VW "LOOKING" at F1 with Liberty in charge going forward into 2021

Yes, they will have to do that to guaranty a level playing field and gain some credibility.

Allegedly Liberty wants to things differently; they could start with that.

 

I see only one Bugatti participation in F1; that was in 1956 at the French GP.

Bugatti wheeled a new racer for Maurice Trintignant to drive in his home GP.
The Bugatti 251 had a transversal 8-cylinder in line rear engine (I kid you not!) designed by former Ferrari designer Columbo.

The car was plagued by lack of development; Trintignant qualified way down the field and battled with a stuck throttle for most of the time, before giving up.

The Bugatti 251 was never raced again and disappeared into oblivion. Apparently 3 cars had been built at the cost of 60 millions of French Francs according to Bugatti aficionados, but only one seems to have survived. It has been a painful flop.

 

yes - it was a terrible flop - no development and Ettore was gone by then - Jean Bugatti was trying to keep things going.

however if you look at the late 20's and early 30's - Bugatti was the car to beat ... type 35 until the Germans came along in the late 30's.

I just have a soft spot for cars that carry the original owner's name - Bugatti, Ferrari, Porsche, Pagani, etc... it was one guys ideas - and they made the company & cars work... I'd love to see a modern Bugatti racing - the name deserves it!

 

I believe under today's F1 climate, historic names and nostalgia don't mix. Today is a totally different world. I love the past.

 

I've been watching f1 for 30 years.

I absolutely would rather have big manufacturers battling at the pinnacle of motorsports, even if just in the back of other team's cars. I could care less about Sauber vs. Manor vs. Haas. I want to see Ferrari vs. Mercedes vs. BMW vs. Honda vs. Renault. The big guns going after each other with the most technologically advanced cars in the world. I can't go buy a Williams or Sauber or Red Bull car, so I don't really care how they do on the track as nothing they do there gets transferred to a road car I can buy unless they are working tightly with a manufacturer (ie Williams BMW). That at least gave us the sublime v10 m5 and m6 cars.

I hated the end of the v8 era, the only thing good about those engines was the noise, but they were development locked, rev limited, forced equal garbage by the end. At least now it's a real race where the team that builds the best power unit wins. I have a feeling at least 80% of the grumbling in here is due to the fact that Ferrari didn't build the best PU instead of Mercedes. The new cars are way more fun to watch on track as, at least at the beginning of this era, they were no longer on rails and sliding all around. I'm not looking forward to more aero as it's going to ruin the close racing and the drivers are going to be back on rails again, which is boring to watch.

I don't know what kind of rose colored glasses you guys are wearing but the last years of the v8's sucked, the only redeeming factor was the new Pirelli tires that mixed stuff up because the teams didn't have a handle on them yet.

This year would be great if they reduced aero instead of increased it...A little more power, new tires with more mechanical grip and less aero would make for some really awesome racing.

And **** the sound already, Jesus. I went and saw the v10's in person at the peak and they were awesome, but if you offer me two engines in the same car and one is loud and the other powerful, give me the powerful one. These cars are faster over a single lap than the v10's or v8's even with ****tier tires, so they're better. Sound is a tertiary or lower concern, give me a fast car that requires driver involvement with good racing that is completely silent and I'd rather watch it than a ****ty on-rails procession that's loud as all hell (which was a few of the so-called pinnacle v10 years).

 

It wasn't one manufacturer - it was everyone except Ferrari. Yeah Mercedes had a leg up because they knew the future was forced induction and hybrids - and they were right. Almost all performance cars made today have one or the other or both.

F1 should be and always has been about the pinnacle of vehicular technology and v6 turbo hybrids are MUCH closer to that than the rev limited, development locked v8's were. Those things are now antiques. Ferrari doesn't make one, Mercedes doesn't, Mclaren doesn't. Who still does, Audi? What's in Ford's new super car? It's certainly not an NA v8, is it? What's in Mclaren's cars? What are in Ferrari's cars? No NA v8's. Those are relics, both in road cars and top motorsports. What do LMP1 run? No NA motors, period. You want to watch antiques race with limited development v8's badged by different manufacturers, there's a racing series that does exactly that. Go watch NASCAR. Their ratings aren't so hot, either.

 

Sorry, but Jean Bugatti was long gone by then. He died circa 1937/38 in a road accident testing a car near Molsheim. Bugatti went on declining after his death; he was truly the best engineer in the company; father Ettore was an artist more than an engineer. In fact, Ettore Bugatti copied a lot from other car makers, it has to be said. He bought a couple of American Miller to copy their overhead twin cams cylinder head he could design himself, etc...

I personally don't like companies that usurp famous names from the past and cash on past glory. That cheapen the name, IMO. Today's Bugatti has absolutely nothing in common with the pre-war company. Shame on VW for hijacking the name. Same for Bentley, nothing in common with cars designed by WO Bentley before 1930, those are priceless.

 

No they're not faster. In fact they're slower.

They've got (far) more aero, far more torque, less peak power. The tires on a single lap should have the around the same grip as the grooved ''V10'' tires. On a single lap they're slower. A1 ring is not truly representative, the track is shorter now than the 2003 time, which was also set on old and very rough tarmac. Now the track is very smooth.

Nowadays we start with full tank of fuel as well, making the cars even slower for most of the race. 2007 opening stint at catalunya was 7 (!) seconds a lap (!!!) quicker than current F1 cars. As an indication, after 5 laps the 2007 cars would be 30 seconds ahead of the 2016 field... Qualifying was still faster in 2007 as well, with far less power and race starting fuel on board.

So your theory of the cars being faster now is rubbish.

I for one enjoyed F1 back then far more. Was there much overtaking? No, but there was close following for lap after lap, which is impossible now. It wasn't perfect, but now we're much further from perfect.

I've seen the V12s, V10s, V8s and V6's. The V6's noise is terrible. Absolutely terrible and not inspiring at all. They may be nearly as powerful as the V10s, certainly more torque, but boring. There is more procession these days than then, because cars can't follow each other closer.

 

If you have been watching F1 for so long, you have certainly witnessed how big manufacturers have used it for their own interests and not for the good of the sport in general.

Big manufacturers come and go as they wish; they are not reliable participants. They gate crash F1 with big budgets, sometimes after obtaining unfair advantage by lobbying the FIA or FOM to get the rules they want, then they dominate the small teams and end up putting some out of business.

Then, when their publicity campaign stops or the economy tells then to cut down on lavish expanses, they leave F1 at short notice. Just look at the last 30 years, and tell me if BMW, Renault, Toyota, Honda, Ford, Jaguar, haven't done just that, several times in the case of Renault and Honda! Mercedes will do the same, and Renault and Honda's participation isn't guaranteed 10 years ahead.

In short, big manufacturers completely destabilise F1, and then the small players are left to pick up the pieces.

So, I would prefer having a championship with regular teams like Williams, McLaren, Red Bull, Sauber, Manor and else than one dominated by big manufacturers. It is after all predominantly a DRIVERS championship.

If you want to watch manufacturers competing with cars you can buy, I suggest you follow GT or Touring car racing, and leave F1 to the real enthusiasts.

 

I would agree with that, but then you will upset those who call themselves "the car guys", if you don't put noise on top of your list of priorities for a reshape of F1.

For some, noise is all important; for me, it isn't. Power is.

 

V10 days were WAY worse for procession racing. Almost all passing was done in the pits. I have a couple of races recorded from that era and they were pure processions. There were like 2 or 3 passes a race outside the start, it was ridiculous. But, Ferrari were winning and they sounded good so everyone put on their rose colored glasses.

The cars this year broke a few qualifying records and they don't have more downforce than the v10 era cars with their ultra wide wings and less regulated floors. Yes, race lap times are slower because of fuel and tire differences, but over 1 lap they're as fast or faster than ever in history. They'll be even faster this year. Torque, as anyone with an engineering degree will tell you, is meaningless by itself. It's HP, and more specifically, HP under the usable rpm curve, and more HP under the curve is more power, even if the peak number is less. These power units have more HP in the usable rpm range, so are more powerful, even if the peak number is less. Torque is meaningless, the v10's had half the torque (or less) but still were almost as fast because HP is the important number. They just had slightly less throughout the whole rpm range as they were a lot peakier and didn't have 8 gears.

As to the sound, like I said, it's like a tertiary or worse concern. Yeah, good sound is nice, just like a nice livery is nice, but it doesn't add more than window dressing. If the main draw for f1 is the sound, you can't be much of a fan. I hated the end of the v8 era due to the almost spec like nature of those rev limited, development locked antiques. To go back to that just for sound would be crazy.

 

You know that I think sound is hugely important but I do think that other things are more important such as sorting out the aero properly, as that will sort out much better racing.

In fact I could be pretty happy with twin turbo V8, no energy recovery from the exhaust.

 

That's the whole debate about F1; should it stay a sport, or just a technology showcase.

Does F1 have to be relevant to street cars, or can it have its own logic.

It's, after all, a drivers championship, and you don't need high tech to determine that: power alone can do that.

A 1000hp formula doesn't need hybrid system, a myriad of computers and sophisticated aero to sort out the men from the boys. It can be done far more simply than the present rules dictate, and certainly cheaper.

 

I go along with that but you know that, in fact, a turbo acts as a muffler, so a turbo engine will never sound as crisp as an atmo one.

To keep the sound, a mechanical supercharger would be best, but at what cost ?

 

I do watch GT racing, but I also want to see the future, the cutting edge of technology. GT racing doesn't have that. F1 does, and should as it then feeds the GT cars. Mercedes is building a supercar with a version of the f1 powerplant and I can't wait to see it.

Plenty of privateers have left the sport, too. More recently than any manufacturers, and as a whole are way more volatile in participation in f1 than the manufacturers. Ferrari is a manufacturer, the most long lived team in the sport. Manufacturers as a whole are way more committed to the sport for longer terms than privateers. Some privateer teams are in the sport for 2 or 3 years (or less), the shortest manufacturer stint in recent memory was probably Toyota and that was still 8 years long. BMW was in the sport for 10 years. When a manufacturer enters the sport, they're generally committed for 5-10 years, bring money and sponsorship (and viewers). A privateer might only last 1 year. Some never even make it to a race (USF1 ring a bell?).

 

Then what's the point of Ferrari participating? F1 has never been just about the drivers, in fact it's always been the opposite. Spec racing is about the drivers, F1 is about the cars, and to me, for the last 30 years (and looking at the history) has always been with a few seasons exception where you had two very strong drivers in a dominant car. The teams always have and always will prioritize the constructors championship, as it should be. There's a reason f1 is so much more popular than any of the spec series, and that's because the cars and manufacturers (Ferrari!) are a huge draw. Killing that kills f1, at least for me. Then I'll just watch Lemans and GT racing as at least the cars will have meaningful differences.

 

Ferrari aside, you will always find that the manufacturers participation is less than most small teams.
They usually have to leave because they are dwarfed by the big constructors budgets, put out of business or not rewarded for their participation as they should do.

We have lost quite a lot of valuable teams that brought a lot to F1 and supported it for many years: Lotus, Cooper, Brabham, BRM, for example. I wouldn't call them insignificant.- they won championships!

Among the others, Ligier, March, Minardi, played a significant role, so did Tyrrell, etc...

In fact, for many years, there was only Ferrari and the small teams on the grid! They sustained F! Without them F1 wouldn't have survived!

Where were BMW, Toyota, Mercedes and others at that time?

Also, big manufacturers DON'T make race cars; they subcontract their racing programs to small engineering outfits, buy existing small teams, or poach staff from them. What is racing is only a brand on a car made somewhere else, and financed by the big manufacturer advertising budget.

Mercedes was Brawn, which was Honda, which was BAR, which was Tyrrell originally.

BMW was Sauber before.

Renault (the Enstone team) was so-called Lotus, was Renault, was Benetton which was Toleman before!

Still exited about big manufacturers?

 

Cars have far more downforce these days, simple as that. If you look at the front wings of the 2004 and the Mercedes w07 you'll see the difference in elements...the W07 had an enormous amount of it, dictating where all the aero goes. The cars where longer, so more floor area = more downforce. Back in 2004 the flooring was massively regulated as well, and now they know more on exploiting, too. The rear wings where wider then, yes...now they're more developed. And the front wings where much less wide than current ones

Many people hated the Ferrari dominance, many on here got bored with it too. In fact the rules changed purely because of Ferrari dominance.

Today there may be more passing, but it's artificial so not memorable. Was it ideal in 2004? No, plenty things where wrong then as well. As I spoke about this a few days ago, the refueling allowed strategy to negate passing if it was too hard, so few would take the risk.

If you think racing right now is good, be my guest...

 

Ahem, Ford? Not exactly small.

BMW was there for part of that time, Honda as well.

Without manufacturers coming in and swooping those teams up, a lot of them just disappear (Lotus, Brawn etc). There's room for both, but without the manufacturers there'd be no engines. When was the last time a small manufacturer was competitive engine wise? The Matra days? Cosworth wasn't competitive without Ford backing, Ford left and their engines were no longer competitive and now gone. Ford kept all those small teams competitive, without their backing what happens to F1 back in those days? Ferrari dominates and gets bored and leaves most likely or some other manufacturer with the resources to make a competitive engine has to come in.

edit: Mugen Honda was competitive for a season and despite the name not part of Honda. That's the only time since Matra I can think of a non-manufacturer engine being competitive.

 

It was created as the World Drivers Championship first.

Only 10 years later, it became in parallel a World Constructors Championship.

Now teams prioritise the WCC, because since Bernie Ecclestone took over the organisation, they are financially rewarded by the number of points they score during the year. That's the Concorde Agreement.

A WDC doesn't necessarily benefit a team (in terms of sponsorship perhaps), but a good ranking in the WCC does guaranties a good part of the following year budget will be covered.

In most public opinion, a WDC is more important than a WCC! Most people would be unable to tell you which cars Fittipaldi , Stewart or Piquet drove when they became world champion, and many thinks that Schumacher won ALL his 7 championships with Ferrari!!

 

They don't, 2010 was peak downforce. RB6 was probably the highest downforce car created but at that point the engines were weaker than the v10's and didn't have refueling so race laps weren't the fastest. The new cars haven't eclipsed that and the tires are worse. 2011 the diffuser shrunk, a bunch of other aero stuff removed (f-ducts and all that fun stuff) etc. Then 2012 we got the pirelli tires along with more neutered aero that really changed stuff. To think we're back to 2010 levels given the smaller wings, smaller diffusers, elimination of off-throttle blown diffusers etc. isn't true. Look at the RB6 in 2010, it was flat in a ton of corners they have to lift now - yet the cars are faster in qualifying. Why? They have a ton more usable power now, especially compared to the v8's. Maybe the v10's were similar or slightly more powerful but the rules are so much different it's hard to tell. They had 2 element front wings and super wide rear wings with a tire war then, so tons of grip. Also why they couldn't get near each other on-track to make a pass. I think Williams set a couple of speed records this year, further underlying the massive power they have.

I thought the pirelli tires were one of the best things to happen to the sport in a long time as the drivers actually had to drive the cars again instead of running through turns on rails, plus they'd fall off a cliff if they abused them. Watching the first laps in Australia with the even lower downforce in 2014 and the v6 turbos coupled with the slippery Pirellis was awesome. I remember Vettel hacksawing the wheel in the Red Bull at 120mph 6" from the wall thinking he had a sack the size of my head. I hadn't seen that type of driving since the mid 90's before aero really ramped up.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1h4340_2014-australian-grand-prix-fp3-sebastian-vettel-onboard_auto

I'm excited for this year but think increasing aero was a huge mistake. They're already at their 3 second target for increased lap times without it and without the wider tires or more power. They should have reduced aero, tbh.

 

BRM won a WDC and races up to 1967 with their own engines.

Dan Gurney had his own engine in his Eagle which won a GP in 1967, I think.

The Cosworth DFV was commissioned by Walter Hayes, Ford UK CEO, to replace the supply of Coventry-Climax engines to small independent teams.

Ford obtained more publicity by powering 3/4 of the grid than by entering its own team!

 

Beyond paying Keith Duckworth £250 000 for the design of the DFV, and the agreement with Colin Chapman to have exclusive use of the engine for one year before it was made available to ALL teams, Ford didn't have much involvement .

Colin Chapman was on board because along with Duckworth, he was the only one believing in a stress-bearing engine doing away with rear chassis. The other constructors weren't so convinced, and Lotus was the guinea pig in that experiment - quite successfully as it turned out to be!

Walter Hayes also insisted that the Ford name appeared on the cam covers for a period of 10 years. But the marketing was mostly Cosworth business.

Yes, Cosworth's fortune declined later when the turbo appeared in F1. Duckworth was against the turbo, and lobbied against it. He wouldn't build one for F1, although the DFV turbo was introduced with some success at Indy.

In later years, other engineers at Cosworth built a 1500cc turbo engine for F1, but without Duckworth input. They were tried unsuccessfully in F1 with Beatrice and other teams, but the Honda, TAG, Renault and Ferrari turbos were much better.