Are all forms of Motorsport headed down the same path ???

I think motorsport has a huge problem to deal with. As we learn to research more, we spend more money. Over time motorracing has become more and more technological and thus more and more specialised.

In the old days F1 cars did not (for example) even have adjustable suspension ... the drivers just drove around any track related issues. Nowadays with superior knowledge we want and need everything to be perfect for every track or surface and this costs mucho dollars.

But how do we stop this problem, 'cause it sort of kills the goals of a motorsport competitor to knowingly ignore a performance advantage.

Got to do some work ... will be continued.
Pete

 

Your points raised are valid and you prob. answered your question with your quote
"if you want to play this game you have to be willing to spend everything"

With the economic conditions everywhere its difficult for a team owner to justify spending multi-millions to fund teams w/o major corp. sponsorship. Some of the series appear to be holding well (Speedvision GT & Touring, NASCAR for the most part excluding field fillers, and DP's) Others have not due to poor management and infighting (IRL/CART). It may be a cyclical thing too where the enviroment is just soft as far as dollars are concerned. This is really nothing that hasn't been seen before. IMSA GTP, GTO back in the day and remember single car teams of CART and F1 for that matter.

Lack of money ran me out of racing 12 years ago, heck I did and still do pretty good financially, but there is no way to compete now.

The more things change, the more it looks like the same old thing. $$$$

 

Continuing ... and taking on Tom's points ...

I think motorsport needs to pull back on fringe expenses. Yes we can't race without sponsors but do we really need the fancy motorhomes, the expensively decked out garages, etc. We need to move the focus back to on the track as I think the balance is wrong and most of the focus currently is off the track in wining and dining, etc.

Even the Aussie Supercar series which is incredibly basic rules wise has enormous amounts of money wasted on lining garage walls, etc. to make the pit complexes look up market. They also waste enormous amounts of money making dashboards, rearview mirrors, etc. out of carbon fibre ... fibreglass would do just as well and cost 1/10th the amount ... but ofcourse not flash enough.

In the move to upmarket the sport we have costed ourselves out of the game ... and added too many fringe things that are not core to the sport.

Pete

 

/rambling mode on

The fluff is there for the sponsors to feel they are getting money for their dollar/yen/euro. Its easy to feel good about dropping a million on a friend's car when you get pit passes, a nice motor home to crash in and decent food (Vanessa's Catering is the most valuable hard card in racing). The extras really aren't that much if you depreciate it and use it as a service cost.

Racing has always been about who has the depest pockets. To be competitive, you have to have an edge. Doing testing or having the best engineers is one way to get it. Buying/fabricating the best components is another. Cheating is the third choice, but has its own issues. He who has the most cash will probably find the best solution quickest, but not always (look at Toyota's F1 effort).

Its up to the organizers to write a rule book that will bring the most parties to the table to have a successful series. Racing is business, people don't do it for $hits and giggles.

/ramble off, work to do...

 

PEUGEOT OUT OF WRC!!!!

They are like Ferrari in F1...

 

It's not what you spend, it's what you get for your money.

F1, in an effort to keep the cars slow enough for current tracks, has been banning technology that's appropriate on street cars, but leaving stuff (like carbon fiber brakes) that will never fly in production.

WRC has gone to a formula that lets manufacturers completely rebuild econoboxes as one-off specialty cars.

Racing used to be a venue to develop automotive technology. Not just to "invent" but to work the bugs out. I'll pass on a car with all-wheel steering, twin turbos, drive-by-wire, and other gizmos, until the manufacturer can get the same stuff to the end of a race event. For what Shumi makes, let him have to deal with experimental hardware, before they stick it on a production car. New technology brought straight to the streets makes garage queens. (4-6-8 engine, AWS, early ABS, etc.)

But today, racing has gotten parsecs away from any kind of production hardware. At the same time, production has shifted to regulation loopholes like SUVs, built for "drivers" who don't know any better.

Even in automotive safety, the shift to track-only equipment like the HANS - while worthwhile on the track - has no benefit to production car safety systems. And "ownership" of safety has shifted to the bureaucrats, rather than to the manufacturers.

The manufacturers are no longer getting product line improvements for their money, so the money they spend is now seen as "too expensive".

While it may sound silly to talk about F1 cars with "run flat" tires, emissions controls, and fuel consumption limits, that would be a way to restrict the cars that gives the manufacturers something they can put in the showrooms. (Not to mention the effect that eliminating both tire and fuel stops would wreak on "passing the in pits" strategies.)

 

I think that part of the problem is that the car manufacturers have been given too much power in the various series. Toyota do not exist to win races. They exist to sell cars and make money. To help sell more cars they are happy to spend big to get success in motorsport. Once they have success in a particular motorsport arena they tend to move to a different one. From a PR point of view it looks great for a new team to start out and improve every year until they win the championship. To then lose the championship looks bad so they tend to move to another series and try there. Toyota have had success in just about all series except F1. When a major manufacturer decides to quit one series and move to another they take a huge amount of money with them so the whole series suffers. I use Toyota as an example here. The same applies to Ford, Honda, and all other major manufacturers.

Ten years ago the teams in F1 were racing teams, not manufacturers. Sure, Renault, Honda et al were supplying engines, but they didn't have their own teams. Williams did not quit F1 when Renault decided that they'd had enough good PR from F1. Williams is a racing team and it's reason for existance is to compete in F1. Frank Williams doesn't care how many 5 Series BMW sell. He just cares about how well his F1 cars do. F1 (and other race series) is in a precarious position. When Renault and Toyota come to the same conclusion as Ford and pull out of a series that costs a fortune to be competitive in then a load of cash will be sucked out of the sport. There may not be a Red Bull to rescue all of their employees when this happens.

I'm not really sure how to solve the problem however. I can't see hoe you can stop Team A spending ten times the budget of Team B to acheive the same results. I think the time has come to make F1 more of a spec type series. There should be just 1 tyre manufacturer. The cars should habve standard CPUs so an effective ban on Traction control can be brought in. They should have spec wings and brakes. I don't know. I guess I'm just thinking out loud here...

I suppose the question that needs to be asked is 'What made you start watching F1?'
For most the answer would be a certain driver who sparked their imagination with his battling drives and spirit. We want F1 to contain the best drivers in the world driving cars that we know we'd probably stall or spin if we were given a chance to drive one, on circuits that excite with their variety and potential for danger.
I don't care if one engine contains unobtainium or if the wing on Car A is 5mm lower than that on Car B. I do care if I get to see Schumacher power-sliding a Ferrari around the parabolica at Monza! Less aero. Less electronics. More driver.

 

i've been involved in motor sports since the late 50's and it's always been about the money. speed = cubic money. this holds true at all levels, from karts to f1. you got to pay to play but you got to spend to win.

 

agree with you 100%--(i gave up racing when the cost of rebuilding my 4-cam Carrera motor jumped to $3500!!;oh yeah, that was a few years ago....)

BUT

continually escalating costs (and now we're in pretty rarified air $200M - $500M - and climbing), added to declining audience numbers globally; public companies are finding it harder to justify that kind of marketing/advertising expense (it's only a part of their total marketing expenses) to management committees.

>very unpopular idea here: much as I/we all love "unlimited"/"the pinnacle of technology"/etc., that continues to cost more and more. I think F1 will have to go in the direction of "spec", to one degree or another, to control costs.

Also, many of us here have said that we really just want to see the drivers duking it out; and MS aside, some of the current drivers are being supported by their cars/teams abilities/$$.

So if you take away the costly technology, youre' left with drivers abilities only.

Way oversimplified I know, but it may be necessary.

OK guys, flame away........
james

 

It's unfortunate when escalating costs have negative effects on racing, but the sport as a whole ultimately needs to fall subject to the laws of natural selection. Things are naturally cyclical, and after expansion we have contraction, and so on. In the States, I'm sure economic factors will eventually bring IRL and CART to the table. F1 has been moving in two directions for several years, with the "haves" getting bigger and the "have-nots" shrivelling and even disappearing--Larousse, Forti, Lotus, Jag. Racing will ultimately find that level at which it can sustain itself. If that means hitting rock bottom first, then so be it. BernieCo is going to have to keep in mind that fans' wishes need to be acknowledged just as much as those of the sponsors.

 

Gilles27 --

Agree with you!

Re: BE; unfortunately, at his age, and given that he/his family are well set for the future ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$), it almost seems as if he just doesn't give a **** anymore, and he's just stoking the fires, without worrying about 'the future of the sport'. Opinions?

james

 

Not really ... Peugeot have always come in, gone out again in rallying. When they come in they dominate, prove their point and then take a break ... have a look at the history.

Ferrari have stuck it out in F1, through the good and the bad!

Pete

 

Good points!

I still think in reply to judge4re, that we are spending too much money on the sponsors. While I understand that that makes the sponsors feel great ... it also shows the sponsors are not really interested in getting their monies worth via actually on the car sponsorship ... hence why they do not care if the racing sucks or not.

What has happened is that sponsors are using the race meetings and being part of the exclusive club to do deals ... this has to be a negative thing because the exclusiveness has become MORE important than the racing, etc.

It will not be long before some wise arse realises this and creates a very exclusive club that costs a fortune to belong to ... exit left all F1 sponsors as they no longer have to put up with the noice and cr@p side or racing and just can enjoy the wheeling and dealing and pretty girls in this exclusive club.

The purpose of sponsorship has been lost and the use of the sponsors money is not wisely spent any more ... I believe.

Pete

 

This is why I like Spec Miata so much. Great cars, equal power, cheap. Who cares if you wad one?

Dale

 

Grand Am has looked to hit on a pretty good formula with the Daytona Prototypes.
Maybe part of the answer has something to do with tires? The contact patch between the mega engineering/horsepower and the asphalt. I know F1 went with the grooves and did not accomplish much but the theory works.
I have a friend that races 250cc shifter karts...top notch equipment, actually has a back-up and probably has close to $20K in each of them. He got beat by a guy this weekend that has at least that much just in his motor!!!! This is all for a trophy!!! Let them spend and they will spend!! Kind of a killer for the little guy, talent only goes so far!!

 

It's not the cost that is the problem - pro racing can only survive if there are spectators and sponsors. If teams had NFL-level income, they could drive at the speed of light.

the key is to have public interest. how? beats me, most everyon I know thinks racing is dull, and something anyone coudl do with a fast car.

 

too true. many/most? people now view driving as just a necessary evil. don't want to bother learning how, don't want to watch others do it. many people will be happy when "automatic" cars and roads are the norm. one less thing to think about. we on these forums are really in the minority.

james

 

Jon, a recent issue of C&D really clarified this point for me.

In one corner, you had Brock Yates griping about how racing is no longer about the driver any more. He proposed that racing go to more of a spec type series so that the driver was the key. (Sound familiar? This is the NASCAR formula.)

In the other corner, you had a writer who particpated on a Le Mans race team. The contrast was stunning. Apparently, the race team manager had uplinks to a meteorology site that could predicte the likelihood of rain BY EACH CORNER!

Simply put, the days of the champion are over in professional motorsports. The key today is the team.

Dale

 

Should we drop the World Championship for Drivers title then?

Pete

 

I think Gilles27 has a good point. Just like the economy and the stock market, there will be ebs and flows - AND some painfull corrections! Maybe F1 is heading for one. Everyone can't sponsor Ferrari and the prices will go down - as will the carmaker commitments.

Just a thought, how about a modified salary cap? On the sponsors? Limited ad space and limited $$$$. Any company/person that wishes to be a general sponsor can anti-up and it goes to a general fund distributed evenly among the teams. Granted, it would be next to impossible to police. AND it flys in the face of F1's creedo of the best of the best of the best. However, I'd be willing to bet that there would be even more money floating around with this arrangement. Kind of Communistic though! Not an easy solution.
Jim

 

I think the old adage of “race on Sunday sell on Monday” no longer applies.

Car companies are in the business of building cars to make a profit. Period. The argument of racing as a means to develop components or cars is long dead. Formula as the panicle of motorsport for technology is no longer the case. The last item on a F1 car that made a difference to Joe Q. Public was the ECU development that occurred in the 80s because of the rules change that banned refueling. Ferrari’s F1 paddle shifter has been around for over ten years now and although we see it in a few top end cars the technology isn’t cost effective or reliable enough to go into the every day Toyota. Besides the fact that a retired engineer in England has developed a Zero Shift gearbox that will allow any standard gearbox to be changed into one that transfers power directly from one gear to the next without any hesitation. (see Race Car Engineering for the details- I can get you the Volume number if needed) This is currently being development run in a TVR and thought up out side the racing community. The argument that World Rally cars benefit car development is a much stronger case than any other series. For the moment Formula one is simply involved in trying to perfect the same technology that’s been around for the past 15 years. The example of the Zero Shift above and the example of the wale flipper aero design (http://www.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/spew4th.pl?ascribeid=20040511.071106&time=07%2026%20PDT&year=2004&public=1 ) being two examples of innovations that could propel a F1 team above others while having a direct impact on the world outside of motorsport should not be lost on all of us. Just because the F1 engineer might be the best paid in the world doesn’t mean he’s actually the best. And yes, top designers in F1 are getting paid with seven digit salaries. It’s not just the drivers who’re braking the bank open.

Ultimately a car company’s board of directors must stand up in front of it’s share holders and justify their decisions. GM had been making great strides with their 2002 LMP02 and some say could have had an Audi beater on their hands (http://www.mulsannescorner.com/cadillaclmp02.html ). But, the decision was made to pull the plug on the team. Why? It didn’t make financial sense. The amount of money spent wasn’t being recouped in marketing terms and sales in the eyes of the board. In my opinion Ford has made the right choice for now as far as getting out of F1. As I’ve said I think they’ve done better promoting their brand with the new GT than they could in F1. And they’ve done it at a fraction of the cost.

Ford has a big job on their hands turning their Premier division to profitability. The Jag road cars have never been more reliable than under Fords management but they took a terrible step going down market with their X-Type. Now they need all the resources they have at their disposal. Aston Martin isn’t doing that great either. To me the sports prototype racing is a better fit to sell their products than F1 and I’m not talking about those hideous looking Grand Am cars either. I’m wondering how long Ferrari road cars can hold out operating as the funding force for the Ferrari F1 team. Fiat isn’t in the best condition these days. Would they begin to siphon off some of the profit away from the team if they were in a financial jam? Racing used to be one of the only avenues to spotlight a car makers performance attributes. Not any more. Go to the store and look at the magazine rack. Turn on the TV. Get on the internet. You’ll see much better venues for advertising your product to the public for the dollar spent. Racing is no longer needed to get a product out in front of the target audience. Therefore car manufacturers no longer need to go racing.

The worlds changing. It doesn’t always change the way we want it to.

 

From a marketing perspective, of course not, but honoring the team would be more honest.

Dale

 

thats why i got out. they should divide classes by money invested instead of cc's

 

I think you'll find this very interesting: http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_feature_item.php?fes_art_id=22912