For multiple reasons, 2014 will go down as a defining year for the sport of Formula 1. And I say this for technical, sporting, and commercial reasons.
The past month hasn’t been the best for the sport on the commercial front, but we’ll get into that later. The biggest positive of the 2014 F1 season is the successful switch from V8’s to hybrid V6 turbo engines – in what could be called the most ambitious regulatory change in the sport, ever!
I was a loud opponent (louder than the hybrid V6 turbos for sure) of this switch. While I appreciate the technological advancements made on the powertrain front, I think Formula 1 has overdone it in their attempt to ‘appear’ environmental friendly. While the speeds and acceleration numbers haven’t been impacted, the crucial element of ‘sound’ has. And this is possibly the only area in which I agree with the CEO of the sport.
Being against the move, why do I label the switch a successful one? Well, think back to February (pre-season testing), except for the Mercedes powered cars, all the others struggled to even finish a race distance. Despite this, the immense engineering talent in the sport ensured that we didn’t have a single race that could be labelled as a farce due to multiple ‘technical’ failures (well, except for Lotus, of course). Although you could argue that we have had a World Championship that’s been decided on the might of a particular powertrain – but that’s another argument altogether.
Will this technology make it to road cars in the near future? Well, I certainly hope so. But will it be affordable enough for the average Formula 1 fan? I wouldn’t think so. Given the cost escalations in the sport, and the millions spent in R&D for this new hybrid powertrain, the only thing an average F1 fan could afford this year was a can of Red Bull.
And while there was the successful transition to the hybrid powertrains, there is talk amongst many teams (except for Mercedes, of course) about a switch back to the much-loved V8’s for multiple reasons. Sound being one of the obvious reasons, and the second being cost. The V8’s may have two extra cylinders, but their cost is nearly a third of the current powertrains (or so I’m told).
While the switch back may seem logical to many, I believe it would be highly illogical and could backfire on many levels. Firstly, these power units should have been properly researched before being launched and unleashed on the fans. We’ve done well to accept this change. And now that the switch has been made, going back would indicate that the sport isn’t sure of itself and it’s place in an evolving ecosystem. From an automotive industry point of view as well, moving back to fuel guzzling V8’s could be a PR disaster for the likes of Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault.
From a sporting point of view, 2014 was similar to the year before – wherein the technical advantage between teams helped decide the eventual winner. The biggest difference being that, unlike Red Bull Racing, Mercedes allowed their drivers to race – and race they did! The Rosberg vs. Hamilton battle will go down in history as one of the most epic teammate battles in the modern era – and I can only hope that more teams join the fight in 2015. There’s nothing quite like watching drivers in different cars having a go at the title. Remember 2009, 2008, 2007...?
The question is, will the double points system have an impact on the World Championship result? You’ll know by the time you read this, and I certainly hope it hasn’t. While Hamilton has won 10 GP’s (before Abu Dhabi) this season, Rosberg’s consistency has been noteworthy. I’m sure that we’ll see more of their battles in the coming years – at which point we’ll be hoping that Mercedes publically displays a little more support for Rosberg.
And, lastly, 2014 will be remembered as the year in which the sport gave its first indication of going into extinction. Apart from Caterham and Marussia’s disappearance from the grid, and the unequal treatment meted out to the mid-field teams – Lotus, Sahara Force India and Sauber – Bernie Ecclestone’s statements have me worried.
The octogenarian Ring Master publicly disregarded a majority of F1 fans recently when he stated that Formula 1 targets mainly retired 70-year olds who have the money to buy a Rolex, as opposed to teenagers with little or no disposable income – because apparently they’re of little or no value to sponsors.
And while you do have to keep everything in context, what worries me is the brattish manner in which the statement was made – and that too by the CEO of the sport! Time and again Formula 1 has failed in its attempts to lure a new generation, not to mention audiences in new territories like Turkey, Korea, India, and several others. While new countries (and hence circuits) line up every year to host Formula 1, Bernie must realise that there’s only so much one can milk the brand without backing it with a proven ‘product’ (yes, that’s the marketer in me talking).
One may argue about powertrains, their sound, or lack thereof, or about the increasing prominence of pay drivers on the grid, but what good are these arguments if the audiences don’t flock to the circuits or tune into the global television feed? Bernie Ecclestone has built Formula 1 to where it is today, but he could also be blamed for the inability of the sport to reinvent itself and appeal to newer audiences – all of which are important for the ‘Formula 1 economy’ to flourish. And if you think about it, Formula E is doing the exact opposite in terms of marketing and promotions when compared with Formula 1.
But, for the old timers (not just the 70 year olds) the blame game in Formula 1 isn’t something new. And like our friends at Sniff Petrol put it, Bernie’s next statement could well be ‘Formula 1 doesn’t need cars.’ Now can someone go speak to Dorna please?
Read Kunal’s views at his F1 blog.
Write your Comment