Pastor Maldonado, Williams FW33 livery launch

Williams FW33 livery revealed

2011 F1 carsPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Williams have revealed the definitive livery of their 2011 F1 car.

Their car will retain the blue-and-white of last year with stripes that hark back to their 1990s Rothmans livery.

2011 F1 cars

Browse all 2011 F1 cars articles

Images ?? Williams/LAT

154 comments on “Williams FW33 livery revealed”

  1. That really wasn’t worth the wait.

    1. Didn’s you like the show of the kitchen, then?

      Livery pretty much on the same level as all their agressive/new cars have been up to this year. Not really special.
      Good thing at least that gearbox is interesting to talk about.

      1. So dissapointed. The most exciting thing was mishearing that Michael Caine was doing the catering this year haha

    2. It may look better in the sunlight, the colours are altered due to the lights.

      1. Yeah, I kind of wondered why they didn’t light it properly. Kind of like the Lotus launch, except that was a rendering. This is the real car. Light it properly for ****’s sake!

        I think you’re probably right that it will look a lot better in the sun.

    3. Yeah, faultless and boring…typical Williams!

    4. Completely agree that it wasn’t worth the wait – but also I think its the best livery on the grid. Renault, THAT is how you do rework a retro livery.

      Only thing is that there was no need to hype it up/have an official launch for it.

      1. Ruined. The “livery” they had before was much better.

        1. It doesn’t look like the 1990s livery with Rothmans! What is going on?

  2. prefer what they had before

    1. am I the only one here who thinks this is a pretty cool livery now…?!
      the bold white strips and the rothmans stripes with the red details are beautiful!

      1. I agree that it is pretty cool – at least at the back. I also like the way the red line goes in front of the cockpit.

        1. yes, the red stripes make it really cool!

          loved it.

          i didn’t get the darkness too, but let’s see how it looks outdoors.

  3. I quite like it, but I still like the interim livery more.

  4. Rothmans-esque with less sponsors.

    Airbox and top of the sidepods look good.
    The rest? Meh.

    1. Agreed. I don’t like the top of the nose cone.

      I tweaked it a little bit (in MSPaint) so it was white and I think it works better. What do you think?

      1. yes, they should have done that. Send it to them!!!!

      2. Really improves it.

      3. Almost makes you wonder if they wanted to do that, but had a lawyer advise to colour that bit blue, just in case Canada came after them and looked under Sodium lamps to make the silver look gold, then fine them :)

        1. That’ll be the reason, just as well for putting in silver instead of gold.

    2. Meh indeed. Williams are so boring I only remembered they existed this morning. Now I can go back to forgetting them again

      1. thatscienceguy
        24th February 2011, 11:51

        the livery looks like a racing car. Which is what it is. Its not some moving bling, its a racing car.

        I like it because it is exactly what it is.

        1. If it has 4 wheels, two wings, sidepods and a nosecone, I think anything looks like a racing car. The livery is there to define its image a bit more, and in my opinion the Williams livery does nothing

          1. thatscienceguy
            24th February 2011, 12:01

            there are “racing car” liveries, and there are liveries which are to present some image. This is a racing car livery.

            Its image is “we’re here to race, everything else is secondary”

          2. i think HRT will prove you wrong

        2. Unfortunately for an accurate post tobacco ban Rothman’s livery that’s the only thing lacking – the word RACING or ???????? to replace Rothman’s!!!

          1. Didn’t need to. They have “Randstad” – look even the first letter is right – replacing that. And the PDVSA nicely replaces the Castrol.

            I had a look at F1 colours. Pretty nifty trick to explain why they presented it with this lighting:
            For a kickoff, there’s something fairly clever about the way the car’s been presented, at the launch itself and in these shots. Because, from the lighting, and at an initial glance, the second trim colour on the car, along with the red, appears to be gold – successfully calling to mind the Rothmans livery of the 1990s that the car is intended to evoke. But in fact, when you look closer up – and I’m sure this will become more apparent when we get either a studio launch, or some shots of the car on track – those stripes aren’t gold. They’re silver.

            So in other words, should someone in authority accuse the team of advertising cigarettes, they can turn around and say “No, we’ve just put red and silver on the car in honour of our new sponsor PDVSA, I don’t know where you’ve got the fag packet idea from”.

            Clever, it is realy a redone smoke from ’97!

          2. that should have been a blockquote. sorry.

    3. I like it more then last seasons. But then i like today more then yesterday because i feel less ill, so its faint praise, but praise.

      1. I don’t get the “It looks like a racing car”

        A brown racing car looks like a racing car. What of it?

        1. I posted this in the forum earlier….

          Moving 2 logos around, instantly (in my eyes) makes a rather dreary livery look a whole lot better, and fully maximises the Rothmans lines.

          1. Yes, but by leaving it blank, they show possible sponsors there is room on the car for their logo. If they fill the logo with someone elses, sponsors may take no notice.

          2. If that’s their plan, then why not pull an HRT and put “We’re desperate for any and all sponsorship! Please give us a Starbucks giftcard and we’ll put your name on our car!” That would get the idea across.

  5. the style of this livery is much like the car driven by D.Hills in the past in 90s.

  6. Thanks for the pics Kieth .

  7. Not a huge change, but I like the fact that its harking back to the Rothmans glory days, particluarly near the back of the sidepods.

    I wonder if the Canadian authorities will have the same issues with Williams as they are going to have with Renault?

    1. Good point, though the Williams livery is far less blatant. Still, it looks like retro is in.

    2. How are Ferrari not allowed to have a few red stripes on the car but two teams can copy cigarette packets and get away with it?

      Rothmans is even trending on Twitter for goodness sake.

      1. Anything can trend on twitter. What crowds think is what one person thought and someone else agreed with. Anyone who has done any reading on crowd behaviour would be worried if anyone was seriously using what was trending on twitter as a basis for decision making.

      2. I know,the world of F1 is full of strange goings on, that’s why we love it!

        I see loads of people say the FW33 needs more sponsors, but this image of the FW16 shows that Williams only had 6 sponsors on it, one less than the FW33!

        1. Sorry, 7 in total!

        2. This also shows the current car looks nothing like the Rothmans livery.

        3. well, i think that those tobacco conglomerates paid much more than Chavez’s little friends…

          1. This is true, and it costs a bit more to run an F1 team these days too.

      3. I see your point, but I think the key difference is that Ferrari are getting money from a tobacco company, and the barcode was clearly there in place of that company’s logo, whereas Williams and Renault are not (as far as we know) getting any money from tobacco companies, just imitating the liveries that are associated with successful cars of the past that happened to have tobacco sponsorship. I admit, it’s still a bit dubious as the connection with tobacco can still be made indirectly.

      4. In addition to what Mateo said, Williams will no doubt point out some key differences, like that it is darker blue, with a darker red stripe, and then silver, not gold. Anyone who knows the Rothmans livery will recall seeing this car, but it is also clearly a different set of colours; colours that match with their new non-tobacco sponsor.

        1. I think Williams’ livery is quite subtle in the way it makes the link to the Rothmans cars – it’s really only around the sidepods that it becomes obvious what they’ve done, and even then you’d have to have prior knowledge of the Rothmans livery to get it. Renault’s effort is rather more blatant, and as I said before, Ferrari actually do get tobacco money, and after having their barcode banned they’ve gone and incorporated what is basically a stylised version of the Marlboro logo into the team’s logo.

  8. I like it. It’s nothing too radical on last year I guess but the sidepods and fin look really nice.

  9. I prefer it to last years boring livery. Its has the ‘Rothmans’ vibe about it :)

    that ‘tight rear end’ does look fragile though :\

    1. Agreed!! big improvement!

    2. I agree, the rear will never survive being ‘webbered’

      1. Although since it’s so low, Webber may see it as more of a speed bump rather than a moving road block…

  10. Gorgeous livery! I love it! very much like the rothmans livery of the past! Much better than 2010!

  11. About as exciting as Nick Heidfeld.

    1. Blasphemy!

  12. Is this an expensive spot the difference game?

    1. thatscienceguy
      24th February 2011, 11:53

      no, but I’m guessing its going to be an expensive trip to the optometrist for you.

  13. It still annoys me that AT&T are title sponsors, yet you hardly notice their logo. Why not put it on the sidepod/airbox so it is more noticable? At lease then it would look like Williams have actually got some sponsors.

    1. Why not put it on the sidepod/airbox so it is more noticable?

      Presumably because AT&T won’t pay the extra.

    2. The exposure sponsors get is proportional to their financial or technical contribution.

      The logos are not there for the sake of ‘looks’.

    3. Because that’s not the deal. AT&T pay for their name in the title, not their logo on the sidepods. I agree- it’s a strange arrangement, but that’s the deal…

  14. I’m not a fan. The irony of this is that it’s a mess, but a few minor changes could make it look really good:

    1) Get some more sponsors in there. Maybe include some big numbers.
    2) Those vertical fins alongside the sidepods should be dark blue, not white.
    3) The whole topside of the nose assembly, from the Williams logo back to the cockpit, should be white.

    Once again, it’s a case of the testing livery looking better than the definitive one. But a few minor changes should make it considerably better.

    I’m also not keen on the way Sam Michael presented it. Pretty much the first thing he said was “We knew we wanted something different” and it was for the sake of being different. The design should produce the best car available, even if it is the most generic and conservative design imaginable. If it works, notbody will care. But to deliberately make something new for the sake of being new sounds like you’ve compromised yourself from inception. No doubt the FW33 has the best design available with that shrink-wrapped bum in mind (I refuse to say “tight rear end” after that presentation – you could have turned it into a respectable drinking game), but the burning question is whether that is the best design overall.

    1. to follow on your thought. They want to do something new … and end up redoing something old!

    2. I hadn’t realized until you pointed it out that the large round retro numbers are now gone from the car. I agree, the testing livery was better. This is the second biggest livery letdown of the year behind Sauber.

  15. The livery is nothing special but Michael’s brief was great.

    1. You mean the chef, don’t you?

      1. I mean Sam, but getting a Michelin starred chef to run the kitchen is also great. :)

        1. I think Pirelli may have something to say about that.

  16. Is that a grey stripe dividing the white? Or silver? I can’t really see in this light. Nice touch though.

    Not exactly a flabbergasting livery, but I like it.

    1. Could’ve turned the lights on couldn’t they? Or they that hard up?

    2. According to ITV it’s actually gold!?

  17. Such an unprofessional launch . They didn’t show the car , pathetic lighting , the guy who was speaking kept fumbling and *** was the chef doing ????

  18. wwhhhaaaaaaaaattt!! all the hype for… hmmm… nothing!

    I thought we were going to see some extraordinary change from their standard and instead, we didn’t!

    I know teams like to have their image or team colours but surely they could have done something different to mark the change of the RBS era and part of the team floating.

    If it had been different it might have tempted me to buy some shares lol :D

  19. Pff. Nothing special. The interim livery looked better and photos in this ridiculous dark setting are awful.

  20. well i like it.. needs another sponsor, but i like it

Leave a Reply

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

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.