Interesting how F1 goes in cycles. Until 1958 all the cars were basically built entirely by the constructors: chassis, engine, gearbox. Then Cooper and Lotus introduced the concept of the "kit car": chassis, Climax (and later Cosworth) engine, Hewland (or other outside mfr) gearbox. By 1969 the only true (full-car) constructors left were Ferrari and BRM. And Renault was entering just about when BRM disappeared in the late 70s. But about a decade ago the pendulum began swinging the other way: Jaguar acquired Stewart, Renault acquired Benetton, and pretty soon most of the teams were building the car, engine and gearbox themselves again. And the others were using engines from those same constructors, not a single source like Cosworth. Well, now we're going back to the "kit cars": BMW, Honda and Toyota are out and now we stand to get a new bunch of Cosworth-powered cars. So it's beginning to look a bit like 1969 again. Will Ferrari once again be the only constructor building the entire car?
Constructors are better for F1 because they are actually involved for the racing. The manufactures like Jaguar only got involved to promote their brand name and thus they can fnck off, along with BMW, Honda, Toyota, etc. Also NONE of these companies were actually building the cars, a constructor they bought was. Toyota are probably the closest to being a proper manufacturer because they were trying to learn the art ... but even they ran it as a completely separate division in Germany. This is all because of Bernie because he wanted the manufacturers to return because he could see the bigger $'s, but as I've just said it was the wrong direction for racing for racing's sake. Also the constructors bought advancing technology to F1, before them we had front engined pieces of **** (but wonderful all the same, but hardly push the boundaries) puttering around the track in grids of 8. It was all about the motor and a few brave and gifted drivers ... then Cooper, Chapman, etc. realised that you can actually move race car design forward. Pete
A lot of people don't realize that this year's action -- which was fantastic -- was mostly bought and paid for by boardrooms before the economic collapse. We are only now seeing the true effects. Those effects may well include F1 becoming some sort of spec series. With Honda, BMW, Toyota and perhaps Renault exiting, who's left to make the engines? Two manufacturers and a one supplier (that many young people have never heard of)? That will have some big effects on consumer interest and, I believe, further erosion of the customer base. To me, FIA & FOA's focus on controlling costs came at the expense of any attention on return. Having no races in some manufacturers' key markets (such as North America) created a serious ROI problem. Given this, it's hard to see how any boards can justify the cost of F1 at all given lack of return. With yet more races in doubt (still no US GP, no set Canadian GP, British GP, French GP), it's become politically impossible to stand before ROI-hungry execs and justify their program. To my eyes, the continued erosion of the customer base and lack of ROI make F1 far closer to the edge than most would think. This ship is listing.
F1 has suffuered many deaths over the years. But each near death experience brings evolutoin. Many brillaint minds here talk of F1 in decades or eras, raising valid points about inovation Vs safety. F1 is a Pinacle Sport (never been done before) and as such is like space travel or land speed records. People of all types should be in awe of what the pilots do, and unaware of the polotics behind it
The reality is that F1 has had too many negatives for the past few years than positives; and these are more black eyes. (Toyota leaving made the Buffalo News; but Jenson Button winning the title did not) 2010 F1 will have 1 or 2 powerhouses; 2-3 mid-field teams and 6 backmarkers; completely reversed of what F1 should be. This is why Ferrari is so upset; they want to be the best against the best. Not just against McLaren regularly. Add to that Bernie's relentless chase for the dollar in boring tracks (Valencia????) [BTW - Still no Canada deal?] F1 is not dead, but it's going through a cycle that you have to realize is not good. (What if Hoosier tires is the only bidder?) Don't whistle past the graveyard thinking how great F1 is; it has some serious problems. For all of the supposed drastic changes; this year sucked in terms of on track action. I will still watch & support our sport and the beloved Scuderia, but this has been a terrible week for F1. Kevin
The only time it was not like this was the 60's, the most competitive period for F1 ... note this is the time when the manufacturers left and the constructors took over. Pete
As much as I miss those days I have to point out that the "competitiveness" of the period was in part due to the unreliability of even the fastest cars. More mid-level teams will have good results when the leaders fail.
IMO, the breakway series should have happened. Who knows, we might still have Toyota on board, and maybe Honda even joining them soon. F1 these days are un-attractive, boring, and nothing to look forward to besides a parade. Those monkeys running the whole thing are more focused on new teams, getting new teams aboard rather than taking care of the current teams. What a shame.
Very good point; my only point was that there shouldn't be 3 distinct groups; with the minnows being the dominant group. Who knows though; 2010 could be the greatest season ever....lol At least we don't have to listen to that arrogant puke Mosley anymore
Interesting point, since back then the finishing rate at most races was just over 50%, much less than today. (Of course, there were anomalies like the '61 Dutch GP, where there were no retirements and no pit stops!)
Hmmm, not sure I agree. I think reliability was well spread, particularly because most ran with the same engine. I'll have to look at the qualifying times, but we had Lotus, Cooper, BRM, Ferrari and later Brabham all making competitive cars. Pete
That video is so funny it's brilliant nail on the head.. My fav line : Get Max, or that small Troll, on the phone and have them do something to sort this **** out NOW!!!.
Yes unreliability was well distributed but that doesn't alter the fact that slower cars won more often than they do now.
Andreas, I didn't say that the 2009 season wasn't any good. I was only commenting that the underpinings of the sport seem to be under threat. When the major car companies leave the sport (only months after fighting furiously to obtain control of it), and the tire companies say 'no thanks', not to mention LDM stating that the 'management' of F1 has been attacking the manufacturers....the sport is in trouble. The 'nonsense' is in fact the behaviour of Bernie and Max.
sometimes I feel the american media has affected the way our brains function in life... we seem to like to hear doom and gloom, we only want to hear doom and gloom and many sit around and speculate about doom and gloom. Without it, we would have nothing to talk about... For me... it gets old
I really don't understand the issue. So a bunch of under performing, over spending teams have left (Honda (bad timing!), BMW, Toyota). Who cares? Next years grid is going to be bigger than this years anyway. Bridgestone? Don't care - a tire is a tire. Someone else will be desperate to sign up as supplier. As long as Ferrari stays, grids are big, and there is no alternative global formula, F1 will not be going anywhere. Churn is good for the sport - nothing wrong in survival of the fittest. If we lose a bunch of inefficient mega corps and get a bunch of true racing enthusiast teams, that can only be a good thing for the sport and the fans.
Do you really believe any of the new teams are going to be better than the outgoing ones? Back in the 1970s (which is probably my favorite era because of the Ferrari, McLaren, Lotus battles) there used to be a lot more teams, but still very few at the top and many of the tail enders were just moving chicanes, (Amon, ATS, BRM, Eifelland, Ensign, Lola, Fittipaldi, Kojima, customer March teams, Martini, Merzario, Politoys, Rebaque, Surtees, Tecno, Thoedore, Token, Trojan, etc.). Did any of these teams actually make the racing better or did they just add more cars to the grid? Deep quality fields would make for better racing, not just under funded tail enders. There are exceptions (Williams, Benetton, Brawn, Red Bull). But to say that it is good to get rid of the manufacturers is a double edged sword. Next year should be interesting, but I have to agree with Ferrari and share great concern of several of the new teams not even making onto the grid next year, let alone being competitive.
I agree with Andreas that this isn't the beginning of the end - it's just a natural cycle. We are in probably the worst economic slump in 70+ years, and these companies are losing billions. They will be back in time. What I do not understand at all is the anger and outright venom displayed here towards some of the teams. It's like you guys genuinely hate Toyota or Honda or BMW. What's up with that? The teams can't all be on top, so Toyota being behind doesn't mean they are a bunch of idiots, it just means they didn't excel as much as Brawn did this year. What (some of) you guys are doing in displaying this wrath against these teams is sort of like saying the 2nd through 9th girls in the Miss Universe competition are ugly cows. It's completely without merit. I would love to see BMW, Honda, Toyota and Renault in F1. You guys would prefer 2 big names winning everything and a bunch of small guys competing for the scraps? How is that interesting? The big teams bring the viewers which brings the technology and the big name drivers. 2010 will be an interesting season to watch, but it's not going to be like 2009 or 2008... Frankly, I will be surprised if all the new teams make the grid. Folks seem to think we have an abundance of teams... we don't. Who thinks USF1 will even be on the grid? Will Manor be there? If so, will they be there in year 3? What are the chances that Campos or Lotus are no-shows or perhaps one-season teams? Toyota, BMW and Honda ain't coming back anytime in the next 2-3 years, so if these new teams show up at all, I don't see them lasting until the big guys return. It's very worrying that the big names are leaving. Comments like "good riddance, they sucked anyway" are ignorant.
I'd say plenty of non-McLaren-Ferrari-Williams teams have made F1 more interesting. Who can forget the Wolf exploits of the late-1970s and the fact that they won their first race! Simtek certainly made some decent waves when they came out until the death of Ratzenberger. What about Prost? They were pretty interesting in 1997..... Gurney Eagles, what about Senna's early promise shown in a Toleman! I love small privateer type racing teams. Yeah, they'll come and go, and yes, quality varies greatly. But they make F1 an amazing place.
