Customer Cars

[ArrowsFA1]

Looks like there could be a storm brewing over Super Aguri & Toro Rosso's plans to run (their own versions of?) 2006 Honda & Red Bull cars in 2007 :dozey:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/55924

IMHO they should be allowed to run 'customer cars' if they want to, but apparently this should not happen until 2008.

[Mark]

How can you stop them tho? If they own the rights to the design?

[ArrowsFA1]

I think that's the problem though. Is it their design or not? They argue 'yes' but others say 'no' and proving the case one way or another could be...errrr...difficult.

[Sleeper]

I Super Aguri's case they will probably do what Torro Rosso did this year. Buy the interlectual property rightes from Honda, make a few small changes and then build the cars themselves, it would conform to the letter of the rules I believe.

As for Torro Rosso, I think they're currently trying to work out a way to run the same Newey chassis that RBR will run next year. Cant see that happening myself.

[trumperZ06]

;) Aren't we really looking at Factory " A " and " B " teams ?

The Factory teams will share information & technology with one another anyway...

so shouldn't F-1 accept the facts and get on with the show ?

:s mokin:

[baker]

As far as I can tell Super Aguri are within the current rules because their 2007 car is based on intellectual property rights which are NOT held by another F1 constructor. The 2007 Honda will have a different chassis altogether.

However Toro Rosso and Red Bull, according to the link, intend to effectively share the same chassis for 2007 which, again as far I can tell, is not allowed. Presumably because this would mean sharing the same intellectual property rights.

Perhaps some of the other constructors have been miffed by Super Aguri's sudden turn of speed in the recent winter tests. :D

[Hawkmoon]

;) Aren't we really looking at Factory " A " and " B " teams ?

The Factory teams will share information & technology with one another anyway...

so shouldn't F-1 accept the facts and get on with the show ?

:s mokin:

Whilst I agree with you, it makes me smile at all the outrage that surrounded Sauber's relationship with Ferrari a few years ago.

Now it's perfectly OK for 'A' and 'B' teams that are using exactly the same cars, not just similar ones.

If it wasn't OK for Sauber to apparently copy the F2003-GA and run as Ferrari's defacto 'B' team in 2004, then it's not OK for Super Aguri and Torro Rosso to use a any other car than one they have designed themselves. The rules haven't changed since '04 and by the letter of the law, the two 'B' teams should have to wait until 2008 before getting the 'A' team's hand-me-downs.

I can perfectly understand why Spyker are resisting Super Aguri's attempts to get a Honda chassis. Afterall, no one is going to give Spyker a race winning car to play with.

[Valve Bounce]

I Super Aguri's case they will probably do what Torro Rosso did this year. Buy the interlectual property rightes from Honda, make a few small changes and then build the cars themselves, it would conform to the letter of the rules I believe.

As for Torro Rosso, I think they're currently trying to work out a way to run the same Newey chassis that RBR will run next year. Cant see that happening myself.

The point here is whether Super Aguri are buying the intellectual rights from Toshigi and not from Honda. I think that Eiji Matsumata informed us that Toshigi were running a parallel development for Honda last year. So the question here is whether Toshigi is a part of Honda or is it a separately registered company doing R&D for Honda. We need a smart lawyer for Super Aguri here; someone like Danny Crane.

[ArrowsFA1]

Whilst I agree with you, it makes me smile at all the outrage that surrounded Sauber's relationship with Ferrari a few years ago.
Fair point, although the idea of 'B' teams was not on the agenda at that time. It is now, and as Toro Rosso appeared to have been allowed to run a "Jaguar" in 2006 the door has opened for others who want to do something similar.

[harsha]

Spykar has every right to feel agreived...

[PSfan]

Well, I was thinking about this, and a question I have now is, how long has Honda R&D been developing for Honda F1? I would assume that its has just started this year, or else Aguri could have used this loophole last year. So if thats the case, then I don't believe that Aguri should be able to use last years Honda, or its design for 07. But I would believe that Honda R&D could design the Aguri car around the new Honda f1 car, and that should be alright...

If Spyker was smart, they would allow the use of 1 year old chassis this year (better that then Aguri, and Rosso utilizing a loophole to use current spec chassis.) and part of the deal would be to have them make a deal with Ferrari to use their year old chassis.

[ioan]

Fair point, although the idea of 'B' teams was not on the agenda at that time. It is now, and as Toro Rosso appeared to have been allowed to run a "Jaguar" in 2006 the door has opened for others who want to do something similar.

Well the idea it's on the agenda for 2007 not before.



If Spyker was smart, they would allow the use of 1 year old chassis this year (better that then Aguri, and Rosso utilizing a loophole to use current spec chassis.) and part of the deal would be to have them make a deal with Ferrari to use their year old chassis.

Not a bad idea, the question is if Spyker can afford to buy the Ferrari chassis, given that they are not a Ferrari B team.

[PSfan]

Not a bad idea, the question is if Spyker can afford to buy the Ferrari chassis, given that they are not a Ferrari B team.

Well depending on how its implemented, They wouldn't be owning the ferrari design, just the right to use it for one season, I would imagine, like Aguri, and Torro, they would have to manufacture the chassis' themselves. So how much Ferrari would charge for the use of their design is anyones guess. But I imagine if Torro & Aguri get to use their sister teams current chassis, its a easy bet as to who will finish last in the championship in 2007, and not hard to predict they will be running Ferrari engines :p :

[ioan]

But I imagine if Torro & Aguri get to use their sister teams current chassis, its a easy bet as to who will finish last in the championship in 2007, and not hard to predict they will be running Ferrari engines :p :

This would turn F1 into charity and would be wrong, I doubt Ferrari would agree to do that.
People know that having a good engine doesn't mean winning races.

[PSfan]

This would turn F1 into charity and would be wrong, I doubt Ferrari would agree to do that.
People know that having a good engine doesn't mean winning races.

I'm not suggesting that Ferrari give away the design to their year old chassis, Just that what ever value is placed on the design, be weighed against the possibility that should Spyker's main competitors be allowed to use chassis' developed by a third party, then there is a good chance that Spyker will finish last in 07, which won't look that good for its engine supplier... Besides, Spyker and Ferrari already have the f1 engine deal, and an engine deal for Ferrari powered Spyker SUV's which is more then what Sauber had with Ferrari, and its still arguable that Sauber got their hands on ferrari designs at some point...

Oh and I almost forgot, if Spyker use Ferrari designed chassis then there might be the possibility of some benefitial feedback, which might be of some value with the limited testing this year...

[Powered by Cosworth]

I always thought you could use a teams car aslong as the Team wasn't in F1 anymore. Example:

Toro Rosso Could use the old 'Red Bull' car, but argued it was designed a non-constructing team (Jaguar).
Just like Minardi (If they wanted to) Could run all the Arrows that Stoddy bought a while ago.

[sonic_roadhog]

Been here before haven't we?? Ligier/Benetton, Ferrari/Sauber, RBR/STR. As long as the team own the rights nothing can be done. And quite frankly even if these smaller teams made a completly new design would we notice - modern cars are all so similar who cares??

Sonic :)

[harsha]

it is probable to think that ferrari might benefit from spyker using their chassis as well as their engines,in that case,we might well see a ferrari at the front row of the grid and a ferrari engine at the back row of the grid

[PSfan]

I always thought you could use a teams car aslong as the Team wasn't in F1 anymore. Example:

Toro Rosso Could use the old 'Red Bull' car, but argued it was designed a non-constructing team (Jaguar).
Just like Minardi (If they wanted to) Could run all the Arrows that Stoddy bought a while ago.


Well from what I understand, Toro was able to use the Jaguar chassis, was because Jaguar F1 wasn't the constructor:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/55813

FIA president Max Mosley said earlier this year, when commenting about the Toro Rosso situation: "My understanding is that with Ford/Jaguar, the parts were, for some obscure reason to do with tax and the internal structure of the Ford Motor Company, designed and built by a company that was not the racing team.

"If the parts are designed and manufactured by another company, and you own the intellectual property rights of the car that requires them, then it is completely legitimate.

"The thing you can't do is if you're Williams you can't run a McLaren front wing. But both Williams and McLaren could run a Lola front wing."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, this seems like the loophole Honda are trying to jump threw by having Honda R&D, design the car instead of Honda F1.

[grassrootsracer]

Another interesting point comes into play when the financial and points risk to backmarker teams is considered, as pointed out in a recent Autosport article:

"Teams like Spyker and Williams could lose several constructors' championship positions, and many millions of FOM payments, if both Super Aguri and Toro Rosso leapfrog them as a result of running customer cars."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/55953

However, this smells of political BS and doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth.

[BDunnell]

Been here before haven't we?? Ligier/Benetton, Ferrari/Sauber, RBR/STR.

And, most famously, Shadow/Arrows - an occasion on which something was done. I know that that was a rather different affair, though!

[sonic_roadhog]

And, most famously, Shadow/Arrows - an occasion on which something was done. I know that that was a rather different affair, though!

Yeah, didn't mention it because it was different. No one gave permission for the design to be swiped.

Sonic :)

[BDunnell]

Yeah, didn't mention it because it was different. No one gave permission for the design to be swiped.

Sonic :)

But the designers thought they didn't need permission to swipe it, because it was their design.

[courageous]

I can't help thinking its a bit of a silly argument - the principle of customer cars has already been agreed for 2008, prize money aside, what difference is there in a year?

It is unlikely that any other team (other than Prodrive) will run customer cars in '08, so Williams & Spyker will still be stuffed.

[Valve Bounce]

Another interesting point comes into play when the financial and points risk to backmarker teams is considered, as pointed out in a recent Autosport article:

"Teams like Spyker and Williams could lose several constructors' championship positions, and many millions of FOM payments, if both Super Aguri and Toro Rosso leapfrog them as a result of running customer cars."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/55953

However, this smells of political BS and doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth.


The way I see it, arbitration would be the best way to procede. Then we can get a firm ruling one way or the other.

[trumperZ06]

The way I see it, arbitration would be the best way to procede. Then we can get a firm ruling one way or the other.

;) And the FIA following their normal operating procedure will...

"arbitrate this" until 2008...

when the problem solves itself.

:s mokin:

[wmcot]

From what I understand by reading FIA rulings in the past, there doesn't have to be that much different on one chassis to make it "unique" in the FIA's eyes.

Then again, I don't have a problem with customer cars as long as they aren't re-branded as something they aren't. In the 1970's, there were teams running customer cars all the time (I specifically recall Mark Donahue driving Penske McLarens) The grids were fuller and the racing was better. The question that comes up is that if a "customer" car wins or scores points, who gets the credit for the constructor's points? I think that the FIA should limit constructor's points to those scored by the team's two factory cars. Customer cars could earn driver's points, but not constructor points.

[eloyf1]

I think Super Aguri can use the RA106 chassis 'cuase they "say" it was made by Honda Japan, when the Honda F1 2006's chassis was made in Europe... It's ****ing crazy, but true, so I believe RBR would say they make their cars in England, when STR make theirs in Faenza...

[Valve Bounce]

I think Super Aguri can use the RA106 chassis 'cuase they "say" it was made by Honda Japan, when the Honda F1 2006's chassis was made in Europe... It's ****ing crazy, but true, so I believe RBR would say they make their cars in England, when STR make theirs in Faenza...
The names of the two companies are nearly the same, but they may be registered as different companies.