Both Danny Bahr and Tony Fernandes are guilty of attempting to benefit from Colin Chapman's legacy, and all they've done is make a back-team, bog down what could have been a decent mid-field team, and confuse F1 commentators.gridwalker wrote:Why are we even discussing the Exos? The pictures in the original post are clearly not of an Exos, which isn't even built by the same company (Renault F1 still being an independent business)!
The Exos was released by Group Lotus before they got involved with the Renault F1 team, whilst they were still licencing their name to Lotus Racing (soon to become Team Lotus). It was also designed and built by Group Lotus without the involvement of Lotus Racing, so they cannot claim any F1 pedigree through the team they were involved with at the time.
There is no direct connection between F1 and the Exos, as it was designed and built independently from the F1 teams carrying the Lotus name, so it really is trying to emulate F1 technology and cannot claim to be based on any of their genuine F1 efforts!
This is why I hate what Danny Bahr is doing with the Lotus brand : he is passing off Group Lotus as the genuine heirs of Chapman's legacy and cross marketing their road car arm using the achievements of independent F1 teams that owe NOTHING to Group Lotus.
This is the precise reason why I was totally against the "return" of Lotus to F1 in the first place ...
As for why the Exos was brought up, it was guessed that the original post was related to the Exos. It has been well determined that it is not.
