Forza Rossa F1 Team granted 2015 entry.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Nikki Katz

I'm pretty sure it's 26 as USF1 were supposed to enter at the same time as Hispania, Virgin and Lotus. If I remember correctly, after USF1 pulled out a fortnight before the opener, someone bought Toyota's cars and turned up to the first race, but were refused entry as the FIA wouldn't re-open entries with only a fortnight to put the team together. It was 24 from the 90s up until that year I think though.

When the 107% rule was introduced in 1997, 26 cars was the maximum. The rule was to ensure all were competitive. We had 18 and the FIA gave approval to four teams when the manufacturer's fled. One never made it, another team tried to with Toyota's cars but was disallowed and another has since dropped away.
We have 22 cars so permission has been given for 2 teams or 4 cars. The FIA will make it possible for all to start so if it was 24, they would change it anyway. Its their series, they make the rules....

[S griffin]

The 107% rule was actually introduced in 96. Forti fell foul of this rule in the first race. Similar to HRT when the rule was brought back in 2011

[Hawkwood]

Originally Posted by S griffin

The 107% rule was actually introduced in 96. Forti fell foul of this rule in the first race. Similar to HRT when the rule was brought back in 2011

The 107% was dropped at some point?
I remember both Alex Yoong and Tarso Marques falling foul of it a couple of times.

[Hendrix]

I'm always happy to see new teams, even if they are backmarkers. I just hope nobody drops out as I'd really like to see a 26 car field.

Originally Posted by Hawkwood

The 107% was dropped at some point?

They dropped it after the 2002 season.

[Biscuits In A Red Bull]

I'd like to see a 26 car field if 26 cars can compete for points with 26 deserving drivers.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Biscuits In A Red Bull

I'd like to see a 26 car field if 26 cars can compete for points with 26 deserving drivers.

Maybe the points system should be changed then.
We could stay with 25 for 1st but go to 20th.....

25,22,20,18,16,15,14,13,12,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1.

That way it would be easier to see who the top 10 teams are....

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Hawkwood

The 107% was dropped at some point?
I remember both Alex Yoong and Tarso Marques falling foul of it a couple of times.

As S Griffin said it was 96 not 97. It lasted till 2002 then wasn't required again until it was reintroduced in 2011.

In 1995 there were 13 teams some with slower cars so it came as a recommendation to weed out the really poor efforts. Max Mosley said any properly organised team should be able to get within the 107%.

What is not realized is just how much the return from the sports revenues is weighted against the newer smaller teams and how much in favour of the 'respected teams' the rewards are in favour of. The fact that sponsors of course go for the successful teams only adds to the problem.

[Paradise City]

Originally Posted by Biscuits In A Red Bull

I'd like to see a 26 car field if 26 cars can compete for points with 26 deserving drivers.

Middling drivers and poor teams are part of the fabric of F1. As long as that doesn't sneak too far up the grid and the drivers do met a certain minimum standards, then it's all good.

[wolfhound]

The problem is that with the new agreements between Bernie and teams means the rich get a lot richer and the poorer tems get a lot worse off.

If Red Bull or Ferrari were to finish the season with no points and one of the midfield teams was to win every race 1;2 they would still get less money from Bernie than RB or Ferrari.

That is how much things are stacked against the lower ranked teams.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

The problem is that with the new agreements between Bernie and teams means the rich get a lot richer and the poorer tems get a lot worse off.

If Red Bull or Ferrari were to finish the season with no points and one of the midfield teams was to win every race 1;2 they would still get less money from Bernie than RB or Ferrari.

That is how much things are stacked against the lower ranked teams.

I am not sure how accurate this is but here are figures I found in a press article on the web about the distribution of '506 million pounds' in 2013. This will support Wolfhound's above assertions .

Ferrari 99.7
RBR 97.2
McLaren 57.1
Mercedes 55.2
Lotus 39
Force India 35.4
Sauber 32.2
Williams 33.6
STR 30
Caterham. 18.6
Marussia 7.2

[Mekola]

Originally Posted by kurski

Romanian promises Robert Visoiu and Mihai Marinescu.

Don't forget Michael Herck.

[Beryl]

Originally Posted by kurski

Romanian promises Robert Visoiu and Mihai Marinescu.

Visoiu has some talent, so he'd be acceptable alongside a decent veteran, but I think they'll be struggling if they put Marinescu in the other seat.

[wolfhound]

Forza Rossa have yet to lodge their $20million bond to enter F1 but have another two weeks to do so.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns28161.html

[Cookie85]

Do we think they will definitely submit the bond in the next 2 weeks?

[Biscuits In A Red Bull]

I think that they actually will, and that they'll enter for 2016, hang around until 2024 before giving up on their costly dream, having amassed a maximum of 3 points, but having introduced a future world champion into Formula 1.

Being honest, I have no idea.

[Amaroo Park]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

Collin Kolles involved? That sounds really promising, the man with the Midas touch.

Anything that has the good Dr involved in can only but succeed

[steve_r]

I'm really hoping this happens. The more teams the better.

I still don't quite understand why anyone would want to start from scratch when they could possibly buy out one of the current F1 teams that are rumoured to be struggling financially? No doubt this would be more complicated than anyone with the brain of a mere mortal could imagine....

[Tucky]

Perhaps they think that if they buy a team like Caterham then all they'll be doing is changing the colour of the car but still be at the back, maybe with a fresh start they could avoid problems that some of the other teams encountered when they start.

I don't subscribe to this method of thinking but it could be how they see it

[steve_r]

Yeah, but if the alternative is that you move into an old supermarket that HRT used, and employ some ex-Dallara dude, then you don't really have a great start to life, especially when next season is now only about 8 months away. On that basis presumably it's going to take a while to catch up with Caterham and Marussia, let alone the rest of them.

Caterham are by no means the only F1 team which have been rumoured to be struggling financially. Some teams much further up the grid are to, IF we believe press rumours etc.

[Paradise City]

Buying an existing team is the sensible way to go. Noone thinks of Force India as Jordan, noone thinks of Mercedes as Tyrrell. Fernandes wouldn't be difficult about selling his team. Bit too much cockiness at the expensive of common-sense on display here but on their own head's be it of course.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

Middling drivers and poor teams are part of the fabric of F1. As long as that doesn't sneak too far up the grid and the drivers do met a certain minimum standards, then it's all good.

Isn't that elitist? Maybe.

Surely the series should be based upon a level playing field with the opportunity for people to come in and compete on a level playing field with open regulations and rewards for effective and efficient teams to be rewarded on merit.

That doesn't happen now as the incumbent participants do so under a system heavily weighted in their favour.
There was a time like that but it was last seen 20-25 years ago

[rich07]

Originally Posted by Amaroo Park

Anything that has the good Dr involved in can only but succeed

Hahahaha nice one