|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
11 May 2011, 21:46 (Ref:2878985) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,920
|
Causes of the retirement of Honda, BMW and Toyota.
After more than 2 years of the retirement of Honda, BMW and Toyota.
Do you really think that the only reason for withdrawal was the crisis? I think that the main reason for the retirement was the few possibilities of the engine technology development in the actually context. The engine development freeze and the biggest rules limitations that impossibility the new technology introduction, for me was more important reason to retired that the crisis. The main factor in a actually F1 is the aerodynamic, and this factor not allow the brands show your technology. |
||
|
11 May 2011, 21:53 (Ref:2878993) | #2 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
I think it was also related to the fact they persistently embarrassed themselves.
Toyota spending billions to finish at the back end of the points. Honda swapping a sponsors livery for an atlas. BMW closing the factory down as soon as they won a race in 2008. Pathetic, each and every one of them. |
|
|
11 May 2011, 22:01 (Ref:2878996) | #3 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,254
|
Quote:
got to agree with this, |
|||
__________________
never eat belly button fluff |
12 May 2011, 07:34 (Ref:2879119) | #4 | |
Rookie
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 19
|
Only one that is a puzzler is BMW. Looked set in 08 as if they were going to really step it up (and they really did that year), then took a step in the wrong direction and ran away just as quickly. Perhaps if 09 wasn't as bad as it was for them they would still be around. Clearly, BMW doesn't like not dominating / competing for wins week in week out - in any form of racing.
Toyota wasted millions / billions and couldn't get results. Honda.... Well, once the BAR portion was dropped.... Honda followed the same path of Toyota. At one point, the Honda was one of the slowest cars in the field week in week out, all while having a healthy budge. Toyota has a history of spending money and failing to get results. *cough cough GT-One cough cough* then running for cover. |
|
|
12 May 2011, 08:00 (Ref:2879131) | #5 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
They all came into a series that was already being dominated by big budget teams running to regulations that were tighter than a ducks backside!
The Can-Am series was originally a series participated in by enthusiastic amateurs with little in the way of money. From that series motor racing got wings, ground effects and even a fan car well before they were ever heard of in F1! However, all of that innovation was then to be stifled by the later participation of a big bucks Porsche team. The regulations had to get increasingly tighter in order to stop Porsche running away with everything. This once excellent series lasted just eight seasons (1966-1974). Honda, Toyota and BMW had entered a series where technical regulations were already tight and were unlikely to be given much freedom. Unsurprisingly, they all came away disappointed. |
|
|
12 May 2011, 08:30 (Ref:2879155) | #6 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,126
|
Quote:
I find it amusing/sad that some people here are slagging HRT and Virgin who are doing almost as well as these guys on a fraction of the budget! |
|||
__________________
Locost #54 Boldly Leaping where no car has gone before. And then being T-boned. Damn. Survivor of the 2008 2CV 24h!! 2 engines, one accident, 76mph and rain. |
12 May 2011, 08:39 (Ref:2879163) | #7 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
Well the colour scheme was a handy visual summariser of Honda's second F1 stint: Cringeworthy, humiliating, awe inspiringly ****e.
|
|
|
12 May 2011, 08:44 (Ref:2879166) | #8 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
90% of the performance of an F1 car comes from aerodynamics. Maybe it's people like Boeing that should be entering F1? |
||
|
12 May 2011, 11:05 (Ref:2879235) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,013
|
I think they quit because they were all fortune tellers and realized that after 2+ years with no F1 involvement...
...it wouldn't matter one bit. |
||
|
12 May 2011, 11:31 (Ref:2879258) | #10 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,857
|
Quote:
BMW had a real chance of the title but threw it down the drain, Toyota had everything you need to win titles but never built a wining car. Honda well... so much promise so little delivery, Bet they are gutted about not staying in another year though. |
|||
|
12 May 2011, 11:55 (Ref:2879268) | #11 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
||
|
12 May 2011, 13:33 (Ref:2879316) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
I think you are right here, along with the fact they were embarrassing themselves with poor results, and they no longer believed that their marketing spend was achieving anything. The other problem is that F1 had little or no entertainment value and it would have been difficult for any non F1 enthusiast on the company boards to become emotionally involved with the sport, or indeed believe that the viewership figures were anything but fantasy. Politically correct and bureaucratic decision making also seems to fall flat in the world of F1. Look how long Gascoine lasted at Toyota when he tried to solve their problems. Decision made. |
||
|
12 May 2011, 21:03 (Ref:2879601) | #13 | |||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,597
|
Quote:
While you can argue that the three teams here underachieved for their budget their cars were never hopelessly slow. Yes, that is down to budget, but HRT is not "doing almost as well". |
|||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
12 May 2011, 23:13 (Ref:2879666) | #14 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
Honda managed to make a couple of woefully slow cars in 2007 and 2008. How on earth (wahey!) that happened I think we will never know.
|
|
|
13 May 2011, 00:03 (Ref:2879671) | #15 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
It all went downhill after Geoff Willis left in 2005, having done much work on the 2006 chassis. No one of any note had any input in the following chassis.
|
|
|
13 May 2011, 06:59 (Ref:2879723) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,192
|
The three manufactures left for a number of reasons:
|
||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
13 May 2011, 09:37 (Ref:2879762) | #17 | |||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Finally realising that correct technical personnel acquisition was more important than pennies. Red Bull 'bought' the right bloke.
Quote:
Quote:
Ironically, he could have been a big help to them and F1. But they all jumped on the same Ferrari bandwagon back in 2009. |
|||
|
13 May 2011, 11:33 (Ref:2879817) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,067
|
I still stand by what I felt in 2009:
The budget cap proposition should have gone ahead. You would have had some outrageous looking machines for 2010! We can merely speculate. Selby |
||
__________________
Run-offs, chicanes, hairpins... Think you can do better? Let's see it! Check out the "My Tracks" forum here on Ten-Tenths. |
13 May 2011, 11:54 (Ref:2879831) | #19 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
|
|
|
13 May 2011, 12:05 (Ref:2879838) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,067
|
I'm thinking of starting to do some "What if?" columns on here.
Would anyone be interested? This would be a fantastic topic. Perhaps some of the guys with some good technical insight on here could try to pieces together what some of the cars may have looked like for 2010..? Selby |
||
__________________
Run-offs, chicanes, hairpins... Think you can do better? Let's see it! Check out the "My Tracks" forum here on Ten-Tenths. |
13 May 2011, 12:11 (Ref:2879845) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,192
|
The budget cap isn't the way to go. It would just be another restriction, although one difficult to enforce. I more believe in 'divergent governance'.
|
||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
13 May 2011, 12:15 (Ref:2879849) | #22 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,067
|
But there were two options from what I remember:
Technical freedom to a budget cap (35 million) OR Unlimited spending with restrictions. It meant that the Ferrari's/McLaren's of the world could eek the best out of their restricted packages, with all the simulator work they could do in the world, using their sophisticated software to figure out the best way of getting a competitive package given their restraints. Whereas the other guys would be counting every penny, choosing their direction wisely and trying to get the most out of that. I would love to see the looser/budget capped regs. Does anyone know where I could find them? Did they ever exist? Selby |
||
__________________
Run-offs, chicanes, hairpins... Think you can do better? Let's see it! Check out the "My Tracks" forum here on Ten-Tenths. |
13 May 2011, 12:23 (Ref:2879853) | #23 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,067
|
Here's an exert from an interview with Max in regards to the 2009 regs:
"What technical and other freedoms will the cost-capped teams have which are not available to the other teams? MM: A different (but standard) under body, movable wings, no engine rev limit, no restriction on the number or type of updates, no homologation requirements, no limits on materials, testing, simulators, wind tunnels and so forth - most of the cost saving measures introduced over the last few years will not apply to these teams. However measures to save money during the race weekend, such as the ban on refuelling and the Saturday parc ferme, will apply to both categories of team. We are also thinking about a much bigger capacity KERS for the cost-capped teams. But all this must be covered by the £30 million - no exceptions and no free or subsidised outside help. Anything supplied by another team or an outside supplier will be included at its full commercial cost except for items supplied to all teams at subsidised rates under the single supplier arrangements negotiated by the FIA (e.g. for tyres), which allow all teams to benefit equally from reduced costs." Very interesting, indeed. I can't help but feel it would have been a much better direction to go in.....? Comments, thoughts, opinions? Here's a link to the full interview: http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns21249.html Selby |
||
__________________
Run-offs, chicanes, hairpins... Think you can do better? Let's see it! Check out the "My Tracks" forum here on Ten-Tenths. |
13 May 2011, 12:27 (Ref:2879860) | #24 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
Would have been good. The two tier part was later taken out. |
||
|
13 May 2011, 14:41 (Ref:2879904) | #25 | |
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 385
|
Definitely would have been a good direction to explore. All for it :S
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Honda & Toyota | mabs_nsx | ChampCar World Series | 20 | 26 May 2005 23:36 |
Honda or Toyota? | Wrex | Formula One | 96 | 30 Dec 2003 03:37 |
Honda or Toyota | mabs_nsx | Formula One | 3 | 26 Dec 2003 11:56 |
Honda Vs Toyota | Mark F1 | Formula One | 25 | 4 Apr 2002 08:52 |