23 replies to this topic

[August]

Next year, there will be four car manufacturers in F1, unless you count the likes of McLaren and Caterham as manufacturers. But do you think there should be more manufacturers or does it even matter?

 

I think car manufacturers are important for the image of F1. They are brands people care about and are even passionate about. It doesn't make much difference if a team is owned by a car manufacturer or a soft drinks company but more people are interested about the car manufacturer, especially if it's a traditional racing brand.

 

Also, I think more car manufacturers mean more teams with works engines, that can mean more teams on the top.

[BobbyRicky]

The question should be:

Does car-manufacturers need F1?

Edited by BobbyRicky, 25 June 2014 - 20:29.

[biercemountain]

Yes and no. Teams like McLaren and Williams have such a long history in the sport they are important in and of themselves. Then there's Ferrari which is well…Ferrari. It remains to be seen how long Mercedes feels the expense of bankrolling an F1 team makes marketing sense. As long as they're winning everyone feels like genius. Once they're not, it becomes harder to justify.

 

And just out of curiosity, what does Infinity have to do with Red Bull beside paying to have a logo put on the side of their car? 

[Frank Tuesday]

Next year, there will be four car manufacturers in F1, unless you count the likes of McLaren and Caterham as manufacturers. But do you think there should be more manufacturers or does it even matter?

 

I'm curious how you are counting.  I count 7 in F1 currently as either car or engine mfg:  Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Lotus, Caterham, Marussia and Renault, and 8 next year with Honda joining (assuming Lotus, Marussia and Caterham survive). 

[Cabby]

Definitely helps.  In other sports, you have cities or country's that you can cheer for.   It's easier for casual fans to get into it.  In F1, you have the driver's country, which is mostly Europe and a few South American countries.  The rest of us just choose favourite drivers/teams or just like watching cars.

 

Having manufacturers gives casual fans someone to cheer for even if they only catch a few races a year.  Own a Toyota, cheer for the Toyota team, etc.

[PayasYouRace]

Next year, there will be four car manufacturers in F1, unless you count the likes of McLaren and Caterham as manufacturers. But do you think there should be more manufacturers or does it even matter?

 

I think car manufacturers are important for the image of F1. They are brands people care about and are even passionate about. It doesn't make much difference if a team is owned by a car manufacturer or a soft drinks company but more people are interested about the car manufacturer, especially if it's a traditional racing brand.

 

Also, I think more car manufacturers mean more teams with works engines, that can mean more teams on the top.

 

I agree that having a few manufacturers involved is good for F1, but the last bit is just silly.

 

It wasn't like that in the heyday of works engine supplies in the 90s, and it wasn't like that in the days of works teams in the 00s. It's exceedingly rare to have more than two teams on the top no matter who is involved.

[jee]

F1 simply needs to be open to new teams and no closed party.

Having no custom cars in lower formulas does not help generating new teams either.

[BullHead]

I always thought a happy relationship could be had with said car manufacturers simply around as engine suppliers. It would be a very different F1 privateer only. However, speed, technology, and sporting prowess would have to be top notch and gleaming for it to retain the 'big boy' image, and keep sponsor money and prestige flowing.

[BullHead]

There's cost cutting / budget capping solution right there, but thinking more about it, a pinnacle motorsport, with true motor racing heritage, really should be series where manufacturers own their own teams, so now I'll say, yes, F1 does need manufacturers.

To address the need for more privateers, the cost cutting has to come another way.

[KWSN - DSM]

Does F1 need car manufacturers? No.

 

[redreni]

Need? No.

 

Is it good to have car manufacturers? That depends. Brands that are associated with bland, dull, mass-produced road cars, I could take or leave. To me, they're like most of the other brands with a presence in F1 - I realise the importance to the sport of having corporate backers, but I don't care about Toyota or Renault any more than I do about Red Bull or PDVSA or Martini, or any other F1 sponsor. Marques that are known for making high end, beautiful road cars, sports cars etc are another matter. Ferrari, Mercedes, even Mclaren to an extent, are really good brands to have in F1, and the loss of those brands to the sport would matter in a way that the loss of other brands wouldn't. If Etihad or Petronas or Red Bull walked away, it would have a financial impact on the team concerned, but I don't think it would lessen the value of the F1 brand itself.

 

And there's another caveat to the notion that car manufacturers are good for F1 - they do tend to insist on regulation changes that are often daft, and incredibly burdensome for the non-manufacturer backed teams, or have unintended consequences (e.g. the loss of engine noise).

[chipmcdonald]

I'm tired of it.  This "competition" that is artificially rigged so that it will cost so much only extended-pinky companies can participate, and so regulated that nobody can really "fail" or "lose" (except they messed that up).

 

If it were a real competition the engine rules would be open, wouldn't they?  They're not, it's effectively "spec by cost".   I would rather see real Judd and Cosworth engines going around, proper RACE CAR engines, than this charade of "competition". 

Frozen engines???  Ridiculous. 

[Sash1]

I think car manufacturers can provide engines but should not be in any other way involved with the teams. Their commitment is always short, they invest a hell of a lot of cash to win for a few years (or fail) and leave when the CEO changes or the marketing department runs out of cash. Toyota, BMW, Honda, they come and go. Only Ferrari has beel loyal to the sport all the time but basically they are paid to do so. I would like to see it different but am old enough to understand that things will never change.

[Alexis*27]

I say that they DO, as the current rules stand.

 

It's too expensive to start a new team, or come up from GP2. 

 

If the manufacturers disappeared overnight, the costs rules would have to change drastically to replace them quickly, if at all.

[Timstr11]

I think car manufacturers can provide engines but should not be in any other way involved with the teams. Their commitment is always short, they invest a hell of a lot of cash to win for a few years (or fail) and leave when the CEO changes or the marketing department runs out of cash. Toyota, BMW, Honda, they come and go. Only Ferrari has beel loyal to the sport all the time but basically they are paid to do so. I would like to see it different but am old enough to understand that things will never change.

 

What a big non-issue.

 

Over the past decades, more private teams have come and gone than manufacturer teams

(would you like me to sum up the private teams that went bust?).

In most cases, the manufacturer teams have remained, just with different ownership and some of them are actually very successful (Redbull, Mercedes). Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Edited by Timstr11, 26 June 2014 - 12:48.

[4MEN]

Does F1 need car manufacturers?

The same way F1 need tyre suppliers. They come and go. They are expendable and rules should not be may to please them.

[chunder27]

Realistically, the only way you can afford to get into F1 with the new rules is with the help of a manufacturer, as theya re going to be the people largely funding the new technology with the energy systems and new engines.

 

I cannot see many companies other than massive firms like Apple, Siemens, HP beine even able to afford to develop a F1 engine energy recovery system, then you cannot see any reason fort them to be there either!

 

The main ones missing really are Ford, GM and some of Japanese makes. Nissan are sort of there with Renault. I think some companies like perhaps KTM or Suzuki would benefit hugely from F1 but can't ever afford the development into the systems needed. Thay struggle with bikes even. but in some ways are cuting edge in their fields.

 

I do think there will always be teams especially in the UK who can run an F1 operation. But that isnt the point. All that is missing is a US giant like GM or Chrysler to get involved and it could be great.  Arab money is gret, but they make chuff all so are only marketing their country little else.

[Anderis]

Over the past decades, more private teams have come and gone than manufacturer teams

That's because we had far more private teams than manufacturer teams, didn't we?

 

In most cases, the manufacturer teams have remained, just with different ownership and some of them are actually very successful (Redbull, Mercedes). Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

The issue is the whole process. When manufacturer teams come and go, it tends to weaken the whole F1 grid. Manufacturer teams spend huge amount of money. Private teams go into debt to keep any chance of being competitive against them. Manufacturer teams take away top engineering talent, sponsorship interest etc. from them. Then they leave the sport because they're always going to leave unless they're winning (unlike private teams, who usually leave only if they can't afford to run the team anymore). They're usually not going to be replaced by anyone who is ready to spend the same amount of money, but the harm that has been done to smaller, private teams is irreparable. So we end up with F1 struggling to have a grid consisting of numerous of teams, that are financially stable and established enough to attract top partnership and show some progress.

 

For me, ideal situation would be F1 with Ferrari, McLaren, Williams and then bunch of Saubers, Tyrrells, Brabhams, Jordans and Minardis. Numerous of car manufacturers present as engine suppliers, technological partners and sponsors, but not as team owners.

[Timstr11]

That's because we had far more private teams than manufacturer teams, didn't we?

 

The issue is the whole process. When manufacturer teams come and go, it tends to weaken the whole F1 grid. Manufacturer teams spend huge amount of money. Private teams go into debt to keep any chance of being competitive against them. Manufacturer teams take away top engineering talent, sponsorship interest etc. from them. Then they leave the sport because they're always going to leave unless they're winning (unlike private teams, who usually leave only if they can't afford to run the team anymore). They're usually not going to be replaced by anyone who is ready to spend the same amount of money, but the harm that has been done to smaller, private teams is irreparable. So we end up with F1 struggling to have a grid consisting of numerous of teams, that are financially stable and established enough to attract top partnership and show some progress.

 

For me, ideal situation would be F1 with Ferrari, McLaren, Williams and then bunch of Saubers, Tyrrells, Brabhams, Jordans and Minardis. Numerous of car manufacturers present as engine suppliers, technological partners and sponsors, but not as team owners.

 

Given your logic, it's funny you mention Ferrari first.

Ferrari was the first team to start spending in a huge way in modern F1.

 

Manufacturer or not, when you're succesful, you attract more sponsorship money and you subsequently spend even more to remain succesful. Nothing to do with manufcaturers. Otherwise Honda, BMW and Toyota would still be in the sport with great succes. It's clearly not all about money. Luckily.

Edited by Timstr11, 26 June 2014 - 13:52.

[redreni]

Realistically, the only way you can afford to get into F1 with the new rules is with the help of a manufacturer, as theya re going to be the people largely funding the new technology with the energy systems and new engines.

 

I cannot see many companies other than massive firms like Apple, Siemens, HP beine even able to afford to develop a F1 engine energy recovery system, then you cannot see any reason fort them to be there either!

 

The main ones missing really are Ford, GM and some of Japanese makes. Nissan are sort of there with Renault. I think some companies like perhaps KTM or Suzuki would benefit hugely from F1 but can't ever afford the development into the systems needed. Thay struggle with bikes even. but in some ways are cuting edge in their fields.

 

I do think there will always be teams especially in the UK who can run an F1 operation. But that isnt the point. All that is missing is a US giant like GM or Chrysler to get involved and it could be great.  Arab money is gret, but they make chuff all so are only marketing their country little else.

 

If all the manufacurers pulled out tomorrow, independent racecar engine makers would not be able to come in as the regulations stand. That's because the regulations were specifically written to enable the manufacturers to spend hundreds of millions on R&D on complex hybrid systems and energy recovery, which are R&D areas they're already investing in heavily for their roadgoing vehicles, and then show off about the fact that they've done so. It wasn't done just to make F1 look green. F1 will never look green. It was done because the manufacturers wanted it. But if the manufacturers pulled out, the rules would simply need to be amended to accommodate V8 Cosworths, or whatever is knocking about. F1 wouldn't end.

[Paco]

Without manufacturers f1 would need to become more of spec series. So just watch Cart if you want f1 without manufacturers.

[Rinehart]

I'm curious how you are counting.  I count 7 in F1 currently as either car or engine mfg:  Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Lotus, Caterham, Marussia and Renault, and 8 next year with Honda joining (assuming Lotus, Marussia and Caterham survive). 

You cannot seriously be counting Lotus - that is a licensing agreement, nothing more.

[chunder27]

Not quite sure why F1 would never look green?

 

I think they are doing a pretty good job in terms purely of what the car is doing.

 

I repeat a stat I heard Brundle or Edwards come out with in Austria, last Austrian GP year the cars used nearly 170 litres of fuel in the 00's (and were they not limited at all then?), so a saving of over 70% I would say is massive progress in the first year of the rules.

 

The cars are very quiet now, which is very green, they use a lot of recoverable energy and use clever systems using many techniques to do this, OK not massively green as it is written, but actually very useful as so far electric has proven to be a waste of space as a power source for cars, so limiting the use of an oilbasd system or assisting it is surely an advance?

 

The issue facing F1 ia the massive money it costs, the huge use of tech and power that making it work costs, which is all non green.

 

But even green energy like bio fuel, wind farms and solar fields use oil to transport, build and lok after them!  So you can never win really.

 

But in my view F1 and its manufacturers are doing a decent job, and that is what will attract more, what wont is the marketing dross like viewing figures, fallout from Berniegate etc.

[D28]

No I don't believe they do, except for the fact that the development costs of racing are now so extravagant that only major corporations can finance it.

Some of the finest F1 racing occurred when auto manufacturers were largely absent. BRM, Cooper, Brabham, Vanwall never made any road cars, Maserati did but not in significant numbers. F1 as a sport was better served by accessory sponsorship, and tire and fuel firms, or by manufacturers supplying engines, outright, or through partnerships like Ford-Cosworth. Multinational corporations will always have an ambivalent attitude to the cost/benefit relationship with racing. Their attention commitment will always be short term.

 

I feel that F1 should set the rules and formula and leave it to the corporations to race, or watch from the sidelines. The auto manufacturers should not be allowed to influence the formula, or write rules which allow them to write off development costs of new road car technology.  I like F1 to be about racing and be supported by firms committed to  racing, and individuals who appreciate the sporting side of auto racing.