLaren and Lotus for the 1988 season. Leaving Williams with a choice of lesser Megatron turbo power or going the 3.5 liter route, a year earlier than they would have liked.
Knowing how Williams always works to tight budgets it is hard to believe the financing options for the Megatron and Judds did not play a significant part in the decision.
#6
Posted 21 July 2013 - 09:08
#7
Posted 21 July 2013 - 11:27
Wasn't this purely done as a short-term decision? Williams had lost their Honda engines to McLaren, and they had a deal with Renault to run their V10s from 1989. I guess the Judd was a cheap option to fill the gap.
Yes, I think that's correct, at least that was my understanding. Renault had been signed for '89 so Judd was a stop gap as none of the engine manufacturers would have agreed to a 1 year deal.
#8
Posted 22 July 2013 - 00:02
Williams failure to deliver championships (driver and manufacturer) to Honda in '86
Actually they did deliver the Constructors' Championship in '86......
#9
Posted 22 July 2013 - 05:46
Yes, I think that's correct, at least that was my understanding. Renault had been signed for '89 so Judd was a stop gap as none of the engine manufacturers would have agreed to a 1 year deal.
The Williams-Judd deal for 1988 was announced by the time of the Italian GP in 1987. Was the Renault deal for 1989 already in place by that time? The first I heard it discussed publicly was in an interview with Frank Williams in mid-1988, after Mansell had already announced his move to Ferrari for 1989.
When Williams picked the Judd engine for 1988, I am not sure that they knew at the time that it would be only a one-year stopgap. Perhaps that Renault deal was already in the works, but it was not disclosed publicly.
#10
Posted 22 July 2013 - 21:26
Mansell drove well at Silverstone in the wet after having the suspension completely changed to a passive set-up, but the FW12 was never going to set the world on fire even though it wasn't a bad car.