Yet another court case

[Flat.tyres]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63047

This time Williams want Prodrive thrown out before they start

[VkmSpouge]

Kind of wished it hadn't gone to court but as long as it resolves the issue, so be it. I hope the decision will allow Prodrive to race next season.

[wmcot]

Kind of wished it hadn't gone to court but as long as it resolves the issue, so be it. I hope the decision will allow Prodrive to race next season.

It might give us something to talk about in the off-season.

[Crank]

Hey...lawyers have families to feed too!!!...and Aston Martins to fuel

In any case, I was wondering why Prodrive was so quiet about getting a customer deal. This got me thinking...would they still buy the Mac's car now that all that fuss from the Stepneygate stained it?

[Sleeper]

Hey...lawyers have families to feed too!!!...and Aston Martins to fuel

In any case, I was wondering why Prodrive was so quiet about getting a customer deal. This got me thinking...would they still buy the Mac's car now that all that fuss from the Stepneygate stained it?

Since McLaren is their most likely source for a car, no one else seems quite willing that isnt already supplying someone, so I dont think that was ever going to effect them. Problem is, customer cars arent exactly legal for next year yet.

[truefan72]

I can see William's issue with prodrive, but I am not sure that they are going about it in the most productivve manner. Besides, isn't theFIA about to change the rules anyway?

Yes there are some ethical questions to be asked about prodrive, it is one thing to inherit an outdated Arrows chasis, or a slightly uncompetitive Red Bull car ( even though it shouldn't make a difference) but a whole other issue to inherit the prevous year's winning F1 chasis. With all the RD freeze etc. I dare say that even next year, the 2007 McClaren car would be more than a match for most cars. I'm not sure that a reduced winnings payout for customer cars is enough of a deterrant to disuade this practice.

I also seem to recall that the earlier Sauber cars were essentially tuned down ferrari clones. But I'm not sure how those rules applied then.

Prodrive had 2 years to prepare for F1, why didn't they develop their own chasis at the very least.

IMO Toro Rosso and Super Aguri should be working on their own chasis now.

Perhaps they should institute a 1 year cap on using customer chasis, if the team can't develop their own car after 1 year in F1 then they shouldn't be in the sport.

I remember the days when up to 15 teams were in F1 all trying to do their own thing.

No B-teams for me please

[Hondo]

Sleeper is right, the agreement for customer cars next year has not been signed, and until Max and Bernie agree to divide up more of the revenue between the teams, it may not be signed, meaning the 2007 rules would apply.

I think Ferrari is working on a customer car for A1 GP though.

[truefan72]

Sleeper is right, the agreement for customer cars next year has not been signed, and until Max and Bernie agree to divide up more of the revenue between the teams, it may not be signed, meaning the 2007 rules would apply.

I think Ferrari is working on a customer car for A1 GP though.

that would be cool, do you mean Gp2 or A1 GP, either way, does that mean they will be going a way with the single engine and chasis rules both series have?

[Hondo]

No, I believe it would mean Ferrari would be the sole supplier.

[Rover V8]

I can see William's issue with prodrive, but I am not sure that they are going about it in the most productivve manner. Besides, isn't theFIA about to change the rules anyway?

Yes there are some ethical questions to be asked about prodrive, it is one thing to inherit an outdated Arrows chasis, or a slightly uncompetitive Red Bull car ( even though it shouldn't make a difference) but a whole other issue to inherit the prevous year's winning F1 chasis. With all the RD freeze etc. I dare say that even next year, the 2007 McClaren car would be more than a match for most cars. I'm not sure that a reduced winnings payout for customer cars is enough of a deterrant to disuade this practice.

I also seem to recall that the earlier Sauber cars were essentially tuned down ferrari clones. But I'm not sure how those rules applied then.

Prodrive had 2 years to prepare for F1, why didn't they develop their own chasis at the very least.

IMO Toro Rosso and Super Aguri should be working on their own chasis now.

Perhaps they should institute a 1 year cap on using customer chasis, if the team can't develop their own car after 1 year in F1 then they shouldn't be in the sport.

I remember the days when up to 15 teams were in F1 all trying to do their own thing.

No B-teams for me please

There have been customer cars in F1 for longer than there haven't- from memory, the rule that a team must design/build their own car (or at least have exclusive use of a car supplied by an outside builder) only dates back to the early 80's or so. I really dont have a problem with this, unless it becomes clear that Prodrive are clearly operating as a McLaren 'B'team, and acting under obvious McLaren influence to support McLaren in a race situation...

To me that's where an ethical question might arise- I have more of a problem with the idea of two teams being under common ownership than I do McLaren selling their '07 chassis (or even their 2008 car if rules allow) on to Dave Richards.

It's ironic that it's Frank Williams speaking out about this, when he spent much of his early F1 career running customer Brabhams and Marches...