F1 » Haug: We need costs cut by 50 per cent

Champ Car had a terrific formula for very fast cars, exciting racing and sensible costs. Unfortunate that reunification of the IRL and Champ Car didn't utilize the Champ Car technical formula.

F1, with it's mandatory cost cutting will become the new version of Champ Car (just with more manufacturers - if any stay), but still more expensive and less exciting.

The IRL will have a new chassis and multiple engine manufacturers in 2010, costing a fraction of F1. It may be a hard decision for the auto makers to determine where they get their best return on investment. Bernie and the gang have their work cut out for them.

don, interesting points. i remember that in the past, there was talk of unification. it would make sense to everyone (bar BE) to have a one chassis series with multiple engne suppliers. merc, bmw, toyota et al rely on the world wide sales of their cars, so a world wide formula would make sense. large grids, good tracks,close racing----lovely. but i cannot see it ever happening, sadly

@ sunny
where's the double-faced hypocrisy? and I'm assuming you mean McLaren? and Norbert Haug does actually say " by at least 50%"..we're all painfully aware that McLaren isn't your favourite team but you can't blame them for everything,oh!! and while I'm on the subject Ron Dennis and his team DIDN'T cause the financial meltdown the world is facing either

To win the F1 championship is obviously a great accomplishment, but at what cost? Have you ever purchased a product because it's on an F1 cars side pod or engine bay? What does the auto manufacturer achieve by participating? Would the hundreds of millions that it costs to participate in F1 sell more cars if the money were used towards increasing standard marketing budgets (TV, print, etc).

So, if you're an auto maker facing financial tough times and you can compete in the IRL for a tenth of the cost of F1, what would you do? Where would you get your best return on investment? The Indy 500 is still the largest sporting event in the world.

The auto mfg's and F1 have a dilemma on their hands

@stivala sunny

What sources are you using when you quote budgets?, factual information or assumption. Maybe snippets taken from some journalistic exaggeration?
Are you privy to the accounts of the teams you are quoting? If so I would be very interested to see them, and I cant imagine Ferrari sparing the expenditure on their efforts either.

What about using engines derived from normal production cars...
Engines blocks for example from production cars with at least 5000 sold units.
Same with brakes and transmissions.
Smaller teams could buy these engines, transmissions and from whomever mixing them too.
The car itself though, in my opinion should be built by each team.
Multiple tyre manufacturers but only 2 or 3 different compounds for the entire season.
Just my 2 Cents...

frank, interestingly in the turbo era, bmw actually used engine blocks from production cars, and these were used engines, as it meant blocks were already stressed for use. so it is totally possible.

sunny, sorry to disagree with you, but before the block was used, it was in fact put through a usage cycle so as to ensure there were no faults and it had gone through heat cycles. this is a known fact, as stated by bmw. they would not use an untested block at the time.

Man rich ard, you must be as old as me to remember those details from that era!!! LOL
Great time for F1 in my opinion... car-wise not really in safety though...

Yes, I really do not understand why they can't go the "production block" path... would save a ton.

@ sunny
Don't McLaren have the 4th biggest budget behind Toyota,Ferrari and previously Honda? at least that's what I (NOT WE ) thought.As to the rest of your post I haven't got a clue as to what you're on about sorry