Jump to content


Photo

1993 F1 numbers allocation


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Kvadrat

Kvadrat
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 17 June 2006 - 08:45

Does anyone know why in 1993 Benetton got numbers 5 and 6 instead of 19 and 20 and Mclaren got 7 and 8 instead of 5 and 6 which should be given to them after Williams won 1992 championship?

1992:

McLaren - 1 and 2
Williams - 5 and 6
Benetton - 19 and 20

1993:

Williams - 0 and 2
Benetton - 5 and 6 (should remain 19 and 20 according to allocation system used then)
McLaren - 7 and 8 (should be 5 and 6 taken from Williams after loosing championship)

Advertisement

#2 Vicuna

Vicuna
  • Member

  • 1,588 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 17 June 2006 - 11:05

Does 1993 qualify for nostalgia already? :confused: : :| :drunk: :stoned:

#3 Kvadrat

Kvadrat
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 17 June 2006 - 14:15

I don't see any problem.

I know a lot of people who remember Senna's years with great nostalgia.

My favourite period is from 1894 to 1955. So what? Is it reason to doubt everyone who asks later periods questions?

#4 David Lawson

David Lawson
  • Member

  • 866 posts
  • Joined: November 03

Posted 17 June 2006 - 17:32

The last time I camped for all three days of the British Grand Prix was in 1994 and I look back on it with very fond memories and with a certain amount of nostalgia.

David

#5 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 35,909 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 17 June 2006 - 20:39

That was the year they changed it to Constructors' Championship order. No idea why they did that, unless it was to stop explaining to people that Tyrrell was not very good anymore and had 3 and 4 by legacy. Something similar was nearly done in 1984.

#6 Rob G

Rob G
  • Member

  • 10,840 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 17 June 2006 - 21:40

Originally posted by ensign14
That was the year they changed it to Constructors' Championship order.

That was 1996.

Here's my theory, and keep in mind it's only a theory. Brabham went out of business during 1992, leaving their coveted single-digit numbers unused. Being a top team without the traditions of Ligier or Ferrari, Benetton probably wanted to move up the list. Perhaps the same sense of tradition that kept Ligier and Ferrari where they were also meant that McLaren felt the urge to recapture the numbers 7 and 8 that they had used for so many years in the late '70s and through much of the '80s.

#7 Richard Jenkins

Richard Jenkins
  • Member

  • 6,103 posts
  • Joined: November 00

Posted 17 June 2006 - 21:52

Originally posted by Vicuna
Does 1993 qualify for nostalgia already? :confused: : :| :drunk: :stoned:


Considering two of those racers that year are dead, one is without legs, and the majority of them are now aged between 45 & 55, I'd say, yes.


What an intriguing little question. I had a look at all my 1993 material but couldn't find a answer. Rob's theory seems a correct one, IMO. I always remember McLaren as 7 & 8 when they weren't, of course, 1 & 2.

#8 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 35,909 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 17 June 2006 - 22:00

Originally posted by Rob G

That was 1996.

Here's my theory, and keep in mind it's only a theory. Brabham went out of business during 1992, leaving their coveted single-digit numbers unused. Being a top team without the traditions of Ligier or Ferrari, Benetton probably wanted to move up the list. Perhaps the same sense of tradition that kept Ligier and Ferrari where they were also meant that McLaren felt the urge to recapture the numbers 7 and 8 that they had used for so many years in the late '70s and through much of the '80s.

Sorry - my bad.

That sort of thing had happened before - after March went bust in the late 70s ATS moved from the 34-35 slot to 9 and 10. In 1984 Spirit moved from 40 to 21, Arrows came down from 29-30 to 17-18, Toleman from 35-36 to 19-20 and Osella from 31 to 24 to fill in gaps left by March, Fittipaldi and (anciently) Merzario, and RAM took over 9 and 10 from ATS who were fielding one car and therefore could slot in at 14 after being left vacant following Ensign's merger with Theodore.

#9 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 17 June 2006 - 22:22

Originally posted by Rob G

McLaren felt the urge to recapture the numbers 7 and 8 that they had used for so many years in the late '70s and through much of the '80s.


I very much doubt that; the only numbers that matter to Ron are 1 and 2!

#10 Vicuna

Vicuna
  • Member

  • 1,588 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 17 June 2006 - 23:14

Originally posted by Richie Jenkins


Considering two of those racers that year are dead, one is without legs, and the majority of them are now aged between 45 & 55, I'd say, yes.


What an intriguing little question. I had a look at all my 1993 material but couldn't find a answer. Rob's theory seems a correct one, IMO. I always remember McLaren as 7 & 8 when they weren't, of course, 1 & 2.


I wasn't actually being serious..

#11 Andretti Fan

Andretti Fan
  • Member

  • 353 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 18 June 2006 - 01:12

Who has lost their legs?

#12 canon1753

canon1753
  • Member

  • 618 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 18 June 2006 - 01:23

Alex Zanardi raced F1 that year. So he was the one who lost his legs.

#13 David Hyland

David Hyland
  • Member

  • 289 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 18 June 2006 - 03:48

Originally posted by Rob G
Perhaps the same sense of tradition that kept Ligier and Ferrari where they were also meant that McLaren felt the urge to recapture the numbers 7 and 8 that they had used for so many years in the late '70s and through much of the '80s.

Originally posted by Richie Jenkins
What an intriguing little question. I had a look at all my 1993 material but couldn't find a answer. Rob's theory seems a correct one, IMO. I always remember McLaren as 7 & 8 when they weren't, of course, 1 & 2.

Like Richie, I had a look through all my 1993 material but also couldn't find any conclusive evidence. (All the "number talk" was about Damon Hill having the number 0). Having said that, my initial thought/recollection upon seeing this thread was that McLaren had chosen/been allocated 7 and 8 because they were the numbers they had used from '78 to '83. (Of course it's fairly dodgy reasoning - they also used 5 and 6 for much of the early '70s). Maybe Ron had a whole pile of Marlboro red/orange 7 and 8 decals in a cupboard he wanted to use up? ;)

#14 Andretti Fan

Andretti Fan
  • Member

  • 353 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 18 June 2006 - 23:45

Ok I have to blame that one on serious brain fade............since I'm a big Zanardi fan.  ;)

#15 cosworth bdg

cosworth bdg
  • Member

  • 1,350 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 19 June 2006 - 00:57

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vicuna
[B]Does 1993 qualify for nostalgia already? :confused: : : NOSTALGIA, for myself and many others in this CITY are the years 1985 to 1995 when the F1 GP was held in ADELAIDE...... :up:

#16 subh

subh
  • Member

  • 1,014 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 19 June 2006 - 11:49

Originally posted by Vicuna
Does 1993 qualify for nostalgia already?


For me, the years when Toleman / Benetton ran numbers 19 and 20 generate plenty of nostalgia; as do the 1990s, really. Perhaps it depends on your age at the time - although I emphasise this is not meant as a judgement on the ages of any of you to have posted above this....