Dallara designing F1 entry

[Powered by Cosworth]

Friend of a friend stuff here, Supposadly Dallara are designing an F1 chassis at the moment, based around a Cosworth engine, which Cosworth USA are testing on the dynos ready for entry next year.

[Jag_Warrior]

For whom, themselves?

[maximilian]

Ummm, can we get a little more on this than just "some dude told me"? :p :

[wmcot]

More info on the Dallara:

http://www.classiccarsforsale.co.uk/classic-car-page.php/carno/58214


:)

[DexDexter]

Friend of a friend stuff here, Supposadly Dallara are designing an F1 chassis at the moment, based around a Cosworth engine, which Cosworth USA are testing on the dynos ready for entry next year.

Hmm..Last time they were in F1 with Scuderia Italia in 1992 if I remember correctly. The car was a dog, in the first race it had flexi front wings, Martini and Lehto wondered why the car was so strange, the wings were not rigid enough and bent under pressure :) .

[555-04Q2]

Oh look, a pie in the sky. Splat!

[wedge]

Dallara designed the LMP Audis so must have done something right since.

[Knock-on]

Interesting rumour PbC.

Thanks for the heads up and let us know if you hear any more.

[V12]

The BMS Dallaras were not bad, just underfunded and were generally solid midfielders. They had the occasional impressive run in 1989 (mostly down to Pirelli qualifiers though IIRC), and JJ Lehto got a podium at Imola in 1991 (admittedly it was a wet race of quite high attrition). But look what happened when BMS switched the Dallaras for Lolas in 1993 - they dropped like a stone.

[DexDexter]

The BMS Dallaras were not bad, just underfunded and were generally solid midfielders. They had the occasional impressive run in 1989 (mostly down to Pirelli qualifiers though IIRC), and JJ Lehto got a podium at Imola in 1991 (admittedly it was a wet race of quite high attrition). But look what happened when BMS switched the Dallaras for Lolas in 1993 - they dropped like a stone.

You are right, the Dallara was better than Lola. But in the next year or two we'll have both if we are (un)lucky.

[Knock-on]

Lola, you've got me on my knees
Lola, I beg you darling please
Lola, darling wont you ease my worried mind
.
.
.
And not enter this time :D

[Hondo]

Maybe Max has the ultimate goal of putting MARCH back on the map. Generate a little retirement income.

[Knock-on]

Maybe Max has the ultimate goal of putting MARCH back on the map. Generate a little retirement income.

LOL :laugh:

[chuck34]

USGP (or whatever they're called now) anyone?

Lola & Dallara are just as good engineering companies as are currently in F1.

Their involvement should be welcomed....especially by the very people who were crying about the influence the manufacturers have in F1 not more than 12 months ago.

Worms that turn is, I believe, a suitable description.

[DexDexter]

Lola & Dallara are just as good engineering companies as are currently in F1.
.

The facts don't support your opinion. Their last F1 designs were below the bar, in Lola's case simply embarrassing, in fact the last two Lolas we've seen in F1 have been totally out of place. Things change of course but the bottom line is money and it's not so easy to find it in the current climate.

The facts don't support your opinion.

Really?

The core products produced by Lola & Dallara for the past 10 years have been exceptional.

Please show where the engineering expertise is missing.

http://www.dallara.it/

[DexDexter]

Really?

The core products produced by Lola & Dallara for the past 10 years have been exceptional.

Please show where the engineering expertise is missing.

I'm talking about their cars in F1, and the expertise was certainly not there. The Mastercard thing possibly clouds my judgement a little bit. I'm not an expert enough to discuss their work outside F1.

[ioan]

Really?

The core products produced by Lola & Dallara for the past 10 years have been exceptional.

Please show where the engineering expertise is missing.

Tam, we are talking F1 here, not GP2, not F3, not LMP cars, F1! and their history in F1 has nothing impressive to show.

[Sleeper]

Tam, we are talking F1 here, not GP2, not F3, not LMP cars, F1! and their history in F1 has nothing impressive to show.
Maybe not, but DAllara and Lola both have the technilogocal base to match half the grid these days, things have moved on for them quite a bit since they both last competed in F1.

[ioan]

Maybe not, but DAllara and Lola both have the technilogocal base to match half the grid these days, things have moved on for them quite a bit since they both last competed in F1.

I wonder if they are so great why they need a dumbed down F1 in order to compete? I just don't see the logic.

[woody2goody]

I wonder if they are so great why they need a dumbed down F1 in order to compete? I just don't see the logic.

They are still fairly modest companies despite their technical skill. They would still need to secure sufficient backing and pay drivers who are up to standard. £40 million is still a lot for any company to get to fund anything let alone an F1 team.

[ioan]

They are still fairly modest companies despite their technical skill. They would still need to secure sufficient backing and pay drivers who are up to standard. £40 million is still a lot for any company to get to fund anything let alone an F1 team.

Than they should continue doing what they did so well until now.
F1 isn't for everyone it's that simple.

[V12]

Out of all the outsiders looking in, Dallara and Lola are infinitely more qualified than anyone else, and I for one agree with tamburello and would welcome their involvement, and judge them on their current offerings, not their "Priceless" 1997 disaster, or an ill-conceived 1993 car - and that's just Lola, Dallara *never* embarrassed themselves in F1, and were pretty much nip-and-tuck with Minardi for the title of top underdog-Italian-marque throughout their involvement.

Both constructors have achieved an F1 podium in the past 19 years.

[DexDexter]

Out of all the outsiders looking in, Dallara and Lola are infinitely more qualified than anyone else, and I for one agree with tamburello and would welcome their involvement, and judge them on their current offerings, not their "Priceless" 1997 disaster, or an ill-conceived 1993 car - and that's just Lola, Dallara *never* embarrassed themselves in F1, and were pretty much nip-and-tuck with Minardi for the title of top underdog-Italian-marque throughout their involvement.

Both constructors have achieved an F1 podium in the past 19 years.

I followed Scuderia Italia quite closely in 91-92 and 91 Dallara was an ok car, they qualified 9th and 10th in Phoenix in the first race. They got the Ferrari engine for 92 and that car was really bad.

[Knock-on]

Actually, now I've stopped laughing, I am quite open to the idea.

F1 is going to explode if it carries on like it is. There could quite easily be a split that leaves some gaping holes.

I am not against a cost reduction but know that the way it is proposed is unworkable and almost demands teams cheat.

If there was a workable way to get more teams in F1, I would welcome it. Unlike some people, the latest greatest aero or electronic twist doesn't excite me. I prefer to see very fast cars being driven by the best drivers and if there was a reasonable way to do that for £40m, then superb. Lets get Lola, Ligier, Dallara, March, Arrows, Minardi and all the other names that made this sport great back into F1 along with the Prodrives and new companies.

[still missing champcar]

Single car entries anyone?

[wedge]

Tam, we are talking F1 here, not GP2, not F3, not LMP cars, F1! and their history in F1 has nothing impressive to show.

With a few years racing in F1 Dallara never had a proper chance to compete.

Look at the likes of Williams and Jordan. They had crap cars before they could make decent ones.

[ioan]

With a few years racing in F1 Dallara never had a proper chance to compete.

Look at the likes of Williams and Jordan. They had crap cars before they could make decent ones.

Why didn't Dallara stay longer in F1 than? If Williams and Jordan could make it why couldn't they?

[wedge]

Why didn't Dallara stay longer in F1 than? If Williams and Jordan could make it why couldn't they?

Because BMS Scuderia thought they were better off Lola and nobody else wanted to take on Dallara again.

[ioan]

Because BMS Scuderia thought they were better off Lola and nobody else wanted to take on Dallara again.

So they were either crap or crap and expensive, otherwise why is that no one wanted their chassis?!

[ioan]

Apologies for the double post :p

You can delete them within 15 minutes after the mistake! ;)

[N. Jones]

From reading all of the posts I gather the following:

- Lola and Dallara are welcome into the sport but with trepidation.
- Both have a dubious past in the sense that they were not competitive and bowed out of F1 rather quickly.
- Arrgh - I forgot my last point! :)

It looks to me like it is a 50/50 split - half want these teams to sign up and half want them to go away. Since I was not watching F1 in the 90's I don't really have a foundation to cast my vote one way or the other. I can only hope that whoever joins stays for the long term.

[nigelred5]

Why didn't Dallara stay longer in F1 than? If Williams and Jordan could make it why couldn't they?

Fiscal responsibility?? Dallara built the chassis for a team, they weren't the team IIRC. Lola did try it alone. It sapped resources, diminished their Indycar product at the time, and their core business-building race cars-went tango uniform requiring a re-organization as I recall. Didn't the regs also change that required the team to build their own chassis right around then?

If I"ve got $40M to race with and I'm in the business of building race cars, What makes more sense? dump 100+ million into the sea competing with manufacturer backed teams with huge retail automobile sales, or build cars for multiple series which ARE my retail sales and my core business.
Lola and Dallara are builders of race cars, not race teams. Teams like Williams, Minardi, etc., are race TEAMS. They have a single purpose- to race in F1.
No one has mentioned Reynard. Look what their involvement in BAR did to Reynard's operation. One doesn't get involved in F1 to make money on the race team.

I'm all for a return to the teams being teams. They CAN build their own complete chassis, or buy one form a manufacturer. Let the automobile companies g oback to being engine suppliers. Bring back march, lola, Dallara, etc, as well as engine companies like Cosworth, Hart, Judd. Mix it all back up

[wedge]

So they were either crap or crap and expensive, otherwise why is that no one wanted their chassis?!

F1 teams tend to be constructors of their own cars ie. in house.

[ioan]

Teams like Williams, Jordan and Minardi didn't even have a race car building business to build on, still they stayed and managed to evolve, some of them become race and/or championship winning teams in F1.

As far as I know the manufacturer backed teams usually do not run on manufacturer money (exception being Honda and Toyota) but on sponsorship money and also with their technical partners with whom they share technology. It's not like FIAT or Ferrari SpA is pumping money into Ferrari F1 team, BMW F1 are also financially independent of the manufacturer.

It looks to me that Lola and Dallara, and other F1 wannabees are going where they can make more money with least investition and right now F1 looks like the best bet for them.

I'm not very enthusiastic about such an approach because they will surely leave as soon as they are not making enough money out of it.

[wedge]

Errrr isn't that what the budget cap is there for?

[ioan]

Errrr isn't that what the budget cap is there for?

The budget cap is there in order to give Bernie one more reason not to pay to much to the teams. I don't see other use for it given that it can't be policed.

[Hondo]

Teams like Williams, Jordan and Minardi didn't even have a race car building business to build on, still they stayed and managed to evolve, some of them become race and/or championship winning teams in F1.

As far as I know the manufacturer backed teams usually do not run on manufacturer money (exception being Honda and Toyota) but on sponsorship money and also with their technical partners with whom they share technology. It's not like FIAT or Ferrari SpA is pumping money into Ferrari F1 team, BMW F1 are also financially independent of the manufacturer.

It looks to me that Lola and Dallara, and other F1 wannabees are going where they can make more money with least investition and right now F1 looks like the best bet for them.

I'm not very enthusiastic about such an approach because they will surely leave as soon as they are not making enough money out of it.

If memory serves me correctly, didn't Ferrari use his road cars to finance his racing? I believe Ferrari was the last team in F1 to start accepting outside sponsorship.

[Giuseppe F1]

This story was in Autosport Magazine released today in the UK and I am literally typing it out as a link does not appear on the Autosport.com website.

So, seems the rumours of Dallara being involved in a 2010 F1 entry were indeed true:

Autosport Magazine - Thursday 28th May 2009 - Page 15;

Dallara will return to Formula 1 as a constructor next season if Spanish outfit Campos Racing is granted an entry, AUTOSPORT has learned.

The prolific Italian chassis manufacturer has been working with former Minardi racer Adrian Campo's operation since March on the design of its 2010 F1 challenger.

Should the team be granted an entry, Dallara will build the Cosworth-engined cars to be run by the outfit in its debut season. Campos is strongly tipped to be accepted as one of the new teams, and has already lodged an entry with the FIA under the Campos Meta F1 banner.

The tie-in with Dallara gives the team extra credibility, as the Italian company has enormous experience of manufacturing single-seaters, including Indycars and Formula 3.

Despite admitting to being the first team to enter the 2010 championship, Campos has been unwilling to comment on the funding and infrastructure already in place for the F1 project.

Dallara was last involved in F1 as a technical partner of Midland in 2005, and most recently built a full chassis for the test car of the stillborn Honda project in 1999.

It was a full-blown F1 constructor in its own right from 1988-1992, when it provided chassis to the Scuderia Italia team and claimed two podium finishes before being replaced by fellow F1 returnee Lola at the Italian outfit.

[ioan]

If memory serves me correctly, didn't Ferrari use his road cars to finance his racing? I believe Ferrari was the last team in F1 to start accepting outside sponsorship.

Maybe at the beginning, for sure not after FIAT owned 90% of Ferrari, and it's been many decades since that happened!

[ioan]

The tie-in with Dallara gives the team extra credibility, as the Italian company has enormous experience of manufacturing single-seaters, including Indycars and Formula 3.

Another Formula F3 level entry in F1 then. Way to improve the value of the series, Not!

If memory serves me correctly, didn't Ferrari use his road cars to finance his racing? I believe Ferrari was the last team in F1 to start accepting outside sponsorship.

Correct.

Ferrari first took sponsorship in the mid 1980's, from Marlboro, manifest by a small logo near the roll hoop with the drivers name included, which was basically Marlboro paying the drivers retainers. Before then, the only logos on the car were for suppliers to Scuderia Ferrari.

Obviously FIAT bankrolled the organisation from 1968 onwards, but they were in effect owners rather than sponsors.

[chuck34]

Another Formula F3 level entry in F1 then. Way to improve the value of the series, Not!

So who is worthy of F1 then. Chassis manufacturers are out, teams from lower formula are out. Who does that leave? Car manufactureres seem to be the only ones left, and they are all talking about pulling out.

[ioan]

So who is worthy of F1 then. Chassis manufacturers are out, teams from lower formula are out. Who does that leave? Car manufactureres seem to be the only ones left, and they are all talking about pulling out.

The manufacturers aren't pulling out they are trying to force Max to give up on his dictatorship and Bernie to put more money back into the sport instead of giving it to the banks.

[Sleeper]

The manufacturers aren't pulling out they are trying to force Max to give up on his dictatorship and Bernie to put more money back into the sport instead of giving it to the banks.
You didnt answer the question ioan, who do you see as being worthy of entering F1 since you're pouring scorn on two race car manufacturers with the technical base to match half the current grid, even if they themselves lack a race team (at least for now) to compete themselves?

[ioan]

You didnt answer the question ioan, who do you see as being worthy of entering F1 since you're pouring scorn on two race car manufacturers with the technical base to match half the current grid, even if they themselves lack a race team (at least for now) to compete themselves?

The ones who can come in and take up the fight on an equal basis without help from the FIA. There's your answer.

[ioan]

I think what you mean is, as long as the budget cap can be scrapped and the incoming teams have as much money as Ferrari, then it doesn't matter.. Engineering and development don't really matter either, as long as money can buy success??

Engineering is what makes the difference in F1, not money.
Renault has always had about 100 million USD/per season than McLaren and Ferrari, Still they managed to beat them twice in a row.

Want to watch a cheap series? Watch GP2 and spare us the "smart @ss" comments.

[555-04Q2]

Engineering is what makes the difference in F1, not money.

:up:

I've always maintained that I would rather have a bunch of smart people with a small budget than a bunch of monkeys with a fat cheque book and twitchy pens designing a car.

[DexDexter]

:up:

I've always maintained that I would rather have a bunch of smart people with a small budget than a bunch of monkeys with a fat cheque book and twitchy pens designing a car.

Me too, but the problem is that looking back at history of F1, we've had a lot of not so smart people with a small budget. The grid is now more competitive than ever in the history of F1, I mean it's amazing, every team designs their own chassis and the whole grid is often covered by less than two seconds. Put in a small-budget team with a dog car and it could be embarrassing, one "Forti" would be about 3-4 seconds slower than the second slowest car. Having said that, I'm looking forward to Prodrive coming in, they are the sort of organisation that belongs in F1.

[555-04Q2]

Having said that, I'm looking forward to Prodrive coming in, they are the sort of organisation that belongs in F1.

So would I. I own a 2002 Prodrive Scooby and their workmanship and components are top notch :up:

[chuck34]

The manufacturers aren't pulling out they are trying to force Max to give up on his dictatorship and Bernie to put more money back into the sport instead of giving it to the banks.

So Toyota and Renault haven't made any noise about pulling out even before this budget cap deal?

I would agree with you that engineering should be the focus of F1. But then why do you scorn chassis manufacturers and other teams comming in? Do you not think they have high engineering standards? If not, how do you come by aquiring these "high engineering standards"? Must you work for one of the current teams or something?

Just trying to understand your logic.

[Sleeper]

The ones who can come in and take up the fight on an equal basis without help from the FIA. There's your answer.
That would be virtually no one. Your right in that engineering is what makes a difference on the track, but lets not delude ourselves that its the only diffirentiator. Remember that for most of the last 10 years F1 design has been about optimisation rather than inspiration in trying to find a new concept. Thats changed this year as the fact we have 9 very different looking cars proves, but it wont last beyond next year. With current spending levels no one could join the grid regardless of how talented their engineers are and lets have no confusion on this; Lola, Prodrive and Dallara have very tallented engineers.

[ioan]

That would be virtually no one.

Than so be it.



Your right in that engineering is what makes a difference on the track, but lets not delude ourselves that its the only diffirentiator. Remember that for most of the last 10 years F1 design has been about optimisation rather than inspiration in trying to find a new concept. Thats changed this year as the fact we have 9 very different looking cars proves, but it wont last beyond next year. With current spending levels no one could join the grid regardless of how talented their engineers are and lets have no confusion on this; Lola, Prodrive and Dallara have very tallented engineers.

I think you are exaggerating it a tad to much.
What's Force India's budget?! A bit under 100 millions? And they are only 1.5 seconds of the pace of Brawn who had a blank check last year to design this season's car. Not to mention they are very close to McLaren who have one of the biggest budgets in F1 and they also are looking competitive against BMW who are not on a shoe string either.

It's been quite some times since last time when a team has been more than 2 seconds of the top guys' pace in F1.

So it is possible.

The problem is that these cheapos who are looking to enter F1 now only want to enter if the rewards are bigger than the expenses no matter their competitiveness, or if the rules give them enough of a technical advantage over the wealthier teams.
Some will say I'm bad and so on, but just wait and see the mobile chicanes next season, because there will be no 2 tier championship, that's sure.

[V12]

Well the rewards have to be bigger (or equal to) the expenses, or they'd go bust. I personally think that prize money should be scrapped and starting money should be paid out equally amongst the 26 entrants qualifying for a race. The bigger teams can already command more in sponsorship revenue so why skew it even further?

More than 26 cars should be allowed to enter but if you don't qualify, you don't get paid for that race - which should help keep the grid at manageable levels organically, and if someone is that persistent despite a string of DNQs, then good for them.

If less than 26 cars are entered for the championship, rather than splitting it 24/22/20 ways, the surplus should be paid into a pot, which can fund incentives and initiatives to attact new teams in the future.

Too much self-interest for that idea to work of course.

[wedge]

Ioan, you are exaggerating things.

The budget isn't for the benefit of new teams but for F1 teams all round after Honda pulled.

If if helps new teams to enter then so be it.

If the rewards are bigger than expenses then isn't that a good thing? More investment for the team but that's for the FIA and accountants on both sides to figure.



What's Force India's budget?! A bit under 100 millions? And they are only 1.5 seconds of the pace of Brawn who had a blank check last year to design this season's car.

Honda were early to design this year's car.

[chuck34]

So Toyota and Renault haven't made any noise about pulling out even before this budget cap deal?


And Honda. How could I forget HONDA?!?! They must not have been a manufacturer that pulled out, right?

Thanks for the reminder Wedge.

[Bagwan]

I read , I believe on Allen's blog , that Brawn can expect $70million if they win this year .
If regulated at $100million , the budget will never be covered by the winnings .

But , it was never meant to cover a team's expenses .
Team expenses are covered by sponsorship , in return for ad time and copy .

If you win , sure , you get $70million , but the face time is worth so much more , that teams want to be photographed beside teams that win .
To sit your car amongst the great marques is enough incentive to enter .

To win against them is a dream fulfilled for the admen .

[V12]

One thing I think a lot of people have forgotten in all this talk of budget caps though, is that say it is set at $100mil, it doesn't mean you HAVE to spend $100mil, if you only have $80mil available to you through winnings and sponsorship, well that's all you got to spend matey. Or 70, 60, 50 for that matter.

Maybe it means you can't optimise everything to the n-th degree, but you can still surely put a couple of cars on the track for the season and do a solid job, maybe a rival has more money to spend than you, but then life isn't fair and in this regard it never has been.

[Sleeper]

Than so be it.



I think you are exaggerating it a tad to much.
What's Force India's budget?! A bit under 100 millions? And they are only 1.5 seconds of the pace of Brawn who had a blank check last year to design this season's car. Not to mention they are very close to McLaren who have one of the biggest budgets in F1 and they also are looking competitive against BMW who are not on a shoe string either.

It's been quite some times since last time when a team has been more than 2 seconds of the top guys' pace in F1.

So it is possible.

The problem is that these cheapos who are looking to enter F1 now only want to enter if the rewards are bigger than the expenses no matter their competitiveness, or if the rules give them enough of a technical advantage over the wealthier teams.
Some will say I'm bad and so on, but just wait and see the mobile chicanes next season, because there will be no 2 tier championship, that's sure.
Cant really compare Force India to any new team as they arent a start up operation. They havnt had to locate/build premesis with a windtunnel/ CFD department, various testing rigs, composit departments etc. Or hire personel that may or may not have any experience of F1. Theres a good reason why we havnt had a real new team in F1 since Toyota, only GM and Audi could have afforded it and neither were interesed.

No one competes in any series if they cant get out what they put, they dont last long that way. To consider the likes of Lola, Campos and Prodrive cheapos because they can "only" drum up about £40m in sponsorship- in a recession!- is short sited.

[ioan]

My question is why none of these teams thought about buying Super Aguri one year ago? They would have got plenty of personnel + experience and other stuff?

Because they aren't willing to invest what it's needed, that's why.

And they are cheapos, because they are entering a series only when they can do it on the cheap.

[VkmSpouge]

I don't see any problem with the new teams coming in when they can do it on the cheap, I'm quite enthused by it really.

[wedge]

My question is why none of these teams thought about buying Super Aguri one year ago? They would have got plenty of personnel + experience and other stuff?

Because they aren't willing to invest what it's needed, that's why.

And they are cheapos, because they are entering a series only when they can do it on the cheap.

What was their to invest in Super Aguri? They relied too much on Honda.

[Malbec]

And they are cheapos, because they are entering a series only when they can do it on the cheap.

Of course, if you lower the bar for entry into F1 you will get more competitors, its only natural.

I think Max is being disingenuous here regarding the cost cap.

Honda has not pulled out of any motorsports series on 2 wheels or 4 EXCEPT FOR F1, so why is F1 unique in being regarded as dispensible? From what I hear from Honda the problem with F1 is that the costs are not only sky high they cannot be predicted accurately from year to year.

I'm not talking about the cost of building a new windtunnel or CFD facilities which are part of the organic costs of keeping an existing team competitive. I'm talking about sudden regulations changes that require a whole new chunk of money. The ToyotaF1 CEO revealed recently that it cost as much to develop KERS as it did to develop an all-new F1 engine, and lets remember this is a system that half the grid haven't even bothered using. KERS was announced with one years notice when F1 budgets had already been predecided by companies for 2009, so F1 chiefs had to go cap in hand to their mother companies and ask for an extra $100 million or so on top of what they were getting to develop the systems needed.

Now we've got plans to cap costs to $40 million, raised to $100 million with a bit of negotiation. Great, so all those manufacturers and teams that had invested in new windtunnels etc using the normal business model that would have assumed they would have been competitive for x number of years suddenly have that figure cut short as they'd be unusable under the new regs. How much would that cost the existing teams?

Then there's the Concorde agreement, the manufacturers haven't signed up to a new one so they've had their TV money withheld, thats another extra unpredicted cost that the manufacturers have to cough up for.

Honda didn't think that staying in F1 was worth the hassle of this unpredictability and they are not alone.

In short what we need isn't a cost cap, its a way of keeping the regs stable enough that teams don't have to throw away what they've built up over the years whilst changing them enough to keep mixing things up on the grid. Ruthless cost caps really aren't the way ahead.

And as for Dallara, I think they'd be great in F1, they certainly have the pedigree.

[ioan]

I can appreciate that you find that quite frustrating, but surely thats good business on their part?

I do not watch F1 in order to give some cheapos a chance, I watch it for the best.
Maybe now you get the point.

[Donney]

That and the fact to be the best you have to start some time somewhere....

[Knock-on]

If £40m is being cheap, I wouldn't mind a bit of cheapness.

The reasons we have more teams is that it becomes acceptable to spend that amount. This money vs pinnacle crap is a smokescreen which makes no sense otherwise we would just keep overinvesting until you have 5 teams, 4 teams, 3, 2 and finally 1 team that can afford to compete.

The pinnacle is all about getting the best racers to go head to head and if you can do that on a reasonable budget that doesn't preclude teams and drivers who should be there but cannot afford to, then so much the better.

I am not in favour of the cap as it stands because it is stupid and will lead to widespread abuse of the system but I am in favour of getting costs in F1 at a level that is sensible.

[nigelred5]

My question is why none of these teams thought about buying Super Aguri one year ago? They would have got plenty of personnel + experience and other stuff?

Because they aren't willing to invest what it's needed, that's why.

And they are cheapos, because they are entering a series only when they can do it on the cheap.


Because there was actually little to nothing to invest in at SA?. They didn't design or build anything, it was simply a satellite race shop that relied 99% on what Honda gave them. Was it even actually for sale? Two spots on the grid with no guarantee of engines or support from Honda in 08-09 wasn't worth the cost of buying the team apparently.

[Knock-on]

Because there was actually little to nothing to invest in at SA?. They didn't design or build anything, it was simply a satellite race shop that relied 99% on what Honda gave them. Was it even actually for sale? Two spots on the grid with no guarantee of engines or support from Honda in 08-09 wasn't worth the cost of buying the team apparently.

Nice sig Nigel. :up:

;)

[555-04Q2]

All this talk of cheap teams and low budget caps...it doesnt take money to make a good, fast car in any formula. It takes good engineering, good design and a clever group of people. It can be done with 40 million or 400 million. Its how you spend the money that matters.

[ioan]

Because there was actually little to nothing to invest in at SA?. They didn't design or build anything, it was simply a satellite race shop that relied 99% on what Honda gave them. Was it even actually for sale? Two spots on the grid with no guarantee of engines or support from Honda in 08-09 wasn't worth the cost of buying the team apparently.

Several companies and individuals were interested but they were turned down.
Super Aguri had design team in place with highly capable individuals involved, engineers who managed to extract more from a year old Honda than the factory team did with a new car.

[ioan]

All this talk of cheap teams and low budget caps...it doesnt take money to make a good, fast car in any formula. It takes good engineering, good design and a clever group of people. It can be done with 40 million or 400 million. Its how you spend the money that matters.

That's exactly how I see it.

No one did stop these cheapos from entering F1 previosuly, and the only thing that appeals to them is that the big teams might be handicaped in order to give them a chance to have a part of the cake!

[chuck34]

That's exactly how I see it.

No one did stop these cheapos from entering F1 previosuly, and the only thing that appeals to them is that the big teams might be handicaped in order to give them a chance to have a part of the cake!

Didn't you have to have something like $40 million just so that Bernie would allow you to play in his sandbox? That brings up a question is that still around for next year?

[Sleeper]

Several companies and individuals were interested but they were turned down.
Super Aguri had design team in place with highly capable individuals involved, engineers who managed to extract more from a year old Honda than the factory team did with a new car.
Most of Super Aguri's design team ended up back at Honda as the main team were thouroghly impressed with the development work done by them on the 06 car.

[Sleeper]

All this talk of cheap teams and low budget caps...it doesnt take money to make a good, fast car in any formula. It takes good engineering, good design and a clever group of people. It can be done with 40 million or 400 million. Its how you spend the money that matters.
You've got to pay for those people and resources though, and for the last 10 years £40m wouldnt get you enough time and people to run the windtunnel and CFD programs as well as the rest of the build, development, test and race team departments and still have a competative car.

[wedge]

Most of Super Aguri's design team ended up back at Honda as the main team were thouroghly impressed with the development work done by them on the 06 car.

And are now back on the dole


Unfortunately

[Sleeper]

^Not all of them, the people that crated the DDD on this years Brawn started the idea on the SA a couple years ago and are still there.

[ioan]

^Not all of them, the people that crated the DDD on this years Brawn started the idea on the SA a couple years ago and are still there.

Impressive that people from the smallest team around were so clever and that they are the ones who made the difference for Brawn GP.

Impressive that people from the smallest team around were so clever and that they are the ones who made the difference for Brawn GP.

I guess that's another reason to keep the "cheapies" out of F1 -- they make it more difficult for the red cars to finish in podium positions!

[ioan]

I guess that's another reason to keep the "cheapies" out of F1 -- they make it more difficult for the red cars to finish in podium positions!

So much hate against Ferrari!
Now I understand why you were hiding in the woods for the last 10 years, I hope you'll survive their comeback! :laugh:

So much hate against Ferrari!
Now I understand why you were hiding in the woods for the last 10 years, I hope you'll survive their comeback! :laugh:

My first (and probably last) Ferrari T-shirt has both Alboreto and Berger on it. Back then I was not embarrassed to support them -- it was still Enzo's team, with his spirit and drive, not this arrogant, greedy corporate behemoth that it is today.

As for the last 10 years, we've supported Mark in keeping these forums running (so you could rant and rave on them).

[Knock-on]

My first (and probably last) Ferrari T-shirt has both Alboreto and Berger on it. Back then I was not embarrassed to support them -- it was still Enzo's team, with his spirit and drive, not this arrogant, greedy corporate behemoth that it is today.

As for the last 10 years, we've supported Mark in keeping these forums running (so you could rant and rave on them).

:laugh:

You're OK by me Tommy Boy :up:

[quote="tomh"]My first (and probably last) Ferrari T-shirt has both Alboreto and Berger on it. Back then I was not embarrassed to support them -- it was still Enzo's team, with his spirit and drive, not this arrogant, greedy corporate behemoth that it is today.[/QUOTE

Enzo's "spirit" did involve holding the race organisers to ransom too.

Ferrari flexing its muscles to get what it wants isn't a modern invention, as anyone who really knew the Scuderia, well before Michele & Gerhard were the drivers, would know.

Doesn't make it right, nor a pleasant tactic, but to claim a dislike for the current political stance of Ferrari would mean that they should also dislike the founders willingness to play the political card.

There is no difference....not to a real Ferrari fan. Evidently there is to the half-hearted ones.

There is no difference....not to a real Ferrari fan. Evidently there is to the half-hearted ones.

Didn't claim I was even a half-hearted fan, of either the team or the current (FIAT) chairman, di Montezemolo.

[ioan]

Didn't claim I was even a half-hearted fan, of either the team or the current (FIAT) chairman, di Montezemolo.

Could you explain us in a couple more words why you 'don't like' Ferrari and it's present president?
It is really weird given that he was responsible of Ferrari also when you were still buying their T-shirts.

Could you explain us in a couple more words why you 'don't like' Ferrari and it's present president?
It is really weird given that he was responsible of Ferrari also when you were still buying their T-shirts.

Montezemolo spent 1975-1991 at FIAT, not Ferrari.

I don't like the arrogance, the sense of entitlement, the self-importance, the flexing of corporate muscle, the blind devotion of the fans. Is that enough?

[ioan]

Montezemolo spent 1975-1991 at FIAT, not Ferrari.

I don't like the arrogance, the sense of entitlement, the self-importance, the flexing of corporate muscle, the blind devotion of the fans. Is that enough?

One has to stand up for their interests, I don't call that flexing of corporate muscle.

One has to stand up for their interests, I don't call that flexing of corporate muscle.

I'm happy to see that you are not arguing the other points.

Didn't claim I was even a half-hearted fan, of either the team or the current (FIAT) chairman, di Montezemolo.

And I repeat, Di Montezemolo didn't start Ferrari's willingness to play its political card....

"Ferrari has been vehemently opposing FIA's decision of introducing budget caps from 2010, a stand that has been endorsed by the company's board.

However, this is not the first time that the Italian team has threatened to quit the sport. In 1986, Ferrari had issued a similar threat because of FIA's decision to introduce new engine regulations.

In the mid-1980s Formula One teams were run on engines ranging from V6 turbos (six cylinder turbo-charged engines) to naturally aspirated V12 (V-shaped 12 cylinder engines).

In order to introduce some sort of standardisation, FIA had proposed to put a limit on the number of cylinders to eight. Enzo Ferrari, founder of the iconic Italian brand, refused to accept FIA's decision on engine regulation and threatened to pull out of Formula One if the governing body persisted with its plan.

Enzo's son Piero recently said that his father was serious about his threat and was ready to compete in the Indianapolis 500.

In fact, Enzo had even got a Ferrari designed and built for the American CART series. Named Ferrari 637, the car had undergone tests and was ready to race on the Indy circuit. However, the car never made it to the starting grid of Indianapolis 500 as Enzo had his way with FIA and Ferrari continued to be a part of Formula One."

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1257294

That had nothing to do with the current management structure, nor Luca (who, at the time, wasn't even working for FIAT, he was working for the ITALIA 90 World Cup organisation)...

...that was all Enzo....the same Enzo whose 'spirit' you admired.

[ioan]

I'm happy to see that you are not arguing the other points.

Because they were not realistic and I didn't want to lose my time.

(...) ...that was all Enzo....the same Enzo whose 'spirit' you admired.

Respected -- there is a difference. He built the team and the company from nothing (Ferrari entered part way through 1950, basically a garage operation back then).

What has Montezemolo ever done to earn anyone's respect (being born with a fancy last name doesn't count)? Au contraire, he doesn't seem to respect anyone else.

Anyway, there is little point arguing this.

Respected -- there is a difference. He built the team and the company from nothing (Ferrari entered part way through 1950, basically a garage operation back then).

He also employed Di Montezemolo.



What has Montezemolo ever done to earn anyone's respect (being born with a fancy last name doesn't count)? Au contraire, he doesn't seem to respect anyone else.

Ridiculous. I don't agree with Luca's current view, but his achievements deserve respect. He has overseen the two most successful periods in Ferrari history, and also is recognised as having organised a succesful World Cup.



Anyway, there is little point arguing this.

Don't type bollocks then.

[BDunnell]

What has Montezemolo ever done to earn anyone's respect (being born with a fancy last name doesn't count)? Au contraire, he doesn't seem to respect anyone else.

Not knowing what he's like as a person, I don't respect him. But one surely has to recognise the success he has achieved at Ferrari, not just in recent times but also in the 1970s when he and Niki Lauda made such a powerful team, and accept that it's impressive.