Engines - partnerships - Manufacturers becoming engine suppliers only...
#1
Posted 16 May 2013 - 18:29
Arguably almost all the manufacturers have finally accepted that unless your name is Ferrari, then you can not be a manufacturer and titel winning entry in F1. I am obviously aware that Renault did win
with Alonso, but will argue that was really a team fully funded by Renault, but for all intents and purposes a team in mold of McLaren, Sauber, Bennetton.
With Mercedes as the lone holdout, and Ferrari the special case they are 2015 will give us something like
[codebox]Ferrari - The number 1 Ferrari engined team.
Sauber - Ferrari customer engines.
Marussia - Ferrari customer engines
Red Bull - The number 1 Renault engined team
Williams - Renault customer engines
Caterham - Renault customer engines
Toro Roso - Renault customer engines
Lotus - Renault customer engines
Mercedes - The number 1 Mercedes engined team.
Force India - Mercedes customer engines
McLaren - The number 1 Honda engined team[/codebox]
I am presuming that Marrussia will end with Ferrari engines, and that Toro Roso will go the way of official Red Bull B team on the engine side as well. And I are placing Lotus with Renault since they used to be the Renault team. So the mix is not optimal, The FIA would prefer 3 + 3 + 3 + 2 and for a 12th team to show as soon as possible. I can actually see how Lotus could be the one becoming second Honda team, I do think that the potential to be fielding a better engine than most by using a Honda is there.
Will this prompt other manufacturers to jump in? Despite the constant denials I still see a VW, AUDI, Porche, Skoda F1 engine happening eventually. Toyota have decided to once again go for the Le Mans win, they may manage that this time. But if Honda is in F1 and getting headlines after slinking out of F1, I can see them wanting to join again, but not to become anything but an engine manufacturer this time around.
The world economy will improve and smart, sound business acumen could bring some of the current small teams to the points scoring positions. My guess will be on Sauber being first in line, and if Toyota happens for Williams to be there.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 16 May 2013 - 18:57
I hope not.
#3
Posted 16 May 2013 - 19:17
I hope yes.
#4
Posted 16 May 2013 - 19:32
Manufacturers becoming engine suppliers only?
I hope yes.
+1
Gotta agree
#5
Posted 16 May 2013 - 19:54
I'd prefer a Jordan or Ligier any day over one of the manufacturer teams!!!
And back in the 1990s, the question which team would have which engine actually added a lot to the silly season each year! Especially McLaren had quite a wild ride through the 1990s engine-wise. I think we now have quite fixed alliances due to the complicated integrated drivetrain, technological cooperation, cooperation on non F1 projects, corporate identity and financial complexities, which will mean that we won't see too much action on the supplier front.
Nevertheless, I like to keep teams and engine suppliers separated. Most healthy situation for both sides!
#6
Posted 16 May 2013 - 19:56
Other manufactuers I think would want a big name #1 team in their ranks and I dont know who that would be with Ferrari, Red Bull and Mclaren taken. Lotus, maybe, but I think Lotus are probably pretty keen on staying with Renault for the time being.
We'll see how big a difference different engine performance makes first. I dont think many manufacturers are going to be all that excited about joining up if they all prove to be pretty comparable.
#7
Posted 16 May 2013 - 20:05
#8
Posted 16 May 2013 - 20:10
I dont think being a 'works' team has quite the advantage it used to.looks like lotus will be left out to dry since big four teams are all works team and she isn't
#9
Posted 16 May 2013 - 20:15
BMW butchered Sauber? Whom are you kidding? BMW Sauber partnership, whilst it lasted, was one of a competitive team, a contender on the grid in extremely short period. Where is your Sauber-privateer today? Ask Hulk, how he feels about it.I never saw the Honda and Renault teams as the most exciting ones, yet I acknowledged their past as F1 teams, so it was ok. But Toyota was really the bottom of that development. Imagine a whole grid of them! However: at least Toyota did not butcher a team as BMW did (both Sauber and Williams were lucky to actually survive BMW's ambitions). The fact that I do not miss Benetton too much is probably linked to their former team principal and their history of, well, pursuing victory at any cost.
I'd prefer a Jordan or Ligier any day over one of the manufacturer teams!!!
And back in the 1990s, the question which team would have which engine actually added a lot to the silly season each year! Especially McLaren had quite a wild ride through the 1990s engine-wise. I think we now have quite fixed alliances due to the complicated integrated drivetrain, technological cooperation, cooperation on non F1 projects, corporate identity and financial complexities, which will mean that we won't see too much action on the supplier front.
Nevertheless, I like to keep teams and engine suppliers separated. Most healthy situation for both sides!
#10
Posted 16 May 2013 - 20:24
I dont think being a 'works' team has quite the advantage it used to.
in new engine refulations it certainly is
#11
Posted 16 May 2013 - 20:44
BMW butchered Sauber? Whom are you kidding? BMW Sauber partnership, whilst it lasted, was one of a competitive team, a contender on the grid in extremely short period. Where is your Sauber-privateer today? Ask Hulk, how he feels about it.
I think he's talking about the way BMW got rid of Sauber.
Either BMW were incompetent or malicious, its difficult to tell.
#12
Posted 16 May 2013 - 21:00
I think he's talking about the way BMW got rid of Sauber.
Either BMW were incompetent or malicious, its difficult to tell.
F1 is a risky business, and Peter Sauber was fully appraised, and came to understanding of the corporate objectives of that period. Nothing special or unusual, IMO.
#13
Posted 16 May 2013 - 21:08
F1 is a risky business, and Peter Sauber was fully appraised, and came to understanding of the corporate objectives of that period. Nothing special or unusual, IMO.
Claiming several times to have done due diligence that QADBAK was a kosher (or should that be halal?) company to sell the team to despite them being banned from owning football teams in the UK and headed by a guy with a history of fraud would indicate to me that BMW are incompetent in this regard. I think you should look into the history of that investment fund which pretended to have investors from the Middle East who mysteriously evaporated when any cash was actually required.
BMW insisted that the sale of the team to QADBAK was going ahead for months, during which the team sponsors who had been with Sauber for years fled. They could obviously see what BMW refused to, that QADBAK was a sham. A brilliant sponsorship portfolio assembled over many many years frittered away by incompetence.
That BMW insisted on selling the team to Peter Sauber for $20 million when Honda gave away their team for £1 could be regarded as good business or cynical knowing the value the team's survival had for the Swiss.
#14
Posted 16 May 2013 - 21:42
That BMW insisted on selling the team to Peter Sauber for $20 million when Honda gave away their team for £1 could be regarded as good business or cynical knowing the value the team's survival had for the Swiss.
Ehh... what?
I don't tend to support the manufacturer's side, but BMW hardly had to give out the team for free - they legally owned it, it was theirs.
#15
Posted 16 May 2013 - 22:28
#16
Posted 16 May 2013 - 22:45
I thought there is a rule for engine manufacturer to supply (at least) two teams on the grid? If that's the case, who's Honda's second team?
Marussia would be the speculative favourite, given they have a McLaren technical partnership. Otherwise, it will be a current Renault-powered team as they've indicated they wish to cut down the number of teams they supply.
Edited by Disgrace, 16 May 2013 - 22:47.
#17
Posted 16 May 2013 - 22:49
#18
Posted 16 May 2013 - 23:16
I thought there is a rule for engine manufacturer to supply (at least) two teams on the grid? If that's the case, who's Honda's second team?
There's a rule they have to be able to supply, but not that they have to.
#19
Posted 16 May 2013 - 23:42
That BMW insisted on selling the team to Peter Sauber for $20 million when Honda gave away their team for £1 could be regarded as good business or cynical knowing the value the team's survival had for the Swiss.
I believe the difference was that Honda had signed the concorde so they would have had to pay Bernie to leave F1 (so they had an incentive to transfer the entry to someone) whereas BMW hadn't signed the concorde so they weren't in any particular rush/need to sell
Advertisement
#20
Posted 17 May 2013 - 06:00
Marussia would be the speculative favourite, given they have a McLaren technical partnership. Otherwise, it will be a current Renault-powered team as they've indicated they wish to cut down the number of teams they supply.
According to Pat Symonds, atm Marussia is looking like getting Ferrari engines next year. But ofcourse for a team like Marussia, the price of the engines is probably the most important thing. If Honda's engines are cheaper, then they might change. Otherwise i feel that for continuity reasons they would stay with Ferrari (or whoever their engine supplier is next year).
#21
Posted 17 May 2013 - 08:23
Just ask Eddie Jordan and Craig Pollock about the importance of 'works' team lol. Does anyone else remember this?I dont think being a 'works' team has quite the advantage it used to.
#22
Posted 17 May 2013 - 09:16
#23
Posted 17 May 2013 - 10:22
It makes it good for the engine manufacturer that they can develop their engines, and good for the team as they have a close relationship with a manufacturer.
Problem is, I doubt seeing this happen because of the engine freeze regulations.
#24
Posted 17 May 2013 - 10:55
did brawn actually pay 1 pound to honda ?
Yes he did and the pound would actually have to change hands. Basic British contract law, you can't give something for nothing. So instead of giving it to him for free, they gave to him for one pound.
However in reality Honda sent the team on its merry way with a years' budget in the bank. So they essentially paid Brawn to take it away and run it for a year. That's a hell of an honourable thing to do.
#25
Posted 17 May 2013 - 11:04
+1 on them returning to their place, which is between the fire wall and the gear box.
#26
Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:02
#27
Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:13
I would love a Ford manufacturer team, not the cheap Cosworth engine version of Ford.Rumours from our friend @joseluisf1; Ford may be coming to F1 again...
#28
Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:20
There's no reason to suggest that a Ford-designed engine would be any better than a Cosworth.I would love a Ford manufacturer team, not the cheap Cosworth engine version of Ford.
#29
Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:08
Yes he did and the pound would actually have to change hands. Basic British contract law, you can't give something for nothing. So instead of giving it to him for free, they gave to him for one pound.
However in reality Honda sent the team on its merry way with a years' budget in the bank. So they essentially paid Brawn to take it away and run it for a year. That's a hell of an honourable thing to do.
agreed, this was in stark contrast to how BMW dealt which sauber at the same time
#30
Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:13
Rumours from our friend @joseluisf1; Ford may be coming to F1 again...
Stop teasing me!!
#31
Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:14
I dont think Honda would have came back without the partnership with Mclaren.
Other manufactuers I think would want a big name #1 team in their ranks and I dont know who that would be with Ferrari, Red Bull and Mclaren taken. Lotus, maybe, but I think Lotus are probably pretty keen on staying with Renault for the time being.
We'll see how big a difference different engine performance makes first. I dont think many manufacturers are going to be all that excited about joining up if they all prove to be pretty comparable.
I think most manufactures would be of the opposite opinion, there would be no kudos in trouncing the field every other weekend but if you where winning in a close field it would be great marketing for your brand.
#32
Posted 30 May 2013 - 14:15
#33
Posted 30 May 2013 - 15:15
Potentially Lotus as team? Enstone as Benetton had Ford badging their Cosworths until 1994.