Honda has gone, not a buyer in sight, and if you believe the prophets of doom, of Red Bull, Williams and Mosley, there is another manufacturer that is thinking about an exit. The question remains whether what is happening there, is not good for Formula One at the end.
Ross Brawn is the chance that Australia will go into his team's two cars at the start, with 50 50 It is not at all clear, with which drivers, sponsors and motors you want to go to the start. And the longer the decision regarding the engine drags on, the less likely it becomes that the ex-Honda team ever to go to the start. If 18 cars are, it would therefore not surprising, but some assume that it could also be just 16 minutes. But who stands on the brink?
You hear about this again and again two names: Renault and Toyota. The French are for two years as a loose candidates in terms of Formula One, even if one insists again and again, it would definitely make more. Still want to tear down the rumors that you maybe ... And as we have seen with Honda, a director can quickly pull the plug if it is a must. But - it must not be forgotten - Renault suffers much less from the sales slump, as the rest of the world. It was quick to put on small, energy efficient and cost models and radically change its model policy must not suddenly expensive. The chance that Renault's are small and are only acutely, should the economic crisis last longer.
At Toyota, it's different. The involvement in Formula One is not exactly a huge success and, unlike Honda is still running after a win. At the same time also to break away from Toyota's sales figures and in the important U.S. market, it is represented in NASCAR, what does the manufacturer, more so than Formula One. And then there's the rumor that Toyota is working on a hybrid prototype at Le Mans, could emerge the next year. What is more, for Toyota by the withdrawal of Honda in Japan is an important marketing tool is broken. There are quite a few arguments that could speak for an exit from Toyota. For the Formula One would be unattractive because Toyota supplying Williams with engines, too. And so is the Cosworth in 2010. So I guess that you will keep the Japanese at least one more year at the bar.
The question is just whether what "downsized" Niki Lauda has called today, not actually doing the series really well. New rules, a significant unification and a retreat of several manufacturers provide sorrowful faces, but are really necessary?
I'm certainly not averse to change, because I hope that a temporary unification will do well in motorsport. I am definitely interested, though nothing as Williams again in a position to be able to go to the podium when the engine, transmission, brakes and other things would make no difference. Because it would come in this case, the driver again more in the foreground. It would interest me already, how well a Rosberg is and I would not mind if this phalanx of McLaren and Ferrari would finally get more competitive.
On the other hand, one must also remember that more does not necessarily ensure uniform component that smaller teams can go forward with. The best example of this is the NASCAR where it is since the introduction of the CoT, much less scope for changes to the car. Has changed so little? No - it continues to win the "big", ie Hendrick, Gibbs and Roush. The economic crisis has even ensured that even more small teams are gone.
But what options you have for anything, you want to save the series? It is clear that we must save. It is also clear that this is only possible if one forbids manufacturers to develop certain things, which in turn means that more needs to unify.
So I think at least the idea of the motor unit, or an engine to be built according to specifications must be determined, absolutely right and good because it means that the field at least for a moment back closer together. If it means that more manufacturers are pulling back for the moment - ok. There are others jump into the gap, and stick their name on a motor.
2009 is not for Formula One, a tough year. 2010, the matter can again be different. And I hope that the motor sport, and therefore the driver will again stand in the foreground.
And what else?
Once again fails to do much just because of something less updates than usual TV program for the week, but the weekend is coming back. The "Race of Champions" is even on Sunday!
After the withdrawal of Honda sometime soon I'll have to change the header :)
No related posts.
This motor program-itself is not bad, so wenns so should prevail. But sooner or later disappear when McLaren Mercedes and Ferrari out of F1, the series was simply missing. So I think it's more or less wrong, add the surcharge to Cosworth and not to give one of the major manufacturers, which is anyway vertretten in F1. But you probably will not be able to change.
Yes I know, wait first as Mercedes and Ferrari respond in the near future. But maybe you just go in the near future once again to more than 22 vehicles that do not attack itself.
Downsizing possible?
There are currently only 3 more or less dependent teams in Formula 1 (one incapable of any other cars with 4, the last as fluid as the main sponsor) support, more than half of the event to the direct support of a manufacturer. What should I shrink in Formula 1 yet? It's not like as if you set an excess of fat (teams), which is now only a run-down times could celebrate before the situation goes to the substance.
Small teams stand a chance? Driver's unimportant? Voltage is not present?
- 5 out of 10 teams in last season won at least one race.
- 9 out of 10 teams in last season at least achieved a podium finish.
- 7 out of 20 drivers have won last season at least one race.
- 14 of 20 drivers have in the past season at least achieved a podium finish.
- 18 of 20 drivers have collected in the previous season World Cup points.
Sometimes statistics can be fun.
...
A case's silent shake of the head:
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns21037.html
The crucial point which I would mean by "downsizing" is so that you can return the manufacturer's involvement would have. For then would the amount of money that would be in the game, shrinking back. It would take just more of these teams like Williams, for there is only one quasi motorsport field of activity. For who can spend only what they earn in motorsport. That would be the deciding factor for me. And that could then get their engine, Cosworth or Toyota or Mercedes, but the only supply just the engine. If you were there then a really tight engine formula, thus introducing a quasi-unit engine would then be burnt there is not too much money.
I hope that we could end there, that withdraw after Honda even Toyota, Renault and just goes to BMW or limited to engine and to move up to designers from other series, which for me would be the ideal health shrink-development (in fact would We then back at the level of the 80s to mid 90s ;-)
@ NoteMe: These statistics are worth gold, you should almost always have memorized in your head when someone drags back on the oh so boring F1 :-) it's "pure Ferrari-McLaren-event" ...
On a forum, the question arose whether the ban on tobacco advertising has contributed to the problems in the F1. I would say yes. This was a lot of lost money, the same could not be replaced by other sponsors. One should therefore consider making the ban to be reversed. Although I myself am Non smoking, but smoking is allowed as long as at times now, brings a ban on very little advertising.
Moreover, the involvement of all manufacturers, but also the way of all teams is focused solely on winning and good placements. Therefore, they are always all the money they can muster, will invest in the development, where it is still allowed. Consequently, will continue to dominate the richer teams. One would have to create a complete series unit to prevent it. That would, of course, but the complete opposite of what was the F1 and should be.
How was that? According to statistics, every fifth human being is a Chinaman? Funny. At the supermarket today was not.
The statistics are good. Especially because it really well against boring Sundays helps if the rain fails again. And the guys here complain every fortnight in the shoutbox or blog comments about boring F1 race, it can move with the assurance that a spreadsheet is always right.
My suggestion NoteMe: take the time to LapCharts of Formula 1 racing before that took place under dry conditions through time and count how many overtaking maneuvers has given it an average per race on the open road.
But the tobacco Werbevorbot in the EU ... the moves at all.
if ecclestone another eu-run wegschiesst, and a race to bring us see the thing again but very different.
I also think that the clever men are businessmen should take a closer look around, there is still some question about what to get. after all the marketing. could all the windows are nice battle Apple hthematisiren via F1 technology marketing perspective auschlach ^ h ^ h ^. them apart ... make the oil multis just not enough coal? But just because Währe NEN good aufzupoliren F1 venue the image. Ifs to the sponsors, coal is then only the (now each has the team to satisfy) cleverness of marketing / pr people asked, imho.
people where it really comes to racing at the whole thing anyway is what bosom for NEN lettering on the car stuck. On the flip now, alcohol or other drugs socially acceptable or even unscrupulous oil multis are is in effect, but damn. They get updated very often, even us as racing-advertising for the überfettungsgesellschaft (McDonalds) or the Army. Tucholsky quote.
The oil companies have also become more economical, the cost of Dubai Palme indeed some change ^ ^
Did yesterday again read something about new F1 engine with 4 cylinder engine with 1.8 liters and a turbocharger, which Mosley wants to have like 2013. Somehow, if it were good times, let a motor constant, instead of again and again and again to build new ones. And still I do not see the Cosworth engine in F1 from 2010. In 2009, when the engines have to last longer, have Ferrari, BMW, Toyota and Mercedes capacities that the rest of the field must have auszustatten.Es not every team the same engine, they were presented earlier does not, a Bissel mixture should already lassen.Aber Now comes Cosworth, Mosley's favorite since the days when F1 was still held by F2 and Spa was twice as long ^ ^ I see again, if all worked up over the weak-Cossy, and do not want to know what the back kostet.Immerhin is the flagship engine, because there are more from other sites where you could save as kann.Tesfahrten make it even more, but not, but on Monday after a GP, if you already there anyway ist.So as Moto GP also makes ( Okay, bit far-fetched comparison :) In the paddock you could save, and yes, I want to go back to the Red Bulletin, right? ^ ^
So the issue with the smaller engines I am very open to. Currently, the trend is very common to reduce the number of cylinders and engine displacement in high-volume vehicles. That's what Mercedes or BMW to its current 10 - and 12-take the final out of the program, and introduce turbocharged eight-cylinder. They have less internal friction and save fuel, the power gets to the boost pressure. VW makes so well in a big way with the TSI engines. I think that is only logical step further. Manufacturers often refer to the fact that the technology flows from motorsport to series production. Now it seems that the normal aspirated engine should disappear from the series. Well then to the turbo or supercharged engine in F1. Must indeed be a 4-Ender, a six cylinder but is also a fine aggregate. Roars might not like the current, he compensated for it but perhaps a nice turbo whistle.
[Quote] Did yesterday again read something about the new F1 engine with 4 cylinder engine with 1.8 liters and a turbocharger, which Mosley wants to be happy in 2013. [/ Quote]
I think you are confusing something here: Turbo engines will there be from 2010/2011 again. But not in de F1, but the American Indy Car series ind! There will then be either V6 or turbo 4-cylinder with Doppelauflandung.
@ Florian, tell the time of MSa (Motorsport News) stood on the side 5 of the printed edition ^ ^
'd say dumb question:
why is no eigenmtlich stork came to the idea NEN f1 car build with electric motors? :)
If Mosley wanted INNOVATION really, he would ask something and ned so NEN crappy KERS.
yes something is possible, see:
http://www.teslamotors.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqqtJpfZElQ
I cry and neither Honda nor GM after ne tears for anything. who had both been feasible in the 90s electro-cars. GM built the EV1 even 1,000 pieces, and even spent hollywood stars. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ldmWebflUU <- Tom Hanks on his on Letterman. Sowhol Honda and GM have the parts but only leased out. once it became clear that the choice of Bush, the "2% of all vehicles must be emission-free" rule does not druchkommt for california, have they (GM / HONDA) the cars again collected and processed granular handy. There are also ne nice docu about it called "Who killed the electric car?".
myearhdreams-myass. development process until granules and then, 10 years later, when the strategy does not mean to yell and say the rises we have no more money for innovation development /. great. But I digress.
So, back to topic:
reduce cost but KERS development costs. is clearly yes nee ...
my personal opinion on the topic boost button-ned is the best. it gets all the F1 so ne art arcade-feeling. why not throw banana peels, as in mario kart?