after buying stewart why is the jag so cr@p

[tanalised]

why has jaguar consistently produced such a terrible car , for 3 years in a row, after buying out Stewart racing which had a reasonably competitive car on the grid in 1999?
any thoughts?
obviously they paid no attention to the previous years design (for year 2000 onwards)

[tanalised]

the only reason I think of this subject is because of the rumour of mark wber going to Jag, which would just be a sideways move

[Red]

Well..... indeed a good question. Why was Stewart GP so good and why Jaguar was so bad even from the first year. Actually they didn't change that much of the chassis (I believe they didn't even claim that they'll build a completely new car, like BAR did when they bought Tyrell). The engine was the same Cosworth... the team and facilities... etc etc. Actually my idea (and I underline it is MY idea, I don't want to imply anything) makes some strange correlations with Max' "midfield team that played not-so-kosher" in 1999; no penalties were awarded (if indeed that was the case, maybe FIA and FOA/or FOH or whatever Bernie's companiy were willing to close an eye if Ford would become more involved)... also I find a bit strange Jackie's resignation...

Sorry if I offended anyone, but since imagining conspiracies seems to be our favorite game allow me an attempt too.

[Adam43]

I remember the midfield dodgey team and it could be Jaguar/Stewart (although I doubt it), but I think that Jackie leaving the team is completely independent of that. Jackie had plenty of other things in his life that justified leaving Jaguar.

[Raven]

They've simply done too much chopping and changing.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by Raven
They've simply done too much chopping and changing.

And there could be even more! Check out the crazy Motorsport News rumour thread by clicking here!

[Lee Janotta]

Originally posted by tanalised
the only reason I think of this subject is because of the rumour of mark wber going to Jag, which would just be a sideways move

At least Jag'll be able to pay him...

As for the thread's main question... Look at it this way: You're a promising young designer, engineer, or aerodynamicist, with offers to do major work at most of the midfield teams, or go to Ferrari or McLaren and really build your credentials... Or go to Jaguar.

Now ask yourself this: Do you _really_ want Niki Lauda for your boss?

Or Eddie Irvine first failing to give any meaningful input while you're developing the car, then whining about it to the press when he does something stupid and crashes it?

[MiniMe]

I would of thought Jackie wanted to stay, but he was pushed or wouldn't put up with the politics of working second fiddle to Niki. Jackie spent a lot of time, money, know-how and energy to build his Stewart Racing team. Its better being a team boss than a grid walking commentator.

I gather they are so inconsistant because their management & engineering lineup is inconsistant. Ferrari (love em or loath them), had the right formula to get themselves to the top, i.e. a five year plan, whereas at Jag its a case of 'perform in the next few months or you're out'.

[Total-F1]

Just because you have a 5 year plan, it doesn't mean the team is magically going to follow it. Ferrari bought in the best, it's simple as that.

Niki Lauda wasn't even in the picture when Jackie sold his team. Neil Ressler from Ford was the first guy. Who got the sack. Bobby Rahal was the next guy. Who got the sack. Niki Lauda was the next guy. Do we see a pattern emerging here?

Jaguar have no consistency, and there's no structure within the management. They have a philosophy of throwing money at a problem and hoping it will go away - like BAR.

Unfortunately, the only well developed department seems to be the PR/spin department.