Is this the end of F1?

The noise/notes or lack there of is gone. The thrill of the scream as the racers accelerate out of turns and down straightaways is gone all for the BS philanthropy of being "green".

Is the drive of being green to stop racing? Because there is far more fuel spent getting to each race than actually racing.

 

Probably because technology is concerned: a Formula One is a car, after all. And among those who are spending large amounts of money into this, are some main car manufacturers. They are into this not only for the sport...
The days of the bolt-on DFVs and club racers are long gone; note that during those days, you were not able to watch it on TV, it was not even broadcasted...(it began here in 1976, and not even for all races; before that, you had the Monaco G.P, and the French G.P).

rgds

 

Racing has developed a lot of things that make passenger cars better and safer. There has always been great political pressure on racing and F1 is feeling a lot of it and has responded by forcing F1 to become more fuel efficient. There is not much any of us can do to change this. All racing is facing these issues and responding. If it doesn't it will banned. Personally I like the old days but when thoughts like these are espoused openly we're racing through uncharted waters.

» Professor Calls For Climate Change ?Deniers? To Be Imprisoned Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

 

"Be wary of people who wants to jail those that do not think like they do; of people who wants to force happiness onto you without taking what you think into account; and of people promising you happiness if you never see them smile".

 

+1

F1 is the arena for the car manufacturers to show who is king. Win on Sunday, sell on Monday. However that only really works if there is a relationship between the technology being raced and what's in the road cars.

Unlimited hp and unlimited fuel consumption is NOT what's happening with road cars. It is only logical that F1 focuses on similar issues (like fuel consumption and energy recuperation). If it doesn't, it becomes technically irrelevant and the link to road cars and car sales in general is lost. At that point the manufacturers would pull out and we'd be left with a few garagistes and yesteryear's engines.

 

The teams are also to blame in this fiasco - whilst developing the new V6 they should have realised it will fall short of desirable sound characteristics - Then they could petition FIA for tweaks to the rules but still maintaining V6 architecture

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk

 

Most car manufacturers get involved in some sort of motor racing anyway.

Why they are not all in F1 at the same time, is because they look at the most favourable time for their effort. Ford WAS in F1 for a long time. Porsche has been in F1 twice. Honda keeps going back to F1. VW isn't in F1, but there is a strong link with Porsche and AUDI, both leaders in WEC.
Others find their niche in rallying, touring cars, GT, endurance, etc...

If it wasn't for car manufacturers, private teams wouldn't have any engine to put at the back of their cars. The era of BRM, ATS, making their engines and gearbox is gone.
Ferrari can afford it only because of FIAT money.

Without car manufacturers, there would be no F1 now. They have become essential to maintain the hi-tec level in F1.

By the way, reasearch and development may turn out to be just as efficient as racing to push technology, but are far less glamourous to advertise a brand, and don't bring much exposure either.

 

+1

Except the part of Ferrari financing. I'm not sure on that. I heard that the main $ for Ferrari actually comes from merchandising. More than car sales etc. The road and racing cars are merely a catalyst

 

Merchandising accounts for about 20% of Ferrari's profit. It not therefore the main source, but it is not small either.

Ferrari makes $62,000 profit per car

 

I've been watching F1 since the early 90's, and I'll admit this is the most interested I've been in about a decade. I actually like the turbo sound more than the restricted V8's. Sure, it's no comparison to the old V10's and the V8's before they rev-limited them, but I wasn't keen at all of the cars for the past 4-5 years.

Yep, I wish they'd open things up a bit more with larger naturally aspirated engines - preferably V10's or V12's. But that's not palatable right now and at least they're pushing new ground technologically again.

 

Great link, at least they are getting the message. Turn the boost up to 5 bar, no fuel limits, open headers, and get rid of all the winglets.

So funny really to hear people (everyday people) complain about the LACK of sound.

 

Watching since the late 60's on Wide World of Sports and attended first race in 84. Seems a lot here never experienced the 80's turbo era other than thru old youtube video's. Even some that claim they did have faulty recollections. If you didn't experience at least live on TV you can't talk about it's reality. Let me assure you, you needed ear plugs if you were close to the track for the 1,000+bhp cars. Anyone who says different is full of it.

 

you know something is not right in the world of F1 when gp2 cars are:
louder
more powerful
and use more gas

than a formula one car......

you know something is REALLY not right in the world of F1 when i can say that some of my own (mostly stock) road cars are:
louder
more powerful
and use more gas

than a formula one car.......

who would have thought this day would come

people will vote with their feet. i for one have no intention of going to a race this season, and i wont be interrupting my day to catch the race on tv that often either.

 

No, you do not seem to understand, or you pretend you don't.

At present, if it wasn't for the car manufacturers' presence (Renault, Ferrari/FIAT, Mercedes and soon Honda), there wouldn't be any F1 because no private team can built its own powerplant, and none are available off the shelf as before (Cosworth, JUDD, Hart era).

Even Red Bull will all its millions wouldn't contemplate investing hundreds of millions to create its own powerplant, nor would Williams, or McLaren.

The time when small chassis builders could queue up at Cosworth for engine, then Hewland for gearbox to go racing is over. An independent engine builder wouldn't make money in F1; it has to be a motor manufacturer with large pockets.

Mercedes and co are in F1 for the return they hope to get out of it, but I suspect not all will benefit from it. After a few years without success (Honda and Toyota story), they give up and wait for another occasion.

Money alone cannot sustain F1, you need the participation of manufacturers, and Ecclestone understood that very well when tobacco sponsorship dried up.

 

Yes the prices makes me feel positively ill.

 

i think we have to trust the technology,with in 3 years they will work perfectly with the limits set,engineers will find another 100 hp or so

 

Are your road cars faster around a track than a F1?
Are GP2 cars?

 

If you think Ferrari manufacturer is bankrolling the F1 Scuderia team, you don't know much either!!

The F1 team has been financed for decades mostly by parent company FIAT.
There is a long time since Enzo Ferrari wasn't able to finance his racing team with car sales.
That's why he attempted to sell to Ford, and later made a deal with FIAT.
Scuderia Ferrari is nowadays merely the F1 branch of FIAT.

That's why all other programmes at Ferrari itself (sport cars) or in other brands of the group have been terminated one by one (Alfa protos and F1, Lancia rallying and endurance), to compensate for the increase in the Scuderia budget.
Of course, Ferrari get sponsorship as well, but not enough to maintain the highest level of expenses in F1.