F1 Racing - UK (2020-07)

FINISHING STRAIGHT

THE FINAL LAP

last season’s championship-

winning Mercedes, not a ripple

of complaint has emanated from

Brackley. Likewise, successive

generations of Haas chassis

closely resemble Ferrari’s

back catalogue since Haas

employs a perfectlylegal ( though

widely complained-about) technicalpartnership withMaranello.

It buys as many components as it can from Ferrari; it is the very

definitionof a client.

Might this cosiness be in danger of being unpicked by the coming

budget cap? Renault team principal Cyril Abiteboul has suggested

that it could.

“Now that we have a budgetcap that is low enough that the grid

will be much more competitive, I’m curious to see what will happen

to those collaborations betweenteams,” he toldGP Racing’ssister

titleAutosport. “Because Ithink r ight now Mercedes is happyto

let Racing Point copy its car. Whether it’s legal or not legal isn’t

my point– but they’re very happy to help

them in making their car very competitive.

I will be very curious to see if that’s still the

case for 2022.

“Anyone will be a threat to anyone, that’s

the game changer.”

You would be hard-pushed to find anyone

not desirous of such a state of affairs. But

Renault is a team with a recent history of

permitting under-delivery totrudge in on

the coat tails of over-promising, and I fear

that Cyril’s optimism may not be accurately

reflected in whattransp ires over the next

couple of years. For a start, there will still

be huge gaps in resources and expenditure:

in our feature on p50 this month you’ll see

both Otmar Szafnauer and Guenther Steiner

admit their teams are spending less than

the budget cap threshold of $145m. Even if

the larger teams undergo shrinkage pains as

they downsize, they still have vast archives

of data and research they can’t unlearn.

Or perhaps Formula 1 really is coming

back towards Renault, the one team in the

field with no clients to speak of. Abiteboul

has longsaid that Renault’s aim was to beat

the top teams while operating at 85% of

their resources. Maybe this is his chanceto

prove that it can...

Given unfettered spending,racing series

really do develop a practical and philosophical

parallel with wedding cakes – they all end in tiers.

Arguments about how to rein in that spending,

at least in Formula 1, have been raging since

not long after the recessionbefore the recession

before last. What’s interesting is that while the

competitors have (grudgingly for the most part)

knuckled under to FIA clampdowns ontesting,

mandatory long-life gearboxes and engines and

such, a newecosystem has gradually emerged –

one in which smaller teams end up as clients or

vassals to larger ones.

Compare the spread of laptimes across thegrid

with those of, say, 25 years ago, and you’ll see the

pace differential has come down from perhaps

8-10secs to 3-4secsper lap at certain tracks. And

yet tiers remain, albeit fewer and more compact.

F1 is currently atwo- tier sport in which you

cannot win unless you’re driving for one of the

top three teams, and the gap between them and

the rest of the grid remains substantial.

This state of affairs has persisted during the

hybrid era, during which time the client-team

system has evolved, founded upon the principle

of powertrain powerbroking. The likes of Racing

Point and Williams may gnash their teeth at

being unable to get closer tothe fr ont, but when

did youlast see them vote againstMercedes?

And while several midfielders have railed against

the Racing Point car’s close resemblance to

DON’T BITE

THE HAND THAT

FEEDS YOU...

PICTURE

:MANUELGORIA

.ILLUSTRATION

:BENJAMIN

WA

CHENJE

@CoddersF1 facebook.com/gpracingonline

PICTURES

98 GP RACING JULY 2020

STUART CODLING

FLAT

CHAT

{ {

FULLTHROTTLE

MUSINGSWITH

Currently,ifyouwanttowin

inF1youhaveto drive for

oneofthebigthreeteams.

Butaretheclientsaboutto

upsettheirmasters?

PERHAPS F1

REALLY IS COMING

BACKTOWARDS

RENAULT

GPRacinghasapodcast!

Search for ‘Flat Chat with Codders’ in

your podcasting platform of choice.

FINISHING STRAIGHT

THE FINAL LAP

last season’s championship-

winning Mercedes, not a ripple

of complaint has emanated from

Brackley. Likewise, successive

generations of Haas chassis

closely resemble Ferrari’s

back catalogue since Haas

employs a perfectlylegal ( though

widely complained-about) technicalpartnership withMaranello.

It buys as many components as it can from Ferrari; it is the very

definitionof a client.

Might this cosiness be in danger of being unpicked by the coming

budget cap? Renault team principal Cyril Abiteboul has suggested

that it could.

“Now that we have a budgetcap that is low enough that the grid

will be much more competitive, I’m curious to see what will happen

to those collaborations betweenteams,” he toldGP Racing’ssister

titleAutosport. “Because Ithink r ight now Mercedes is happyto

let Racing Point copy its car. Whether it’s legal or not legal isn’t

my point– but they’re very happy to help

them in making their car very competitive.

I will be very curious to see if that’s still the

case for 2022.

“Anyone will be a threat to anyone, that’s

the game changer.”

You would be hard-pushed to find anyone

not desirous of such a state of affairs. But

Renault is a team with a recent history of

permitting under-delivery totrudge in on

the coat tails of over-promising, and I fear

that Cyril’s optimism may not be accurately

reflected in whattransp ires over the next

couple of years. For a start, there will still

be huge gaps in resources and expenditure:

in our feature on p50 this month you’ll see

both Otmar Szafnauer and Guenther Steiner

admit their teams are spending less than

the budget cap threshold of $145m. Even if

the larger teams undergo shrinkage pains as

they downsize, they still have vast archives

of data and research they can’t unlearn.

Or perhaps Formula 1 really is coming

back towards Renault, the one team in the

field with no clients to speak of. Abiteboul

has longsaid that Renault’s aim was to beat

the top teams while operating at 85% of

their resources. Maybe this is his chanceto

prove that it can...

Given unfettered spending,racing series

really do develop a practical and philosophical

parallel with wedding cakes – they all end in tiers.

Arguments about how to rein in that spending,

at least in Formula 1, have been raging since

not long after the recessionbefore the recession

before last. What’s interesting is that while the

competitors have (grudgingly for the most part)

knuckled under to FIA clampdowns ontesting,

mandatory long-life gearboxes and engines and

such, a newecosystem has gradually emerged –

one in which smaller teams end up as clients or

vassals to larger ones.

Compare the spread of laptimes across thegrid

with those of, say, 25 years ago, and you’ll see the

pace differential has come down from perhaps

8-10secs to 3-4secsper lap at certain tracks. And

yet tiers remain, albeit fewer and more compact.

F1 is currently atwo- tier sport in which you

cannot win unless you’re driving for one of the

top three teams, and the gap between them and

the rest of the grid remains substantial.

This state of affairs has persisted during the

hybrid era, during which time the client-team

system has evolved, founded upon the principle

of powertrain powerbroking. The likes of Racing

Point and Williams may gnash their teeth at

being unable to get closer tothe fr ont, but when

did youlast see them vote againstMercedes?

And while several midfielders have railed against

the Racing Point car’s close resemblance to

DON’T BITE

THE HAND THAT

FEEDS YOU...

PICTURE

:MANUELGORIA

.ILLUSTRATION

:BENJAMIN

WA

CHENJE

@CoddersF1 facebook.com/gpracingonline

PICTURES

98 GP RACING JULY 2020

STUART CODLING

FLAT

CHAT

{ {

FULLTHROTTLE

MUSINGSWITH

Currently,ifyouwanttowin

inF1youhaveto drive for

oneofthebigthreeteams.

Butaretheclientsaboutto

upsettheirmasters?

PERHAPS F1

REALLY IS COMING

BACKTOWARDS

RENAULT

GPRacinghasapodcast!

Search for ‘Flat Chat with Codders’ in

your podcasting platform of choice.