Controversy
Red Bull Technology was generally regarded as a loop-hole used by Red Bull to run two teams (Red Bull Racing and Scuderia Toro Rosso) with the same car, which otherwise is prohibited in Formula One. The rival Spyker team lodged complaints about this early in the 2007 season, as they were direct competitors with Toro Rosso. However, they were rebuffed by the sport's ruling body, the FIA. The Williams team also believed the two cars were too similar.
Neither Red Bull Racing nor Scuderia Toro Rosso denied that what they ran was fundamentally the same chassis, but claimed that things such as separate development programs, differing engines as well as the fact that the chassis was designed by neither team made it legal. The two cars in question were the Scuderia Toro Rosso STR2 and the Red Bull RB3, with each team claiming that they owned the intellectual rights to their car.
Although their cars were virtually identical, with both sharing the quick-shift gearbox technology which debuted at the 2007 Spanish Grand Prix, the results of Toro Rosso had left a lot to be desired considering the hype surrounding their car earlier in the year as well as the controversy of the chassis's origins in Red Bull Technology. However, Toro Rosso eclipsed Red Bull Racing in the 2008 season by finishing 6th in the Constructors championship with 39 points, compared to Red Bull Racing's 7th place with 29 points. This effort was helped by winning the Italian Grand Prix, with Sebastian Vettel claiming a first pole position and the first win for himself and the team.
From 2010 onwards, new rules brought in to Formula One outlawed the use of identical cars between teams, and Scuderia Toro Rosso can no longer share chassis designs with Red Bull Racing. Each team now designs and builds their own chassis in house.
Read more about this topic: Red Bull Technology
Famous quotes containing the word controversy:
“And therefore, as when there is a controversy in an account, the parties must by their own accord, set up for right Reason, the Reason of some Arbitrator, or Judge, to whose sentence, they will both stand, or their controversy must either come to blows, or be undecided, for want of a right Reason constituted by Nature; so is it also in all debates of what kind soever.”
—Thomas Hobbes (1579–1688)
“Ours was a highly activist administration, with a lot of controversy involved ... but I’m not sure that it would be inconsistent with my own political nature to do it differently if I had it to do all over again.”
—Jimmy Carter (James Earl Carter, Jr.)