Lotus F1 car spy picture revealed

Posted on Author Keith Collantine

Autosport has scooped the new Lotus F1 car ahead of it launch on Friday.

See here for a picture of the car testing at Silverstone earlier today.

The Lotus is due to be officially launched in a ceremony in London on Friday.

Thanks to everyone who sent in tips about the story!

Read more about the Lotus F1 team

Posted on Categories 2010 F1 season, Articles in brief, Lotus

Promoted content from around the web | Become an F1 Fanatic Supporter to hide this ad and others

66 comments on “Lotus F1 car spy picture revealed”

  1. Oh dear, I love Lotus, i adore Lotus. I would still support them even if they came out with a pink colour scheme. But I hope this car looks better than this shot makes it seem, the green looks ‘swampy’ colored rather than prober British Racing Green. The worst thing for me though are the wheels – they look so cheap.

      1. I wonder if this is another case of a team choosing a colour based on how it looks ‘in the flesh’ without considering how it looks on TV and in pictures.

        Spyker had to change their livery before the first race a few years ago because it didn’t look right on TV (which is of course what 99.99% of people will see it through). Mabye Lotus will have to do the same.

    1. There’s not much to be gained from the spy shots other than publicity. Unless you have some radical aero solution or similar exterior innovation that you want to keep under wraps I’d question whither it’s worth it. It’ll probably help generate a bit of extra interest for the team anyway, in the same way that controlled leaks do.

      Ferrari have their “shakedowns” in secret and it seems McLaren are able to also but these are teams who have greater exposure and more to lose.

        1. Yup, but those shakedown we’ve seen in the internet happened after the launch of the car. They’ve never “deliberately” leaking pictures of their new challenger i believe. Only to gain the effect of viral promotions.

  2. It looks similar to the Force india in the nose cone in that it does not have the V nose, also like the fact that it has no shark fin. Mixed feelings about the green and gold (presuming they keep them, that is), it would be good to see the colours but it makes it feel a bit more pastiche

    1. funny that – didnt VJ try to sue Gascoyne over him taking their ideas to the new team?

      He hasn’t worked for them for a long time, but somehow the unique things to the FI car are also on the lotus car…

    1. Well.. what is Lotus anyway?
      It would NEVER be the lotus team that raced before, because it ended and its been like that for ages, the brand moved on, etc.
      Would it be Lotus for you only if they sold it back to previous owners and mananged to get the same race engineers, team principal?
      Is Mclaren post Ron Denis not actually Mclaren, because its different somehow?

      Would you say the new Lambos are not Lambos because now they are now german owned?

      No.. so Lotus is what Lotus is now.

        1. If by big connection, you mean owning the company for 14 years, then yes, it does have a fairly large connection to Lotus.

          If David Richards had been successful with his latest F1 bid, would there have been similar comments about it not being the “real” Aston Martin? By that logic, Aston Martin hasn’t been Aston Martin since 1947.

          Just because the guy who owns the company is not named Chapman, doesn’t mean its not Lotus.

      1. “Is Mclaren post Ron Denis not actually Mclaren, because its different somehow?”

        Excellent point. Was McLaren really McLaren after the takeover by Ron Dennis and Project 4 in 1980? Was McLaren still McLaren after the death of Bruce McLaren in 1970, even?

        The Lotus that last competed in F1 in 1994 bore little relation to the team that won its last title with Mario Andretti in 1979. Even Lotus in the later Chapman years was a shadow of its former self. It’s easy to get nostalgic and misty eyed but forget the reality.

        Chapman was a great innovator but for every astonishing success there was a complete disaster. Nor was he the best at refining his ideas to fully exploit them – Lotus may have pioneered ground effect in F1, for example, but Williams perfected it. Chapman’s attitude to driver safety was also lamentable.

        1. Truthfully honest, mclaren were crap in the dip between senna 91 and hakkinen 98. The team was a shambles, ended up with Peugeot engines! Lotus was a championship winner that fell into decline, and I expect the lotus team to do badly, but with continued investment over the next few years they will hopefully be able to get podiums and maybe a win. If lotus – the team cynics call proton – win within the next few years, it would be great for malasia and it would be a metaphorical one fingured gesture to all the doubters. 20 on lotus to win a monsoon Malayan gp anyone?

      2. Thanks Tiago. Im getting tired of people saying it isnt actually Lotus. We all know it isnt the same Lotus Team that won championships decades ago, but it IS Lotus. Lotus is malaysian-owned now, and we’re going to have to deal with it.

        1. The point is, why use the name Lotus and fake like there is some connection when cleary it has nothing to do with it.

          They even go so far as to copy the color scheme. And yes, I’d feel Bringing Aston Martin back would be daft too. Especially with those 70s colors.

          1. When clearly it has nothing to do with what? The lotus F1 team of today is affiliated with the lotus car company now, in the same way that the old team was affiliated with the company decades ago. Just because Colin Chapman isnt around doesnt mean it “isnt” lotus. Besides, by your logic, Mercedes GP shouldnt be allowed to call themselves Mercedes.

    1. I agree. It does not seem to be as aerodynamically inclined as some of the other cars. But then again, this is a car from a new team.

      I hope that they have a good season!

    2. I agree Solid, it looks incredibly underdeveloped. Of course that is impossbible for me to know, especially given that I am not an F1 engineer and I have only seen it in a low-res photo. Either way, I hope this thing isnt as slow as it looks.

  3. Hmmm… I’m not immpressed, that shade of green looks really dull to me. I was hoping they’d use a Jaguar- esque bright shade of green instead.

    Then again, I imagine the livery is better than this picture makes it seem. It’s difficult to make out the nose. From a different angle showing more of the yellow bits I think it might look a lot better… at least I hope so

  4. I need a better shot. Too much of it seems to blend in with the background. I’m having a hard time telling where the car ends and the scenery begins.

  5. Good luck to Lotus, an iconic name, but this car “looks” like the name is the only thing they got right.

    Heck everyone deserves the right to run around at the back of the grid, if they can make the grid? (Is there a 7% requirement?)

    Obviously, it is premature to actually judge a new car or team on a snap shot, but if this car doesn’t herald a New Age of Simplicity…they are in trouble.

    Which reminds me, if the powers that be want larger grids they might consider allowing 3 car teams. I remember it as being, among other things, a way to showcase new young drivers in cars that could actually make it into Q3. Most teams now days would choose to forgo the financial pleasure of such an effort, but they could run a third car at certain races…such as their home GP, or the home GP of a special driver they were trying to showcase.

    I would, and I believe most fans would also, find it immensely more interesting than watching extremely marginal teams struggle at the back of the grid.

    My apology to Lotus, hopefully these remarks don’t presage the inevitable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>