The most successful F1 engine manufacturer is?
  • Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
Results 1 to 25 of 28
Like Tree2Likes

Thread: The most successful F1 engine manufacturer is?

  1. #1
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default The most successful F1 engine manufacturer is?

    TAG. (Porsche) 25 victories in only three years in the sport between 1984-1987.

    Advertisement
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  2. #2
    1000+ Posts FIVEDOOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Qld
    Posts
    20,202

    Default

    How about Renault in the V8 era - 59 wins 1988-1991?

    or

    Cosworth DFV - 12 drivers titles and 10 constructors titles?

    or

    Depends on how one defines greatest - Ferrari must have won a few over the years
    Any day I wake up and don't have to go to work, is a good day
    Every day is a good day

  3. #3
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    I calculated the wins from the total number of years active in the sport. That gives 25 wins from three years for TAG an average of 8.33 wins a year over their total involvement of three years. Coventry Climax do well at 5.7 wins per year also between 1958-1965 with 40 wins.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_engines
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  4. #4
    1000+ Posts FIVEDOOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Qld
    Posts
    20,202

    Default

    I assume you included Porches largely unsuccessful involvement in F1 in the early 60's in you calculations. Your post #1 suggests only the second foray in the 80's was considered.
    Any day I wake up and don't have to go to work, is a good day
    Every day is a good day

  5. #5
    dvr
    dvr is offline
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FIVEDOOR View Post
    How about Renault in the V8 era - 59 wins 1988-1991?

    or

    Cosworth DFV - 12 drivers titles and 10 constructors titles?

    or

    Depends on how one defines greatest - Ferrari must have won a few over the years
    Sort of like asking what's the world's most dangerous snake. Our Taipan has the most lethal venom but the Cobra injects more poison with its bike. Then again the Indian Krait kills more people than any other snake.

    For me I'd pick the Cosworth. It wins because of its championship record and longevity. It beat a succession of numerous other engines that couldn't usurp it for some 25 years or so. I can't think of any other engine that stayed on top for such a long time.

    If we move out of F1 engines then the Meyer Drake Offenhauser would win. An engine that was a copy of a Peugeot engine which, because of the war ie WW1, couldn't be maintained in the US as parts weren't available from France.
    FIVEDOOR and lozenge like this.

  6. #6
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    TAG were a separate organisation to Porsche, my "in brackets" notation was included to allow those without the historical knowledge of the TAG organisation to understand that Porsche were initially unwilling to have their name on the engines. With success however , the "Made by Porsche" badges eventually appeared. If you aren't prepared to put your name on it, it doesn't belong to you, and TAG therefore were an engine supplier in their own right and were extremely successful, whilst "Porsche" only ever had one win under their own name in F1.
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  7. #7
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dvr View Post
    Sort of like asking what's the world's most dangerous snake. Our Taipan has the most lethal venom but the Cobra injects more poison with its bike. Then again the Indian Krait kills more people than any other snake.

    For me I'd pick the Cosworth. It wins because of its championship record and longevity. It beat a succession of numerous other engines that couldn't usurp it for some 25 years or so. I can't think of any other engine that stayed on top for such a long time.

    If we move out of F1 engines then the Meyer Drake Offenhauser would win. An engine that was a copy of a Peugeot engine which, because of the war ie WW1, couldn't be maintained in the US as parts weren't available from France.
    If you want to go a close second to TAG, look no further than Coventry Climax. 5.7 wins per year of total competition. Ford won a few but won more as Cosworth, however, although Ford/Cosworth won 176 GP races it was over a period of 36 years which equates to an annual yield of 4.888 wins per year, slightly ahead of Renault at 4.8 per year of total involvement.
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  8. #8
    dvr
    dvr is offline
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    694

    Default

    I think factoring in a win to race ratio doesn't work. There are probably twice as many GP races these last few decades as there were in the 50's, 60's and 70's. Cosworth stayed on top against all-comers for about 25 years. If that was a boxer who only one fight a year but still beats every challenger for about 25 years he'd be hailed as the greatest.

  9. #9
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    You can argue all you like, I decided the parameters for this discussion and as long as you stick to the wins per year of involvement theory we'll all be happy!
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    TAG. (Porsche) 25 victories in only three years in the sport between 1984-1987.
    um, i think you will find that is 4 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    You can argue all you like, I decided the parameters for this discussion and as long as you stick to the wins per year of involvement theory we'll all be happy!
    so doesnt this win on that basis, anyway?

    How about Renault in the V8 era - 59 wins 1988-1991?
    even more

  11. #11
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    The topic is for discussion.......I have a particluar fondness for Vanwall and Coventry Climax, Repco V8's and Renault V10's......but wins per year of involvement over the modern period, even if it does conflict with your always erudite and most personal views, does show up some magic engines.
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  12. #12
    dvr
    dvr is offline
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    You can argue all you like, I decided the parameters for this discussion and as long as you stick to the wins per year of involvement theory we'll all be happy!
    Speak for yourself. Not happy Jan...

    Your theory sucks. Of course any modern engine is going to wins lots of races and rack up the numbers during its purple patch. Especially when it can race every other weekend. We now have Mercedes doing that and before them Renault.

    The Cosworth never had the same number of races per season but its "success" lasted almost a quarter of a century.

    So come over to my argument and we'll all be happy.
    Last edited by dvr; 27th September 2015 at 10:11 AM.

  13. #13
    1000+ Posts robmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne / Caulfield
    Posts
    19,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    TAG. (Porsche) 25 victories in only three years in the sport between 1984-1987.
    Coventry Climax

    Racing

    Results

    1958 2 GP victories Cooper-Climax
    1959 5 GP ,, Jack Brabham made champion
    1960 6 GP ,, again Jack Brabham champion
    1960 2 GP ,, Jim Clark in a Lotus
    1965

    Results in 1965-66
    World Championship 1965
    1. Jim Clark (Lotus-Climax), 54 pts.
    2. Graham Hill (BRM), 40 pts.
    3. Jackie Stewart (BRM), 33 pts.
    4. Dan Gurney (Brabham-Climax), 25 pts.
    5. John Surtees (Ferrari), 17 pts.
    6. Lorenzo Bandini (Ferrari), 13 pts.
    7. Richi Ginther (Honda), 11 pts.
    8. Bruce MacLaren (Cooper-Climax), 10 pts.
    Mike Spence (Lotus-Climax), 10 pts.
    9. Jack Brabham (Brabham-Climax), 9 pts.
    10. Dennis Hulme (Brabham-Climax), 5 pts.
    11. Jochen Rindt (Cooper-Climax), 4 pts.

    26 wins in 8 years.

    I guess the "trick" in the question is if factor in time period or just the number of wins.

    Forget it, you have narrowed the stakes down to FI anyway. But CC still needs a honorable mention.

  14. #14
    1000+ Posts FIVEDOOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Qld
    Posts
    20,202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dvr View Post
    I think factoring in a win to race ratio doesn't work. There are probably twice as many GP races these last few decades as there were in the 50's, 60's and 70's. Cosworth stayed on top against all-comers for about 25 years. If that was a boxer who only one fight a year but still beats every challenger for about 25 years he'd be hailed as the greatest.
    I agree on your view on win to race ration. Number of titles won is more meaningful measure in my book. Much easier to win a race than the title.
    Any day I wake up and don't have to go to work, is a good day
    Every day is a good day

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    The topic is for discussion.......I have a particluar fondness for Vanwall and Coventry Climax, Repco V8's and Renault V10's......but wins per year of involvement over the modern period, even if it does conflict with your always erudite and most personal views, does show up some magic engines.
    i dont have a view on this one.
    i was just pointing out that, by your metric, Renault wins with 59 in 4 years vs 25 in 4 years for TAG.

  16. #16
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexander View Post
    i dont have a view on this one.
    i was just pointing out that, by your metric, Renault wins with 59 in 4 years vs 25 in 4 years for TAG.
    No, you have again missed the "wins per total years of competition" qualification; i.e: total years of competition divided by number of wins. Renault come in at 4.8 per year under that scenario....TAG only competed for 4 years and scored 6.25 per year under the same rule.
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    oh i getcha. i am thinking the thread title
    The most successful F1 engine manufacturer is?
    may be misleadingly general.

  18. #18
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    Always read the fine print first......
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    some of it apparently requires a stronger magnifying glass than has yet become available.

  20. #20
    1000+ Posts robmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne / Caulfield
    Posts
    19,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    Always read the fine print first......
    Even when it's missing in the first post?

    You need to state what you consider is " the definition of the most successful F1 engine manufacturer is" . In the first post you gave an example but not the criteria to decide by.

    IT matters nought to me, but IMO there is more needed to be judged than a the number of wins/ year (which I assume is your criteria). .

  21. #21
    1000+ Posts Fordman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Perth/West Australia
    Posts
    1,383

    Default

    On the other end of the scale, and for no particular reason, I looked at the record of Hart Engines. They competed in many more GPs than I had imagined.

    They were in F1 between 1981-1986 and 1993-1997 inclusive, a total of 11 years.
    In that time they competed in 157 GPs, powering 368 entries and won NIL GPs.
    So a ratio of wins per year of competition at 0.00:1 (or is that infinity?).

    Any worse ones?



    (Edit: I think I was following the OP fine print rule here, number of years in competition versus number of wins, just the bottom of the list instead of the top - may be a timing error re next post of Kim's?).
    Last edited by Fordman; 27th September 2015 at 12:11 PM.
    2004 Scenic I 2.0 auto (Hers)
    2016 Ford Territory (His)
    2004 WRX (Sunday car)

  22. #22
    1000+ Posts Kim Luck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Aus.
    Posts
    17,960

    Default

    Sorry guys! The print was indeed fine, however don't let that stop you tag teaming to disagree. The post was based on a fairly simple premise but it might well have been too a radical concept for general discussion here. Please continue your discussion without me......
    Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone............

  23. #23
    1000+ Posts FIVEDOOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Qld
    Posts
    20,202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fordman View Post
    On the other end of the scale, and for no particular reason, I looked at the record of Hart Engines. They competed in many more GPs than I had imagined.

    They were in F1 between 1981-1986 and 1993-1997 inclusive, a total of 11 years.
    In that time they competed in 157 GPs, powering 368 entries and won NIL GPs.
    So a ratio of wins per year of competition at 0.00:1 (or is that infinity?).

    Any worse ones?

    So what would make the worst engine in F1, the greatest number of races with no win or the most unreliable ones.

    Another thread derailed
    Any day I wake up and don't have to go to work, is a good day
    Every day is a good day

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Luck View Post
    Please continue your discussion without me......
    did anyone hear something?
    i thought i did, but perhaps i was mistaken.
    it has happened.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FIVEDOOR View Post
    So what would make the worst engine in F1, the greatest number of races with no win or the most unreliable ones.
    surely the shortest length of time to achieve no wins?

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •