Chassis Sharing
February 8th 2007 05:13
The continuing row over the use of customer ars in F1 (i.e. the purchase of one teams chassis and/or parts by another to use competitively) is inviting opinion among many in the Paddock. Spyker team boss, Colin Kolles spearheaded the dissent, claiming it to unsporting and especially unfair to his team, whose closest rivals, STR and Super Aguri will be racing with cars that they had no part in developing or building. Kolles’ sentiments have been echoed by McLaren’s team boss Ron Dennis and Williams’ engineering maestro, Patrick Head.
The issue has heated up to the point where Kolle’s is threatening to let it boil over in the courts. “If we don’t like the cars, then we will have an injunction, for sure”, he said.
“They will have to learn the hard way”, he said. “They” of course, referring to Super Aguri and STR, who are thought to be planning to exploit a loophole in the Concorde Agreement, whereby the Intellectual Property rights to the chassis’ they plan on using, the Honda RA106 and Red Bull RB3 respectively, are owned by third parties outside of the immediate realm of F1.
But while STR and Super Aguri are confident that they are well within the law, there are calls now to exclude them from the championship. “I don’t see how a team can compete and score points in a Constructor’s Championship if they’re not a constructor,” said Patrick Head at the launch of Williams’ FW29.
Spyker’s grievances are reasonable –as for sporting and monetary (FOM’s television revenue) reasons they would not like to see their nearest competitors waltz off with points that they could have earned with an original car. But the vocal involvement of McLaren and Williams suggest that this is a rapidly expanding concern that is affecting the upper reaches of pitlane.
FIA president, Max Mosely seems quite happy to allow this level of technology sharing, or ‘leasing’ in the name of cost cutting. It was his initiative to change the sporting regulations for 2008 onwards to allow such exchange of technology in an effort to reduce costs and increase racing competitiveness.
It is here where the FIA’s desire to reduce the running cost of F1, and the common spectators desire to witness closer racing meet. The regulations seem to be heading towards racing homogenisation: same tyres, same ECU’s, frozen engines and soon – same chassis’. David Richards makes no secret of the fact that his team, Prodrive, due to debut in 2008, will take full advantage of these regulations. “I want to do things in my own very frugal way,” said Richards, who is planning to simply lease out a manufacturers chassis and operate as a non-works team.
The trend is heading towards one-make series territory, where racing is close, but prestige is compromised. As Peter Windsor said in February edition of F1 Racing, “If this is the future of Formula 1, then we might as well call it Champ Car.”
Windsor’s fears are certainly justified. Despite threats of legal action – the FIA seem resolute in increasing momentum on the chassis-sharing idea. It is up to the manufacturers now, to stick to their guns and remain in opposition. This is a battle that will rage on and on.
“They will have to learn the hard way”, he said. “They” of course, referring to Super Aguri and STR, who are thought to be planning to exploit a loophole in the Concorde Agreement, whereby the Intellectual Property rights to the chassis’ they plan on using, the Honda RA106 and Red Bull RB3 respectively, are owned by third parties outside of the immediate realm of F1.
But while STR and Super Aguri are confident that they are well within the law, there are calls now to exclude them from the championship. “I don’t see how a team can compete and score points in a Constructor’s Championship if they’re not a constructor,” said Patrick Head at the launch of Williams’ FW29.
FIA president, Max Mosely seems quite happy to allow this level of technology sharing, or ‘leasing’ in the name of cost cutting. It was his initiative to change the sporting regulations for 2008 onwards to allow such exchange of technology in an effort to reduce costs and increase racing competitiveness.
It is here where the FIA’s desire to reduce the running cost of F1, and the common spectators desire to witness closer racing meet. The regulations seem to be heading towards racing homogenisation: same tyres, same ECU’s, frozen engines and soon – same chassis’. David Richards makes no secret of the fact that his team, Prodrive, due to debut in 2008, will take full advantage of these regulations. “I want to do things in my own very frugal way,” said Richards, who is planning to simply lease out a manufacturers chassis and operate as a non-works team.
The trend is heading towards one-make series territory, where racing is close, but prestige is compromised. As Peter Windsor said in February edition of F1 Racing, “If this is the future of Formula 1, then we might as well call it Champ Car.”
Windsor’s fears are certainly justified. Despite threats of legal action – the FIA seem resolute in increasing momentum on the chassis-sharing idea. It is up to the manufacturers now, to stick to their guns and remain in opposition. This is a battle that will rage on and on.
| 35 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
