Jump to content


Photo
* - - - - 2 votes

So, the new turbo engines 'kept Mercedes in F1'


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#51 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,588 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 09 April 2014 - 19:20

It also show why none of the Manufacturers should be made part of the ownership group. They are not in it for the long haul.

 

:cool:



Advertisement

#52 SanDiegoGo

SanDiegoGo
  • Member

  • 625 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 09 April 2014 - 19:25

This shows that Mercedes are only interested in the short term wrt F1 and are not really committed to motorsport as a reason to be as a manufacturer.

 

They will stay only for as long as the the F1 'powers that be' will bend to their demands, ie turbo PU's (Merc technology which just so happens to be dominant). I would say that the slap on the wrist by the 'independent' International Tribunal for their illegal testing last season was also resulting from not to subtle treats to leave.

 Utter toss. Mercedes have been in it for the sport for the past 20 years or have you forgotten the manufacturer that powered your teams cars? You sound like a bitter ex. Pathetic. :rolleyes:

 

The ill-informed bull that is being spouted in this thread and about the PU in general is embarrassing for people who claim to be F1 fans, but yet can't be arsed to do simple research about these new regulations and what it means to the sport. And if weren't for these new regulations Honda wouldn't be coming back and McLaren wouldn't have a pot to piss in.



#53 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 1,908 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:12

So is Mateschitz hinting at Red Bull possibly pulling out for 'non-sporting regulations' (meaning we aren't winning) any different to a works team pulling out, as presumably he would pull Torro Rosso out as well.
So Ferrari have been in F1 all the time, except the times when they threw the toys out of the pram over start money and didn't turn up (but of course that was due to 'metalworkers strikes' and hence outside Ferraris control).
Who's to say that Fiat won't get fed and pull the Ferrari cash either.

#54 pathogen

pathogen
  • Member

  • 149 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:29

Point is that the manufacturers come and go with one exception, Mercedes and Renault leaving would not kill F1, and would not make F1 a one engine formula, the hole left by a Mercedes and Renault withdrawal would be filled.

 

Discussion of teams coming, going, disappearing is for another thread.

 

:cool:

Teams ˝come and go˝ is part of the thread. A lot of teams has their roots and evolution on manufacturers role. They are interdependent now and this won't change, is part of the F1 bussinnes. New fans, people on their 20's or 30`s didn't saw the old model. They didn't care. Manufacturers (with or without turbo or DRS or Kers) are core in

current model. I hate the come and go, but they are on control of the show... big time!



#55 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,588 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:29

So is Mateschitz hinting at Red Bull possibly pulling out for 'non-sporting regulations' (meaning we aren't winning) any different to a works team pulling out, as presumably he would pull Torro Rosso out as well.
So Ferrari have been in F1 all the time, except the times when they threw the toys out of the pram over start money and didn't turn up (but of course that was due to 'metalworkers strikes' and hence outside Ferraris control).
Who's to say that Fiat won't get fed and pull the Ferrari cash either.

 

Yes an engine Manufacturer leaving is not same as a Team disappearing, sometimes they go bankrupt and just stop working as an entity, most times in the past the remains of a team or their license have been taken over by a company interested in becoming a F1 team. Like how Red Bull came to being through the acquisition of Jaguar (and many many other examples). If Red Bull were to find F1 no longer something for them, they would sell the teams to another company willing and interested in taking the challenge of F1 up.

 

:cool:



#56 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,588 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:31

Teams ˝come and go˝ is part of the thread. A lot of teams has their roots and evolution on manufacturers role. They are interdependent now and this won't change, is part of the F1 bussinnes. New fans, people on their 20's or 30`s didn't saw the old model. They didn't care. Manufacturers (with or without turbo or DRS or Kers) are core in

current model. I hate the come and go, but they are on control of the show... big time!

 

Not sure what you mean here, possible that I just replied in my previous post.

 

:cool:



#57 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:37

From some of the comments on here about it being a scare story/PR waffle, I begin to wonder if some posters actually read the article.
From my reading, and being an ex-engineer, I admit I may not understand the nuances of language as well as some, it seemed to me he was saying that there would have been less incentive for Mercedes to remain in F1 with the old regulations, as it would have been more a marketing decision as to whether or not they continued, and that would be mainly determined on results.
The new regulations give them added reasons for continuing, although there is always the option for them to pull out if the marketing return is not worth the expense.
That also applies to any PU supplier or sponsor for that matter, and if we had smaller 'garage' engine manufacturers they would be even more dependent on the sponsorship the team could bring.

You're 100% correct. My concern is that they have openly said "it's only good as long as we're winning," whatever that really means. It is no different for anyone else, true, but it seems like a statement aimed at the FIA as well as the public - keep it interesting/changing/etc. if you want us to hang here. Ho0w often can F1 afford to change as the demands of "relevance" change?



#58 MikeV1987

MikeV1987
  • Member

  • 1,714 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:43

I was under the impression this was common knowledge, I thought they hinted at something like this years ago unless I am thinking of Renault.



#59 pathogen

pathogen
  • Member

  • 149 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 09 April 2014 - 20:51

Not sure what you mean here, possible that I just replied in my previous post.

 

:cool:

sorry, double post. My mistake.



Advertisement

#60 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,877 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 09 April 2014 - 22:04

probably want to avoid becoming a joke like peogot did, or honda later on

 

but its worth remmbering manufactorers pump in money to the sport, and bring marketing and portray importance



#61 krod

krod
  • Member

  • 101 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 April 2014 - 22:32

And welcome one and all for yet ANOTHER meeting of the Flat Earth Society!



#62 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 10 April 2014 - 01:57

Mercedes have been in F1 since 1993, I don't believe this one bit...



#63 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 April 2014 - 02:26

 Utter toss. Mercedes have been in it for the sport for the past 20 years or have you forgotten the manufacturer that powered your teams cars? You sound like a bitter ex. Pathetic. :rolleyes:

 

The game has changed now that they are a works team and the entire operation is governed by an oversight board.  They are at any given time one 'strategic marketing decision' away from the Daimler Oversight Board voting to leave F1. They admitted to having this discussion which is very significant.

 

It means that everything is on the table if their money is at risk.


Edited by halifaxf1fan, 11 April 2014 - 00:31.


#64 garagetinkerer

garagetinkerer
  • Member

  • 2,731 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 10 April 2014 - 03:21

 Utter toss. Mercedes have been in it for the sport for the past 20 years or have you forgotten the manufacturer that powered your teams cars? You sound like a bitter ex. Pathetic. :rolleyes:

 

The ill-informed bull that is being spouted in this thread and about the PU in general is embarrassing for people who claim to be F1 fans, but yet can't be arsed to do simple research about these new regulations and what it means to the sport. And if weren't for these new regulations Honda wouldn't be coming back and McLaren wouldn't have a pot to piss in.

I see that Halifax already replied to you... i have not much else to say but reiterate the same.

 

Mercedes in 90's entered as an engine supplier. Winning races and championships as an engine supplier works just as well, as their racing team winning. However, it is not "utter toss" that there were a lot of rumours of them withdrawing from the sport, if they were punished/ found in violation of regulations (i have tried to be as accurate in reproducing what i had read at the time), which was suspiciously enough before the tribunal held the hearing. There were rumours even before that if Mercedes did not win and a fair bit in coming 2-3 years or so, they may withdraw as a manufacturer, and return to their old status as engine supplier.

 

Honda have been contemplating a return for a while. They do sell a lot of cars with engine capacity between 2.4-3 litres (Civic and Accord usually). They're also returning as an engine manufacturer. So nothing which discredits anyone saying that Mercedes may have had decided to bail if not for good results. Especially since one of the Mercedes guys is now saying as much. Why not take it at face value? Pretty sure Lauda has more knowledge about the "feeling" with the board.


Edited by garagetinkerer, 10 April 2014 - 03:30.


#65 garagetinkerer

garagetinkerer
  • Member

  • 2,731 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 10 April 2014 - 03:23

The game has changed now that they are a works team and the entire operation is govererned by an oversight board.  They are at any given time one 'strategic marketing decision' away from the Daimler Oversight Board voting to leave F1. They admitted to having this discussion which is very significant.

 

It means that everything is on the table if their money is at risk.

It is nothing new. Such rumours have been afloat since the beginning-mid 2012, iirc. Some know and acknowledge it, while some will choose to live in denial.

 

edit: This was the reason why i was quite non-plussed and concerned by Lewis' move to the team. Schumacher was there owing to his long-standing Mercedes connection (he wanted to show his appreciation for all Mercedes did for him)... Rosberg pretty much had nowhere to go. I mean, going to a manufacturer is rarely questioned, but this one was a bit funny given the presence of the team in F1 itself was anyone's guess. What with rumours of potential withdrawal being as frequent as they were. What was going on at the time was that Mercedes will give it may be 3 or so years at the max, before they decide if they will pull the plug, and go back to being an engine manufacturer..


Edited by garagetinkerer, 10 April 2014 - 03:29.


#66 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,877 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 April 2014 - 04:03

its worth remmbering they bought out brawn thinking the RRA would be in effect, and f1 would be cheap.... that seems like a great bit of salesmanship now doesnt it?



#67 garagetinkerer

garagetinkerer
  • Member

  • 2,731 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 10 April 2014 - 04:18

its worth remmbering they bought out brawn thinking the RRA would be in effect, and f1 would be cheap.... that seems like a great bit of salesmanship now doesnt it?

Don't quite think that was the case... Mercedes have been involved with F1 on an on-going basis for almost 2 decades before they decided to have a works team. Pretty sure there are costs involved which customer teams don't have. There is a lot of cost associated with developing engines. One of the key reasons why Ferrari always kicked and screamed when McLaren always pushed this before... McLaren were running free engines for a long time :p and next year, they're getting money and free engines (a twofer) if you believe the rumours that is. Mercedes is also in the same boat now. They have vetoed any costs reduction agreements for next year (along with Ferrari and RBR. RBR i think pay for their engines). I don't quite think that Mercedes ever thought that being a works team and an engine supplier was going to be cheap. If they did, well, they must have been high :D



#68 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,802 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 10 April 2014 - 09:17

I didn't know where to put this, it's a little off-topic. But I also didn't want to start a new thread for an unconfirmed rumour. Minardi is saying that the BMW board is looking into entering F1 again; apparently the new regs suit them as well. They claim German sources, so it would be nice if someone from that part of the world can look into it in more detail:

http://www.minardi.i...k-in-formula-1/

 

 


German rumour has it that a BMW Board of Directors has been fixed for the month of May to consider a coming back in F1 already for 2015.

 


Edited by boldhakka, 10 April 2014 - 09:18.


#69 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,683 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 April 2014 - 10:23

Unless they are well along the design stage already then I can't see them having an engine ready for 2015.


Edited by Clatter, 10 April 2014 - 10:24.


#70 PhilG

PhilG
  • Member

  • 474 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:45

The thing you need to remember in all this is that Lauda is a complete bell end.



#71 ReeVe

ReeVe
  • Member

  • 178 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:57

I didn't know where to put this, it's a little off-topic. But I also didn't want to start a new thread for an unconfirmed rumour. Minardi is saying that the BMW board is looking into entering F1 again; apparently the new regs suit them as well. They claim German sources, so it would be nice if someone from that part of the world can look into it in more detail:

http://www.minardi.i...k-in-formula-1/

 

I 'd be amazed if they can build an engine with so little lead time ...I mean even if they decide on May 1st and start working on May 2nd it's still just 8 months till 2015 pre-season testing starts.If the article said 2016 I might be more open to considering it plausible



#72 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 10 April 2014 - 12:34

Absurd.  If F1 doesn't warrant having a manufacturer involved on it's own merit's, then why bother?

 

A turbo V6 makes sense for *Mercedes* as an "economy car" engine, but that's not the path most of the world is taking.

 

I'd love F1 to go back to being a meritocracy.  The money involved without manufacturer assistance is still staggering, if a Redbull or McLaren can't come up with an engine on their own then let it be.   I'd rather teams run souped up unregulated box engine Chevy 350's than this ridiculous Goldbergian "regulation" contraption we must call a "power unit".



#73 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,807 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 April 2014 - 12:43

Absurd.  If F1 doesn't warrant having a manufacturer involved on it's own merit's, then why bother?

 

 

Everyone would love to do F1 if they could but at some point you have to justify the cost. Not so absurd if you're running a business. 



#74 vas04614

vas04614
  • Member

  • 329 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 10 April 2014 - 13:30

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/113381

 

 

Makes sense :up:



#75 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,676 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 10 April 2014 - 13:56

Absurd.  If F1 doesn't warrant having a manufacturer involved on it's own merit's, then why bother?

 

A turbo V6 makes sense for *Mercedes* as an "economy car" engine, but that's not the path most of the world is taking.

 

I'd love F1 to go back to being a meritocracy.  The money involved without manufacturer assistance is still staggering, if a Redbull or McLaren can't come up with an engine on their own then let it be.   I'd rather teams run souped up unregulated box engine Chevy 350's than this ridiculous Goldbergian "regulation" contraption we must call a "power unit".

So now in your imaginary universe it's just Merc that wants these engines.

 

In the real world it's Renault and Honda too, and pretty much every other manufacturer who's thinking about getting involved.



#76 garagetinkerer

garagetinkerer
  • Member

  • 2,731 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 10 April 2014 - 15:43

The thing you need to remember in all this is that Lauda is a complete bell end.

"a complete bell end" who knows what the board feels about this much more than most here in the forums, no?



#77 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 10 April 2014 - 22:59

So now in your imaginary universe it's just Merc that wants these engines.

 

 

 

 I suggest decaf.



#78 Seano

Seano
  • Member

  • 297 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 10 April 2014 - 23:42

 A straight 4 would have been more relevant than a V6 (Thanks Bernie - clearly dementia kicking in, can't wait for you to take an 8 year holiday in Germany).

 

Give them not one more kg of fuel and be utterly ruthless with the fuel flow rate.

 

This should be the territory of the mainstream manufacturers - I expect this years car's to be quicker than last years by the middle of the season while using significantly less fuel. Ferrari you have had plenty of time to change but if you can't or won't - well thanks for the memories of the last century. Dinosaurs are magnificent but  are creatures of the past not the future.

 

For TV companies mike up the circuit properly - the sound has changed. I like hearing the crowd, tyres, turbos and ERS whoosh. Silence GP2 a bit - noise is just manifestation of mechanical inefficiency and the idea that people need to wear protection for their hearing to watch sport is just crazy. It's still pretty damn loud!

 

Seano



#79 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 11 April 2014 - 00:38

Everyone would love to do F1 if they could but at some point you have to justify the cost. Not so absurd if you're running a business. 

 

 

The cost was made radically higher by introducing more complex engines.  The boards of these companies may be sold on the idea that these contraptions are "road car relevant", but if 2 years from now Mercedes is still on top, it will be like any other year: manufacturers will drop out.  There won't be more than 3 or so manufacturers interested in pursuing a scorched-earth spending policy, particularly as the global economy collapses.

 

Race on sunday, buy on monday needs to be brought back.  Make them run stock blocks/cranks/rods/pistons, ERS, and throw their money at making their actual road car engines better directly. 



Advertisement

#80 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,807 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 11 April 2014 - 01:14

I'm fine with that. But you have to deal with all the fans complaining that model isn't pure F1  :lol:



#81 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 11 April 2014 - 12:45

I'm fine with that. But you have to deal with all the fans complaining that model isn't pure F1  :lol:

And then we start the side debate about what "pure" means!



#82 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 7,942 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 11 April 2014 - 19:22

really, people are taking a Corporate PR report this seriously??? do people really believe Mercedes would've left the sport if they didn't win first 3 races??? also, the engine formula was decided upon 3 years ago, and now a corporate spokesperson says merc would've left if not for the new engine ... 

 

corporate drivel BS is not even worth reading. 

 

nothing to see here. ... move along.

 

This corporate spokesperson is the Daimler board member responsible for R&D within Daimler under which the F1 team and HPP reside. Toto and Paddy report to him.

I do believe R&D synergies help to spread and justify expenditure for a manufacturer in addition to it being a marketing platform, if you do it right.


Edited by Timstr11, 11 April 2014 - 19:26.


#83 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 April 2014 - 20:22

really, people are taking a Corporate PR report this seriously??? do people really believe Mercedes would've left the sport if they didn't win first 3 races??? also, the engine formula was decided upon 3 years ago, and now a corporate spokesperson says merc would've left if not for the new engine ... 

 

corporate drivel BS is not even worth reading. 

 

nothing to see here. ... move along.

 

Like it or not these are the type of people calling the shots at Mercedes.  For them it seems the marketing plan is what rules the racing not he other way round as it should be.


Edited by halifaxf1fan, 12 April 2014 - 02:20.


#84 Zoony

Zoony
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 11 April 2014 - 21:24

 

Race on sunday, buy on monday needs to be brought back.

 

It never went away... from touring cars and perhaps from sports cars. But, to me at least, F1 isn't about that. It has a history of not being remotely 'road car relevant', at least not until Max parachuted into Place de la Concorde and realised that he could start getting political by bringing in his safety campaigns and stars awards on the back of F1 publicity.

 

How relevant to road cars was ground effect and skirts? How relevant to road cars was the Tyrrell P34? How relevant to road cars was high pressure refuelling? Come to that, how relevant are Pirelli's ultra short life P Zero Zero tyres?

 

The best situation for F1 to involve manufacturers is to have them just fund engines, (Williams & McLaren Hondas; Williams Renaults; DFVs; McLaren Mercedes), but even that isn't perfect, because at some stage the manufacturers will usually up-ships and bugger off, (Williams & McLaren Hondas; Williams Renaults), at the whim of sales figures and board decisions. When they start running their own teams it always seems to end in tears, because they're being shown up as losers (Toyota, Honda, Renault Mk1). Even as engine suppliers they're fickle, and can leave because they feel that they're too successful and are 'only getting negative PR when something goes wrong', (Honda 1992; Renault 1997).

 

The fewer manufacturers teams are involved in F1 the better as far as I'm concerned.


Edited by Zoony, 11 April 2014 - 21:28.