Theissen: customer cars will ruin F1

[ArrowsFA1]

That's my biggest concern. What will be left if that happens?

[DexDexter]

sorry, but it's the truth.

From reading the responses, both here on this thread & forum and in others, it has come to me that a great many are products of the present generation, that of which are used to what they see as Formula 1 of the last 15-20 years. Unfortunately, what they are actually witnessing is the triumph of marketing over motorsport, which didn't happen overnight, but over time.

Remember when Formula 1 trully exuded the ideal of innovation & creative thinking?... that was back when the teams & manufacturers built original designs in both chassis & engines, such as the Ferrari 312 Boxer engine, or Renault-Gordini Turbo V6, BMW Turbo I-4(which was based on their production engine), Matra & Alfa Romeo V12, Ford-Cosworth DFV V8... Lotus 72 & 78, Ferrari T312, McLaren M23, Brabbham BT-series, Tyrrell P3/4 & later the P34 6-Wheeler...

These and many ideas that sprung from the fertile minds of those we held in the highest esteem all the way to the mid-80's were replaced by the cold, repetitive logic of fluid dynamics & wind tunnels, producing chassis that if one removed all paint & advertising marks, as well as driver numbers, and run them on track at the same time, one would have a devil of a time trying to distinguish one from another. Engines that have been legislated into a one size used by all specification, where the only way to know which is which is in how much throttle the driver is using.

The recent slate of rules that been a classic example of what has happened over the past 20+ years; true creative thought has been drownned out, replaced by incremmental mediocrity, and buttressed by hype to give it justification fleecing the world public.

I often find it comical when people do comparisons between F1 & NASCAR, as both are essentially doing the same thing: equalization by fiat as a means generating revenue. Thank you, Bernie & Max.

This is just one of those posts where "in the old days things were much better", funny how people always think like that. Times change, F1 cannot afford an active suspension Williams which is 2,5 seconds faster than anything else any more, or a ground effects Lotus 79 for that matter. Limiting creativity is better than for example Mclaren winning 15 out of 16 races. In order to survive, f1 needs to be entertaining for the masses since the competition for peoples "souls" in more fierce than ever. If f1 becomes more entertaining because of technical restrictions, then I can live with it.

[BDunnell]

That's my biggest concern. What will be left if that happens?

I think it's dangerous for people to assume that F1, by becoming such a big business, has come out of the phase whereby there are periods of high manufacturer involvement and then slumps in that participation. There probably needs to be something to fall back on, unless new independent constructors come in to fill the breach.

[ArrowsFA1]

Limiting creativity is better than for example Mclaren winning 15 out of 16 races. In order to survive, f1 needs to be entertaining for the masses since the competition for peoples "souls" in more fierce than ever. If f1 becomes more entertaining because of technical restrictions, then I can live with it.

But by limiting creativity aren't we moving more and more towards a 'spec' series, which is something many say F1 should not be?

[jso1985]

exactly we already have Champ Cars for a spec series!
Plus current ideas makes F1 even more unfair, why should Super Aguri bother to design a chassis if they can take someones work(Honda's one) and beat teams who actually work and try to innovate like Williams or Spyker?

[BDunnell]

Plus current ideas makes F1 even more unfair, why should Super Aguri bother to design a chassis if they can take someones work(Honda's one) and beat teams who actually work and try to innovate like Williams or Spyker?

This happens in all sorts of forms of motorsport. I don't see why F1 should necessarily be any different. It doesn't have an inalienable right to be.

(By the way, this is not to say I'm in favour of allowing customer cars - as I said earlier, I'm not that bothered either way.)

[DexDexter]

exactly we already have Champ Cars for a spec series!
Plus current ideas makes F1 even more unfair, why should Super Aguri bother to design a chassis if they can take someones work(Honda's one) and beat teams who actually work and try to innovate like Williams or Spyker?

Unfair or not, if borrowing Honda's chassis makes Super Aguri competitive, I'm all for it, since your average Joe (who keeps F1 alive) doesn't care about intellectual rights of a chassis or if SP chassis is in reality a Honda. What they want to see is competitive racing and drivers from their home country competing in a competitive car. I too don't want a spec series but the realities of today's world require limiting the John Barnards and Colin Chapmans of today.

[jjanicke]

Is that mean we will have a:
Drivers Championship
Manufactures Championship
And Possibly a Team Championship.

I drought it, Cars may be coupled to a different engines to the Main Team.
Many combinations are plausible. Interesting Thought that!

at least someone is thinking outside the small confinds of the present F1 box.

Let's see what responses this spures.

[jjanicke]

I have much sympathy for your sentiments, but I can't help but feel that there have been some benefits in restricting some of the wilder excesses of the innovation of that period. In particular, it strikes me as very sensible that there should be a rule stating that F1 cars should only have four wheels.

In other ways, yes, it is a shame that there's not more scope for being different.

What's the logic behind a rule for 4 wheels? Seems quite arbitrary to me, isn't it?

[jjanicke]

That's my biggest concern. What will be left if that happens?

The privateers will be forced to develop their own cars, with their existing budgets and F1 will evolve yet again, and probably for the better.