[ 2020 ] Racing Point F1 Team - Mercedes

[Emag]

I see nothing wrong with customer cars, or cars that are almost photocopies. People are constantly complaining that their isn't enough action, and a bunch of similar cars would provide that.

People are also always complaining that everything's so expensive, and copying 95% of your car would surely drive costs down and allow you to focus on your own customizations.

I'd go as far as saying, the number one issues with f1 currently is ridiculous amount of over-regulation.

That's fine, but people are underplaying this situation in my opinion. I feel like this can change the outlook of the sport. There is a chance that in the future, we may have a couple of teams with top resources that will battle it out for the championship and the rest of the field filled out with a bunch of copies of these teams. We will end up with a more expensive version of F2, where the midfield teams are all running weaker versions of the top cars. Does FIA want to move in that direction? If yes, then they will not do anything to prevent this sort of business model. If not, then they have two ways to go around it.

They either allow Racing Point to continue on this season with the car they have now, and make changes to the regulations for next year and onwards.
Or they decide to be strict about it and demand them to change elements of their current car after this whole Renault protest is dealt with.

EDIT: I feel like this whole protest will be decided on the meaning of the word "design" in the regulations. Because I highly doubt it that Mercedes shared classified information with RP. They have so much to lose from that move and absolutely nothing to win in return (unless there are deeper things involved outside of F1).
Renault will 100% say that by "designing a part on your own" means that the team has to come up with a concept on their own and it is not enough for a team to claim something as their own design just because they built it on their own. RP would have a lot more trouble if Mercedes were the ones making the protest, because they can definitely argue that their own design was stolen (Example: If a Samsung S10 copy was doing well on sales, then that's taking part of the market from Samsung which invented the design, so they have the right to sue the copy company).
However Mercedes has no reason to file a protest for as long as RP is slower than them.

[Macklaren]

The Autosport story is very clear -- Renault has high confidence (but not certainty) that the internal design of the RP brake ducts will be largely similar (doesn't need to be identical) to the Merc 2019 brake ducts, which will prove that something is amiss. They are not debating the "Tracing Point" nature of the exterior design -- they are using the internal design trying to prove that there was actual IP transfer (or even if there wasn't the designs are too close to pass the rules for a listed component). They also admit that they are guessing about the internal design but strongly believe that they are correct.

[nzjrs]

The Autosport story is very clear -- Renault has high confidence (but not certainty) that the internal design of the RP brake ducts will be largely similar (doesn't need to be identical) to the Merc 2019 brake ducts, which will prove that something is amiss. They are not debating the "Tracing Point" nature of the exterior design -- they are using the internal design trying to prove that there was actual IP transfer (or even if there wasn't the designs are too close to pass the rules for a listed component). They also admit that they are guessing about the internal design but strongly believe that they are correct.

The bolded part is the hard part to argue (from both sides) .....

[Big Tea]

I know its only words, but remember RP say it is for this season only as they were left in the tub between seasons. It is (according to them) never intended to be a philosophy just a survival tactic.

[dans79]

I see nothing wrong with customer cars, or cars that are almost photocopies. People are constantly complaining that their isn't enough action, and a bunch of similar cars would provide that.

People are also always complaining that everything's so expensive, and copying 95% of your car would surely drive costs down and allow you to focus on your own customizations.

I'd go as far as saying, the number one issues with f1 currently is ridiculous amount of over-regulation.

That's fine, but people are underplaying this situation in my opinion. I feel like this can change the outlook of the sport. There is a chance that in the future, we may have a couple of teams with top resources that will battle it out for the championship and the rest of the field filled out with a bunch of copies of these teams. We will end up with a more expensive version of F2, where the midfield teams are all running weaker versions of the top cars. Does FIA want to move in that direction? If yes, then they will not do anything to prevent this sort of business model. If not, then they have two ways to go around it.

They either allow Racing Point to continue on this season with the car they have now, and make changes to the regulations for next year and onwards.
Or they decide to be strict about it and demand them to change elements of their current car after this whole Renault protest is dealt with.

F1 allowed customer cars for long periods of its history. The ban on customer cars, is a relatively new thing, and in my opinion one of the key things that has driven up cost.

[yinlad]

Marc Priestly made an interesting point in his last video regarding the whole RP Renault protest.
Some of the midfield teams spent a lot more money than RP for this season (McLaren and Renault) by designing every bit of their car on their own. Now both McLaren and Renault receive extra funding from external sources (McLaren from the Bahraini investors and Renault from the road car division).

They are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on these cars, so when they ask for a little more next time around to take the next step, the investors have the right to ask: Why did this team with half our budget (RP) outperformed us this badly. Why can't we follow their way of working to save money and get better results?

And this is a big problem because if by copying the best car, a midfield team can finish 3rd in the constructors, then what is the point of everyone designing their own car? Might as well allow customer teams again and have a bunch of last year Mercedes's copies battling around in the midfield for the best copy title. You see how teams like Renault might feel a little "not so happy" about this whole situation because they have been trying to develop everything on their car on their own as per rules. If the rules allowed customer team cars (or essentially, copies of faster cars), then perhaps they would have taken a different approach back when they rejoined the sport, by buying parts from RedBull and copying their aero until they were in a strong enough position to try and develop their own concepts.

This is a huge deal and FIA has to provide some clarifications on what is legal and what is not because this is setting a role model for every new / low budget team to follow. Cutting costs down and ending up with a better car is such a no brainer for a lot of teams (Haas, Alfa Romeo, Alpha Tauri are all teams that can definitely gain a lot by following RP footsteps).

The protest is right because FIA banned customer teams for this exact reason. A couple of years ago RedBull was running on 4 exact same cars on two different teams and that wasn't something FIA were happy with back then. What RP is doing is a slightly different approach which ultimately leads to the same result, so all that Renault is doing right now perhaps is just seeking clarification regarding these rules that were set a while back.

The difference is, the McLarens and Renaults are aspiring to put their efforts into a concept of their own that they can shape into a championship winning design, you aren't going to get a car that can win the championship by copying last years winner.
Racing Point have been clear in that this was the result of the old concept (Red Bull inspired) hitting a wall so they decided to take a gamble on copying the Mercedes W10 concept for what was supposed to be a bit of a gap year between regulations.

[Emag]

The difference is, the McLarens and Renaults are aspiring to put their efforts into a concept of their own that they can shape into a championship winning design, you aren't going to get a car that can win the championship by copying last years winner.
Racing Point have been clear in that this was the result of the old concept (Red Bull inspired) hitting a wall so they decided to take a gamble on copying the Mercedes W10 concept for what was supposed to be a bit of a gap year between regulations.

If you copy a top team's design this year, and you are successful with it, what's there to stop you from continuing to develop that concept for the upcoming seasons? And if the car turns out weaker than the car you copied, you can just start over by copying them again. It's not too far-fetched to think that if every midfield team followed this philosophy, one of them will get it very right and start fighting for the championship. It's a matter of luck, and a bunch of smart people being at the right place at the right time.

Yes, McLaren and Renault want to design their own concept and develop that into a championship winning car, and that's the goal of every other team. However if Racing Point is so successful with this other business model, why should the other teams continue on that approach?

I got nothing personal with Racing Point, but we have to accept that by allowing this business model, then you are setting a precedent for other teams to follow. And I mentioned that perhaps this is what FIA wants, and it's fine. However, that will lead to some of the innovation aspect of Formula 1 to disappear in the future if the sport shifts to this mentality.

[Big Tea]

Marc Priestly made an interesting point in his last video regarding the whole RP Renault protest.
Some of the midfield teams spent a lot more money than RP for this season (McLaren and Renault) by designing every bit of their car on their own. Now both McLaren and Renault receive extra funding from external sources (McLaren from the Bahraini investors and Renault from the road car division).

They are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on these cars, so when they ask for a little more next time around to take the next step, the investors have the right to ask: Why did this team with half our budget (RP) outperformed us this badly. Why can't we follow their way of working to save money and get better results?

And this is a big problem because if by copying the best car, a midfield team can finish 3rd in the constructors, then what is the point of everyone designing their own car? Might as well allow customer teams again and have a bunch of last year Mercedes's copies battling around in the midfield for the best copy title. You see how teams like Renault might feel a little "not so happy" about this whole situation because they have been trying to develop everything on their car on their own as per rules. If the rules allowed customer team cars (or essentially, copies of faster cars), then perhaps they would have taken a different approach back when they rejoined the sport, by buying parts from RedBull and copying their aero until they were in a strong enough position to try and develop their own concepts.

This is a huge deal and FIA has to provide some clarifications on what is legal and what is not because this is setting a role model for every new / low budget team to follow. Cutting costs down and ending up with a better car is such a no brainer for a lot of teams (Haas, Alfa Romeo, Alpha Tauri are all teams that can definitely gain a lot by following RP footsteps).

The protest is right because FIA banned customer teams for this exact reason. A couple of years ago RedBull was running on 4 exact same cars on two different teams and that wasn't something FIA were happy with back then. What RP is doing is a slightly different approach which ultimately leads to the same result, so all that Renault is doing right now perhaps is just seeking clarification regarding these rules that were set a while back.

The difference is, the McLarens and Renaults are aspiring to put their efforts into a concept of their own that they can shape into a championship winning design, you aren't going to get a car that can win the championship by copying last years winner.
Racing Point have been clear in that this was the result of the old concept (Red Bull inspired) hitting a wall so they decided to take a gamble on copying the Mercedes W10 concept for what was supposed to be a bit of a gap year between regulations.

Why did this team with half our budget (RP) outperformed us this badly. Why can't we follow their way of working to save money and get better results?

The obvious answer would be to do it. It is all within the rules and not cheating. In the case of half the teams the same can be said about using someone elses' engine, not making their own. It is in the rules so legal.

If it should be in the rules as legal is another case, as it is with engines.
Was that a can of worms I hear being opened.

[NAPI10]

RB is also feeling the heat -
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/15055 ... cing-point

[Jackles-UK]

The big issue for me isn’t the nature of the copycat philosophy but the fact that one car can be so dominant that, by copying it, another team can immediately become the 3-4th fastest car on the grid despite a full year of development from other teams.

Haas in 2018 did something similar to rocket up the standings and this speaks more to an inherent issue with the disparity of the grid in 2019 (probably the largest gap between the top three teams & the midfield teams I can remember, rarely under a full second difference in qualifying) which has allowed this to happen. Hopefully the 2022 rules close this up.

[KiLLu12258]

for me the biggest question in this debate is - why should mercedes risk anything in that case and make something illegal with nearly no outcome besides a strong RP?

This make no sense for me.

[Emag]

for me the biggest question in this debate is - why should mercedes risk anything in that case and make something illegal with nearly no outcome besides a strong RP?

This make no sense for me.

The only way I can think of for this to be possible is if Stroll paid them a ridiculous amount of money. Enough to cover a potential fine in case they are caught. And money isn't a bad thing to have after covid, even for Mercedes.

[KiLLu12258]

for me the biggest question in this debate is - why should mercedes risk anything in that case and make something illegal with nearly no outcome besides a strong RP?

This make no sense for me.

The only way I can think of for this to be possible is if Stroll paid them a ridiculous amount of money. Enough to cover a potential fine in case they are caught. And money isn't a bad thing to have after covid, even for Mercedes.

its possible that this would harm the whole mercedes brand/company when it comes out. never ever did they take that risk for even a lot of money.

[JRindt]

for me the biggest question in this debate is - why should mercedes risk anything in that case and make something illegal with nearly no outcome besides a strong RP?

This make no sense for me.

This probably saved RP a lot of wind tunnel time. Merc could use it for testing their designs for new rules. With their resources and extra wind tunnel time, they could get a head start and cement their domination for another 4-5 years.
Also the money, though I think it’s not a very big consideration.

Besides, Toto has a share in RP, doesn’t he? And he reportedly has a close relationship with stroll. Honestly, if it were anything other than F1, we would’ve had a proper investigation 4 months ago.

[adrianjordan]

for me the biggest question in this debate is - why should mercedes risk anything in that case and make something illegal with nearly no outcome besides a strong RP?

This make no sense for me.

The only way I can think of for this to be possible is if Stroll paid them a ridiculous amount of money. Enough to cover a potential fine in case they are caught. And money isn't a bad thing to have after covid, even for Mercedes.

its possible that this would harm the whole mercedes brand/company when it comes out. never ever did they take that risk for even a lot of money.

Agreed. Stroll isn't rich enough to offset the damage to Mercedes' reputation.

I keep going back and forth on this one, but my initial instinct was that it's impressive how close RP got by copying photographs etc.

I don't like the idea of this becoming the new normal, but at the same time, I applaud them for managing to make the idea work!