Is Haas really "American"?

C'mon guys this thread is really tiresome, get over it already. Haas is as American as Red Bull is Austrian (even though they are based in the UK), as Sauber are Swiss. Leave it alone.

 

exactly what I was thinking, along with the major US bands that have paid millions in fines for the 2008 melt down, and plenty other cases in history.

 

Sauber is actually Swiss. All team operations are in Hinwil, Switzerland. Most employees are Swiss. In that they are comparable to Ferrari and Toro Rosso being Italian

 

OK so Mercedes is German but the team is based in the UK. Big deal! This thread is ridiculous

 

Interesting article on the finances and reasons for the formation of the Haas team....

What Really Fuelled Gene Haas' $1 Billion F1 Bet

 

Well, Sauber hasn't, nor has Manor ...

 

Both have come incredibly close to having to leave F1 (only recently both had to ask Bernie for advance payments, and only recently Sauber couldn't afford to pay its staff!).

Two other things to note:

1) Both those teams are not paying all of the bills themselves as Haas are (so far).

2) Gene Haas has entered F1 in order to promote his business around the World - Not because he thinks he can become F1 World Champions.

As a business man, if he finds he's spending $1billion to generate 500 Million Dollars worth of extra business then he's either not going to be in business for very long or he's not going to be in F1! - I know which one My monies on!

 

I can't predict how Gene Haas will operate (apparently you can), but he may not rely on his business alone to substain the F1 team, and court outside sponsorship to finance part of his budget like other teams. It's early day yet ... I cannot see an shrewd industrialist risking the bank.

Even business Dieter Mateschitz who entered motorsport and bought 2 F1 teams willingly accepts outside sponsorship on his car,s although he wants to advertise Red Bull first of all.

 

Haas says rivals should welcome F1 approach


Haas says rivals should welcome F1 approach

Gene Haas thinks that Formula 1 should be welcoming the fact that his team's approach has produced something that has excited fans, rather than worrying about who makes his car.





I think he is right. What's the point of every team re-inventing the wheel?

 

by same metric... Mercedes, Toyota, Honda, Kia, Hyundai, etc can American, as Ford, GM, and Chrysler can be Mexican... I guess it's where they count their money :=)

 

If you take that to the ultimate evolution though, then you arrive at full blown customer cars from the big teams.

And the big advantages there are:

1) The costs can be policed a lot easier.
2) The racing will be closer as there will be less performance disparity between the cars (especially if the FIA dictate that cars supplied to customers must be to the exact same spec as the factory car).

As Haas only construct the car (as in put it all together), rather than actually manufacture the car, perhaps we now need a third F1 World Championship?:

1) The Drivers World Championship
2) The World Constructors Championship (which Haas would be eligible for)
3) The World Manufacturers Championship (Which Haas would not be eligible for)

 

I am all for customer cars like we had before, when private teams (non-constructors) used to compete in F1.

Tyrrell, Williams, and several others started as customer teams.

The Constructors Championship could become the Teams Championship. I would agree with that.

At the moment, the so-called constructors (McLaren, Williams, Force India, Red Bull, Toro Rosso, Sauber, etc...) are not really constructors: they only make chassis and assemble their cars from various suppliers. Haas is doing the same, and I don't know what Pat Symmonds is on about !

Only Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault build complete cars and deserve the title of "constructors". .

 

The two major components of a modern F1 car are the power unit/gearbox combination and the chassis. Simplified, a modern F1 car is often thought of as being 50% power unit and 50% chassis (It's actually far more complex than that though).

Currently, McLaren, Williams, Force India, Red Bull, Toro Rosso, Sauber, etc... all manufacture their own chassis and so are thought of as manufacturing 50% of the car themselves, therefore they are constructors (Based on the precise FIA definition).

Haas on the other hand manufacture neither the power unit/gearbox or the chassis, so how can they been seen as a constructor in the same way that the other teams are?

They are (cleverly) utilising a loophole in the FIA's regulations on what is required to be recognised as a constructor, based on what is allowed when it comes to using subcontractors for major parts, but as far as I'm concerned it's wrong! To Me, as a bare minimum they should have to manufacture the chassis themselves to qualify as a constructor!

Considering that Haas is using F1 to promote his Machine tool company, it would be interesting to know how much of the car is actually made on Haas machines (And before we get the: "Ferrari only use Haas machines" - No they don't!, they use a number of different manufacturers machines, I know that for a fact! )

 

I will never blame anyone who uses a loophole !!

The FIA only stipulates that to be accepted as a constructor, a team need to own the intellectual properties of a certain number of components.

The rules don't say that a team needs to have all the carbon fiber manufacturing facilities in house (oven, autoclave, etc...), nor that all the mechanical parts have to be machined by the team.

The FIA rules only say that the drawings must belong to the team, and that who does the design and the manufacturing shouldn't work for another competing F1 team.

Gene Hass must have read the rules better than some!! He cleverly outsourced most of his stuff whilst observing the rules.
I say Bravo !!!

You may consider that it's wrong, but I don't.

Ferrari had some chassis made in England by Thompson in the past, and McLaren had carbon fiber chassis made in the US by Hercules too; according to you, they should have lost the title of constructors?

 

Where a company's headquarter sits is a good indication of its nationality, most of the time.

As far as F1, the nationality is determined where the team obtains its entrant license.

Yes, we could do away with nationality, and country flags in sport, and cut all the pageantry, national anthems and so on, but would that enhance the show?

 

Yes, I agree with that about the Olympics.

I wish the athletes could compete as individuals and not as part of a national team where their success is political exploited.

But then, I cannot answer the question as where their training will be bone, their coaching come from, and most of their financial support come from. It's a tough question...

Private sponsorship perhaps?

 

"Who pays the piper calls the tune", as they say.

Was Dan Gurney 's Eagle American?

Designed by Len Terry (a Brit), built in UK, powered by a British-made Weslake engine, etc...

But, it's still considered as an iconic American F1.

 

Great post! Thanks for giving this thread some perspective.

 

+1

Williams comment pretty much nails it!

If Gurney's entry was considered American, & it certainly was per the history & legend, then Haas has to be too.... Maybe even more so....

Cheers,
Ian

 

Are "Americans" really American when their ancestors were mostly Europeans trying to test a new market with their home savings?