New Car Launches
2018 F1 season
New teams latest: Campos changes name, Stefan GP agitating
New teams latest: Campos changes name, Stefan GP agitating
Posted By: James Allen  |  02 Mar 2010   |  7:57 pm GMT  |  218 comments

There is plenty of movement going on behind the scenes this week among the new teams and aspirant teams with the new season starting next week.

Campos is undergoing a name change today and this will be made public shortly. Sections of the Spanish media have suggested that it will be called “Hispania Racing”, in line with the new majority owner Jose Ramon Carabante’s business enterprises.

Kolles: Turning Campos German

However it is clear that this team is becoming increasingly German since former Force India team principal Colin Kolles took the reins. The team is set to run out of the former Opel DTM factory in Germany and there is German money being pumped into the team to get it functioning. It is a race against time.

The team will use the Dallara chassis designed and built for Campos and the Cosworth engines they have already paid for.

Adrian Campos is no longer involved; he was apparently offered an honorary position in the team, but turned it down.

Spanish sources say that Carabante has put €12 million into the team already and following a meeting with Bernie Ecclestone last week was encouraged to invest a further €12 million. Ecclestone has apparently assured him that he will get his investment back. It appears that he may be a saviour/broker figure rather than a long term investor, but time will tell.

There have been a lot of rumours that Volkswagen is in the background of this deal, but there are several problems with this theory. The first is that if VW/Audi group were to come into F1, they would probably start with Red Bull Racing as the energy drinks company has poured many millions of Euros into VW/Audi motorsport programmes over recent years in an attempt to get them to come in. And they are at the cutting edge of F1 design technology. Although Kolles is well connected in Germany and the factory will be based there, there are other teams with a better claim on VW/Audi’s attention at this stage than a team which is using a customer car and is starting from scratch.

The other problem is that there is no point in a manufacturer coming into F1 before 2013 as the engine formula will change totally then, so an investment in a 2.4 litre V8 for only a year or two of racing doesn’t make sense. It works for Cosworth because they had an existing engine they could easily adapt.

The rules for the 2013 engine will probably be specified later this year by the FIA and are likely to be very green and futuristic. Max Mosely wanted the formula to be based on fuel use rather than CCs. Jean Todt has indicated that he wants it to be road relevant. Either way it is likely to be a 1.5 litre four cylinder turbo or something of that kind with a big 120 KW electric hybrid motor, harvesting energy under braking.

The FIA will be sounding out manufacturers and potential manufacturers to see what engine would work best and once the new rules are specified, it is possible to imagine one or two manufacturers coming in if the engine is relavant to the motor industry of the future.

Ferrari launched its first hybrid car today, with a KERS system derived from the F1 programme, so this is clearly the direction of travel.

Meanwhile word is spreading from the USA that the staff at USF1 have been told today that the operation is closing down and the dream is over. Eddie Jordan has stuck his neck out again and said that Stefan will be on the grid in Bahrain, with Jacques Villeneuve in the car. He is acting on an inside tip off and this could be a smokescreen, a bit of tree shaking, but with USF1 collapsing and its driver Jose Maria Lopez in discussions with Campos, it looks like Stefan is making a mighty final push to get on the grid next week. The team has not managed to test yet because of a lack of tyres, but has the Toyota chassis designed for this year and a supply of its engines.

Incidentally the information that former McLaren sporting director Dave Ryan is with Stefan GP is incorrect. There were discussions but Ryan did not join the team. However former McLaren designer Mike Coughlan is there. Also negotiating with Stefan is USF1 investor and You Tube founder, Chad Hurley.

It has been suggested that Bruno Senna is required to come up with some money to secure the Campos seat he signed for some months ago and that Karun Chandhok is being lined up for the second seat.

Featured News
Editor's Picks
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!


by Newest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

all academic now, no new teams allowed take USf1’s place in 2010 season…thankfully.


Well, it seems that Stefan GP will definitely not be allocated the vacant grid slot, as revealed today by the French newspapers “Le Parisien”.

Jonathan De Andrade

Out of topic but it worth watch:

McLaren spies Ferrari again!


this is so funny! Id never thought of this happening like this … they act like kids bullying each other!! is it common in the paddock?


I think the ferrari guys should have told those McLaren punters to piss off.


Why? From what I saw they were doing nothing wrong and I am sure Ferrari will be looking at the McLaren so what’s the problem?


James, this comment is not meant for posting, just to make you aware of this interesting article about the teams that were and weren’t chosen:

I’m not sure how much of it is technically accurate, but I’m sure you do.


As I’ve said before they should do just as the author of that piece says: let anyone try to qualify that turns up and passes inspection.


How the hell did Prodrive not get a slot…..would have been great to see Aston Martin on the grid……


Max Mosley!


Future engines could include both 5 cylinder, which was the smoothest ever, (Audi I think) and Wankel rotary engines.

You really need generators on all four wheels or at least two front and the crankshaft, in order to salvage power under braking: the braking effort has to be transferred from brake disk/pad friction into the shunting effect on the generator. As I have mentioned before, the major problems will become heat produced by losses in the power transfer cables. Supercooling of conductors would be a great advantage.

Also let’s not forget the Williams and Toyota flywheel KERS system. FLywheels have been used for many years on commercial vehicles, however for F1 speeds the safety problems of a flywheel are similar to that of a wheel braking free, only much, very much, worse. It is also possible that precession would be a problem unless equalised (Step forward Erick Laithwite, one of our greatest scientists and inventor of the linear motor, who was later ridiculed by his contemporaries for his work on gyroscopes, which still one day, may be proven)

However for things to really advance, we need free movable flaps front and rear, and maybe a total aero plan surface area restriction, but allow smart surfaces.


Just give em the tyres to test with???Then you have another team – I hope VW / Audi set up comes in – shown you can win Le Mans with a diesel. The new green and green coloured Ferrari shows what KERS was meant for to help planet earth and lower your petrol price at the pump…


Porsche might make a good F1 team. The hybrid motor philosophy would tie in well with their 318 cicely car (3.4L V8 hybrid)


I think its really telling that arguably the most successful racing marque ever – Porsche – avoids F1.


my opinion is that there should be only three engine regulations, a maximum spend on engines per team, a maximum fuel tank size which can be adjusted season by season and a maximum amount of engines per season. That way manufacturors can be as innovative as they like and can experiment with all sorts of different layouts; V10’s, F6’s, turbochargers, hybrid power etc.


From a reliable source i am hearing there is NO WAY Stephan GP gets a spot on the grid.


Autosport just confirmed that Stefan GP are not on this year’s entry list. Good, I was not in favour of Stefan GP being given a spot. There was a bit of the fly-by-night about Mr. Stefanovich and I think there could have been as much of a circus around him just as much as if USF1 had made it…


…from my reliable source…..

“I am assured by an FIA person that Stefan won’t get an entry due to a combination of Coughlan, Stefanovic’s personal background, the fact that he dragged the FIA before the European Commission over the format of the new team selection process, the team did not file an entry under it’s proper name, fear of litigation by the other teams who were declined entry, possibly the fact that Stefan doesn’t own anything (Toyota has been paid nothing for any of it’s equipment, staff or factory space) and perhaps the fact that Stefanovic is allied with Bernie Ecclestone, who is not very popualr around the Pairs offices these days. “


I’m glad that Campos/Hispania is going to hopefully make the grid. The more the better. I hope Stefan can make it as well. It’s sad to see USF1 fail, but I am not surprised. Bernie had it right all along with Campos and USF1.


I think limiting the fuel the teams can run over a race would be a good idea. Open up the regulations to allow for different engine/motor configurations as long as the fuel is limited. This would open up for some innovation.


I think it reflects badly on F1 that Senna is scrapping around for a seat in a third tier car.

Someone like Williams should have given him a chance.


If he’d been quicker than Hulkenburg or better than Rubens they would have wouldn’t they?


While I am in favour of smaller turdo/hybrid engines that relate to production vehicles. I had a horrible vision in the future where I’d go to see a race and the engines have lost all of their stomach churning sound.

To me the sound of an f1 engine in the flesh is what in part makes the sport so exciting.

Heaven forbid we see in the furture hybrid cars with speakers attached to sound like V10’s!


I find both Campos and USF1 a general embarrasment to Formula 1. Especially Ken Anderson, such high dreams now nothing… Its pathetic, nothing but a day dreamer without a business head..

Christopher Martin

Stupid Turbos! =(

Bring back the banshee wail of those awesome V10’s!!!

I thought they were supposed to be improving the spectacle for us fans, not turning the sport into a showcase of green technology. >:(


I’m loosing patience with the Campos/US F1/Stefan farce.

Campos are just about going to make it to Bahrain and limp onto the back of the grid after failing and having to be brought out.

Just because Stefan have the Toyota cars and seem to be in a position to race doesnt mean that they have a right to race ahead of Prodrive, Lola etc as they were not in the hunt for a 2010 slot in the frst place.

And i am most dissapointed with US F1. I thought that these guys could have been the fastest out of the newbies. Ken and co have really messed things up and the US public (If they care) will be laughing at there efforts. The US is where the should be F1 expansion and not neccessarily the middle east.

F1 without a US race and now a US team, IMO, means F1 is still not complete. There should be at least one race in the US and i’d seen the US F1 team as a big factor to getting a US race back on the calender in the future.

Just cant wait for this to end and the racing to start!!


The championship should go with the teams that have an entry, the eleven that have tested during pre-season and Campos if they show up with a racing car at Bahrein.

USF1 will not be there so there entry should be cancelled and there entry should be given to others interested in racing in F1 but only in 2011.

Why such a rush to include Stefan GP at last minute? There´s no problem on having only 12 teams.


James, what is your gut feeling about Stefan GP? Do you think they’ll be on the grid in little over a week, or in 2010 at all?


Having read every comments here and re the engines I think we need to think out of the box and set the engineers free to show us why they are the best and what they can do.

The FIA should simply set an annual fuel allowance which would include all testing and races and let the teams use this fuel as they see fit and design whatever engine they see fit.

If the FIA did this we would see many different routes engineers took in trying to gain an edge and the innovation we’d see would lead us to many benefits for us all when this as yet unknown technology filters down to normal car drivers.

It would make for a fascinating season as innovations came on stream with some teams testing and others not with some getting low on the allocation as the season progressed.

To ensure no team ran out of fuel the FIA would need a penalty system so severe that no team would consider allowing themselves to run out of fuel.

Should the FIA have the warped view that their role is to make F1 greener (F1 being green, somebody’s having a laugh, F1 can never be green and just turning the lights out at Singapore would probably save more greenhouse gases than anything the teams d with their engines) all they would need to do is lower the annual fuel allowance year on year.

I say set the engineers free, we’ll all benefit, every one of us.

Rons best mate!

VW have long wanted to get in to f1 but there hasnt been the right time or team. red bull would be a good fit, and the vw logo on their stand has been there a long time!!

Quite wisely vw didnt do a jagf1, ie spend a whole lot on a minor manufacturer with a big old name!

Having said all this, i reckon there is no better team to get into f1 with than the mighty mclaren!! with mb pulling out of the best team in f1, there is a gaping hole for a new manufacturer.The guy who mentioned Hyudai earlier is bang on the money, they have wanted in and Dave Richards was rumoured to have them in his pocket a few years ago.

About 3 or 4 years ago I would have tipped DR to buy into Williams and have a Willams Hyundai, theres no doubt DR knows his stuff and was stitched up at BAR. And lets be honest what “proper” f1 fan would not want to see the revival of the biggest name in F1 – Sir Frank – take a bow and tie up the DR – it just makes sense…. I love my wife, my kids and Ron and Frank!!

What do you reckon James, how likely is DR to return, or someone to shake up Williams to revive the good ol days?


Williams without Sir Frank is like Tyrell without Ken. Just won’t be right. DR had his chance as a team principle and didn’t really set the pit-lane on fire. If he comes back it should be with his own team, not jumping into one, so he can prove Prodrive can do more than rally and road.

Stay where you are Frank…. plan for succession by all means, but keep those plans firmly in the future.


Hallo james. I’ve been following your blog for months and I have to say it is the best out there! Keep up your good work.

“so an investment in a 2.5 litre V8 for only a year or two of racing doesn’t make sense” That 2.5 litre…Typo? We’re currently racing with 2.4L V8 as far as I know..

Alistair Blevins

What should Bruno Senna do now?

Does he stick with Campos/Hispania/Whatever and risk an embarrassing and lacklustre season in (what I’m certain will be) uncompetitive machinery or jump ship and take an F1 sabbatical?

I’m sure there will be a force majeure in his contract that will allow him an out given that the team ownership has changed in the past few days, AND the fact that he’s not being asked to bring more money.

Tough one for a newbie. He needs to be certain his talent can outshine his car – like Alonso did back in 2001.


When you put it like that it makes perfect sense.

Next thought is WHY OH WHY does JV want to come back to F1 in this situation??

People are questioning MS coming back and wether it will risk his reputation, it will be nothing compared to what will happen with JV.


I have always wanted more teams in F-1 and I am happy about Virgin and Lotus joining the grid. However, the increase of the grid should not happen at costs of prestige of F1. Campos and Stefan have not even had a shakedown test and yet they want to take part in the races.

What is the most likely scenario if two Campos cars really do appear in Bahrain? They are most probably going to spend most of Friday session time fighting with hydraulics (or whatever) issues rather than testing the car. Then, on Saturday morning, one of the cars will lose the front wing and thus cannot take part in qualifying session and race as no spare parts will be available. The second car will be 10 seconds off the pace and just get on other drivers’ nerves with its slowness. Sorry but I can’t imagine a more positive development of things after the problems that Virgin and Lotus experienced during the pre-season testing.

I believe that Zoran Stefanovich has already had enough publicity and it is about time to start to forget his ex-Toyota car (rumours say that the second car is actually not ready), Kazuki Nakajima, two-containers-to-Bahrain and all the other stuff. Well, at least they made some news highlights during the winter and life would have been more boring if Stefan GP had not been there.

FIA is definitely partly responsible for what has happened after the selection process of the new teams. And Lotus, which is most probably the strongest team of the newcomers, was not even among the first three of the accepted entrants. It got the entry only in September after BMW had pulled out. So Jean Todt and his predecessor Max Mosley really have something to think about.

Matthew Villari

the new engines will sound crap wont they.


Yes. They’ll be whiney little sopranos.


How come campos are allowed to change their name but sauber cant drop the bmw bit from their name?


Why does everyone think Campos/Hispania will be so off the pace!?Dallara know how to make a good race car and the Cosworth doent look too shabby.Sure they will be unreliable due to their total lack of testing but they will be around the Virgin/Lotus speed.Go Bruno!


Sad to see USF1 go. As an American I hope we at least get a race over here someday. Seems so strange there is not one now. I hope the FIA let StefanGP in so we can get on with the season.

James, thanks for your tireless work making this site my first stop for in depth F1 news!

the speed gods

james, when are the cars shipped to baharein? Wasn’t today the dateline, to have them at heathrow?

ready for baharain

yes james, don’t you have that info.?


Hispania Racing F1 Team another A1 GP name i think


I have read that Hurley has decided to give F1 a miss, and has expressed a reluctance to get involved in motor racing generally.

The whole of the marketing industry is watching this new entrant soap opera I can imagine what they must be thinking….

the speed gods

he saw that f1 is a mess.

The thing is there are 200 million fanatics, that even if angry but their choices, can’t help but watch. we are like drug addicts, that use the drug, even if it is bad quality.


Well he’s a few mill poorer…


How do you make a small fortune in motor racing?

…start with a large one! 😉


G’day ladies and gents. I think the mobile chicane consequence is not a bad thing altogether. In Le Mans and other sports car formulas, you have cars with high speed differentials on the track at the same time. If F1 drivers are the best in the world they should be able to cope with the speed differentials between the untested teams and the contenders. The bigger safety issue is the chance of something just failing catastrophically in an untested car, such as Virgin’s front wing. James, would Hispania and Stefan be given the chance to do safety testing before allowed on the track in Bahrain?


Hopefully Chad Hurley sticks around F1 as a team owner for 2011. Bernie and Jean Todt surely recognize that a team in the US is still a top priority. Bernie needs to give personnel advice to Chad as he did with Ferrari when they engaged Jean Todt for the Michael era that rejuvenated the red team.


You raise an interesting question: Is a US team a priority anymore?

Pre-downturn, when F1 had manufacturers wanting to maximise the US market, it would have been very useful. But who cares now? Mercedes and Ferrari no doubt do very nicely in the US already but I doubt the yanks are ready to embrace Lada.

So without BMW, Toyota, Renault and Honda, surely the US has fallen way down the pecking order, behind other markets where the audiences are huge for both FOM and the remaining global sponsors.

In short, no one is going to fight too hard for a US presence in the next decade unless Bernie can get a race through Central Park.

the speed gods

what do you think he was doing the past few months. He wants hurley, to catch the bug, like the rest of us.


Why should F1 continue to try and break into the US when there is already a saturated market with INDY car, and Nascar – when they can break into new markets such as India, China, the Middle east, Russia, South America – so much of the world is available to be brought into Formula 1, the US doesn’t want it and competing with hugely popular racing is just not worth it!


Exactly. The next big car market is NOT the USA! Its gotta be China, or India just on sheer population alone.


Hi James,

I have made the point before that this engine freeze needs to be re-evaluated and quickly.

We now have 4 engine suppliers (5 if Stephan GP are allowed a slot – however the difference in performance should not be seen as a differentiator between the teams – as the teams themselves have agreed upon.

It now seems that Formula 1 which prides itself on being the forefront of innovation and technology – that should in effect flow through to general population is in grave danger of becoming obsolete.

With the focus more and more on greener and sustainable technology where is the incentive for manufacturers to use F1 as a development, testing and promotional ground for their products? If it can only do it once every three, 4 or 5 years!!

Porsche’s 918 Spyder concept claims 724 horsepower from a hybrid V8 engine whilst being able to hit a top speed of 200 mph and 0-60 in less than 3.2 seconds – this from a car that weighs in at over 1600 kg’s!

Surely Formula 1 is in danger of becoming reduntant to these manafacturers if the technology is first being developed for road cars and then applied to F1 from time to time.

The 918 Spyder claims under 3L per 100km’s – obsviously this wouldn’t be representative in sport/race spec – however even if this tripled we could in the near future see complete races run with under 40L’s of fuel on board with no loss of power; great sound or speed!

Surely a restriction on aerodynamical updates to the cars each year would be a better way of saving costs than restricting what is to be the pinnacle factor in motorsport in years to come?


Manufacturers dont enter F1 for R&D, they enter it for publicity, advertising, pride, showing-off, and whatnot. F1 is entertainment, and most of it’s “technology” is useless aero stuff. It has almost no relationship to road cars except some badges – and you know what they say about badges!


Oh and 40 litre of fuel for the whole race; this is about 9 gallons you are talking about over 20 mpg in a F1 car??? Not in the near future, mate.

In order to get good fuel consumption, the internal combustion engine has to be working at its optimum speed. And this, I am afraid, is not the speed the engine operates when racing.

Yes, I know 98 mpg for the 918. Put your foot down and drive a bit more spiritly and see what figure you will get.


Thanks for pointing out the obvious Sherlock. And for completely misunderstanding my comment – at no point did I suggest that this engine would be capable of being fitted to current spec F1 car and be as competitive. My point was that the engine freeze is choking one of the aspects that makes F1 what it is.

And as a result it is in danger of becoming obsolete in these areas – hence the restriction on engine development at least towards greener and more sustainable technology does not make sense.

I also pointed out that in the near future we could see results of this kind in fuel efficiency being achieved out of a F1 car not straight away.

The other danger I was pointing out is that if manafacturers are restricted in developing technologies that have a greater flow on effect to their own race performance but also their core business then there is a real possibility that they will withdraw from F1 as we have continued to see.

If you are a premium sports car or supercar manafacturer and the technology you are producing for road cars is superior to that of what you are running in Formula 1 – why as a company would you continue to sink money into a sport when it isn’t possible for you to demostrate and market your performance and technology?

Next time read a comment and try and see the point behind it; if I wanted a simpleton answer I would have posted on autosport.


Well… you obviously didn’t put your point over very well, did you??

you are entitled to your opinions….


Wrong, wrong, wrong …

Sure this is the future. But if you put the 918 next to even the worst F1 car on a track. There is no comparison.


Hispania Racing.. I want to know who thought naming an f1 team that, was a good idea. I mean would you ever buy a car called Hispania.

Anyway a quick question James,

Do teams still have to agree for Stefan to get an entry now that USF1 can’t make it this year, or is it up to the FIA?

the speed gods

they sold one called hispano-suiza. And they were the pagani zondas of today. So think twice about the name.

Christopher Snowdon

Would be super strange if stefan gp came in and did a brawn – nah – can’t happen can it? Ok more seriously, looking at legal issue’s here (which stefan gp could technically point to). There situation is not to dissimilar to Saubers, in respect of taking over a team facilities (previously owned by a manufacture), renaming and putting a very good case to be allowed to go racing, or more importantly into business (even more so in terms of driver talent with JV – ok debatable, but a court would see him as the 1997 world champion vs two drivers at sauber). Now if that 13th slot is free, they would have certainly have a case with precedent, as sauber we’re not guaranteed anything until Todt sensibly gave them the go ahead (thank god he did). Now Todt did as much because of his relationship and history with that team and knowing it was the right thing to do, however, court will see him making a solid business decision for the FIA. Remember there are also employment issues here as well which I won’t go into, but would be argued. Now I know what you guys are going to say, Sauber has the history of the sport, respect of the grid and fans and what have you, but in court its not seen so black and white. It would go down to treating people fairly with similar situations, and Stefan gp’s case maybe stronger than that of Saubers.



Did BMW sign the Concorde Agreement before they were sold??

Also, what about Toyota, have they sign this??

They (Stefan GP) will have a case if Toyota has signed the agreement.


No to BMW, yes to Toyota, but it lapsed when they filled the slot with Lotus


In response to those above who are saying that the teams like Campos, USF1 and Stefan GP are dragging our great sport down, making it look a joke and ruining it. With the greatest respect, I don’t think you’re entirely correct.

Yes, they have messed around with everything. Yes, it would appear that they were seriously overly optimistic(!) about what they could achieve. Yes, it doesn’t look great for the FIA, the FOM, FOTA and all the other acronyms.

But we all know what F1 politics is like – never boring!

I promise you all, when you see those beautiful machines round the corner at Bahrain after the warm up lap, and you hear their revving V8 engines, see the sun gleam upon their livery, and when that green light goes… all this be left way behind, like the dust, the tires marks, the exhaust fumes….

…and Rubens Barrichello, who will have locked the anti-stall on his Williams…;-)

So lets all watch the racing and not let the politics get to us too much! After all, that’s what we truly love. Roll on 2010!

(Apologises to any Rubi fans, I am of course, lightly jesting)

Stephen Kellett

Not sad to see USF1 fail, not at all.

It is sad that those people encouraged to join the team have been let down by the management.

The bit I don’t understand is that I’ve worked with many Americans (I’ve yet to meet an American I didn’t like) and I do business with many Americans. I’ve never, ever, come across the attitude expressed by USF1. They are always positive, pleasant, not nationalistic (not the same as patriotism), not jingistic, etc, and they will always use the best talent, regardless of where it comes from. Completely the opposite of USF1.

I look forward to a future US Formula 1 team that understands management, finance and PR and that has a respectful, realistic attitude rather than the brash, arrogant, jingoistic attitudes that emanated from USF1.

USF1 are now members of a rather select club – teams that entered the F1 championship but failed to compete.


Living in the US, I am sad to hear about the situation of USF1. I had hoped for a better outcome. It will be interresting as all the facts of their downfall slowly start to come out. Someone on the inside of USF1 is bound to start revealing information sooner than later.

With regards to Stefan GP, the FIA has to be very careful. The possibility of legal action is real. If I were one the other teams that wasn’t chosen for the 2010 grid, I’d be really ticked off if SGP gets in. That being said, if STG can somehow get hold of the official USF1 entry (maybe via a merger) then go forth and race.

Regardless of what happens, it is definitely the drama that is F1.


“1.5 litre four cylinder turbo or something of that kind with a big 120 KW electric hybrid motor, harvesting energy under braking.”

I’m not sure how the average F1 fan will feel about this, but I love the idea myself being interested in Ev’s and greener cars. F1 drive trains will then be directly related to the road cars of the future which will start coming out in 2011/12. F1 cars like road cars, can then potentially become fully electric depending on how the car market develops. This will be great to push the technology forwards.

F1 cars should always be loud though. Can I make a proposal that if the electric motor becomes more important than the petrol motor as the cars evolve, that they then switch to micro turbine range extenders and don’t use sound insulation. 🙂


“F1 cars should always be loud” hear hear, it would not be the same without the scream of the engines, but you could say the same about the smell of the fuel…maybe they will have the marshals spray a petrol-scent every time a car passes!


But surely with the Toyota chassis they could post times quicker than 12 seconds than the pace.

It’s a good point you raise though,


I think the whole arguement of having last years mid field to top performing Toyota chassis is a bit of a red herring to say they will be a mid field team anything like that.

The cars underwent physical changes this year, the most obvious being the introduction of the full size fuel tank.

You cant just make the fuel tank bigger underneath and expect the aero efficiency to be the same! – it requires a whole overhaul of the design, so basically a new car aerowise, look at the amount of time and money the established teams spend on upgrading their existing already designed for the new regs parts.

Stefan GP will be way off, like others have said struggling to qualify even 110% rule if applicable.


But Toyota designed a car for this year during last year. Although I do agree it’s optimistic to think the Toyota will be much good – they never did much in the past and this year they haven’t even had any testing.

Ok Brawn did last year under similar circumstances, but Ross Brawn had been leading the Honda team the previous year when they were designing the car. Toyota had the same erratic team they’d had before so not much reason to expect this car would be vastly better. If it makes it on the road I would estimate they’ll be ahead of Lotus and Virgin but behind everyone else – maybe fighting with Toro Rosso. Pure guesswork obviously!


Where did the info come from that the chassis and aero is circa 2009?


add to this 0 testing miles and a 1 week leadtime before the first race, its a disaster waiting to happen, more backmarkers to potentially ruin the extremely tight and low tolerence (read get held up with back markers)racing and strategies of the top drivers to are at the sharp end of the grid.


No, no! You forget they ‘shipped’ containers full of ‘equipment’ to bahrain already!! Those race-winning cars are just lurking there – waiting…


StefanGP have bought the car that Toyota developed and built for the 2010 season, not the 2009 car.


No, if they have a Toyota chassis, it is the one that was developed for THIS year, not last year’s one.


I actually think the 1.5L four-cylinder hybrids for 2013 sound like great news. The more relevant to the everyday driver F1 is, the better, as Jean Todt clearly recognises.

As long as they don’t go biofuel – now that would really be the thinnest, most pointless and self-defeating exercise in Green PR nonsense in a long time. It’d be healthier for the environment to use diesel.


The diesel engine is very versatile, I run my state of the art, cutting edge, Xantia on used veg oil in the summer at 50p/lit. Unfortunately the advances in road engine tech mean that the new common rail HP diesels cannot run on old veg oil, a green step backwards. Lets also remember that Le Mans P1 class has been won by a diesel of German origin.


Ppl keep running on about ‘green’ cars and so forth. All these discussions just assume gasoline engines. Its probably too ‘low tech’ to suggest they just switch to methanol like Indy cars isn’t it.


Actually, rPaco, thats ETHanol you’re thinking of. The one thats mandated by our wonderful government to be 10% of what you get at the pump. Regardsless of the facts that it drives up the price of tacos and takes over those vast swathes of farmland, it wont go way because it now an entrenched “entitlement” for a certain bunch of “farmers” and is totally political now.


Well Methanol production has a bit of a bad name for taking over large areas of farmland which was used to grow food, this has pushed up the price of grain and sugar. When we finally start using algae and the desert areas to produce our fuel we will be on a sustainable track. Asi ti is we shall run out of food and water before oil.


Definitely agree with the above comments. Campos, USF1, Stefan GP have dragged us and the sport along and made a complete embarassment of the sport due to being incapable. Makes me wonder whether they fooled the FIA and everyone into granting them the berths for this season.


Fair point James but nothing else is relevant on an F1 car to road vehicles so why should the engines have to be? You don’t see carbon brakes, aero wings, sequential seamless shift, slicks, carbon fibre steering wheels, diffusers, brake bias adjusting etc on you average family car.


I had a Ford Cortina like that once.


You didn’t see ABS or traction control on your average family car a few years ago either.


And you dont see it in F1 now. With the exception of aero, my Grandma’s Caddy is more technologically advanced than F1 cars!


ABS was in road cars before it was ever in F1. I believe it was only ever used in F1 in 1993.


have a look at bicycles (racing bikes) and you’ll see the obvious crossover of aerospace design especially carbon fibre frames and most traditionally metal parts even saddles!


“nothing else is relevant on an F1 car to road vehicles so why should the engines have to be?”

Well said.

The idea that knowledge gained through racing an open wheel car on a paved track will result in improvements which will “trickle down” to road cars the general public can buy is quaint at best and laughable to those who know cars.

If any sort of motorsport can result in technology which might improve road cars, it is rally. If you doubt what I

say, just take an Audi Quattro over a snowy mountain pass, and then try the same thing with virtually any Ferrari

road car.

F1 is entertainment. Only a naive person who doesn’t know

much about cars could believe that F1 has anything to do with road car technology. If you don’t believe this is the case, you simply need to improve your knowledge of the subject and quit believing adverts you read.


Think you got that the wrong way round. Audi changed the face of rallying forever by using their already 4wd road car.

And yes I suppose their are still a few naive people (as you put it) about who believe the £0.5m works rally they see going around Kildare forest is the same as the one they aspire to buy from the showroom! Minus the ‘go faster’ decals of course.


Like a lot of the world we live in… it’s about perception. If F1 is perceived to “trickle down” technology to road cars and to be more “green” (in the future), then it fits in with changing attitudes towards the ecology\environment and thus retains it’s relevance…

As others have mentioned some tech has moved into road cars and other realms; it’s hard to determine as to whether these did so, as a consequence of F1 using them (first) or whether they would have done so, regardless?

My hunch is the latter 🙂

For me, the “trickle down” line has always been an “excuse” for the FIA to use or for a Team Manager to utilise when going cap in hand to the owner\manufacturer.


No, but we do see them on a variety of sports cars, and the dual-clutch transmissions are starting to filter to more prosaic passenger cars (such as the VW range). The manufacturers need a reason to be in F1. They want it to be more than just advertising, and want to use the millions they spend to showcase their technology. 2.4 litre V8s using pneumatic valves don’t do that in a meaningful way.

The future is going to be smaller displacement turbos with an electric component, both on the street, and likely on the track. F1 either can lead that move, or miss it.

It seems too many people don’t remember the 1.5 litre turbos of the 1980s either, which were the most powerful GP motors ever.


And a few years ago you did not see ABS brakes, direct fuel injection, etc.

Technology on F1 cars today is not on road cars of today, but technology from earlier generation F1 cars has transferred from motorsport to road cars in the past and will continue to do so.

I think fuel economy/regenerative technologies that could come from Formula 1 development with a change in regulation could filter to road cars of the future.


1.5L turbos? All sounds a bit 80s to me! 😉 I’m not old enough to remember the turbo era but my old man does reminisce about it in quite glowing terms. I don’t know if that’s the rose tinted specs tho…

As for Eddie Jordan, I know a lot of people don’t like him but I do and he knows his stuff – I think he is probably right about Stefan GP. I didn’t realise Mr Villeneuve hadn’t tipped 40 yet, so perhaps not a bad person to have for a ‘new’ team in their first year.


Rose tinted specs I say. I followed from the end of the turbo era, and things seemed much better as a result of the switch back to NA. For one, overtaking in the turbo era was often very unspectacular as a driver would simply crank up the boost and pass on the straight, often without the need for ultra late braking.

Things will be different in the ‘new’ turbo era though – I’m sure the engines will be more reliable and tightly controlled.


Well villeneuve is younger than Schumi…and only a year older than barrichello.

Martin Collyer

Like your Father I remember the turbos from the 80’s. They were spectacular beasts with an excess of power over roadholding. They were not especially reliable though, at least not until the Porsche built TAG engines were developed for McLaren and the Hondas were eventually OK.

The blow-ups were great big flame belching events!

They can sound good too, the favoured format was a V6 although the BMW 4-cylinder was always said to be the most powerful.

What is unknown at the moment is how these new engines may be hobbled with rev limits, fuel consumption or energy efficiency regulations. This could well impact on the sound the engines are able to make, the turbo acts as something of a muffler of the sound anyway. I think folks will have to forget about wailing V8’s at 18,000 rpm. Enjoy it while you can.

Dave in post #1 asks if 1.5 litre turbos could equal the revs of current engines. Unlikely (I’m not an engineer by the way) I would say, turbo engines make their power from the boost they develop just as much (more so?) as the revs they use.

the speed gods

they will use a pop off valve to limit the boost. They did that in 1988. The last great year was 87. I went to silverstone, and saw mansell win over piquet on the last laps of the race, after he had to stop for a puncture. They put on a set of qualifiers, and started a series of quick qualifying type laps, that gave him an superb victory, may be his best one.


What made the original turbo era so great is that there was no one mandated type of engine (1.5 liter 4 cylinder turbo with mandated fixed V-angle) – you had 4 cyl and 6 cyl turbos competing against 3.5 liter naturally aspirated engines with 6, 8, 10, 12 cylinders, V, W or flat…

This variety meant that some engines performed better than the others on certain tracks, but not necessarily on all of them – turbos did great on the long straights of Monza or old Hockenheim but were notoriously bad on the twisty streets of Monaco. With less than bulletproof reliability – unlike today when we rarely see an engine caused DNF – it created some surprise results every mow and then making a much more interesting championship.

But, i doubt the new turbo era with the mandated engine will be anything like the old one.

We need more liberal rules that would allow greater variety of engineering solutions!


This is a very good point, James.

Because of all the restrictions, I think we will see some very similar solutions with very similar performances.

It is not going to be same as the 80’s; when you have all those different engines.

Engine is the soul of the car; it gives all the different cars characters. Comparing to the 80’s, this is what is missing in modern F1. A sad loss…

Almost like having a one engine series if this is the road we are going down …!!! I have very mix feeling for this.

the speed gods

they won’t allow engines to brake, like in the old days. F1 team couldn’t afford it. They are broke.



Just thought I would also point out that the website isn’t working on Opera. I think Opera is very popular on mobile phones which I guess lot of people, myself included, use to view your website so hopefully you can solve this problem soon.

Have to say I am not surprised about USF1, the big question is what if anything will happen to their entry for 2010.


You are right that we had a problem with Opera due to some changes we made, which affected Opera users’ performance, but It is working now. Thanks for your patience.



Its still not working with my Nokia E71 james.

I cant read comments or use any of the buttons with the new mobile plugin you installed.



I hope common sense prevails and USF1 now sell their slot to Stefan GP so that they can race in Bahrain. Without that, I would imagine the FIA would open up the now vacant 13th slot to tender, as Stefan GP haven’t exactly made friends with the governing body by the way they tried to bully their way into the sport. However, despite this, they look a serious outfit, with good backing, a potentially decent car designed by the now defunct Toyota F1 team, and a big name driver in former champion Jacques Villeneuve. They would be much better for the sport than teams like Campos who will inevitably be well off the pace. And 5 world champions on the grid – what a prospect that would be!!!


I agree with Freespeech. The winter antics of Campos / Hyspania, Stefan GP and – taking it to an extreme – USF1 have been a farce and made a mockery of the sport.

It’s also dragged what what I hope to be the serious new teams of Virgin and Lotus down by association. You only have to read Ferrari’s website for that.

It doesn’t reflect particularly well on the previous FIA administration.


it has made the off-season great though.


Hardly a mockery… circumstances have changed, that’s all. Who’s to say that Prodrive (or one of the other rejected applicants) might not have suffered the same issues as USF1 and\or Campos?



Lotus and Virgin should not be tarred by the Campos/USF1 brush.


Sad to hear about USF1, they seem to have made a real mess of things, but it would have been good for F1 generally to have a US team.

I strongly believe that Stefan should not get an automatic entry. Ferrari was right comparing them to vultures – I hate the way they have been looking for the scraps of the new teams that are struggling.

I believe that Prodrive, Lola, Epsilon, etc. should all be given the chance to reapply, and noone should have the 13th slot for 2010. Making a lot of noise should not give a team a slot over teams with a far better motorsport heritage.

And no way that Mike Coughlan should be allowed back into F1 ever.


The Americans are great at building gaz guzzling outragous sized and frankly barge handling like bohomoths, fits that they fell flat on their face when they tried to engineer a sleek elegant triumph of mechanical and aerospace engineering for a car in the world’s most advanced motorsport series!


“sleek elegant triumph of mechanical and aerospace engineering”

Ever heard of Boeing?


Do you think that this new team business, Toyota – Stefan GP, Honda – Brawn (now Mercedes), BMW – Sauber, Renault – whatever it will… is making a mockery of our sport and teams are now being traded like baseball cards??


I don’t see why, teams have always been bought and sold. Ok we’re seeing a concentration of it now because a number of teams left at the same time, but it’s nothing new.


Technically, StefanGP would not get an automatic entry – in the true meaning of the word ‘automatic’. After all, they were one of the initial applicants for a 2010 entry. Just as Lotus were awarded the vacant spot (as the next best team) when Toyota withdrew, the same could be applied to StefanGP now that USF1 are out. If the FIA can apply this method to award them the vacant spot, then the current teams’ approval isn’t necessary.

I’m sure someone here will let me know if I missed something that would exclude this possibility 🙂


But it would be sad if a nice, competitive Toyota chassis didn’t get to race this year…


Fair point.

But I guess that would presume that Stefan were the next best applicant.

Whether that was the case probably depends on the random number generator that the FIA apparently used to order the relative merits of the applicants.


Well, is there any other team with a car ready to race this season? If not (which I believe is the case), that puts StefanGP at the top of the list as the next best team.


James given that it now seems possible Stefan GP (or ‘Steve’ GP as one wag is calling it) makes it to the grid will it and the other new teams be subject to qualifying fast enough to race?

Surely with zero testing Stefan and Campos (Hispania?) will struggle to be within 10-12 seconds of pole. This must surely place them in ‘mobile-chicane’ territory would you not think?

Might the 110% rule need to be re-applied this year, otherwise we could be in for some embarrasingly slow backmarkers?


There’s no such thing as “mobile chicanes” any more… I can see your point; they’d be so slow as to be damaging\annoying, simply getting in the way etc… but that’s what the blue flags are for, to indicate that “the snails” should move over sharpish 🙁


you mean 107% I thought it was, or is it 107% and your saying it should put back to 110% this season?


Quite right; it was 107% – this is the rule from Wikipedia – Note this has not been updated since the extra teams have come on board.

“As the number of cars entered in the world championship fell below 26, a situation arose in which any car entered would automatically qualify for the race, no matter how slowly it had been driven. The 107% rule was introduced in 1996 to prevent completely uncompetitive cars being entered in the championship. If a car’s qualifying time was not within 107% of the pole sitter’s time, that car would not qualify for the race, unless at the discretion of the race stewards for a situation such as a rain affected qualifying session. There are now only 10 teams in F1 so the 107% rule has been removed since the FIA’s rules indicate that 24 cars can take the start of an F1 race, and a minimum of 20 cars must enter a race. For 2003 the qualifying procedure changed to a single-lap system, rendering the rule inoperable.”


Hadn’t thought that through; probably right about Stefan, but that still leaves the thorny issue of just how slow Campos / Hispania are going to be, especially in the first few races.


Ive always thought that any new teams/cars should complete a mandatory set milage in order to compete, I find this essential on many levels.

1, Improve lap time so they become less of a “mobile chicane”

2, Operatonal and logistical aspects, because F1 is a globally recognised sport, they should appear professional

3, Most impotantly reliability/saferty. Is the car safe to drive to the drivers, fans and fellow competitors.

This rule should be applied the same way a driver obtains his super license.

Also I might add that im a huge JV fan and so I hope Stefan GP find a route to the grid.


It’s an interesting point that Villeneuve himself raised during the speculation over his potential race seat.

The 2009 Toyota was a solid mid to top-end car, and with evolutionary development over the last year and Winter – there’s no reason why the 2010 car can’t be quick. That’s what is so attractive for JV – StefanGP should (in theory) be much quicker than any of the new teams due to the base on which they are starting from, and providing they can run the car sufficiently and have good reliabilty (easier said than done), I wouldn’t be suprised if they were capable of scoring points. They’re not starting from scratch like the other new teams.


Fair point, but I think Kamui Kobayashi in the Sauber will be faster than JV in the ’10 Toyota.


Even with zero testing I think StefanGP would get that old, reasonable Toyota chassis well within 12 seconds of pole.


You raise a good point which I will raise with the FIA


How many F1 blog/website authors can use that line! 😀


First a general comment: This website is the absolute best for F1 news and information. I hope it goes on and on! (And not just the content — the restrained graphics and layout are brilliant too.)

On USF1, I’d say the powers that be dodged a bullet by not having a totally half-assed American effort show up at the first event of the season. In a month or two, USF1 will be forgotten. But Max Mosely’s legacy of dodgy wannabe’s at the back of the 2010 grid — it looks terrible, although not dissimilar to the F1 scene in Max and Bernie’s youth: the days of DNPQ’s.

Finally, I want to second other posters’ requests for tips on how to follow events where TV coverage is poor. I am in the USA — it’s tough to follow F1 here! And management’s attitude to new media coverage reflects the age of our sport’s fearless leader and avaricious rights holder.

Thanks again James, keep up the great work.


Why isnt Chad Hurley investigating putting F1 on the net for pay-download?, he would surely make a large profit and he has the resources.

What are Bernie’s reasons for not being web friendly?


How is the TV coverage poor in the USA? Speed/Fox broadcasts 2nd practice, qualifying and the race itself for every GP weekend. In my opinion, its quite easy to follow F1 here.


Do you have to pay for this coverage?

Do the BBC not stream live F1 on the internet or is that just the UK(if at all).

I do feel for you guys who have a pasion for sport but unable to see it.


No it’s not. The cliched commentary is barely ever insightful (barring Windsor who is no longer with the team now). I remember when Hamilton was on the podium the first time at the Aussie GP and someone quipped ‘That’s the blackest face we have ever had on the podium!’. Besides, there are too many lengthy commercial breaks, especially during the races which are broadcast late at night. And about five of the races each year are not televised live, but are rerun after five hours on Fox.


“And about five of the races each year are not televised live, but are rerun after five hours on Fox.”

The inability to watch a live broadcast even after paying more for it doesn’t amount to much.


His original statement referred to the ability to watch F1 broadcasts, not the quality of the broadcasts.

the speed gods

yes but you need cable. He meant open like abc, etc.

in spain there is a lot of live coverage, but it’s so bias towards alonso, that can make you sick. Now they are selling the rights to the different communities, so let’s see how it goes. I live in asturias, where alonso was born, so i doubt it’s going to be any better. we’ll see.


I entirely agree with your comments about this website. It is such a relief to find one that just give good up-to-date news and prescient opinion without 10,000 bells and whistles. Good on you, James.


Yeah I feel for anyone who can’t get F1 free to air.

Bernie wants to control every last frame of F1 footage, and FOM are incapable of thinking bigger picture on this. Old F1 footage has no value to the general public, and there is no way to view it. A large community of F1 nuts on Youtube puts race up from the 80s and 90s, and sooner or later their accounts are deleted through FOM request. Just think – they actually dedicate resources to stop die hard fans watching old races. It is truly pathetic.

Bill, I’d love to say that we’ll see some current F1 footage through the internet soon, but sadly I just can’t see it.

Bernie Ecclestone was obviously once a forward thinking entrepreneur, but he’s truly lost in this current age. The way forward is not to jealously guard any image of the sport you are trying to promote. Things will change, but don’t hold your breath.


Just look at how the WRC is embracing new media: actively encouraging fans to put videos online.

Bernie is going to loose the battle one day, I hope, but this is the person that is immovable on HD coverage, for instance. Gah!


Thanks for your kind sentiments. Please spread the word..


1.5 litre?

F1 is going down every year, and that’s why we lose talents like Kimi Raikkonen.

We need those V10 back in action.

F1 can’t be ecological. It doesn’t go one with another. They should stop doing that.

Zobra Wambleska

The 1.5 liter turbo formula was one of the most exciting times in F1. It took some serious driving skills to handle the power and the turbo lag. Let’s wait and see how restrictive the FIA make the formula before we get all teary eyed over the lose of the V10’s.


V10s have been gone for a while already…

Zobra Wambleska

I know the v10s have been gone for a long time now. I was simply replying to an earlier post lamenting the fact that we no longer have the v10 formula and are likely to end up with a 1.5 liter formula.

the speed gods

you meant the v8’s. The v10’s are long gone.

The thing is they don’t want lots of power at the fia. But we the fans are missing it. I hope todt does something smart about that.

F1 is not dangerous anymore, more power is not going to make it so. But it’s going to make it more difficult, so we’ll see who are the best drivers with clarity.


Modern F1 engineering should be about pushing the state of the art to new heights. That’s why a fuel efficiency formula is a good idea; we get to witness what levels of performance these guys wring out from such restrictions. Usually, the cars just keep getting faster. I don’t see any lap records from the 80s or early 90s still left, a time when they had the most power and and most cylinders engines.

James, I just hope that they leave some room for creativity by not specifying engine capacity, i.e. restricting fuel consumption but leaving it open to engineers with regards to number of cylinders, displacement and manner of aspiration. Do you know which way they’d go on this?


it’s the FIA. they will restrict it to hell, prescribe every little thing, and waste the opportunity to allow genuine technological and world relevant research to be performed, instead yet again ensuring all the attention and money is focussed on pointless and wasteful aero development.

Stephen Kellett

Look in your history books.

1.5L is what a lot of cars were running in the 70s. And they had more power than we have now.


I.5L Turbos were the formula in the early 1980s, that’s true, starting with Renault in 1977. Plenty of power. Turbos are a bit more sophisticated these days.


Ahh, mobile chicanes we used to call the Ferraris. Unable to apply power smoothly they used to block the track until they got to a straight bit then pedal to the metal, count to five then then power kicked in, often accompanied by a huge plume of white smoke. Those were the days!!!

the speed gods

the problem is not that they can’t get lots of power from a 1.5 turbo engine. The bmw used by piquet to win on 1983, was able to do close to 1300bhp on quali trim. The problem is they don’t want powerfull cars, for safety reasons, and it’s making the sport much easier than it was. Rookie drivers start now, and they are 1 sec off the pace. That was unimaginable in the turbo days.


The final race of 2012 will be a sad day – the end of the naturally aspirated F1 engine. Watching a screaming field of cars heading towards the first corner will never be quite the same after that.

But things can’t stay the same forever – I will just try to make sure I get to race before 2013!

the speed gods

sad is now. It would be tragic, to go to 750 bhp. Right now f1 is underpowered, imagine if you take 100 horses off of it. But i guess there is nothing we can do about it, just dream of the 1000 bhp of the past.


I already got to see the end of the naturally aspirated F1 engine once, it was a Cosworth in the back of Tyrrel, and that was a sad day. The turbos that took over had almost double the horsepower of todays engines though, and it was amazing to watch guys drive cars with way too much power exiting a hair pin, and when they were gone that was another sad day. There is nothing wrong with the sound of a screaming V8 though and it will be sad to see them go again, but wouldn’t it be nice if the powers that be decided to cut costs by supplying teams with a standard body shell (let’s say a mid sixties Lotus – think of the savings in aerodymamic costs if there are no wings, and virtually none of that technolgy transfers to road cars anyway) and let them get was much power as they can out a litre and a half turbo. We’ll see who can handle 1500 hp with nothing but four tires to stick it to the road.


Oops….get AS much power as they can…


I’m on your side and made my feelings felt in the LG fans survey.

Although if it brings in more manufacturers, even just in an engine capacity, then I’m less against it than I previously have been. I’m less of a fan of these mickey mouse teams and about 3 engine suppliers in total than I would be if we dropped to 1.5 litre eco turbos but more manufacturers. Plus I’m sure those badboys will still kick out some serious power!

But I absolutely want those badazz V10s back in the game!! Never gonna happen again though 🙁


I don’t think the world is heading towards gas guzzling V10s! 1.5 litre two turbo with hybrid boost will do at least 750hp, as the current engine have.


Doesn’t Audi/VAG own Seat? Nice Spanish brand that one…..


Button, Hamilton, Alonso, Schumacher, Villeneuve…. have we ever had five Champions on the grid before?

Just imagine if Vettel wins this year and Kimi comes back too… Party Seven time!


Real shame Kimi isn’t on the grid this year – then we’d have had the world champion from the last 10 years on the grid!


and schumacher will have won more than the rest of them put together! 😀


Probably wrong. The odds are one of the list will win, so unless its Schumacher there should be an equal number

1 – button

1 – hamilton

1 – Villeneuve

2 – alonso

1 – kimi

that 6 so far so if anyone else but Schumacher wins..


Yes, in the late 60’s, twice.


Hispano-Suiza anyone, now that’s a name 🙂


Yes far better than HRT the menopausal womens final recognition in F1! 🙂


Oh brilliant!



Jacques has signed for Stefan GP. Official. Mr. Stefanovic wrote here.


Peter thats just more self-serving press release BS. It means nada. Do you believe everything you read? Or is that your blog?


Sad about USF1. I look forward in the week to come hearing the ‘real’ story.


What an absolute farce this is with the new teams, doesn’t it prove to us all how dodgy the selection process was?

Prodrive/Aston Martin being overlooked was and is a disgrace.

On the new engines, in my opinion the only limit that need be imposed on the teams is the amount of fuel they can use during a race weekend or better still allocate the teams an annual amount as this would provide so many variables for the teams to use & exploit as THEY see fit.

Doing this would allow the engineers to push the boundaries and would almost certainly produce fantastic engines as well as bringing a degree of unreliability back to F1


Well Prodrive were looking to enter with a customer car, not actually designing and constructing their own, which would not have been allowed under current rules.


Why is everybody so sure that Prodrive had a bulletproof bid? They couldn’t even make the field through the McLaren customer car route.


That was more due to the fact that Williams and others threatened legal action, since customer cars are not permitted. On the other hand, if I remember correctly, Dave Richards was only interested in bringing Prodrive in when there was the talk of the budget caps – since they never came in, perhaps he would’ve ended up in a bit of a mess too


ummm, the FIA banned customer cars…

Geoffrey Stone

Prodrive didn’t make the grid via the McLaren customer care route because it didn’t look like that route was legal under the Concorde Agreement then prevailing, and Frank Williams was set to challenge it. It would have been folly to invest in building up a team on that pretense.


The McLaren customer car route was blocked due to the issues surrounding the rules on customer cars. Hence Torro Rosso now needing to produce their own car.

It was nothing to do with Prodrive not being capable.


Thats because customer care were deamed illegal


I thought the McLaren customer car option was eventually derailled by the threar of legal action (by Williams?).


Because the rules were changed after they were granted a place to ban customer cars…it was not Prodrive’s fault that they couldn’t compete, they weren’t given enough time to adapt to the new rule changes.


Not quite sure the whole season fuel cap would work. Consider this. team A races a prius and team B races a m3(or any fast car that is half as efficient). B wipes the floor with A in the first 10 races, parks the car and still wins a 19 race season.


I think that if teams are also deducted points for a ‘no-show’, then it would work very well.


They could show up, but just keep running out of fuel a few laps in


The annual fuel allowance which would also include testing could be used as each team saw fit.

This would allow teams to test as they so wished, use maximum power on tracks that suited their car and be fuel efficient at others.

All the FIA would need to do is ensure any penalties for suing their fuel allowance before the end of the season was punished to in effect cancel whatever gains they had made.

There is no greener way to run F1 than to have a maximum fuel allowance over the course of a whole season and by doing this teams will all go off in different directions in trying to find an edge with the result being we’d all see some real F1 innovation and probably the likes of VW and others, possibly a return for Honda who would surely excel if allowed to innovate as they saw fit and not be bound by these silly FIA rules which stop the manufactures excelling at what they do best.

This would also benefit all motorist as F1 innovations filtered through to us mere mortals.

I say, let the engineers loose and show the world why F1 is the pinnacle of motor sport and not be thrown in a direction just because someone at the FIA wants to push a certain idea, they engineers know best so let them show us.


I feel it is totally wrong, that a team called Campos – submitted for an entry in 2010, succeeded at the expense of other teams and yet within 12 months having never produced a car or tested or ever showed any serious intent can be allowed to sell out. These people proposing to take over did not submit before, nor did they show any commitment. In fact as James points out, they do not even look like they are in it for the long term….

The fact that Bernie is allowed to step in is wrong. He does nothing for credibility….

What should happen, is that the other submitters should be given a choice first, and then they would not have to commit to race until next year.

If the FIA is to have any clout, then it should end this now. If both USF1 and Campos cannot make it… so be it. Re-open tenders and this time allocate properly



agree in principle. I think the guy carabante was already involved so he has effectively taken the remaining control rather than come in and bought the operation.

I expect stefan to get the entry. What bernie wants usually happens.


Teams are sold and names changed all the time. I don’t see it being different that Campos never got to a GP. Otherwise Brawn should have reapplied last year, and again as Merc this year surely?


Yesterday and today rss links not working on Opera browser.

Please fix it.

the speed gods

the spanish media say the deal with chandhok is done, and senna has found the money. looking better, if they just had another extra month to get everything ready.


Hispania Racing hardly flows off the tongue. And gives everyone an easy slur to use against it.

But I’m more interested with the engine talk. This aggressive switch to a greener engine is precisely what could have persuaded the manufacturers we’ve just lost to have stayed.

I know these things take time but all three of the companies that have left have filled the newspapers with adverts for their new, greener cars.

It’d be nice to see some new manufacturers in a few years. I predict Hyundai-Kia being one.


I doubt that a ‘greener engine’ regulation would have kept those ppl in F1. Its all about money for huge corporations and its hard to justify spending the obscene amounts on F1 when times are bad.

And all the ‘green’ adverts are just that: adverts. They actually mean nothing.


I agree I think Korea will get increasingly involved in Formula 1, especially if the costs reduce. What Ferrari would think of racing against a Kia I dont know but it would be funny!


Seems USF1 has folded up shop, did Hurley jump ship with the entry in hand? Have you heard anything solid yet?

I agree that Audi would be a nice fit for Red Bull Racing, good car, nice factory, would work well for VW/Audi. I say Audi because they are getting really strong in lots of markets.


I’d say that would be the logical conclusion. Did the CEO of Volkswagen not state a few weeks ago that if the Volkswagen Group did enter, it likely wouldn’t be with the Volkswagen brand itself? Surely, having dominated Le Mans for so long, then F1 is the next step.

Though I suppose it could just as easily be branded under Skoda…


Now that would be funny a Skoda whooping a Ferrari or a Merc 🙂


Even funnier would be lada if they take over renault


It may interest you to know that the VW top brass: Winterkorn, Piech, and Porsche all own huge houses in Salzburg, Austria… a place I know well, and the home of… you’ve guessed it… Red Bull! They happen to be buddies with Red Bull’s top brass: Mateschitz and Helmut Marko, who live around the corner.

Therefore, it makes a lot of sense for VW to think about taking over a Red Bull team in 2013 as either the “Audi” or “Porsche” team (or at very least “Red Bull VW” as an engine supplier) if: 1) VW finances are in a good state, 2) the F1 budget road map has seen a reduction in costs, 3) the manufacturers still maintain some power in the next concorde agreement, 4) Mateschitz is happy to sell one of his teams, 5) they can make a good story about the new engine being ‘eco’ and ‘real-world relevant’. They would announce the news as an ‘appropriate’ time to join F1 as it would now be efficient and eco-friendly.

A real possibility.


Nice idea.


Only one name in the VW/Audi stables makes sense, and that’s Auto Union…


Well they have expressed alot of interest in becoming an engine supplier in the future, (as long as its green-ish etc) I can see that happening in 2013, but would RBR really want to sell if they’re in a strong position? but yes they would be a very logical choice, VW are not going to join with a back of the grid new team!


Yeah, I was thinking Bugatti is probably the best fit for F1, but then again it hardly needs advertising.


Or for that matter, the “Lamborghini” team, or the “Bugatti” team.


“vorsprung durch technik”, Audi would make a lot of sense in F1, with Volkswagen as a little subtext. Something like Ferrari and Fiat.


Should be an interesting week ahead! Looking forward to the 14th!


James, what do you say concerning the rumours that today it is effectively game over for USF1.


Well USf1 have already petitioned the FIA to have their entry deferred until 2011 so from the point of view of Stefan the grid slot is there. Dont know about any official close.


James said: “Meanwhile word is spreading from the USA that the staff at USF1 have been told today that the operation is closing down and the dream is over.”


But have a story that USF1 are asking the FIA to defer their entry until 2011.


James, maybe you know, would a 1.5ltr turbo engine be capable of equalling the revs the existing engines do and would the cars be able to reach 200mph+ in 3 years time ?


you are very unlikely to get a turbo charged engine running at 18000 rpm. there’s no reason it can’t still have 800 bhp tho.

however, turbo technology is clearly the future of gasoline engines so it makes sense to do this – well it, would if there were more manufacturers in the sport and they were able to use the engine as a performance differentiator…


Take a look in your history books Dave – BMW were knocking out 1500 bhp+ in qualifying spec in the mid-80’s – todays engines are heavily restricted

Nadeem Zreikat

I remember an interview with john Todt about 5 years ago. He was being asked about getting more horsepower out of engines or something like that. His response was that what is smarter and more relevant is getting small engines to be fuel efficient and able to get similar horse power. This would be great. Look at what is happening with Audi/VW using smaller engines with turbos and superchargers much better use of technology in road cars. F1 engineers will be able to get the same power back after a few years no problems- they are the best in the world.

Zobra Wambleska

The last time we saw a 1.5 liter turbo formula the engines were producing upwards of 1200 hp in qualifying trim. Not slow!


yes to the first question, unlikely to the second. I think it was JB who went for the 400km/h record a while back (without running wings), he came close, but with one hell of an engine compared to a 1.5l. I’d like to see 200mph though!


of course with a 1.5 l engine..

Top Tags
JA ON F1 In association with...
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer

Sign up to receive the latest F1 News & Updates direct to your inbox

You have Successfully Subscribed!