Two or three car teams?

HammydiRestarules - I understand what you are saying about wanting to see a more level playing field with all teams having to work hard to succeed. However, is that not what a spec series is? I am sure you mean that you want to see all teams being able to make a competitive car without the need for further regulations. I too would like to see this, but unfortunately there is only on Adrian Newey.

No matter how frustrating it can be to watch the same team succeed every weekend they are there because they have utilized the rule book better than any other team. I know that there would be unforeseen issues with three car teams, however the positive would surely outweigh the positives.
 
How about the return of 1 car teams? ATS used to do a pretty good job and many "rich young men" used to but second hand cars and go racing. Maybe a championship for year old cars, single car teams, opening up the grid for young drivers to get a start?
 
FB let's try and do some back-of-the-fag-packet calculations

For a back of the grid team, if we assume a budget of £40 million.

The team will require an engine contract; this is normally about £10 million, but they may get a discount of 40%, due to fixed costs and intellectual property issues (And that during testing they will be presumably doing the same amount as other teams).
Engines - 6 million versus 10 million (4 million saving)

Design team: The design of the car will be unaffected - as they still need to design the same amount - so no saving here...

Manufacturing; There would be a saving of about 1/3 here - let's say on a budget of 20 million - so a saving of about 6 million... (I claim 1/3 as the 2 car teams have 3 chassis, as they have a spare tub, so we can also assume that the 1 car teams would need 2 tubs). Similarly for spare parts.

So, we have a saving so far of 10 million.

However, there is also the drivers to consider; At a back of the grid team, the drivers can each bring budgets of about 10 million. (E.g. Sergio Perez). So, by not running a second driver, there is an opportunity cost of 10 million.... So, they make 10 million of savings on running the team, but lose out on 10 million of driver investment (And also lose out as they only have half as many billboards on the track!) - So, how much cheaper is a 1 car team? I'd argue that it's unlikely to be that much cheaper to run - and could actually turn out to be more expensive than a 2 car team!

NB - These figures are all (educated) guesses, but it does demonstrate a very interesting possibility!
 
There's the personnel costs The Artist..... , not sure how much that would reduce by, plus the back of the grid teams have to pay their own transport costs so, again, not sure how much they would save. Fully accept you point on lost sponsorship from a 2nd driver.
 
FB good point- I'd actually semi deliberately ignored the personnel costs as these are likely to be low for a back of the grid team...

Mechanics could be reduced, but the design team and manufacturing teams would likely to be of a similar size (manufacturing would be slightly smaller as fewer parts need making)...

Caterham have about 200 staff... If we assume a loss of 1/3 of staff, at an average cost of 50k, that's about a 3 million saving....

Transport is another good point, but savings wouldn't be huge- again likely to be about 1/3.... (for the reasons given above)
 
Seems that this thread may have some life left in it after all.....almost two years on...

For me the twin goals of F1 are to find the best team and to find the best driver.... the best team usually wins over the course of a season but very often it seems the best driver does not as he's in the wrong car at the wrong time.

I love the underdog teams but there is so much wrong with the system and funding at present that they have no realistic chance to progress up to the top 4.

For me the solution is ;

1) introduce three car teams - scrap the team orders rule so that each driver is allowed to compete on equal terms.
2) only the highest placed driver gets Constructors points for the team but all drivers score points for themsleves (so a 1,2,3 for Merc gets Merc 25 points but each driver gets 25, 18 and 15 respectively). NB team points also flow down so if red Bull were 4th in this example the team would get 18 as they were the second constructor to finish but their driver would get 12!
3) equal distribution of F1 monies to all teams ; you can raise more in sponsorship if you want / need but each should start with the same technical rules and the same cash to spend. (NB I'd also at least try and introduce a cost cap for all excluding drivers salaries)

Far from ideal I grant you but you should get at least 3 and possibly 6 or even 9 drivers in with a chance at each race.
 
Last edited:
Think you may find the 3 car teams are coming for 2015.

The rumours of RBR & Ferrari already setting up 3 cars for next season becoming stronger & stronger in the press.

Think we'll probably also find the closed Winter break as more entertaining than the F1 season itself.

Assume we'll find out what all Sunday's slanging matches after the GP between the big 4 team principles, the 3 smaller team principle and Bernie, will mean for Sauber, Force India & Lotus. But it is looking like they may all have just a single race to run.

Apparently these 3 smaller teams are accusing the big 4 teams of engineering with the CVC to reduce the F1 grid to 5 or 6 teams, with some running 3 cars for 2015 and then Customer Cars being made available for supply from 2016.

#worrying
 
I'm struggling to see how it'll be fair for some teams to run 3 cars but not others? We already have one or two teams who have a 'sister' team - i.e Red Bull/Toro Rosso - and there have been cases where the sister team has acted as a mobile chicane to the advantage of the other partner team. This would mean the likes of RBR would have 5 or even 6 cars 'on their side'.
 
The "3-car provision" in the Concorde Agreement binds certain teams to running a third car if the grid falls to 16 cars, so unless somebody else goes belly up soon, then 3 car teams will not be happening.

Bernie has contracts saying that he'll deliver at least 18 cars. His only concern is that race promoters may not have to cough up their fee.
 
Bernie has allowed Ferrari and Red Bull apparently 3rd cars and Mclaren and Mercedes are next to be given priority
I think it will happen because Bernie needs to have 20 cars on the grid and the two teams gone don't look like they will be around in 2015
 
Call me a Luddite if you want, but something in me says that squeezing out the smaller teams by giving the lions' share of prize money to the big teams, then allowing (or forcing them) them to run three cars, is totally wrong, will be disastrous and will be the death knell of the sport.

But then perhaps it needs to die when it is so full of marketing gimmicks, when 17 year-olds with hardly any racing experience are allowed to drive in it, when it has been mismanaged to the point where it is so ridiculously expensive to compete in and those who run and regulate the sport are both clueless and spineless in controlling costs, sharing out prize money more equitably or indeed anything else.

I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but I might stop watching if the sport goes the way it looks like going.

And I never thought I'd hear myself say this:

Come back Max Mosley, all is forgiven!

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/210297/1/max-mosley-expects-more-f1-teams-to-fold.html
 
Il_leone - I think it used to be 20, but according to several sources the critical number is now 18. So unless Sauber, FI, or STR pack up shop soon then the grid will most likely consist of 18 cars next year and then hopefully back to 20 or more in 2016.
 
MOney has always been at the centre of the politics that Bernie is involved in promoting the sport

It will not go away - it depends who succeed after Bernie goes but they will never surrender their power to the teams
 
Back
Top Bottom