F1 will burst like subprime bubble

[jshaw]

T'is hard to believe that somewhere in the middle of this, there is some racing going on.

[donskar]

The explanation for Ferrari's opposition to new teams sounds somewhat lame. Ferrari do not want to compete the hard way but by every cheat or secret vetoed rule they can get. So the FIA is well advised to kepp filling the grid with independant teams and make sure they have an independant engine supply. It looks like this is developing rather nicely.

That way they should hail Toyota's exit. Are you expecting any of new teams to be tougher competition to Ferrari than Toyota on track?

WhiteBlue, Timbo and Pup are right on. And you are more intelligent than your long post suggests. It was disappointing to see you chanting the stale old anti-Ferrari mantra.

Are you suggesting that Ferrari will somehow be orders of magnitude more competitive with 3 cars rather than only 2? WHY?

And on Machiavelli: F1 is a high stakes game. There are MANY instances of outright cheating NOT involving Ferrari. And more instances of underhanded political infighting (where Ferrari excels -- Machiavelli WAS an Italian!)

Are you suggesting that Ferrari created FOTA in order to:
1) hoodwink and then drive out the other manufacturers,
2) lure in weak teams, and
3) foist the 3-car concept?

If you really believe that or anything close to that, I'd think you'd admit some admiration for Ferrari's strategic planning and execution!

Face it: IF F1 remains at the "pinnacle" (through reality or Islamatron's hated PR efforts) then it will attract lots of money and some high profile manufacturers. It is not a game -- not even a sport in any idealistic sense -- it is a big business. I'm at work -- can't go into detail I'd like -- but it seems to me that Bernie was largely responsible for creating the business of F1 as we know it -- for better or worse. F1 is what it is.

I would love to see more cars (pre-qualifying), more personalities in F1, more close competition. But it is no longer possible to go back in time to the 1970's or 1980's. That time is past. I miss it, but I can't see a way for it ever to return.

I'm a Ferrari fan, but look at my signature: I attempt to take a balanced view of Ferrari and F1. I do not understand the blind hatred of Ferrari that you and others share. Ferrari has done some things I do not admire, and Enzo was in some ways an evil man. But for the masses of fans without whom F1 would be a shadow, Ferrari IS F1. Imagine next years F1 field without Ferrari. You'd love it? Now try HARD to put yourself in she shoes of the track promoters, sponsors, and spectators. NOW do you still like the idea of an F1 without Ferrari.

Back on topic: innovation is not free. Technical advances cost LOTS of money (see KERS). Adrian Newey does NOT have a file of brilliant advances he will not implement until budgets are reduced. Boss coming . . .

[Pup]

Saward certainly picked up some interesting points there. It is logical that the FIA and FOTA share an interest in cutting CVC's share of the FOM profits. Fifty percent sounds pretty outrageous. 15 looks nicer indeed.

I think the problem with that is that the numbers aren't working now for CVC, even with 50%. The debt is too high, and its growing year by year.

At some point, I'm certain there will have to be a break. Either the banks take a loss and restructure F1 with a more reasonable debt load, or there is a breakaway of some sort. And by that I don't necessarily mean the teams going it alone. While the FIA does own the F1 trademark, they don't have an opportunity to profit from it again until after we're all long dead. So while it does have some value now, simply because the FIA says it does, they could in an instant devalue it completely, with little harm to themselves, by creating another series above it. Move the existing teams to the new series, sell the commercial rights at a reasonable rate and give the teams a reasonable cut of the take. Essentially, cut CVC loose and hang them out to dry.

And that's just one scenario. I'm sure there are numerous others that would have the same result in the end.

F1 is sadly killing all its claim to technology with specs that regulate 99% of the car. LMP is rightfully the new home of automotive technologies. F1 is losing the plot because of Bernie’s greed and Max’s power lust.

I agree. LMP is a killer series. The problems with LMP though are 1) there are too few races, and 2) an endurance series will never be able to match the popularity of something like F1. Not enough people have the patience for a 5-hour race. My ideal series would be a combination of F1 and LMP. Running 15-20 races, primarily F1 length on classic F1 courses, but with 5 or so endurance races thrown into the mix, including LeMans and Daytona. The cars would be a mix of open wheel and prototype, similar to the Sigma F1 concept (that you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about ).

[Ciro Pabón]

I don't mind WB's quips, Ciro. You well know that I've been known to encourage them at times. I'll count on you to let us know when our exchanges start to spoil the atmosphere of the place.

Nice place, btw.

Well, I already let all of you know it. Maybe you don't mind, but certainly we at F1Tech do: it's not about us, it's about the site.

If you are not aware of my little campaign for an attractive forum, here it is: it's perfectly right to say that a post is idiotic but not that the poster is an idiot.

Simple: you don't have to respect other people's opinion (if you're not educated enough or sarcasm is not your preferred option) but you have to respect other people, at least while I'm here.

I'm glad you like the site and I truly hope you participate frequently: the caliber of arguments between people like WhiteBlue and yourself is outstanding and a reason for the site's high number of hits I'm witnessing.

[Pup]

If you are not aware of my little campaign for an attractive forum, here it is: it's perfectly right to say that a post is idiotic but not that the poster is an idiot.

Good policy. You can also plant flowers. Just an idea.

I'm glad you like the site and I truly hope you participate frequently: the caliber of arguments between people like WhiteBlue and yourself is outstanding and a reason for the site's high number of hits I'm witnessing.

My agent will contact you for a cut of the ad revenue. These posts take time, you know.

[xxChrisxx]

I agree. LMP is a killer series. The problems with LMP though are 1) there are too few races, and 2) an endurance series will never be able to match the popularity of something like F1. Not enough people have the patience for a 5-hour race. My ideal series would be a combination of F1 and LMP. Running 15-20 races, primarily F1 length on classic F1 courses, but with 5 or so endurance races thrown into the mix, including LeMans and Daytona. The cars would be a mix of open wheel and prototype, similar to the Sigma F1 concept (that you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about ).

That is a really good idea, to be honest i've acutally preferred watching sports prototypes to F1 recently. It's not just from a technical interest point of view, F1 has had too much bullshit and politicking lately.

[gcdugas]

F1 is sadly killing all its claim to technology with specs that regulate 99% of the car. LMP is rightfully the new home of automotive technologies. F1 is losing the plot because of Bernie’s greed and Max’s power lust.

I agree. LMP is a killer series. The problems with LMP though are 1) there are too few races, and 2) an endurance series will never be able to match the popularity of something like F1. Not enough people have the patience for a 5-hour race. My ideal series would be a combination of F1 and LMP. Running 15-20 races, primarily F1 length on classic F1 courses, but with 5 or so endurance races thrown into the mix, including LeMans and Daytona. The cars would be a mix of open wheel and prototype, similar to the Sigma F1 concept (that you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about ).

Lets ask ourselves an honest question. It pertains directly to the health af F1 and this thread. What gives a manufacturer a greater boost, winning LeMans or winning any GP (pick one, Monaco, Spa, Suzuka, Silverstone etc.)? It doesn't even matter if zero fans tune in their TVs to watch it or not. Right now LeMans carries much more prestige, cache, elan etc. in the hearts and minds of the public and it carries much more weight as a technical challenge in their minds as well. Hence it will soon be the new home of the manufacturers in their flight from the F1 spec racer series. The manufacturers need a place to race their concepts and innovations. LMP is now that place.

An honest evaluation of this is key for us to understand in view of the topic of this thread. It is like a run on a bank... first a few withdrawals, then a steady trickle, then the mass exodus. Right now, in the mind's of the general car buying public, F1 is seen as a corrupt rich-boy series full of lying scandals, unfettered greed, cheating, endless courtroom disputes, corporate power plays and tabloid dungeon whippings. It is not even perceived as full of glamour any more. The media spotlight has shifted from the glitter to the tawdry. The once "underbelly" is now the dominant image in the minds of the public.

And then there is what F1 is not.... F1 is no longer perceived to be the proving ground of new technology. This is because it has been ages since any road relevant technology has emigrated from F1 to a production car you car buy. LMP has made a big splash with the "eco-friendly" diesels. And you can buy a car with it today.

In my view F1 lost the essence of their technology orientation shortly after the FW13 and FW14 appeared in the early 90's. Rather than embracing a world of new electronic possibilities F1 shut down whole new areas of road relevant technologies. Electronic active suspension was banned, the CVT was preemptively banned in the prototype stage etc.

(ABS, TC and LC, fully auto gearboxes should be technically embraced. "Driver's aids" were shunned as impure but in reality they are not. If you enter a corner too hot all the ABS in the world will not save you from a crash or blowing your line. If you exit too hot on a less than optimal line the TC cutting in at the limit of adhesion will take away from your lap time. And then there is the steering, it is still verty possible to spin out a TC car by asking too much of the steering. It may plow off the track or loop out according to the balance of the car and according to the weight transfer incurred by the driver's technique. These things will limit crashes for sure but to get the optimal lap time out of a fully "aided car" you have to have optimal braking point/weight transfer/ apex clipping/exit line technique. There is as much skill in that as anything that lacks the "aids". The "aids" are just one more thing that the driver has to fully master.)

These are things that can trickle from the F1 "proving grounds" to actual production cars in a relevant and quick way. F1's image as the "pinnacle of motorsports" would suitably and justifiably be enhanced. F1 had a chance with KERS to change all that but it was regulated to death from the start. It should have been unlimited and AWD should also be allowed for greater energy capture. (the front could be electric only. or not, let the best design win) Road cars of the future will have all these things and more. Don't fight "technical destiny". If they resist, then F1 will take a back seat to whichever racing series most prominently embraces these technologies and more.

F1 fans look down upon NASCAR for its stone-age push-rod engines, antiquated carburaters and spec car chassis but they somehow fail to see that F1 is going down the same stone-age road with std. ECUs, "frozen engines", "equivalent engines", spec this and spec that etc. Every rule limitation kills technological innovation and road relevance. Throw off the mechanical limits but greatly reduce wing sizes and outlaw carbon brakes. Get lap times from having no minimum weight, any size tire, any car width, any wheelbase, any engine configuration, and even unlimited engine capacity. A 1300 BHP 4L I6 may beat a thirsty 2000 BHP 5L V12, or a fuel sipping 900BHP 3L V8 may be 25 Kmph slower on the straights but more nimble in the corners and lighter because of less fuel enough to turn a quicker lap. No limits does not mean insane lap times if the wings (road relevance please?) are reduced 75%. Lap times could be managed so they are roughly what they are today but instead of 4.5G cornering you may have only 2.8G cornering but you would regularly see 360-400 Kmph of the straights (much safer than 4.5G cornering BTW) and with carbon brakes outlawed ceramics would be developed (a road relevant technology) and there would still be greater passing due to increased braking distances.

Who cares about double diffusers and aero wheel shrouds? The biggest difference the average person can see in the cars is that some have shark fins and some do not. F1 had the opportunity to contribute to real road cars in a meaningful way but instead the public now sees technological innovations arising from LMP cars. Open up the regs to embrace "technical destiny" or stay in the irrelevant stone-age while other series pass you by. Better yet, stay a step ahead of "technical destiny" by being the racing series from whence innovations originate.

[gcdugas]

F1 is sadly killing all its claim to technology with specs that regulate 99% of the car. LMP is rightfully the new home of automotive technologies. F1 is losing the plot because of Bernie’s greed and Max’s power lust.

I agree. LMP is a killer series. The problems with LMP though are 1) there are too few races, and 2) an endurance series will never be able to match the popularity of something like F1. Not enough people have the patience for a 5-hour race. My ideal series would be a combination of F1 and LMP. Running 15-20 races, primarily F1 length on classic F1 courses, but with 5 or so endurance races thrown into the mix, including LeMans and Daytona. The cars would be a mix of open wheel and prototype, similar to the Sigma F1 concept (that you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about ).

Lets ask ourselves an honest question. It pertains directly to the health af F1 and this thread. What gives a manufacturer a greater boost, winning LeMans or winning any GP (pick one, Monaco, Spa, Suzuka, Silverstone etc.)? It doesn't even matter if zero fans tune in their TVs to watch it or not. Right now LeMans carries much more prestige, cache, elan etc. in the hearts and minds of the public and it carries much more weight as a technical challenge in their minds as well. Hence it will soon be the new home of the manufacturers in their flight from the F1 spec racer series. The manufacturers need a place to race their concepts and innovations. LMP is now that place.

An honest evaluation of this is key for us to understand in view of the topic of this thread. It is like a run on a bank... first a few withdrawals, then a steady trickle, then the mass exodus. Right now, in the mind's of the general car buying public, F1 is seen as a corrupt rich-boy series full of lying scandals, unfettered greed, cheating, endless courtroom disputes, corporate power plays and tabloid dungeon whippings. It is not even perceived as full of glamour any more. The media spotlight has shifted from the glitter to the tawdry. The once "underbelly" is now the dominant image in the minds of the public.

And then there is what F1 is not.... F1 is no longer perceived to be the proving ground of new technology. This is because it has been ages since any road relevant technology has emigrated from F1 to a production car you can buy. LMP has made a big splash with the "eco-friendly" diesels. And you can buy a car with it today.

In my view F1 lost the essence of their technology orientation shortly after the FW13 and FW14 appeared in the early 90's. Rather than embracing a world of new electronic possibilities F1 shut down whole new areas of road relevant technologies. Electronic active suspension was banned, the CVT was preemptively banned in the prototype stage etc.

"Driver's aids" were shunned as "impure" but in reality they are not. ABS, TC and LC, fully auto gearboxes should be technically embraced. If you enter a corner too hot all the ABS in the world will not save you from a crash or blowing your line. If you exit too hot you will soon be on a less than optimal line with the TC cutting in at the limit of adhesion and taking away from your lap time. And then there is the steering, it is still verty possible to spin out a TC car by asking too much of the steering. It may plow off the track or loop out according to the balance of the car or according to the weight transfer incurred by the driver's technique. These "aids" will limit crashes for sure but to get the optimal lap time out of a fully "aided car" you have to have optimal braking point/weight transfer/apex clipping/exit line technique. There is as much skill in that as anything that lacks the "aids". The "aids" are just one more thing that the driver has to fully master. Shunning the "aids" was a PR coup from those who are overly nostalgic. In another era they would have similarly shunned "horseless carriages" because it did away with managing your animal's pace vs. endurance rather than seeing it as something else for humans to fully master.

These are things that can trickle from the F1 "proving grounds" to actual production cars in a relevant and quick way. F1's image as the "pinnacle of motorsports" would suitably and justifiably be enhanced. F1 had a chance with KERS to change all that but it was regulated to death from the start. It should have been unlimited and AWD should also be allowed for greater energy capture. (the front could be electric only. or not, let the best design win) Road cars of the future will have all these things and more. Don't fight "technical destiny". If they resist, then F1 will take a back seat to whichever racing series most prominently embraces these technologies and more.

F1 fans look down upon NASCAR for its stone-age push-rod engines, antiquated carburaters and spec car chassis but they somehow fail to see that F1 is going down the same stone-age road with std. ECUs, "frozen engines", "equivalent engines", spec this and spec that etc. Every rule limitation kills technological innovation and road relevance. Throw off the mechanical limits but greatly reduce wing sizes and outlaw carbon brakes. Get lap times from having no minimum weight, any size tire, any car width, any wheelbase, any engine configuration, and even unlimited engine capacity. A 1300 BHP 4L I6 may beat a thirsty 2000 BHP 5L V12, or a fuel sipping 900BHP 3L V8 may be 25 Kmph slower on the straights but more nimble in the corners and lighter because of less fuel enough to turn a quicker lap. No limits does not mean insane lap times if the wings (road relevance please?) are reduced 75%. Lap times could be managed so they are roughly what they are today but instead of 4.5G cornering you may have only 2.8G cornering but you would regularly see 360-400 Kmph of the straights (much safer than 4.5G cornering BTW) and with carbon brakes outlawed ceramics would be developed (a road relevant technology) and there would still be greater passing due to increased braking distances.

Who cares about double diffusers and aero wheel shrouds? The biggest difference the average person can see in the cars is that some have shark fins and some do not. F1 had the opportunity to contribute to real road cars in a meaningful way but instead the public now sees technological innovations arising from LMP cars. Open up the regs to embrace "technical destiny" or stay in the irrelevant stone-age while other series pass you by. Better yet, stay a step ahead of "technical destiny" by being the racing series from whence innovations originate.

[Ray]

I agree. LMP is a killer series. The problems with LMP though are 1) there are too few races, and 2) an endurance series will never be able to match the popularity of something like F1. Not enough people have the patience for a 5-hour race. My ideal series would be a combination of F1 and LMP. Running 15-20 races, primarily F1 length on classic F1 courses, but with 5 or so endurance races thrown into the mix, including LeMans and Daytona. The cars would be a mix of open wheel and prototype, similar to the Sigma F1 concept (that you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about ).

That is a really good idea, to be honest i've acutally preferred watching sports prototypes to F1 recently. It's not just from a technical interest point of view, F1 has had too much bullshit and politicking lately.

My main gripe with ALMS coverage here is that they are really bad about covering just the P1 class and the GT2 leaders. No one else. The camera positions are set up way too long and low. All I see are advertisements on the side of the track and no in car, not to mention that the camera angles give absolutely zero sense of speed. You never get the felling that they are racing at high speed anymore Formula 1 is the same way. I really like the ALMS because to me it's way more road relevant than the joke that is KERS. But the coverage is horrible from a fans point of view. I have seen the cars from the angles they show because they are the very same as if you were at the track. I want to see in car views, or cameras hanging off the cars, something that shows me a view that isn't littered with ads. Until that gets better I think I'm going to boycott all racing on television. I'm tired of getting ads shoved down my throat for the entire race, I see that crap enough during my daily life.

The future of car technology is in series like the ALMS and FIA GT and so on. Formula 1 is a joke, not road relevant as touring car racing, and too expensive because of all the rule changes and restrictions. That's where the money is wasted. They change the rules so often and they have to spend money over and over again to keep legal. Anyone that thinks budget caps are the answer is wrong. Restrictions to make things 'equal' is a guaranteed killer. I really wish they'd quit rigging the series as well. Races in F1 are decided in courtrooms and not on the track and will be the ultimate downfall of Formula 1 and rightly so. I hope politics kill that series dead. There are better ones out there that are more road relevant and don't pull that kind of crap on it's fans.

[xxChrisxx]

F1 fans look down upon NASCAR for its stone-age push-rod engines, antiquated carburaters and spec car chassis but they somehow fail to see that F1 is going down the same stone-age road with std.

I'm going to admit something I never thought I would now. NASCAR is acutally a guity pleasure of mine.

After being used to F1, european sports and touring car commentary, I find the NASCAR commentary slightly juvenile, and I find that little rat thing that keeps popping up irritating.

Apart from those two very minor niggles, it's quite fun to watch.


F1 coverage could learn a thing or two about becoming more accessable. Ok F1 is a more serious racing series and business, which is fair enough. Since the 90's it's got to the point where it feel stuffy and forced. I firmly believe that this is due to the manufacturers fault and can't wait for a series of 'garagist' teams.

Manufacturers are the death of any good racing series. When coverage increses, they see the chance to showcase themselves. It sterilises any soul the sport has for a clean corporate image.

[rjsa]

Lets ask ourselves an honest question. It pertains directly to the health af F1 and this thread. What gives a manufacturer a greater boost, winning LeMans or winning any GP (pick one, Monaco, Spa, Suzuka, Silverstone etc.)? It doesn't even matter if zero fans tune in their TVs to watch it or not. Right now LeMans carries much more prestige, cache, elan etc. in the hearts and minds of the public and it carries much more weight as a technical challenge in their minds as well. Hence it will soon be the new home of the manufacturers in their flight from the F1 spec racer series. The manufacturers need a place to race their concepts and innovations. LMP is now that place.

Don't think so. Here, in Brazil, neswpapers are not aware of the existance of LM or ALMS. Neither mainstream TV or Radio. That's available thru Speed cable channel and I'm happy when it's not on Spanish.

You won't find mention to it even on Atlas forums. It won't make to CNN nor NYT home page. Neither The Times.

It's just obscure.

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, good arguments on each side. Now, allow me to look for numbers, instead of opinions, as usual. Also, as usual, this is a ballpark aproximation, please, do not argue about my precision but about how to improve it and reach your own conclusions.

World daily traffic rank at NASCAR (red curve), F1 (blue), ALMs (cyan), DTM (gold), Le Mans (black) sites.



Yes, it's Alexa, so the figures have to be taken with a grain of salt. It's distorted by markets (that is, where people uses Alexa's sidebar).

I think it's at least a measure of the commercial value of each site, if not of the sport behind (and I've heard some people saying that the web is the future of advertising, but I'm too skeptic to fully understand them).

My first take of the graphic: well, NASCAR and F1 are neck to neck. The Dtm, Alms and Le Mans sites are barely visible at the bottom of the graphic. They're not the sites Pup should ask for a cut. He should (as his agent probably has recommended) go for Nascar and F1: they give you approximately the same number of visitors. Your best day (during races, I imagine) gives you a hefty 0.1% of the net.

Le Mans has two peaks, I assume the largest one is Le Mans properly. Alms has one (Daytona?). Dtm is non existent: there is only a small peak around August 2009.

As for NASCAR, it has more races and it shows. However, F1, with less peaks has larger ones. F1 goes below NASCAR when there are not races: NASCAR surfers are more faithful. There is a strong "end of season effect".

So, I move from the big net honchos of F1 and Nascar, reassured that Formula One is not going to disappear from the world of sports, and zoomed in the lower part of the graph, throwing into the fray the sites of Indycar and SuperV8. How does it look? Who has the largest "advert dick" in the world of motorsports?

Alms (gold), Dtm (red), Le Mans (cyan), SuperV8 (black) and Indycar (blue): what gives?


Indycar dominates, altough LeMans get more fans once a year. V8Supercars has its "little peaks", while Dtm doesn't register. I might have a problem with that site here.

[tok-tokkie]

That is a logarithmic scale (why is it upside down?) so F1 interest seems to have already declined significantly.

Watching F1 on TV is watching a really dull & long event. My circle of acquaintances have long since moved on from watching it. F1 results are still given prominence on the TV news broadcast. (I live in South Africa) It seems to me the technically interested are disillusioned & the uninformed are losing interest - Bernie has the equivalent of CDs to sell in the age of MP3s.

[noname]

does F1 really needs to be so much road relevant ? are not great drivers riding damn fast car and pushing them and himself to the limits good enough reason to watch the race ? are football, golf, basketball and many others sports in any way relevant to our everyday live ? I do not think so, but they are cost a lot, and it does not look like they would like do die.

what I am really upset is lack of technical freedom in F1 and that is, I think, real problem, bigger than lack of "road relevance". give the engineers freedom and just let them play and you will have bunch of innovations. you may have advances in composites, electronics, CAD/CAE tools (enormous speed of F1 developments is a good reason to more and more rely on numerical simulations), even project management (for the same reason - speed of operations) and many others. later they could be transferred to other areas, do not limit ourselves by stating we are interested only in technologies applicable to ordinary cars.

as far as I like LMP and GT cars I still rate F1 bolids higher. smaller, lighter, more powerful, more agile... I would be missing them "dancing" over the kerbs, for example. I do not expect LMP machines would provide us with more overtaking (like Montoya's move on Schumacher in Bus Stop in 2004) than F1 and I can not imagine them riding trough the tight and twisty roads of Monaco.

[tarzoon]

@noname

I disagree here. I think that even F1 cars should have something of a practical nature. It makes me somehow differently connected to the sport. Not meaning everything, but parts of it.

On the other hand, I'd like to see more power in those cars. Soon enough a factory built german saloon will have more power than an F1 car, and that idea puts me off. Besides, if cars had more power - say, 1000 bhp - drivers would be more often on their tip toes and engineers would need to pay extra attention to traction.

There are many ways of connecting f1 to future road car technology. If I just wanted to simple and straightforward technology I would be watching NASCAR. On the other hand, there is much to learn from USandA's way of doing rules. NASCAR is actually fun, basketball is fun, and even american football with all its stops and pauses is fun. F1, on the other hand, has a tendency to look boring on the telly, while watching live almost seems like a different universe.