Teams converting?

[Marcus666]

After all this "one car is a second faster than the other car wich is one second faster than the third car". Wouldn't it be better if teams like Marussia and Force India to convert their operations to either Indycar or WEC. There is so much money spend on those cars but not enough when comparing with the Billion dollar teams like Red Bull and Ferrari.

I think they might have bigger chances in Indycar and WEC (LMP2 then) than in F1 and might show winning capabillities there. Or is the "F1 is far above others" still the argument? Is it more worth being a backmarker in F1 than winning races in Indycar?

[Dragger]

Someone has to finish last. If not Caterham then Williams, Sauber, etc...

I'd think even with a limited budget, the people involved in the lower tier teams of F1 still profit financially? The drivers and crews still get paid and make money.

[JABWOA]

There is better prestige in competing in a world wide known series than a local domestic series even if they were to win.

[JacobP]

The rift in prestige and race attendance between F1 and others is huge. Caterham may be racing in the back of F1 field, but they're racing 18-20 times a year in front of over 100,000 spectators. In WEC, the only well-attended and well-televised race is 24 hours of Le Mans. While running a WEC team will be cheaper, the sponsorship deals will also be meager because less eyes are watching the racing. The top level LMP1 class is again dominated by factory teams with huge budgets.

An IndyCar team is also cheaper to run, but there is again significantly less money involved. Caterham would have to lay off 80% of its work force if not more, and lose the manufacturing capability since IndyCar will be racing the spec Dalara DW12 chassis for many years.

So F1 teams have nowhere else to go. In sports cars it's different. There were teams drifting between WEC, ALMS, and Grand Am, but that's because those are roughly the same levels of competition.

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by Marcus666

After all this "one car is a second faster than the other car wich is one second faster than the third car". Wouldn't it be better if teams like Marussia and Force India to convert their operations to either Indycar or WEC. There is so much money spend on those cars but not enough when comparing with the Billion dollar teams like Red Bull and Ferrari.

I think they might have bigger chances in Indycar and WEC (LMP2 then) than in F1 and might show winning capabillities there. Or is the "F1 is far above others" still the argument? Is it more worth being a backmarker in F1 than winning races in Indycar?

No. You are missing the point that Formula 1 cars are actually "high speed billboards" that carry advertising, or branding, to hundreds of millions of people worldwide. That is their business and it's also the business of CVC to sell these viewers to race organisers for either commercial or political benefit.

Whilst you and I can see the worth of perhaps being a winner in a barely viewed series like Indycar or WEC because we are fans of the sport, the sponsor wanting mass worldwide exposure would not. Teams like Sauber, Force India, Caterham and Murrussia would simply not exist outside of Formula 1.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by JacobP

The rift in prestige and race attendance between F1 and others is huge. Caterham may be racing in the back of F1 field, but they're racing 18-20 times a year in front of over 100,000 spectators. In WEC, the only well-attended and well-televised race is 24 hours of Le Mans. While running a WEC team will be cheaper, the sponsorship deals will also be meager because less eyes are watching the racing. The top level LMP1 class is again dominated by factory teams with huge budgets.

An IndyCar team is also cheaper to run, but there is again significantly less money involved. Caterham would have to lay off 80% of its work force if not more, and lose the manufacturing capability since IndyCar will be racing the spec Dalara DW12 chassis for many years.

So F1 teams have nowhere else to go. In sports cars it's different. There were teams drifting between WEC, ALMS, and Grand Am, but that's because those are roughly the same levels of competition.

That said, Caterham is supporting a Moto2 team next season isnt it?

[TWRv12]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

That said, Caterham is supporting a Moto2 team next season isnt it?

And a spot of sailing, not mention potentially racking up a £60m fine in football....

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by Marcus666

After all this "one car is a second faster than the other car wich is one second faster than the third car". Wouldn't it be better if teams like Marussia and Force India to convert their operations to either Indycar or WEC. There is so much money spend on those cars but not enough when comparing with the Billion dollar teams like Red Bull and Ferrari.

I think they might have bigger chances in Indycar and WEC (LMP2 then) than in F1 and might show winning capabillities there. Or is the "F1 is far above others" still the argument? Is it more worth being a backmarker in F1 than winning races in Indycar?

Running at the back of F1 is many times the cost of running at the front of other series. It may be that the target audience [and volume] is the reason why some of these teams are in F1 and not elsewhere... or it may even be the egos of those behind them. However given that teams like Caterham and Marussia [and others] are loosing money by being in F1, racing elsewhere or closing up shop, is something they ought to be giving serious consideration to... particularly as neither team has made any progress since they joined the fray.

[wolfhound]

I could see logic in Caterham or Marussia moving to the WEC & LeMans. They are both road car maufacturers (although Marussia have not built many yet) and in sports cars the manufacturers name is more important than the drivers.

Most people will remember the car manufacturers name first as winners of LeMans. There is a good audience for LeMans as it is not only on TV but its streamed live on the net. There are a number of classes that they could compete in if they do not want to take on the major manufacturers directly. They also have the possibilty to sell cars to private teams. At present sports car racing seems to be on an upswing in terms of popularity.

[Paradise City]

They wouldn't be able to mount a challenge to the factory outfits of Audi, Porsche and Toyota. They'd get the same coverage as Rebellion and much less sponsor interest. It would be a very silly thing to do to from a commercial pov.

[JABWOA]

Originally Posted by davyboy

particularly as neither team has made any progress since they joined the fray.

They've made great progress (although not as much this year unfortunately.) They've reduced the time gap, increased reliability and Marussia proved that fully computer designed cars (CFD) don't work. Caterham should really have done better with the talent and engine they had.

Remember the dark days with Pre-Qual (and Pacific and Lola in hte 90's) where cars were 10secs off the pace, not 2.

Shame a two-tier championship never happened.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JABWOA

Shame a two-tier championship never happened.

I think that's actually happened on more than one occasion, but the last time it happened was when the Cosworth/naturally aspirated engined teams did not stand a hope of competing with 1,000 plus bhp turbo engined cars.

"The announcement at end of the 1986 season that turbocharged cars would be banned from 1989, and the introduction of the Jim Clark Cup and Colin Chapman Trophy championships for naturally aspirated cars for 1987, prompted Cosworth to revive their elderly engine design."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosworth_DFV

[JABWOA]

It's been before and was mooted a part of the granting of three new team licenses but nothing ever became of it. They would have restrictions placed on them and possibly allowed customer cars. Oh well.

[JHamilton]

We'll take Marussia if you take Chip Ganassi. And I don't mean the team, just Chip.

[BSchneiderFan]

Out of interest, what's the difference in operating budget between, say, Marussia and, say, Penske?

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

Out of interest, what's the difference in operating budget between, say, Marussia and, say, Penske?

I reckon the annual budget of Marussia is about 5 times that of Penske.

There's an article here that does a comparison between the costs of fielding a front running Indycar and a front running F1 team. It's quite interesting.

[chillibowl]

Ferrari's budget for 2013 was $470 million???

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by davyboy

I reckon the annual budget of Marussia is about 5 times that of Penske.

There's an article here that does a comparison between the costs of fielding a front running Indycar and a front running F1 team. It's quite interesting.

I am not so sure about some of those numbers...

Ferrari annual budget $470 Million ??

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I am not so sure about some of those numbers...

Ferrari annual budget $470 Million ??

Who knows Jeremy. All of these figures seem eye watering to me, but this guy Christian Sylt is one of the more respected sources for this kind of information so I guess it's about as good as we could get until/unless Ferrari come out and confirm or deny it.