Parr says only eight teams next year, three car teams.

[wesley123]

I am quite sure it had something to do with Kolles thanking him for his work in the Audi R10 ran by Kolles back in, I believe, 2009.

But I would like to know, what sponsorship money? and also, why? Why would he pay for a seat in a backmarker when he is being succesful in both Super Formula(for which he had to miss a race) as well as in the FIA WEC where he is challenging for the title in both championships.

He did not pay for his seat.

[Vettel Maggot]

Speaking of Caterham, the car almost seems sponsorless now compared to the beginning of the year. Sign of the times?

[pob]

According to Amus, Lotterer's seat was paid for by his sponsor Hype energy drink.

[GitanesBlondes]

F1 should explore allowing for 1 car team entries like IndyCar.

[basti313]

F1 should explore allowing for 1 car team entries like IndyCar.

I do not think that this will lead to anything. Development costs are the same, but they will have MUCH less data for their development. This is the same with the three car teams: As long as the most data can not be achieved by testing, but at the race weekend, all teams must have the same number of cars. Otherwise this would be highly unfair.

[flyboy2160]

F1 should explore allowing for 1 car team entries like IndyCar.

I'll advocate going beyond exploring: just do it. It would allow more filthy rich billionaires to achieve the celebrity status of being in the F1 circus and to hobknob with the rest of the F1 celebs. Let whoever pays the bills decide if it's worth it or not to run just 1 car, not the F1 bureaucratic wanna-be king weenies.

[Raleigh]

Economies of scale work against 1 car teams...

Sure, you save on the cost of building one car and shiping it around the world, the engine bill will be half and you don't need as many mechanics.

But design costs will be the same and you need the same manufacturing facilities. With half the coverage the sponsorship slots will be less valuable, and I can't see the FIA paying the same money for a 1 car entry. Plus one less seat that could be sold to a paydriver.

[Pingguest]

F1 should explore allowing for 1 car team entries like IndyCar.

Teams should be allowed to use whatever number of cars and constructors should be allowed to sell any number of cars to other teams. To have some equality, the FIA could - assuming of a twenty race calendar - decide to make only the best twenty results count for the constructors' championship.

[SectorOne]

Might as well rename it to spec F1 then.

I´m all for a third car idea, but it can only be used in practice with a rookie in it or for the two main drivers if their car has broken down.
For example Vettel lost a whole session today and with a third car the mechanics could have done their part and he could have done his part on track with the third car.

[AnthonyG]

The main problem with a 3rd car is that slower teams will have less chance to shine, cause there's one more fast car they'll have to beat by luck or strategy.
Don't know if I'm against or in favor of 3 car teams.

[xpensive]

There's little doubt in my mind that we will see three-car teams in 2015. MrE's deal with the race organizers is based on a given number of cars, not teams if I understand it correctly, why he has no choice if three or four teams are giving up a hopeless quest.

As a matter of fact; http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns28958.html

[prince]

It is indeed painful to see the back markers doing nothing but creating nuisance of unwanted traffic. The only purpose they serve is to keep the track side marshals busy by flashing the blue lights, slowing down the leaders lapping them and in rare scenarios like in US GP 2012, create a chance for good overtake. There isn't any genuine progress that these back marker teams have displayed in the last few years. On the other hand, the FIA/FOM have to constantly think of trying to reduce cost from F1 as these small teams cannot afford innovation, plus the embarrassing Pay Driver situation. In the last few years, there isn't one Pay Driver from any of the bottom 3 or 4 teams, who have gone on to make it big.

It would be great to see 3 cars from the top teams as it would enhance the show. Imagine Lewis, Nico and SOMEONE fighting for championship, taking each others' points and then a Second best team also getting in the mix.

[AnthonyG]

Wouldn't customer cars be a better solution then?

[Moxie]

It is indeed painful to see the back markers doing nothing but creating nuisance of unwanted traffic. The only purpose they serve is to keep the track side marshals busy by flashing the blue lights, slowing down the leaders lapping them and in rare scenarios like in US GP 2012, create a chance for good overtake. There isn't any genuine progress that these back marker teams have displayed in the last few years. On the other hand, the FIA/FOM have to constantly think of trying to reduce cost from F1 as these small teams cannot afford innovation, plus the embarrassing Pay Driver situation. In the last few years, there isn't one Pay Driver from any of the bottom 3 or 4 teams, who have gone on to make it big.

It would be great to see 3 cars from the top teams as it would enhance the show. Imagine Lewis, Nico and SOMEONE fighting for championship, taking each others' points and then a Second best team also getting in the mix.

We'd have fewer teams fighting each other. At the moment the teams in mid field and at the back have pride in beating their competitors, but that incentive would vanish if the people at the back were an after thought.

Remember how team orders neutered Barrichello and Massa at Ferrari? Now imagine if that was doubled for teams with a history of having a number 1 driver (ie Ferrari and Red Bull).

Some teams like McLaren or Merc have a reputation for letting 2 drivers race each other, but I can't imagine that would be practical for 3 drivers. I imagine they'd probably view the number 3 as a reserve or development role.

Teams like Lotus or Sauber could easily see this as an opportunity to have an extra pay driver.

In a nutshell, 3 drivers in a team would result in more drivers following team orders, more development drivers, more pay drivers. Less diversity lead to less competition.

[prince]

We'd have fewer teams fighting each other. At the moment the teams in mid field and at the back have pride in beating their competitors, but that incentive would vanish if the people at the back were an after thought.

Remember how team orders neutered Barrichello and Massa at Ferrari? Now imagine if that was doubled for teams with a history of having a number 1 driver (ie Ferrari and Red Bull).

Some teams like McLaren or Merc have a reputation for letting 2 drivers race each other, but I can't imagine that would be practical for 3 drivers. I imagine they'd probably view the number 3 as a reserve or development role.

Teams like Lotus or Sauber could easily see this as an opportunity to have an extra pay driver.

In a nutshell, 3 drivers in a team would result in more drivers following team orders, more development drivers, more pay drivers. Less diversity lead to less competition.

I guess it is too negative a way to be thinking on these lines. The situation is vastly improving in these areas. Ferrari does not have a No.1 and No.2 and why would they do it with two champions and with new management, things could be different. Red Bull did not had that concept by default, except for Webber under performing. That has changed with Dan now and one can't say Red Bull is doing that. So essentially, there are 4 big teams who are letting their drivers race and if they have 3 cars, it would be 12 competitive drivers trying to fight for the front (hoping there would be competitive Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren in 2015).

As for inferior role for the 3rd driver, again I don't think the top teams would do that as they will be constantly locked in battle for the constructors position, they would want as much performance as possible from all their drivers.