It's a matter of costs vs benefits. As you said, the rules remain stable for 2016. However, you can take that both ways: do you want to rush the car now to have a bit more performance this year, or do you want to properly develop the car for next year, knowing that the 2015 car might not be enough to close the gap this year?nevill3 wrote:I thought Ferrari couldn't supply 2014 engines indefinitely, because they only have a certain amount of "old" stock. It makes sense to try to run a 2015 car this year especially with the stability of the regulations for 2016. Even only getting the last third of the current season with a new car could be useful in designing things for 2016.
Well, those are factors that make it a whole lot more difficult to introduce the car, but does not yet outright state they will not have a 2015 carWilliamsF1 wrote:“I think that’s a strategy we need to think about.
“We haven’t been in the wind tunnel since October last year .........................”
They never got a deal. They were proposed they could run the original 2014 car in 2015, but a voting blocked that. They adapted their 2014 chassis instead to meet the 2015 rules. They could even run the very same car next year since the technical rules don't change.skoop wrote:i thought the deal they got was like "okay, you can run your 14 car in 2015, but you have to introduce your 15 car during the 2015 season".
has anything changed, or am i completely mistaken?
They don't have the money to spend. They are dripfed last years winnings a round at a time, hence BE claim of stopping the Australia instalment, they currently are running a second car for free, and James Allen has backed up my assertion earlier in the thread that Fitzpatrick doesn't have the cash to privately finance the team.WilliamsF1 wrote:Manor in its current form reminds me a bit of Virgin Racing, a lot of talk about being there but not spending enough.
Since Australia Manor has not shown any urgency in spending on the team. They just seems to be dragging along with no urgency to catch up with the midfield. If there is no new car this year the task of bridging the gap next year is even lesser (unless they are willing to spend $150 million a year).
Doubt they are genuinely that worried about that.WilliamsF1 wrote:That would guarantee them 2-3 seconds behind the next slowest car
Jonnycraig wrote:Doubt they are genuinely that worried about that.WilliamsF1 wrote:That would guarantee them 2-3 seconds behind the next slowest car
They went bankrupt because their mysterious Russian (state) backers pulled funding the second the Russian GP had happened.WilliamsF1 wrote:
I think they should be. 2-3 seconds off the pace is one of the reasons they went bankrupt. Next year what they can charge pay drivers also will be an issue for manor as the number of drivers is going to be lot lesser with the new super license regulations.
Anyway any sightings of their new car colours?