F1 » Stewart defends Mosley over F1 2010 disarray

Given their fractious past relationship, three-time world champion Sir Jackie Stewart is perhaps an unlikely candidate to defend Max Mosley, but the Scot argues that the former FIA President is not entirely to blame for what has been described as the 'Mickey Mouse' nature of F1 2010

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

TestingTimes - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 11:13 AM

The Toyota recall shows 1 thing. How bad modern day drivers have become.
Dipping the clutch solves the problem without needing any specialist skill. In
case of auto's serve you right for buying one!:)

TestingTimes - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 11:23 AM

as freddy already alluded to, blaming the manufacturers for the excessive spending levels and their withdrawal is somthing the FIA as governors should have seen.
Inherent lack of political will in the 90s is why we are here today. The escalated technology war between Ferrari and mclaren in the mid 90s was when the fia should have implemented a constuctive way of dealing with it. Ferrai and mclarenwerent going to hold back as that meant losing to the other, this is why the FIA should have been stronger.
As governors of the sport they shoulder the blame in my book.

davecooper - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 12:16 PM

I always believed that one on the main problems with KERS was the restrictions the FIA put on the ammount of energy that could be recovered and reused. It was only a fraction of that available and rarely made up for the extra weight of the system. Had there been no limit then no team could have afforded not to use it. I believe there was an argument by the FIA over potential speed increases but that could have been managed by smaller engines.

CarCrazed - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 12:22 PM

-“Stewart defends Mosley” that's something you don't hear every day. I agree with Richard, he is not outright defending him

-TT, half-agree with the auto remark, I don't like slush-boxes but you can always put those in Neutral.

-There's another issue for (big) manufacturers other than the economy and bad governance, they are too concerned trying to look green to sell cars. And in Toyota's case, I agree with previous posters (on other threads) when they say Toyo knew the sh*tstorm that was coming to their “transport appliances”

aeaventures - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 12:29 PM

The fact that FOCA had become a unified organisation meant that for Mosley nee Ecclestone the obvious stategy to take was to undermine it by causing it to fragment, its how they operate, rule by choas,now with all these much smaller and much less well financed outfits, the ringmasters are once again calling the tune, ie tow the line or face finacial ruin, shut up and get back in line!!

Paddockman - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 12:53 PM

TestingT KERS was not forced on the teams. They agreed with the principle and they themselves evolved the rules.

The reason most teams did not fit KERS was the compromises on chassis design (particularly weight distribution and aero) which were necessary in order to incorporate it

Magnetti have an off-the-shelf system. Williams have a novel system which is being fitted to a Porsche. Neither is expensive. The teams spend far more on (pointlessly) refining their gearboxes than they ever spent on KERS.

Mercedes is perhaps an exception to that but they have used their F1 KERS technology in the new S400 Hybrid. And now Ferrari (Geneva).

We will see KERS in F1 again in 2011 and thereafter.

Paddockman - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 1:05 PM

TestingT You are right about the McLaren/Ferrari cost escalation in the late 1990s. But the FIA repeatedly called on the teams to moderate costs. It could not act without the teams because of the Concorde Agreenent.

In the end after a succession of team meetings produced no result (late 2002), the FIA (ie Mosley) imposed measures (January 2003) without (he claimed) changing the rules.

McLaren started arbitration proceedings but most of the "measures" stuck. The rich teams have always opposed cost cuts because lower costs mean more teams can challenge them.

I am going to stop mow because I don't want to be an apologist for the FIA. But we should get the facts right and try to be fair.

that guy - Unregistered

March 05, 2010 1:08 PM

To the ignoramus suggesting de-clutching/autos-in-neutral to get over the Toyota problem, have you ever been in this specific accelerating situation where your car has suddenly shot up to 100mph on a busy freeway or crowded intersection and managed to safely get out of it using your recommended 'obvious' techniques? Didn't think so.

Page 2 of 4
« 1 2 3 4  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2016 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.