Caterham, Marussia and HRT are the worst teams ever...

[Nick1point9]

...statistically speaking if they fail to win a point by the end of the year. As far as I can tell, since the start of the constructors championship, no team has ever gone 3 consecutive seasons without scoring a single point. They even have an extra 2 places to finish in and still achieve points.

Is this simply that improved mechanical reliability is meaning that a higher percentage of cars finish, meaning fewer opportunities for back markers to find themselves out of position in the points?

[TheHeretic]

Well, you would have to compare the average number of cars finishing a GP.If it has gone up, then the chance for a back marker to sneak I to the points is less, I would imagine.

Edited by TheHeretic on Wednesday 19th September 11:04

[joewilliams]

The really rubbish teams don't last three season!

[Steamer]

Do you remember the days when F1 cars used to break down on the warm-up lap?!

All teams are so much more reliable these days - Cate, Marussia & HRT included. The best just got even better thats all.

[Eric Mc]

What about those teams in the past that couldn't even qualify?
Remember Forti, Pacific, Simtek, Fondmetal, AGS, RAM, ATS etc etc etc?

Define "worst".

Today there are more races.
All teams get to race each time - with the odd exception.
Very few cars break down.

I think ALL the modern teams are WAY more professional and reliable than some of the dodgy outfits that populated the back end of the grid up until the mid 1990s.

[robmlufc]

I'm fairly impressed with the new teams to be honest. Turning out two F1 cars at every race takes a lot more than it did 10 years ago.

[Laughingman21]

To be fair, there have been a lot of teams that haven't lasted three seasons so it's a little harsh to class these three as the worst ever!

[robmlufc]

Going by the always accurate Wikipedia, Minardi didn't score points in their first 3 seasons and only 1 point between 1996 and 2001.

[acf8181]

2012 British GP quali (1):

1st Alonso (Ferrari) 1:46.515
23rd Karthikeyan (HRT) 1:53.040 (Gap = about 5.5secs)


1992 British Grad prix quali:

1st Mansell (Williams) 1:18.965
13th Boutsen (Ligier) +5.580
26th Hill (Brabham) +7.413



.....and ligier and brabham teams had been around more than 3 yrs!

[DanDC5]

Worst team ever has to be Lola in 97. Failed to qualify in Melbourne, didn't even unpack in Brazil and then never seen again.

[freedman]

Life

Mastercard Lola

Andrea Moda

Eurobrun

[Mr E]

DanDC5 said:

Worst team ever has to be Lola in 97. Failed to qualify in Melbourne, didn't even unpack in Brazil and then never seen again.

I have a soft spot for "Life Racing".
Slower than a F3 car. 14 attempts. 14 failures to pre-qualify.

http://www.f1rejects.com/teams/life/profile.html

Edited by Mr E on Wednesday 19th September 12:45

[daimatt]

acf8181 said:

2012 British GP quali (1):

1st Alonso (Ferrari) 1:46.515
23rd Karthikeyan (HRT) 1:53.040 (Gap = about 5.5secs)


1992 British Grad prix quali:

1st Mansell (Williams) 1:18.965
13th Boutsen (Ligier) +5.580
26th Hill (Brabham) +7.413



.....and ligier and brabham teams had been around more than 3 yrs!

Isn't the difference between 1:46.5 and 1:53.0 about 6.5 seconds?

[DanDC5]

Mr E said:

DanDC5 said:

Worst team ever has to be Lola in 97. Failed to qualify in Melbourne, didn't even unpack in Brazil and then never seen again.

I have a soft spot for "Life Racing".
Slower than a F3 car. 14 attempts. 14 failures to pre-qualify.

http://www.f1rejects.com/teams/life/profile.html

Edited by Mr E on Wednesday 19th September 12:45

I think that makes them better than Lola. At least they turned up

[Nick1point9]

robmlufc said:

Going by the always accurate Wikipedia, Minardi didn't score points in their first 3 seasons and only 1 point between 1996 and 2001.

It would seem that http://www.autosport.com/results.php?s=0&y=201... doesn't always include teams who didn't scored points. That might have a huge bearing on my initial statement....

[Eric Mc]

Lies and statistics - not much different sometimes.

[hornet]

They're orders of magnitude better than the likes of Andrea Moda or Monteverdi. I'm not sure Perry McCarthy ever actually managed a lap in anger with the former (probably wise when you read the story about the steering rack at Spa) and I'm fairly sure the latter were raiding museum pieces for parts in their short but eventful existence. At least the modern day back of the grid teams actually turn up and race. More than US F1 managed!

[acf8181]

daimatt said:

Isn't the difference between 1:46.5 and 1:53.0 about 6.5 seconds?

yeah, maybe, my maths is rubbish when dont try!

[Redlake27]

Statistically yes.....

....but the only time I can remember the likes of Osella (who were far better than many back of grid teams), Rial, Lambo, AGS etc getting a point were when a lot of cars fell off. Sometimes Minardi and Dallara were genuinely competitive, but often it was due to a tyre war going in their favour at one race.


The likes of Pacific, Coloni, Forti, Life, EuroBrun etc....... now they were pretty poor.


Watch any 80s and 90s GP, and you will see teams get podiums, not just points, by being 1 or 2 laps behind the winner at the end of the race. That's about where our botom 3 are now in terms of pace.

[coppice]

Nick1point9 said:

...statistically speaking if they fail to win a point by the end of the year. As far as I can tell, since the start of the constructors championship, no team has ever gone 3 consecutive seasons without scoring a single point. They even have an extra 2 places to finish in and still achieve points.

Is this simply that improved mechanical reliability is meaning that a higher percentage of cars finish, meaning fewer opportunities for back markers to find themselves out of position in the points?

Assuming your indepth knowledge of GP racing extends back as far as ..ermm..5 years?..I am sure you are right.Try researching names like Connew, Eifelland and Merzario before sharing your wisdom eh ?