Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
The FIA and Bernie Ecclestone say that the formula 1 manufacturers have too much power, are they right?
Is it not really that only 2 currently have a decent engine and even between those there is a significant difference!
In this situation if one manufacturer left or decided not to supply a team there would be a big problem.
If, however, all 4 engines were equal or nearly so this problem would not exist!
An engine freeze on brand new untested power units is ridiculous and IMO the reason certain manufacturers have too much power.
Renault - By not producing a competitive engine.
Red Bull - Not wanting to wait another year to bridge the gap
FIA - Not doing anything to bridge the power gap between manufacturers. Should have identified crisis in 2014 beginning and allowed Ferrari and Renault to work on development. This probably would have been a better invitation to new manufacturers who are now too cautious to venture into F1.
Engine freeze was stupid but I disagree with the bridging thing for only certain manufacturers- everyone should play by the same set of rules, that way everyone is in the same boat. BOP is for BTCC and horse racing.
Bernie thinks the manufacturers have too much power. The FIA thinks they should be seen to be doing something. RedBull thinks the world owes them titles.
The reality is that, as always, some people have done a better job than the others and have reaped the rewards of that.
The engine freeze hasn't helped the situation though, that's true.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
Regarding engine costs, I cant believe that the media ignore the cost benefit perspective.
If I had $250 mil to run an F1 team each season, I would look at the most efficient manner to gain performance for my car. Relative to aerodynamics, engines have a higher performance benefit for the cost. I would therefore, focus on getting the best engine I could possibly get , and thereby get a jump on the other teams, possibly even those with more money.
Engines deliver a higher performance return for investment than aero development does. Therefore the engines may be expensive, but they are COST EFFECTIVE. Given the massive budgets of even underperforming F1 teams, there is no sense in complaining about engine prices.
Obviously, I'm firmly in line with the opinion that Bernie has manufactured a crisis.
(god I wish I could do Ronspeak. He'd probably explain this better)
I don't think that Manor will pay for the power unite (PU) at least not the entire purchase price. There's some technical deal behind it. Maybe Pascal Wehrlein?
The teams have been complaining about the cost of the engines from day one. Wasn't the Manor deal to make sure they supplied 4 teams as all the manufacturers had to promise?
What do you mean too much power? F1 works exactly as designed by F1 owners, FIA and big teams. Who gave Ferrari veto power they recently used? Ecclestone and Mosley. Ecclestone mocks mid-field teams that they agreed to unequal deals and then whines about engine rules he never liked but had 100 times more influence on. Can you feel the irony?
When you hear from Jean Todt that the rule that manufacturer can deny supplying engines was a "mistake" you cannot help but laugh. No, mistake is when you miss a penalty by half a meter, when you point the ball in the opposite direction, shoot at the other goal and score there it's not a mistake. They all knew exactly what they were doing.
Engine rules were in favour of all the biggest teams: Mercedes and Ferrari (full manufacturer) but also Red Bull and McLaren. RB less but they thought they'd be fine, even in '14, Renault wanted it and they had no choice. They co-rule F1 blocking every healthy change that would touch their privileged position starting with costs, they all loved engines deciding the championships. Mateschitz was one step behind five times during engine change period but now it's all about bad rules? McLaren failed in '13 and with the best engine in '14, that is before low new engines dice score and Honda's $$ saving them but now it's all about the "crisis"?
F1 works as designed and the whole noise exists only because:
- Ecclestone's beloved RB, richest and very strong marketing wise team that co-owns and co-rules this circus along with owning a grand prix and track ($$) firstly got a low score on engine dice and then were stupid with engine contracts. Where was Ecclstone when it was RB that used their position to force Renault to focus on their teams? It was fine because Lotus going broke is part of the design, engine costs included in that.
- wrong team - Mercedes - is winning, partly personal (BE), partly practical - one more variable to add to Ferrari. Too much power is not a problem, Merc not giving customers upgraded engine is the joint biggest scandal this season yet it's a no story in media.
- CVC selling F1 and relative problems with it
