2012 F1 team information and statistics updated

2012 F1 season

Robert Wickens, Virgin, Abu Dhabi, 2011

Goodbye Virgin, hello Marussia

Last week the 2012 F1 driver biographies were brought up-to-date for the new season and now the corresponding team information pages have been overhauled too.

Like the driver pages these now including interactive charts showing the teams’ performance in F1, revised histories of the team, and in some cases a selection of featured F1 Fanatic articles.

Each team page also has an up-to-date list of every driver that started a Grand Prix for them.

The names of prominent members of staff have also been reviewed. There are likely to be further changes announced for these between now and the start of the new season.

And, as with the driver pages, you can also find out which F1 Fanatics support which teams.

The 2012 season will see three changes in team names. Lotus have become Caterham and Renault have taken over the Lotus name. Virgin has become Marussia.

You can find the updated information pages here:

2012 F1 team statistics

Summary information on each of the 2012 teams plus the two former teams:

First season Best championship result Wins Poles
Ferrari 1950 1 (16) 216 205
Mercedes 1954 4 (2) 9 8
Lotus 1958 1 (7) 79 107
McLaren 1966 1 (8) 175 147
Williams 1977 1 (9) 113 126
Renault 1977 1 (2) 35 51
Sauber 1993 4 (1) 0 0
Red Bull 2005 1 (2) 27 38
Toro Rosso 2006 6 (1) 1 1
Force India 2008 6 (1) 0 1
HRT 2010 11 (2) 0 0
Virgin 2010 12 (2) 0 0
Caterham 2012 n/a 0 0
Marussia 2012 n/a 0 0

2012 F1 teams’ championship positions

Here are the constructors’ championship positions achieved by every team since the title was inaugurated in 1958.

You can use the controls below to hide or show different teams:

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2012teamcolours.csv

1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
McLaren 9 10 2 4 5 6 3 3 1 3 2 3 8 7 9 6 2 5 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4 4 4 1 2 2 2 3 3 5 2 3 11 2 3 2 2
Ferrari 2 2 3 1 6 4 1 4 2 5 4 5 2 3 4 6 2 1 1 1 2 1 10 5 1 1 2 2 4 4 2 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 4 3 3
Red Bull 7 7 5 7 2 1 1
Mercedes 4 4
Renault 12 6 4 3 3 2 5 7 4 4 3 1 1 3 4 8 5 5
Force India 10 9 7 6
Williams 9 2 1 1 4 4 6 3 1 1 7 2 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 5 3 3 2 2 4 5 8 4 8 7 6 9
HRT 11 11
Toro Rosso 9 7 6 10 9 8
Sauber 7 8 7 7 7 6 8 8 4 5 6 6 8 7
Lotus 6 4 2 2 2 1 3 1 5 2 8 1 3 1 5 1 1 4 7 4 2 1 4 5 7 5 8 3 4 3 3 4 6 8 9 5 6 10 10
Virgin 12 12

2012 F1 teams’ race wins

Here are how many races each team won in each season they competed:

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2012teamcolours.csv

1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
McLaren 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 3 4 3 6 3 0 0 0 1 4 1 12 6 4 3 15 10 6 8 5 5 0 0 0 3 9 7 7 4 1 2 1 10 0 8 6 2 5 6
Ferrari 3 7 7 2 1 5 0 2 2 1 5 0 1 3 0 2 0 1 0 4 2 1 0 3 6 6 4 5 6 0 2 3 4 1 2 0 2 1 3 6 0 0 0 1 1 3 5 6 6 10 9 15 8 15 1 9 9 8 1 5 1
Red Bull 0 0 0 0 6 9 12
Mercedes 4 5 0 0
Renault 0 0 1 3 3 4 4 0 0 0 1 1 8 8 0 2 0 0 0
Force India 0 0 0 0
Williams 0 0 5 6 4 1 1 1 4 9 9 0 2 2 7 10 10 7 5 12 8 0 0 0 4 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HRT 0 0
Toro Rosso 0 0 1 0 0 0
Sauber 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lotus 0 0 2 3 3 7 3 6 1 4 0 5 2 6 0 5 7 3 0 1 5 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Virgin 0 0

2012 F1 teams’ pole positions

Here are how many pole positions each team set in each season they competed.

Last year Red Bull set a new record for the most pole positions achieved by a team in a single season:

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/charts/2012teamcolours.csv

1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
McLaren 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 0 15 15 12 10 1 1 0 0 0 1 12 11 7 2 0 2 1 7 3 8 8 4 1 1
Ferrari 3 7 6 2 1 6 0 4 2 1 6 0 1 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 3 4 0 10 9 4 2 2 2 0 1 3 8 1 1 0 3 1 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 4 3 3 3 10 11 10 8 12 1 7 9 8 0 2 0
Red Bull 0 0 0 0 5 15 18
Mercedes 4 4 0 0
Renault 0 0 6 5 6 10 3 1 0 0 2 3 7 7 0 0 1 0 0
Force India 0 1 0 0
Williams 0 0 3 3 2 1 1 0 3 4 12 0 1 1 6 15 15 6 12 12 11 0 0 0 4 7 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
HRT 0 0
Toro Rosso 0 0 1 0 0 0
Sauber 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lotus 0 0 4 1 6 7 5 6 2 9 0 5 5 3 0 3 10 1 0 1 7 12 0 0 0 0 1 2 8 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Virgin 0 0

More information on the 2012 F1 season.

2012 F1 season


Browse all 2012 F1 season articles

Image ?é?® Renault/LAT

Advert | Go Ad-free

43 comments on 2012 F1 team information and statistics updated

  1. Flying Lobster 27 said on 10th January 2012, 10:53

    There’s a typo in your first table: if you’re counting Mercedes back to ’54, their top championship position should read 1(2).

  2. Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 11:29

    Bit confused about the Lotus and Renault listings there. Surely Lotus and Team Lotus are two different things, and Renault are Lotus from next year, so would it not make more sense to simply list Caterham (previously Lotus Racing and Team Lotus for one year) as its own entry, and Lotus as being formerly the Renault team, and neither as being a continuation of the team started by Colin Chapman? If you’re going to group together all the teams known as Lotus then you may as well chuck Renault in there as well.

    Makes more sense to me to keep it listed by the teams themselves with their current name and their previous results under other team names. Team Lotus which raced in F1 in 2011 was not the same team as that which was started by Chapman, and nor is the team which will be called Lotus from next year.

    It’s all very confusing and stupid, and probably the fault of Bahar and co.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 10th January 2012, 19:07

      But to be honest a team name does not change that often. And it would get complicated that way as well. Remember the original Renault also was on the grid when the predecessor to the team until recently known as Renault (team Enstone) was already racing.

  3. Sasquatsch (@sasquatsch) said on 10th January 2012, 11:32

    Apparently you regard the Lotus team of Colin Chapman as the same team as the Lotus teams of F1Malaysia and now the new Lotus team previously known as Renault.

    IMHO these are not the same. Yes, the chassisnames are the same, but the entrant or the owner (as is the case with Mercedes) is definitely not the same. So I would prefer to see the histories of these teams in different pages and not on the same page.

    (Yes, you would get two Lotus pages, one for the old (1958 – 1994) team and one for the current team. The history of F1Malaysia’s Lotus teams would be on the Caterham page).

    But that is my opinion.

    • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 11:40

      That’s what I was thinking.

      Team Lotus – Colin Chapman’s team
      Lotus – formerly Renault, formerly Benetton
      Caterham – formerly known as Team Lotus and Lotus Racing (though clearly not affiliated with the original team to bear the Team Lotus name)

      In 2012 there isn’t a team called Renault so they shouldn’t really be listed as a 2012 team.

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 10th January 2012, 12:03

        In 2012 there isn’t a team called Renault so they shouldn’t really be listed as a 2012 team.

        The sixth paragraph makes that quite clear. The Renault and Virgin pages have been updated accordingly, that’s why they’re included at the end of the list, after the identities that have replaced them.

        • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 12:19

          I take your point but I disagree with the way you’ve listed the Lotus teams. I realise it’s a difficult decision to make but I don’t think you can count the team competing as Lotus in 2012 as a continuation of the team founded by Chapman. It just doesn’t make any sense. It’s a rebranding of the team which previously raced as renault and benetton, and the team history section should reflect that. Yet when you click on Lotus it tells you about Chapman and gives the Team Lotus stats. They’re not even called the same thing, so it’s hard to understand why you’ve done it that way.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 10th January 2012, 12:37

            I explained my point of view on the team names situation last year:

            Lotus vs Lotus: Time to stop the nonsense

            The FIA have seen fit to allow one team to take over a name another team were using last year. I don’t like it, and I think those involved should have treated this historic name with a lot more respect, but that’s the way it is.

            I’ve been having this discussion with people in one form or another for over 12 months and it’s well beyond words like “boring” and “tedious” now.

          • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 13:09

            That’s not the case though. I know it’s boring, but it’s important to get it right, no?

            Team Lotus are becoming Caterham. Renault are becoming Lotus. Renault aren’t being given anything which Team Lotus had. They’re a totally different team. Do you think that Lotus (2012) will be considered to be the team which came 10th in the constructors’ championship last year? They won’t. The FIA/FOM aren’t considering the 2012 Lotus team to be the same team which raced as Team Lotus in 2011, and they’re not being given any claim to the history of the Chapman team.

            I just don’t understand why you’re counting them as the same thing, since nobody else is.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 10th January 2012, 13:12

            I just don’t understand why you’re counting them as the same thing, since nobody else is.

            Read the article I just linked to. I can’t make it much plainer than that.

          • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 13:30

            I did see the article, and all it explains is that to avoid ambiguity the FIA decided in 2011 to describe the Lotus Renault team as Renault, and the Team Lotus team as Lotus. This makes sense, but I can’t see how this impacts upon the current arrangement going forward from 2012. The FIA may have decided to refer to Team Lotus as Lotus, but they were still technically called Team Lotus. They weren’t a manufacturer team, and had no backing. If anything, this new Lotus team should just be considered to be a totally new team in its own right.

            The names may be similar but they are very clearly not the same thing. Either physically, or in the complicated world of trademarks and intellectual property. Team Lotus has ceased to be, and has disappeared from F1.

            I don’t believe the FIA ever stated that they considered either 1Malaysia or Renault to be inheriting the history of the Chapman team. If you can point me to something which states that, then maybe I’ll understand. But as far as I’m concerned, and as far as I can tell the FIA agree with me, the 2012 Lotus team are a totally new entity who can make no claim to any history other than perhaps that of the Renault and Benetton teams.

            Sorry Keith. I know it may seem like I’m labouring a fairly inconsequential point, but I’m not having a pop at you about it. It’s a stupid situation caused by posturing by two foreign busnessmen, neither of which has any business going anywhere near the history of that great name. I feel like the history of the original Lotus team ended in the mid nineties, and while Lotus Cars have decided to place an entry from 2012, they’re totally distinct.

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 10th January 2012, 19:14

            Well, Chris, it is important (i agree, that it would have been better to leave that name be altogether).

            But I would say that the fact Fernandes secured the rights to the Team Lotus heritage (from D. Hunt who kept them alive since 1994) would provide the link, and the court sessions these parties had seem to point at that as well.
            Fernandes parted with those rights and sold them to the enstone outfit (or to Lotus Cars who back the Enstone team). How are we to discern between them buying rights and actually buying teams rights or intellectual property rights on chassis?

      • electrolite (@electrolite) said on 10th January 2012, 12:22

        In the graphs, however, where he has plotted Renault (Now Lotus’) results, that was when the team was Renault, and not Lotus. Having Lotus plotted as dominating in 2005-2006 would be much more confusing in my eyes.

        • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 12:27

          I just think the lineage should be from the team itself, regardless of name. You can’t just change your name and then inherit decades of motorsport history, which you had no part in. And I’m sure the (probably relatively few, admittedly) people in the 2012 Lotus team who contributed to the championships in the mid noughties would like to just ignore everything they worked so hard to achieve.

          • electrolite (@electrolite) said on 10th January 2012, 12:31

            Agreed, but seeing as no 2012 results have been plotted yet, I don’t think it’s a problem on the graphs we have at the minute. We can worry about that next year :P

          • John H (@john-h) said on 10th January 2012, 14:21

            people in the 2012 Lotus team who contributed to the championships in the mid noughties would like to just ignore everything they worked so hard to achieve

            I know this blog is somewhat important (certainly to us lot), but seriously, I don’t think it is that important!

  4. Tiago Carvalho (@tiagocomodoro) said on 10th January 2012, 12:02

    I think its very understandable, good job!

    In my eyes, Lotus were, and now they are a Car manufacturer.
    Renault does not exist anymore, since 2009, but as it seems the name was keeped even in the official f1 website, now, we can consider Renault as dead on 2011.

    2012 is the same car manufacturer who Colin Chapman built.

    • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 12:31

      It’s still not the same thing as the old Team Lotus team, though. Team Lotus wasn’t technically a constructor – Team Lotus was a legally distinct entity from Lotus Engineering (Chapman did this intentionally to protect its assets in the case of the car company going bust) so Team Lotus were technically an independent team, not a constructor. Lotus, as in the road car manufacturer, never had an F1 team until 2010.

      • Gridlock (@gridlock) said on 10th January 2012, 12:54

        Thats disingenuous though, like suggesting that Ferrari have never entered F1, only Scuderia Ferrari. The separation was a financial necessity from the manufacturer’s point of view but was never meant to enable the racing outfit to be chopped off from the manufacturer.

        • Chris Goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 13:05

          That’s exactly what it was meant for – in case there was a problem with the car business, it meant that the team wouldn’t be affected. It’s the reason why the Team Lotus name wasn’t attached to the manufacturer, enabling Fernandez to buy it against the wishes of Lotus Cars. It’s a unique setup – all other manufacturer teams are owned by the parent company. Team Lotus wasn’t, and that’s why they weren’t a manufacturer.

          The point being that Lotus, as they will race in 2012, are not the same thing as, or a continuation of anything to do with, Team Lotus.

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 10th January 2012, 19:20

            It was the other way around actually Chris.

            The racing team was seperate to avoid the car builder risking any liability issues in case of a big accident, something stemming from the horrible accident of LeMans that made Mercedes pull out of F1 in the 50′.

            It is surely not the same team, but by now they do so with the intellectual property and trademarks of the original team (they bought it from Fernandes, who aquired it from David Hunt), weather we like it or not.

          • Chris goldsmith said on 10th January 2012, 22:14

            Thats not the case though. Renault are racing as Lotus Renault (lotus chassis, Renault engine) in 2012. Not Team Lotus. Hence what I’m saying that it’s not the same thing as using the Team Lotus name, as they’re not doing this whether they own the rights to do it or not. They really aren’t, in any sense, linked with Team Lotus. They’re effectively a totally new team. Otherwise we’d have to say they came 10th in the constructors’ championship last year, which would make no sense.

            Sorry everyone. I know it really is very dull and pedantic.

  5. verstappen (@verstappen) said on 10th January 2012, 13:20

    Heeeey!!! What about Lotus? And Lotus? And Caterham and Fernandes and Chapman and Bahar and Heritage and Enstone and Renault and Benneton and Toleman and …. ooowwwww I’m sooo confused!!!!

    * yawn *

    Thanks @KeithCollantine for updating the site. As far as I’m concerned, all is in order now.

  6. matt90 (@matt90) said on 10th January 2012, 15:50

    I love how the mess caused by Lotus/Renault has led to them being credited with 9 total championships, when it should only be 2 if you look at recent history or 4 (2 of which aren’t ones counted by the table) if you follow the team back logically.

  7. west (@west) said on 10th January 2012, 16:22

    Lotus vs lotus the chapman and bahar and so on is confusing and the mercedes please can you update that, but so far this year you are coming up with good updates and feedback thanks @keithcollantine, good job.

  8. Cyclops_PL (@cyclops_pl) said on 10th January 2012, 19:14

    As far as I’m concern, there should be three separate Lotus entities there. One for historic Team Lotus, one for 1 Malaysia/Lotus Racing/Caterham and one for Renault/Lotus, all with clear distinction.

  9. Weasel (@weasel) said on 10th January 2012, 20:12

    FYI, on the Force India team page (http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-information/f1-teams/force-india-f1-team/), the link at the bottom for “Browse all Force India articles” actually takes you to http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/category/renault/

    On each team page, the browse option just takes you to the most recent articles in which the team was merely mentioned. For a more complete overview of the team, it might be handy if you could provide cherry-picked articles on the team pages (from time to time, when an article strikes you as particularly significant in regards to the team in question).

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 10th January 2012, 21:21

      @Weasel Thanks, I’ve fixed the Force India error.

      For a more complete overview of the team, it might be handy if you could provide cherry-picked articles on the team pages

      That’s such a good idea I already had it! On several of the pages (Ferrari, McLaren, Lotus etc…) you’ll noticed they have “featured articles” which do just that.

  10. manatcna (@manatcna) said on 10th January 2012, 23:02

    Looks fine to me

  11. matthewf1 (@) said on 11th January 2012, 0:03

    Click on the Lotus page, it says the following:

    Active years: 1958-1994, 2010-
    Previous identities: Toleman
    (1981-1985), Benetton
    (1986-2001), Renault (2002-2012)

    So, not only were Lotus active in 1958-1994, they concurrently raced as Toleman in 1981-1985, and Benetton from 1986. If you are saying this then you have to say that MSC won the championship for Lotus in 1994 and 1995.

    There should not be any mention of Toleman or Benetton (or Renault) on the Lotus page.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 11th January 2012, 8:17

      @matthewf1 The current Lotus team was Renault last year and Benetton before that, etc… They were based in the same factory, hence it’s relevant (if confusing) information. Other pages have similar information (e.g. Mercedes and Force India).

      The phrase “don’t shoot the messenger” springs to mind.

  12. This would be so much easier if when you wanted to rename a team you had to build a new factory.

  13. Solo (@solo) said on 16th January 2012, 11:08

    I think one thing is missing. Each teams page should at least have written the constructors and drivers championship they won along with wins and poles. Some of that can be found by studying the graph but seriously it’s a hassle for someone that just wants to see the number of wins or championships.

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.