Auto manufacturers essential to F1?

[GitanesBlondes]

Let me just start out by clarifying that I mean are they essential with regards to fielding works entries into F1?

As engine suppliers I do see them as being essential because the teams do need engines to power their cars for one. The other is that the engine is the most relevant component in a F1 car for the manufacturers.

WhiteBlue has been insistent that the auto manufacturers should be encouraged to field actual teams into the sport. I disagree with that as there is nothing that has shown they are needed for the sport to survive. If anything, there is little relevance to their R&D to be had from F1, since the focus is no longer on engines. Audi said as much when they said they had no interest in participating in F1 as the extreme focus on aerodynamics benefits them not in the least. Further they had said the inability to develop engines in any meaningful manner made the whole thing pointless when one considers how little benefit there is to be had.

Given that the auto manufacturers do not have the level of autonomy that private entries have into F1, they are subject to the whims of their corporate boards.

I don't see why anyone would want teams that can be gone at the drop of the hat if there is any sort of economic recession, or if the company decides to move in a different direction.

What are your thoughts?

[MOWOG]

there is little relevance to their R&D to be had from F1, since the focus is no longer on engines. Audi said as much when they said they had no interest in participating in F1 as the extreme focus on aerodynamics benefits them not in the least. Further they had said the inability to develop engines in any meaningful manner made the whole thing pointless when one considers how little benefit there is to be had.

I said much the same thing in a different thread recently. Of course, no one pays the slightest attention to what I have to say!

[langwadt]

Let me just start out by clarifying that I mean are they essential with regards to fielding works entries into F1?

As engine suppliers I do see them as being essential because the teams do need engines to power their cars for one. The other is that the engine is the most relevant component in a F1 car for the manufacturers.

WhiteBlue has been insistent that the auto manufacturers should be encouraged to field actual teams into the sport. I disagree with that as there is nothing that has shown they are needed for the sport to survive. If anything, there is little relevance to their R&D to be had from F1, since the focus is no longer on engines. Audi said as much when they said they had no interest in participating in F1 as the extreme focus on aerodynamics benefits them not in the least. Further they had said the inability to develop engines in any meaningful manner made the whole thing pointless when one considers how little benefit there is to be had.

Given that the auto manufacturers do not have the level of autonomy that private entries have into F1, they are subject to the whims of their corporate boards.

I don't see why anyone would want teams that can be gone at the drop of the hat if there is any sort of economic recession, or if the company decides to move in a different direction.

What are your thoughts?

I think there is more to it, a manufacturer entering the sport obviously wants to be successful to get some good PR

So either;
-Believe that your engine so superior it will make a winner in even a small team, with the tight engine rules that is not so realistic
-supply a big team with the skills and the huge budget to make a winner, there is not so many to choose from
-buy a team convince the board to spend 200M a year and hope you can build the team and make it successful before they cancel

[Greg Locock]

So far as the auto manufacturers go motorsport is mostly PR. It is paid for by Marketing, and as such is subject to their way of analysing whether it is cost effective. It looks as though Marketing departments around the world have decided the cost benefit ratio is not appealing for F1.

[timbo]

As anything it has pros and cons. At the peak of manufacturer driven F1 (2006-2008) we has a field of very fast, professional and payed F1 drivers. Which is good.
Actually I think now we have very fast grid too generally, but the decline is non the less apparent.
However, F1 being not essential to their business is not something they stick to during the hard times. So despite all the agreements with FIA or Berni there's no guarantee they would not left when they feel they had too much of it.
Another con is that as F1 is an image sport manufacturers can not afford to loose, so after a few seasons of continuous humiliation manufacturer would consider quitting. I do think that the manufacturer exodus of 2009 was greatly influenced by the poor performance of Honda, Toyota and failure to meet the goal by BMW.
So I think we need balance and a partnership is much more preferable for a well being of F1 that 100% works teams.

[WhiteBlue]

.. WhiteBlue has been insistent that the auto manufacturers should be encouraged to field actual teams into the sport. I disagree with that as there is nothing that has shown they are needed for the sport to survive. If anything, there is little relevance to their R&D to be had from F1, since the focus is no longer on engines. Audi said as much when they said they had no interest in participating in F1 as the extreme focus on aerodynamics benefits them not in the least. ..

As it often happens you are getting it all ass to face. There is no need for F1 to spend silly money on aero games. To reach any desired level of performance you just have to keep the expenditure on power unit, aerodynamics and other mechanical stuff like recovery in an equilibrium. The manufacturers are not intersted in F1 aero. The constructors are. Because they have the rule making power they keep the rules tweaked for those things that give them the competitive edge over the manufacturers to the detriment of the sport. At least that is my humble opinion. I obviously respect people who disagree but that will not change the hard facts. The rules are written in a way that aero is king and 80% of the development money is spend on aerodynamic research. This simply has to change for F1 to get back to the glory days when the big automotive brands were heavily engaged in F1. It would be much better for the acceptance of F1 by fans world wide if Ferrari, Mercedes, Honda, BMW, Toyota, Aston Martin and McLaren were fighting it out with engine and energy recovery technology than Red Bull and GENII and other non automotive entities with arcane aero tweaks. For once I agree with Montezemolo here.

[GitanesBlondes]

.. WhiteBlue has been insistent that the auto manufacturers should be encouraged to field actual teams into the sport. I disagree with that as there is nothing that has shown they are needed for the sport to survive. If anything, there is little relevance to their R&D to be had from F1, since the focus is no longer on engines. Audi said as much when they said they had no interest in participating in F1 as the extreme focus on aerodynamics benefits them not in the least. ..

As it often happens you are getting it all ass to face. There is no need for F1 to spend silly money on aero games. To reach any desired level of performance you just have to keep the expenditure on power unit, aerodynamics and other mechanical stuff like recovery in an equilibrium. The manufacturers are not intersted in F1 aero. The constructors are. Because they have the rule making power they keep the rules tweaked for those things that give them the competitive edge over the manufacturers to the detriment of the sport. At least that is my humble opinion. I obviously respect people who disagree but that will not change the hard facts. The rules are written in a way that aero is king and 80% of the development money is spend on aerodynamic research. This simply has to change for F1 to get back to the glory days when the big automotive brands were heavily engaged in F1. It would be much better for the acceptance of F1 by fans world wide if Ferrari, Mercedes, Honda, BMW, Toyota, Aston Martin and McLaren were fighting it out with engine and energy recovery technology than Red Bull and GENII and other non automotive entities with arcane aero tweaks. For once I agree with Montezemolo here.

I don't disagree with you regarding the silliness of Formula Aero as it has become. The only motorized vehicle F1 has anything really in common with are fighter jets at this point. They just happen to have some parts that all cars have. I've not been a fan of the aero idiocy as it's the sort of snooze-inducing garbage that makes little difference to anyone - from the fans to manufacturers.

With that said, what do you consider the glory days of manufacturer involvement?

The '00s were certainly not that as it was the definitive proof they were in over their heads. Renault managed for only 2 years. What other era is there, the 50s when Alfa, Ferrari, and Mercedes were all dominating the sport?