Engine development costs, why all the moaning?

[RemarkLima]

In so many threads, people keep harping on about how much the new engines cost to develop, how many millions of contractors were at Mercedes etc...

One thing that appears to be glossed over, to my mind, is that most of those costs were in man hours, therefore a lot of people earnt decent money doing a highly skilled job... This is a good thing. A fair chunk will continue to earn good money and many more will have some great experience on their cv, again this is a good thing.

It's increased the costs for supply, but if that's the cost then c'est la vie, marussia and Caterham couldn't swallow it but everyone else is getting along... Some close to the wall but they seemed to be in the same position in the v8 era as well.

So why all the moaning about costs? Ultimately I see it as a good thing for many people.

[patmahe]

You make a lot of valid points. However I think sustainability is the key thing here.

It's taken huge investment just to get the current power plants into the cars and racing. Now these incredible energy recovery systems, engines and turbos must be developed, some of the materials required may not exist yet, mistakes can be made, blind alleys pursued.

It's risky stuff for all involved and some may decide it's not worth it. Eg. Cosworth can no longer supply customer units to smaller teams.

If there is no-one willing to invest continuously in these technologies at the rate required, then we can no longer go racing and F1 dies.

This is obviously all worst case scenario stuff but we ignore team/engine suppliers concerns at our peril.

[telecat]

It put the engine costs up a hell of a lot! That probably lead to Caterham and Marussia folding.

[CharlesAL]

The way F1's money was being distributed, it was only a matter of time before Caterham and Marussia folded. Like HRT did, before the new engines even came in.

[AlexS]

telecat said:

It put the engine costs up a hell of a lot! That probably lead to Caterham and Marussia folding.

Actually it didn't. And not only that, but Caterham and Marussia were spending less of their total budget on engines than teams were back in '02.

[Derek Smith]

PW said:

WEC P1 proves that you can build and race incredibly advanced, powerful, efficient and reliable cars on a fraction of F1's budgets.

The problem for the smaller teams, including those which folded, is that they came into the sport, or decided to stay, on the promise of budget control. As soon as they were in, the costs escalated. They built and raced incredibly advanced, powerful, efficient and reliable F1 cars at a fraction of the leading teams' budgets and managed to populate the back of the grid.

The manufacturers and the teams provide the entertainment for a sport which is one of the great earners, possibly the greatest. They do all the work, they feel they don't get a fair share of the spoils. I can't see any argument in that.

The sport is marketed as the pinnacle of motor sport - now easily justified because most other forumlea have been run into the ground - and so innovation is seen as important. But it costs. If you want the major manufacturers in the sport, and encourage them to invest £billions, then they have a right to reasonable management. Merc can justify the investment if they are in the sport for a number of years. If the rules are altered for no other reason that the others can't get near them, despite providing other teams with identical engines, then whose fault is that.

I'm not sure the WEC engines as a whole are that 'incredibly advanced', at least compared to F1 engines.

[RemarkLima]

Derek Smith said:

The problem for the smaller teams, including those which folded, is that they came into the sport, or decided to stay, on the promise of budget control. As soon as they were in, the costs escalated. They built and raced incredibly advanced, powerful, efficient and reliable F1 cars at a fraction of the leading teams' budgets and managed to populate the back of the grid.

Engine costs or not, they would have still folded as the cost cap never happened, marussia decided to not build cars and therefore didn't need a F1 team and TF would have sold Caterham regardless, as even with the v8 engines they were still at the back of the grid.

So, the continued development, the continued investment and therefore employment is "a good thing" right?

Or should we all aspire to be bankers and insurance brokers?

[Europa1]

To me, the moaning about the costs seems to be from those who don't like the noise but are looking for a more credible, less childish-sounding thing to complain about.

[P-Jay]

As with everything F1, it's bullst - the teams who are complaining are the Renault / Ferrari powered teams "oh the engines, the engines - won't someone please think of the children" their solution? standardised parts, thus negating the advantage of the Mercedes Powered teams.

I'd love someone in the F1 press to ask Christian Horner - "the teams spent x £billion on wind tunnels, fluid dynamics and simulators last year - do you think it's time for standardised front wings to help the small teams?" just so I could listen to his bullst answer to that.

[entropy]

P-Jay said:

As with everything F1, it's bullst - the teams who are complaining are the Renault / Ferrari powered teams "oh the engines, the engines - won't someone please think of the children" their solution? standardised parts, thus negating the advantage of the Mercedes Powered teams.

I'd love someone in the F1 press to ask Christian Horner - "the teams spent x £billion on wind tunnels, fluid dynamics and simulators last year - do you think it's time for standardised front wings to help the small teams?" just so I could listen to his bullst answer to that.

FOTA imploded because RBR wouldn't follow RRA.

[Chrisgr31]

The issue is the distribution of money in F1. If the money was distributed in a fair way the participants would as a base get enough to pay design, build, engine, transport, admin, race costs for a basic pair of 2 cars. Additional money could be given out on a performance basis. Then the teams would be able to get sponsorship to pay towards improving their package.

The current engines would appear to have a lot more relevance towards roadgoing cars, than the old engines and if the division of the spoils was fair we wouldn't be hearing the complaints about the costs.

[entropy]

PW said:

WEC P1 proves that you can build and race incredibly advanced, powerful, efficient and reliable cars on a fraction of F1's budgets.

F1 teams have spent decades coming up with ways to spend huge sums of money that are absolutely unnecessary for the operation of 2 race cars, then claim poverty and injustice, and how they should be gifted millions more to "compete" in designing illegal aerodynamic devices and squeezing A-list celebrities into the back of their garages.

Yes, absolutely, the fact that the teams employ thousands in super high tech factories is very much glossed over. It's not a race to the Moon, but everyone thinks that sort of spending is crucial for F1.

Why all the moaning? To keep up that façade and convince everyone it's Bernie Ecclestone's fault.

Giving the teams more money will not fix the problem. They say they need €80 million a year - give them that and next year they'll tell you it's actually €180, because all this designer clothing for the 20 catering staff in the hospitality suite is really pricey...

Doesn't F1 arguably have a higher rate of development? Do P1 teams have an aero department that run 24/7?

[MissChief]

PW said:

If F1 would give me enough money to run an F1 team, I know what I'd be doing next year!

Fairly sure i could get 2 "basic" cars racing for the season and still be able to pocket several million myself. No brainer, really.

But you also have to demonstrate that the cars won't be so slow as to be unsafe? usually that is a laptime within 107% or the fastest lap, something which Marussia and Caterham very nearly fell foul of and HRT fell foul of with a certain amount of regularity. There's no point in doing it half cocked as it'll be money down the drain. They say 'How do you become a Millionaire in Formula one? Start as a Billionaire.'

[entropy]

PW said:

Read his comment again - he's suggesting the teams get enough to run 2 race cars, then "improve the package" with additional funds, not "make them safe and fast enough to enter", so clearly that's covered.

I'm sure taking the approach used by all other motorsport outside F1 in running things as efficiently as possible, there would be some money left over. Even if it's only $50,000 - that's a few grand more than I'm getting paid now, and I'd get to go to all the F1 races, so it's still a no-brainer who cares if I don't win? I'm sure it would be more though, and ANY sponsorship money, no matter how small, would all be profit too! I

The only flaw in the plan I can see is that EVERY PERSON ON THE PLANET would try to do exactly the same.

But would you be competitive? The demise of Brabham was because BCE tried to run it as lean as possible.

[RemarkLima]

So in summary, the teams moaning about the engine costs are just sour grapes... I can understand as they want to win and with complain about everything not in their favour.

But it still doesn't explain why all the public moan about the development costs, lots of threads on here with people saying that the new PU's costs 100 billion, blah blah blah... But as said, 90% of that expense will be in wages and subcontracts (who pay wages etc..) so surely that some of the vast wealth of F1 is spent on people is "a good thing"? Surely, long may it continue?

[London424]

RemarkLima said:

So in summary, the teams moaning about the engine costs are just sour grapes... I can understand as they want to win and with complain about everything not in their favour.

But it still doesn't explain why all the public moan about the development costs, lots of threads on here with people saying that the new PU's costs 100 billion, blah blah blah... But as said, 90% of that expense will be in wages and subcontracts (who pay wages etc..) so surely that some of the vast wealth of F1 is spent on people is "a good thing"? Surely, long may it continue?

Well as a company you don't want to be spending money...even if it's on people if you aren't getting a return. They aren't a charity!

[RemarkLima]

London424 said:

Well as a company you don't want to be spending money...even if it's on people if you aren't getting a return. They aren't a charity!

But they are getting a return, the teams have to buy the engines and costs will drop over the years, and the positive marketing, at least for Mercedes is massive.

The relevance factor is a big one, and not even Renault have talked about switching back / switching to a different format, they're committed and it must tie in with the group strategy.

Hence, it's all good right? Companies have to invest and spend otherwise we'd still be in model T's!

[London424]

RemarkLima said:

London424 said:

Well as a company you don't want to be spending money...even if it's on people if you aren't getting a return. They aren't a charity!

But they are getting a return, the teams have to buy the engines and costs will drop over the years, and the positive marketing, at least for Mercedes is massive.

The relevance factor is a big one, and not even Renault have talked about switching back / switching to a different format, they're committed and it must tie in with the group strategy.

Hence, it's all good right? Companies have to invest and spend otherwise we'd still be in model T's!

It's good if they don't change the rules again yes. But they're expecting a return on the investment they've already made over the next (not sure how long) by having a static set of regulations that are small evolutions. So, if the rules change significantly and they need to spend another chunk of money, they are just pissing money down the drain.

[MissChief]

The smaller teams didn't like the new engines as the initial cost wqas so high that the majority of the FIA's payments to the lower teams, somewhere in the region of $50 million went straight to the Engine supplier. I'm not sure costs will be reduced this season either with only the Engine tokens limiting development.

[RemarkLima]

Renault were saying engine costs were going to drop year on year... And Mercedes, who invested the most, had the cheapest engines!

The regs will not change, the engine manufacturers will make sure to that!

But for the teams to complain that it's too expensive does strike me that it's like complaining that you're £500 bottle of champagne is a touch too expensive... If you're in to that kind of club, expect to spend some cash ;-) especially with no RRA ever happening, nor likely to!