Are there too many series?

[duke_toaster]

This year we now have FIA F2, next year we are getting GP3 Series - both appearing to be political opponents to each other. Then we have IFM, which isn't setting the world on fire. A1GP have carved out it's niche (rejects from other series), but is facing competition from the shock and awe cars of Superleague Formula.

F2 is too early to report on, although one thing hasn't gone right in that the previously scheduled dummy pit-stops didn't happen at round 1, unlike SF which brought them in at short notice and suddenly stuck over-rev on the cars.

Is the number of series too confusing for fans? Even though it is politically unlikely, would a simple F3==>F2==>F1 progression be beneficial to the sport? There are few sports I can think of that have such a complex/disorganized system for its feeder series.

Even so, in the current economic climate will the grids in many of these series go, leading to a revival of F3 as the proper formula for junior drivers?

Just a bit of food for thought.

[Mystery]

What I think of as the privatization of racing series is the problem. Formula 2 used to be run and operated by the FIA. Why was it necessary for GP2 to be farmed out to someone else? All this did was create the template for everyone else to follow hence Nissan, Renault and every chassis manufacturer with a few quid to rub together wanted their own.

It won't happen but the FIA should make the whole lot unsanctioned and re-take control of their sport and its career ladder.

[Jackman]

What difference would FIA sanctioning make? They don't sanction GP2, and yet it's the feeder series to F1.

[duke_toaster]

I think that is the best solution is the FIA to establish a clear career ladder with good rules, a little of buttkissing the ASNs and FIA sanctioned events in the junior formulea.

The second tier : GP2 and the case for a real resurrection of Formula 2

A legitimate Formula Two series needs to be established. GP2 Series has gone downhill, with worse TV exposure and a car that isn't suited. The cars should be more akin to F1 machinery. I suggest that it shouldn't be a spec series. However, there should be a GT3 style equalization process for it. A panel of three or four recently retired drivers should have ago, and adjust the cars.

If F1 were to move to a sensible set of rules based on the 2010 ones (featuring a power cap but freer rules on how it is generated, restrictions on materials and more bans or aero guff), F2 should feature detuned cars.

My suggested areas for detuning F1 cars would be an increased minimum weight, stricter bans on materials, reduction of power (I suggest the F1 power cap to be 800hp and the F2 one to be 600hp), increased engine life (6 races to whole season) and a cap on the number of people working at the cars (roughly average current GP2 levels). F1 will probably cut costs in other areas as well - or it would if I was in charge . As the cars will basically need one crash test as it's a matter of bolting on/off parts, it needs only one R and D operation. I propose F1 teams being required to sell F2 spec chassis or engines, at prices subsidised by TV money. Manufacturers would sell F2 engines (just rev limit 'em and change the fragile parts), indies would sell chassis with the options for mounting two engines. Small makes E.G. Lotus, should they return, would be considered indies exempt from the latter. Nothing to say that non-F1 participants wouldn't be allowed to provide cars.

F2 should go to a format that mirrors F1 in more areas - currently it's as silly as the Premier League playing two 45 minute halves and Division One playing two games on a day, one 20 minutes long and one with two 30 minute halves with a mandatory substitution of all players. That means knockout quali and one Sunday race. Maybe if that logistically is an issue there could be a Saturday race...

GP2 sould be replaced with European Formula 2 Championship, GP2 Asia with Asian Formula 2 Championship (but with 8 rounds, a slightly earlier season and the Middle East races junked making it more Pacific). Then, supporting the last GP of the year the top 10 drivers from each would race in the World Formula 2 Final. The winner being F2 World Champion - a nominated person who is trying to get in to F1.

F3 - How to get it back on track

Little I can say more than a list of rule changes and an idea

• Reduce the aero dependancy. Make the wings smaller and out of GRP.
• Give the engines a bit more oomph, tweak the air restrictors to give 240hp. No engine may generate more than 240hp on the dyno.
• Allow turbos along side NAs for eventual phase-in to reduce engine loads.
• Maximum costs for complete chassis sans engine.
• Chassis phases bumped up to five years. All cars must be used straight from the dealer and with price caps on specific parts.
• Handicap chassis weight system to stop it being Formula Dallara.

That way, there would be more power, less grip. Should be cheaper as there would be less of an aeromageddon and a bit more power.

Every real motorsport country should have its own F3 series as its top level of motor racing. Little idea on how the FIA could do much aside from making the rules a little better. An FIA organized Grand Slam of F3 would be helpful. It should feature the biggest F3 races in Europe (Pau was, Zandvoort Masters) and have two new rounds to bulk it to four - Germany (Norisring) and UK (Silverstone). Winner is FIA F3 World Champion and gets recognised as the best driver in that category under the age of 23. Simples.

Formula Junior : the case for a New World Formula

Formula Junior shouldn't be something new and cobbled together. It should use an existing cheap formula where cars have already been developed. It should use cheap and plentiful engines in order to increase the supply of the parts.

One basis for this that I propose is SCCA Formula 1000. Tube frame chassis, light car, 1000cc bike engine, standard bike gearbox. Get the rulebook. Go around and ban anything that is stupid and isn't banned now. Traction control. Four wheel drive. Four wheel steering. You know the drill. Bring in the basic safety things like fire extinguishers (part of the SCCA's general comeptition rules) and rear marker lights. One trend in the bike industry is the move to 1200cc V-Twins, so maybe legalize them (Superbikes now consist of 1000cc 4-pots or 1200cc 2-pots).

Then bring in things like a 8 year chassis homologation phase (let's face it, lots of cars in F1000 now are probably approaching that).

Then, put their weight behind national series, organize a World Final, bingo. Bring in an age limit so that older drivers can compete in a separate series using what would hopefully become a gold standard for worldwide club racing within a few years, with one or two things like power steering and shorter races in order to make it more suited to them.

Presumably you want me to shut up now

[Mekola]

Originally Posted by Jackman

What difference would FIA sanctioning make? They don't sanction GP2, and yet it's the feeder series to F1.

Briatore/Renault made the difference. They made the ladder F.Renault 2000 - WSR - GP2 - F1. And step by step since 2000, almost unnoticiable to F1 core fans.

[Mekola]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Every real motorsport country should have its own F3 series as its top level of motor racing. Little idea on how the FIA could do much aside from making the rules a little better. An FIA organized Grand Slam of F3 would be helpful. It should feature the biggest F3 races in Europe (Pau was, Zandvoort Masters) and have two new rounds to bulk it to four - Germany (Norisring) and UK (Silverstone). Winner is FIA F3 World Champion and gets recognised as the best driver in that category under the age of 23. Simples.

Problem about F3 is, that not all countries with respectable levels of motorsport would allow it as mandatory top formula series for themselves. There are the cases of North America, where F3 was a failure, Argentina, where the change of national F1/F2 for a SudamF3 finally distrusted teams and drivers to participate (in fact, Sudam is Brazilian F3), and Australia, similar case to Argies but where the series still exists and is undershadowed by touring car series too.

Specially is the case that European carmakers are highly benefitted by F3 Standards, there are not much possibilities that other parts of the world could built chassis for their local F3 series (Berta tried in SouthAm during 1988, but was a mere attempt). So it isn't the best sollution for countries who rely on their own structures and tries to avoid imported parts in order to not to degenerate their own constructions, specially these where touring cars (stock car-like or general touring-like styles) are the top of the cream on their lands.

[AMT]

Originally Posted by Mystery

What I think of as the privatization of racing series is the problem. Formula 2 used to be run and operated by the FIA. Why was it necessary for GP2 to be farmed out to someone else? All this did was create the template for everyone else to follow hence Nissan, Renault and every chassis manufacturer with a few quid to rub together wanted their own.

It won't happen but the FIA should make the whole lot unsanctioned and re-take control of their sport and its career ladder.

I totally agree with you Mystery. Having worked for the old-time independent manufacturers (Lola, Reynard, March, Ralt) and designed a few F3 cars, the solution I've pushed for the past 10 years or more is this: Reinstate F2, using cars that are very similar to F3. Keep the production-based 2.0litre 4-cylinder engine (a very common architecture), but F3 would have 270 bhp and F2 would have 320 bhp. Aero rules would be more restricted than current F3, but F2 would have wider wheels and tyres than F2, plus CF bodywork. F3 would be national series, and F2 would be an FIA-sanctioned world championship, with regional championships feeding it. It would be possible to upgrade an F3 car to F2. Below those series would F4, which would use the same safety structures and basic engine architecture, but a lower cost engine and minimal aerodynamic downforce

This would give independent manufacturers a big market over which to amortize their design and development costs, and there's nothing like commercial competition to keep costs down. Anybody who thinks that monopoly supply (like in GP2) reduces costs is naive, at best.

Unfortunately the FIA have been preoccupied with F1 (to F1's detriment, as it seems now) to care what happens below it. So we've got GP2 and "F2", both of which are plastic racing, with no teaching value for drivers or engineers.

It's a mess....

[strider]

Originally Posted by Mekola

Briatore/Renault made the difference. They made the ladder F.Renault 2000 - WSR - GP2 - F1. And step by step since 2000, almost unnoticeable to F1 core fans.

That's very true, Mekola, and the reason for the problem. There are now two ladders: the Renault one and the FIA one.

But what happens if Renault pull out of F1? Surely their ladder system doesn't pay for itself?

[duke_toaster]

I doubt it, I'd actually think it would go first, although maybe they could abandon it and just flog engines, someone will want to race those chassis.

AMT, the idea of modularity between classes is a good one, that is why I proposed it for F1 and F2 (not F2 and F3, as F2 should be closer to F1). However, there are a few issues. Firstly, is it wise to have carbon monocoque cars in the junior formulea? It won't make too much difference if it is good old tubular steel, if you keep them nice and light, and use a cheap, plentiful but powerful engine (that's why I kept the SCCA's idea of 1000cc bike motors) you'll still have performance that works. Besides, the junior formulea should teach drivers how to race and as well as how to drive, as wackier statement as that sounds. That's why longer races should be considered, when these youngsters are in F1 and so-on they will be driving for 90 minutes so can't banzai 100% of the time - 90 minutes is too long for that, but 40 or 45 is fine.

One little issue is that I doubt an F2 World Championship going all over the world is a good idea due to travel costs. Whilst MotoGP pulls it off, it has always been like that from day one and I imagine the costs of running a bike are significantly lower. GP2 currently operates a series in Europe and one in Asia. Africa is non-existant as far as motorsport is concerned, and going to the Americas - especially North America - would be a whole new stratosphere of annoyance to IndyCar. The only issues with GP2 Asia's calendar are the 2 year season, and the related races in the Middle East supporting F1, when it would be more practical to stay in the Pacific Rim and have a round or two in Japan and one in Korea (for some reason I have doubts about the Korean GP, but that's a sidepoint). An F2 World Final is a more practical way of crowning a champion.

[AMT]

toaster - the multi-formula chassis has been suggested by the FIA, so it's a very rare good idea from that quarter. They would no doubt find a way to screw it up, on past evidence.

The good thing about (properly designed) carbon chassis is that they're very durable and very safe, safer than steel tubes because of their anti-intrusion protection: spaceframes have "space" as well as frame. If you broaden the market base for a design of monocoque and nosebox, and allow multiple suppliers, you can get the prices down. And a chassis could last for 5 seasons, easily, provided it wasn't treated too badly.

I don't agree that F1 and F2 should be closer together than F2 and F3. F1 will always be at least one order of magnitude dearer than F2 (at the moment it's 2 orders of magnitude - 100 times - dearer than GP2), and I think it's right that F1 should be well ahead of the rest in outright speed. My proposed F2 would be, I guess, somewhere between the current "f2" and GP2 in terms of laptime. It's interesting that good F3 drivers are capable of moving straight into F1 and being competitive, so I don't think speed is an issue when it comes to driver education. Driver stamina is a different matter though, so longer races would be worth considering. Macau is around 45 minutes.

When I say World Championship, I mean following F1 around for selected GPs. Not all the non-European fly-aways, but the ones that make commercial sense. I have no doubt some venues would help with the costs if the series was credible.

In my opinion, the reason we need a budget cap in F1 and more of the generated income going to the teams, is to get back to situation where F1 didn't hoover up all the sponsorship money, there was enough to go around and enough for companies like Philip Morris to establish driver development schemes through from the lowest formulas up to F1.

[bella]

Originally Posted by strider

That's very true, Mekola, and the reason for the problem. There are now two ladders: the Renault one and the FIA one.

But what happens if Renault pull out of F1? Surely their ladder system doesn't pay for itself?

to steal mr toaster's rock analogy, allow me to do the guitar solo

i've been trumpeting the glory of the world series by renault weekend for a little while and i think the doubts around f1 right now show why it's utterly genius. renault have created this glorious little self funded self perpetuating support weekend that gives the spectators free motorsport and a f1 demo, allows renault to win every race and promote freely and without dilution their brand however they choose. the initial lure to the event for the spectators (judging by their viewing patterns and when the grandstands are mobbed) is the f1 cars, then they want to see the fr3.5 cars (which renault carefully tweak each year to look similar to the f1 car they're demo-ing). the kids can muck about at the funfair, get drivers autographs on the pitlane walkabout and dad can have a look at the new cars without the kids getting bored and see some new cars. they just create a giant showroom once every 2 weeks and people absolutely love it.

right now you couldn't pay people to go to a car showroom - renault do it without batting an eyelid. they're pitching it at exactly their end of the marketplace by making it free of charge, and they're getting exactly the people they need in through the gates. it might not increase car sales now, but the constant brand promotion through those events all day to a small percentage of the people compared to a tv or magazine advert which takes 2 seconds to read or 20 seconds to view... genius. utter calculated marketing genius.

we now return you to the chorus and back to the topic

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by AMT

The good thing about (properly designed) carbon chassis is that they're very durable and very safe, safer than steel tubes because of their anti-intrusion protection: spaceframes have "space" as well as frame. If you broaden the market base for a design of monocoque and nosebox, and allow multiple suppliers, you can get the prices down. And a chassis could last for 5 seasons, easily, provided it wasn't treated too badly.

I agree that carbon fibre chassis are necessary for F2 and F3, but not for FJnr. FPA uses a tubular chassis IIRC, as does SCCA Formula 1000 - which is practically identical to my proposed Formula Junior.

One valid proposal would be a single design for the monocoque (but as many people allowed to cook them as they want) but not a single design for it. Besides, whilst they have mounting implications a monocoque isn't a real performance differentiator, just a carbon fibre bathtub.

I don't agree that F1 and F2 should be closer together than F2 and F3. F1 will always be at least one order of magnitude dearer than F2 (at the moment it's 2 orders of magnitude - 100 times - dearer than GP2), and I think it's right that F1 should be well ahead of the rest in outright speed.

The costs will always need be nearer to F3 and the performance should be at a reasonable level - but in terms of stature and media exposure, it needs to be nearer to F1. The Premier League-Championship gulf as it were is largest in F1 rather than any other sport. F2 should be offered to the F1 broadcaster in major motorsport countries.

My proposed F2 would be, I guess, somewhere between the current "f2" and GP2 in terms of laptime. It's interesting that good F3 drivers are capable of moving straight into F1 and being competitive, so I don't think speed is an issue when it comes to driver education. Driver stamina is a different matter though, so longer races would be worth considering. Macau is around 45 minutes.

Not all good F3 drivers have done well, Marko Asmer was great in F3 but didn't do well in GP2.

The lengths is one thing I agree about - 45 minutes would be a good length for F3 and Formula Junior finals, and F2 races should be 1 hour to 1 hour 15 minutes.

When I say World Championship, I mean following F1 around for selected GPs. Not all the non-European fly-aways, but the ones that make commercial sense. I have no doubt some venues would help with the costs if the series was credible.

That would be clearly more viable than taking the series to the Mickey Mouse races like Bahrain and China with no fans.

In my opinion, the reason we need a budget cap in F1 and more of the generated income going to the teams, is to get back to situation where F1 didn't hoover up all the sponsorship money, there was enough to go around and enough for companies like Philip Morris to establish driver development schemes through from the lowest formulas up to F1.

Perhaps getting them to do a development scheme in kind by selling heavily subsidized F2 cars would be a good idea. My proposal for a budget cap would be that it would be based on 95% (assuming FOTA buy FOM from CVC, which would be expensive but logical) of a revenue share + a realistic/low sponsorship amount. FOTA Shared revenue should be TV money, sanctioning fees, F1 branded swag, video game rights, collective sponsorship and similar. The 5% and any more sponsorship would be profit. However, the cap shouldn't include driver salaries and engine development (there, the power would be capped).

[Mak]

I can't believe you guys actually sit down and spend so much time writing all this cows fodder!

[AMT]

FPA tubs are aluminium honeycomb, FBMW are carbonfibre. Ali honeycomb is too restrictive in shape - you have to use flat panels - hence why FPA cars are so ugly. A big NO to a single monocoque design. It should be up to the manufacturer to decide the design of the car. If the rules are stable and he gets his design right, the monocoque design should be good for at least 3 years, and because the investment is substantial there's a big motivation to do it right.

The big issue here is the pace of development in F1 compared to the formulas below it - GP2 is fixed for 3 years, zero development allowed (not even taping over body joints). There's no opportunity for a driver to learn to develop a car, and in GP2 almost no track time to do it anyway. Asmer was great in F3, but the fact that he failed in GP2 (did he? I don't follow it) was probably due to the team he was with: the idea that a fixed monotype formula means that it's all down to driver is another myth.

Originally Posted by Mak

I can't believe you guys actually sit down and spend so much time writing all this cows fodder!

Cut out the fizzy drinks - you'll find it easier to concentrate

[Mystery]

I've been watching motor racing most of my life I can remember but way back when it seemed so much more straight forward.

You had karting for the kids, and the best of those might head off to do some local Formula Ford maybe, best of those might get a national F3 slot. A couple of champs jumped straight to F1 but most went via F2/3000.

Whatever was wrong with that? It was simple, easy to understand, easy to sell to sponsors I'd imagine too. If I was trying to market a WSR team to a sponsor and they asked me, so how far away from F1 is this driver, I'd be stumped.

Whilst I hate to say this NASCAR still have the right structure, local racing, then more powerful national racing, then in progressively bigger better classes up to Sprint Cup. Keep it simple people!

[brucelok2003]

Yea there are too many racing series.

I think they should cut or combine some series which have 10-12 cars to participate (Each of them).

[Roninho]

No there are not to many series.

GP2, WSR, Euro/British/Spanish/German F3 and F2 all have full grids, so there is a demand. Series like Euroseries 3000 or F3 Italia don't have full grids and they will be a marginal serie or slowly dissapear. And to be honest i don't think the average joe and/or the f1 bosses give it any consideration anyway.

Only thing i really think is missing is that there are only junior series, there is no 2nd division to F1 where there are succesfull standalone events, good tv-coverage, teams having decent sponsorship and drivers actually can make some money. Something like the Nation wide series is to Nascar.
A serie where ex-f1 drivers, guys who just missed out on F1 and young talents would battle it out with each other and the best of these having a nice career in this serie. A1GP is trying to be this, but they haven't landed good media-coverage and sponsorships, and i'm wondering if they ever will make that break-through.

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by Roninho

Only thing i really think is missing is that there are only junior series, there is no 2nd division to F1 where there are succesfull standalone events, good tv-coverage, teams having decent sponsorship and drivers actually can make some money.
A serie where ex-f1 drivers, guys who just missed out on F1 and young talents would battle it out with each other and the best of these having a nice career in this serie. A1GP is trying to be this, but they haven't landed good media-coverage and sponsorships, and i'm wondering if they ever will make that break-through.

Isn't GP2 like this, certainly has been in the recent past. People like Pantano, Pizzonia, Carroll, Di Grassi have either been F1 drivers or had fair amount of F1testing experience and paid for that experience to lead GP2 teams.

I think there's every chance that the series will see more and more drivers continuing to do GP2 for multiple years, with drivers dropping in and out of F1 because GP2 is always in front of the F1 team managers and the cars are good fun to drive.

As a pure fan, i'd rather see it 'stand alone' like 3000 used to be but I guess being on the F1 card makes it easier to get budgets?

What we won't see unfortunately in these overtly commercial and pressured times is top line F1 drivers guesting in GP2 races. Brilliant to see it would be, but there's too many driver and F1 team bosses egos that could be bruised in front of their major sponsors!!

As for overall number of series, from a simplistic point of view it would be easier for everyone if there was one key category at every level of the ladder like there was until about 10 years ago or so, or 2 series at every level maximum.

We can't grumble as at the moment as there's more to go an see as speccies, as long as what we go an see has quality cars and drivers on the grids, something we always have had with F Ford; FF2000/GM Lotus, F2 and the OLD F2/3000/GP2 level.

[courageous]

GP2 (& arguably the sharp end of A1) meet that aim as far as drivers go, but a real second division should have the fastest cars on pace with the slowest cars from the first division.

There is such a jump between GP2/A1/Indycar & F1 performance, the nearlyman has to switch to NASCAR, Touring cars or Le Mans (from where they almost never come back)

[duke_toaster]

In my opinion it's not a performance gulf that's the problem, it's the gap in exposure. If an F2 were to mirror F1 rules more the series would probably be more effective.

[Roninho]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Isn't GP2 like this, certainly has been in the recent past. People like Pantano, Pizzonia, Carroll, Di Grassi have either been F1 drivers or had fair amount of F1testing experience and paid for that experience to lead GP2 teams.

I think there's every chance that the series will see more and more drivers continuing to do GP2 for multiple years, with drivers dropping in and out of F1 because GP2 is always in front of the F1 team managers and the cars are good fun to drive.

To some degree yes, but at this moment it sure isn't a serie where 15 drivers are being paid to race. Maybe they can develop into this but i'm not sure, gp2/cvc doesn't seem to care much for the tv-exposure.

In the first year of GP2 they had a break after a couple of races when F1 changed it's qualifying format and the big tv-networks had a free tv slot on sunday morning. GP2 had 1.8 million viewers on spanish tv for the barcelona race, 0.8 million on rtl in germany for the french gp and 0.8 million on rai in italy for nurnburgring. Unfortunately the tv-deals fell through for the next year because with these kind of viewers you really can attract sponsorship as a team.

[Roninho]

Originally Posted by courageous

GP2 (& arguably the sharp end of A1) meet that aim as far as drivers go, but a real second division should have the fastest cars on pace with the slowest cars from the first division.

There is such a jump between GP2/A1/Indycar & F1 performance, the nearlyman has to switch to NASCAR, Touring cars or Le Mans (from where they almost never come back)

This has nothing to do with speed, but with money. In Nascar, Touring Cars and Le Mans there are manufacturers willing to spend money on a good salary for a talented driver. There are almost no teams who have this kind of money available for salary in GP2 & A1GP.

If Mercedes would offer the salaries they offer(ed) in DTM to drive in F3 you'd see a lot of ex-f1 drivers back in f3.

[bella]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

In my opinion it's not a performance gulf that's the problem, it's the gap in exposure. If an F2 were to mirror F1 rules more the series would probably be more effective.

this is where renault work their genius. the wsr cars look exactly like the f1 cars (to the idle eye) so it's easy for the casual spectator to link the two. they don't need to understand the rules, they have the aesthetic link and for the non-motorsport person, the casual fan, that's the really important bit.

which is where i don't think your plan works. to get the really massive exposure you have to involve the casual fans, the people who don't really know what they're watching. they also don't really know (or care about) the rules. take f2, tart the cars up and make them look like f1 cars, then exhibition run a williams f1 car alongside them and that might help the people who actually bother to turn up. that's a start.

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by Roninho

gp2/cvc doesn't seem to care much for the tv-exposure.

In the first year of GP2 they had a break after a couple of races when F1 changed it's qualifying format and the big tv-networks had a free tv slot on sunday morning. GP2 had 1.8 million viewers on spanish tv for the barcelona race, 0.8 million on rtl in germany for the french gp and 0.8 million on rai in italy for nurnburgring. Unfortunately the tv-deals fell through for the next year because with these kind of viewers you really can attract sponsorship as a team.

I'm sure there's no coincidence that so many people were interested in it. The racing has been far better then F1 ever since GP2's inception.

I'm also sure it's no coincidence that there isn't a decent 'proper' tv deal for the series as a result. Bernie simply does not favout anything that even remotely looks like it might damage his baby.

GP2's big break could come as a result of the F1/FOTA split assuming it happens.

As you allude to, the golden 'formula' for any sport, racing or otherwise, is make a good series = public interest = tv figures = sponsorship magnate.

[Go_For_Pole]

Here we go, GP3 car has emerged