Does Formula BMW work?

alchemy · 21 Aug 2006, 21:25 (Ref:1688324)

Has Formula BMW, particularly the UK series, lived up to its promise as being the definitive ‘feeder’ class?

maximus · 22 Aug 2006, 11:43 (Ref:1688655)

Well it has a large field, out of which many drivers have progressed, so I would say yes. It certainly is a popular and viable alternative to Formula Ford.

hotwheels · 22 Aug 2006, 14:20 (Ref:1688780)

Well, the series is quite new (first champ was on 2002) and Nico Rosberg made it already and Sebastian Vettel will make it to F1 in the near future. Ok, both come from the German Championship. Maybe the problem in UK is that F-BMW and F-Renault requires very similar budgets, even because they race in the same event. It is a bit hard to choose...

ss_collins · 22 Aug 2006, 15:38 (Ref:1688839)

I thnk it is overpriced, are composite tubs really needed?

I'd like to see spaceframes introduced but using the same engine, transmission etc... if that happens long term FBMW is likely to become the biggest race series in the world.

hotwheels · 22 Aug 2006, 18:09 (Ref:1688940)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ss_collins

I thnk it is overpriced, are composite tubs really needed?

I'd like to see spaceframes introduced but using the same engine, transmission etc... if that happens long term FBMW is likely to become the biggest race series in the world.

Good point, ss_collins. In your opinion, composite tubs are that expensive? (i really have no idea...)

Ranald · 22 Aug 2006, 19:45 (Ref:1689023)

True, composite tubs are considerabley more expensive than spaceframe ones but they are also considerabley more safe.
I absolutely think that FBMW has been as success. Good grids in all series and of a high quality too. The series seems a good stepping stone on to better things. The series has already produced 2 Formula 1 drivers in Christain Klien and Nico Rosberg. The series infrastructure is excellent and is one of it's biggest selling points. The driver training in racing, fitness, diet, media skills and motorsports business skills are unique to the series and make the series very attractive to young drivers.

sceptic · 22 Aug 2006, 21:04 (Ref:1689098)

The British championship really hasn't been going long enough to judge. The first year had a lot of mediocre drivers, which made Bridgman and Glew look special. And while they are good, they are not F1 class.

Give it another three years and see where we are.

luke · 22 Aug 2006, 21:08 (Ref:1689100)

I was told that it was created as a cheaper alternative to Formula Ford yet its roughly the same price if you wish to do a season...
Formula BMW UK is what I hope to reach in the future, future that is...although anyone would be happy to land anything really with a gear stick and 4 wheels, hehe...
Its certainly more apealing to young drivers then Formula Ford.
I don't know that much at all about either series, but am I right in saying that Formula Ford is not what it used to be?

luke.

sceptic · 22 Aug 2006, 21:27 (Ref:1689121)

Quote:

Originally Posted by luke

I was told that it was created as a cheaper alternative to Formula Ford yet its roughly the same price if you wish to do a season...
Formula BMW UK is what I hope to reach in the future, future that is...although anyone would be happy to land anything really with a gear stick and 4 wheels, hehe...
Its certainly more apealing to young drivers then Formula Ford.
I don't know that much at all about either series, but am I right in saying that Formula Ford is not what it used to be?

luke.

Formula Ford has had a difficult couple of years but is on its way back up now.

...and it's still a lot cheaper than FBMW if you want to win the title.

ss_collins · 22 Aug 2006, 21:33 (Ref:1689126)

Quote:

True, composite tubs are considerabley more expensive than spaceframe ones but they are also considerabley more safe.

Indeed they are when new and propertly maintained - how often do FBMW teams test the chassis? once a year? less? maintaining a carbon chassis is a very complex and expensive operation - not maintaining it can lead to catastrophic failures, a delaminated tub could be more dangerous than a spaceframe. Also was the tub built to be safe or pass crash tests? it can be a very different thing. Does anyone belive that the FBMW tubs are properly checked after each off? are thy even checked at the end of the year? some of them must be getting really old now - have they been back to ATR?

Overall for a lower speed series like FBMW I think a composite tub is excessive. People question spaceframes safety and certainly they are not as safe as caron tubs in the short term, in the long term the ageing of steel climbing frames is well understood and to be honest they chassis are cheap enough that if a major shunt causes worry its cheaper to buy a new spaceframe than have the integrity of a composite tub checked.

For those not that into the costs of it all - a spaceframe (professionally built by the likes of Mygale) is about a fifth of the cost of a carbon tub. Maintaining the spaceframe to a decent standard is probably close to twenty times cheaper.

mountainstar · 23 Aug 2006, 04:37 (Ref:1689281)

FBMW may have some merits, but I'm pretty much against it since it is way too expensive for what you get. I recently saw FBMW in denver again and yes there was some good passing and racing, and yes there seems to be a few talented drivers in there and yes the hospitality unit is enormous, BUT $300,000 to race a MOTORCYCLE engined car? No thanks. I'm sure the nice hospitality tank is great and it all looks professional, but the series has drawn too many SORFs to it. Some of these kids racing in this series are horrible drivers. Most of them would be so better off racing FF1600 and working with a driver coach to learn how to race. AND THEN maybe move on from there.

Again, $300,000 to race a motorcycle engined car. It can be done cheaper. I think the problem is that people are very faddish and trendy and FBMW is all the rage because it has the illusion of being very professional and the phony carrot of an F1 test, but if you are a realist and sit down and add the numbers up the COST/BENEFIT ratio just isn't there.

It wasn't that long ago the FBMW Spanish Championship was advertising arrive and drive, 6 weekends, 18 races, 6 tests(i believe), suit helmet, etc. etc. for 35,000 euros. Now that sounds more reasonable for a 140 hp car.

Go_For_Pole · 23 Aug 2006, 07:19 (Ref:1689322)

The Spanish BMW car was is the previous generation of the current F. BMW car and frankly their difference in quality, safety etc is huge. Another factor is that in Spain the cars are serviced centrally, it's an arrive and drive arrangement.

Anyway I don't find judging F. BMW only from a car point of view fair. Unlike Renault or Ford, BMW is doing much more for their championship like promoting, educating, giving scholarships etc. Plus their car has tricks to prevent people from cheating and I have been told (don't know if that's a fair assesement, perhaps somebody with a better view could help) that those tricks are pretty much bulletproof.

At the end of the day whether it is works or not is reflected by grid sizes and as fas as i know in every country/region that there is a championship the grid is full so i suppose this speaks for itself.

Super Tourer · 23 Aug 2006, 09:54 (Ref:1689405)

The main draw for drivers is that it is a manufacturer supported entry level series and has the potential to make you part of the BMW family. You can't say that about Formula Ford, which has enjoyed sporadic support from Ford over the years and often left to wither on the vine.

This level of support from BMW give the series extra kudos and prestige, which no doubt helps drivers with investment and backing. On top of this if you come to the attention of BMW they have a whole gambit of motorsport programs to slot you into, whereas Ford's on/off motorsport policy depends on who is doing the accounts this year.

Ford could have made FFord a fantastic addition to their business and a great tool for developing drivers for Ford, but they haven't.

If you are advising drivers on the best career choice, it would have to be BMW for all the above reasons.

ss_collins · 23 Aug 2006, 11:43 (Ref:1689485)

certainly BMW is a good series - the racing is good but due to the cost its not as good as it could be.

Lets look at the engineering (with me thats where often seems to end up) mechanically the car is not incredibly dissimilar to a Sports 1000, same family of engines - a stock BMW K1200RS engine can be had in perfect condition for sub £1000. Super fly Suspension could put he cost up but still I think you could get the mechanical bits and bobs together for around £10k - £15k (probably less) then you have the option the £2,500 space fame or the stiffer and initially safer carbon tub - C£40,000. Before the car has turned a wheel.

Mountainstar hits the nail on the head:

Quote:

Again, $300,000 to race a motorcycle engined car. It can be done cheaper. I think the problem is that people are very faddish and trendy and FBMW is all the rage because it has the illusion of being very professional and the phony carrot of an F1 test, but if you are a realist and sit down and add the numbers up the COST/BENEFIT ratio just isn't there.

However I hold up the example that FBMW is copying almost exactly - Formula Vee. In the late 1960's VW decided it anted its own junior racing class and put lots of money into launching Vee in nations around the world and it came complete with a world final... one major difference is it was realised early on that allowin a range of chassis to compete controlled costs. And the created the legacy of FVee as it now is, FBMW is the heir apparent in the long term however spaceframes need to be introduced.

There are some very good engineers working in FBMW at the moment but they regularly complain to us that they are bored, can't do much with the cars apart from put it back together and set it up. Yet these highly paid experts are there simply because you must have a team of engineers around you. Does a 140bhp car that can lap Brands Indy in 47 seconds (compared to a Vee with up to 100bhp and a Indy lap of 52s, or FFord with 48s - both significantly cheaper) realy need a composite chassis?

Super Tourer · 23 Aug 2006, 12:03 (Ref:1689497)

I have no idea whether it needs a composite chassis or not, realistically how many of the drivers and their managers/mentors/fathers will care how the car is made - as long as it is safe! They will be placed in the series as a career choice and no one can argue that putting you protege infront of BMW is a bad thing, compared to FFord - IMO.

The whole pitch from BMW has been to present the car as a 'mini F1 car', hence the use of composite materials, extraction seat, HANS, etc.

If we are talking 'career' drivers, realistically if you can't afford FBMW, you aren't going anywhere anyway, I can't see that using a cheaper chassis would make any difference in the long term.

sceptic · 23 Aug 2006, 13:58 (Ref:1689628)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Tourer

The main draw for drivers is that it is a manufacturer supported entry level series and has the potential to make you part of the BMW family. You can't say that about Formula Ford, which has enjoyed sporadic support from Ford over the years and often left to wither on the vine.

If you are advising drivers on the best career choice, it would have to be BMW for all the above reasons.

If you look at it from that point of view, then put the driver in F Renault.
BMW doesn't really have the same career path.

You do FBMW, and if you win the World Final you test a F1 car.
Then what?

The next three years of your career are going to be spent racing something not powered by BMW, and your immediate choices in Europe are Renault, Mercedes and Honda, while in the US or Japan it's Toyota or Honda.

...and funnily enough, all those manufacturers have their own F1 teams too.

ss_collins · 23 Aug 2006, 14:06 (Ref:1689636)

a cheaper chassis would ensure the long term health of the series and would allow talented but less well funded driver to show thier skills. Not every kid working his way up is mega rich but some have gone a long way with not much - Joey Foster for example in F3 or Gareth Howell in the BTCC

Super Tourer · 23 Aug 2006, 14:23 (Ref:1689645)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sceptic

If you look at it from that point of view, then put the driver in F Renault.
BMW doesn't really have the same career path.

You do FBMW, and if you win the World Final you test a F1 car.
Then what?

The next three years of your career are going to be spent racing something not powered by BMW, and your immediate choices in Europe are Renault, Mercedes and Honda, while in the US or Japan it's Toyota or Honda.

...and funnily enough, all those manufacturers have their own F1 teams too.

Sebastian Vettel - from FBMW Champion in 2004 to BMW F1 test driver and now BMW F1 3rd driver in 2006.....via Euro F3 and WSR - moving up within a manufacturers ladder doesn't neccesarily mean they have to stick to their machinery, but they have access to their funding.

Super Tourer · 23 Aug 2006, 14:33 (Ref:1689650)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ss_collins

a cheaper chassis would ensure the long term health of the series and would allow talented but less well funded driver to show thier skills. Not every kid working his way up is mega rich but some have gone a long way with not much - Joey Foster for example in F3 or Gareth Howell in the BTCC

Sam you are equating a cheaper chassis (or better value) with the health of a series, when has that really been a deciding factor?

We all know the main costs of competing in these series are the team costs for which you are buying their level of experience and track record. If the FBMW cars were built as you suggest, how much do you think it would actually reduce annual running budgets by? You still need the same factory, truck, awning, people, consumables, food, hotels, fuel, etc, etc. Agreed that you are saying that composite cars may not last as long, but at this level I would suggest that teams will be writing off the value of the cars over three years anyway.

Roninho · 23 Aug 2006, 15:18 (Ref:1689692)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Tourer

Sam you are equating a cheaper chassis (or better value) with the health of a series, when has that really been a deciding factor?

We all know the main costs of competing in these series are the team costs for which you are buying their level of experience and track record. If the FBMW cars were built as you suggest, how much do you think it would actually reduce annual running budgets by? You still need the same factory, truck, awning, people, consumables, food, hotels, fuel, etc, etc. Agreed that you are saying that composite cars may not last as long, but at this level I would suggest that teams will be writing off the value of the cars over three years anyway.

Personally i feel that the succes of Formula BMW and Formula Renault compared to the downfall of formula ford has nothing to do with the cars that are being raced, but by the support of BMW and renault.

Formula Ford has been a succes for decades, and has been the starting point of many f1-careers. Imo the introduction of national formula bmw and renault championship simply made the cost of the first step of the ladder higher. Basically you would use to do Formula Ford before the step was made to F3.
Now you start in Formula Renault or Formula BMW (depending where you live), before you move to f3, basically resulting in more costs for almost the same training ground.

The only advantages i see are the junior development programs almost all manufacturers seem to have, offering support to talented racers.

Sharp_31 · 23 Aug 2006, 16:00 (Ref:1689735)

I think the support that BMW have provided can only be good for the sport with regards to raising the profile. I just hope they hang around like Renault have and show their support for years to come.

I don't think the spaceframe issue is worth arguing about. In the late 90's - early 2000 it could cost drivers well over 100k for a drive in a top formula ford team. Renault in 2006 it is approx 140k for a top team and as little as 90k for a lower team so I don't think it makes much difference. I do think however for a poxy car like the bmw, the car and especially the parts are way over priced.

I think it is the top teams which reap the rewards if they have a good reputation, one top team in bmw uk were asking for 180k for 2005 seat.

If a dad want's his son to win he will always pay for the top team. Teams are wise to this and charge what they wish. I have nothing against teams doing this as they have probably spent several years giving drives away for close to nothing to gain that reputation.

At the end of the day you can only charge what people are willing to pay and if they are willing to pay 150 k upwards then thats how much it will cost.

I think drivers should always start their car careers in ff even if its at club level it gives them a good grounding and some club racers are of a very high standard and have alot of experience. Once you have proved yourself against these guys should you go onto Renault/bmw/f3.

I still believe that Formula Renault is a better contested championship (higher level of driver). Renault have shown their support for a far longer period than bmw have and are more likely to carry on that way.We shall see!

alchemy · 24 Aug 2006, 07:47 (Ref:1690141)

Technicalities aside for a moment, rookie drivers require all the ‘track time’ they can get. As I see it FBMW falls short in this area on two counts. 1) Restricted testing. 2) General running costs. As someone who is heavily involved in coaching rookie’s straight from karting, I still think Formula Ford has the edge as regards these points.

I know one could argue that it’s the same for everyone as regards running in FBMW, but that’s not the issue really. The whole object is to produce ‘racing drivers’. Winning the FBMW championship really only means you were the best of a lot of other inexperienced drivers. I think being in more established classes generally means you could be up against some quite experienced drivers which you will learn from.

ss_collins · 24 Aug 2006, 09:22 (Ref:1690195)

agree there alchemy.

Ignoring the chassis issue (wait and see on that one) you mention the good reputation teams - the Carlins of this world, however I was looking into it a while ago and the universal feeling from the engineers is that they like the money but they are bored as there is nothing to do. Show the driver some data - tell him he can go a little faster through paddock - then bolt it back together when he goes a little too fast through it.

All the teams do is set the cars up and rake in the cash - I suggest that a talented club team (say from FF1600) could run a FBMW just as well as Carlin or similar. So do you really need all those expensive people, huge awnings, team hospitality etc... or could you do it from the back of a transit van. I suspect the backbone of britain team could easily be on the pace with a decent driver. However a club team do not have the ability to test the integrity of a carbon tub on a regular basois - but then do all the existing teams?

So again for a number of reasons FBMW is about 4 times the cost it needs to be.

Quote:

Sam you are equating a cheaper chassis (or better value) with the health of a series, when has that really been a deciding factor?

well yes actually - the cheaper the car the more competitors you get - thats pretty obvious. But look at past examples - FVee and FFord1600 both kicked off as manufacturer backed series and both are still going strong. Formula Renault - would we have it without Renualt involvement or would it have faded with the cars popping up in Mono every now and again. FBMW will fizzle pretty quick when BMW gets bored of it which won't be for a while yet, but the series could be a fantastic one if the chassis rules were freed up. BMW could still approve each chassis type so it looks good but there will be loads more cars.