Marussia to miss Austin GP

Marussia to miss Austin GP

Author
Discussion

Scuffers

20,887 posts

273 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
Ahonen said:
The 80-85kg is perhaps a little optimistic, they're nowhere near as restricted by fuel as people think.
pretty sure some of them are, obviously cct dependant and how 'pushed' they are with the competition.


Soul Reaver

499 posts

191 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
The Corporation runs the sport and corporations don't care about anything other than making more and more and more money because they are run by greedy men that have more money than pretty much anyone else and still want more of the stuff.

They will keep on keeping on until there is no more money to be squeezed out of it and the "sport" is in tatters.

Europa1

10,923 posts

187 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
Gaz. said:
It's odd how the falling attendances are interpreted differently depending on the country:

Australia - because F1 is broken
Malaysia- not real fans anyway.
Bahrain - forced at gun point to turn up and set venue attendance record.
China- not real fans so we'll overlook the increase from last year.
Spain - it's the economy, stupid.
Monaco- because F1 is broken.
Canada - because F1 is broken.
Britain- F1 broken, too expensive...
Germany- F1 broken.
Hungary- F1 broken, despite selling 20k more tickets.
Belgium- F1 broken.
Italy - F1 broken.
Singapore- not real fans anyway.
Japan - F1 broken.
USA- F1 broken.
Brazil- F1 broken?
Abu Dhabi - not real fans, stands full of soldiers....


F1 goes around in cycles, there's always a moment every few years where people fear the sky is falling in. In 2008 Super Aguri folded. Honda announced they were leaving the sport with nothing on the horizon to indicate a management buyout. In 2009 BMW & Toyota also announced their departures at the end of that season while sponsor less Hondas lead the championship tables, then Renault announced they would be heading for the exit as a team and remain as a supplier. All this time some predicted the death of the sport was 'just around the corner' and 'months away' yet 7 seasons later it's still kicking the can along the road.

Teams come and go. There's been 135 teams in various incarnations since 1950. Some span decades under different ownerships, many didn't even last a season.

How often has the grid remained identical - same teams, name & ownership from year to year? Going through the list of constructors it doesn't seem to happen that often.
It's a good point, but the world in which F1 lives has evolved considerably over the last few years - more TV channels than you can shake a stick at, pay TV and social media mean F1 is competing for attention like never before. Those same media offer a fantastic opportunity, but F1 seems to have an unerring ability to score own goals, so rule changes/"interpretations" part way through a season, a new found need to respect national anthems etc are reported instantly without the sport properly explaining them, or celebrating the amazing technical achievement that the new power units are instead of high profile figures who drive the rules publicly bhing about them.

There is also the mismatch between the green rationale for the new power units vs a calendar that is geopgraphically illogical - Autralasia, Asia, Middle East, Europe, Canada, back to Europe for a bit, off to Asia again, Russia, back to North America, then South America then back to the Middle East. Which in turn makes the sport ever more expensive for the teams as they have to have multiple sets of kit being freighted around the globe.

I'm going to go for a lie down now...


Crafty_

Original Poster:

13,248 posts

199 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
Crafty_ said:
Scuffers said:
Are there enough real sponsors these days?
Lotus seem to have little problem picking them up this year, even with a dreadful car.
Really?

Thought they were skint too?

Its not like they have not lost half their staff.
On track to break even apparently, and are shifting to Merc power units to save money (how crazy is that?) Yes they have lost staff, but so have McLaren in recent years.

The point is Lopez got off his arse and did something about the team and they are (hopefully) heading for a solid future.

zac510 said:
Crafty_ said:
Marussia's problem was it wasn't more prolific. No-one was out getting sponsors, or finding investment partners, at the same time the owner gave them just enough money to keep ticking over, no real investment to move them forwards.
From what source did you divine that information?
Look where Merc where in 2010. Better than Marussia, but no where near the front. They invested lots of money, it soon bought race wins and this year championships.

Ok its a massive amount of money, the point is the team has not stagnated.

Back to Marussia, ok they were Virgin at first, so lets write off that period. When Marussia took over did you see the guy at the track with the team ? has he given any interviews ? has the team ever given any hint of doing more than declare which pay driver would be in the seat next year ? have they actively chased sponsorship ? Haas who hasn't even bought his UK base and won't enter F1 for another 18 months has been to more races and given more interviews than Mr Marusssia (whatever his name is).
Did you ever hear that they had bought an upgrade to a race? christ even Caterham managed that !

When were they ever going to move forwards?

RYH64E

7,960 posts

243 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
Look where Merc where in 2010. Better than Marussia, but no where near the front. They invested lots of money, it soon bought race wins and this year championships.

Ok its a massive amount of money, the point is the team has not stagnated.
Mercedes haven't invested huge amounts of money because they have any real interest in F1, they've invested huge amounts of money because their various marketing departments have decided that the cost will be more than recouped through increased sales of saloon cars.

Also, unlike traditional F1 teams they aren't dependant upon sponsors or win bonuses for funds, they have the resources of an enormous corporation behind them and can spend whatever they like in order to win. It's a fallacy to compare them to a team Marussia, Marussia don't have unlimited funds available and can't justify their profligate expenditure with increased car sales.

entropy

5,403 posts

202 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
Gaz. said:
It's odd how the falling attendances are interpreted differently depending on the country:

Australia - because F1 is broken
Malaysia- not real fans anyway.
Bahrain - forced at gun point to turn up and set venue attendance record.
China- not real fans so we'll overlook the increase from last year.
Spain - it's the economy, stupid.
Monaco- because F1 is broken.
Canada - because F1 is broken.
Britain- F1 broken, too expensive...
Germany- F1 broken.
Hungary- F1 broken, despite selling 20k more tickets.
Belgium- F1 broken.
Italy - F1 broken.
Singapore- not real fans anyway.
Japan - F1 broken.
USA- F1 broken.
Brazil- F1 broken?
Abu Dhabi - not real fans, stands full of soldiers....


F1 goes around in cycles, there's always a moment every few years where people fear the sky is falling in. In 2008 Super Aguri folded. Honda announced they were leaving the sport with nothing on the horizon to indicate a management buyout. In 2009 BMW & Toyota also announced their departures at the end of that season while sponsor less Hondas lead the championship tables, then Renault announced they would be heading for the exit as a team and remain as a supplier. All this time some predicted the death of the sport was 'just around the corner' and 'months away' yet 7 seasons later it's still kicking the can along the road.

Teams come and go. There's been 135 teams in various incarnations since 1950. Some span decades under different ownerships, many didn't even last a season.

How often has the grid remained identical - same teams, name & ownership from year to year? Going through the list of constructors it doesn't seem to happen that often.
F1 core demographic are are the over 40s and is struggling to attract and retain young fans. Its a recognised problem for a number of years.


Crafty_

Original Poster:

13,248 posts

199 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
Mercedes haven't invested huge amounts of money because they have any real interest in F1, they've invested huge amounts of money because their various marketing departments have decided that the cost will be more than recouped through increased sales of saloon cars.

Also, unlike traditional F1 teams they aren't dependant upon sponsors or win bonuses for funds, they have the resources of an enormous corporation behind them and can spend whatever they like in order to win. It's a fallacy to compare them to a team Marussia, Marussia don't have unlimited funds available and can't justify their profligate expenditure with increased car sales.
I disagree.

Yes Merc are there for the marketing. The point is that they could have gone to WEC, or just stuck with DTM, maybe USCC to make it big in the USA.. lots of options.

They decided F1 was where they wanted to be and were obviously determined to get to the top.

I didn't suggest that Marussia parent company/owner had the money that Merc do, nor that Marussia should be winning races. Its more of a frame of mind thing.

Maybe we should consider Force India, rescued from Midland / Spyker / an much deflated Jordan, its now battling with the mighty McLaren on a smaller budget and in years past have been a solid midfield team.

ZX10R NIN

27,493 posts

124 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
SteBrown91 said:
Scuffers said:
where did you get that idea from?

most of the time, they are all 100% up against the 100L fuel limit, hence all the fuel saving.

if you want them to race harder, they need more than 100L of fuel to do so.
They aren't though. There are some races where they are fuel limited, however most of the time they are racing with around 80-85kg (merc engines are anyway) and fuel saving within their driving style, so it ultimately makes minimal difference to the performance. Previously cars were just driving slow to save fuel. This year has made the teams really think on how to drive fast and efficient at the same time. Its only when they are really in trouble they slow down.
They don't fill their tanks because they see fuel as ballast so the less they can put in the better off they will be, If on the other hand you give them no choice but to put in the 100 litres of fuel (which wouldn't be part of the minimum weight limit) then you'll see the drivers using the fuel.

Chrisgr31

13,440 posts

254 months

Wednesday 29th October 2014
quotequote all
On the subject of race attendance I think F1 have priced themselves out of the market to an extent. Everyone I know who used to go doesnt anymore, some go to Le Mans some go to none.

On race day there is very little on track action, and Kangeroo have gone so keeping track of what is happening is difficult. Circuit food is expensive (has to be) etc


RYH64E

7,960 posts

243 months

Thursday 30th October 2014
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
Maybe we should consider Force India, rescued from Midland / Spyker / an much deflated Jordan, its now battling with the mighty McLaren on a smaller budget and in years past have been a solid midfield team.
That says more about the decline of McLaren than the rise of Force India, both are now midfield teams and neither can compete with Mercedes or Red Bull.

I wouldn't be too confident about the future prospects of Force India, it's a rich man's plaything and we've seen before what happens when the rich men lose interest or find a better toy.

Vocal Minority

8,582 posts

151 months

Thursday 30th October 2014
quotequote all
So despite Audi's categorical denial, the PH party line is ignore them, they are signing up really?

The Hypno-Toad

12,249 posts

204 months

Thursday 30th October 2014
quotequote all
Vocal Minority said:
So despite Audi's categorical denial, the PH party line is ignore them, they are signing up really?
Errr.... think you might have missed this?
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Vocal Minority

8,582 posts

151 months

Thursday 30th October 2014
quotequote all
The article that predates Audi's denial of the rumour...nope, seen it

http://motorsportstalk.nbcsports.com/2014/10/25/au...

Edited by Vocal Minority on Thursday 30th October 08:00


Edited by Vocal Minority on Thursday 30th October 08:58

jamiebae

6,245 posts

210 months

Thursday 30th October 2014
quotequote all
Chrisgr31 said:
On the subject of race attendance I think F1 have priced themselves out of the market to an extent. Everyone I know who used to go doesnt anymore, some go to Le Mans some go to none.
I used to live 45 mins drive from Silverstone, but chose to do Le Mans instead because it was cheaper. By the time you've bought race day tickets, grandstand seats (you can't see anything unless you get there at 6am without them) and bought some of their massively overpriced catering it's cheaper to buy entrance, camping, ferry, fuel, tolls, charcoal, meat and Stella Artois and spend five days in La Sarthe instead. Plus you see a lot more action for your money.

Crafty_

Original Poster:

13,248 posts

199 months

Thursday 30th October 2014
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
That says more about the decline of McLaren than the rise of Force India, both are now midfield teams and neither can compete with Mercedes or Red Bull.

I wouldn't be too confident about the future prospects of Force India, it's a rich man's plaything and we've seen before what happens when the rich men lose interest or find a better toy.
You've completely missed the point. Force India are solid midfield runners from being a tail end team. This hasn't happened by running the team on just enough money (some from drivers) to keep the cars ont eh grid. Its had investment (albeit a limited amount) to move the team forwards. If they spend the money from this years WCC wisely they could move even further forwards. Marussia were never going to get anywhere with the attitude the owner had.

At one level or another all the teams are a rich mans plaything. Williams, Zetsche, Mateschitz ,Ferrari (now Angelli family).

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
entropy said:
Scuffers said:
That's more to do with the aero reduction than the powertrain.
No doubt but still has stopped drivers expressing how use the powertrain characteristics are a challenge. Also worth considering that most teams struggled with coanda type exhaust which often gave a very narrow operating window

Scuffers said:
where did you get that idea from?

most of the time, they are all 100% up against the 100L fuel limit, hence all the fuel saving.

if you want them to race harder, they need more than 100L of fuel to do so.
Fuel is ballast.

If you give the teams a bigger limit then teams will be looking to race with the least amount of fuel which is what happened previously.
like I said, show us the data to back up your claim that they are running with less than 100Kg's.
Theyve just been discussing this on sky, during P1. According to them, quoting Pat Symonds, they've been running with less than 100kgs of fuel at some tracks, since the very beginning of this year, including Australia.
A

Scuffers

20,887 posts

273 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
REALIST123 said:
Theyve just been discussing this on sky, during P1. According to them, quoting Pat Symonds, they've been running with less than 100kgs of fuel at some tracks, since the very beginning of this year, including Australia.
A
Simply don't believe that, especially for the first race of the year, nobody was that brave/confident.

Crafty_

Original Poster:

13,248 posts

199 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
REALIST123 said:
Theyve just been discussing this on sky, during P1. According to them, quoting Pat Symonds, they've been running with less than 100kgs of fuel at some tracks, since the very beginning of this year, including Australia.
A
Simply don't believe that, especially for the first race of the year, nobody was that brave/confident.
So, you make a claim, are given proof from pretty much the horses mouth and you still don't believe it ?


Is this like your declaration that they wouldn't ever use over 10k RPM, yet at many races we've seen them do exactly that ? Is the TV telemetry not trustworthy either ?

Scuffers

20,887 posts

273 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Crafty_ said:
So, you make a claim, are given proof from pretty much the horses mouth and you still don't believe it ?


Is this like your declaration that they wouldn't ever use over 10k RPM, yet at many races we've seen them do exactly that ? Is the TV telemetry not trustworthy either ?
I never said that, I said 12K, and I think you will find that's pretty much spot on.


Crafty_

Original Poster:

13,248 posts

199 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
[quote=Scuffers]Yes, with the fuel flow restrictions, power will climb to 10,500Rpm, then not just plateau, but actually fall after this, as with more RPM and the same fuel burn rate, increased pumping/frictional losses will mean less power, at which point they will not want to rev them any more than the gap between gears, which with 8 won't be huge..
[\quote]

you spent ages telling us how revving past 10,5000 would be pointless.
They regularly use 11-12k RPM, and IIRC we've seen higher than that on occasion.

Before the season you said there would be no increase in torque and the cars wouldn't be harder to drive, despite the teams, engine manufacturers and even pirelli were saying the increase in torque would make it harder. And surprise surprise they were right, drivers can't just go WOT out of a corner now, the cars build speed quicker, the drivers have to actually work the throttle a bit. This isn't opinion, its fact.

Its ok to be wrong sometimes.