PDA

View Full Version : Greatest Racing Heritege



Ferrari Tifosi
07-05-2004, 05:58 PM
Which manufacturer do you believe has the greatest racing heritege. Is it Porsche, Ferrari, Mercedes, Alfa Romeo, Ford, etc.?

I personally think its a tie between Porsche and Ferrari. Porsche because of its dominating success in sportscar racing and Ferrari for its success in sportscar racing and its great success in Formula One.

fpv_gtho
07-05-2004, 07:38 PM
i can think of numerous reasons why anyone could have the greatest, like Ford and their GT40's, Jaguar and the old E types etc, but i think overall it would have to bbe Alfa Romeo

Coventrysucks
07-05-2004, 08:02 PM
It depends what you mean by greatest.

Mercedes certainly has been racing the longest, so in a way that makes their racing heritage greatest in one sense.

:)

Ferrari Tifosi
07-05-2004, 08:07 PM
It depends what you mean by greatest.

Mercedes certainly has been racing the longest, so in a way that makes their racing heritage greatest in one sense.

:)

I mean greatest in a sense of durability, winning, diversity, etc.

R34GTR
07-06-2004, 12:53 AM
It's Ferrari hands down :D

EvilPaladin
07-06-2004, 01:15 AM
Bugatti, no way it couldn't be(Type 35 :rolleyes: ).

Wouter Melissen
07-06-2004, 01:30 AM
i can think of numerous reasons why anyone could have the greatest, like Ford and their GT40's, Jaguar and the old E types etc, but i think overall it would have to bbe Alfa Romeo

The E-Type wasn't much of a racer. Alfa Romeo has had success in every type of road racing, winning LeMans, F1 championships and multiple touring car championships. Ferrari has managed to use their racing successes as a marketing tool best of all manufacturers.

DasModell
07-06-2004, 03:52 AM
hard to choose one . but i'll go for one of the italians :)

Coventrysucks
07-06-2004, 04:46 AM
The E-Type wasn't much of a racer. Alfa Romeo has had success in every type of road racing, winning LeMans, F1 championships and multiple touring car championships. Ferrari has managed to use their racing successes as a marketing tool best of all manufacturers.

The E-type wasn't the most successful racer, but has to be one of the best looking.

John Coombs built 12 E-Type Lightweights with factory backing. Several of them were later converted to Low drag Coupes.

Unfortunately the E-Type's main rival on the track was the Ferrari 250GTO, no wonder it wasn't a regular winner, although it clawed a few heroic victories back form Ferrari.

Aside from the E-Type, other prominent Jaguar race cars include:
SS100, XK120, C-Type, D-Type, MkI, MkII, MkVII, Group 44 XJS, TWR XKS, XJR5, XJR9, XJR13, XJR14, XJ220C and now with F1
Winning since 1936.
:)

Matra et Alpine
07-06-2004, 07:51 AM
you included 'diversity' in the list of attributes.

So by definition that will knock out a lot of the one or 2 event type achievers.
Ferrari, Aston Martin, Bugatti, Jaguar all going, gone.
and the specialists in drag, Nascar etc

I think you end up having to let this go to Fiat, Renault or Ford.

I think Renault would be the ultimate winner as I cannot think of ANY maker who has succeeded in every form of motor racing out there. By this I am by necessity grouping similar classes otherwise it becomes fragmeneted eg Renualt have never done NASCAR, but have done modified saloon.

Rally, open wheel racing, closed, GT, prototypes, Renault have been world winners in all classes.

If and when Ford manage to win the pinnacle of open wheel single seaters then the debate could start, but until then. Allez France :)

CassioC
07-06-2004, 08:06 PM
I think it's a three-way tie between Ferrari, Ford, and Porsche.

Porsche's dominance of Le Mans is legendary (their marketing people won't let us forget, either), and they've even gone outside their car's core competency (i.e. road racing) into other forms, such as the Paris-Dakkar rally with a 959 no less! Ford has also competed (and won) just about everything.

Ford is tied with Ferrari as the F1 engine manufacturer with the most wins, and for a spell in the 60's and early 70's, if your Grand Prix car didn't have a Ford engine, you were going to have a very difficult afternoon. They've also won rallies, stock car, touring car, and Le Mans.

Ferrari is probably the most passionate manufacturer when it comes to racing, and if you see racing success as part of a commercial strategy, then they have hit a home run. No car manufacturer on earth is more associated with racing than Ferrari. This metric might be able to nudge them onto the top rung of the ladder, although the call is a tough (and subjective) one.

Honourable mentions: McLaren, Renault, Honda, Lotus

fpv_gtho
07-06-2004, 08:17 PM
If and when Ford manage to win the pinnacle of open wheel single seaters then the debate could start, but until then. Allez France :)


Hopefully they get serious with Jaguar in F1. Even though Webbers sure to go to Williams, it would be a big dissapointment if Ford pulled out of F1 for good.

motorsportnerd
07-06-2004, 08:22 PM
I'd have to go with Ford. Remember, Ford badged Cosworth engines absolutely dominated Formula One from the late 60s to the early 80s. And Ford Cosworth engines powered Schumacher's championship in 94. So, Ford qualifies on the count of its F1 success.
Also, Ford has won (either in its own right or as an engine supplier) NASCAR, Indycar, all types of touring cars (ETCC, BTCC, V8 Supercar, Group N, etc), Le Mans and WRC.

Also, on the qualification that diversity has to be considered, then BMW and Porsche also must be mentioned. Both have won in Le Mans and sports car racing, F1 and occasionally in the WRC. Porsche also has Paris-Dakar victories and Indycar victories. BMW has an impeccable touring car record with wins in every touring car catagory they allowed to compete in. But no NASCAR for either BMW or Porsche.

And Renault is my number 4 for the reasons Matra mentioned. However, they biggest successes have been in F1 and WRC. Their touring car and sports car successes have not been over a sustained period like Ford, BMW and Porsche.

Also, Fiat by itself doesn't have much of a heritage. No F1 for example. But the Fiat group companies combined are a different story - Ferrari, Lancia, Alfa Romeo, Maserati. But I have to consider one company.

So due to their US success (mainly due to NASCAR been an American only zone), I have to put Ford at no 1, followed by BMW, Porsche, Renault.

tigerx
07-06-2004, 08:53 PM
Porsche, they won everything (cept f1) and they've gone where ferrari haven't, rallying.

Wouter Melissen
07-07-2004, 03:45 AM
Porsche, they won everything (cept f1) and they've gone where ferrari haven't, rallying.

Ferrari won the Tour de France nine times in a row.

Matra et Alpine
07-07-2004, 04:02 AM
I'd have to go with Ford. Remember, Ford badged Cosworth engines absolutely dominated Formula One from the late 60s to the early 80s. And Ford Cosworth engines powered Schumacher's championship in 94. So, Ford qualifies on the count of its F1 success.
That was only an engine.
Ford never designed a suspension or chassis for F1.
So if 'diversity' comes to play they lose out big style to quite a few players.

And Renault is my number 4 for the reasons Matra mentioned. However, they biggest successes have been in F1 and WRC. Their touring car and sports car successes have not been over a sustained period like Ford, BMW and Porsche.
ermn, Renault won Le Mans 3 years running. They came 1-2-3, they won WRC, they won Monte Carlo 1-2-3 ( had a bit of help from the stewarsd tho' :) )
Not sure about Eruope, but they won British Touring cars.
From diversity I can't see anyone who has achieved the full range with ALL aspects of each formula.

Also, Fiat by itself doesn't have much of a heritage. No F1 for example. But the Fiat group companies combined are a different story - Ferrari, Lancia, Alfa Romeo, Maserati. But I have to consider one company.
erm that would knock Ford WAY off top spot as the rally was Ford UK, the touring cars was Ford Germany. These were independant legal entities from Ford USA :)


So due to their US success (mainly due to NASCAR been an American only zone), I have to put Ford at no 1, followed by BMW, Porsche, Renault.
NASCAR ? I though we were discussing motorsport :) j/k :)

On NASCAR, I think we would need to apply an 'equivalence'. Nascar is a wholy US formula. Nobody else races it so can't really judge a 'diversity' on such a narrow geography. So it either has to be ingored (no) or an 'equivalent' formula compared. I think the orirginal Le Mans GT prototypes are close. They orirignally matched a body shape, hey were free to engineer the chassis but had to use an engine from their stable. What do you think ?

Alterrnatively, I claim Hillman as the overal winner as the Imp won the North Glasgow Hill climb in 1976 ahead of all the other contendors. So ipso-facto Hilman are best :) ( :) )

Matra et Alpine
07-07-2004, 04:15 AM
Ferrari won the Tour de France nine times in a row.
Only because he was Lance Armsrtong's doctor ( alledgedaly ) :)

( For those unaware, a DR Ferrari has been cited a number of times for alledgedly doping cyclists to improve performance )

Matra et Alpine
07-07-2004, 04:17 AM
Ferrari won the Tour de France nine times in a row.
THis was always classed by the FIA as a road race formula and never as a rally IIRC ??

motorsportnerd
07-07-2004, 05:50 AM
That was only an engine.
Ford never designed a suspension or chassis for F1.
So if 'diversity' comes to play they lose out big style to quite a few players.)

Um, didn't Renault's main success in F1 also come as an engine supplier? For example the 92-93 World Drivers and Constructors titles with Williams, the 94 Constructors title, the 96 & 97 Drivers & Constructors titles? Renault has never
won the World Championship as a constructor. Sure, Renault has more race wins as a constructor (a total of 16 wins - 15 between 1979 and 83 and one in 2003) than Ford (does the one victory by Stewart-Ford count as a Ford win?), but less victories as an engine supplier.
I'm counting success by manufacturers as engine suppliers.


ermn, Renault won Le Mans 3 years running. They came 1-2-3, they won WRC, they won Monte Carlo 1-2-3 ( had a bit of help from the stewarsd tho' :) )

All true. Won't dispute that. But they haven't had the same sustained success in sports car racing and Le Mans as Porsche. And Renault hasn't had close to as much WRC success as Ford (think Escort RS1600/RS1800, RS200, Sierra Cosworth, Escort Cosworth, Escort WRC & Focus WRC - all WRC round or championship winners). Though I'll admit the Renault 5 Turbos looked pretty awesome.


Not sure about Eruope, but they won British Touring cars.

Renault has never won anything major in touring car racing outside of Britain or France. Unlike Ford or BMW (both with numerous ETCC, BTCC, DTM, Bathurst, Spa 24 hour, WTCC and ATCC race/championship victories).
However, the Menu/Plato Renault Laguna should have won the 1997 Bathurst 1000, but it didn't like being driven across a sandtrap very much... If the Laguna had won the 97 Bathurst 1000, I'd rate them a touch higher in touring car success terms. Ford and BMW stand head and shoulders above any other company in touring cars. And companies like Audi, Mercedes, Volvo and Holden have better records than Renault in touring cars.


erm that would knock Ford WAY off top spot as the rally was Ford UK, the touring cars was Ford Germany. These were independant legal entities from Ford USA :)

Yes, it would. However, we'd then have to consider the Ford Group as whole, and we'd have to include Jaguar, Aston-Martin, Mazda and Volvo - which would even the score somewhat. If we're doing that, than you have to include Nissan with Renault, which improves Renault's score (esp in touring cars) as well. I was considering Ford in terms of Ford UK, Ford US, Ford Aust, etc. They may be seperate legal entities in each country, but they were never completely independant companies in the way the Fiat Group companies were prior to becoming part of the Fiat Group.


NASCAR ? I though we were discussing motorsport :) j/k :)

On NASCAR, I think we would need to apply an 'equivalence'. Nascar is a wholy US formula. Nobody else races it so can't really judge a 'diversity' on such a narrow geography. So it either has to be ingored (no) or an 'equivalent' formula compared. I think the orirginal Le Mans GT prototypes are close. They orirignally matched a body shape, hey were free to engineer the chassis but had to use an engine from their stable. What do you think ?:)

I don't think NASCAR can be ignored, even though I'm not a fan. If we ignore NASCAR, then we also have to ignore all the other series which are limited to a few makes or engine suppliers. NASCAR is just too popular to ignore. Besides, even if I don't count NASCAR, Ford has had success in pretty much every other catagory anyway.
I'm open to include the Le Mans GT formula, Trans Ams, CanAm, F5000s, etc into this discussion. Or we exclude the lot and are still left with Ford, BMW, Porsche, Renault to argue over as successful in a array of catagories.


Now, I'll admit to being a Ford fan. However, in F1 I'm a Ferrari fan, but had to exclude them on the diversity grounds. And I've also followed BMW and Nissan in touring cars. I've admired Porsche's achievements. But by no means do I dismiss Renault. I just don't think they quite match Ford, BMW or Porsche.

motorsportnerd
07-07-2004, 06:08 AM
Porsche, they won everything (cept f1) and they've gone where ferrari haven't, rallying.

I count victories as an engine supplier as part of a company's motorsport heritage. Thus, Porsche did indeed have success in F1 - as an engine supplier. The McLaren TAG-Porsches took 3 drivers titles (1984 Niki Lauda & 85-86 Alain Prost) and 2 constructors titles (1984 & 85).
Porsche also has F1 success as a constructor - a single victory in 1962 French Grand Prix to Dan Gurney.

Matra et Alpine
07-07-2004, 07:55 AM
Um, didn't Renault's main success in F1 also come as an engine supplier?
Yes, but they also one the FIRST EVER GP in 1906.
Also, the Renault RS series of turbo-powered F1 cars were reasonably succesful - especially when the compeition is considered and the money being spent. Renault also had internal polotics and divided loyalties with Le Mans getting the government backing and francs :)
VERY nearly won the F1 season in 1983 (IIRC) and were close for quite a few years. Then as you say moved on to provide only the engines whilst Renault concentrated on other activities.

(does the one victory by Stewart-Ford count as a Ford win?), but less victories as an engine supplier.
I'm counting success by manufacturers as engine suppliers.
If you count engines then Ford HAS to win as NO other supplier has ever had so many race series based around their engines.
Formula Ford has put more races and miles on circuits around the world in the las 35 years than ANY other formula. AND all Ford engines - not coz they're the best but because the formula stipulated it and Ford paid the sponsorship :) So I'm not sure about including just engines.

Likewise I don't think we should be including controlled one-make race series wins.
Renault Cups for example. As many races as Ford's over the years but only REnault cars could compete !!
Hmm, maybe that should be the exclusion order for NASCAR - isn't it now down to just 2 "makes" Also, the chassis always an independant supplier yes ??

An interesting point in trying to answer the best overal is should we just take engines ?
Where should that stop ?
It could get as extreme as saying CHAMPION are the best oz their plugs were used by all the winning teams in all the formulae. Or SPAX. Why is the engine any different ??


All true. Won't dispute that. But they haven't had the same sustained success in sports car racing and Le Mans as Porsche. And Renault hasn't had close to as much WRC success as Ford (think Escort RS1600/RS1800, RS200, Sierra Cosworth, Escort Cosworth, Escort WRC & Focus WRC - all WRC round or championship winners). Though I'll admit the Renault 5 Turbos looked pretty awesome.
Points on Porsche and Ford agreed.
But I'd raised Renault only coz I tried to take depth as well as width :)
Also Renault are a funny commercial beast ( esp as most of it was goverment controlled ) but they went into Le Mans to win, the won, they go out. They went in to F1 to win, they won, they got out. They've never gone after WRC in a serious fashion since the days of the Alpines - when they were THE dominant car prior to the arrival of GroupB. But road rallies, they had a totally dominant car in the Megane, just never campaigned outside of French roads and on the one UK season it couldnt' handle gravel :)


Renault has never won anything major in touring car racing outside of Britain or France.
I concurred with that.
But at the time the BTCC was recognised as THE saloon car championship in the world. The best cars, the best drivers :)

Unlike Ford or BMW (both with numerous ETCC, BTCC, DTM, Bathurst, Spa 24 hour, WTCC and ATCC race/championship victories).
I was totally nodding in agreement until you said .....

However, the Menu/Plato Renault Laguna should have won the 1997 Bathurst 1000,
:)
So they were close. Wasn't that a private UK Renault entry as well - no "factory" support ??

Ford and BMW stand head and shoulders above any other company in touring cars. And companies like Audi, Mercedes, Volvo and Holden have better records than Renault in touring cars.[/QUOTE}
I put forward Reanult NOT because I thought they were BETTER than all of these in their respective formula but that they had a width and depth that no others aspired to over the century of motorsport.
[QUOTE]Yes, it would. However, we'd then have to consider the Ford Group as whole, and we'd have to include Jaguar, Aston-Martin, Mazda and Volvo - which would even the score somewhat. If we're doing that, than you have to include Nissan with Renault, which improves Renault's score (esp in touring cars) as well. I was considering Ford in terms of Ford UK, Ford US, Ford Aust, etc. They may be seperate legal entities in each country, but they were never completely independant companies in the way the Fiat Group companies were prior to becoming part of the Fiat Group.
Good point, I wasn't looking at it from the historical perspective. Ferrari, Lancia, Alfa cannot be grouped with Fiat as at the time they were independant companies. Don't think we should let companies "buy" there way into this list. But it still makes those independant Ford's a wee bit contentious :) And what about Lincoln and Ford ?????

I don't think NASCAR can be ignored, even though I'm not a fan. If we ignore NASCAR, then we also have to ignore all the other series which are limited to a few makes or engine suppliers. NASCAR is just too popular to ignore. Besides, even if I don't count NASCAR, Ford has had success in pretty much every other catagory anyway.
I was only joking about Nascar, but it is difficult. It's a controlled formula. So the "Formula Ford" issue comes up again. being successful in a controlled formula surely can't be as important as in an open competitive one ??

I'm open to include the Le Mans GT formula, Trans Ams, CanAm, F5000s, etc into this discussion. Or we exclude the lot and are still left with Ford, BMW, Porsche, Renault to argue over as successful in a array of catagories.
I think all of the races and forumal over the century would have to be considered in trying to be analytical abotu this. But the biggest issue is all those single-make races :)

Now, I'll admit to being a Ford fan. However, in F1 I'm a Ferrari fan, but had to exclude them on the diversity grounds. And I've also followed BMW and Nissan in touring cars. I've admired Porsche's achievements. But by no means do I dismiss Renault. I just don't think they quite match Ford, BMW or Porsche.
I think an important angle is FaCTORY v PRIVATE.
Renault have succeeded with facory efforts.
They've not ( beyond the one make stuff ) generally succeeeded in private hands the way Ford, BMW, Porsche ( esp Porsche ) have in Le Mans, saloon and GT classes.
So when we think about success, should it be success of the company or of the company's products. For the latter it can ONLY be FORD. For the former, I'd still have Renault in my top 3 for sure :)

Coventrysucks
07-07-2004, 08:23 AM
I'd have to go with Ford. Remember, Ford badged Cosworth engines absolutely dominated Formula One from the late 60s to the early 80s.

Ford badged doesn't make it Ford.

Ford provided the capital, but it could have easlily been any other manufacturer.

Wouter Melissen
07-08-2004, 01:23 AM
THis was always classed by the FIA as a road race formula and never as a rally IIRC ??

Were there rallies like we know them now in the 1950s? I think the roads were as bad then as many offroad stages now. It might officially not qualify as a rally, but events like the TdF or the Mille Miglia incorporate many aspects of rallying.

motorsportnerd
07-08-2004, 04:48 AM
So they were close. Wasn't that a private UK Renault entry as well - no "factory" support ??.

It was a factory effort. The full Williams Renault squad turned up at Bathurst. An Aussie driver called Graham Moore helped put the deal together and organised sponsorship with an Australian bank. However, it was a proper factory effort.


I put forward Reanult NOT because I thought they were BETTER than all of these in their respective formula but that they had a width and depth that no others aspired to over the century of motorsport.

I agree that Renault has width and depth to their motorsport history. They're not the only ones though. Ford, Porsche, BMW, Mercedes in particular have width and depth and history as well.


I was only joking about Nascar, but it is difficult. It's a controlled formula. So the "Formula Ford" issue comes up again. being successful in a controlled formula surely can't be as important as in an open competitive one ??..

NASCAR is a difficult one - though it currently has 3 makes (GM - just Chev now?, Ford and Dodge). If NASCAR is excluded we'll need to exclude V8 Supercar as well (also only two makes). Without NASCAR and V8 Supercar considered that reduces Ford's impact a touch. And I forgot about Formula Ford and Formula Renault.

Matra et Alpine
07-08-2004, 04:49 AM
Were there rallies like we know them now in the 1950s? I think the roads were as bad then as many offroad stages now. It might officially not qualify as a rally, but events like the TdF or the Mille Miglia incorporate many aspects of rallying.
Like all the many Mille races of the day, I considered them more a road race than a rally. So a track success rather than rally :)
They were VERY long sections, high speed but NOT sprint, very variable roads.
Rallies became shorter sections, typically same surface for each section, sprint. ( with the current WRC events becoming 'boring' sprints :( )

fpv_gtho
07-08-2004, 04:56 AM
NASCAR is a difficult one - though it currently has 3 makes (GM - just Chev now?, Ford and Dodge). If NASCAR is excluded we'll need to exclude V8 Supercar as well (also only two makes). Without NASCAR and V8 Supercar considered that reduces Ford's impact a touch. And I forgot about Formula Ford and Formula Renault.


Well perhaps rather than considering V8 Supercars, just consider the ATCC, as over the years theres been plenty of variety in winning manufacturers. Toyota and Mitsubishi have expressed intentions to get into V8 Supercars though, but with the state Mitsubishi are in, they dont have the 60 odd million needed to get in, and Toyota have never really been public with their intentions.

motorsportnerd
07-08-2004, 05:18 AM
I think I've made my bias towards Ford clear. Also, I think Matra has made his bias towards Renault clear.

I'm prepared to ignore success as an engine supplier. That does mean that Ford can't be considered due to zero F1 success. Also excludes BMW. However, still leaves Porsche as a candidate - though with just one victory as a constructor.
Since US motorsport catagories and success have to be excluded, that would tilt things in the direction of Porsche, who have had sportscar success in the US.

So, who else is there? Amongst car companies who have been constructors in F1 (including the pre World Championship years) we have Ferrari, Maserati, Bugatti, Honda, Renault, Porsche, Lotus, Alfa Romeo and two who have so far been forgotten - Mercedes and Audi (through the Auto Union cars of the 30s).

Of the above, Bugatti no longer exists, though its record cannot be denied.
Maserati hasn't competed since the 1950s except sporadically.
Honda has only one win as an F1 constructor and outside F1 has only competed in Touring Cars (I'm not going to count motorcycle racing).
Lotus hasn't competed in F1 or in fact much other motorsport for 10 years, and lacks depth outside F1 anyway.
Alfa Romeo has a strong sports, touring car and F1 heritage, so does have a claim. However, in recent years they have mainly competed in touring cars. Also, it has had limited success in rallying.
Also, it must be said that none of the above have had much success in the US.
We've gone over Renault and Porsche.

That leaves Audi and Mercedes. Audi purchase Auto Union, so that makes them a bit of a dubious inclusion. However, if we can count the Auto Union success as part of Audi's heritage, then they have a strong claim. Audi has had success in the US also - in sports cars, Trans Am and rallying. Then there is the Audi success at Le Mans and European sportscar racing, in rallying and in touring cars (BTCC and DTM). Perhaps Audi has a strong claim?

Then we have Mercedes... Since F1 history is an important consideration, then Mercedes has a very strong claim. There were the Mercedes - Auto Union battles in the 30s. Mercedes helped Fangio to his 1954 and '55 driver's title. As a constructor, Mercedes have won just nine World Championship F1 races, but have a part in two F1 World Driver's championships. That MUST rate.
Also, Mercedes has Le Mans and sports car win, WRC experience, and a strong touring car record (mainly in the DTM). Not to mention road racing success in the Mille Miglia in the 50s.
If Mercedes hadn't withdrawn from motorsport at the end of 1955 due to that horific Le Mans crash, then we probably wouldn't be debating which manufacturer had the strongest heritage. We'd probably be saying - Mercedes. However, they have made up some lost ground since returning in the early 80s, though not unfortunately as an F1 constructor. Their recent F1 success has been as an engine supplier. Also, Mercede's has only had success in the US through the Mercedes badged Ilmor powered cars that competed in CART.

So, where does that leave us?

Since F1 success is a prerequisite for motorsport heritege, and depth and width of success in other catagories and in non European countries (esp the US) has to be considered, I think we're left with Porsche.
Once Ford and BMW are excluded due to lack of wins as an F1 constructor; once Renault and Mercedes are excluded due to lack of wins in the US; once Audi is excluded due to its F1 success coming through a company it acquired; once Alfa Romeo is excluded for lack of current day depth and width and once Ferrari is excluded for lack of depth outside F1/Le Mans - we're left with - yes - Porsche.

Porsche is the only company I can think of that meets all the criteria and exclusions we've discussed - though it is thanks mainly to its success in US motorsport.

And it was second on my original list before excluding engine suppliers.

motorsportnerd
07-08-2004, 05:34 AM
Oops, forgot to credit Renault with winning a Grand Prix this year - at Monaco. That means they've won 17 races as an F1 constructor.