Where to for Caterham?

[Supertec]

Originally Posted by Flavio Galtieri

I also agree.

I think it's easy to underestimate exactly how hard it is to develop a car capable of running even in the midfield under the current regs.

Especially with a small budget, the need to recruit staff, fit out premises. It's an achievement for them to be in the game at all imho.

'Small budget' Caterham, their budget is bigger than all the mid field teams. small budget applies only to Marrusia and HRT thats why its going to hurt loosing the 10th spot to Marrusia.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Supertec

'Small budget' Caterham, their budget is bigger than all the mid field teams.

are we talking about the same Caterham? budget numbers are hard to find so you could be right but im sorry to say that doesn't sound right to me.

[Ferrari333SP]

Comments on Twitter tonight from Tony Fernandes:

RT @edgemy: Che Khalib: Proton can bring down DRB if problems not fixed http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/busin...YG3ZyQ.twitter …

Proton is good company and given the right startegy can be very successful. It Lotus which is dragging proton down.

I warned everyone about what was going on in Lotus but no one listened.

Watch what caterham is doing soon. Could have been and should have been Lotus. What a waste.

[OZ_HCR32]

If only Caterham could get the SP300R through tech inspections it is likely to be quicker then their 2012 F1 contender

A lot of pundits have heaped praise on Heikki this year and whilst I like him I dont think he has completely out classed Petrov who grunts out decent enough drives. Drivers are not their current problem.

I hope they get some good engineering signings and some more funding for next year. Really hope STR and Caterham can take a jump next year and beat FI.

It may not be a stretch that Caterham are able to steal a good wack of FI people if they spin the credits of their growing team right....as whilst the Force India F1 is separate to other business activities the talk of unpaid drivers etc must have a few in the team scratching their heads about what they can be doing to shore up a good team possition for the future.

Even better, VW to buy Proton and get behind Caterham with new engines in their road cars leading to soem level of badge engineering with Caterham F1

[BSchneiderFan]

The real point, for me, is that the "new team" tag (excuse?) is wearing thin. When are any of these teams, but Caterham in particular, going to make that leap to fighting to be in Q2 and occasionally getting a sniff of points? At the moment, you generally wonder who is going to join the usual six in going out in Q1.

[Zen]

Originally Posted by Ferrari333SP

Comments on Twitter tonight from Tony Fernandes:

RT @edgemy: Che Khalib: Proton can bring down DRB if problems not fixed http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/busin...YG3ZyQ.twitter …

Proton is good company and given the right startegy can be very successful. It Lotus which is dragging proton down.

I warned everyone about what was going on in Lotus but no one listened.

Watch what caterham is doing soon. Could have been and should have been Lotus. What a waste.

Will the automotive world miss Proton....No

Will the world miss Lotus...Yes, the original that is

Does the automotive world give one Iota what Caterham is doing or going to do ...No


Does Tony Fernandes and his massive ego care ........Yes ..

Why not get your own house in order Tony before stirring it up for others

[Ferrari333SP]

What do you think he meant though by "Watch what caterham is doing soon. Could have been and should have been Lotus. What a waste"?

Signing more engineers soon? Making their home base bigger? Got some better aero coming? Better tech to put on the car?

Sounds like Tony's airline business continues to expand, which is bringing him more money. Question is if he'll invest that money into the F1 team.

[awrb]

Perhaps Fernandes is referring to the road car side of Caterham, and some new models. Maybe some lightweight sport cars while Lotus try to push into the supercar market. Still seems an odd message to those who work at Caterham to say it 'should have been' Lotus.

I still don't understand the hostility toward the new teams. Yes they are quite far off the pace at the moment but they certainly don't detract from the sport.

With them there is a chance we'll end up with three more competitive teams on the grid. Without them we would not, and there'd be six less cars.

[OZ_HCR32]

Red Bull came out of the ashes of Jaguar F1, which was Stewart and with loads of cash, Ex McLaren, Renault and Honda people and Newey they still spent 4 years in the wilderness.

So I had hoed Caterham would be racing STR and on occassion when a team's car didn't suit a particular track I hoped they would be racing for 10-14th on merit. But you cant be surprised that they are not.

I read Cosworth are for sale. I would LOVE if Fernandes stepped up and bought them and turned them into a going interest, mostly for support of the Caterham road cars.

[Greem]

I find it interesting that the regular back markers - the new teams - are decried for not having moved up higher.

The system plays against them. If you don't do particularly well in one year, the income from FOM is small so your development budgets are small, making it very difficult to progress. On the flip side, if you do well (even midfield), more money is forthcoming so you're likely to stay there.

If only it was as simple as "the new teams have rubbish drivers and cars and their designers are rubbish too". The biggest factor, as always, is the money - and the current (and future) agreements, for want of a better word, between the teams/FIA/FOM are hugely biased to the grandee teams.

[Marbot]

F1 cars tend not to break down too often in recent times, so the chances of even getting a 10th place finish are pretty slim to nil. The 'new' teams are consistently well within the 107% rule and tend to have decent race pace, which means that they tend not to get lapped as often as the Minardi's and other tail end cars did, only a few years ago.

[Supertec]

Originally Posted by Marbot

F1 cars tend not to break down too often in recent times, so the chances of even getting a 10th place finish are pretty slim to nil. The 'new' teams are consistently well within the 107% rule and tend to have decent race pace, which means that they tend not to get lapped as often as the Minardi's and other tail end cars did, only a few years ago.

One big difference Minardi scored points and brought on some very useful drivers...

And they didn't rely on the others falling off

[kipper]

Originally Posted by Supertec

One big difference Minardi scored points and brought on some very useful drivers...

And they didn't rely on the others falling off

I wouldn't dispute that Minardi did bring on some good drivers (although it is debatable if the likes of Nissany, Yoong or Lavaggi fall into this category); however, once the early 90s had past the points that the team scored where generally in races of attrition.

[Supertec]

however, once the early 90s had past the points that the team scored where generally in races of attrition.[/QUOTE]

Much like Spa this year, but still no points.

How many have to fall off before the points come I wonder

[Hawkwood]

Originally Posted by Supertec

One big difference Minardi scored points and brought on some very useful drivers...

And they didn't rely on the others falling off

It took Minardi 20 years to score 38 points.
Between 1996 and 2001 (6 whole years!) Minardi scored 1 point.
So far Caterham, Marussia and HRT haven't even been in for half that time, so let's just see what the next 3 years bring.

[Zen]

Originally Posted by Ostrogothicus

It took Minardi 20 years to score 38 points.
Between 1996 and 2001 (6 whole years!) Minardi scored 1 point.
So far Caterham, Marussia and HRT haven't even been in for half that time, so let's just see what the next 3 years bring.

When quoting stats you need to get all the facts.

Minardi scored points in 1988, 1 point by finishing 6th but what you haven't factored in is when they started in 1985 only the top 6 finishers scored points not till 2003 did it change to top 8 and now they score down to top 10 If in 1985 their first season top 10 scored they would have been in the points and every year after that. Making Minardi far more successful than all three of the current bottom three

[Hawkwood]

Originally Posted by Zen

When quoting stats you need to get all the facts.

Minardi scored points in 1988, 1 point by finishing 6th but what you haven't factored in is when they started in 1985 only the top 6 finishers scored points not till 2003 did it change to top 8 and now they score down to top 10 If in 1985 their first season top 10 scored they would have been in the points and every year after that. Making Minardi far more successful than all three of the current bottom three

When showing stats you needs to show the facts, and you surely realise the fact that the retirement rate of cars is totally different now from even half a dozen years ago. Meaning that getting near the points is far more difficult.

[Supertec]

Originally Posted by Ostrogothicus

When showing stats you needs to show the facts, and you surely realise the fact that the retirement rate of cars is totally different now from even half a dozen years ago. Meaning that getting near the points is far more difficult.

This excuse sounds like its straight out of Catherhams PR dept clutching at straws again.

Even with only top 6 scoring Minardi finished 7th and 8th in the constructors championship Catherham cant make top 10

[Zen]

Originally Posted by Ostrogothicus

It took Minardi 20 years to score 38 points.
Between 1996 and 2001 (6 whole years!) Minardi scored 1 point.
So far Caterham, Marussia and HRT haven't even been in for half that time, so let's just see what the next 3 years bring.

Minardi had 111 top ten finishes are you saying all were gained through others dropping out I think not. How long for Caterham to get 111 top ten finishes

Its east to disrespect Minardi but in fact they achieved a lot more with very little resource

[Marbot]

Let's also try to remember that Minardi were one of the more successful 'back of the grid teams'.

20 years. 38 points, and mostly in an era where unreliability was rife. I liked the team a lot, but they were never more than mobile chicanes at the best of times (lapped 3 or 4 times on average), even when they had employed some very notable drivers.

Currently we have 24 cars of which around 20 of them always seem to finish the race. Given that, it's hardly surprising that none of the 'new' teams have yet scored a point.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Zen

Minardi had 111 top ten finishes are you saying all were gained through others dropping out I think not.

Yes, actually most of them were.

Originally Posted by Zen

How long for Caterham to get 111 top ten finishes

Just as soon as current unreliability in F1 matches that of the Minardi era.

[OZ_HCR32]

I agree the reliability is making it near impossible for the new teams. Ditto we will never see on paper some of the "amazing drives" of the past where a guy spun/crashed, pitted and resumed racing to overtake every car on the grid and win....the quality of the grid is higher then ever before.

Though I would argue that the driving standard was at its highest about 2-3 years ago, today its still very high

[Supertec]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Let's also try to remember that Minardi were one of the more successful 'back of the grid teams'.

20 years. 38 points, and mostly in an era where unreliability was rife. I liked the team a lot, but they were never more than mobile chicanes at the best of times (lapped 3 or 4 times on average), even when they had employed some very notable drivers.

Currently we have 24 cars of which around 20 of them always seem to finish the race. Given that, it's hardly surprising that none of the 'new' teams have yet scored a point.

38 points! when F1 only scored down to 6th place finish, they had 111 top ten finishes what would they eqate to in todays scoring, what is difficult to understand about the point being made.
If F1 only scored down to 6th place now some teams would never score a single point, and when they employed those 'notable drivers they were rookies.
As for mobile chicanes even at the last GP Kovalainan was blocking the front runners. It is surprising that Caterham hasn't scored a single point yet because for 3 years their PR was telling us what teams they were going to overhaul in the championship Thank god they've got real now and shut up.

Caterham have suffered from day one with a phenomena that has blighted motor sport for a long time 'Gascoyne'

So please stop knocking a great little team that did put points on the board and never shouted about it.

Finaly just so as you got the point, when Minardi scored their 38 points F1 only scored down to 6th

I can sense an edit coming on this post

[kipper]

Originally Posted by Supertec

Finaly just so as you got the point, when Minardi scored their 38 points F1 only scored down to 6th

Not quite true; Baumgartner secured a point for finishing eighth at the '04 US race; whilst a further seven points were garnered at the 2005 race where, of course, only six cars started.

Whilst I wouldn't dispute that Minardi did secure some impressive results in their time in F1 given their resources (the end of 1988 and 1991 spring readily to mind), the fact remains that races featured more retirements than now. Furthemore, the majority of the top 10 finishes that Minardi secured were within the first half of their time in F1.

I was something of a Minardi enthusiast during their F1 tenure; however, I certainly feel that Caterham is the better bet for F1 success.

[Marbot]

Caterham are, on average, about 3 seconds slower than the top teams in qualifying. They are 1 second slower than Williams are in qualfying, and they have a race winning car. These are stats that Minardi could only dream of. So, with regard to 'actual' car performance, there is no real comparison.