F1 Livery Histories

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

As I recall, Sauber kept the BMW tag for their last year only because the change in ownership took place too soon before the beginning of the season for a change.

It's the same rules/regulations that have created a naming problem for Force India that applied to when BMW bowed out of Sauber back then. FOM and the FIA making life more complicated so that teams cannot behave in the same way as other normal businesses.


Despite all the protestations about the fact that they do not, the FIA and FOM run Formula 1 as a cartel.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by mstets

Don't know about the politics, but remember the cars being entered as "Gold Leaf Team Lotus".

Originally Posted by jimclark

'Nothing to do with politics. 'Just rules/regulations regarding advertising, and livery on the cars. No different than now...placement, markings, size, etc. Just about every sanctioning body has 'em for consistency of the "product".

Notably, #9 (pgs5-6) here: https://www.fia.com/file/70710/downl...token=szOjLZMY

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

It's the same rules/regulations that have created a naming problem for Force India that applied to when BMW bowed out of Sauber back then. FOM and the FIA making life more complicated so that teams cannot behave in the same way as other normal businesses.

Despite all the protestations about the fact that they do not, the FIA and FOM run Formula 1 as a cartel.

'Hate to disagree, but, I do. They run it as any business does. Without rules/regs. there's chaos. As stated above, inconsistency of the product. If one doesn't wish to participate, don't.

Cartels don't have a "set" of "rules/regulations"; they're whimsical.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

BRM certainly had a torrid time of it towards the end.

Fair enough.

Such a pity that the V12 was not introduced instead of the V16, BRM would have dominated everything at that stage with their V12.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

As I recall, Sauber kept the BMW tag for their last year only because the change in ownership took place too soon before the beginning of the season for a change.

They did. If you look at the team entry for Bahrain 2010 it says, BMW Sauber F1 Team.

https://www.racing-reference.info/ra...n_Grand_Prix/F

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Without rules/regs. there's chaos.

I don't disagree about that, but it's putting in place rules and regulations that ordinary businesses don't have or need. And one of them being that a team that changes owners has to retain the existing name (in some form or another) to carry on in the circus at least until the end of a season, hence the retention of BMW name in the Sauber team name when BMW had no interest in the team whatsoever.

And it's a cartel because a team has to abide by all the non-technical rules and regulations as set down by FOM. And here I am not talking about the sporting and safety regulations, etc. because they need to apply across the board.

And the EU's business competitions' department still believes that F1 operates as a cartel.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I don't disagree about that, but it's putting in place rules and regulations that ordinary businesses don't have or need. And one of them being that a team that changes owners has to retain the existing name (in some form or another) to carry on in the circus at least until the end of a season, hence the retention of BMW name in the Sauber team name when BMW had no interest in the team whatsoever.

And it's a cartel because a team has to abide by all the non-technical rules and regulations as set down by FOM. And here I am not talking about the sporting and safety regulations, etc. because they need to apply across the board.

And the EU's business competitions' department still believes that F1 operates as a cartel.

This rule was apparently brought in to prevent unsavoury team owners declaring bankruptcy and launching phoenix companies to defraud creditors, bringing F1 racing into disrepute and damaging the F1 brand. I seem to remember Bernie settling some of these debts out of forgone prize money.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I don't disagree about that, but it's putting in place rules and regulations that ordinary businesses don't have or need. And one of them being that a team that changes owners has to retain the existing name (in some form or another) to carry on in the circus at least until the end of a season, hence the retention of BMW name in the Sauber team name when BMW had no interest in the team whatsoever.

I addressed that. It's a franchise, and foremost for a franchise (again) is consistency amongst the troops.

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

And it's a cartelbecause a team has to abide by all the non-technical rules and regulations as set down by FOM. And here I am not talking about the sporting and safety regulations, etc. because they need to apply across the board.

Again, no they don't. Don't buy into the franchise. Go race somewhere else if you don't prefer the rules. Colin played by the rules when he couldn't plaster Gold Leaf all over the car.. He used the rules (team name was allowed), changed his team name, and voila....Gold Leaf (Team Lotus) was on...by the rules.

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

And the EU's business competitions' department still believes that F1 operates as a cartel.

I'm going to come knock on your door to use your loo to do my "business". If that doesn't work for you, I guess I'll have to call the "EU's business competitions' department" and report you. Your "cartel" rules don't suit me. (sarcasm)
I'm not interested in a "one world order", thank you very much. I prefer independence. Hey....does that ring a bell?

Methinks we're way off topic at this point. Back to the regularly programmed livery thread please.

[F1 Livery Histories]

I always thought Sauber kept "BMW" in its official title in 2010 so they could still get their hands on the prize money earned by BMW-Sauber in 2009?

Could be wrong though.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

BRM certainly had a torrid time of it towards the end.

Originally Posted by wnut

Such a pity that the V12 was not introduced instead of the V16, BRM would have dominated everything at that stage with their V12.

wnut - If you're referring to bjsmith's "end", they were using v-12s, not 16s. The V-16s were very early on (if that's when you meant, pardon me. ), then IL-4s, V-8s, the H-16 in mid '60s (which I'm pretty sure was the last 16 cylinder engine in F1). V-8s and finally V-12s.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by jimclark

wnut - If you're referring to bjsmith's "end", they were using v-12s, not 16s. The V-16s were very early on (if that's when you meant, pardon me. ), then IL-4s, V-8s, the H-16 in mid '60s (which I'm pretty sure was the last 16 cylinder engine in F1). V-8s and finally V-12s.

BRM chose the V16 over that very v12 design, if they had adopted the V12 instead of the V16 the BRM story may have been very different, the V12 was a really good engine. It would have been untouchable if it had been introduced at the beginning of the 3 liter formula.

[jimclark]

Weak as it may be...my attempt at returning the thread to it's roots....

If only SUNOCO had sponsored Rogere's (Penske) F1 effort, we mighta' seen some very simple but very beautiful livery on his PC1s, 3s, and 4s...maybe like:

http://1u4we0207ruc34o1s412c2ca.wpen.../KO_MHAR-3.jpg

or

http://api.ning.com/files/3**UVPA*eS...led48small.jpg

[wnut]

I always thought that the F1 Penskes were very beautiful and immaculately prepared:

http://picssr.com/photos/sieversraci...=133741471@N06

Bottom of page.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by wnut

BRM chose the V16 over that very v12 design, if they had adopted the V12 instead of the V16 the BRM story may have been very different, the V12 was a really good engine. It would have been untouchable if it had been introduced at the beginning of the 3 liter formula.

Humbly, and with all due respect, I'm sure you're mistaken. There was no BRM V-16 during the three litre era, that was what confused me. It was the heavy, unreliable, H-16 (one flat-8 stacked upon another, so to speak, with a gear driven output shaft), reverting to V-12 in '67. The BRM story remained the same even with the V-12. Heck at least they had both Championships in '62 with Graham (V-8).
The H-16 had one win in the back of Jimmy's Lotus at Watkins Glen in '66.

See my signature below.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Humbly, and with all due respect, I'm sure you're mistaken. There was no BRM V-16 during the three litre era, that was what confused me. It was the heavy, unreliable, H-16 (one flat-8 stacked upon another, so to speak, with a gear driven output shaft), reverting to V-12 in '67. The BRM story remained the same even with the V-12. Heck at least they had both Championships in '62 with Graham (V-8).
The H-16 had one win in the back of Jimmy's Lotus at Watkins Glen in '66.

See my signature below.

Sorry Jim, you are completely right, it was the H-16, that was tragically chosen instead of the V12 that was later adopted. (Have no idea why I put V16??!!)

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by wnut

Sorry Jim, you are completely right, it was the H-16, that was tragically chosen instead of the V12 that was later adopted. (Have no idea why I put V16??!!)

No problem. Only thirty lashes with a wet noodle for you!!!

The last paragraph from a good little read on the H-16:

"The BRM P83 H16 was doomed from the start. The engine was way too ambitious and absurdly complex. Its massive weight, narrow power band and dreadful center of gravity in effect made it wholly unsuitable for racing. Its appalling reliability made its viability even worse. After stubbornly soldiering on with the concept in the P115, BRM eventually wised up. For 1968 it opted to developed a much more conventional and reliable V12."


The entire article: https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wy3vdr8/


H-16s, turbines at Indy (F1, and endurance racing), the switch to mocoque, etc., etc.
It's interesting what one remembers (and doesn't) as one gets "old"...eek..."er".

Yes, those were the days.

[wnut]

Thanks for the link Jim, whilst doing penance and recovering from the severe beating, I followed up on the article, to refresh the dodgy memory and found this:

http://www.thehodgkinsons.org.uk/brm-e-H16.htm

Looks like a longer piece that your article may have been taken from.

It had an interesting point that I really did not know:

"It should also be remembered that while running the H16 the team worked on the BRM V8, Westlake V12, Matra V12 and their own BRM V12 - all race winners at one time or another."

All really good engines!

Perhaps they should have just gone with a 3 liter version of their original V8.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by wnut

Perhaps they should have just gone with a 3 liter version of their original V8.

Yup....V-8 configuration worked out really fine for Michael and Keith, no?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by jimclark

Yup....V-8 configuration worked out really fine for Michael and Keith, no?

That was my thinking exactly.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Reading that article, BRM certainly had a rather hap hazard way of doing things, as well as wasting resources in the process. It seems to have been a recurrent theme. I remember when they would quite often run 4-5 drivers per race, during the 1972 season and 3 drivers in 1973. Maintaining all those cars, can't have helped with the development of the P180, which only won one race, the non championship, 2nd World Championship Victory Race at Brands Hatch in 1972. The following year they went back to using the P160.

With all this focus on BRM, how about BRM's livery history, that would bring the thread, as interesting as it, back on track.

[coppice]

Weslake - no ' T ' (he said , pedantically )

[BSchneiderFan]

No place for pedantry round here, sonny.

[jimclark]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

No place for pedantry round here, sonny.

But, but, but....I have a penchant for sunny days...... (oh, was that pedant and sonny...?)

[F1 Livery Histories]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

With all this focus on BRM, how about BRM's livery history, that would bring the thread, as interesting as it, back on track.

That's exactly what I'm planning to do mate. Should have the video ready in a couple of weeks or so. I owe a lot to all of the knowledgeable posters here on tentenths for laying down some invaluable info on the team and inspiring me to base my next video on them.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by F1 Livery Histories

That's exactly what I'm planning to do mate. Should have the video ready in a couple of weeks or so. I owe a lot to all of the knowledgeable posters here on tentenths for laying down some invaluable info on the team and inspiring me to base my next video on them.

Look forward to it.