Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

2 new teams in F1 in 2015


  • Please log in to reply
555 replies to this topic

#101 Eff One 2002

Eff One 2002
  • Member

  • 868 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 12 April 2014 - 03:49

So what if they're just some more backmarkers? We had hopeless contenders filling up the grid for most of F1 history and someone has to be last after all. F1 needs more teams to give talented rookies a chance to impress even if they aren't connected to one of the big teams. 

Exactly. I'd be very happy if we had once again had a full grid of 26 cars for the first time since 1995. The more teams in F1, ther better. There's always going to be someone at the rear that's not all that competetive making up the numbers and as you say, this has been the case in F1 since the beginning. Good to hear that Haas has a confirmed entry now. Here's hoping it works out for them.  


Edited by Eff One 2002, 12 April 2014 - 04:13.


Advertisement

#102 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,189 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 12 April 2014 - 04:58

pagenaud and hinchcliffe will be the ideal choice for Haas ... one for tallent and other for shenanigans  :p

 

who knows maybe Honda be interested in supplying this team, honda of USA is a huge enough corporation, maybe Sato will be development driver.

 

newgarden as reserve. that'd be my ideal lineup for Haas F1.



#103 wonk123

wonk123
  • Member

  • 924 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 April 2014 - 06:09

OK, Time to starting hiring.

 

Who is on our list? Do we start at the top? TP, I assume Gene will be smart enough to hire someone with experience and a track record in F1.

Rumours suggest Gunther Steiner, but exactly what will his position be?

 

Head designer. Who is available, or can be poached? Rumours (again) of a Dallara chassis, but will the design be from Haas or inhouse?

 

Lots of questions about a base. Obviously in season there needs to be a European base, but would you really move it away from Windshear?

 

Talking of windshear. If they manage to get some decent aerodynamicists, then they have the perfect tool to exploit. As they are not yet in F1, I assume unlimited full scale testing, this however depends on them producing a car lol



#104 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,562 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 06:13

Dallara have all the facilities and design engineers to produce the chassis. Unlike Campos Meta I fully expect Haas to pay Dallara. Not sure if they can use Windshear since the FIA have outlawed certain wind tunnels.



#105 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,562 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 06:18

Forza Rossa? Ferrari customer team? Surely a jest? Satellite teams only work if the main team is successful and does not take resources from the works outfit. Honda had to pull the plug on Super Aguri.



#106 wonk123

wonk123
  • Member

  • 924 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 April 2014 - 06:18

Dallara have all the facilities and design engineers to produce the chassis. Unlike Campos Meta I fully expect Haas to pay Dallara. Not sure if they can use Windshear since the FIA have outlawed certain wind tunnels.

 

I wonder though if they test at windshear before the season starts, a little bit like honda can be out testing their new engine? It will also be interesting to watch the lobbying re Windshear "Hey we don't have access to a 60% tunnel, just this Lil 'Ol 100% rolling road in our back yard"

 

Maybe they will secretly hire Laurel Hill from Chip Gannasi ha ha ha



#107 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,948 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 06:50

I really hope its not another "Dallara chassis" confirmed backmarker outfit. I hope they get good investment and backing and do something real. I can't see a team that can't make its own chassis have any medium term future...talkless of long term.



#108 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,562 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 07:06

Your take on Dallara deserves further scrutiny;

Firstly, Campos never paid Dallara , resulting in an iteration 1 car that was never developed throughout 2010. Even then it was still within 105% of pole time.

Secondly, for whatever reason Kolles undermined the Dallara collaboration. His decision to cut the co-operation ultimately killed HRT. In 2012 when HRT were forced to produce their own chassis, they ended up with a Frankenstein hack with components sourced from all over Europe and the handling of  a shopping trolley.

And Kolles' entry is under serious consideration for an F1 slot?


Edited by Petroltorque, 12 April 2014 - 07:08.


#109 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 1,556 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 12 April 2014 - 08:27

Your take on Dallara deserves further scrutiny;

Firstly, Campos never paid Dallara , resulting in an iteration 1 car that was never developed throughout 2010. Even then it was still within 105% of pole time.

Secondly, for whatever reason Kolles undermined the Dallara collaboration. His decision to cut the co-operation ultimately killed HRT. In 2012 when HRT were forced to produce their own chassis, they ended up with a Frankenstein hack with components sourced from all over Europe and the handling of  a shopping trolley.

And Kolles' entry is under serious consideration for an F1 slot?

 

Good post. I think that chassisproducers like Dallara (HRT) often get the blame for producing a bad product while closer scrutiny reveals it was what the buyers did with the chassis after it was delivered.

 

Look what Scuderia Italia did with Dallara's chassis in 1989, 1990 and 1991. Several top-six finishes, a podium here and there. Not bad at all.

 

I think also that the new rules favour third party chassis more than the earlier rules. I daresay that the rules between 2009 and 2013 were dominated by aerodynamic know-how, which costs a lot engineering power (Newey, ahem) and time to experiment (windtunnel, ontrack, etc). I think a slightly less developed aerodynamic car with a Mercedes-PU could be a nice midfielder nowadays.



#110 AVA1

AVA1
  • New Member

  • 19 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 12 April 2014 - 10:35

Does haas have racing colours?

#111 rmac923

rmac923
  • Member

  • 431 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 12 April 2014 - 11:18

Does haas have racing colours?

In Nascar, If Haas has self sponsor a car for a race, the livery is black with red.

 

If the team does use Ford Cosworth engines, I wouldn't be surprised if they ran traditional white with blue stripes.



#112 northanmonkee2

northanmonkee2
  • Member

  • 54 posts
  • Joined: February 14

Posted 12 April 2014 - 11:20

At a World Motor Sport Council meeting in Morocco, the governing body approved the 2015 entry of Californian Gene Haas’ outfit, called Haas Formula.

And the FIA said "further investigations" are ongoing for another "high standard" application filed by Forza Rossa.

It is believed Forza Rossa is the name of former HRT boss Kolles’ new Romanian-backed project.

However, Friday’s news was even better for Haas, despite the fact his Nascar team co-owner, Tony Stewart, is not involved in the new project.

"Now the really hard work begins," Haas said in a statement on Friday.

Last week, he had warned that the entire project was "up in the air", including the identity of the team’s 2015 engine supplier.

"As things go forward it will be clearer, but you can’t really do anything until we actually have been notified that we’re a participant," he had said.

He seemed to contradict speculation he could bring the Ford name back to the grid, in collaboration with the former F1 supplier Cosworth.

"There’s only three engine suppliers, you’ve got Renault, Mercedes, Ferrari," said Haas.

"Next year there will be Honda, but probably Honda is not really viable.

"We have talked to Mercedes and with Ferrari, just preliminary discussions, but we haven’t nailed anything down yet. I guess that would be the next move," he revealed.

 

http://motorsport.ne...Haas,75193.html



#113 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 386 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 12:49

I'd push as much as possible for a Merc engine if I were Haas



#114 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,741 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 12 April 2014 - 12:58

Forza Rossa is the company that runs the Ferrari dealership and Ferrari store in Bucharest, so that would indicate that the person running that company is indeed Kolles' big Romanian investor.



#115 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,045 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 12 April 2014 - 13:33

Forza Rossa is the company that runs the Ferrari dealership and Ferrari store in Bucharest, so that would indicate that the person running that company is indeed Kolles' big Romanian investor.

 

I am intrigued that being a Ferrari dealer in Romania generate enough profit to fund a F1 team, or at least to the extent funds which make them a possible entry in the eyes of the FIA.

 

:cool:



#116 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,741 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 12 April 2014 - 13:38

I am intrigued that being a Ferrari dealer in Romania generate enough profit to fund a F1 team, or at least to the extent funds which make them a possible entry in the eyes of the FIA.

 

:cool:

 

The person in question was also an ex-government minister as far as I'm aware, so there are perhaps some contacts in that area, and some government funding being called into this effort. Not sure how well that would sit with the Romanian public though.



#117 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 386 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 13:44

If they got an entry, surely Forza Rossa would be one of the strangest F1 teams of all time?



#118 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 386 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 13:55

So, lets do a round-up of what we know:

 

Haas has (okay never say Haas 'has' anything, it just sounds weird) his own wind tunnel, used by F1 teams. So that Haas :-) to be a big boost, that could probably be in the midfield in a few years.

 

I actually think being based in the US is a great idea. For one, the have American sponsors (virtually) all to themselves, plus they could hire the very best in American engineering and aerodynamic talent from across the country.

 

2015 CAR

 

The HS01 (as we will codename it for now) will be desgined by Dallara. Dallara got a lot of stick last time because they made an F1 car (HRT, 2010) because they had the funding to develop the car cut off by HRT, so they ended up with a slightly mobile chicane to drive. Haas looks like he can fund the development of the car. If think he will view 2015 as a 'test the water' year, whilst preparing a bigger (non-dallara) operation for 2016. Haas stated he had two choices when it came to Engine, Ferrari and Mercedes. If this Forza Rossa gets entry, then he can kiss goodbye to a Ferrari PU. If I were him, I would go for Merc. I hope the livery is not as it is on their NASCAR team (black and red). We have enough Black and Red on the grid with Marussia and Ferrari.

 

DRIVERS

 

Its really hard to see who he will get to drive next year. Possibly Rossi and Patrick?



#119 Freytheviking

Freytheviking
  • New Member

  • 11 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 12 April 2014 - 13:56

FIA granting Haas entry is a no-brainer. Here are a couple of reasons why:

1) Established team. Say what you will about NASCAR but to run any championship winning race operation requires a very skilled staff. They will already have a lot of the necessary manufacturing capability of a modern F1 Team.

2) Haas Automation. Gene Haas actually owns the CNC equipment company that most racing teams use to manufacture their cars. So don't really need to pay much money there.

3) Windshear. Haas owns the best and largest wind tunnel in the world. I think it is even equipped with a "rolling" road so that engineers can capture aerodynamic data and its interaction with a simulates surface. I wouldn't be surprised if some F1 teams actually rented hours in this thing. This is probably their trump car for car development.

4) F1 gaining popularity in US. 1 race in Austin, 2 planned in NJ and Long Beach, F1 is finally starting to break back in to the US. Not to mention NBCSports buying the rights to F1. The viewers in the US are also more valuable on a per head basis than anywhere in the world. Having a decent home team might finally seal the deal. Bernie is very damn happy right now.

Advertisement

#120 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,562 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 14:02

I too am intrigued as to this concept of government funding. If the government money is being used to set up a technology centre which trains and recruits high quality engineers, I can see a benefit. However if it's just a means of sequestering government money into off shore accounts the FIA should black ball them now.

#121 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,045 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 12 April 2014 - 14:13

I too am intrigued as to this concept of government funding. If the government money is being used to set up a technology centre which trains and recruits high quality engineers, I can see a benefit. However if it's just a means of sequestering government money into off shore accounts the FIA should black ball them now.

 

I have a possibly unfounded very low view of the Romanian level of transparency and corruption.

 

:cool:



#122 McLaren

McLaren
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 14:22

FIA granting Haas entry is a no-brainer. Here are a couple of reasons why:

1) Established team. Say what you will about NASCAR but to run any championship winning race operation requires a very skilled staff. They will already have a lot of the necessary manufacturing capability of a modern F1 Team.

2) Haas Automation. Gene Haas actually owns the CNC equipment company that most racing teams use to manufacture their cars. So don't really need to pay much money there.

3) Windshear. Haas owns the best and largest wind tunnel in the world. I think it is even equipped with a "rolling" road so that engineers can capture aerodynamic data and its interaction with a simulates surface. I wouldn't be surprised if some F1 teams actually rented hours in this thing. This is probably their trump car for car development.

4) F1 gaining popularity in US. 1 race in Austin, 2 planned in NJ and Long Beach, F1 is finally starting to break back in to the US. Not to mention NBCSports buying the rights to F1. The viewers in the US are also more valuable on a per head basis than anywhere in the world. Having a decent home team might finally seal the deal. Bernie is very damn happy right now.

 

Can you please expand on that, as I don't understand why that would be?



#123 Newbrray

Newbrray
  • Member

  • 751 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 14:53

Good on him gaining an entry. Although I think being based in America will be a logistical nightmare.



#124 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,045 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 12 April 2014 - 14:56

Can you please expand on that, as I don't understand why that would be?

 

Consumerism run amok.

 

:cool:



#125 MikeV1987

MikeV1987
  • Member

  • 1,269 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 12 April 2014 - 15:26


 I wouldn't be surprised if some F1 teams actually rented hours in this thing. This is probably their trump car for car development.

Lotus used it IIRC.



#126 kandru

kandru
  • Member

  • 177 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 12 April 2014 - 16:30

The second team accepted is not Stefan GP, it is a Romanian consortium lead by Colin Kolles. 

 

 

The more teams the better, I'd be delighted with 26 cars on the grid once again, how long it's been since we last had that, 1994? More teams = more action = more chances for drivers = more changes for new engineers, designers and staff = more back-ups to retain some competition in the case other teams start going bankrupt.
 
Though if one of the entries is Stefan I'd shut the door on him, I think he's a lunatic and/or a scammer and wouldn't take the risk of putting him in the paddock even if he has Kolles on board.

 

'Even if he has Kolles on board'??? I would say, ESPECIALLY SINCE he has Kolles onboard. The further that guy is from F1, the better



#127 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,424 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 12 April 2014 - 16:31

I too am intrigued as to this concept of government funding. If the government money is being used to set up a technology centre which trains and recruits high quality engineers, I can see a benefit. However if it's just a means of sequestering government money into off shore accounts the FIA should black ball them now.

Half of the WC rounds are at circuits funded by government money, so why should the FIA baulk at a team getting funding that way?  As other have in the past of course, such as state owned oil and tobacco companies, not to mention state owned car manufacturers (Renault for one).  Not that I approve of government money being wasted in this way.

 

As for Haas, it is interesting that all the same justifications (NC being centre of US racing scene, local wind tunnel, access to all these massive US sponsors, good old Yankee can-do spirit etc etc) were also paraded for USF1 when that was first proposed.  The only substantial difference that I can see is that Haas does have some real motor racing credentials, although how much NASCAR experience will be helpful in F1 remains to be seen.  I wish them well, but will wait until I see a proper F1 racing car moving under its own power. 

 

Or a toaster of course.



#128 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,036 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 17:43

I think Haas is the kind of entrant F1 should be attracting. A racing company, involved in a top level national series and with plenty of facilities to get the job done (at least in theory). I've said for a while that F1 should be where any racing team worth their salt should be aiming to be.

 

I've had enough of investment companies, dodgy businessmen and "national teams". Hell I've even had enough of works manufacturer teams, though I think they should be supporting the sport with engines and other technology.

 

No, I want to see racing teams.



#129 DinocoBlue

DinocoBlue
  • Member

  • 419 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 18:50

Well Forza Rossa hasn't been given the go ahead yet, I presume naming them was a sign that things are going well for their bid, but it could still get refused. Time will tell.



#130 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,816 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 April 2014 - 19:51

I wish Haas the best, but the last American team to make an impact on Grand Prix racing did so in 1921, so I don't hold out much hope.  Every subsequent American effort has based themselves in England.  Indeed most American single seater efforts over the last couple of decades have been at best disappointing.  Remember the Falcon Indycar? 



#131 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,180 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 12 April 2014 - 19:53

 Remember the Falcon Indycar? 

 

Errr..... no  :D



#132 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 1,855 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:15

I wish Haas the best, but the last American team to make an impact on Grand Prix racing did so in 1921, so I don't hold out much hope.  Every subsequent American effort has based themselves in England.  Indeed most American single seater efforts over the last couple of decades have been at best disappointing.  Remember the Falcon Indycar? 

Whilst it's true that Dan Gurney's Anglo-American Racing team was run from a base in Rye, East Sussex, the Eagle T1G chassis were built in Santa Ana, California. The short-lived Scarab F1 effort of 1960 also featured a California-built chassis and (unlike the Eagle) an American-built engine too.



#133 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 9,427 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:23

'Even if he has Kolles on board'??? I would say, ESPECIALLY SINCE he has Kolles onboard. The further that guy is from F1, the better

 

I get your point but that was in the context of an hypothetical association with Stefan. Kolles is a questionable character but he's at least managed to get running a couple of F1 teams, whereas Stefan...



#134 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 178 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:31

Whilst it's true that Dan Gurney's Anglo-American Racing team was run from a base in Rye, East Sussex, the Eagle T1G chassis were built in Santa Ana, California. The short-lived Scarab F1 effort of 1960 also featured a California-built chassis and (unlike the Eagle) an American-built engine too.

 

So, in 64 years of Formula 1, there has been ONE win from a USA built car (with a British built engine). This is something to brag about?



#135 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,816 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:32

The short-lived Scarab F1 effort of 1960 also featured a California-built chassis and (unlike the Eagle) an American-built engine too.

 

Point proved...



#136 Lotus72b

Lotus72b
  • Member

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:37

Me too!!! Syke!!!! :wave:



#137 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,610 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:38

usf1 had dreams and toasters, Haas actually owns a bunch of stuff, and nascar is a heavy investment in everything, 36 races and lots of repairs and devlopment and making stuff. sure theres the normal concerns, plus maybe hes gone abit "lotus". (expanded to 4 cars this year)

a dallara designed car makes sense, and that might be able to made at the indycar center?



#138 NotAPineapple

NotAPineapple
  • Member

  • 93 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:45

 As they are not yet in F1, I assume unlimited full scale testing, this however depends on them producing a car lol

 

I assume that the fact that they've been accepted officially means that they are now bound by the testing rules...



#139 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,552 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:45

Good post. I think that chassisproducers like Dallara (HRT) often get the blame for producing a bad product while closer scrutiny reveals it was what the buyers did with the chassis after it was delivered.

 

Look what Scuderia Italia did with Dallara's chassis in 1989, 1990 and 1991. Several top-six finishes, a podium here and there. Not bad at all.

 

I think also that the new rules favour third party chassis more than the earlier rules. I daresay that the rules between 2009 and 2013 were dominated by aerodynamic know-how, which costs a lot engineering power (Newey, ahem) and time to experiment (windtunnel, ontrack, etc). I think a slightly less developed aerodynamic car with a Mercedes-PU could be a nice midfielder nowadays.

 

Unfortunately, results in the early nineties are hardly relevant. Successful chassis manufacturers of that period such as Reynard no longer exist. Dallara got the blame for producing a bad product, because that's exactly what they did according to Geoff Willis. Kolles gets a bad reputation on this board, and to me it seems utterly baseless. He knows how to run an F1 team, and there is something about F1 that favours those players familiar with the game. I would have thought Gene Haas would be on the phone to a certain Mr. Whitmarsh to get him on board ASAP.


Edited by Disgrace, 12 April 2014 - 21:46.


Advertisement

#140 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 1,855 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:48

So, in 64 years of Formula 1, there has been ONE win from a USA built car (with a British built engine). This is something to brag about?

Strictly speaking, two wins - Dan Gurney also won the 1967 non-Championship Race of Champions at Brands Hatch in the Eagle-Weslake. Not a great record it's true - but more than for example, Arrows, Toyota or Jaguar F1 achieved.



#141 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 1,556 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 12 April 2014 - 21:56

Unfortunately, results in the early nineties are hardly relevant. Successful chassis manufacturers of that period such as Reynard no longer exist. Dallara got the blame for producing a bad product, because that's exactly what they did according to Geoff Willis. Kolles gets a bad reputation on this board, and to me it seems utterly baseless. He knows how to run an F1 team, and there is something about F1 that favours those players familiar with the game. I would have thought Gene Haas would be on the phone to a certain Mr. Whitmarsh to get him on board ASAP.

 

You are right, the nineties are hardly relevant. But the 10's (2010-2013) neither because with the new rules the whole game has changed significantly. I think that to succeed in the last past eight years you either had to have a idiotic good and simple aerodynamic idea (Brawn) or an aerodynamic genius aboard (Newey), because the powerplants were a. effing reliable b. differed very little in hp, torque and petrol use. The big difference was made in aerodynamic packaging (tight!) and clever stuff like blown diffusors, flexible undertrays andsoforth.

 

I think it will take at least five years before the power units of Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari and Honda will be as close and reliable compared with eachother as they were in the past eight years. That means that aerodynamics will be less dominant than in 2006-2013.

 

That offers chassisproducers as Dallara a good chance, methinks.



#142 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,552 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 22:03

...

 

As for Haas, it is interesting that all the same justifications (NC being centre of US racing scene, local wind tunnel, access to all these massive US sponsors, good old Yankee can-do spirit etc etc) were also paraded for USF1 when that was first proposed.  The only substantial difference that I can see is that Haas does have some real motor racing credentials, although how much NASCAR experience will be helpful in F1 remains to be seen.  I wish them well, but will wait until I see a proper F1 racing car moving under its own power. 

 

Or a toaster of course.

 

Ultimately, a large majority (other than the logistical side) of the US theme is superficial brouhaha. Beyond that, USF1 was nothing but the equivalent of a tech start-up, which was reflected in their marketing and their outcome. What you describe as the "only" substantial difference is a very substantial one indeed: Haas is already a racing team.



#143 HoldenRT

HoldenRT
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 12 April 2014 - 22:05

Was hoping for a better effort when USF1 failed and didn't take the pleasure in it, that some did.

 

Now there seems to be a better chance, maybe it's still against the odds and difficult but seems like a better chance.  Wish them well.. it'd be interesting to see, especially if they have some success.



#144 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,552 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 22:08

You are right, the nineties are hardly relevant. But the 10's (2010-2013) neither because with the new rules the whole game has changed significantly. I think that to succeed in the last past eight years you either had to have a idiotic good and simple aerodynamic idea (Brawn) or an aerodynamic genius aboard (Newey), because the powerplants were a. effing reliable b. differed very little in hp, torque and petrol use. The big difference was made in aerodynamic packaging (tight!) and clever stuff like blown diffusors, flexible undertrays andsoforth.

 

I think it will take at least five years before the power units of Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari and Honda will be as close and reliable compared with eachother as they were in the past eight years. That means that aerodynamics will be less dominant than in 2006-2013.

 

That offers chassisproducers as Dallara a good chance, methinks.

 

Interesting analysis, to be honest this isn't something I had given much thought about in the context of the new rules. I wonder which chassis producer would be interested, Dallara presumably already make enough of a fortune from drivers such as Cecotto and Viso in their cars over the years.



#145 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 178 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 12 April 2014 - 22:10

Strictly speaking, two wins - Dan Gurney also won the 1967 non-Championship Race of Champions at Brands Hatch in the Eagle-Weslake. Not a great record it's true - but more than for example, Arrows, Toyota or Jaguar F1 achieved.

 

Heikki Kovalainen won the ROC against Michael Schumacher in his prime. Does this make HK better than MS? The clue is in the name. Non Championship. Jaguar, BTW, went on to win 4 WDC and WCC championships.In addition, Arrows managed a best of 5th in the WCC, and Toyota 4th, whereas the best the All American Racers managed in the WCC was 7th. So, Arrows and Toyota beat AAR, whilst Jaguar equaled their 7th then went on to win 4 WDC and WCC titles.

 

I think you should just admit that American involvement in F1 has been abysmal.



#146 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 6,015 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 22:32

Heikki Kovalainen won the ROC against Michael Schumacher in his prime. Does this make HK better than MS? The clue is in the name. Non Championship. Jaguar, BTW, went on to win 4 WDC and WCC championships.In addition, Arrows managed a best of 5th in the WCC, and Toyota 4th, whereas the best the All American Racers managed in the WCC was 7th. So, Arrows and Toyota beat AAR, whilst Jaguar equaled their 7th then went on to win 4 WDC and WCC titles.

 

I think you should just admit that American involvement in F1 has been abysmal.

 

That's not the same Race of Champions...



#147 wonk123

wonk123
  • Member

  • 924 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 April 2014 - 23:15

Half of the WC rounds are at circuits funded by government money, so why should the FIA baulk at a team getting funding that way?  As other have in the past of course, such as state owned oil and tobacco companies, not to mention state owned car manufacturers (Renault for one).  Not that I approve of government money being wasted in this way.

 

As for Haas, it is interesting that all the same justifications (NC being centre of US racing scene, local wind tunnel, access to all these massive US sponsors, good old Yankee can-do spirit etc etc) were also paraded for USF1 when that was first proposed.  The only substantial difference that I can see is that Haas does have some real motor racing credentials, although how much NASCAR experience will be helpful in F1 remains to be seen.  I wish them well, but will wait until I see a proper F1 racing car moving under its own power. 

 

Or a toaster of course.

 

I think his $750 million net worth may be an advantage as well



#148 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 1,855 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 12 April 2014 - 23:25

Heikki Kovalainen won the ROC against Michael Schumacher in his prime. Does this make HK better than MS? The clue is in the name. Non Championship. Jaguar, BTW, went on to win 4 WDC and WCC championships.In addition, Arrows managed a best of 5th in the WCC, and Toyota 4th, whereas the best the All American Racers managed in the WCC was 7th. So, Arrows and Toyota beat AAR, whilst Jaguar equaled their 7th then went on to win 4 WDC and WCC titles.

 

I think you should just admit that American involvement in F1 has been abysmal.

The 1967 Race of Champions was an F1 race that featured a representative field, including John Surtees (Honda), Bruce McLaren (McLaren), Jack Brabham & Denny Hulme (Brabham), Lorenzo Bandini & Ludovico Scarfiotti (Ferrari), Jochen Rindt & Pedro Rodriguez (Cooper), Jacky Ickx & Jean-Pierre Beltoise (Matra), Jo Siffert (Rob Walker Cooper), Mike Spence (Reg Parnell) and several lesser-known privateers. Very different from the scripted "entertainment" that bears a similar name.

 

Jaguar F1 did not go on to win 4 WDC and WCC - Red Bull Racing did. The same factory but a very different team. In my book, winning a Grand Prix is a greater achievement than scraping a 4th or 5th in the WCC. Dan Gurney's Anglo-American Racers won a Grand Prix, Arrows, Toyota and Jaguar never did. I'm not an American and I have no great love for that country but the Eagle was one of the great F1 cars, sadly too often let down by its British-built Weslake engine.



#149 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 1,947 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 12 April 2014 - 23:41

Why, though? They know Mercedes is destroying everyone - and they have a spot for 2015.

 

 

 

 

Like what? Google barely does any marketing. Oracle has what, the America's Cup and then who watches that? Both can reach out to a much bigger audience via F1. That applies more for Google than Oracle, given its consumer-oriented business. Google still has awareness issues with Android (barely anyone knows it's Google-engineered/owned) and could benefit from tying the brand up with an F1 team... or maybe Microsoft too, who knows (but they would have to dump Lotus). 

Google and Oracle both do a lot of marketing.  You just aren't seeing it.  Oracle is B2B, no need to for consumer facing marketing and much of the technology they license is restricted for export.  Marketing in F1 is a bad value proposition not just for them but for consumer based  companies as well.  That is one of the reasons it's difficult to get any F1 sponsorship.  There are better, less expensive ways to get that sort of exposure particularly if you are targeting a US market.



#150 helioseism

helioseism
  • Member

  • 1,429 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 12 April 2014 - 23:59

Well I will be rooting for Haas in the face of the European backlash. I think y'all are worried that y'all gonna be whipped by the 'mericans. :lol: