FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

Formula One related discussion.
User avatar
By deMuRe
#6389
Have done a little reading today on the issue with Spyker taking Super Aguri and Torro Rosso teams to court over not making their own cars. What do you guys think of this? I'm fairly supportive of their plight to be honest, if you don't make your own car you should receive half points or no points at all.

Then again the same could have been argued when Prost had his own team. He purchased engine/drive-train (plus plus) from Ferrari, which could be argued along the same lines...
User avatar
By Freddie
#6390
Isn't it very hard to prove ?
User avatar
By welshie
#6393
I can understand why Spiker are rather annoyed, but it's tough luck. How much would Spiker achieve if Super Aguri and Torro Rosso weren't in F1 at all? Not a great deal I would think.
User avatar
By madbrad
#6395
When did The Prost car have a Ferrari engine? Never, that's when.
The rule says the team has to make its own chassis, but does not prohibit the purchase of engines and transmissions. Why single out Prost? All the non carmaker teams have always bought their engines. Be it from an outside supplier(Peugeot, Cosworth, Hart, Yamaha ,Judd, Renault/Mechachrome/Supertec, Honda, Lamborghini ,Mercedes, etc) or a supplier that just happens to also have a team in the series(Toyota, Renault, Honda, Ferrari) it's the same thing.
That aside, the legal wrangling confuses matters. I'm fence sitting. Different corporate entities have been det up to mak the chassis appear on paper to be sourced in a way that satisfies the rules, but the actual making of it is physically done by Honda and Red Bull.
User avatar
By deMuRe
#6406
When did The Prost car have a Ferrari engine? Never, that's when.
The rule says the team has to make its own chassis, but does not prohibit the purchase of engines and transmissions. Why single out Prost? All the non carmaker teams have always bought their engines. Be it from an outside supplier(Peugeot, Cosworth, Hart, Yamaha ,Judd, Renault/Mechachrome/Supertec, Honda, Lamborghini ,Mercedes, etc) or a supplier that just happens to also have a team in the series(Toyota, Renault, Honda, Ferrari) it's the same thing.
That aside, the legal wrangling confuses matters. I'm fence sitting. Different corporate entities have been det up to mak the chassis appear on paper to be sourced in a way that satisfies the rules, but the actual making of it is physically done by Honda and Red Bull.


I singled out Prost because it was being reported he purchased a lot more then the engine from Ferrari, I can remember the Autosport of the time reporting the entire back end of the car was last year's Ferrari, including the suspension...

To me, that's no different to what Spyker are arguing right now. Nobody kicked up a stink back then, probably because Prost was such a legend.
User avatar
By madbrad
#6408
I'm lost---The Prost had a Ferrari engine? Did I black out or something? I can't remember all the engines they had. I remember they had Peugeot which I think was a works engine for them.

The suspension come off of the tranny so maybe they could use the argument that it was not part of the chassis? Maybe the FIA did whatever Ferrari said as usual. Today, IIRC our 2 customers claim this was allowed by the FIA beforehand, and maybe back then there just wan't a team that wanted to protest it.

NM I found the Ferrari engine. They did so poorly that maybe that's the reason no one cared to balk at the customer parts.
By Red Five
#6412
Wasn't it the Sauber team that was slated for fielding what appeared to be a year old Ferrari?

Besides, all this was settled last year when Max Mosely said that as long as the team, or the company they employed to build the Chassis (BAR's early Chassis' were designed and built by Reynard IIRC) had the intelluctual right's to the car's design by having their own blueprints and it was different to every other car from an existing team, it was fine. That's why Toro Rosso was allowed to run what was basically an RB1 - because they did their own drawings, that had a few (very subtle) differences from the 2005 Red Bull car and they built it themselves.

So by the letter of the law, there's nothing wrong with what Toro Rosso and Super Aguri are doing this year, however, the spirit of the law says that they shouldn't be allowed to run their cars.
User avatar
By madbrad
#6413
Also, after Flab bought Ligier, did you notice the Benetton and Ligier looked identical?
By Alien_SAP_Fiend
#6427
Why don't Spyker just buy a Ferrari chassis and STFU.
User avatar
By darwin dali
#6429
...because they want to continue Stoddart's tradition of antics and stirring the pot. :D
User avatar
By deMuRe
#6436
Wasn't it the Sauber team that was slated for fielding what appeared to be a year old Ferrari?

Besides, all this was settled last year when Max Mosely said that as long as the team, or the company they employed to build the Chassis (BAR's early Chassis' were designed and built by Reynard IIRC) had the intelluctual right's to the car's design by having their own blueprints and it was different to every other car from an existing team, it was fine. That's why Toro Rosso was allowed to run what was basically an RB1 - because they did their own drawings, that had a few (very subtle) differences from the 2005 Red Bull car and they built it themselves.

So by the letter of the law, there's nothing wrong with what Toro Rosso and Super Aguri are doing this year, however, the spirit of the law says that they shouldn't be allowed to run their cars.


Good point, then I would very much like to see these cars banned, just for Bernie to be consistent with his past rulings... How many technical advances have we had nerfed because even though they didn't break any particular laws, they went against the spirit of the regulations...
By sonic
#6446
Oops posted twice
Last edited by sonic on 26 Mar 07, 18:08, edited 1 time in total.
By sonic
#6447
It's certainly not the first time it has happened. Ligier and Benetton in 1995? Tom Walkinshow running both teams. He only bought Ligier so that Benetton could get the Renault engines that Ligier had. He then built 4 Benetton chassis, threw Ligiers Renault engines in two and called them Benetton Renault, took a couple of Mugen Honda engines off the shelf and threw them in the other two and called them Ligier Mugen Honda. Most of the teams moaned about it but it quickly blew over. It didn't even get a mention when Olivier Panis took the chequered flag with a Ligier at Monte Carlo. Sauber and Ferrari have done it. Even in 2006, Super Aguri were using 2nd hand Arrows chassis.

    See our F1 related articles too!