Renault: F1 Needs Manufacturers to Put On A Show

Discussion in 'Formula 1' started by Bethonie Waring, Mar 20, 2017.

  1. Bethonie Waring

    Bethonie Waring

    renault manufacturers.jpg Renault believes Formula One cannot put on a good show without the investments from manufacturers such as themselves.

    Renault Sport Racing president, Jerome Stroll, believes manufacturers should be “main players” in discussions with Liberty about the future of F1, because of their contribution to the sport.

    We’ve had some discussions,” Stroll told “We explained that we should work together in order to increase the show, because the attractiveness of the show has decreased a little bit.

    “We have to open a new era with Liberty, and they are really willing to do something different. I don’t know what that’s going to be, but we want to be considered as the main players for the show.

    “Without the car makers like Mercedes, Ferrari and ourselves – because we are the only ones who are developing engines and investing money – there’s not going to be a show.”

    Others have argued that Formula One needs to focus less on the manufacturers, who come to the sport to trial new technology to later put into their road cars. It’s that new technology that pushes up the research and development costs and pushes smaller teams out of the competition. In the past, Christian Horner has shared this view.

    “I think the manufacturers, as Bernie [Ecclestone]’s often said, will come and go as the want,” Horner told ESPN. “So building a formula around suiting just manufacturers is unhealthy. The manufacturers will choose to be in F1 just if it suits them and it gives the commercial return and advertising platform for their product.

    “So, I think, bending yourself out of shape for manufacturers that have a history of leaving and rejoing as and when it suits isn’t the right one for Formula One.”

    Fans have also argued that making F1 “road relevant”, such as the switch to quieter, less “exciting” engines, has taken away from the show, with moves such as the switch to quieter.

    For more Formula One news and discussions head over to the RaceDepartment Formula One sub forum and join in with your fellow community members.

    Do you think the manufacturers are a key part of the F1 identity, or would you not mind if they left? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
  2. Blimey


    Without the car makers like Mercedes, Ferrari and ourselves – because we are the only ones who are developing engines and investing money – there’s not going to be a show.”
    Was that supposed to be a sick burn for Honda?
    • Haha Haha x 9
  3. InsaneOzzie


    Maybe it's time the big players of F1 came down from their pedestals, so they can hear what the real world is saying about F1.

    This is one of the big issues with F1 in my opinion, it's become a "show" an "orchestrated performance", what ever happened to the days when guys who love motor-racing did it for the love of racing, not some fat multi-million dollar contract, put up by multi-billion dollar Co's, that spend more on R&D than some countries GDP's.

    Personally I believe it's wrong to have the teams involved in the decisions, it's their "if it wasn't for us, there would be no show" attitude that's part the problem, along with the fact they have driven the costs up, purely by not having a ceiling on R&D and taking development out of the reach of low budget teams. I'm not against R&D, but there has to be a limit on how much can be spent, and how far components can be developed. I believe that the tech used in F1 must be of a level that all the teams can develop in house, this idea that 3 manufacturers lease engines to other low budget teams just makes F1 a game of "our motor is better than yours" which is against the spirit of the sport imo.

    Keeping F1 to a lower budget with tighter controls on R&D, IMO, will create closer field's as every team can then develop to the edge of the regulations envelope, leaving it to the drivers to have the edge, not the car under their butt.
    Here's hoping Liberty Media show they will not be manipulated by idle threats from the "big players of F1" who are making multi millions in engine deals as I type.
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Rob


    He's an arrogant man for sure. Full of self-importance. Shocking, eh?

    But he's right about one thing. When he says "Without the car makers...there’s not going to be a show" he's right. F1 has become a competition amongst specialized skill sets and cash cows. The drivers are famous, but they simply cannot represent the best of the best in motorsport. There is no parity or even ability to get to partial parity (think NFL, good or bad) with even the best driver in the world. Fans who think these drivers have a significant role in the success or failure of a car are delusional. Put a world champ in a McLaren and he can't score a point. Put a four time world champ in a car than is slightly less powerful? He's barely even on the podium. Put a 17 year old fresh from F3 in an F1 car? lol.

    Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of good things about F1, but the FIA and FOM are not in those bucket of things. Thankfully, one is gone. And if Liberty gets fed up with the slime-ball bureaucrats in Paris, then good riddance. They loose F1 and the FIA is barely even major player anymore. Even now the F1 feeder system is a sham. When drivers like Montoya and Rossi get passed over for Lance Stroll and Pascal Wherlein, it's a sure sign that F1's talent lives in a shallow gene pool and drivers are basically enslaved by contract. It's becoming like a Royal Family. Useless.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  5. Matheus Machado

    Matheus Machado
    Talking Door Racing

    F1 should be about building the fastest thing which keeps 4 wheels on the ground most of times and the manufacturers are a key role of that. Luckily some idiots are always wanting to drive those ridiculous machines (me included)

    If I wanted to watch close racing, I will go to a spec category or watch rental karts on a high level field. F1 has never been about racing, the best car always won by far and the field always spreads up really quickly.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Terry Rock

    Terry Rock

    I've personally always hated the word 'show' as it relates to Formula One.
    Everytime Bernis said it, I cringed..
    I personally would not miss manufacturers.
    Do they have a place in today's F1? ....absolutely.
    I don't however, subscribe to the notion the sport would die without them.
    They certainly should not be dictating the terms of F1.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. TomcatMF


    For those of you who cringe at the thought of F1 being a "show", well that is exactly what it and all other spectator sports are. We watch it to be entertained. As for what is considered entertainment for F1 that varies widely among the fan base. Some think that close wheel to wheel racing is where it's at, and others like the development race and strategies over the course of the season. It all comes down to why you as the fan are watching.
    NASCAR and IndyCar have close racing every week, but that is because they are spec series, and they are struggling to keep their fan base, so wheel to wheel racing alone is not the answer either.
    I watch F1 because they are the fastest cars around a track in the world, and they are unlike anything else out there. It is about pure speed, and to be honest that is what I enjoy about racing. To me, the faster the cars go, the more exciting it is for me. IMO that is the whole reason auto racing began in the first place: "my car is faster than yours." When IndyCar became a spec series, I kind of lost interest in it, and I don't follow NASCAR as much as I used to either. Why? because it's not about raw speed anymore. They slowed the cars down for the sake of the "show". They wanted more wheel to wheel racing, and now with the segments, they have even more, but even then it doesn't grab me. The races are still too long.
    On the other hand, despite all its faults, and the fact I absolutely despise the current engine formula, I still find myself very engaged in F1, and I feel that the current aero package are returned some of the spectacle to the sport due to the outright speed of these cars. Relative to IndyCar and NASCAR, the races are short (only about 90 minutes to complete a GP) so I don't get bored. And I can't miss qualifying because that is where you see the cars going with everything they have, and it's a sight to behold them flying through corners at speeds that should be impossible.
    As for the Manufacturers, I think they are the problem with the spiraling costs. F1 always has been expensive, but the manufacturers threw so much money at it in the early 2000's that it took things beyond what the privateer teams could do, and that is not healthy for the sport, because now we have this two tier system where we know certain teams will never win, and only certain teams have a chance if they get things right over the winter.
    I think Brawn is taking the right approach in that he is looking at standardizing some of the things that cost a fortune for the teams to develop, but has little impact on what the fan's perceive is happening with the car. I think bringing back active suspensions is a good idea, as this is something that could be standardized and reduce the costs, while still maintaining the performance.
    I also like how he plans to study the aero so that the cars can follow each other better.

    While these measures may bring the racing closer, more needs to be done to bring parity to the development side too. I don't ever want F1 to be a spec series, but something has to be so that the privateer teams can compete with the works teams. I think the engine rules should be opened up so that the teams can use whatever configuration they want, just limit the amount of fuel they can use for the race. I think you will see some very interesting developments there, and it would be very "road relevant".
  8. Wizbiscuit


    BTCC with manufacturers a few years ago vs now... now wins all the time, the manufacturer is there to win and sell cars, entertainment is not really something they care for... BTCC is an example of what happens when the manufacturers abandon a sport because it no longer "fits into there marketing".... few years to recover and now BTCC is stronger than ever...

    F1 will continue to loose popularity and interest with the big boys using there muscle to make sure they win, when they dont, they will be gone, just like Honda and Toyota did a few years ago... and Renault does every 10 years or so :)
  9. Rob


    Not true. IndyCar T.V. ratings and attendance here in the U.S. have risen significantly every year for the past several years. This year's Indy 500 set a record. And that's saying something. Why? IndyCar re-united, made the right calls, and is aiming to get back to when it was as popular as F1. NASCAR had been acting just like F1 (and both are re-acting to undo the damage this year) by expanding the track list, cutting traditional venues, dictating to track owners what they will make (many of those very track owners are stakeholders in NASCAR) and commercializing the hell out of everything. Currently IndyCar is not a spec series, but it may seem that way if all you follow is F1.

    Good to hear you like the Indy 500 the best. ;)
  10. TomcatMF


    Actually, I love watching the Indy 500. It is a terrific race, and it has always been well attended even during the split years. It is one of those marquee races like Monaco, Le Mans or Daytona. People who aren't necessarily avid fans of racing know about it, and they will watch it.

    I went to the Fontana race a couple of years ago (it was a night race too) but it was very poorly attended. I saw bigger crowds at a NASCAR Xfinity race. I thoroughly enjoyed the race too.

    I think IndyCar is starting to do the right things again, but they drastically need to improve the cars themselves IMO. If you are going to have a spec series at least make the cars look cool, this current generation I find hideous. From what I understand the 2018 cars are going that direction, but again, they need to bring back the SPEED of yesteryear. Those cars from the early 90's were insane, and Indy is missing a bit of that. They need to add more power to these engines. IIRC they are only around 600 HP, and there are many road cars out there with more HP, that just shouldn't be the case. IMO race cars should be the fastest and most powerful thing to hit the pavement, especially at the top levels of motorsport.

    Yes Indycar is a spec series. All the teams have the same chassis, and the only difference is the Aero Kits, and Engines, but those are by manufacturer, not team by team like F1.

    I follow F1, IndyCar, and NASCAR, but I follow F1 more closely than the other two.

    So I agree with you that things are improving with IndyCar, and I have accepted it will never go back to what it was in the late 80's and early 90's (when all the teams built their own car like F1), and while there are some races I make it a point to watch (like the Indy 500 and Long Beach GP) I don't watch every race. Besides I don't really have the time to watch every race of all three series.