Lotus back in F1

PARIS (AFP) - Lotus have beaten off competition from BMW Sauber to be named as the 13th team to compete in next year's Formula One World Championship, motorsport's governing body the FIA announced on Tuesday.

FIA said it had received an impressive application from the BMW Sauber Team but because of uncertainty over future ownership given that BMW has announced it will withdraw its support in 2010, Lotus was granted the 13th spot.

BMW Sauber were, however, handed the 14th place should a vacancy arise on next season's grid.

FIA added that "a good case can be made for expanding the grid to 14 teams".

It would be "consulting urgently with the existing teams regarding the introduction of an appropriate rule change to expand the grid to 28 cars in time for the first Grand Prix in 2010".

The Lotus team, which competed in F1 from 1958 through to 1994, will be backed by 1Malaysia F1 Team Sdn Bhd, a partnership between the Malaysian government and a consortium of Malaysian entrepreneurs.

Tony Fernandes, the founder and CEO of the Malaysian-based Tune Group, owner of the Air Asia airline, will be team principal.

The role of technical director falls to Mike Gascoyne, who has more than 20 years of experience in Formula One having previously performed the same role for the Force India, Toyota, Renault and Jordan Formula One teams.

The team will initially be based in Norfolk, England, some 10 miles from the Lotus Cars factory at a 50,000 sq ft fully equipped facility built by Toyota for its initial Formula One programme and then used by Bentley for its successful Le Mans programme.

The team's future design, R and D, manufacturing and technical centre will be purpose built at Malaysias Sepang International Circuit.

As part of its application, the team has agreed an engine supply deal with Cosworth and a wide variety of technical partnerships including Xtrac and FondTech.

Cosworth engine = not Lotus.

Yeah, I know Lotus has used a variety of engines - look at the Elise, but with the spec Cosworth engine being used by all/many it becomes a series of minor differences and is an F1 IROC. Not interested.

carguy123 wrote: Cosworth engine = not Lotus. Yeah, I know Lotus has used a variety of engines - look at the Elise, but with the spec Cosworth engine being used by all/many it becomes a series of minor differences and is an F1 IROC. Not interested.

Uh, you may want to look back and see how many Lotus-Cosworths won championships. The first Cosworth win was '67 in a Lotus 49. Lotus' last 5 championships were powered by Cosworth.

So, historically, Lotus = Cosworth Engine.

Oh, and you lament the "spec" nature of it- since 3 teams will run it. But in the 70's, for the most part, the entire field outside of Ferrari were running "spec" Cosworth engines (in '69 and '73 ALL races were won by a Cosworth DFV, but not by one team). Or should we ignore McLaren, Matra, Brabham, March, Surtees, Tyrrell, Hesketh, Lola, Williams, Penske, Wolf and Ligier?

Interestesting how this IS a repeat of the 70's, the Lotus Glory Days....

Eric

I am glad that F1 is finally increasing numbers by decreasing cost of entry. They have gone from 18 cars last year, to a projected 28 cars in 2010...pretty exciting if you ask me.

alfadriver wrote: ...McLaren, Matra, Brabham, March, Surtees, Tyrrell, Hesketh, Lola, Williams, Penske, Wolf and Ligier...

Ahh.. sweet memories.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Awesome!

alfadriver wrote:

carguy123 wrote: Cosworth engine = not Lotus. Yeah, I know Lotus has used a variety of engines - look at the Elise, but with the spec Cosworth engine being used by all/many it becomes a series of minor differences and is an F1 IROC. Not interested.

Uh, you may want to look back and see how many Lotus-Cosworths won championships. The first Cosworth win was '67 in a Lotus 49. Lotus' last 5 championships were powered by Cosworth. So, historically, Lotus = Cosworth Engine. Oh, and you lament the "spec" nature of it- since 3 teams will run it. But in the 70's, for the most part, the entire field outside of Ferrari were running "spec" Cosworth engines (in '69 and '73 ALL races were won by a Cosworth DFV, but not by one team). Or should we ignore McLaren, Matra, Brabham, March, Surtees, Tyrrell, Hesketh, Lola, Williams, Penske, Wolf and Ligier? Interestesting how this IS a repeat of the 70's, the Lotus Glory Days.... Eric

Gotta have something to complain about though? Right?

maroon92, completely agree. Imagine what Turn 1 will be like now!

z31maniac wrote: ... Imagine what Turn 1 will be like now!

Basically, a carbon fiber shredder/chopping block.

Sounds good to me too. Love me some Lotus goodness.

Doood! Sweeet!

Lotus and Cosworth are two of my most favorite words.

RossD wrote: Lotus and Cosworth are two of my most favorite words.

i think this quote is Magazine worthy...

Heck yes. Now I can wear my Lotus F1 shirt and actually be supporting a currently running F1 team.

carguy123 wrote: Cosworth engine = not Lotus.

Wat?

Right now, they use Toyota engines in the Elise. In the past, they have used Coventry Climax, Cosworth/Ford, Renault, Mugen-Honda...

The various iterations of the Esprit used Lotus designed engines, but there the only ones that pops to mind. Most of the recent F1 cars were Cosworth/Ford designs.

carguy123 wrote: Cosworth engine = not Lotus.

Not to pile on, but Cosworth is named for its founders, Mike COStin and Keith DuckWORTH, who were both with Lotus before they started the company.

billy3esq wrote:

carguy123 wrote: Cosworth engine = not Lotus.

Not to pile on, but Cosworth is named for its founders, Mike COStin and Keith DuckWORTH, who were both with Lotus before they started the company.

Oh so true!

Ford went on the valve covers of the DFV only after they ponied-up money to Cosworth (for engine development).

Turned-out to be a good investment as that engine was the lynch pin for F1's "kit-car" era that ran from the late 60's to deep into the 80's.

155 victories out of 262 races, just an awesome engine

I wasn't complaining that Lotus was using Cosworth, I was more complaining of everyone using the same engine whatever it is.

I don't like the spec aspect that's coming into F1. Sometimes a step back is simply a step back, not an improvement.

As far as the new specs getting more cars on track at one time, they've had the capacity to do that under the old rules, but they didn't allow it. The run for inclusion is more about the fact they will not allow more teams than the new CHEAP F1

carguy123 wrote: I wasn't complaining that Lotus was using Cosworth, I was more complaining of everyone using the same engine whatever it is. I don't like the spec aspect that's coming into F1. Sometimes a step back is simply a step back, not an improvement. As far as the new specs getting more cars on track at one time, they've had the capacity to do that under the old rules, but they didn't allow it. The run for inclusion is more about the fact they will not allow more teams than the new CHEAP F1

Some of what you say is correct, some is not.

Recent F1 grids were restricted to 22 cars; this year it is 20.

The global economic collapse convinced some in the sport to implement cost-cutting proposals, but those were not universally supported. You may recall that there was the threat that the "real" factories were going to break away and start their own F1 series. Honda quit before the compromise and BMW quit anyway. Toyota and Renault are both rumored as doubtful for 2010.

Many people look forward to grids with upwards of 25-28 cars, but they may be lucky to see the 20 car fields experienced this year. It's all about the money.

As much as you want to believe the "rules" can be changed so easily, they can't. There's a provision in the Concorde Agreement that requires all teams accept it's terms. Should any one team decide a rule change doesn't benefit them and refuse to sign-on, the rule change is mooted.

Personally, I don't buy into the mantra that F1 has to be most technology-intensive racing series in the world. There is more relevant trickle-down tech going on in endurance racing than what occurs in F1.

One may see rules stabilization as a step-back and perhaps it is. But if the alternative is collapse, that's not exactly an improvement is it?

Toyota will be running next year because they are looking for drivers.

carguy123 wrote: I wasn't complaining that Lotus was using Cosworth, I was more complaining of everyone using the same engine whatever it is. I don't like the spec aspect that's coming into F1. Sometimes a step back is simply a step back, not an improvement. As far as the new specs getting more cars on track at one time, they've had the capacity to do that under the old rules, but they didn't allow it. The run for inclusion is more about the fact they will not allow more teams than the new CHEAP F1

I dunno, dude..the late 1960s-early 1970s were a pretty awesome time for F1. And as other people have alluded to, a lot of those teams used an "off the shelf" DFV. Ken Tyrell actually started his own team after Matra insisted (after Jackie Stewart won the `69 World Championship) that he use their own V-12, rather than the DFV. Stewart was Champion again in 1971 and 1973. The 1970 winner was Jochen Rindt (sadly, posthumously) in a Lotus Cossie (which was appropriate because Lotus got Cosworth & Ford into F1 in the first place), and the 1972 winner was Emmo Fittipaldi in an evolved version of the same car.

I don't recall who won the Manufacturer's Championship in those years, but I'm sure the data's avalible online somewhere.

I'm too lazy to find any real pictures, so here's a nice Micheal Turner print:

But during that era you had a lot of innovation in chassis as evidenced by the pic you posted. They not going to give them the chassis freedom now that they did then.

It makes sense that if you lock in the motor you free up development on other parts to make it interesting, but what they are demanding now is a locked in motor and minimal play in other aspects. It reads like IROC to me.

Is #8 a Tyrell?

carguy123 wrote: But during that era you had a lot of innovation in chassis as evidenced by the pic you posted. They not going to give them the chassis freedom now that they did then. It makes sense that if you lock in the motor you free up development on other parts to make it interesting, but what they are demanding now is a locked in motor and minimal play in other aspects. It reads like IROC to me. Is #8 a Tyrell?

The #8 is a Lotus 72, Fittipaldi at the wheel leading into T1 (Paddock Hill Bend) at Brands Hatch. The following car (#1) is a Tyrrell (003?) with Stewart driving; the next car is a BRM (P160 or P180) with either Rodriguez or Siffert at the wheel.

Michael Turner created some inspiring art, transferred to race posters - I've four of his poster renditions from my trips to the Glen in the mid-to-late 70's.

Carguy, I understand your lament about the current status of the rules structure. For one, I really like the new direction as it places more emphasis on the drivers, not the manufacturers. To me, the WDC>WCC.

If car companies want to compete to build their reputation they need to focus on endurance racing - which (to me) is a nominal second choice behind F1.

I love'em both!

I'm actually looking forward to Ferrari's new commitment to other venues. It seems there's no telling where you'll see Ferrari's fingers next.

This is just one of the reasons why I favor F1 (and its' drivers) over most other series, and it makes no difference what they're wheeling:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl2tIFxSEGA&feature=related