Do we need more cars on the grid?

[Used to be Starter]

I think they Andretti deal should be approved. They are quality team and will bring additional competition to the grid. They seem to have some impressive backing with Gainbridge and Group1001. It actually might grow the pie with Cadillac and GMC supporting the Andretti deal.

I have not seen an argument of why it would not be good for F1. All I have seen is a protectionist attitude where they are taking a position that their team is going to be diminished if another team joins.

Another question to ask is given the declaration of a number of automaker brands to go all electric within the next 10 years or so, where does that leave F1?

[Nitrodaze]

Another question to ask is given the declaration of a number of automaker brands to go all electric within the next 10 years or so, where does that leave F1?

There is a good chance that there may still be internal combustion vehicles in ten years' time using environmentally friendly fuel. The 2026 F1 engine is geared towards the development and use of this type of fuel which will be produced from plant oils.

The question is valid for it shows there is a divergence in the direction car manufacturers are going relative to where F1 is trending toward. F1 is taking a calculated risk that environmentally friendly fuel has a place in the automotive future; say 10 years down the line for instance. The rate of development of electric powertrain which has its source and roots in the formula-e series is such that the efficiency of electric motors and storage mediums such as batteries is improving dramatically. The range expectation will double in a few years. We can reasonably expect electric cars at some point in the near future to be capable of a thousand miles on a full battery. And for batteries to be smaller to reduce the weight penalty they currently have.

The fact of the matter is that internal combustion engines may become unclean and redundant in the long run. And may be a luxury thing for those with deep pockets or pure petrolheads. This was one of the main criticisms of the 2021 regulations, that it did not have a plan for the future of F1 powertrain in line with auto manufacturing trends. It is hard to tell at this stage if the 2026 engine regulation is a subjective obsession or objective insight into future trends. After all, all the infrastructures to support the future volumes of electric cars that would replace fossil-fueled cars are still in their infancy. The current infrastructure will not be able to sustain the growth trends expected in line with the affordability and ubiquity of electric cars.

Then there is the matter of developing countries where the challenges of infrastructure and culture of running old cars for very long periods would mean there would be lots of internal combustion cars operating around the globe well into 50 years from now.

But more relevant is; how willing are car manufacturers to dismantle their internal combustion car manufacturing infrastructure.

[Nitrodaze]

Three things that I think (just my opinions) will work against Andretti:
- A lot of people outside of NA fail to realize how big the Andretti name is in the US. Having Andretti in F1 will bring with it a lot of growth in the US as well as $US. But I think Europeans generally have trouble with the concept that a slightly smaller piece of a bigger pie is a good thing.
- The teams are afraid of losing their American sponsors to Andretti.
- The excitement that Drive to Survive brought to F1 and the corresponding increase in the value of F1 has peaked, so Andretti will be 'buying in high'.

I'd really like to see Andretti on the grid, but I still think there's quite a bit of struggle ahead before it happens.

I don't think the teams are afraid of losing American sponsors. After all, when Andretti joins the grid they would most likely start at the rear of the grid fighting Haas, Alpha Tauri, and Williams. They would not be offering the sort of media exposure of the established teams.

Drive to survive brought good exposure to F1 but it is a small part of the reason why the value of the teams has increased. The main reason why the value of the teams has gone up is due to the introduction of the cost cap in the 2021 regulations onwards and only ten teams competing in the sport at this time. The cost cap gave the small teams financial security and lowered the threshold for operational and financial efficiency to allow small teams to be able to survive in F1.

The original idea of why the cost cap was introduced was to make F1 more attractive to potential new entrants. It has worked in protecting small teams like Williams but it has also attracted five new applicants to the sport since its introduction. Audi is clear to join the grid through the purchase of Sauber. Andretti has progressed through the FIA stage of application.

The important thing is that the current Concorde agreement is defined around profit sharing across 12 teams. Though there are actually 10 teams competing and enjoying the sharing of profits that should have been for 12 teams, but are shared among 10 teams on the grid. This fact is where the dilution of share argument falls flat on its face. The teams can grumble about diluted shares, that is not sufficient reason to bar a new team from joining the grid under the current Concorde agreement.

[F1nKS]

Another question to ask is given the declaration of a number of automaker brands to go all electric within the next 10 years or so, where does that leave F1?

I am not sure what pertinence that question has on whether Andrietti team is let in or out.

As far as everything going electric in the next 10 years? I don't think it will happen in the U.S. unless there is a battery breakthrough. The infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to sustain that.

Personally, I think Hydrogen fuel cells are a better bet if they can't get the storage/transportation worked out. Then, there are still infrastructure that needs to be built.

[N. Jones]

Yes.

[Nitrodaze]

I am not sure what pertinence that question has on whether Andrietti team is let in or out.

As far as everything going electric in the next 10 years? I don't think it will happen in the U.S. unless there is a battery breakthrough. The infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to sustain that.

Personally, I think Hydrogen fuel cells are a better bet if they can't get the storage/transportation worked out. Then, there are still infrastructure that needs to be built.

Hydrogen will only be a viable solution if an onboard hydrogen generation solution is found. All you would need to do is just add water and you are off. The hydrogen gas station route is just as problematic as the electric situation. Also, they have not found a clean way yet to mass-produce hydrogen. Current production techniques are just as dirty as fossil fuels.

[Used to be Starter]

Hydrogen will only be a viable solution if an onboard hydrogen generation solution is found. All you would need to do is just add water and you are off. The hydrogen gas station route is just as problematic as the electric situation. Also, they have not found a clean way yet to mass-produce hydrogen. Current production techniques are just as dirty as fossil fuels.

With the exceptions of wind, water, geothermal and nuclear, everything is currently as dirty as fossil fuels. And none of those has a big enough footprint to make any real difference in emissions.

[Matthew]

For me, 20 cars are enough to produces all kinds of drama one can expect from an F1 race. What I would want to change is closer competition among the teams.