News

Now I'm starting to get really worried...

Discussion in 'Other Racing' started by owsi, Sep 23, 2004.

  1. owsi

    owsi Karting

    Dec 7, 2003
    160
    Maryland
    Full Name:
    Matt
    I find it hard to believe that Bernie can actually be stupid enough to think that it is okay if the privateer teams leave, and the rest of the teams have to run three cars.

    http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=22393

    From the above article, and Bernie's quotes, it sounds that way though. Does he not realize that if teams are leaving and not being replaced, F1 is dying. It has been happening for a while now, and has had me concerned. However, it did not concern me anything like Bernie being so indifferent to THREE teams leaving in a short time. I know Jordon and Minardi are not gone yet, but with Bernie talking like they soon will be, who is going to want to sign a sponsorship deal with either of them?
     
  2. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    I like variety in F1 and am all for many teams. However if they can't survive financially a third car from the big teams isn't such a bad deal: They will be fairly competitive, probably more so than a Minardi would ever be and by that will make the whole race more entertaining.

    Again I'm sad to see any team leave, but I agree with Bernie, that the number can't fall below 20. And so far any attempts to make F1 more affordable have failed, partly also as a courtesy of Scuderia Ferrari. As long as you have top teams like Ferrari, Mc Laren, Williams etc around, the arms race will continue and making it all the harder for the smaller teams. If you want to make F1 more affordable you would have to introduce stock parts, which goes against the grain of F1.

    Thinking about it, there is actually one solution, which I'd prefer to see to the 3 car approach:

    The top 5 teams have to sell "stock cars" to smaller teams. Could be e.g. last year's Ferrari repainted as a Jordan or whatever. Not completely unheard for F1 btw. In the early eighties Williams offered its last year's car to paying customers who used them. They would never be as fast as the current car, but the small teams are not about winning anyway, but about making a buck for themselves and adding to the show. Hey Bernie, are you reading this?
     
  3. MS250

    MS250 Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Dec 10, 2003
    24,913
    Full Name:
    Avvocato
    In order to work, Bernie needs to sharte more of ther cash. We need a GM(corvette) in there, a ford now leaving. A lotus, a lambo, these teams need special treatment to get back in and promote. I am not a fan of the 3 car team. But why cant Audi, Bently or someone else come in? Bernie needs to fund more.Pure and simple. Is anyone aware that recently he sold his home in London next to the QUeen, and it was recorded as the highest paid home in the world. It sold for 120million.....yes 120million us.
     
  4. owsi

    owsi Karting

    Dec 7, 2003
    160
    Maryland
    Full Name:
    Matt
    I agree that F1 should be at the top technically, and I realize that this means it will always be expensive. I also realize there will always be teams that can't make it and have to give up. However, I think if Bernie et al make it more affordable to get in, and more affordable to stay in, things would improve and teams that folded would be replaced by new teams. Unfortunately, Bernie doesn't seem to want to do this. By having teams run three cars he is INCREASING costs to the teams that remain. What manufacturer's board is going to decide next that the benefits don't justify the costs? Like I said, I think F1 is dying. I don't think the way to heal it is to make the teams run more cars.
     
  5. Mr Payne

    Mr Payne F1 Rookie

    Jan 8, 2004
    2,870
    Bakersfield, CA
    Full Name:
    Payne
    Being at the top technically really doesn't need to be that expensive. An unlimited racing car could probably destroy the entire grid of current cars for a sum of less than 25million.
     
  6. Oblio

    Oblio Karting

    May 9, 2004
    129
    Puget Sound, WA
    Full Name:
    Todd R
    If Bernie let them have more money, more would race and he would make more money. Loosen up Bernie.
     
  7. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    Actually running three cars doesn't increase the costs that much. They need to bring obviously an additional car and parts, but they have these cars anyway. The big expenses is getting everybody paid and to the races and develop the first car. Once you have made two (plus spares) you might as well make three.

    From a cost/benefits perspective it might even make sense as the third car will also mean more TV and press coverage for the sponsors.

    There is a good reason to keep the entrance price high as it keeps dreamers out of the show like the collapsed Lola (?) team with alleged Master card sponsorship.
     
  8. scuderia47

    scuderia47 Karting

    Nov 5, 2003
    208
    Mainland
    Full Name:
    Bill
    I would hate to see F1 use stock parts...the most interesting thing for me about F1 is that all the cars are different as a result of the team's production and development...as a result, the small teams cant keep up.



    just a hypothetical...if F1 does eventually cease to exist...then i suppose that Ferrari would become a powerhouse in sports car racing. i would assume that they would pour their money and effort into making factory Ferrari team for the ALMS series and all of those other sports car races. I suppose that there would even be a Ferrari racing in the prototype class at Le Mans. That would awsome.
     
  9. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    F1 will never perish. It might be called something else and run as the Constructors' GP, but it will always remain the pinnacle of automobile racing. Which is why I don't want Ferrari to go anywhere else. Le Mans is nice, but those forms of racing are too manipulated.
     
  10. Jay GT4

    Jay GT4 F1 Rookie

    Oct 16, 2001
    4,995
    La mamma dei fessi
    Full Name:
    e sempre incinta
    I agree that F1 should be the top tier when it comes to technology, BUT I would love to see them get rid of paddle shifters and put a clutch back in the car. Let's see how good these drivers are shifting gears MANUALLY with a clutch and shift knob. That should do the job of slowing the cars down in the corners where the real danger is. This would also allow smaller teams to keep up since they wouldn't have to write complex computer programs for shifting. I think a lot of money is eaten up in writing and testing computer programs.
     
  11. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    I would prefer them to use clutch and a manual shifter as well to see where the real talent lies, agreed.

    However if you want to bring in $$$ as an argument, I think you're looking in the wrong direction. Computer controlled shifting probably saved several engines from being blown to pieces. And developing that software I think is a minor cost compared to what they spend on engine and aero development. I think that's where the real costs lie.
     
  12. Jay GT4

    Jay GT4 F1 Rookie

    Oct 16, 2001
    4,995
    La mamma dei fessi
    Full Name:
    e sempre incinta
    True, but remember DC's car? From the pits they "Fixed" his smoking engine. That is some serious computer programs, not just for shifting but engine management. I'm sure for Friday practice they try a few different scripts in the car.

    What they really need to do is get rid of the buses with the sattelite TV, jacuzzi tub, kitchen with stainless steel appliances, bedrooms, ensuite, chandeliers, and marble tile! :)
     
  13. tifosi12

    tifosi12 Four Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Oct 3, 2002
    45,838
    @ the wheel
    Full Name:
    Andreas
    Not to be argumentative, but those toys aren't either what eats the budgets. 24/7 windtunnel and aero development with super expensive former aero/NASA engineers is one of the cost sources. The other one lies in the engines.

    What a stupid move by Mosley trying to save costs by introducing the one engine/weekend rule - soon to be expanded to 1 engine per 3 races -: All that this does is INCREASE the engine costs: Now you have to find the power AND the reliability. I said that before they came up with this and sure enough it didn't save any money, quite the opposite. If you want to save money on engines, come up with a standard design and mass produce the motors as disposable quantities - insert Cosworth DFW here -. If you demand they have to be the Swiss Army knife of all trades, it will only boost costs.
     

Share This Page