Comply or Die.

[Il_leone]

the costs in F1 are sky high but also the sponsorship sources are getting more scarce. All the cars use to be tobacco sponsored and looked at how many have them now since the ad ban was introduced in the EU.

The next area is banks and most of them reduced their sponsorship during the recession so we go to other sources and that is oil potentially. So if the revenue streams for all teams falls then it makes finishing in the constructors more important.

It is not helped when you have engine manufacturers who pretty much can name their own price to lease engines to teams if you are not a works team

 

[RasputinLives]

I've said it before but the solution for me is the engine manufacturers to have the contract with the FIA not the teams. Each engine manufacturer is asked to produce a certain amount of engines and supply a certain amount of support staff. Then the teams are supplied the engine by the FIA/FOM.

Every 2 or 3 years the teams would submit a pick for an engine with a draft system - for instants the first pick goes to the team with the most points since last pick - and the engines are allocated to the teams. It would mean every team would pay the same for the engine, every engine would be the same, every team would get an engine, every 2 to 3 years everything would be shaken about and it would mean an even spread of the engines across the field.

On top of which it would also mean more financial security for the engine makers as their bills would be paid by the FIA/FOM and not the teams, meaning they wouldn't be be left with a big loss if a team goes belly up - The FIA/FOM would. This in turn means the FIA/FOM would have more of an interest in making sure all the teams survived financially meaning they'd have to put more effort into making the whole sort more secure.

I know with how things are at the moment it will never happen but it is a solution.

 

[soccerman17]

The only problem is that the top teams would all pick the best engines, then would remain the top teams. The bottom teams would be stuck with the worst engine, so as a result all of that engine manufacturer's cars would be towards the back of the field. They would then quit due to the negative publicity of their engines being slowest (which would be much more exaggerated than it is now), and we would slowly lose manufacturers.

 

[RasputinLives]

Yeah I get that. They'd have to be a system for preference that took that into account.

Maybe work it like the draft system in American Football.

 

[marksawatsky]

We have a kart league that had trouble because some drivers always dominated. So we switched the points system and gave points for qualifying then we had the drivers line up for the race based on their season points, but inverted. The top points driver started at the back and the lowest point driver was on Pole. We have not found any faults with this system and I think it would make for very exciting races with the Mercedes drivers starting at the back and Marussia on Pole.

 

[Dash Racing]

You could always give the lowest points scoring team the first pick, and the highest scoring the last pick. Meanwhile, you give out the highest monetary prize to the highest scoring, and the lowest monetary prize to the lowest. This would mean that the teams who struggled the most should have the best engines, while the teams that struggled the least have the handicap of a lower quality engine.

 

[Il_leone]

F1 competes in the world of capitalism and every team is driven by $$$ that is why they exist in their own form. It's a free market but unfortunately those with greater influences will always look after themselves.

 

[Speshal]

I don't think VW will be supplying engines any time soon

 

[Il_leone]

I think VW have got serious problems in restoring their reputation and I think they will have enter F1 especially as the US is a big market for all car companies and it will hurt their sales if they are being driven out of the US market

 

[Bill Boddy]

VW's Matthias Mueller: Recall to start in January - BBC News

'Mr Mueller told employees at VW's Wolfsburg home plant in Germany the firm is facing changes that "will not be painless."

All investments that were not deemed absolutely necessary would be abandoned or delayed, he said.'

That sounds to me very much like "F1 will be chopped".

 

[siffert_fan]

I really do not understand why people decry a so-called spec series option for F1.

In the past, there have been de-facto spec series eras for F1: the Coventry Climax era and the Cosworth epoch. The former gave birth to Lotus, Brabham, and Cooper, while the latter allowed Williams, McLaren, March etc to come into being. All this was possible because it was possible to buy a truly competitive power train over the counter, not at all like today.

Both eras also allowed the private entrant to have a chance against the major teams. The late great private entrant
Rob Walker had Stirling Moss driving his private entry Cooper Climax. In the Cosworth era, he entered a private Lotus with such drivers as Graham Hill, Jo Siffert and Mike Hailwood at the helm. He also gave Jochen Rindt his first F1 drive. Hesketh gave James Hunt (nickname at that time: the Shunt) his first F1 drive and was possibly the only way Hunt ever got a shot at F1, given his reputation. Lauda got his first F1 drives by entering a privately-owned March.

I really don't see how such a condition could possibly be a bad as things are today. In fact, such a series might actually make the WDC have some meaning again. If all of the knobs and switches on the wheel were banned and a spec manual transmission were required, as well as a return to "iron brakes" (without ABS) to make braking on the limit a true test of ability, driver skill would once more come to the fore.

I remember when Chapman first introduced the monocoque chassis on the Lotus 25. When Ron Tauranac, designer of the Brabham F1 cars, was asked why he was refusing to accept such a structure and was sticking with the tubular space frame construction, replied "the fastest thing about the monocoque is Jim Clark".

Can anyone truly imagine someone today claiming that "the fastest thing about the Mercedes is Hamilton"?

 

[P1]

I don't see the issue as long as there are multiple manufacturers.

It has always been the case that there are only 3-4 teams capable of winning a championship and only 1-2 teams capable of doing it in a given year.

I like the arrival of manufacturers because it increases the relevance of the sport. I can't go out and buy a Red Bull to drive myself, but I can go and buy a Mercedes, McLaren, Renault or Ferrari.

I think the link to their exciting road cars is what makes Ferrari so iconic, and the absence of this makes Williams less iconic.

 

[Il_leone]

the issue with manufacturers is always how much influence should they have on the sport? They come and compete when it suits them and leave when it does not

 

[P1]

the issue with manufacturers is always how much influence should they have on the sport? They come and compete when it suits them and leave when it does not

The same can be said of non-manufacturer teams.

The two oldest teams in the Sport - Ferrari and Mercedes - are manufacturers.

Regular teams seems to come and go all the time - Caterham, Virgin, HRT, Marussia, Jordan, Benetton. The only non-manufacture team with real staying power is Williams.

If you go back to the 1950 season of F1 - the teams were:
Ferrari (OEM)
Talbot (OEM)
Maserati (OEM)
Alfa Romeo (OEM)
Milano
Simca-Gordini (OEM - division of Renault)
Cooper
ERA (OEM)

If you look at the first 20 years of Formula One Constructors champions - it is also mostly manufacturers (in bold)
1950 Alfa Romeo
1951 Alfa Romeo
1952 Ferrari
1953 Ferrari
1954 Mercedes
1955 Mercedes
1956 Ferrari
1957 Maserati
1958 Ferrari
1959 Cooper
1960 Cooper
1961 Ferrari
1962 BRM
1963 Lotus
1964 Ferrari
1965 Lotus
1966 Brabham
1967 Brabham
1968 Lotus
1969 Matra
1970 Lotus

So mostly manufacturers there.

The reality is that it is the nature of sport for teams to come and go. Even in the world of football - England has not been in every world cup. At times they can't field a decent team. Same is true of F1 teams - at times they become so bad they can't survive and others come in to fill the void.

To me F1 is interesting as long as OEMs are competing.

Because at the end of the day, this is about our love of cars. And cars are made by companies like Ferrari, McLaren, Lamborghini, McLaren, Aston Martin, BMW, Audi, Ford, GM, Renault, Toyota and Honda. These are the names I want to see on the track - not Joe Bloggs Racecars.

Without the manufacturers, F1 becomes a curiosity like those guys who build custom cars for land speed records. Those are interesting, but they have nothing to do with our love of cars.

 

[Il_leone]

I would like to see manufacturers in the sport because it can only be good for F1 if they are competing at the pinnacle of motorsport

The only issue I have is when they quit because they suddenly realise they are getting a serious beating before fighting through adversity to be competitive again. I take BMW and Toyota for example they were influential behind the rules for 2009 season and when they realised that other teams have outsmarted them on rules they made they then decided to quit F1

It is that sort of attitude why you don't want manufacturers influencing F1

 

[rufus_mcdufus]

But non-manufacturers quit too...

 

[siffert_fan]

Batman

I'm not sure that Lotus should be included as a manufacturer. The selling of Lotus road cars (some in kit form) and the establishment of Team Lotus were virtually simultaneous. Chapman was already a hardcore racer and he basically decided to sell road cars (Thank God that included the 7) to finance his race team. He didn't start racing to add lustre to the road cars' reputations.

And from it's establishment in the 40s all the way through the mid 60s, most of the cars that Ferrari built, including the 166s, 340s and 250 GTs of various marks, were largely homologation specials. They were thinly disguised race cars, built so that Enzo could meed the production requirements set out for cars to compete, primarily at Le Mans. That was a bigger priority for him than Formula One at that time.

 

[P1]

The more I think about this, I think the sport should strengthen the value proposition for Manufacturers. What would be awesome if you could be allowed to own up to 2 teams running the same chassis and engine.

This way for the same R&D budget, Ferrari could field an A team (Ferrari) and a B team (Alfa Romeo). Mercedes could field a B team under the Aston martin brand, and McLaren could run a B team as Honda, Renault-Nissan could run their A team as Infiniti and their B team as Renault. The expanded advertising exposure for their secondary brands could be huge.

Plus the B teams could be real contenders for wins because they would have same chassis and engine as the A team.

In this world view there would be tighter battles, because even with a dominant team like Mercedes, you would still have 4 drivers and 2 brands capable of winning title.

 

[Il_leone]

Mercedes usually ran a policy of an experienced driver paired with a rookie or young driver in their sportscar and DTM days so I would not mind if Mercedes actually fielded two teams that were allowed to race each other. I mean I think in DTM they use to have 3 AMG teams