Total domination in motorsport
#1
Posted 15 October 2006 - 07:13
... Audi winning 6 of the last 7 LM 24hrs
... McLaren in 1988 winning 15 of 16 races
... Ascari in 1952 winning every WDC GP but the Indy 500 and Swiss GP, then winning 5 races the next season.
These are just a few examples of teams/drivers totally dominating in a category/series. What are some other examples?
#3
Posted 15 October 2006 - 07:36
Originally posted by DNQ
... Audi winning 6 of the last 7 LM 24hrs
7 of 7 ;)
No one surely think 2003 was anything but a disguised Audi effort?
#4
Posted 15 October 2006 - 07:36
Who has won the most Indy 500s?
Who has won the most grand prix and world championships?
Who has won the most Bathurst 1000s?
They have had wins in most froms of motorsport but thankfully their almost total domination of the last 30 years is eventually coming to an end. Can you guess this name?
#5
Posted 15 October 2006 - 07:37
#6
Posted 15 October 2006 - 07:41
Benoist's Delage, sweeping the Grands Prix in 1927.
#7
Posted 15 October 2006 - 07:58
Too recent?
#8
Posted 15 October 2006 - 08:09
#9
Posted 15 October 2006 - 08:24
#10
Posted 15 October 2006 - 16:29
#11
Posted 15 October 2006 - 16:57
#12
Posted 15 October 2006 - 16:59
#13
Posted 15 October 2006 - 17:16
His closest rival had three.
#14
Posted 15 October 2006 - 18:01
#15
Posted 15 October 2006 - 18:12
#16
Posted 15 October 2006 - 18:12
#17
Posted 15 October 2006 - 18:12
#18
Posted 15 October 2006 - 18:33
Originally posted by jcbc3
7 of 7 ;)
No one surely think 2003 was anything but a disguised Audi effort?
Me.
;)
#19
Posted 15 October 2006 - 18:51
Originally posted by Vicuna
McLaren in the 1969 Can Am
How quickly we forget.... From 1967 to 1971, Bruce McLaren Motor Racing utterly dominated Can-Am. Today, there are many who have no idea the "McLaren" team was actually named after someone named McLaren, much less just who Bruce McLaren was....
Advertisement
#20
Posted 15 October 2006 - 19:24
Maybe not "total" domination, but they seemed to win a lot...
#21
Posted 15 October 2006 - 19:34
#22
Posted 15 October 2006 - 21:39
Originally posted by PeterElleray
Me.
;)
But aren't you obliged to think so by association?
#23
Posted 15 October 2006 - 21:43
#24
Posted 15 October 2006 - 22:21
Originally posted by jcbc3
But aren't you obliged to think so by association?
!
#25
Posted 15 October 2006 - 22:28
Originally posted by PeterElleray
!
So correct me if the following is wrong.
The engine was exclusively designed by Audi.
The chassis was based on the original Audi closed coupe concept R8C GTP (but highly modified by Bentley).
Tom Kristensen was lent to Bentley by Audi.
#26
Posted 15 October 2006 - 22:55
Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
How quickly we forget.... From 1967 to 1971, Bruce McLaren Motor Racing utterly dominated Can-Am. Today, there are many who have no idea the "McLaren" team was actually named after someone named McLaren, much less just who Bruce McLaren was....
Looking back on the Can-Am racing of the late 60's gives me a different perspective than I remember at the time. The domination was so complete for so long, and I remember going to the first public race at Road Atlanta hoping to see the Chaparral 2J beat the hated orange cars, only to see Tony Dean whiz in everyone's cheerios in the 908. Granted, it was a race of attrition, but still, the McLarens just didn't break down in those days, and certainly not both of them. What a shocker.
There really wasn't any competition in that series though, and I remember Hulme coming under the bridge and down the hill on the 1st lap looking like a men amongst boys, a real GP driver racing largely semi-pro racers. The teams they competed against just seemed so amateurish in comparison to them, as can be seen in the number of good drivers that had short lived careers in Can-Am in uncompetitive cars.
At the time I remember hoping with every race that the tide might turn. The series seemed somewhat boring at the time because of the lack of competittion. In retrospect, I',m glad to have seen first hand something so special.
Going in a completely different direction, Richard Petty's 200 wins and 7 championships would seem to indicate domination, and he certainly had some strong years, but it was never without competition. Pearson, Yarbrough, Yarborough and others certainly kept him honest. He was awfully damn good.
#27
Posted 15 October 2006 - 23:11
#28
Posted 16 October 2006 - 00:11
Originally posted by jcbc3
So correct me if the following is wrong.
The engine was exclusively designed by Audi.
The chassis was based on the original Audi closed coupe concept R8C GTP (but highly modified by Bentley).
Tom Kristensen was lent to Bentley by Audi.
jcbc3 - no argument about the engine, the situation with Tom was a little more complex than you imply as i will explain.. However, where you are completely wrong is about the car being based on the R8c and that really is the crux of the matter...
Perhaps i should have been a bit more up front with you in my original post, the reason i dont think the Bentley was a disguised Audi effort is because i know it wasnt because i worked on all the cars you mention, Audi R8c and the Bentley's as Chief Designer between 1998 and 2003. Some people on this board are aware of that, some aren't, hence the smilie with the knowing wink and exclamation mark.. Sorry if you missed where i was coming from.
There are quite a few racing people posting here - a lot of us have a strong interest in the history of the sport that has given us our careers.
Getting back to the cars, the R8c project was scrapped after 1999. The first (2001) Bentley was a completely different design that i started in late 1999. The only common bit was the engine, it needed to be, the R8c didnt work very well... The car that won in 2003 was another new design, I started that one in 2002. So the winning Bentley was by some distance far removed from the R8c of 1999. Incidentally the R8c itself was designed in the UK by myself and Tony Southgate in 1998, not at Audi Sport.. Only the R8R's originate from continental europe...
All the Bentleys were therefore designed in the UK- engine accepted - by British design teams. The cars were constructed in the UK - except for the engines - by the company i worked for , rtn, which is part of VAG, and which you can view as the racing arm of Bentley- also part of VAG - during that period. They were run from the UK by Apex motorsport.
It would be quite right to say that both the Audi programme - in which Joest racing play the Apex role - and the Bentley programme are both VAG programmes, this is where the common engine supply and driver pooling orignates, but it is quite wrong to perpetuate the story that the Bentley was an Audi in disguise, an Audi with a roof on, or any of the other permutations that have floated around the net, in the media, or down the pub in recent years.
It certainly was not a disguised Audi effort. It was a pooling of corporate resources into a different programme.
In one respect you are right - perhaps some people do think as you say by association. Perhaps that suits some others very nicely.
Hope that clears any confusion about the nature of the programme up, incidentally it was a privelige ito work with your countryman Tom Kristensen on it.
peter
#29
Posted 16 October 2006 - 00:41
Chris
www.gtreproductions.com
#30
Posted 16 October 2006 - 01:36
#31
Posted 16 October 2006 - 01:47
[B]I love this thread. I love domination in racing. Men and machines displaying their brilliance and tenacity in preparation and results. That's what racing is about to me. I'm not big on luck. What's the point of that. These examples of domination listed on this thread are not about luck. It's all about commitment just like Ford Europe and the now defunct B.M.C.
#32
Posted 16 October 2006 - 01:52
Congratulations Peter - well done. I learn something every day...Originally posted by PeterElleray
jcbc3 - no argument about the engine, the situation with Tom was a little more complex than you imply as i will explain.. However, where you are completely wrong is about the car being based on the R8c and that really is the crux of the matter...
Perhaps i should have been a bit more up front with you in my original post, the reason i dont think the Bentley was a disguised Audi effort is because i know it wasnt because i worked on all the cars you mention, Audi R8c and the Bentley's as Chief Designer between 1998 and 2003. Some people on this board are aware of that, some aren't, hence the smilie with the knowing wink and exclamation mark.. Sorry if you missed where i was coming from.
..................
peter
#33
Posted 16 October 2006 - 02:07
#34
Posted 16 October 2006 - 03:23
#35
Posted 16 October 2006 - 03:54
#36
Posted 16 October 2006 - 04:46
#37
Posted 16 October 2006 - 06:45
Originally posted by PeterElleray
...
peter
Sorry, I wasn't clear either. When I originally said you were 'obliged by association', I knew that you had worked on the project. Though not quite to what extent. I do now.
But of course I didn't post the R8C/bentley link without checking. Here . Seems they could use an update too.
#38
Posted 16 October 2006 - 07:48
Ok checked my figures like a good little boy. In 1967, Petty won 27 of 48 races, including 10 in a row. I'm going back to bed now........hahaha.
#39
Posted 16 October 2006 - 08:36
Originally posted by jcbc3
Sorry, I wasn't clear either. When I originally said you were 'obliged by association', I knew that you had worked on the project. Though not quite to what extent. I do now.
But of course I didn't post the R8C/bentley link without checking. Here . Seems they could use an update too.
well, what they actually say is that there is a resemblance to the R8c - and now you now why, the same bloke drew all of 'em...
They say it shared some technology - correct. Engine. AP Brakes. Momo steering wheel , starter motor, etc...
And then they say that the 2003 car had a new chassis and new body. Which is correct.
What they don't sat is that with a new gearbox in 2001 and new suspension in both 2001 ans 2003 that adds up to a new car with the old engine, like most racing cars. If the implication is there that the car was based on an Audi then its only because people have assumed that in the first place - like i said, it might suit some people not to correct that impression.
Advertisement
#40
Posted 16 October 2006 - 09:53
#41
Posted 16 October 2006 - 12:49
#42
Posted 16 October 2006 - 20:49
Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
How quickly we forget.... From 1967 to 1971, Bruce McLaren Motor Racing utterly dominated Can-Am. Today, there are many who have no idea the "McLaren" team was actually named after someone named McLaren, much less just who Bruce McLaren was....
How sad, but true. the Can-Am Mclaren team was pretty much able (until the arrival of the turbo Porsche panzers) to fend off and defeat world class oppostion. To this day the 'original' Can-Am series remains for me motor racing in damned near purest form.
#43
Posted 16 October 2006 - 21:26
1. Porsche 956
2. Porsche 956
3. Porsche 956
4. Porsche 956
5. Porsche 956
6. Porsche 956
7. Porsche 956
8. Porsche 956
9. Sauber C7
10. Porsche 956
"Nobody is perfect" was the slogan they used after that result.
#44
Posted 28 October 2006 - 22:54
#45
Posted 29 October 2006 - 02:52
I am led to believe that it had something like twenty eight starts and twenty eight wins in its early days , but maybe Ray Bell could shed some light on this ?
#46
Posted 29 October 2006 - 05:14
#48
Posted 18 August 2008 - 20:46
[Sorry about this irrelevant, non-historic and shameless plug, but I couldn't help myself... I'll just get me coat...]
#49
Posted 18 August 2008 - 21:05
#50
Posted 18 August 2008 - 22:58
It's the simple question "Yeah but...who did they beat?".
How many of the dominant marques and men mentioned thus far withstand such scrutiny? Many most decidedly do NOT, since they 'dominated' nothing and nobody worthwhile...
DCN