Horner whines to the FIA

[Nem14]

Christian wants the FIA to handicap Mercedes because the Renault power unit can't handle the competition.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-urges-fia-to-act-on-mercedes-domination

[anfield5]

Strange.. I seem to remember Horner being quite happy and anti any sort of equality moves, only 3-7 years ago. I wonder what has changed?

[anfield5]

I love this part of his quote "Horner has called for action to stop fans from losing interest in the sport because one team is clearly ahead of its rivals." :D

[steveaki13]

Ha. He has some gall:rolleyes:.....

[denkimi]

he has a point. mercedes being a full second faster than everybody else for the rest of the season is good for no one.

[dj_bytedisaster]

His main gripe though was that when RB was ahead, the FIA stepped in every time to nobble them. They were dominant in 2011 because of their EBD and the bendy chassis bits, so both were banned, hampering them in early 2012. When they recovered due to finding a sort of 'emulated EBD' though Renault's four cylinder mode and dominated 2013, that was banned as well.

So far the FIA has done nothing to work against that brutal Merc juggernaut. They are farther ahead than Ferrari in the early noughts or RB ever was. Yet they are left in peace. In that regard he may have a point, but of course this being Horner, nobody takes it seriously anymore. He's whinged so often in the past about minor things, now that he actually has a point for a change, nobody listens anymore.

[Doc Austin]

There's nothing wrong with the rules. There is nothing wrong with Mercedes, and there is probably even nothing wrong with Red Bull.

Renault just sucks. That's the entire story.

Ferrari were in even worse shape last year, but they developed their equipment within the rules and not they look pretty good, as do Sauber with the same engine. It can be done. Renault just didn't do it.
and I can't remember the last time he had anything bad to say about anyone or anything. Maybe they just don't give a chit.

Even Adrian Newey is critical of Renault (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/newey-sees-no-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-with-renault).

"We keep trying to offer help and try to be involved but there seems to be a real reluctance to engage. It's one thing being in the position where you're not competitive but you can see your way out of it.
"It's another thing when you're not competitive and your partner doesn't seem to be willing to engage." Adrian Newey

It sounds like Renault just doesn't give a chit. Why in the world would anyone involved in F1 not accept help from Adrian Newey?

[Doc Austin]

And now, it appears Dieter Mateschitz wants to sell the team and bail completely.

Red Bull Racing's F1 future in doubt (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-racing-s-f1-future-in-doubt-490864)

If you take the two Red Bulls and two Torro Rossos out of the picture, how many cars start yesterday?

[anfield5]

I always kind of laugh at these situations, always have - always will. Everyone has the same rules to work with (or bend), just because one team/driver is doing well you can't penalise them. Penalise RedBull etc for not trying hard enough

[dj_bytedisaster]

I always kind of laugh at these situations, always have - always will. Everyone has the same rules to work with (or bend), just because one team/driver is doing well you can't penalise them. Penalise RedBull etc for not trying hard enough

Thing is though other teams WERE penalized for doing well in the past. When Ferrari had bespoke tyres in the early noughts the tyre regs were changed to eff them over. When Merc in the late nineties shot costs through the roof and had a massively superior engine by using Romulan alloys, they were banned. And RB had their EBD banned twice. Current Merc team is not penalized. You can think about it what you want a bit of a point is there. It's just the wrong main saying it.

[Doc Austin]

It's the FIA. You knew they were going to **** someone over. Even handed rules enforcement has never been something they were good at.

[Duncan]

he has a point. mercedes being a full second faster than everybody else for the rest of the season is good for no one.

Dunno. It's pretty good for Mercedes.

[Duncan]

Motorsport.com understands Horner could be referring to Appendix 4 of the power unit homologation rules, which states:

"A power unit delivered to the FIA after 28 February 2014, or modified and re-delivered to the FIA after that date, which the FIA is satisfied, in its absolute discretion and after full consultation with all other suppliers of power units for the Championship, could fairly and equitably be allowed to compete with other homologated power units."

Horner said: "The FIA, within the rules, have an equalisation mechanism. I think something that perhaps they need to look at.

"equitable" is not the same as "equal". It only means everybody gets a fair shot. How has Renault not had a fair shot at building a decent engine?

[CNR]

it just shows how much they are ripping the other teams off with b spec engines (williams lotus force india and McLaren after they sold there share)

as for motorsport.com thieving (as long term members of this forum know)

[Tazio]

i

as for motorsport.com thieving (as long term members of this forum know)
Yup!

[Tazio]

When Merc in the late nineties shot costs through the roof and had a massively superior engine by using Romulan alloys, they were banned. That is what they want you to believe. They simply cloaked those parts. Go ahead, ask any Klingon. :alien:

[rjbetty]

And now, it appears Dieter Mateschitz wants to sell the team and bail completely.

Red Bull Racing's F1 future in doubt (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-racing-s-f1-future-in-doubt-490864)

If you take the two Red Bulls and two Torro Rossos out of the picture, how many cars start yesterday?

Oh yep, here we go!

[Hawkmoon]

Thing is though other teams WERE penalized for doing well in the past. When Ferrari had bespoke tyres in the early noughts the tyre regs were changed to eff them over. When Merc in the late nineties shot costs through the roof and had a massively superior engine by using Romulan alloys, they were banned. And RB had their EBD banned twice. Current Merc team is not penalized. You can think about it what you want a bit of a point is there. It's just the wrong main saying it.

I think the difference is that Ferrari, Red Bull etc were doing something that was a little different to the others and the FIA stepped in because they didn't like where those developments would lead. As far as I can see, Mercedes aren't doing anything radically different to the others, they are just doing it better. How do you drag Mercedes back to the pack? They don't have a trick diffuser or bespoke tyres or flexible wings or ridiculously rare metals in their engines. What do you take off the car to slow it down that isn't also on every other car?

[Tazio]

I think the difference is that Ferrari, Red Bull etc were doing something that was a little different to the others and the FIA stepped in because they didn't like where those developments would lead. As far as I can see, Mercedes aren't doing anything radically different to the others, they are just doing it better. How do you drag Mercedes back to the pack? They don't have a trick diffuser or bespoke tyres or flexible wings or ridiculously rare metals in their engines. What do you take off the car to slow it down that isn't also on every other car?
Good post Hawk. They've got something going for them in the application of their PU, or somfin', 'cause they lapped every other Mercedes powered rig except Felipe, and he was the better part of one minute behind. just sayin'.

[zako85]

Things have certainly been done to handicap Red Bulls during the Red Bull domination. For example, the changes to Pirelli tires in 2012 and 2013, obviously specially designed to handicap high downforce cars such as Red Bull, while Mercedes was given an opportunity for a clandestine tire test in 2013 season. This charade went on until the tires became so fragile that they started to explode at Silvestone in 2013, causing serious safety concerns, and then the tire design was changed again towards something more durable. Strangely, once usable tires were provided in the mid-season no one was able to catch Red Bulls in the second half of season. I am guessing the FIA will change its attitude towards Mercedes domination once the 2015 season looks like a photocopy of the 2014 season.

[Big Ben]

I don't really understand F1 anymore. And I don't understand the people running it. Horner's right. F1 has some big problems but what he proposes is embarrassing. Asking for FIA to slow down Mercedes is pathetic. Why no one's asking to end this semi-frozen engine development BS? It's done in the name of cost cutting and yet half of the teams are all but bankrupt. It's obviously working like a charm. While really achieving nothing it also creates this 'competition' where after one race we all know Hamilton's going to be WDC and Mercedes WCC. All the people who participated in making these rules should resign and go home. They achieved absolutely nothing. They failed horribly.

And you have the McLaren Honda situation. They had 3 tests to get things done and they f***ed up. And now they participate in races for testing. It's definitely not a sport, it's gambling.

[AdvEvo]

It was last weekend a 11 car race. Maybe we should get used to this kind of fields.

[Doc Austin]

I think if Red Bull, Torro Rosso, Sauber, Force India and Lotus (all of whom have complained about costs) band together, that's ten cars out of the current 20. They could split the field in half and force a change.

Maybe the Concord agreement doesn't work that way, but I can't imagine a boycott by 50% of the entrants wouldn't get the attention of those who control things. It's also not hard to believe if Red Bull took the lead that those other teams would not follow. They were threatening a boycott last year anyway.

Everyone has seen this coming. There was talk by Monza last year of three car teams, and not much later the small teams were talking "financial crisis." It was by Russia that Marussia and Carterham were missing races. All pre season we wondered if force India and Sauber were even going to make it, and Manor still hasn't turned a wheel.

Even we internet experts saw this coming, and still, formula One let this happen.

[N. Jones]

Christian wants the FIA to handicap Mercedes because the Renault power unit can't handle the competition.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-urges-fia-to-act-on-mercedes-domination

I know this has been said before - STR is doing okay with Renault. I think RB needs to work on their car some more.

[N. Jones]

he has a point. mercedes being a full second faster than everybody else for the rest of the season is good for no one.

But that has been true for decades.
Mclaren dominated the mid to late 80's
Williams dominated most of the 90's
Ferrari dominated the late 90's/early 2000's
And we all know who dominated 2010-2013...

[N. Jones]

as for motorsport.com thieving (as long term members of this forum know)

What in the hell does THAT mean???

[Whyzars]

But that has been true for decades.
Mclaren dominated the mid to late 80's
Williams dominated most of the 90's
Ferrari dominated the late 90's/early 2000's
And we all know who dominated 2010-2013...

Exactly.

Mercedes may not be running at anything near the maximum capability of their package yet either.

If Mercedes are foxing then the other teams are totally screwed, now and for the foreseeable future.

Only question for 2015 - Which driver will finish third in the WDC this year?

[Alfa Fan]

What in the hell does THAT mean???

IIRC they stole the old forums and rebranded them as there own.

[A FONDO]

Only question for 2015 - Which driver will finish third in the WDC this year?
Should be Vettel. Both Williamses aren't complete drivers. Ricciardo is going to have many troubles with the french engine.

[Doc Austin]

I know this has been said before - STR is doing okay with Renault. I think RB needs to work on their car some more.

Red Bull's biggest complaint is "driveability," so it's a good bet that Torro Rosso is running something different. My guess is that they are running an older engine map, one that actually worked but maybe gave less outright power.

I kind of doubt there is much wrong with any Adrian Newey chassis. You just can't get the most out of a car, or even make sensible adjustments, when the power delivery has big gaps in it.

Renault is just lost, that's all. The biggest surprise is that things seem to have gotten worse since Mario Iilen has gotten involved.

[Doc Austin]

IIRC they stole the old forums and rebranded them as there own.

If chipped baloney got screwed I am all for it.

[Doc Austin]

Mercedes answers:

"I think 'just get your f***ing head down, work hard and try to sort it out'," (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mercedes-hits-back-at-red-bull-criticism) ............. Toto Wolfe

"Those who continuously criticise have no idea what they are talking about," Niki Lauda

And, the ultimate burn.......

"Everything comes from Red Bull because they're annoyed their car doesn't work" Niki Lauda

[CNR]

Red Bull's biggest complaint is "driveability," so it's a good bet that Torro Rosso is running something different. b spec engine not the same one as redbull

[truefan72]

b spec engine not the same one as redbull

but yet, the STR is more hooked up than the rBR and is probably that bit faster.
Lets rember that RBR won 3/4 straight championships with an engine that was slightly less powerful than the competition., but yet in 2 of those 4 years still manged to comfortably distance themselves from the competition in most races. to the point where vettel would often just toy around in the car and go for fastest laps and other things since the race was well in hand.

Mercedes advantage is not the engine per se, but the entire package. Which ironically was the same thing that gave RBR its advantage when they dominated.

I have a 100+ quotes of Horner during those days talking about the RBR dominance being good for the sport and that other teams need to figure out how to catch up rather than them taking their foot of the gas. So his position now is laughable at best and downright idiotic at worst. Mercedes isn't even close to the top times in the speed traps. I believe 4th behind Williams, Sauber and ferrari.

Yes I would like to see more competitive racing, but i am not going to begrudge MB for doing whats right better than the rest.
Their cars are heavily scrutineered and unlike RBR in its heyday, have not fallen afoul of any regs or gained dubious advantages.
So i firmly say to horner...STFU

[Rollo]

Mercedes advantage is not the engine per se, but the entire package. Which ironically was the same thing that gave RBR its advantage when they dominated.

The three engines for 2014:

Mercedes - 169 points per car
Ferrari - 55 points per car
Renault - 36 points per car

The four engines for 2013:

Mercedes - 93 points per car
Ferrari - 74 points per car
Renault - 114 points per car
Cosworth - 0 points per car

That says that relative to 2013, Mercedes engines scored more points than Renault did. Renault fell off the cliff in terms of performance.



Yes I would like to see more competitive racing, but i am not going to begrudge MB for doing whats right better than the rest.


I'm not going to begrudge MB for being better either. That's the point of motor racing and of sport generally, to go away and to find ways to win.
For many years the DFV Cosworth was the thing to have and then, bang, out of nowhere the boffins at BMW came out with their BMW M12. They looked at the rules, and made something better. Full credit to M-B.



So i firmly say to horner...STFU

+1

Absolutely!

[truefan72]

http://en.espnf1.com/blogs/motorsport/story/194853.html

great articles that somewhat proves my point.

of particular note:

"But a key difference between Mercedes' run of success and that enjoyed by Red Bull is that the Milton Keynes racers were constantly pushing the envelope, using solutions on their car that had never even been considered by the FIA's technical enforcers until they were confronted by them in scrutineering. Red Bull were adept at operating in the grey area between the letter of the law and its intention, which is exactly what an all-conquering team is supposed to be doing.
Adrian Newey and co. interpreted the regulations in ways that were legal - or impossible to prove as being illegal - and because the FIA were unable to prevent the team from running components that were too clever for their own good, the Federation was forced to close up loopholes retrospectively, strengthening each rule so that wording and spirit were better aligned.
Mercedes, on the other hand, have followed the 2014 power unit regulations to the letter, and simply came up with a solution that far outstrips any of those developed by rival manufacturers Renault and Ferrari. Should scrutineering of the power unit discover any innovations considered to be within the letter but outside the spirit of the law, the FIA will act and tweak the regulations to ensure that all manufacturers comply with the rules as they were intended to be read."

[Doc Austin]

Getting and maintaining an advantage is certainly part of racing, but it gets old when you are spending hundreds of millions of dollars and it's the other guy that has that advantage, and worse when you can't overcome it. It stops being fun when you don't even have a chance, and right now, no one has a chance against Mercedes.

Right now the problem is that no one can afford to lose. If I am Renault, I can't justify wasting that much money to get my ass handed to me every week on the world stage. If you want to keep the manufacturers involved, you have to keep them competitive, or at least give them the chance to make themselves competitive.

I certainly don't have the answer because I am also not in favor of restricting Mercedes or giving the others an artificial boost. The rules were the same for everyone going in, so it's too late to change now if you want to have a fair series.

See, the thing is, the FIA should not have written such a ridiculous set of regulations that would have allow this to happen in the first place. We never heard much griping at all over the old regulations, at least not over the engine formula. Maybe that's because it was not such a complex formula that only one company in the world could figure it out and make it work.

We need less complex and less expensive cars.

[Tazio]

If chipped baloney got screwed I am all for it.
I'm pretty sure it was Mark that got screwed mate, but I never got all the details!

[CNR]

the way it was before the motorsport.com beat up
http://www.speedcafe.com/2015/03/15/horner-calls-for-fia-action-on-engine-disparity/
"Red Bull Racing boss Christian Horner has called for the FIA to take action over engine disparity in Formula 1 amid fears Mercedes’ dominance will hurt the sport.

Horner’s team has slipped further down the competitive order this season as engine supplier Renault grapples with the current hybrid power unit technology.

Last year’s champions Mercedes have meanwhile increased their dominance, romping to a one-two finish in the season opening Australian Grand Prix with an engine Horner estimates has 100bhp more than the Renault.

Horner points to a succession of rule changes that took place during Red Bull’s four championship years from 2010 to 2013 as a precedent for legislating to slow down the pace-setting team.

“When we were winning, and we never were winning to the advantage that they have, I remember double diffusers were banned, exhausts were moved, flexible bodywork was prohibited, engine mapping mid-season was changed; anything was done (to bring Red Bull back to the field),” he said.
"

[truefan72]

“When we were winning, and we never were winning to the advantage that they have, I remember double diffusers were banned, exhausts were moved, flexible bodywork was prohibited, engine mapping mid-season was changed; anything was done (to bring Red Bull back to the field),” he said.
"

Well the reason was because those things were borderline legal and often did not comply with the regs as intended. Therefore those things were banned or were asked to be clamped down to fit the regulations. Horner is trying to have yo believe that those measures where taken to stifle their dominance, when in fact they were done because they were outside of the regs. Mercedes is well within the regs and just produced a superior package. If F1 had come to RBR and told them to change their design or aero package to slow them down then that would be a legitimate comparison as to what horner is trying to have done now.

Like i said this is laughable

and btw, all those things he mentioned were on many other cars that followed suit since they saw RBR getting away with it. So the FIA told them ALL to remove it and pointed to the regs stating where it wasn't supposed to be in the first place.

[CNR]

another beat up by motorsport.com
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/manor-had-no-intention-of-racing-in-australia/
Manor "had no intention of racing" in Australia
The team failed to run all weekend, although the FIA deemed it had done all in its hands to do so and decided no penalty was needed.
http://www.racer.com/f1/item/114393-fia-decides-not-to-penalise-manor
"Under article 13.2 of F1's sporting regulations, when teams enter the championship they must show that they plan to "participate in every event with the number of cars and drivers entered."

Following written evidence submitted to the stewards, as well as discussions with senior team members, the FIA eventually decided that there had been no breach of the rules.

A statement issued by the stewards said that because Manor had attended the event, brought equipment and staff with it and got its cars ready and through scrutineering, it had done all that it could. Furthermore, the team was able to demonstrate that even if it had broken F1's curfew regulations it would still not have had enough time to sort out the software problems.
Under article 13.2 of F1's sporting regulations, when teams enter the championship they must show that they plan to "participate in every event with the number of cars and drivers entered."

.
"

[journeyman racer]

Horner whining when his team needs to stand up and be defiant in the face of adversity?

Pathetic clubbie racer. Pathetic leadership. Pathetic glory hunting, attention seeking fool.

[jens]

I am not sure, what everyone's problem is with Horner. He is a politician. Which means he "fights" for his team regardless of where his team sits in the pecking order. It is the task of him as a team principal.

If his team dominates, he tries to protect the advantage. If his team is behind, he tries to find ways to eradicate the handicap. Using politicking for it is just one part of the job. Every team principal does it behind the scenes, even if we do not hear much about it.

Those, who need to act, are Bernie and FIA, who are 'above' the politicking of teams, and make decisions. Teams are there to present their views, and what would be the best (for themselves). Then the governing body needs to make a summary of all this and proceed.

[jens]

Horner whining when his team needs to stand up and be defiant in the face of adversity?

Pathetic clubbie racer. Pathetic leadership. Pathetic glory hunting, attention seeking fool.

Horner can be many things, but pathetic leader he is not.:D 4 WDCs and WCCs. He is up there with the very successful team principals in the sport's history!

[Firstgear]

I'm sure the FIA would like a close competition just as much as the teams, but Horner needs to follow protocol.

He can't just jump up and down and demand that Mercedes be slowed down. He needs to send out his spies to find something (anything) on the Mercedes that looks to be questionable. Then he goes to the FIA and asks for clarification on that component, or how that component is tested (flexiwings anyone?). After that, the FIA can step in to declare the component illegal (for future races) or beef up the testing procedure.

FIA would be happy to rule against the Merc's to help competition, but rewriting their rulebook without being asked for clarification would be admitting that the rules are poorly written without anyone even having to question them.

I'm sure all the teams have brilliant engineers. and engineers are good with logic and finding solutions, but not always quite so brilliant with creativity and thinking outside of the box. Mercedes must be doing something creative or outside the box (like McL knee-blocking hole in the cockpit) that is within the 'grey area' of the regulations to be this far ahead of all the other teams. It's up to the other teams to discover it, then the FIA will clarify/amend the rules to ban it.

[jens]

What do you take off the car to slow it down that isn't also on every other car?

Well, the same was questioned about Red Bull. Many things were banned, but in the end they still prevailed, because the car package was simply above others, and they only had temporary setbacks due to bans.

I don't know about details, but Mercedes has better inherent quality as well. Talking about specifics - wasn't there talk about split turbo last year? FRIC-suspension? As for the effect of ban, even if others get "hurt" by the ban as well, the best team gets hurt the most, because their system is most advanced/developed/refined. Usually that's what differentiates teams - not what someone has on the car or not, but the most advanced development of a "thing", which is aimed to get banned.

I personally don't know, where the solution lies. Because it is obvious Mercedes can grasp these hybrid engines better than anyone. Give new rules, V4 hybrid or V8 hybrid, they will still most likely prevail. Competitors need to hire Merc' staff, and upgrade their inherent quality to compete. But that's not easy to do and would take many years to accomplish. Red Bull's aerodynamics advantage seems to be evaporating only now, after many-many seasons!

[truefan72]

the easiest solution is to undo the engine freeze. With only 4 suppliers, let them worry about the cost of developing the engines.
the other thing is to allow more testing and development.
Increase the engine allotment to 8 vs. 4
and finally. change the payment scale from these secretive ridiculous agreements to an equitable profit sharing system. This will allow the smaller teams to not struggle and constantly worry about financials.
I would cap the teams at 13. Then each will participate in the revenue sharing system. Winners will still get a bonus and extra money, but this will ensure that the smaller teams won't ever struggle again. and in a few years would catch up to the bigger teams. The sport will be stable, the field will be stable, Everyone wins.

[Doc Austin]

Very valid points, Truefan.

Cutting the costs would help a lot too. The current formula is ridiculous and it's just an example of what happens when you try to appease the do-gooders instead of racing with your hair on fire and dragging your balls behind you.

Just give them big ass wings and tires and motors. Get rid of all the complicated stuff, including the semi automatic slushboxes. Make them shift the damm things. That used to be a skill.

I don't think even one of us cares about the green thing when it applies to racing. Let Formula E and WEC have that nitche. Formula One cars should be the baddest thing on the planet. They should go like hell and raise hell while they are doing it. Quiet, fuel efficient cars are killing this sport. The whole point is to be wasteful and scare the schitt out of ourselves and anyone else who gets close enough. People who don't want to risk it can either grow a pair or go home.

[jens]

I don't think even one of us cares about the green thing when it applies to racing. Let Formula E and WEC have that nitche. Formula One cars should be the baddest thing on the planet. They should go like hell and raise hell while they are doing it. Quiet, fuel efficient cars are killing this sport. The whole point is to be wasteful and scare the schitt out of ourselves and anyone else who gets close enough. People who don't want to risk it can either grow a pair or go home.

Industry disagrees with you.:D Motor industry doesn't want to waste money on developing something, which doesn't have future. And green has future! ;)

[Firstgear]

the easiest solution is to undo the engine freeze. With only 4 suppliers, let them worry about the cost of developing the engines.
the other thing is to allow more testing and development.
Increase the engine allotment to 8 vs. 4
and finally. change the payment scale from these secretive ridiculous agreements to an equitable profit sharing system. This will allow the smaller teams to not struggle and constantly worry about financials.
I would cap the teams at 13. Then each will participate in the revenue sharing system. Winners will still get a bonus and extra money, but this will ensure that the smaller teams won't ever struggle again. and in a few years would catch up to the bigger teams. The sport will be stable, the field will be stable, Everyone wins.
I agree with what you're saying truefan, especially that you mention both the testing and pay scale. These two must go hand in hand. If all you do is allow testing, this only benefits the bigger teams and puts a larger gap between them and the have-nots, as the smaller teams won't be able to take advantage of it for financial reasons. Once you flatten the pay scale somewhat, the smaller teams become stable and competitive as long as they are competent. As you say, over time the sport becomes stable and everybody wins.

I think there is an added bonus beyond that. Right now, teams are winning championships with brute force ($$), not necessarily with efficiency (spending less, but wisely). Once you adjust the pay scale it will remove the advantage of brute force spending somewhat. This in turn, takes away the incentive for manufacturers to stay in F1 (why stick around if you can't buy a championship). In time these teams will leave and be replaced with smaller independent teams - and here comes the bonus. The smaller independent teams are much more likely to allow character and personality back into the sport. I've always been a fan of the drivers that actually engage, not just carry the corporate image, so this would be what I'd be hoping for.

[Doc Austin]

Industry disagrees with you.:D Motor industry doesn't want to waste money on developing something, which doesn't have future. And green has future! ;)

Yes, but how many racing fans actually give a schitt about hybrid systems and the green agenda? I don't care about that. I just want to see the cars go fast and the drivers race their arse off.

[CNR]

i wonder what would happen if you put one of williams engine in the Mercedes ?
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns30273.html
"Mercedes has hit back at claims it is not supplying the same specification of engine to its F1 customers.

In Australia, Williams' Felipe Massa was the fastest non-works Mercedes driver in qualifying, but the gap to Lewis Hamilton's pole time was a massive 1.4 seconds.

Brazilian Massa admitted he suspects Mercedes might be supplying inferior equipment to its Grove-based customer.

"If we have the same engine the difference should be in the car," he said. "I hope we have the same engine. I believe we have the same engine, so it's the car.

"Maybe," said Massa.
"

[anfield5]

This argument always comes up. When Cosworth were supplying the bulk of the engines in the 70's and early 80's, the inferior teams would claim that they 'important' customers eg Lotus were getting better engines than themselves, they would refuse to believe Lotus won because their engineering was better. Same when Honda supplied McLaren in the 90's etc, etc. It is the default position to explain why they are not quite as good as Mercedes.

No disrespect to little Fil, but the driver has something to do with it as well. Many little things quickly add up

[Rollo]

and finally. change the payment scale from these secretive ridiculous agreements to an equitable profit sharing system. This will allow the smaller teams to not struggle and constantly worry about financials.
I would cap the teams at 13. Then each will participate in the revenue sharing system. Winners will still get a bonus and extra money, but this will ensure that the smaller teams won't ever struggle again. and in a few years would catch up to the bigger teams. The sport will be stable, the field will be stable, Everyone wins.

Except Bernie.

He obviously cares nil for the smaller teams; this is evidenced by a 30 year track record. This is the same chap who actively let Brabham die whilst he was still in charge, who watched on while Team Lotus imploded and who paid what amounts to a £60m bribe to a court to get out of a bribery charge.
The teams won't result in a better revenue sharing system whilst one particular imp retains 23% of all revenues for himself, has done deals with certain teams to retain that slice.

Incidentally, Bernie also know about pay drivers being rubbish; having been one himself and failing to qualify for two grands prix in 1958.

[anfield5]

Except Bernie.

He obviously cares nil for the smaller teams; this is evidenced by a 30 year track record. This is the same chap who actively let Brabham die whilst he was still in charge, who watched on while Team Lotus imploded and who paid what amounts to a £60m bribe to a court to get out of a bribery charge.
The teams won't result in a better revenue sharing system whilst one particular imp retains 23% of all revenues for himself, has done deals with certain teams to retain that slice.

Incidentally, Bernie also know about pay drivers being rubbish; having been one himself and failing to qualify for two grands prix in 1958.

Only failed to qualify in Monaco. In the British race Jack Fairman had the car and 'Wiggy the Imp' was named as the second driver, just in case he was needed during the race.

[jens]

Yes, but how many racing fans actually give a schitt about hybrid systems and the green agenda? I don't care about that. I just want to see the cars go fast and the drivers race their arse off.

Well, this is true. I also watch F1 mainly for racing, though there are additional elements, why I watch specifically F1 and not other racing series. So it has to be "pinnacle of motorsport" as well, or at least leave such impression in whichever way! That it is worth watching F1 more so than other series.

But I also have to understand the point of view of others, i.e industry. World doesn't exist in isolation, neither does F1 racing.:)

[Jag_Warrior]

Although I understand the point of view of those who don't want to see one team run away with it from the first race on, I find it rather offensive that if the FIA(T) go after the Mercedes engine, they'll also be handicapping Williams, Force India and Lotus.

If there's something illegal on the Mercedes chassis, then ban it. But to go after an engine manufacturer, just because the other manufacturers didn't do their homework as well as the Merc boys? No, that's not F1 either. Personally, I'd love to see McLaren-Honda come on strong and beat Red Bull-Renault into the dust. It's just too bad Newey didn't go to Ferrari with Vettel, IMO.

[Doc Austin]

Although I understand the point of view of those who don't want to see one team run away with it from the first race on, I find it rather offensive that if the FIA(T) go after the Mercedes engine, they'll also be handicapping Williams, Force India and Lotus.

The way the rules are written, they FIA sort of reserved the right to equalize things, but I don't think it's right. The rules were the same for everyone when this new formula started, so why change now just because everyone but Mercedes got it wrong? Then again, the rules for equalizing things have been in there from the beginning too, so Mercedes should have known all along this could/would have happened.

Still, it takes away the incentive to excel if they can take it away with the swipe of a pen.

I'm not a big fan of changing the rules just because they don't suit a particular manufacturer, but for decades manufacturers have used the threat of quitting to get what they want. Sure enough, Red Bull is threatening to quit, almost like clockwork. Remembering that Red Bull really represents four cars (out of Sunday's 15 car field!), you can bet this won't be the end of it. we are going to hear about the inequity all year long and I am willing to be the FIA ends up doing something, even if it is wrong.

Horner does have a point though about how hard the FIA came down on them when they were dominating and now nothing is being done to reel Mercedes in. Then again, the FIA has never earned a reputation for fair governing, so why start now?


If there's something illegal on the Mercedes chassis, then ban it. But to go after an engine manufacturer, just because the other manufacturers didn't do their homework as well as the Merc boys? No, that's not F1 either.

Except the FIA left themselves room in the rules to step in and "equalize" things. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but surely the FIA will find a way to make a mess out of it. It is probably too early to panic because Renault is now claiming they were so bad in Australia because of last minute updates. Imagine the FIA cuts them a break and then they find a solution to their problem and go to the front. How pissed would Mercedes be over that?

You and I will probably watch formula One no matter who is dominating or how bad it is. Unfortunately, there are probably not enough diehards to sustain a sport that requires $95 million cars. If it gets real boring (like Saturday night) TV numbers will sag and the FIA will have no choice. It does not matter any more what is right or sporting ...... it's all about the money now. Actually it has always been about money but formula One has never worried about suffered fan apathy until recently.

The FIA has to keep it interesting enough so that people tune in. Otherwise there would be no point in the manufacturers being there to begin with. Formula One has gotten so complicated and so expensive that everyone is pretty much trapped.

My lasting impression of the race was the very last lap when Nico had seemingly given up and fell back a little. The Mercs circulated around in apparent formation, miles ahead and making it look ridiculously easy. It was actually significant history unfolding and a level of domination we have probably never seen before. It's hard to see this as being good for formula One, but I don't have a fair answer.

[Rollo]

The FIA has to keep it interesting enough so that people tune in.

This an interesting paradox.

Do you as the BTCC have done and reject an offer from pay-TV so that the sport remains on free-to-air and thus retains eyeballs or do you monetise the existing fan base and risk destroying it? I think that the FIA is currently on the road of Ouroboros, the snake will eat itself.

F1 should have looked at the lessons from Germany. where RTL is now the pauper against Sky Sport and Sport 1. When Schumacher was winning championships, there wasn't a problem but lately, pay-TV views have falled off the cliff. I don't know what RTL's arrangements are like for 2015 but if they're similar to the UK, F1 will die a death in Germany.

[Doc Austin]

I think the answer to everything is to simplify everything, starting with the cars. After that they need to adjust the pay scale to keep all the teams solvent.

[rallyfiend]

The FIA has to keep it interesting enough so that people tune in.

With a 100 year (or so) deal with FOM that ensures a fixed fee to them, does the FIA have to take an active interest in that? Isn't that Bernie's problem?

Surely the FIA should be concerned only about sporting integrity.

[Whyzars]

...You and I will probably watch formula One no matter who is dominating or how bad it is. Unfortunately, there are probably not enough diehards to sustain a sport that requires $95 million cars. If it gets real boring (like Saturday night) TV numbers will sag and the FIA will have no choice. It does not matter any more what is right or sporting ...... it's all about the money now. Actually it has always been about money but formula One has never worried about suffered fan apathy until recently.

The FIA has to keep it interesting enough so that people tune in. Otherwise there would be no point in the manufacturers being there to begin with. Formula One has gotten so complicated and so expensive that everyone is pretty much trapped.

My lasting impression of the race was the very last lap when Nico had seemingly given up and fell back a little. The Mercs circulated around in apparent formation, miles ahead and making it look ridiculously easy. It was actually significant history unfolding and a level of domination we have probably never seen before. It's hard to see this as being good for formula One, but I don't have a fair answer.

McLaren/Honda at the end of the 80's were pretty dominant but eventually other teams evolved and caught up.

The difference that I see now is that there are too many rules restricting in-season progress. I fear that we have another one team season to look forward to.

No testing, penalties if an engine blows up, restrictions on fuel flows and volumes, rev limits - for crying out loud, this is supposed to be Motorsport. They can put all the washing machine parts in they want, this is F1 and everything that involves a battery is a side show.

I'll believe that there is a finance problem in F1 teams when the caviar and champagne flows a little slower and the top teams salary bills are less than a national education budget.

Manufacturers can bleat all they want but the only engine manufacturer/team combination that matters is Ferrari. All of the others are fair weather friends that have come and gone as an F1 profile has been to their benefit.

Mercedes must receive every accolade for their incredible product but they must also see that they are not going to prove anything by squashing the other teams into dust. They have produced a mind numbingly beautiful thing - now they need to install a big parachute on its rear wing.

[Big Ben]

Someone here implied :p I'm not a diehard fan if I stopped watching F1 races or something like that :p. Maybe I'm not but my impression is that the object of my passion is gone. This is not the Formula 1 I used to like. I can't just like something no matter what it becomes just because it's called a certain way. I wont support a Man United coached by Mourinho or a Ferrari driven by a Vettel :p or a Formula 1 that is a (failed) show (a not very smart comedy) and not a true competition.

[denkimi]

Getting and maintaining an advantage is certainly part of racing, but it gets old when you are spending hundreds of millions of dollars and it's the other guy that has that advantage, and worse when you can't overcome it. It stops being fun when you don't even have a chance, and right now, no one has a chance against Mercedes.

Right now the problem is that no one can afford to lose. If I am Renault, I can't justify wasting that much money to get my ass handed to me every week on the world stage. If you want to keep the manufacturers involved, you have to keep them competitive, or at least give them the chance to make themselves competitive.

I certainly don't have the answer because I am also not in favor of restricting Mercedes or giving the others an artificial boost. The rules were the same for everyone going in, so it's too late to change now if you want to have a fair series.

See, the thing is, the FIA should not have written such a ridiculous set of regulations that would have allow this to happen in the first place. We never heard much griping at all over the old regulations, at least not over the engine formula. Maybe that's because it was not such a complex formula that only one company in the world could figure it out and make it work.

We need less complex and less expensive cars.

i think the biggest problem is the engine freeze.
the other manufacturers should be able to start all over again, because without using the fundamentally different design of the mercedes they will never be able to be competitive.

that, and of course the ban on testing. also a thing that makes it easier to maintain the advantage and difficult do develop new techniques.

[Jag_Warrior]

Since Horner is so worried about "the show", I have a solution for him. I only watch horse racing when the Kentucky Derby comes on. But if one horse is particularly strong at the Derby, I'll watch The Preakness. And if the strong horse wins The Preakness, I'll be sure to watch the Belmont Stakes. And judging by the TV ratings rise and fall, that's how many people are.

So here it is, Christian. If Lewis wins every pole and every race up through the British Grand Prix, people will howl and complain. But... but... but, if he goes on to win every pole and every through the Russian Grand Prix, all eyes will be focused on whether or not he can accomplish the (previously) impossible: win every pole and every race in a season. Face it, Christian... your engine sucks. It will continue to suck. Even if the FIA takes two cylinders out of the Mercedes V6, your engines will still blow up and the Mercs will still beat you. But since "the show" is what you're most concerned about, why don't you put your efforts into making sure Lewis has clear sailing and let's watch the ratings take off around October? I'm sure that I can count on you to do what's right for the sport. Come on Spice Boy, take one for the team... er, sport.

Jokes aside (though I don't expect it to happen), can you imagine the reaction of the non-racing press if Lewis went on a tear like this???!!! Heck, even people who don't know what F1 is would hear about this.

[CNR]

http://jalopnik.com/the-ten-most-ingenious-f1-cheats-ever-1465111260

can find no info on f1 engine scrutineering
https://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=ybs8VJ_5NeLC8gfL24CgCw&gws_rd=ssl#q=f1+engine+scrutineering&start=30

http://adamcooperf1.com/2014/10/04/ron-dennis-frustrated-by-lack-of-engine-parity-with-mercedes-works-team/http://adamcooperf1.com/2014/10/04/ron-dennis-frustrated-by-lack-of-engine-parity-with-mercedes-works-team/

"Ron Dennis made it clear today that he believes that McLaren has been at a disadvantage relative to the Mercedes works team this year.

Dennis said that McLaren has not had the chance to use the new power unit to its full advantage because of a lack of access to data, and even hinted that the team had not had “the best engines.”

His words made it pretty clear that the team’s 20-season partnership with Mercedes is under strain as it edges towards its conclusion
"

[Doc Austin]

About the only way to guarantee equal access to engines is to distribute them randomly from a common pool. Otherwise the builder can/will keep the good ones for themselves.

[Hawkmoon]

There's nothing new about works teams getting better engines than customer teams. In the '90's Ferrari always supplied Sauber with an engine that was a spec or two behind those in the works cars. As far as I'm aware this was the deal that Sauber signed up for so there were no issues.

Today, I don't think this is possible. I'm sure there are rules about all teams being supplied with the same spec engine, not to mention the stupid homologation rules, so if Mercedes aren't doing this then they have some explaining to do. McLaren, Williams etc sound like they were/are paying for current spec engines from Mercedes so they'd have a right to be pissed if they weren't getting what they paid for.

[CNR]

only info I can find
traction control is currently banned in F1. How is it made illegal? Well, every single car on the grid uses the exact same ECU, so no TC can work through the central computer system. Traction control could possibly come from some kind of exotic means of engine management programming, which could limit the amount of power coming from the engine out of corners. Formula One's management, however, checks every car's engine mapping code and it's not allowed to change race by race.

[The Black Knight]

For one, I am totally fine with RBR quitting F1. I honestly believe that F1 will be no better or worse off without them. I'm also sick of listening to Horner moaning like a whiny little bitch to the FIA about Mercedes dominance because they are no longer on top. In fact, I'd be 100% on for it if collectively F1 told RBR to fuck right off. What a pack of sore losers and moany bitches. I had a lot of respect for RBR and what they achieved in the sport until last year when they started moaning about the rules just because they were no longer winning. Now I'd be happy if they were gone so we don't have to listen to them whinge anymore.

I also wonder what is it that RBR have over Bernie to say that he supports them in their plight to reel in the Mercedes teams? He had no issues when RBR were dominating for 4 years straight and now suddenly when Mercedes are dominating he supports calls for equalisation? Something reeks! Maybe Horner and Ecclestone are spooning partners?

I don't really see what people are surprised about anyway. When sweeping rule changes come in, there is always one team that comes out on top. Just look at 1998 and how dominant McLaren became. 2009 with Brawn GP. These sort of rule changes always have and always will bring about periods of domination. It's just that this time Mercedes have done the best job. It took Ferrari 3 years to reel in McLaren from the 1998 changes. If it wasn't for Schumacher being behind the wheel then it would have been a McLaren sweep. Schumacher dominated for 5 years. Periods of domination come and go in F1 but for me, last year was one of the closest fought championship battles in a long time. It was far better than watching that overrated German go on and win 9 races in a row by 30 seconds. At least now you've two top drivers challenging each other.

[anfield5]

For one, I am totally fine with RBR quitting F1. I honestly believe that F1 will be no better or worse off without them. I'm also sick of listening to Horner moaning like a whiny little bitch to the FIA about Mercedes dominance because they are no longer on top. In fact, I'd be 100% on for it if collectively F1 told RBR to fuck right off. What a pack of sore losers and moany bitches. I had a lot of respect for RBR and what they achieved in the sport until last year when they started moaning about the rules just because they were no longer winning. Now I'd be happy if they were gone so we don't have to listen to them whinge anymore.

I also wonder what is it that RBR have over Bernie to say that he supports them in their plight to reel in the Mercedes teams? He had no issues when RBR were dominating for 4 years straight and now suddenly when Mercedes are dominating he supports calls for equalisation? Something reeks! Maybe Horner and Ecclestone are spooning partners?

I don't really see what people are surprised about anyway. When sweeping rule changes come in, there is always one team that comes out on top. Just look at 1998 and how dominant McLaren became. 2009 with Brawn GP. These sort of rule changes always have and always will bring about periods of domination. It's just that this time Mercedes have done the best job. It took Ferrari 3 years to reel in McLaren from the 1998 changes. If it wasn't for Schumacher being behind the wheel then it would have been a McLaren sweep. Schumacher dominated for 5 years. Periods of domination come and go in F1 but for me, last year was one of the closest fought championship battles in a long time. It was far better than watching that overrated German go on and win 9 races in a row by 30 seconds. At least now you've two top drivers challenging each other.

+1

Further evidence can be seen from the 'stable' 3 litre engine formual days of the 70's-mid 80's. Sure Cosworth engines dominated, but no one team. Lotus won four titles, Tyrrell two, McLaren two, Ferrari three, Williams two and Brabham one (before switching to BMW turbo for a second title). Other teams frequently challeged for and won races as well.

Moral of my story is simple. 'Set an engine formula and leave it alone for a decent period of time, things will eventually equallise between the teams and the racing will get closer as the formula goes on.Big changes as Knight says will see one team (usually but not always the richest team/s) continue to dominate, simply because they can spend money to adapt quickest.

[Mark]

Not just engines. All changes to the car regulations too.

[Firstgear]

With the current restrictions on testing, it will take a loooooong time to equalize.

[anfield5]

Not just engines. All changes to the car regulations too.

Absolutely true Mark. Any major rule changes benefit the cashed-up bigger teams.

I know I keep on harping on about the 70's-80's period of F1, but it was a time when a stable set of regulations were in force and the racing was without a doubt better.... Yes I know that was befor computers and technology ruined things and the world is now a vastly different place, and due to the speed of technological development we can never have the same sort of, or length of stability, but...... something does need to be done. (I am not advocating false after the fact car equalisation, rather a set of stable rules all teams can live with, that are not that cost prohibitive that only the mega-buck teams have a chance)

As Firstgear says, the lack of testing means that any advantage a team has at the start of the season will never be caught by the other teams. It is not a coincidence that one team totally dominating for season upon season corresponds to the testing bans (apart from some obvious exceptions of course)

[denkimi]

+1

Further evidence can be seen from the 'stable' 3 litre engine formual days of the 70's-mid 80's. Sure Cosworth engines dominated, but no one team. Lotus won four titles, Tyrrell two, McLaren two, Ferrari three, Williams two and Brabham one (before switching to BMW turbo for a second title). Other teams frequently challeged for and won races as well.

Moral of my story is simple. 'Set an engine formula and leave it alone for a decent period of time, things will eventually equallise between the teams and the racing will get closer as the formula goes on.Big changes as Knight says will see one team (usually but not always the richest team/s) continue to dominate, simply because they can spend money to adapt quickest.
you can stay with the current engines for 20 years, as long as they remain frozen there will be no equalization.

[anfield5]

you can stay with the current engines for 20 years, as long as they remain frozen there will be no equalization.

Absolutely true, that is why I have argued before about scrapping this stupid freeze idea and finding some other way ie budget cap on engines to even things out.

[Rollo]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/118138
Asked if he appreciated the irony of a once-dominant team demanding equivalency, Horner replied: "I can understand, but when we were performing we never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near.
- Autosport, 20th Mar 2015.

Of course Red Bull "never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near". Red Bull had Vettel and Webber.

I predicted in 2004 that Webber would never win a Grand Prix and would never win the World Championship. He some some Grands Prix but he was never going to win a WDC.
Mercedes in 2014 had a former World Champion and someone with the potential to be a World Champion. Red Bull even in their highest "level of dominance" never had that.

The 2013 Red Bull probably was as dominant and technically superior to the field as the 2014 Mercedes was. It's just that it was driven by a star and an ordinary, whereas the Mercedes was driven by two stars.

[The Black Knight]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/118138
Asked if he appreciated the irony of a once-dominant team demanding equivalency, Horner replied: "I can understand, but when we were performing we never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near.
- Autosport, 20th Mar 2015.

Of course Red Bull "never had the level of dominance that we are seeing, nowhere near". Red Bull had Vettel and Webber.

I predicted in 2004 that Webber would never win a Grand Prix and would never win the World Championship. He some some Grands Prix but he was never going to win a WDC.
Mercedes in 2014 had a former World Champion and someone with the potential to be a World Champion. Red Bull even in their highest "level of dominance" never had that.

The 2013 Red Bull probably was as dominant and technically superior to the field as the 2014 Mercedes was. It's just that it was driven by a star and an ordinary, whereas the Mercedes was driven by two stars.

I've yet to witness Mercedes win 9 races in a row in one season. We'll see if they can do it this year ;) If they win the next race it will be 9 in a row but in different seasons. Oh RBR are such a bunch of sore losers. I've never seen a more obvious case of the boy who cried wolf in my life. Anyway, who wants to see a drinks manufacturer dominate F1? I certainly don't. Totally fine with them quitting. F1 is bigger than any one team, including Ferrari.

All the teams agreed to the 2014 rule changes and had their input into them. Just because RBR didn't do as good a job as the others is no reason for F1 to change. Personally, I've no issue watching two great drivers in the same car battle it out in front. I love watching two drivers push each other like that. That is something F1 has been missing greatly the previous number of years with Vettel dominating.

[jens]

Dj_bytedisaster can be many things, but guess he was right about one thing - some people are so hurt over the success of Red Bull they still can't get over it. Beating Red Bull, Horner, and others even, when they are down. Red Bull is of no importance and should quit F1? Well, then we would lose 2 teams and F1 would collapse. Good luck with that.

F1 is in a pretty dire state right now. Dominance is never good for F1, be it McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull or Mercedes. We got only 15 cars on the grid, and realistically only 9 teams competing. But people are still beating Red Bull over stating the obvious.

The only time, when car-wise Red Bull enjoyed the kind of dominance Mercedes does currently or all through 2014, was the second half of 2013. You only need to look at time gaps to see that. In the first half of 2013 there were plenty of close races, and even races, where Red Bull was nowhere near the front (like Spain in 2013).

As for "interesting battle between team-mates". We will see, how does this season evolve. But there was nothing interesting between Hamilton and Rosberg in Australia. Utterly forgettable GP in terms of racing at the front. So from this point of view not superior to other domination eras.

[The Black Knight]

Dj_bytedisaster can be many things, but guess he was right about one thing - some people are so hurt over the success of Red Bull they still can't get over it. Beating Red Bull, Horner, and others even, when they are down. Red Bull is of no importance and should quit F1? Well, then we would lose 2 teams and F1 would collapse. Good luck with that.

F1 is in a pretty dire state right now. Dominance is never good for F1, be it McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull or Mercedes. We got only 15 cars on the grid, and realistically only 9 teams competing. But people are still beating Red Bull over stating the obvious.

The only time, when car-wise Red Bull enjoyed the kind of dominance Mercedes does currently or all through 2014, was the second half of 2013. You only need to look at time gaps to see that. In the first half of 2013 there were plenty of close races, and even races, where Red Bull was nowhere near the front (like Spain in 2013).

As for "interesting battle between team-mates". We will see, how does this season evolve. But there was nothing interesting between Hamilton and Rosberg in Australia. Utterly forgettable GP in terms of racing at the front. So from this point of view not superior to other domination eras.


F1 won’t collapse if we lose RBR. The likelihood would be that Renault would take over Torro Rosso as a works team. There are also rumours of Audi waiting in the mist should RBR or someone else decide to pull out of the sport. So while we’d lose Red Bull I doubt very much that we’d lose two teams which, as I said, I am totally fine with losing RBR.

As for being hurt over RBR’s success, I am not. They did the best job and that’s it, I just don’t believe a drinks company should be spearheading the success of F1. Simple as really. I’d rather that they left and a genuine car manufacturer came in. RBR were the first ones to come out and say that they shouldn’t be punished for doing a better job during the 2010-2014 seasons and I totally agree with that. You can’t punish a team for doing a better job. It’s up to the others to play catch up.

The only fair way out of this that I see is to unfreeze the Engine homologation rules until the end of 2016 and to allow each team something like 7 engines per season. That leaves enough scope for upgrades every 2-3 races and should allow Renault and everyone else to catch up. If they can’t do it in that length of time then they don’t deserve to do it. This will increase cost but, let’s face it, costs are through the roof anyway so what’s another 20 million? In the grand scheme of things and the likely commercial benefit to F1 it would be worth the investment. There could be a potential agreement done with the Engine manufacturers that they receive an chunk of the cherry through increased revenue generated from a more closely fought F1 race. It's all doable should people put their heads down and agree to it and stop bitching but you can't punish Mercedes for doing a better job.

This was the same with Ferrari and RBR. And, in fairness to Ron Dennis, when Ferrari were dominating, he clearly stated that you can't punish them for doing a better job and it is up to the other teams to catch up. The same applies here.

Regarding the Australian GP, I quite enjoyed watching Rosberg and Hamilton drive out front. They were both driving flawlessly and it was interesting to see the contrast in styles. This is part of what draws me to F1, not necessarily "the show". You might not remember the GP and thought it dull but I still rewatched it twice on Sunday. Lets face it, over the last 17 years in F1 there have been more "dull" races as you put it than entertaining ones with lots of overtaking. If you want overtaking, then go to Moto GP. F1 hasn't been about overtaking in a long time. And DRS is still as stupid today as it was three years ago.

[Rollo]

Anyway, who wants to see a drinks manufacturer dominate F1? I certainly don't.

Would you be fine if a fashion brand did instead?

[jens]

We had plenty of car manufacturers in F1 until 2009, when many of them pulled out due to recession. At the moment we have four big ones (as engine manufacturers), and at least two of them seriously struggle to be competitive. We should not overestimate the value of F1 that big manufacturers would just join. For starters I don't see Audi in F1 any time soon. If they wanted to be in F1, they would already have joined. F1 is in dire state and does not attract sponsors easily, let alone team owners. Red Bull's commitment (with two teams) has been one of the few good things happening to F1.

Oh, and by the way, I am fine with a "drinks company" success.:) Yeah, they do not produce cars, but F1 is a weird sport. Red Bull is very active in the extreme sports sphere as a sponsor. F1 is also sort of extreme in terms of how the cars look like and cutting-edge development. Red Bull sits just fine there.

[Hawkmoon]

F1 doesn't need car manufacturers to own teams, quite the contrary in fact. Car manufacturers are the very epitome of fair weather friends when it comes to F1. Ferrari are the only one who has stuck with the sport through thick and thin. Sure, the Old Man would throw a hissy fit from time-to-time and threaten to leave but he never followed through. Honda, Mercedes, Renault, Toyota, Ford and BMW have all had a go at team ownership and in every single case quit when the going got tough. Mercedes deserve some credit for sticking with the sport for the last 20 years but can anyone really see them going 20 years without a title and staying the course as Ferrari did? I certainly can't.

F1 needs the manufacturers to be involved on the engine side but that's it. Nobody suggests that Pirelli runs their own team and think the sport would be better off if the manufacturers would stick to supplying engines just as Pirelli do in supplying tyres.

[airshifter]

I've never liked when any one team dominates Formula 1, but I dislike it even more now.

I think the primary differences right now are the integration of the power sources into the chassis, as well as domination of those power units. With the limits on testing being tighter, it's no shock that the factory teams should have an upper hand, as from day one the entire car was designed with their power units in mind. The others have to play catch up more to put together a total package.

In past years, teams like RB and Brawn came out on top with the big factors being their ability to think outside the box and exploit loopholes in rules with things like the double decker diffuser, blown diffusers, etc. Other teams did it with a "whole package" approach, such as the years of Ferrari domination.

With the current situation, it seems that only the huge resources of Ferrari even have a chance with catching up with the Mercedes factory car. Well catching up within less than a second of a lap. And personally I think it's just more based on the power units than anything else this time. Go Mercedes, or go home.

Over time I'm sure it will change as the other teams get things in order. But personally I think some of the best years often come after the engine/power unit regs are years in and all teams have had time to get their power sources more in line with one another.

[Doc Austin]

Red Bull's commitment (with two teams) has been one of the few good things happening to F1.

Not to even mention how many cars they are sponsoring in the lower formulas. They also used to run cars in Indycar and Nascar.

I think the only reason we see some people not liking Red Bull is because they won too much. Still, red Bull is racing cars and planes and skydiving from space. They are everywhere people are playing extreme sports.

I thought Red Bull was crazy to let Vettel take points from webber late in 2010 (because Alonso could have beaten them both), but while other teams talk about sport and letting their drivers race, Red Bull does it when both championships are on the line.

I'm also happier about Red Bull owning four cars than any liquor or cigarette companies ..... or condoms companies.

[Rollo]

Ferrari are the only one who has stuck with the sport through thick and thin. Sure, the Old Man would throw a hissy fit from time-to-time and threaten to leave but he never followed through. Honda, Mercedes, Renault, Toyota, Ford and BMW have all had a go at team ownership and in every single case quit when the going got tough. Mercedes deserve some credit for sticking with the sport for the last 20 years but can anyone really see them going 20 years without a title and staying the course as Ferrari did? I certainly can't.

Ferrari are the same kind of operation as McLaren which has been around since 1966 and Williams which has been around since 1977. Ferrari are unlike Honda, Mercedes, Renault, Toyota, Ford and BMW in that Ferrari aren't firstly a car company - they are a racing team which happens to sell cars.

[CNR]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/118139
"Bob Fernley, deputy team principal of fellow Mercedes customer Force India, stressed that this is a contractual obligation.

"Yes, and the contract states that," Fernley told AUTOSPORT when asked whether Force India has engine parity.

"All fairness to Mercedes, they have always been straight with us."
"
HPP are constantly checking the data and all the power units are exceptionally close in performance.

so in other words Mercedes take the best ones when they come off the engine dyno

[jens]

To add a bit to the discussion, one-team domination is never good for F1, regardless of intra-team battle, but the roots for domination lie in general competition strength. Because if the field is very spread out and the level of teams very different, it automatically increases the likelihood of domination.

I'd say one of the recent (last 20-30 years) most competitive periods were 2005-2009. We had then 6 car manufacturers competing and lots of well-funded teams. Also in each of those seasons we had at least two teams, who were capable of fighting for the title, be it either Renault, McLaren, Ferrari or in the case of 2009 Brawn and Red Bull. I think this is no coincidence. Greater general depth in the field means it is harder to rise clearly above others.

Another thing is that the current engine rules are truly radical and costly, even looking at F1 history. This at the time, when there is obvious lack of money in F1. I mean even if some big manufacturers (Renault, Honda) seriously struggle to design a competitive engine, what hope do others have? And those privateer teams, who need to buy those expensive power units and integrate their chassis accordingly? The new engine rules have further spread the field.

[BDunnell]

We had plenty of car manufacturers in F1 until 2009, when many of them pulled out due to recession. At the moment we have four big ones (as engine manufacturers), and at least two of them seriously struggle to be competitive. We should not overestimate the value of F1 that big manufacturers would just join. For starters I don't see Audi in F1 any time soon. If they wanted to be in F1, they would already have joined. F1 is in dire state and does not attract sponsors easily, let alone team owners. Red Bull's commitment (with two teams) has been one of the few good things happening to F1.

Why would any new manufacturer enter any of the FIA world championships, except perhaps the WEC, at the moment? They're not going to win, so what's the point? Even entering the WEC brings little in the way of exposure, other than if you win Le Mans, and even then not much.

[Jag_Warrior]

Ferrari are the same kind of operation as McLaren which has been around since 1966 and Williams which has been around since 1977. Ferrari are unlike Honda, Mercedes, Renault, Toyota, Ford and BMW in that Ferrari aren't firstly a car company - they are a racing team which happens to sell cars.

I think that used to be true. And while I agree that Ferrari isn't like Mercedes, BMW, Toyota, Honda, Ford, Renault or even Porsche, in its approach to racing, the assumption that many of us had, that Ferrari was largely autonomous within FIAT... was shown to be quite incorrect. There are people who I knew who used to work for Chrysler. They thought they were going to be somewhat autonomous too. But like I said, they used to work for Chrysler. Like Signor di Montezemolo, they found out the hard way who the Big Cheese really was. The F1 team now has to carry its own water. And they have to prove their worth as a brand enhancer to the man in charge. Their value to Fiat/Marchionne now seems to be primarily what it can deliver as a brand, and the F1 team just feeds into that.

[jens]

Why would any new manufacturer enter any of the FIA world championships, except perhaps the WEC, at the moment? They're not going to win, so what's the point? Even entering the WEC brings little in the way of exposure, other than if you win Le Mans, and even then not much.

Current WEC is actually pretty attractive. Audi is a long-time customer, but in recent years both Toyota and Porsche have joined plus this year Nissan as well. WEC also has hybrid technology, but it looks like the regulations/cost scale is much better balanced. Which means it is much cheaper to develop the hybrid stuff and go racing in WEC and manufacturers are interested in trying it out.

Problem with F1 is that it is not only expensive, but succeeding is truly difficult as well as the standards are so high. Honda, Toyota and BMW all pulled out once they didn't reach their goals in late 2000s. Now with new hybrid technology everybody else except Mercedes is left a long way behind. If you want to succeed, you have to pump in so much money it is crazy and even then there are no guarantees you may end up near the front of the field!