Couple of thoughts about Brawn GP

I was thinking and had a couple of ideas and queries about Brawn GP?

The first is if (thats if) Brawn GP win the drivers or constructors championship how long will it have been since a Private team won the championship without any form of manufatcture support or a works engine deal?

I was also thinking if they carry on like this, surely it won't be long before they do get enquiries from car manufactures about support or an engine deal maybe simliar to BMW with Williams or Honda before they bought out BAR, and in light of the whole BAR to Honda to collapse debarcle would they be wise to turn it down or would they have no choice?

My final one is that how important have Jorg Zander and Loic Bigois been to this seasons sucess?

Thanks

That would be Benneton in 1994 with customer Ford engines?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

That would be Benneton in 1994 with customer Ford engines?

---

Didn't they have that so-called factory support? In 1993 McLaren and Senna were furious that "factory-supported Benetton" got superior engines. Since McLaren went for a new engine supplier in '94, I guess the same relationship between Benetton and Ford continued in 1994?

Off the top of my head - 1982, Keke Rosberg in the Williams with Cosworth DFV power. I know Cosworth had a few "development" teams but as far as I'm aware there was no official Ford backing at that time, they only came back in in an "official" capacity with the Haas-Lolas in 1985 before switching to Benetton in 1987 (so yeah Schuey in '94 doesn't count)

That's if you don't count the McLarens of 1984-86 who used TAG-funded, Porsche-designed (but not funded) engines on an exclusive basis, bit of a grey area that...


As for your other questions/points. I've always said the best formula for success for a team is to partner a proper racing team with a manufacturer's engines and financing. For example BAR under Prodrive/David Richards and Honda engines were better than when they just became "Honda", while I think Renault's success was partly down to pretty much leaving the Benetton team as it was besides a rename and a lick of yellow paint. I also think a factory-backed Williams-Toyota would probably outdo both the works Toyotas and (obviously) Williams in their current state. Look at the job they've done with the FW31. With Toyota funding behind it it could have been up there with the Brawns this weekend. So I think a manufacturer looking to join or even stay in F1 could do a lot worse than look at a tie up with, rather than buy-out of, Brawn.

As for Zander and Bigois, I would guess a lot. Yes Ross Brawn very rightly gets a lot of plaudits both as technical director and now team owner, but I doubt he was personally responsible for the design of a single part on the car, it's all about getting the right people underneath you as well. Of course there will be lots of engineers at Honda/Brawn underneath those two whose names we probably don't even know who deserve a lot of credit as well. Yes the car has had a long lead time and reportedly lots of Honda funding thrown at it before they quit, but the people on the ground need to know what they are doing.

Benetton had factory support in 94 and was the only team that got the new Zetec-R that year.

To find a team that won a championship without support you may have to go back to the DFV era when anyone could buy that engine and put it in their car.

I know Bigois helped with Prost in the late 90s, and they made some good cars. Not sure if he was there when they made their best car (1997), but I'm guessing he's had a good effect.

For me, one race isn't enough of a sample to go on. We really don't know how good they are. Do they have a leg up on everyone else or did they just nail the weekend (a la Toro Rosso at Monza)?

It makes me wonder what on earth 750 people were actually doing. I did read there were 400 staff 4years ago. It doesn't make Honda look to good - I would agree that a simple engine supplier role is far better than taking the whole operation over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

It makes me wonder what on earth 750 people were actually doing. I did read there were 400 staff 4years ago. It doesn't make Honda look to good - I would agree that a simple engine supplier role is far better than taking the whole operation over.

---

That sort of thing mushrooms quite quickly. When you consider in an F1 factory, or in fact any large organisation, how many people there are actually producing output vs, the people who are there to look after those people and the people to tell those people what to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

how many people there are actually producing output vs, the people who are there to look after those people and the people to tell those people what to do.

---

What a brilliant description of the UK NHS service.... :D

McLaren-TAG surely was the last?

Vettel surely... and if not, Fisichella in the Jordan-Ford Brazil 2003?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norwegian Blue

Vettel surely... and if not, Fisichella in the Jordan-Ford Brazil 2003?

---

Yes, Vettel was the last race winner, but we were talking about world championships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monaro Doorslammer

McLaren-TAG surely was the last?

---

As I mentioned it's a bit of a grey area. Technically they probably are the last, although a bespoke design (it never appeared in anything other than a McLaren) from a manufacturer (Porsche), funded by an organisation (TAG) headed up by a rich Saudi (Ojjeh, current McLaren shareholder) probably doesn't quite fit the usual profile of a private/customer engine.

My thoughts so far is that the coverage in some areas of the press has made Brawn seem like minnows, a la Minardi, when their car was backed by Honda up until a few months ago and has spent longer in development than any other.

I suppose it's a nice tale to sell a story. Maybe I should just be less grumpy about it :D

Here are my thoughts/questions:

1. Who actually designed this car? I assume it wasnt RB himself. RB seems to be getting all the credit for this, but I am wondering if there is someone else in the organization who is more directly responsible for the pace of this car.

2. Honda looks pretty foolish. The Mercedes engine may be good, but it is by no means a dominant engine that can make a bad car look good (McLaren). The "Honda" car is just flat out a good car. It wouldn't shock me if this car would have been even faster with the Honda engine it was designed to run with. Having spent hondreds of millions (maybe even billions?) on their F1 program, Honda pulled out right before all the money and work was about to pay off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woody2goody

I know Bigois helped with Prost in the late 90s, and they made some good cars. Not sure if he was there when they made their best car (1997), but I'm guessing he's had a good effect.

---

Their 97 car was basically the same car that they had in 96 (which was based on the Benetton) with some new bits here and there. So the car was actually based on a Ross Brawn/Rory Byrne design. In 98 Bigois was more responsible for the car which turned out to be a complete dog.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Their 97 car was basically the same car that they had in 96 (which was based on the Benetton) with some new bits here and there. So the car was actually based on a Ross Brawn/Rory Byrne design. In 98 Bigois was more responsible for the car which turned out to be a complete dog.

---

Cool didn't know that :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rabf1

Here are my thoughts/questions:

1. Who actually designed this car? I assume it wasnt RB himself. RB seems to be getting all the credit for this, but I am wondering if there is someone else in the organization who is more directly responsible for the pace of this car.

---

I believe Ross Brawn serves as the technical director with Jorg Zander as deputy technical director and Loic Bigois as chief aerodynamicist

In mid 2007 Honda signed a number of new people to fix the aero problems they were having, along with Jorg Zander from BMW and Loic Bigois from Williams some other names I found are: Francois Martinet (aerodynamicist) from Williams, Peter Coysh (aerodynamicist) from McLaren, Ben Agathangelou (aerodynamicist) from Red Bull, John Owen (aerodynamicist) from BMW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rabf1

2. Honda looks pretty foolish. The Mercedes engine may be good, but it is by no means a dominant engine that can make a bad car look good (McLaren). The "Honda" car is just flat out a good car. It wouldn't shock me if this car would have been even faster with the Honda engine it was designed to run with. Having spent hondreds of millions (maybe even billions?) on their F1 program, Honda pulled out right before all the money and work was about to pay off.

---

I've been wondering about that too. I guess there are several options :

Honda didn't believe the team predictions, or did believe it would be fast but that Ferrari/McLaren wouldn't be as slow as they are.

Honda knew but cutting costs was more important, after all they cut loads of other important projects at the same time as leaving F1.

Honda were fed up of the politics and being owed money by FOM as part of some game played by Bernie.

I guess all of the above factor to some extent, and one ought to remember that they're increasing investment in cheaper forms of motorsport like ALMS GT.

I also think its inaccurate and unfair to classify Brawn as independent and a minnow, that car was developed under Honda ownership in the best equipped factory on the grid with the biggest manpower. Its just that finally, the performance of the car coming out of Brackley actually reflected the amount of money and effort that went into it.

^I wouldnt say best equiped factory, certainly in terms of simulation technology McLaren is by far ahead of everyone still. Minnow, definitely not but they are an indipendant team now, just like Williams, and its good to see them doing well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sleeper

^I wouldnt say best equiped factory, certainly in terms of simulation technology McLaren is by far ahead of everyone still.

---

Not that far ahead surely since their simulations told McLaren that their new car would be pretty quick, something not borne out on the track. It was interesting to see McLaren do so many airflow tests on their car to see if the air really was flowing where they thought it was during winter testing.

"Very interesting piece on the Guardian site today, quoting a Brawn team ‘insider’ talking about how much faster the car is capable of going than we saw on Sunday.

It’s interesting because Ross will not like this very much at all. He didn’t get where he is today by giving anything away and this gives a bit too much away.

I posted on this before the race and it makes sense, you never rub people’s noses in it in F1, that kind of behaviour will always come back to bite you.

“I think we have a little bit in the bag. We’ve got good stuff coming and I think we have reason to be confident.”
http://allenonf1.wordpress.com/2009/...lls-the-beans/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Their 97 car was basically the same car that they had in 96 (which was based on the Benetton) with some new bits here and there.

---

The 1996 Ligier wasn't really competitive. Alright, Panis won a race in unusual circumstances, but on most circuits they really couldn't challenge for points on merit. However, this is what Ligier's successor Prost did a lot in 1997 and managed to challenge even for podiums on merit. If the car itself wasn't much of an improvement, as you say, should we then conclude that most of Prost's rise in competitiveness in '97 was down to tyres (newcomer Bridgestone)? In 1998, however, even the superior tyres didn't help Prost any more...