[Rumours] Customer cars to force out smaller teams ?

[Marbot]

There's a meeting being held today about the future rules of F1, including that of customer cars. But this meeting does not include the likes of Force India and Sauber, who are rightly very dismayed at what is going on.

Please read.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/110772

http://asia.eurosport.com/formula-1/...05/story.shtml

Your views.

[chillibowl]

my views on this are pretty simple, if the top teams are interested in increasing their profits i would prefer they find that extra money by agreeing to a budget cap and reducing their own costs rather then trying to create a secondary market for chassis and parts.

[TimRTC]

Customer cars is certainly a bad thing for the development of the sport - I would rather see mandatory parts, such as the front wing which would free up huge amounts of development budget.

Any sort of 'budget cap' is likely to be controversial - as Christian Horner has previously pointed out, a team like Mercedes can transfer development and staff from their DTM and consumer car development teams so save money, while RBR put all their resources into F1 alone.

[chillibowl]

if it wasnt controversial it wouldnt be F1!

good point about the staffing issues though. its all well and good to say 'spend less money' but the byproduct of that is that some people will lose their jobs.

[Peat]

They're all as mad as a box of frogs.

Just leave 'em to it i say.

[Marbot]

Ferrari said that they wouldn't take kindly to having their books looked at by a Forensic accountancy team. $40m to build '1 shed' in the middle of nowhere, ought to stick out like a sore thumb.

This is exactly what the smaller teams (Sauber, Force India, Williams, Caterham, Marussia) feared, that they would be forced to use a customer car because they couldn't possibly be competitive with their own car, if unlimited spending was allowed to carry on as it is doing now.

[wimiu012uk]

Originally Posted by Peat

They're all as mad as a box of frogs.

Just leave 'em to it i say.

What about march in the 70's building customer chassis and hewland suppling gearboxes, also several engine manufactures supplying engines, customer chassis can work but there has to be some restrictions in other areas such as steel brakes only, two elements only to front and rear wings i am sure some people will add other items that should be restricted.

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Ferrari said that they wouldn't take kindly to having their books looked at by a Forensic accountancy team. $40m to build '1 shed' in the middle of nowhere, ought to stick out like a sore thumb.

This is exactly what the smaller teams (Sauber, Force India, Williams, Caterham, Marussia) feared, that they would be forced to use a customer car because they couldn't possibly be competitive with their own car, if unlimited spending was allowed to carry on as it is doing now.

It would also open the door for someone with suitably deep pockets to do 'a premier league' and buy the latest Red Bull car and almost guarantee themselves some good (and quite rapid) results...

[Paradise City]

You can have customer cars but you don't get a penny from the constructor championship if you go that route. You build the car, you get all the gold.

It might be a good way for teams to 'test the water' before deciding to upgrade to being a constructor.

[TimRTC]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

You can have customer cars but you don't get a penny from the constructor championship if you go that route. You build the car, you get all the gold.

It might be a good way for teams to 'test the water' before deciding to upgrade to being a constructor.

But if you save enough as a customer team then the constructors prizes would have to be enough to make it worthwhile for teams to make the switch, or they would have to spend considerably more for limited reward.

Plus most sponsorship deals are based on the drivers rather than the constructors championship.

[Marbot]

Potential customer teams are unlikely to be happy with a car that they know is inferior to the chosen few, who will also make sure that it stays that way. And the customer teams will also have no say on what should be allowed and what shouldn't be allowed in the future.

Rush: The Trees, "But the oaks can't help their feelings If they like the way they're made. And they wonder why the maples Can't be happy in their shade."

[Biscuits In A Red Bull]

I think that if the smaller teams want to race in F1, then why not let them? Simple, really.

[Paradise City]

There won't be customer cars. That's sensationalism. There might be a lessening of restrictions on some components so those components can be handed down to the smaller teams under the technical partnership umbrella as part of a cost cutting drive. It seems to be the small teams who feel excluded and are fanning this sensationalism as a ploy to reassert their influence.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Biscuits In A Red Bull

I think that if the smaller teams want to race in F1, then why not let them? Simple, really.

It's not really a question of them not being allowed to do it, it's a question of whether or not they want to do it with a car that cannot possibly be competitive against the car manufacturer teams.

I also think that there is enough urgency to do this, so that customer cars, or at least, customer parts, can be be homolgated in time for the 2015 season, when the top teams will have 2014 cars/parts to sell.

[bravo]

How does customer chassis compare with for example, customer engines?

We don't hear of Mclaren complaining of getting poor performance Mercedes engines, and Sauber seems to be putting the customer Ferrari unit to better use than the matching chassis.

Personally I would like to see customer chassis - and set the prize funds to make producing your own chassis a worthwhile endeavour.

[chillibowl]

actually Ross Brawn said the other day that teams receiving the customer engines will be disadvantaged.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns26603.html

despite the income disparities among the teams its still within the realm of possibilities that a midfield team can win a race but with customer cars i would have to think that possibility will drop to almost zero.

if there really is a market for 1 year old chassis then perhaps they should first contemplate first selling them to GP2 or even creating a late model series of some sort instead of moving directly to a two tiered formula.

[littleman]

I totally agree with bravo.

Why not let teams choose either option, buy a car off the shelf or develop your own if you wish.Can only make for a stronger, and perhaps larger, grid.

Many a good privateer outfit appeared throughout the 60's and 70's.Some went on to build their own race winning chassis.

[wolfhound]

Lets not forget the money from FOM is partially based on constructers championship points. How do you score constructer points with somebody else's car?

[littleman]

Simple - you score points under the name you race under.

IE: Ecurrie Fred Blogs = gets the appropriate points.

If a team believes it can get more points using it's own chassis then go that route.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by littleman

Simple - you score points under the name you race under.

IE: Ecurrie Fred Blogs = gets the appropriate points.

If a team believes it can get more points using it's own chassis then go that route.

Then it is no longer a constructers championship.

[TimRTC]

Originally Posted by littleman

Why not let teams choose either option, buy a car off the shelf or develop your own if you wish.Can only make for a stronger, and perhaps larger, grid.

Far from it, the difference in cost between the two options is enormous and with the car being responsible for 95% of a driver's pace, there would be no incentive for a new team to develop their own car and so teams like Caterham and Marussia could buy Red Bull or Merc chassis and shoot up the grid, then teams like Sauber or Force India would have to either spend huge amounts developing their own chassis to stay off the back of the grid or join the consumer brigade and then we would end up with two or three 'factory' teams and a MotoGP situation with no more potential race winners than we already have now.

[Paradise City]

How can you be in a Constructors Championship if you don't Construct?

Don't be in the Constructors Championship. If a team that can't build a good car, they can take a good car from the previous season and run with that. Take account of its dimensions and its other qualities then reenter the constructors fray down the road with a better car.

Teams would be delighted to get their hands on a good car if their own ability to construct wasn't on par which is why they'd take this option in the first place.

New teams from GP2 or wherever could pitch for sponsorship and be able to say to any prospects that they are in F1 and will be ready to build their own car after 1-2 years.

I'd entertain the idea in principle but these guys will almost certainly make a pigs ear of it if it was ever attempted. But it won't be attempted; they aren't interested in doing it.

[littleman]

Teams being interested in the Constructors Championship is something of a smoke screen.

What they're interested in is the points, which in turn represent money....loads of money!

The perfect example is Red Bull, they don't even make a car...a bike.....or even a washing machine!Why would a drinks manufacturer be interested in a Constructors Championship?

No, what they really mean is unless you have an obscene amount of money you can't join in and take a share of the spoils.How can F1 move forward when it's effectively a closed shop? Even Honda,Toyota, BMW, Ford etc etc found the membership fee too much.

All that matters is that points equals prizes - call the championship what you like, it really doesn't matter.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by littleman

Teams being interested in the Constructors Championship is something of a smoke screen.

What they're interested in is the points, which in turn represent money....loads of money!

The perfect example is Red Bull, they don't even make a car...a bike.....or even a washing machine!Why would a drinks manufacturer be interested in a Constructors Championship?

No, what they really mean is unless you have an obscene amount of money you can't join in and take a share of the spoils.How can F1 move forward when it's effectively a closed shop? Even Honda,Toyota, BMW, Ford etc etc found the membership fee too much.

All that matters is that points equals prizes - call the championship what you like, it really doesn't matter.

RedBull *design* and build a racing car, where they get the money from is of little consequence....

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Lets not forget the money from FOM is partially based on constructers championship points. How do you score constructer points with somebody else's car?

I'd say, simple you don't!

If the constructor doesn't enter the chassis, he doesn't score points either!