7 replies to this topic

[Psychoman]

I had seen something in an article about the fall of Olivier Panis (it was '99, he had yet to get back up), and it mentioned that at the time of his crash at Montreal, he was 3rd in points (or 4th--I don't have the issue anymore, but it was somewhere in that range). Supposing he had continued doing well that season, do you guys think that the success and the monetary windfall would have changed the fortunes of Prost Grand Prix (or at least delayed their collapse)?

[aportinga]

I'd like to know what we'd be looking at in regard to Prost now - had they not ran Peugeot engines. I think that is what really started the downward spiral!

[Indian Chief]

I don't think so. The two seasons which killed Prost were 1998 and 2000. They looked like they were improving in late-1998 and 1999. But 2000 was awful partly due to Peugeot. If they had had a better car for 2000, they might not have been in debt and probably would have survived today.

[ehagar]

Or maybe it was doing too much too fast. The move from Magny-Cours to their new facility, hiring more staff (was it about twice that of Ligier?) then the public bickering with Peugeot... Where would Jordan be today if they kept Peugeot...

[Witt]

Originally posted by Psychoman
I had seen something in an article about the fall of Olivier Panis (it was '99, he had yet to get back up), and it mentioned that at the time of his crash at Montreal, he was 3rd in points (or 4th--I don't have the issue anymore, but it was somewhere in that range). Supposing he had continued doing well that season, do you guys think that the success and the monetary windfall would have changed the fortunes of Prost Grand Prix (or at least delayed their collapse)?

I also see this as the defining moment in Prost GP's breif history. Had Panis not crashed in Montreal, i have no doubt he would have won at least 1 GP later that year, perhaps even two. He would have taken Pole Position at the French GP, as Bridgestone and Ligier/Prost had done sooooo many miles there in testing, and they were so fast everytime. I base this on the fact that Jarno Trulli, who was an inexperienced F1 driver back then, put Panis' car 5th on the grid Magny Cours, having barely accustomed himself to the car. I also think Panis would have won in Hungary, probably being the only driver able to match Hill on that day had he not had the accident and raced there.

But, the whole Peugeot affair is just as defining as well. Peugeot, IMO, were not entirely to blame for Prost's 1998 performances. Prost had built a slow brick that year, and it completely stalled the progress Peugeot had been making with Jordan the previous year. That season it seems to me pretty much unmotivated Peugeot to develop their engine anymore, and from then on it was all downhill.

[Earthling]

Prost would have been very successfull if they had kept Mugen-Honda engines, but Prost wanted to be all French and stuff....
But who knows what a crappy Chassis they would have produced over Jordans.

[green-blood]

2000 was brutal for them, but last year was hardly a huge improvement, Alesi dragged that **** heap of a chasis around to gather some scraps - the qualifying was desperate and they used 5 drivers in total , including such leading lights as Mazzacane (remember that piece of genius from Prost), Burti and Enge. Alesi lept at the chance to abandon ship and drive a rather uncompetitive Jordan. Thats what "killed" Prost, 2001.

If Sauber could get to 4th with the same engine, it had to be the Prost chassis and team that was at fault - and thats all that investors could see

Its sad, but they underperformed and they are dead - being 4 times champ driver does not give you any special privledges.

Can I be the first to start the rumour that Lotus are gonna buy the factory and go into F1 again (someone always does with these debates anyway)

[LuckyStrike1]

Originally posted by Psychoman
I had seen something in an article about the fall of Olivier Panis (it was '99, he had yet to get back up), and it mentioned that at the time of his crash at Montreal, he was 3rd in points (or 4th--I don't have the issue anymore, but it was somewhere in that range). Supposing he had continued doing well that season, do you guys think that the success and the monetary windfall would have changed the fortunes of Prost Grand Prix (or at least delayed their collapse)?

You must be thinking of hte 97 season - Prost's first as a GP team. Alain Prost bought the Ligier team just before the seasons start and it was effectively still a Ligier team.

A good engine in the Mugen Honda, and Bridgestone tyres, made them look impressive. Panis took two podiums before his crash in Montreal I think and was regularly a threat at the top spot.

When Panis crashed and broke his legs, Trulli took over the seat, scored a 4:th place in Hockenheim and lead at Austrai before an engine blow-up. They somewhat faded off during the season but this remains Prost's most succesful season yet .....

It was in 98 it all got wrong, the car was a disaster and Peugeot wanted nothing of that and looked like the gave up before they even started. To recover from that would be tough for anyone and I think that was what made Prost break really .... 98, and in some ways 99, evetually lead Prost to loose both his titlesponsor and his engine later ......

Prost started with a tobacco sponsor and a manufacturer deal and ended up with no title sponsor at all and very expensive customer engines ... I doubt he will be back in a front-line role in F1 for a long time.