Talk:Sauber Motorsport

message: The term coined by Honda's after hours F1 projects that were never seriously intended to enter the sport are covered in this rather fascinating article here. http://www.forix.com/8w/6thgear/neverraced.html
That said it's probably worth an article on its own explaining the concept better. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.240.44 (talk) 21:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've explained it as design studies in the text - what do you think? 4u1e 21:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Cool. 4u1e 22:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  F1 'weekend projects' 

message: This is all about the Sauber IMSA car-- http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/67873675&referer=brief_results
* Sauber-Mercedes C9 : the return of the Silver Arrows
* by Ian Bamsey
* Publisher:	Ramsbury : Crowood, 2006.
* ISBN:	9781861268365 186126836X
* OCLC:	67873675
Avail. at 	
* British Library 
* Cambridge Univ. Library
-- Guroadrunner (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional source 

message: BMW Sauber F1 Team is still the official name of the team, and that is not gonna be changed for a while. Source: http://formula-1.updatesport.com/news/article/1262683554/formula_one/F1headlines/BMW-name-remains-for-now/view.html. Someone should rebuild this article back, and continue BMW Sauber article. Case closed... for now. 81.197.79.202 (talk) 09:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I think this year's season should be covered in this article. The only reason for keeping 'BMW' in the name is a technicality. John Anderson  (talk) 14:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team's name 

message: We are labelling people with incorrect facts. Sauber have never won a race. It was BMW Sauber. BMW Sauber is a different company. Merger being re-discussed. The facts are incorrect. BMW Sauber is a different company. And sauber are going to be re-named officially. (Wiki id2(talk) 16:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you would like to look here: http://www.formula1.com/teams_and_drivers/teams/7/ They have won a race. BMW Sauber was not a completely different company. Just a renaming of the same company due to a change of ownership, which has now been reversed. Understand? - mspete93 20:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, a bought and renamed company is still the same company.The359 (Talk) 23:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is not, because if that was the case, we should merge Brawn GP and Mercedes GP. John Anderson  (talk) 18:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Brawn Grand Prix Limited and Mercedes-Benz Grand Prix Limited are still the same company, under new ownership and name. However, in this situation it is best to keep them in separate articles. We don't always need to use the same process in slightly similar situations like these. Each situation is different and needs to be treated differently. - mspete93 15:52, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree every situation is special and should be treated so. However, that goes against your own and 359's arguments from 9 May, where it seems you wanted to base your opinions in this case on a general principle. John Anderson  (talk) 05:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just showing there was evidence for Sauber having won a race. Again, if you look at formula1.com, Mercedes GP and Brawn are treated as separate teams, unlike Sauber and BMW Sauber. I wasn't saying they should/shouldn't be merged simply on that basis. What I meant was that when we have changes of ownership or name for a team we do not automatically have them in separate articles, or in the same article. Each team should be considered on a case-by-case basis. I was citing the F1 website to back up my opinion when it comes to the Sauber matter, not saying it should be merged simply because of that. - mspete93 17:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This very wrong. Sauber won the race. http://www.sauberf1team.com/en/season/race_statistics.cfm?t=2 , http://www.formula1.com/teams_and_drivers/teams/7/ , http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/championships/f1/2012/Pages/entry-list.aspx This wikipedia page shows false informations. This article nowhere says it's about Sauber as an independent team. It says it's about Sauber F1 Team. Unless this is made very clear in article that this about independent constructor, we should refer to official sources like FIA. I strongly recommend to use FIA criteria especially that there is no separate article about BMW Sauber and all official sources recognize Sauber as a winner. Possibly the Sauber stats has been changed retroactively by FIA, so we should refer to new stats. I also don't see why BMW in Formula One and Sauber shouldn't overlap some info.Krzyglo (talk) 16:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-oppose 

message: It says "The team went into the 1994 season as Sauber Mercedes, now officially Mercedes' works team". What does works team mean? I thought that was only a term for a car manufactors own team, owned and operated by the manufactor in question, but that does not seem to be the case here as Sauber was never what Mercedes GP is now. Only in 2006-2009 I thought Sauber was a works team for a major car manufactor, when it was owned by BMW and called BMW Sauber. The Great Cucumber (talk) 06:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with this, though my knowledge of F1 back then is patchy. - mspete93 15:26, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to the term factory-backed, which seems more appropriate. The Great Cucumber (talk) 02:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Works team for Mercedes? 

message: I'm just a casual visitor, but there is a chunk of the article that has been (I'm sure accidentally) omitted. The team results for the BMW-Sauber period of 2006-2009 are missing. It goes from the BMW-Sauber 2006-2009 heading to the results for the Sauber F1 results of 2010-2012.
LynnD71 (talk) 14:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Results this way. The results box on the article details only the results of the independent Sauber team, without BMW involvement. Craig(talk) 14:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, but in that case it is confusing that in the second section ("Formula One"), there is a detailed history of the BMW years. If that belongs on another page, then there should just be a link to the BMW history for 2006-2009. I think it makes more sense to include the history of BMW-Sauber here, since to most F1 followers it's the same team with a direct transfer of people, IP, designs, F1 entry, etc., at all times.  Either way however, a consistent approach to the inclusion of 2006-2009 would be clearer than having it in the textual history but not in the results.LynnD71 (talk) 15:12, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nowhere written that they are results of independent team or that the article is about independent Sauber team, so I suggest including BMW-Sauber results too. Official sources include BMW-Sauber results. http://www.sauberf1team.com/en/season/race_statistics.cfm?t=2 http://fia.com/en-GB/sport/championships/f1/2012/Pages/entry-list.aspx Unless this is made very clear in article that it is about independent team we should include BMW-Sauber results too. But as Sauber is recognized as a team that raced continuously since 1993 till now, I don't see any reason of creating article about independent Sauber team. BMW in Formula One article can overlap some stats, but I don't think this is wrong. --Krzyglo (talk) 19:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Krzyglo seems to be agreeing with me, but I think it makes best sense to include all the results of the team that is seen as organically the same organisation. The periods where the team was owned by BMW can be clearly marked, and can be repeated in the BMW Sauber (2006-2009) page if required, but for a normal reader, you expect and want to see all the results of the team.  This is clearly different to a case like BAR->Honda->Brawn->Mercedes, because at no point did that team return to a previous incarnation as Sauber has. Thanks. LynnD71 (talk) 10:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to add that as long as this is article about "Sauber F1 Team" as such we must include all past results, since they are recognized by FIA and other official sources. In this particular case I don't think this is wikipedia duty to make any criteria and use them to determine which results should be included or not, since we have official sources saying that Sauber is entitled to claim all BMW-Sauber results (including win and pole position): http://www.sauberf1team.com/en/season/race_statistics.cfm?t=2 , http://www.formula1.com/teams_and_drivers/teams/7/ , http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/championships/f1/2012/Pages/entry-list.aspx Brawn and Mercedes results are separated because FIA and teams said so.--Krzyglo (talk) 22:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I also believe that the 2006-2009 results should be included in the results table, and the infobox. DH85868993 (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team results from 2006-2009 missing 

message: Should the new BMW Sauber Navbox be included at the bottom of the page or not.
HRT F1 Team (talk) 19:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: BMW Sauber Navbox

message: I believe the total of 236 races competed by Sauber to be wrong.  Including , I have calculated the number to be 271 (as of the 2012 Japanese Grand Prix).  Is this just an error, or is there some reason behind this?  —Gyaro–Maguus— 11:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you count the BMW Sauber years in there? because they're not included on this page. Otherwise i've no idea how it could be so inaccurate. BosleyTree (talk) 12:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The total I calculated was from  to , and  to .  If 2010 is not included, then the number should be 252.  It looks like an early season of 16 races has not be counted, and nor has 2010.  This therefore must be an error.  252 or 271?  —Gyaro–Maguus— 12:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Races competed in infobox 

message: In my opinion, the transition between Sauber and BMW Sauber has not been described clearly enough in this article.
While this article claims that the team changed its name to BMW Sauber before the 2006 season, the information on F1.com (see links) does not match this claim. The 2006 constructors' championship standings display the team as Sauber-BMW, meaning that the constructor name was still Sauber at that point, while BMW engines were used. For the 2007 season, the constructor name has become just BMW, with no mention of the Sauber name at all. This becomes BMW Sauber in 2008 and the same name is used in 2009. What happens after that is mentioned in the article, as the team continues to be known as BMW Sauber in 2010, in spite of BMW's withdrawal.
While teams and constructors are distinct entities (although not to the same extent as a few decades ago), taking these changes into account is important, at least in the constructors' championship tables each season (the constructor is currently listed as BMW Sauber in the 2006 and 2007 season articles).
There are also similar cases with some other constructors. The constructor previously listed as RBR-Renault became Red Bull Racing-Renault in the F1.com championship standings as well as TV graphics in 2011 (the only difference is that F1.com uses a hyphen unlike the TV graphics). Super Aguri Honda was sometimes listed as just Aguri Honda in the TV graphics although this variation is not used on F1.com. YuckieDuck (talk) 14:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on Sauber/BMW Sauber 

message: In 2019 Sauber are renamed Alfa Romeo. So why are you not putting it in the Alfa Romeo in Formula One page. The reasons please? My Racer (talk) 11:03, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Alfa Romeo