Ford says Formula 1 costs still a turn-off

Exactly. Look at Honda. 100m+ per season so far with no result. It doesn't trickle down to road car development either because Mercedes, Renault, Ferrari and Honda aren't miles ahead (or anything ahead) on hybrid road cars to their non F1 participating manufacturers.

It's a hugely expensive gamble with no high expectancy on returns.

 

Correct. F1 has never been a "Win on Sunday, Buy on Monday" marketing exercise.

 

Given there is already an electric racing series who needs F1 at all? F1 is not worth the new effort from a company like Ford until F1 knows what it wants to be in the future. Liberty has alot of work to do.

 

Have you watched it.....?
While F1 has its problems, especially recently in terms of one team domination, it remains more exciting than Formula E, IMHO. E seems to be on par with watching Formula Continental cars. When you couple that with the pit stop car switch and all of that fumbling around, it is just not that compelling so far. It is a spec series and from that standpoint the SAE Formula Electric is more interesting.....and this is coming from a guy that will watch raindrops race down window glass.... I think it is way too early to call F1 dead because of Formula E.

 

In another note: Ford says Indycar costs are still a turn-off.

 

Given there are awesome computer games who needs real racing at all?

 

I don't follow...

The current engines suck. Can't wait to go back to NA

 

Fixed it for you

While that is true due to the disconnect between F1 cars and road cars there used to be a longer term return on investment for manufacturers. Honda's early road car engines after their first stint in F1 and then their PGM-F1 fuel injection in the 80s spring to mind. The issue with today is that the rules are so stifling that development on F1 doesn't translate to the real world anymore.

 

Suck; as in make more power per unit of fuel? displacement? TQ?
OR
Suck; and in sound like crap?

 

I agree and I have watched the E but prefer F1. But lets be 'real', F1 is going to and does face an identity crisis for whatever it will be in the future. Ford knows implicitly its returns dont match the investment. Ferrari can and will continue to sell all cars F1 or not.

 

Add Robot racing etc etc. F1 will face an identity crisis and does already. They want more races and a budget cap at Liberty. Some reconciliation of reality vs 'wants' will be coming.
Can F1 overcome the challenge? Sure but who is left on the grid. 3 or 4 teams?

Liberty have alot of work to do and frankly in the world we live in, play time activities abound. F1 is one of a myriad of choices we have. If it goes away over time I will have a life nicely without it. Id rather it survive and grow but that remains to be seen.

I have faith in Ross but not that much for anyone else yet.

 

I think DF1 means more ''why pour hundreds of millions into F1'' when it'll be much, much cheaper to race in FE where the development of actual helpful tech can help (notably battery technology).

For everyone info, I doubt batteries can be developed much further. How many years has the technology world had to improve our phones/laptops to get more out of our lithium batteries? Tesla has just released a new ''longer range'' car, from 315 to a massive 335 miles rolleyes...and how? Same amount of batteries, but with less power! Well no ****, I could've told them that!

Lithium mining is incredibly dirty, getting rid of it just as bad. Mind my words...electric cars is more stop gap. Hydrogen is the way forward. Shell and a bunch of manufacturers have just gotten together and formed a Hydrogen technology group.

 

I think Ross is the right man to take F1 forwards...or perhaps backwards. Ross is a very respected man, but can also talk to the teams properly. He understands the sport very well...

Current F1 is not financially sustainable unless you are a manufacturer, and they're not knocking on the door to get a team. There are 2 ways to make F1 sustainable: 1) allow teams to quickly develop newer technology that can be implemented on road cars, and have manufacturers involved developing it (thought the past 3 years have proven this hasn't worked) 2) make the racing exciting for fans, allow it viewable on computer, make going to the track exciting again. Gain lost viewers back, and gain the interest of young people. More viewers, spend less money, this interests sponsors and ''poor'' teams interested and possible to run a profitable team

#makeF1greatagain

 

They sound terrible and make for terrible racing.

 

From Fords standpoint, I agree. I am not sure they would get that much out of FE either at the moment. I think Ford will continue to have a brand presence with endurance racing where they have a heritage. Ford only had a badge presence in F1 with the DFV through Cosworth. Colin Chapman had to convince Ford to fund the development otherwise they would not have been there at all.

I would agree with most all of this. Electric has some nice properties (torque), but batteries remain a chemical process which remains slow, heavy and dirty to produce or recycle. Hydrogen still has some hurdles to overcome, not the least of which is its extremely rapid combustibility...

IC engines are not dead yet! have a look at the Infinity VC turbo that has been developed...
VC-Turbo Engine Technology | Infiniti USA

 

There are so few teams now, how would they even make money as an engine supplier? Massive investment to sell one or two contacts at 20m/yr a pop? Probably to backmarker teams anyway?

 

And with fewer teams overall what is the incentive at all. Liberty in a way faces an F1 that needs to be rebuilt so to speak. Not completely but re-invigorated. How few teams are enough for a minimum, and do they have a number in mind as to how many they would like to see to be optimal.

 

Ford's getting a load of good press from the new GT, why do they need to start pouring money down the F1 drain?

 

+1

 

Hydrogen has NO future as a fuel source for mass transportation. The most basic research into the difficulties of it would convince the most entrenched supporter of that fact.

Companies that need certain 'green tech' credits from their governments are merely paying lip service to its suitability.

 

Funny you mention credits. That's exactly what the USA did to create the electric car market....which is powered off fossil fuels.

If what you were saying were actually true (no future), then companies like BMW and Toyota would not continue to dump massive money into hydrogen fuel cell research.

 

+1

Honda and GM announced a fuel cell development and manufacturing JV few days ago.

 

Both dumped millions into F1 without a moments hesitation before they realised it was a dead end for their companies.

They are not immune to making mistakes and chasing unicorns.

 

In a nutshell, yeah ...