27 replies to this topic

[Jordan191]

Flashback time.

Okay ... I had just watched the Suzuka 1993 race and one thing that the broadcasters had mentioned was that Mclaren had run a test with the chrysler ( lambo ) v12 and apparently at the time it was 1.4 seconds than the Ford V8 bolted in the same car. Now they knew they were leaving ford, so I wonder why they chose Puegeot instead of the Chrysler v12.

There's an article on it as well ( Thanks Jhope )

http://8w.forix.com/mc-lambo.html

There are a couple of things that favored chrysler.

1. They had an engine that was ready to go immediately. the Chrysler as bolted into the Mclaren was 1.4 seconds a lap quicker than the Ford in a car that was not designed to take the v12. That says a lot both about the chassis and the engine. Even if this engine had flaws, it was there and could be worked on , as opposed to the V10 Puegeot that was reportedly based upon a sportscar engine, and was yet to be built in 1993. Given the choice the Lambo/Chrysler should be the pick.

2. Marketing. With Chrysler involved in the v12 , you could have an easy way to get American companies involved in F1 as well as american interest in F1 ( drivers , etc ). With Mclaren being one of the marketing juggernaughts in F1 even back in 1993 it could possibly have influenced F1 into getting into the US earlier than the 2000 USGP. Contrast this to Puegeot who really never was any better than a poor second fiddle to Renault in France.

these two reasons alone make the Chrysler the better choice, even looking at it from a 1993 point of view, unless there's information I'm not aware of. It's really puzzling.

[A Wheel Nut]

Perhaps I am wRONg ;), but wasn't the V10 3.0l Formula introduced in 1994. Was that something that the FiA had been looking at for a while or was it no more than a knee jerk reaction to an accident?

[Jordan191]

the 3.0 formula was introduced in 1995 .. there's no way in 1993 one would know that would happen.

[A Wheel Nut]

Was it just before Spain?

Because if it wasn't, boy does my memory suck.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by A Wheel Nut
Was it just before Spain?

Because if it wasn't, boy does my memory suck.

no it was introduced in 1995 as a way to hopefully cut back speeds after the 1994 debacles. they never ran a 3.0 engine in 94

[A Wheel Nut]

They ran 3.5l in 94 tho, didn't they?

*Flicking through the Yellow Pages for a good nursing home*

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by A Wheel Nut
They ran 3.5l in 94 tho, didn't they?

*Flicking through the Yellow Pages for a good nursing home*

yessir it was 3.5

[Dudley]

2. Marketing. With Chrysler involved in the v12 , you could have an easy way to get American companies involved in F1 as well as american interest in F1 ( drivers , etc ).

Yes, but remember 1993 was the year of Michael Andretti.

Attracting american drivers wasn't their first choice

[Henri Greuter]

From what I remember of that deal:
Having previous recent experiences with V12's vs V10's Mclaren realized already that the V12 was a dead end development alley. Too much fuel needed for not enough extra power compared with a V10 in addtion to the extra weight, size etc. So unless Chrysler had a miracle up within their sleeves the V12 concept was passé for McLaren and they preferred something more compact than a V12 for the long term development.
Hate to admit it but McLaren found out and realized something that Ferrari wasn't willing to admit yet but they also dropped the V12 eventually. Ron & Co were right at the time and see what it eventually brought them: the Peugeot disaster but eventually Mercedes. An MC-Merc is one of the longest constructor partnerships within F1 right now. And all that sability `only` at the expense of loosing Senna.....

Henri Greuter

[howardt]

Peugeot were actually quite serious about their F1 programme, and they put all of the right structure in place to become a big name.
They were a bit unlucky to get dropped by McLaren in favour of Mercedes, and then were made to look silly by the engines being fitted in a Prost. (the Prost cars were even less effective with a top engine than are the current Saubers). There is lots of literature about the Peugeot management complaining to Alain Prost that their plant wasn't being used effectively by the cars. All the indifferent PR that came with running at the back of the grid caused them to ditch their F1 programme & concentrate on rallying instead. I believe that they could have been as successful in F1 with a good manufacturer partner.

I'm not bashing Alain Prost here - he was a great driver. (But those cars sucked.) All I'm saying is that McLaren made a considered decision to take Peugeot engines, based on their infrastructure plans. I don't know why they later switched to Mercedes, but that too seems like a good decision.

[Pascal]

Originally posted by howardt
Peugeot were actually quite serious about their F1 programme, and they put all of the right structure in place to become a big name.

I beg to differ.

Peugeot can be a remarkable competitor when they put their mind into something, but Formula 1 was no more than a default option for them. This manufacturer's culture has always been strongly turned towards rallying, but in 1994 it was not an acceptable choice. Years before, when the FIA banned the Group B monsters in 1987, Peugeot was one of the main companies affected by the rule change. They did not agree with the latter, and they made known that they would never return to rallying until something else came to replace the lesser Group A category that was left to challenge for the World Championship.

After their two WRC titles in 1985 and 1986, Peugeot Sport (still lead by Jean Todt at the time) switched its interest to raids such as the Paris-Dakar race, or to special events like the Pikes Peak hillclimb. This stayed close to their corporate culture, but despite some impressive victories the exposure to the media was limited. The company then decided that Le Mans would offer an interesting challenge, and that gave us the 905 that won the event twice in the early 90's. And then, once again, Peugeot needed a new challenge.

Todt was a strong supporter of the idea to mount a full effort (chassis+engine) in Formula 1. Many managers were less sure given the huge investment such a programme needed. A decision was finally reached to enter only as an engine manufacturer in order to save costs. Todt's resignation quickly followed, and he accepted his current position at Ferrari in the aftermath of his old boss' decision. Nevertheless, Peugeot assembled a team of competent people, mostly carried on from the Le Mans programme. The rationale was that since they had made a V10 engine for the 905, they would have the experience to do so again for F1. Sadly, they were quickly to discover that the requirements of a F1 engine are very different than those of an endurance racer, and that their engine needed more development than they had imagined.

In the meantime, the McLaren opportunity came up. Ron Dennis was looking for an engine for the 1994 season, while already courting newcomers Mercedes that were to enter the series as Sauber's engine supplier. Mercedes was clearly serious in its effort, more obviously so than the French company where the idea was to give an engine package that the chassis supplier would have to use "as is". My suspicion is that Peugeot was merely a stop-gap solution for the British team, or at the most a "plan B" escape if the negotiation with Mercedes came to a dead-end. It eventually didn't, and that is partly why Peugeot got dumped at the end of 1994, and ended up powering the Jordan cars the next year. In retrospect, Jordan was the right choice for Peugeot. The Irish team was coming out of a terrible period being powered by the unreliable Yamaha engine, and their expectations were not too high when it came to working with an engine supplier. That did not prevent Peugeot from contemplating leaving F1 quickly after their third season, and many people now seem to forget that at the time they later notified Jordan of their departure, they meant it for good. Only Alain Prost's intense, and very public, lobbying with then Peugeot Chairman Jacques Calvet made them stay a little while longer...

Prost is certainly to blame for part of the disaster that his team turned out to be, but at the same time he ended up with a reluctant partner. Shortly after the deal was signed, Calvet retired, leaving the ex-drivers with very few supporters within the firm's top management. Furthermore, some changes were underway on the rallying scene, as the FIA was to announce the new WRC category. That meant that Peugeot could return to the sport without breaking their word, and the decision was quickly taken to mount a challenge with the new 206 WRC. That clearly left Prost and Formula 1 on the back burner. Instead of cooperating with each others, Prost and Peugeot quickly became busy blaming each others for the poor reliability of the F1 engine, and the fact that some technical gambles never paid off did not contribute to release the mounting tension. In the end, Peugeot left, possibly never to return to a series they never loved or fully understood anyway. And now that they are busy collecting WRC titles, who could blame them?

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Dudley


Yes, but remember 1993 was the year of Michael Andretti.

Attracting american drivers wasn't their first choice

well more of a complete package than just bringing MA into F1

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Henri Greuter
From what I remember of that deal:
Having previous recent experiences with V12's vs V10's Mclaren realized already that the V12 was a dead end development alley. Too much fuel needed for not enough extra power compared with a V10 in addtion to the extra weight, size etc. So unless Chrysler had a miracle up within their sleeves the V12 concept was passé for McLaren and they preferred something more compact than a V12 for the long term development.
Hate to admit it but McLaren found out and realized something that Ferrari wasn't willing to admit yet but they also dropped the V12 eventually. Ron & Co were right at the time and see what it eventually brought them: the Peugeot disaster but eventually Mercedes. An MC-Merc is one of the longest constructor partnerships within F1 right now. And all that sability `only` at the expense of loosing Senna.....

Henri Greuter

from a simple point of view I would have preferred to choose an engine that exists to one that was on the drawing board. The saw the chrysler , they tested it and it was quick, to the point that Senna himself wanted to run it. Mabye there were some issues with the engine, but again it's something that can be worked on , as opposed to something that was yet to be built.

It has been argued that the Pug was just a stop gap for 1 season untill Mclaren got the Mercs. If that's the case then it's still puzzling why Mclaren didn't go with the Chrysler, since it would have been an program that could have migrated to another team for 1995.

As for development of the v12, Ferrari did not see the need to lose the v12 untill after the 1995 season when it was clear that under the 3.0 litre formula a v10 was the way to go. in 1993 they were still under 3.5 litre rules and had no crystal ball to tell them that the events of the 1994 season would cause such a shakeup of the technical regs.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Pascal



In the meantime, the McLaren opportunity came up. Ron Dennis was looking for an engine for the 1994 season, while already courting newcomers Mercedes that were to enter the series as Sauber's engine supplier. Mercedes was clearly serious in its effort, more obviously so than the French company where the idea was to give an engine package that the chassis supplier would have to use "as is". My suspicion is that Peugeot was merely a stop-gap solution for the British team, or at the most a "plan B" escape if the negotiation with Mercedes came to a dead-end. It eventually didn't, and that is partly why Peugeot got dumped at the end of 1994, and ended up powering the Jordan cars the next year. In retrospect, Jordan was the right choice for Peugeot. The Irish team was coming out of a terrible period being powered by the unreliable Yamaha engine, and their expectations were not too high when it came to working with an engine supplier. That did not prevent Peugeot from contemplating leaving F1 quickly after their third season, and many people now seem to forget that at the time they later notified Jordan of their departure, they meant it for good. Only Alain Prost's intense, and very public, lobbying with then Peugeot Chairman Jacques Calvet made them stay a little while longer...

well actually Jordan had been running the Brian Hart V10 for two seasons ( 1993/1994 ) . The engine was arguably as good as the Puegeot was in 1994. IMHO the only benift that Jordan got by running the POS puegeot in 1995 was that it was free. Puegeot and Jordan IMHO didn't get to grips with the 3.0 litre engine/gearbox untill late 1996 and early 1997, and by mid-late 1997 they were eclipsed by the new Merc and Ferrari engines and others. so basically Jordan got mabye a season of the sweet spot where they were close to the top in engines.

[fines]

Remember, that back in 1993 the Lambo was just a tailender engine, although that could've changed with a proper project along McLaren lines. Alas, Peugeot looked to be a better prospect. I recall being very anxious to see Peugeot as well as Mercedes-Benz return to Grand Prix Racing, 80 years after Lyons!!! But sadly, Peugeot proved to be a bitter disappointment from the word go.

There was another facet: Chrysler/Lamborghini had stated their intent to pull out of F1, unless they could find a top team. McLaren seemed to be an obvious choice, and Larrousse would have the Pug engine, to enable them to debut on a low note, similar to Mercedes-Benz with Sauber. In the end, McLaren weren't satisfied with the Chrysler/Lambo input, and chose to defect to PSA/Peugeot. At the time, I was very disappointed to see Larrousse defunct without an engine deal, but apprehensive of the McLaren/Peugeot partnership. But the PSA side was just a half-hearted attempt!


__________________

Guantánamo is everywhere!

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by fines
Remember, that back in 1993 the Lambo was just a tailender engine, although that could've changed with a proper project along McLaren lines. Alas, Peugeot looked to be a better prospect. I recall being very anxious to see Peugeot as well as Mercedes-Benz return to Grand Prix Racing, 80 years after Lyons!!! But sadly, Peugeot proved to be a bitter disappointment from the word go.

There was another facet: Chrysler/Lamborghini had stated their intent to pull out of F1, unless they could find a top team. McLaren seemed to be an obvious choice, and Larrousse would have the Pug engine, to enable them to debut on a low note, similar to Mercedes-Benz with Sauber. In the end, McLaren weren't satisfied with the Chrysler/Lambo input, and chose to defect to PSA/Peugeot. At the time, I was very disappointed to see Larrousse defunct without an engine deal, but apprehensive of the McLaren/Peugeot partnership. But the PSA side was just a half-hearted attempt!


__________________

Guantánamo is everywhere!

I am puzzled how Puegeot is a better prospect. their engine didn't even exist untill after the seasons end in 1993. And the lambo was proven in a test to be 1.4 seconds quicker in the B spec car than the ford was , despite the car not being designed around the engine.

Mclaren picking up the Chrysler badge lambo would solve chryslers desire for a top team, no?

[Geza Sury]

Originally posted by fines
Remember, that back in 1993 the Lambo was just a tailender engine, although that could've changed with a proper project along McLaren lines. Alas, Peugeot looked to be a better prospect. I recall being very anxious to see Peugeot as well as Mercedes-Benz return to Grand Prix Racing, 80 years after Lyons!!! But sadly, Peugeot proved to be a bitter disappointment from the word go.

Yes, the Peugeot engine was bad in 1994, but gradually improved. In 1997 perhaps it was the most powerful in F1. The Jordan Team with their two young drivers achieved superb qualifying results and Fisichella was close to winning the German Grand Prix. It's a real shame that PSA decided to leave Jordan and supply the Prost Team with engines. But at that time, it looked a good idea as in 1997 the French equipe was very strong especially in the first part of the year thanks to the superb Bridgestone tyres. Olivier Panis was on his way to win the Argentine Grand Prix (he was in second place, catching the leader and only planned two pitstops instead of three), but he retired with some sort of a mechanical failure. It all went wrong for Peugeot from 1998 onwards...

[Jordan191]

see my previous post

[glorius&victorius]

I remember reading Senna's remarks in Autosport issue back then.

The reason, I think wRoNg took Peugeot was that McLaren needed a strategic alliance with a car manufacturer, who had had success in motorsport. In 93 Peugeot had won everything, Rally WDC's, Le Mans!!
Lamborgini was just a smaller name, ok maybe with a huge backer, but still. Better to form an alliance with a succesfull name.

In a way it's ironic, that through Mercedes Chrysler did join McLaren and won all in F1...

[Mac Lark]

Just as a matter of interest - mention hyas made of the 1994 season being a disaster for McLaren.

It should be pointed out that it was only really a disaster 'by McLarens standards'

That 1994 season remains Peugeots most successful of their time in F1.

[Ray Bell]

If Peugeot were after publicity, however...

Their participation in the first lap of the 1996 Australian Grand Prix was pretty good. Well captured by Channel 9, well remembered by all. Especially Martin Brundle, no doubt.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Mac Lark
Just as a matter of interest - mention hyas made of the 1994 season being a disaster for McLaren.

It should be pointed out that it was only really a disaster 'by McLarens standards'

That 1994 season remains Peugeots most successful of their time in F1.

that in itself says a whole lot , no?

[Ray Bell]

Not really, if you're fair...

McLaren had to be a better bet than Jordan, surely? More money, more background and experience, better drivers etc.

On top of that, Peugeot's efforts at development can only ever have been an attempt at catching up. I would guess that they never got as close to the outputs etc of the other top engines as they were in '94.

Of course, that's only a guess. But as the engine supposedly started life as a sports car unit, and as their staff wasn't as galvanised as it had been under Todt, I would think this is true.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
Not really, if you're fair...

McLaren had to be a better bet than Jordan, surely? More money, more background and experience, better drivers etc.

On top of that, Peugeot's efforts at development can only ever have been an attempt at catching up. I would guess that they never got as close to the outputs etc of the other top engines as they were in '94.

Of course, that's only a guess. But as the engine supposedly started life as a sports car unit, and as their staff wasn't as galvanised as it had been under Todt, I would think this is true.

well Mclaren would be in control of this situation would they not ? and if I were Mclaren the chrysler engine woul dhave been thr better choice.

[david_martin]

Originally posted by Jordan191
I am puzzled how Puegeot is a better prospect. their engine didn't even exist untill after the seasons end in 1993.

That is not really correct -- Peugeot had been running their 3.5 litre V10 engine for almost 3 seasons in World Sports Car racing, basically dominating the series and winnning Le Mans twice with it. The 1994 F1 engine was essentially a high output version of the WSC engine, with reworked electronics (switching from Marelli to the TAG/McLaren system IIRC). I have no doubt that some of the misplaced confidence McLaren had in the PSA F1 program stemmed from the commitment and performance that PSA had demonstrated in WSC, albiet under their by then departed cheif Jean Todt.

[911]

Was this the same engine that Larrouse & Lotus used in 1990? If so, then that was the best sounding engine at the time, IMO. I know the performance was not the best, but ooooh that sound! I remember watching Derek Warwick doing a lap around Hockenheim and the Lambo sound was incredible!

911

[Mark Beckman]

Originally posted by Jordan191

Even if this engine had flaws, it was there and could be worked on , as opposed to the V10 Puegeot that was reportedly based upon a sportscar engine, and was yet to be built in 1993. Given the choice the Lambo/Chrysler should be the pick.

History has shown many a flaw that couldn't be cured and the other choice was a motor based on one that was proven to run for 24 hours - to finish first, first you must finish.

[Jordan191]

Originally posted by Mark Beckman


History has shown many a flaw that couldn't be cured and the other choice was a motor based on one that was proven to run for 24 hours - to finish first, first you must finish.

there's a big difference between a reliable sportscar engine and an ultimate pace f1 engine, ie engineering for weight etc.

and the Lambo was a proven race finishing engine albeit in a tailender team with not the same high funding , high profile backing ( at the time ) as the Renaults , Fords and such of the F1 world.

Like I said . Mclaren HAD THE LAMBO ENGINE IN THE CAR. They could not say the same in 1993 of the puegeot. It did not turn in F1 config on a dyno untill December 1993

Oddly enough I was watching some early 94 races on tape and I found some references to differing opinions on the ability of the Puegerot Mclaren to comperte . The Puegeot guy ( forget name ) was saying they weren't confident they could run at the front, and Ron Dennis was saying Mclaren was gonna win.