Williams replace Toyota with Cosworth engines for 2010

[tarzoon]

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... 10082.html

[ESPImperium]

Williams confirmed on Wednesday that they will cease using Toyota engines at the end of this year. The British team’s cars have been powered by the Japanese automaker’s V8s for the past three seasons and in that time they have scored 93.5 world championship points together, including three podiums.

“At a time of great difficulty for us as a team, Toyota stepped forward and agreed to supply us with engines for 2007 through to the end of 2009,” said team principal Frank Williams. “Toyota has been a very decent partner who have always respected our independence and provided us with a first-rate technical product.”

Williams previously enjoyed a six-season long partnership with BMW. This ended at the end of 2005 when the German car company began its relationship with Sauber. Williams then used Cosworth engines for their 2006 campaign before linking up with Toyota. That contract was extended earlier this year, but has been terminated by mutual agreement at Williams’ request.

“We are proud that we have been able to work with such a great company and we are grateful to the team in Cologne for their support,” added Williams. “I would like to single out for our thanks the Toyota engineers and technicians who have worked within our race team tirelessly for the past three years.”

Tadashi Yamashina, Chairman of Toyota Motorsport, commented: "We have enjoyed a productive working relationship with Williams and I believe both companies have benefited from that partnership. We respect the wishes of Williams to look for other opportunities and wish them well for the future."

Williams will confirm their engine partner for 2010 in due course.

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... 10082.html

[Richard]

That "conclude" is an odd use of language.

I'd normally expect to see it in the context of concluding a conversation or negotiation, with a positive outcome. So I first read that as meaning they had concluded conversations about a partnership with Toyota to start engine supplies.

[Saribro]

con⋅clude [kuhn-klood] verb, -clud⋅ed, -clud⋅ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to bring to an end; finish; terminate

[Rob W]

Using 'conclude' in this situation is indeed an incorrect use of the word.

It refers to the finishing of a foreseeable and finite activity which has a definite 'ending' to it (in terms of completing an activity) - such as concluding a speech or contract negotiations. An engine partnership is theoretically an open-ended arrangement with no set (natural) expiry date so conclude is not really the appropriate word to use.

However it might seem correct if translated from another language (using a dictionary). The F1 website often has slightly odd language, which would seem to back up the translated by someone other than a natural English-speaker.

[Conceptual]

You mean like the finishing of the contract term?

Saibro posted the definition. How can you aregue about their use of the word after that?

[Rob W]

You mean like the finishing of the contract term?

Saibro posted the definition. How can you aregue about their use of the word after that?

They didn't finish their contract term, nor is a contract necessarily a finite event such as a meal or game of soccer. It is an open-ended and largely arbitrary concept which in this case was also ended prematurely.

His dictionary definition means little in this respect especially since he truncated it from the full entry which also gave contextual examples of proper use.

- To conclude a speech with a quotation from the Bible.
- At the end of the speech he concluded that we had been a fine audience etc.

Words can often be used improperly in natural language even if they seem technically to be appropriate according to a quick scan of a dictionary. Moreso, dictionary definitions are often misleading because dictionaries are rarely definitive nor of the same quality/standing. The Collins definition, for example, says: finish, come to an end (note: not bring to an end - a significant difference in real-world use).

An example: Discriminating and discerning. You would never say a type of wine attracts discriminating buyers when you want to imply it attracts connoisseurs. You'd say discerning buyers. Yet using only the dictionary definition as a guide it would often make perfect sense to use discriminating. No-one does because there is a more appropriate word available.

Put simply. A competent writer with a grasp of natural English would not use that word in the manner used in the story headline. I imagine they were trying to avoid using 'terminate' - another word they could have used. While it means exactly what they intended, 'terminate' generally has negative connotations which could easily be read as implying the split was not amicable or over a dispute.

It isn't a major in any case. You can view it however you wish... the topic is more important than the poor quality of written English all to common in F1.

[Rob W]

A good writing tip for most situations: If there are two words (which have the same practical meaning) which you can use in a situation, generally the shorter word is the better option. In this case conclude versus end.

Williams end [their] engine partnership with Toyota = win!

[alvinkhorfire]

How about using terminate?

Williams terminates engine partnership with Toyota.

It sounds more formal than 'end', but 'end' is also a great choice.

[axle]

RedBull's bid for Merc engines has been veto'd by McLaren...wonder if the door is now back open for Williams?

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/n ... 3505.shtml

Germany's Auto Motor und Sport reports that the team, whose move to its preferred engine supplier Mercedes has been vetoed by McLaren, is not considering staying with Renault next season.

I didn't think McLaren would want RedBull having the same engine....

[xpensive]

If McLaren can veto such things, I am sure Ron would love to have Frank in his pocket?

[pjobmathew]

Frank Williams agreeing to Massa's test . ( http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79305 ) makes me wonder that they might be looking at Ferrari for engines .

[axle]

Frank Williams agreeing to Massa's test . ( http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79305 ) makes me wonder that they might be looking at Ferrari for engines .

Nope - Frank couldn't stop it even if he wanted to.

[bjpower]

Frank Williams agreeing to Massa's test . ( http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79305 ) makes me wonder that they might be looking at Ferrari for engines .

why would he?
look at STR not doing well at all and clearly they require more cooling than the average bear.

if next year the power output is to be dropped to level the playing field then you want to make advantages in other areas, less cooling, lighter, tighter packaging etc.

[alvinkhorfire]

RedBull's bid for Merc engines has been veto'd by McLaren...wonder if the door is now back open for Williams?

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/n ... 3505.shtml

Germany's Auto Motor und Sport reports that the team, whose move to its preferred engine supplier Mercedes has been vetoed by McLaren, is not considering staying with Renault next season.

I didn't think McLaren would want RedBull having the same engine....

Sigh... It would be interesting to see RedBull running with Mercedes engine. [-o< As F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport, wouldn't we want to see the best teams using the best possible equipment available to them? That way, their full strength can be completely unleashed.
It is possible that if RedBull uses Mercedes engine earlier on this year, they would now still be strong contender for the constructor championship.