No USF1, Stefan GP, or any replacement team

tc3j3r · Post by **tc3j3r** » 03 Mar 2010, 20:20

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pr ... teams.aspx :cry:

Pathetic from the FIA, I mean, it's been obvious for ages that USF1 were not going to compete, why couldn't they do something earlier?

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 03 Mar 2010, 20:34

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81828

Interesting quotation:

The FIA said no replacement could be considered so close to the start of the season.

"Having considered the various options, the FIA confirms that it is not possible for a replacement team to be entered for the Championship at this late stage," the FIA said.

My question is: Why not? Stefan GP are seemingly ready to go, even with drivers...

"In the coming days the FIA will announce details of a new selection process to identify candidates to fill any vacancies existing at the start of the 2011 season."

Will this give Stefan the entry they need to get tyres so they can go testing?

The entry list also confirmed that Campos has been renamed HRT, and that BMW Sauber will retain the 'BMW' moniker for 2010 despite the German car manufacturer having pulled out of the sport last season.

The FIA also confirmed Sauber's team numbers - which has been uncertain for several months after it temporarily lost its entry. Pedro de la Rosa will be number 23, and Kamui Kobayashi 24.

Jynister · Post by **Jynister** » 03 Mar 2010, 20:38

Do Stefan have an actual team though? Or just a driver, a possible driver, a car and some people in some corner of Toyotas facility?

Prodrive for 2011 to be honest. Especially if they use the Gulf livery.

rffp · Post by **rffp** » 03 Mar 2010, 21:26

What is Stefan GP? In the end, my belief (an other's too) is that it was a publicity stunt from Mr.Stefanovic. They said they bought Toyota's car but they never even showed what their paint job would be. Or would they race with the red and white livery with the Panasonic sponsorship? Apparently the cars never left Cologne, they would only do that if FIA granted them an entry. This contradicts previous information that SGP would be testing those cars during the 2010 season in order to be prepared for 2011.

Despite contrary's belief, the Portimão test IMHO was a charade. It was a bluff to see if FIA would bump USF1 or Campos for their lack of readiness.

Their drivers wannabe, well, no needed comments. Either they are rejects of drivers that we forgot they had once a glimpse of talent.

Imagine if FIA let SGP enter the Bahrein GP only to find out that they had no car ready. It would be a huge embarassment. Much worse than the selection program which should be a strong candidate for the Bahrein GP ROTR!

Post by **mario** » 03 Mar 2010, 21:32

tc3j3r wrote:http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/f1releases/2010/Pages/f1_teams.aspx

Pathetic from the FIA, I mean, it's been obvious for ages that USF1 were not going to compete, why couldn't they do something earlier?

The thing is, the hastily renamed Campos (now HRT) team also looked pretty dicey for a while, yet they (just) survived. Whilst negotiation continued between Hurley and the USF1 management for more (and eventually not forthcomming) capital, I guess that the FIA had to wait until that had finished.

Predictably, the FIA has also refused to allow Stefan GP to enter, even allowing for Bernie's apparent enthusiasm in the past (although he does seem to have become quite quiet on Stefan GP recently). Yes, there may be those who are keen to see Stefan GP race, even though he seemingly has no money and no supplies beyond what Toyota sold to him.
Considering that Stefan has effectively tried to force his way into the sport, throwing a few tantrums along the way, neither the FIA or the teams (because most of them probably think that Stefan is simply trying to cash in on Toyta's demise) want him there, and are going to do their best to ensure that he can't gatecrash the 2010 championship.

Jynister wrote:Do Stefan have an actual team though? Or just a driver, a possible driver, a car and some people in some corner of Toyotas facility?

Prodrive for 2011 to be honest. Especially if they use the Gulf livery.

Probably. As for Prodrive, yes, it would be nice for them to finally make it into F1, and it would be nice if they could use the Gulf Oil colours. However, would that be possible, given that Aston Martin use those colours over in Endurance Racing for the Lola-Aston Martin LMP1 cars? Would it be a bit odd if we had Prodrive in F1, and Aston Martin at Le Mans, using the same colours?
I wouldn't bet against Lola having another crack at F1 again too.

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 03 Mar 2010, 21:52

well the idea for prodrive was to eventually use the aston martin name in F1 anyway wasn't it? So maybe they'd just fasttrack that instead of starting off the team with prodrive as the name? would be awesome to see the gulf colours in F1.

Stefangp · Post by **Stefangp** » 03 Mar 2010, 21:55

A bizarre and disappointing day all round. Clearly, having been reporting on the subject for some time, I'll like to pick up a few points. Not for arguments sake, but in a good F1 fanhood banter type way...thingy...whatever.

What is Stefan GP? In the end, my belief (an other's too) is that it was a publicity stunt from Mr.Stefanovic. They said they bought Toyota's car but they never even showed what their paint job would be. Or would they race with the red and white livery with the Panasonic sponsorship? Apparently the cars never left Cologne, they would only do that if FIA granted them an entry. This contradicts previous information that SGP would be testing those cars during the 2010 season in order to be prepared for 2011.

They were actually painted and developed. See the below picture and the Serbian Red around the cockpit and under the protective padding.

And the cars couldn't leave Cologne. I think Mr. Stefanovic was unaware, as well all were, I never read or heard mention of it, of Bridgestones ruling that they wouldn't supply F1 tyres to non-FIA sanctioned teams. So, at the time of announcing the test, Mr. Stefanovic and the team were 100% sure that they would be able to test.

neither the FIA or the teams (because most of them probably think that Stefan is simply trying to cash in on Toyta's demise) want him there, and are going to do their best to ensure that he can't gatecrash the 2010 championship.

The teams had nothing to do with tonight decision. As Bernie said earlier today http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/ecclestone-bestaetigt-ende-von-usf1-1768857.html "Regarding the reports that the FIA must get an agreement from the other 12 teams competing in the 2010 season, Mr Ecclestone said these was false. ”This has nothing to do with the teams. It is entirely up to the FIA to say yes or no.”"

The FIA could have sorted this out well over a month ago and have had 13 teams at Bahrain next weekend. USF1 announced their intention of running an F1 team in February 2009. What have they been doing for a year? Lotus F1 (sorry Fondmetal Team Malaysia Lotus F1 Cosworth) had less that half that time. The FIA are clearly not man enough to admit they were wrong in granting the grid slot to two inept monkeys who couldn't organise an orgy in a brothel. As a friend of mine always says, "They're about as much use as a chocolate dildo."

Amen to that.

rffp · Post by **rffp** » 03 Mar 2010, 22:53

Stefangp wrote:
They were actually painted and developed. See the below picture and the Serbian Red around the cockpit and under the protective padding.

And the cars couldn't leave Cologne. I think Mr. Stefanovic was unaware, as well all were, I never read or heard mention of it, of Bridgestones ruling that they wouldn't supply F1 tyres to non-FIA sanctioned teams. So, at the time of announcing the test, Mr. Stefanovic and the team were 100% sure that they would be able to test.

I forgot about that. But is that the best picture of the full livery of Stefan GP? Even Andrea Moda did better in that aspect.

Stefangp wrote:And the cars couldn't leave Cologne. I think Mr. Stefanovic was unaware, as well all were, I never read or heard mention of it, of Bridgestones ruling that they wouldn't supply F1 tyres to non-FIA sanctioned teams. So, at the time of announcing the test, Mr. Stefanovic and the team were 100% sure that they would be able to test.

My point is even if Bridgestone supplied them, with what cars would they test? The ones that still belonged to Toyota and were in Cologne?

eytl · Post by **eytl** » 03 Mar 2010, 22:57

As much as I am loathe to do this, and as much as we would all have loved to see Stefan on the grid, I think I have to back how the FIA has handled this, especially having read the interview with USF1's Ken Anderson on Autosport.

USF1 announced its intention to enter F1 in December 2008, presumably aware of the FIA's intention to implement cost caps and bring in new teams. I don't think anyone really objects to the concept of cost cutting and new teams. And, when the original three new entrants were chosen (USF1, Campos and Manor), the bolter was actually Manor. Most people thought that USF1 was a good idea, not only for marketing reasons, but because it was run by two experienced F1 people, and surely they could dredge up some funding from the entirety of the USA. Campos was an experienced team in lower categories, Spain an increasing market for F1, and with a Dallara chassis the plan seemed good. The surprise at the time was that Manor had beaten the likes of Lola, Prodrive, Epsilon Euskadi etc.

Well, as things have turned out, Manor/Virgin has been vindicated, as has Litespeed/Lotus/Fondmetal Team Malaysia, which was granted BMW Sauber's original spot. I don't think the FIA can be faulted too much for their original selection criteria or choices. But the point is, Virgin has made it because Richard Branson has got behind Manor, and Malaysian bigwigs have got behind Litespeed. The FIA cannot be blamed for failing to predict that, whereas some economies (eg Malaysia) might be willing to support F1 more, neither the US or Spain were.

Where the FIA did overplay its hand was in setting a cost cap as low as 40M and suggesting a two-tier system. That was one catalyst for the political turmoil which lasted several months. Again, in general there was no disagreement over cost cutting. It was all simply political, with people disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing, and taking outrageous stances (like Formula Elaborate Bluff) that were no more than bargaining tools.

In the context of lukewarm corporate support for USF1 and Campos, these months of turmoil were just about fatal. You can't attract already-hesitant sponsors if you can't even tell them what kind of championship you'll be competing in, and without funding you can't start developing the car. Virgin and Lotus, despite their backing, have only just made it, and now HRT/Campos will just be able to cobble something together.

And even if it has been clear to all and sundry for the last month or two that Campos was looking dubious and USF1 in real trouble, what was the FIA to do? Revoke their entries? Imagine the legal wrangling that would have resulted, breach of contract claims etc.! The FIA can look at the credibility of teams in deciding whether to grant entries, but once they're in, I would have thought they'd be getting into dangerous territory if they start examining teams' credibility and forcing teams out. In other words, the FIA had to wait for USF1 to die/pull out.

And what of Stefan? We all agree that Stefan makes a great story, and we'd love for these rogues to be on the grid for entertainment value. In terms of start-up readiness, they're probably ahead of HRT/Campos. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. Don't forget that Stefan tried to sue the FIA. That's not exactly a great way to curry favour with the governing body. And the fact that Stefan have pressed on despite not having an entry, I can understand if the FIA has looked unfavourably upon that as an act of rebellious arrogance. Having Mike Coughlan on board with his chequered past wouldn't have won brownie points either. Then there are the real questions about Stefan's funding, resources and professionalism.

In short, we'd all love to see another Andrea Moda, but the FIA are right not to risk that at this late stage, 10 days out from Bahrain.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 03 Mar 2010, 23:00

Stefangp wrote:

That car appears to have a refuelling flap...

rffp · Post by **rffp** » 03 Mar 2010, 23:44

eytl wrote:USF1 announced its intention to enter F1 in December 2008, presumably aware of the FIA's intention to implement cost caps and bring in new teams. I don't think anyone really objects to the concept of cost caps and new teams.

Sorry boss, but I do object the cost caps. Of course, cost reductions are crucial for the long term survival of F-1, but the way Max wanted that to work was an invitation to the uttermost failure.

This was an unorthodox measured that had so many holes that if implemented, we would have one or two teams already with shortcuts to spend over the cap. Just take a look at engine freeze and see how Mercedes improved more than Renault for instance (http://www.autosport.com/features/article.php/id/2641 for Autosport subscribers). FIA would have an enormous and herculean task to monitor the actual costs of technology transfers and outsourcing. Besides would the new teams have a chance to invest in research? If not, established teams like McLaren would have a substantial advantage over these new teams.

Edited: If Campos believed in cost caps, then they deserved to fail. From Ken Anderson's interview, USF1 believed in something else.

Well, that is my opinion.

Ross Prawn · Post by **Ross Prawn** » 03 Mar 2010, 23:44

So Jacques WILL record a new album.

Actually not surprising, there was no way the FIA could let Stephan in, having already gone through a laborious selection process for the other entrants late last year.

thalion · Post by **thalion** » 03 Mar 2010, 23:46

While it's understandable, but disappointing that USF1 couldn't pull together enough sponsorship during this recession to make it on to the grid this year, it's really baffling that they wouldn't sell their entry to a team that appears ready to compete. It's really infuriating to see them act like the dog in the manger.

eytl · Post by **eytl** » 04 Mar 2010, 00:38

rffp wrote:
eytl wrote:USF1 announced its intention to enter F1 in December 2008, presumably aware of the FIA's intention to implement cost cutting and bring in new teams. I don't think anyone really objects to the concept of cost caps and new teams.

Sorry boss, but I do object the cost caps. Of course, cost reductions are crucial for the long term survival of F-1, but the way Max wanted that to work was an invitation to the uttermost failure.

Fixed: I meant cost cutting.

Waris · Post by **Waris** » 04 Mar 2010, 00:38

Stefangp wrote:The FIA are clearly not man enough to admit they were wrong in granting the grid slot to two inept monkeys who couldn't organise an orgy in a brothel. As a friend of mine always says, "They're about as much use as a chocolate dildo."

Amen to that.

Erm, family forum...?

thalion wrote:While it's understandable, but disappointing that USF1 couldn't pull together enough sponsorship during this recession to make it on to the grid this year, it's really baffling that they wouldn't sell their entry to a team that appears ready to compete. It's really infuriating to see them act like the dog in the manger.

As far as I know, it's not possible to sell entries (Phoenix, 2002, anyone?).

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 04 Mar 2010, 05:38

rffp wrote:Imagine if FIA let SGP enter the Bahrein GP only to find out that they had no car ready. It would be a huge embarassment. Much worse than the selection program which should be a strong candidate for the Bahrein GP ROTR!

The selection process is already a strong canditate for ROTY in my opinion :lol:

Tealy · Post by **Tealy** » 04 Mar 2010, 09:13

waris wrote:
thalion wrote:While it's understandable, but disappointing that USF1 couldn't pull together enough sponsorship during this recession to make it on to the grid this year, it's really baffling that they wouldn't sell their entry to a team that appears ready to compete. It's really infuriating to see them act like the dog in the manger.

As far as I know, it's not possible to sell entries (Phoenix, 2002, anyone?).

They could presumably sell their entry in the way Campos has, by selling the lot in one go. Stefan had a car and driver, USF1 had an entry and driver it could have worked. However this is assuming that Stefan GP were actually serious about making the grid in the first place.

Stefangp · Post by **Stefangp** » 04 Mar 2010, 09:38

They could presumably sell their entry in the way Campos has, by selling the lot in one go. Stefan had a car and driver, USF1 had an entry and driver it could have worked. However this is assuming that Stefan GP were actually serious about making the grid in the first place.

There were discussions about this by Ken Anderson's ego was involved. He only wanted to race with HIS team and the name USF1 above the garage door. If his super ego wasn't there, we'd all be toasting Stefan GP on the grid this morning. Stefan GP would have had to buy the team USF1 and not just the grid slot.

As far as I know, it's not possible to sell entries (Phoenix, 2002, anyone?).

This was when the ridiculous $48m bond had to be paid. Phoenix tried to get around by buying Prost's assets. The FIA saw around this and told them to bugger off.

As for the next time around with the 2011 13th grid slot auction, what happens if the team the FIA chooses again has financial difficulties and this time next year the FIA has to auction off the 2012 13th grid slot. etc etc...

The FIA cannot be blamed for failing to predict that, whereas some economies (eg Malaysia) might be willing to support F1 more, neither the US or Spain were.

Indeed boss, but the FIA have to be blamed for not keeping their eye USF1 and listening to the alarm bells ringing from across the pond.

Post by **mario** » 04 Mar 2010, 09:56

rffp wrote:
eytl wrote:USF1 announced its intention to enter F1 in December 2008, presumably aware of the FIA's intention to implement cost caps and bring in new teams. I don't think anyone really objects to the concept of cost caps and new teams.

Sorry boss, but I do object the cost caps. Of course, cost reductions are crucial for the long term survival of F-1, but the way Max wanted that to work was an invitation to the uttermost failure.

This was an unorthodox measured that had so many holes that if implemented, we would have one or two teams already with shortcuts to spend over the cap. Just take a look at engine freeze and see how Mercedes improved more than Renault for instance (http://www.autosport.com/features/article.php/id/2641 for Autosport subscribers). FIA would have an enormous and herculean task to monitor the actual costs of technology transfers and outsourcing. Besides would the new teams have a chance to invest in research? If not, established teams like McLaren would have a substantial advantage over these new teams.

Edited: If Campos believed in cost caps, then they deserved to fail. From Ken Anderson's interview, USF1 believed in something else.

Well, that is my opinion.

The point is, Max didn't need that cost cap to actually work - he just needed to threaten the teams with it in order to drive through cost cutting measures that the bigger teams were forestalling, who wanted to use their financial muscle to stay ahead of the smaller teams.

And now it seems that a few more questions are being asked about Stefan, and in particular about his company AMCO (which is supposed to be providing backing). http://formula-1.updatesport.com/news/a ... /view.html
AMCO had claimed to have worked with the German military to design autonomous spy drones, along with working for the European Space Agency. Now, it appears that some of those claims are under question, because the German defence department denies ever working with AMCO, and the suppliers claim that they have not even heard of AMCO as a defence company. I accept that this could well just be speculation - I would like to wait until the story is researched further and more reputable sites report on it - but it is an interesting development, if true.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 04 Mar 2010, 10:23

noisebox wrote:
Stefangp wrote:

That car appears to have a refuelling flap...

Which would make it a 2009 car, would it not?

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 04 Mar 2010, 10:34

noisebox wrote:
noisebox wrote:
Stefangp wrote:

That car appears to have a refuelling flap...

Which would make it a 2009 car, would it not?

Not nessicarily. I mean how else would they get fuel into the car after qualifying? :lol:

f1-gast · Post by **f1-gast** » 04 Mar 2010, 11:36

USF1 was doomed to die.
They said we got all the money for the next 3 seasons ?
Well all the bigguys in America with BIgplans say this, and 99% they fail hard.
And usf1 is like a real American big mouth promise everything but came with nothing only a contract and a fake model f1 car.

It's said that the FIA don't add Stefan GP.
I think the fia missed a point now, why you don't allow stefan GP to make his debute this year ?
He will not just be field filling like campos lotus and Virgin.

Jordan192 · Post by **Jordan192** » 04 Mar 2010, 11:56

It's a bit dissappointing to not see SGP allowed in, but on the other hand, even though they've done more than USF1 did, they're still a tier below even Campos/HRT in terms of credility/history/general professionalism.
More significantly in the long term, if you let SGP in now, or even allow USF1 to defer for 2011, the grid becomes nominally full again, and you're back in the situation where you're waiting on one of them actually dying off before you can re-tender for new entries.
By keeping a spot for 2011 free (and if you let Stefan in now, you're giving them a 2011 spot too), you can re-open bidding and likely get Lola, Prodrive and/or Epsilon Euskadi interested again. Which in turn would hopefully mean that even if Hormone Replacment Therapy don't last out the year, you've already re-done your application process and have credible reserve options (as opposed to 'That guy's got some cars and no-one else has') to fill their spot for 2011, should the need arise.

Waris · Post by **Waris** » 04 Mar 2010, 20:28

Stefangp wrote:As for the next time around with the 2011 13th grid slot auction, what happens if the team the FIA chooses again has financial difficulties and this time next year the FIA has to auction off the 2012 13th grid slot. etc etc...

Presumably they will just do that, then.

Jordan192 wrote:It's a bit dissappointing to not see SGP allowed in, but on the other hand, even though they've done more than USF1 did, they're still a tier below even Campos/HRT in terms of credility/history/general professionalism.
More significantly in the long term, if you let SGP in now, or even allow USF1 to defer for 2011, the grid becomes nominally full again, and you're back in the situation where you're waiting on one of them actually dying off before you can re-tender for new entries.

OR they could increase the number of teams...

By keeping a spot for 2011 free (and if you let Stefan in now, you're giving them a 2011 spot too), you can re-open bidding and likely get Lola, Prodrive and/or Epsilon Euskadi interested again. Which in turn would hopefully mean that even if Hormone Replacment Therapy don't last out the year, you've already re-done your application process and have credible reserve options (as opposed to 'That guy's got some cars and no-one else has') to fill their spot for 2011, should the need arise.

But there's still the problem that when a team's in financial trouble, you don't know if and when they are going to pull out. You (read: the FIA) have to know who will be on the grid before the season starts, as this year's drama showed. If they accept one new team from a bunch that are ready, and an existing team pulls out just before the start of the season, they can't let one of the others in at short notice. Not letting in Stefan this year has set that precedent. So in that case, there will again be new teams who will be ready, but not have an entry and will have to wait one more year.
Now, one could argue they could solve this by issuing provisional entry lists with more than the allowed number of teams, but that really doesn't solve much, because if you're just on a provisional entry list, you don't know if you should start working on a car, spending money that would otherwise be well saved.

I wish they would just let hopefuls build cars before judging their entries, and then let in any team that has proven their ability to build two half-decent F1 cars (by doing so)...

IdeFan · Post by **IdeFan** » 05 Mar 2010, 14:52

Waris wrote:I wish they would just let hopefuls build cars before judging their entries, and then let in any team that has proven their ability to build two half-decent F1 cars (by doing so)...

If you had to build two(!) full F1 cars just to have a chance of a grid spot, I don't think anyone would apply at all!

The FIA were supposed to have checked that the applicants had the finance in place before approving an entry, and obviously they didn't do that one right (campos' woes seem mostly financial, but I admit no one knows WTF is up with USF1). Lets hope that their lessons have been learned when and if they start accepting applicants for 2011, and they pick a team(s) that have a more stable financial platform. There was supposedly some politics going on with regards Cossworth engines and hopefully Todt can cut some of that out.

Finally I will cite the case of Mastercard Lola as evidence that even a well respected, long running and successful chassis manufacturer can still screw things up royally, F1 is a brutal world and you can't expect every new entry to even make it to the grid.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 08 Mar 2010, 06:47

Jynister wrote:Prodrive for 2011 to be honest. Especially if they use the Gulf livery.

Dave Richards has already gone on the record as saying Formula 1 is "irrevalent". He doesn't want in.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 08 Mar 2010, 10:19

Captain Hammer wrote:
Jynister wrote:Prodrive for 2011 to be honest. Especially if they use the Gulf livery.

Dave Richards has already gone on the record as saying Formula 1 is "irrevalent". He doesn't want in.

Yeah, so why did he ever bother lodging an entry? More than once? Having led BAR for, was it 3 years? Or has he changed his mind, having been snubbed?

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 08 Mar 2010, 11:42

Well, he said this after they didn't get a 2010 entry! This was the last time he tried to get into F1.

Jordan192 · Post by **Jordan192** » 08 Mar 2010, 11:45

3 months ago he was bidding to buy Renault's operation, so it's not as if he's given up since getting turned down earlier last year.

Yannick · Post by **Yannick** » 08 Mar 2010, 12:34

Wizzie wrote:The selection process is already a strong canditate for ROTY in my opinion

It won't make it to the award since the new FIA administration is likely to bring forth a different selection process for 2011.

I guess I'll have to retire my Stefan related signature.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 08 Mar 2010, 22:10

dr-baker wrote:
Captain Hammer wrote:
Jynister wrote:Prodrive for 2011 to be honest. Especially if they use the Gulf livery.

Dave Richards has already gone on the record as saying Formula 1 is "irrevalent". He doesn't want in.

Yeah, so why did he ever bother lodging an entry? More than once? Having led BAR for, was it 3 years? Or has he changed his mind, having been snubbed?

Changed his mind. He tried to enter as Prodrive with an entry of his own, and failed. He tried to buy Honda, and failed. He tried to get onto the grid through the 2010 entry process, and failed. And then he tried to buy Renault, and failed.

Dave Richards have the popular vote with fans, but I honestly think he mismanaged his 2008 entry just as badly as USF1 did theirs. His entry to the grid was dependent upon the legality to customer chassis. The FIA failed to get that rule approved, because Williams blocked it. And why did Williams block it? Because Dave Richards wanted to run a McLaren chassis, one of the best of the season. Didn't he think that some of the established teams might be opposed to a newcomer who was instantly competitive because they could afford a Mclaren chassis? Apparently not, since he never had a backup plan in place.

Richards screwed up, and badly. But because he's Dave Richards, the fans are willing to overlook it.

ADx_Wales · Post by **ADx_Wales** » 08 Mar 2010, 22:17

I dont want to overlook any F1 entry made by Dave Richards, cant see whats personally wrong with the man despite the said mismanagement of official entry.

If Prodrive can afford to build 2 F1 chassis then by all means, just make sure they stay around long enough not to be complete jokes.

I also cannot see what is wrong with a "Customer" chassis, not all customer teams do better than the factories at the front, if Ironside has a problem with customer teams doing better than him, then he should look to his own team's problems not the newbies. But thanks to Frank the FIA wont allow it anymore, even though there were more than 2 Williams cars on the grid during the late 70s, he's being a complete mud wallowing critter.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 09 Mar 2010, 03:29

ADx_Wales wrote:I dont want to overlook any F1 entry made by Dave Richards, cant see whats personally wrong with the man despite the said mismanagement of official entry.

Just that: the mismanagement. USF1 collapsed because of mismanagement. Prodrive never made the grid because of mismanagement. So why is it that Prodrive is held in higher esteem?

ADx_Wales wrote:I also cannot see what is wrong with a "Customer" chassis, not all customer teams do better than the factories at the front, if Ironside has a problem with customer teams doing better than him, then he should look to his own team's problems not the newbies. But thanks to Frank the FIA wont allow it anymore, even though there were more than 2 Williams cars on the grid during the late 70s, he's being a complete mud wallowing critter.

How is it fair that established teams have spent years developing their own cars, but their work will be undone by a newcomer with deep pockets? Allowing the purchase of customer chassis will only make Formula 1 a spec series because those teams that cannot afford to or refuse to buy a Ferrari or McLaren chassis will be driven out by those who can, and can therefore be competitive.

Tealy · Post by **Tealy** » 09 Mar 2010, 10:40

Captain Hammer wrote:How is it fair that established teams have spent years developing their own cars, but their work will be undone by a newcomer with deep pockets? Allowing the purchase of customer chassis will only make Formula 1 a spec series because those teams that cannot afford to or refuse to buy a Ferrari or McLaren chassis will be driven out by those who can, and can therefore be competitive.

Totally agree. The one thing that should always have to be built by a team is the chassis. We've got to be careful teams like Ferrari and McLaren don't start running B-Teams with the same chassis and engine as it is unfair on the other teams. Especially these days where we get more and more spec parts.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 09 Mar 2010, 12:09

Tealy wrote:We've got to be careful teams like Ferrari and McLaren don't start running B-Teams with the same chassis and engine as it is unfair on the other teams. Especially these days where we get more and more spec parts.

Well, Red Bull have tried it and now, ToroRosso have to build their own, so I think we're safe there, at least for the time being...

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 09 Mar 2010, 12:21

Captain Hammer wrote: So why is it that Prodrive is held in higher esteem?

Simple, Prodrive despite its previous failed attempt to enter F1 has a 20+ year history of successful racing in other prestigious categories (ALMS, LMES, WRC, ETCC). Up until about 18 months ago, USF1 didn't exist. Lets be realistic, as much as I'd like to see Americans in F1, its painfully obvious the FIA selected USF1 for political and commercial reasons, not because they were the most qualified. What really shocks me is that Campos got one of the slots despite the fact they've outsourced their chassis design and manufacturing. Toro Rosso was one thing, but Dallara has no real F1 experience to speak of (excluding the obvious).

eytl · Post by **eytl** » 09 Mar 2010, 13:22

F1000X wrote:Dallara has no real F1 experience to speak of (excluding the obvious).

Not sure what you mean. Clearly Dallara has had very real F1 experience from 1988 to 1992, but was this "the obvious" you were referring to, and in fact you mean Dallara has no recent F1 experience to speak of?

Faustus · Post by **Faustus** » 09 Mar 2010, 13:31

eytl wrote:
F1000X wrote:Dallara has no real F1 experience to speak of (excluding the obvious).

Not sure what you mean. Clearly Dallara has had very real F1 experience from 1988 to 1992, but was this "the obvious" you were referring to, and in fact you mean Dallara has no recent F1 experience to speak of?

I think too much is being made of 'recent F1 experience'. It's not a question of the company having recent experience, more the personnel involved. Dallara has some of the best engineers in the business, the majority of them with F1 experience.
Also, Dallara is incredibly experienced in all forms of motorsport, with direct involvement in Formula 3 and Indycar, plus doing all sorts of sub-contract aerodynamic and composite work for several Formula 1, rallying and sportscar teams and manufacturers. Dallara can handle building a Formula 1 car, I don't think anyone can argue against that.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 09 Mar 2010, 14:16

eytl wrote: Not sure what you mean. Clearly Dallara has had very real F1 experience from 1988 to 1992, but was this "the obvious" you were referring to, and in fact you mean Dallara has no recent F1 experience to speak of?

Correct, and it was years ago.

Faustus wrote: Dallara has some of the best engineers in the business, the majority of them with F1 experience.
Also, Dallara is incredibly experienced in all forms of motorsport, with direct involvement in Formula 3 and Indycar, plus doing of sub-contract aerodynamic and composite work for several Formula 1, rallying and sportscar teams and manufacturers. Dallara can handle building a Formula 1 car, I don't think anyone can argue against that.

I have no doubt Dallara can build a car and even a decent one, but Dallara aren't the ones running it at the track. Despite all the telemetry and data logging we have on F1 chassis today, if the engineers who designed and built the car arn't there to get feedback from the driver, its going to hurt them. The question is, how bad?

To clarify my statement, my issue is less with Dallara, and more with Campos neither designing or building their own chassis.

Waris · Post by **Waris** » 09 Mar 2010, 17:01

2011:
Mercedes
Red Bull
McLaren
Ferrari
Williams
Renault/Lada/Dacia/Nissan/Gravity/Mangrove/AvtoVAZ/Skype/López/DAMS/<insert name of Arab sheikh>/RUSF1/whoever they decide to sell it to
Force India
Toro Rosso
Lotus
Hispania/Dallara/Kolles/Audi/Volkswagen/nothing, depending on whether they survive 2010
Sauber
Virgin
Stefan
Lola
Swift

Please??
Prodrive will never get into F1 anymore. When you say F1 is 'irrelevant', as David Richards did, your attitude is clearly undesirable and full of yourself.