Questions about Formula One?

[stratogustav]

- Are the cars made with manual transmission or automatic?

- If cars use manual transmission, is there a clotch? How do the drivers use the clotch, is it a pedal or is it in the wheel?

- Can they use automatic transmission?

- Is there a height limit for drivers?

- Is there an age limit for drivers?

- Why is there a Red Bull team and a Toro Rosso team? Isn't that the same thing?

- If Mecedes, Ferrari, and McLaren have more money? Do teams like Williams or Force India still have a chance to win a season?

- If a car like Mercedes is the fastest, and have a decent driver like Hamilton, doesn't that mean they will automatically win the season?

- If teams like Williams or Force India have no chance whatsoever to win a season why do they even bother to compete?

- Why, in the same car, it would say Aston Martin and Citroën? Which one is it? Is it Aston Martin or Citroën?

- I remember seeing BMW Sauber in the past, why did BMW left?

- Do they always race on the same circuits? If not, how do they determine which circuits they will race at?

 

[Yogisd1]

The cars are made with manual trans.
There is a clutch pedal, but it is only used to start or stop the car at the starting line, or the pits.
An automatic trans would be much slower.
There is no height limit, but they like the drivers to be as small as possible.
There is no age limit. As long as a driver has their racing license, they can race.
Red Bull and Toro Rosso are completely separate teams. Different chassis, different engines. Only the sponsor is the same.
Yes, the other teams have a chance, however small it might be.
Not necessarily. There is always driver error, mechanical failure, and plain bad luck. But it does give them the best chance of winning.
We ask the same question ourselves. They compete to win. Design people are always changing teams, and you never know when they will hit something that gives them an advantage.
They could be an engine maker, or chassis designer, or they could be a sponsor.
If they have left, it was probably because there was no demand for their engines.
They don't always use the same circuits. They will race just about anywhere someone will give them enough money to put on a race, and the track has to be up to F1 standards.

These are the simple answers, but I'm not sure they are the answers you are looking for. There is a lot more to the answers, but I hope this helps.

 

[Charlie Spencer]

- Why is there a Red Bull team and a Toro Rosso team? Isn't that the same thing?

Red Bull and Toro Rosso are completely separate teams. Different chassis, different engines. Only the sponsor is the same.

I'd been wondering about that myself. Thanks for asking, thanks for answering.

 

[donthaveanickname]

I remember seeing BMW Sauber in the past, why did BMW left?

If they have left, it was probably because there was no demand for their engines.

They wanted to win the championship as soon as possible.
I think they just lost patience after only one win in 4 years.

- If teams like Williams or Force India have no chance whatsoever to win a season why do they even bother to compete?

Probably for the same reason why Premium Motorsports competes in MENCS.

Red Bull and Toro Rosso are completely separate teams. Different chassis, different engines. Only the sponsor is the same.

Toro Rosso is Red Bull's Junior Team which was formed from the rest of Minardi.
btw. They will both have Honda engines next year.

 

[stratogustav]

Thank you for all the answers.

About Citroën and Aston Martin I got confused. It says Citrix not Citroën. For a second I thought they were the same car.

However still doesn't make sense why McLaren and Renault are making the same car. Those are two different car manufacturers from two different countries.

That's like buying a BMW that also happens to be a Lexus. It doesn't make sense.

Red Bull and Toro Rosso are completely separate teams. Different chassis, different engines. Only the sponsor is the same.

I think I get it now. It's like two different football teams having the same "fly emirates" sponsor.

I think what makes it confusing is that the names of the teams are exactly the same as the names of their sponsors.

Which makes it weird because is like competing with yourself, you can easily share inside information and make both of your teams win.

However that doesn't happen. One Red Bull always do good and the other doesn't, which should make the team getting the bad results mad for not getting the same level of support from their owners.

 

[stratogustav]

Yes, the other teams have a chance, however small it might be.

I guess that makes sense now that I compare it to football. A team like Levante in Spain has no chance whatsoever to win against teams like Real Madrid and Barcelona that have much more money, but they still play regardless.

 

[donthaveanickname]

About Citroën and Aston Martin I got confused. It says Citrix not Citroën. For a second I thought they were the same car.

Well, Aston Martin is sponsoring the Red Bull team, but they have Renault engines (which are labeled "TAG Heuer" for sponsorship reasons).
Same with Sauber: Sponsored by Alfa Romeo, but a Ferrari engine.

However still doesn't make sense why McLaren and Renault are making the same car. Those are two different car manufacturers from two different countries.

They are not making the same car, they just use Renault engines.
Not every team makes their own engines. Renault, Ferrari, Mercedes and Honda are the only manufacturer teams. All the other teams have to pay for their engines.

I think what makes it confusing is that the names of the teams are exactly the same as the names of their sponsors.

They are not just sponors, Red Bull owns both teams.
The football comparison doesn't really fit, because PSG and Real Madrid have different owners.
Red Bull however also owns three major Football Clubs. The New York RedBulls, RB Leipzig and RB Salzburg.

btw. Are you from europe?

 

[stratogustav]

They are not just sponors, Red Bull owns both teams.
The football comparison doesn't really fit, because PSG and Real Madrid have different owners.
Red Bull however also owns three major Football Clubs. The New York RedBulls, RB Leipzig and RB Salzburg.

btw. Are you from europe?

No, I live in Santa Clarita California.

I made the football teams comparison because now the sponsorship makes sense with that I mind, but I get that in this case the sponsors are also the owners.

But like I said in the previous reply, that ownership raises another problem, and that is to know why would they have preferences over one of their teams?

I imagine the team without too much help would complain for not getting the same level of support and for the favoritism of their owners over the other team. One would think that logically the owners would support both teams equally, sharing the same information and technology to make them both win, but that's not the case here.

There has to be a good reason why that happens.

 

[stratogustav]

Well, Aston Martin is sponsoring the Red Bull team, but they have Renault engines (which are labeled "TAG Heuer" for sponsorship reasons).
Same with Sauber: Sponsored by Alfa Romeo, but a Ferrari engine.

So the body is Aston Martin, but the motor is Renault. I guess I can understand that.

 

[stratogustav]

Well, Aston Martin is sponsoring the Red Bull team, but they have Renault engines (which are labeled "TAG Heuer" for sponsorship reasons).

By the way, that's very interesting because if the Aston Martin cars run with Renault engines, and the McLaren cars also run with Renault engines, but the Red Bull cars are still the fastest ones, that would mean that Aston Marton cars have much better aerodynamics in their design than McLaren. Unless Renault is purposely putting the inferior motors on the McLaren cars for some reason.

 

[donthaveanickname]

No, I live in Santa Clarita California.

OK, I was just surprised because I thought all Americans would call it Soccer.​

So the body is Aston Martin, but the motor is Renault. I guess I can understand that.

No, Aston Martin isn't involved in the construction of those cars at all, they are only a sponsor of the team.

But like I said in the previous reply, that ownership raises another problem, and that is to know why would they have preferences over one of their teams?

There has to be a good reason why that happens.

The RedBull F1 Team was founded in 2005, after they had been involved in the sport as a sponsor for several years.
When the Minardi Team folded at the end of the 2005 Season, Red Bull bought the team and renamed it Toro Rosso. Since then, they use it to give drivers from their junior formula programme a chance to get experience in F1.

By the way, that's very interesting because if the Aston Martin cars run with Renault engines, and the McLaren cars also run with Renault engines, but the Red Bull cars are still the fastest ones, that would mean that Aston Martin cars have much better aerodynamics in their design than McLaren. Unless Renault is purposely putting the inferior motors on the McLaren cars for some reason.

The only thing that is identical on both cars is the power unit. Except that, the cars are completely different.

 

[Charlie Spencer]

No, Aston Martin isn't involved in the construction of those cars at all, they are only a sponsor of the team.

I'm learning a lot here. I'm surprised an auto manufacturer would advertise on a car they aren't technically involved in.

 

[stratogustav]

I'm learning a lot here. I'm surprised an auto manufacturer would advertise on a car they aren't technically involved in.

I agree. It sounds very bizarre, maybe we don't have the full info disclosure of how involved they really are, in order to put their name on the vehicle.

OK, I was just surprised because I thought all Americans would call it Soccer.

I'm an U.S. citizen but I grew up in Central America. Everybody calls it football over there.

The only thing that is identical on both cars is the power unit. Except that, the cars are completely different.

So that means Renault is for sure putting the inferior motors on the McLaren cars?

Because the Red Bull cars are clearly faster, and other than the aerodynamics of the body design, the motor definitely plays a big role in accomplishing that.

 

[Charlie Spencer]

So that means Renault is for sure putting the inferior motors on the McLaren cars?

Because the Red Bull cars are clearly faster, and other than the aerodynamics of the body design, the motor definitely plays a big role in accomplishing that.

I dunno about that conclusion. Look at other racing series. There are lots of examples of multiple teams getting engines from the same source but having different levels of performance. In NASCAR, Roush-Yates makes engines for many Ford teams. The Roush racing teams (which are separate businesses from the engine builders but with a common owner) have cars that are currrently slower than some of the other Ford teams buying the same engines.

 

[stratogustav]

.....buying the same engines.

My guess is that the Renault engines are not the same for McLaren and Red Bull, the same goes for different teams using Honda engines.

What is strange is that if engines make such a big difference, I would imagine less wealthy teams could at least try to get the good engines if they can't afford the better drivers.

 

[Charlie Spencer]

My guess is that the Renault engines are not the same for McLaren and Red Bull, the same goes for different teams using Honda engines.

Any supporting evidence, or is this strictly a guess?

 

[stratogustav]

Any supporting evidence, or is this strictly a guess?

It's just my guess, but the guy above said the same thing. He said only the power unit is the same, but I don't know. All I know is that the Red Bull cars are faster than the McLaren ones and I'm sure the motor plays a part in that. However the guy above said they are both Renault.

 

[stratogustav]

I have another question. Why did they added those halo things on top of the cars? They weren't there before.

Don't they hurt the visibility of the drivers? Is it possible they will go away any time soon?

I ask because I like to play the F1 games, and knowing Codemasters on how they like to resemble the real life look of the sport, they will probably want to put them on the new game too.

 

[donthaveanickname]

I have another question. Why did they added those halo things on top of the cars? They weren't there before.

The reason for the introduction of the Halo was Jules Bianchi's fatal crash in Japan 2014, where he hit the rear of a tractor crane with his head.
They believe a Halo would have saved him, however it surely wouldn't have saved Justin Wilson or Henry Surtees.

Don't they hurt the visibility of the drivers? Is it possible they will go away any time soon?

Maybe they will once be replaced by an aeroscreen, but I have only little hope.
Most drivers didn't like the look of the Halo, but they said they got used to it.

 

[Charlie Spencer]

Some form of halo is coming to Indycar too.

 

[gnomesayin]

I'm learning a lot here. I'm surprised an auto manufacturer would advertise on a car they aren't technically involved in.

I'm suddenly reminded that when SHR switched to Ford, Stewart's sprint car teams also picked up prominent sponsorship from Ford Performance. They said at the beginning of 2017 that they would be running Ford engines in the WoO cars and other series as soon as possible.

They're still using Chevy engines.

 

[FLRacingFan]

Red Bull and Aston do have a technical partnership through Red Bull's engineering arm. They helped develop the Valkyrie road car.

Aston would like to be a PU supplier when the new regs come online in 2021 but it's very dependent on cost, and they're really way too small to be able to do it. I wouldn't put the % chance of them building engines in the double digits. So the current arrangement they have with Red Bull is pretty sufficient for a make of their size.

Any supporting evidence, or is this strictly a guess?

Sometimes when a supplier rolls out an upgrade the delivery to the customer teams will be delayed. F1 made a change this year to try to help ensure that all teams running a particular engine have the same hardware and software, but it's still a work in progress and obviously subject to availability of the parts themselves. Generally the works team of a certain supplier has a better idea of how to package the car around the PU since they developed it, but there's an exception in the case of Renault, who don't run as well as their Red Bull customers.

 

[stratogustav]

The reason for the introduction of the Halo was Jules Bianchi's fatal crash in Japan 2014, where he hit the rear of a tractor crane with his head. They believe a Halo would have saved him.

That's a cheap way to clean their hands. He obviously was a victim from the extreme incompetence of the ones in charge of Formula One. Who in their right mind would leave a tractor on the road in the middle of a race? That was a case of negligence and I'm surprised no one high above got fired or put in jail.

 

[stratogustav]

Red Bull and Aston do have a technical partnership through Red Bull's engineering arm. They helped develop the Valkyrie road car.

Aston Martin may be small but they do have some very clever engineers working for them. I'm sure some kind of input has been put into the cars, even if it is just conceptual or purely aesthetics. We probably will never know with all the secrecy within the sport.

 

[stratogustav]

Sometimes when a supplier rolls out an upgrade the delivery to the customer teams will be delayed. F1 made a change this year to try to help ensure that all teams running a particular engine have the same hardware and software, but it's still a work in progress and obviously subject to availability of the parts themselves. Generally the works team of a certain supplier has a better idea of how to package the car around the PU since they developed it, but there's an exception in the case of Renault, who don't run as well as their Red Bull customers.

That still implies that all Renault engines despite the inconvenience of the way things get supplied are at least supposed to be the exact same for all the teams that use it, with the same hardware and software, and that those little inconveniences of how things get supplied make all the difference.

That is very hard to believe considering how much more different the performance of those cars are. They don't perform even close. There is no way the drivers are the ones to blame. You can tell it's the cars.

 

[cheesepuffs]

Aston Martin has zero input and Red Bull engineering is stronger than Aston engineering anyway. The Aston sponsorship is literally just them paying money to advertise on the car.

Red Bull is faster than Renault because of a superior chassis. And McLaren is so slow because they are having trouble correlating their aero simulations to real life. Their aero and chassis are not as good as the others.

The FIA themselves have said that the halo would not have saved Jules. It wasn’t put into place as a reaction to Jules. It’s so if a car goes under another then the drivers head will be protected.

Only one team uses Honda engines (Toro Rosso) but Red Bull will be switching to Honda next year too.

 

[stratogustav]

Aston Martin has zero input and Red Bull engineering is stronger than Aston engineering anyway. The Aston sponsorship is literally just them paying money to advertise on the car.

Red Bull is faster than Renault because of a superior chassis. And McLaren is so slow because they are having trouble correlating their aero simulations to real life. Their aero and chassis are not as good as the others.

The FIA themselves have said that the halo would not have saved Jules. It wasn’t put into place as a reaction to Jules. It’s so if a car goes under another then the drivers head will be protected.

Only one team uses Honda engines (Toro Rosso) but Red Bull will be switching to Honda next year too.

Thanks for the info. I like clear answers like that.

The Aston Martin thing is very ironic, and I believe it, but it makes no sense from a sponsorship standpoint. I guess their rationalizations are that most people that don't follow the sport would simply assume the Red Bull is an Aston Martin car because they don't know.

Although, if you are sponsoring the entire construction and design of the vehicle I'm sure they can still argue some philosophical ideas of who is really making the car, even if we know all they are doing is putting down the money.

About the FIA, it is extremely unlikely that they will decide to remove the halo because of the head protection, but if they stated it wouldn't have made a difference maybe there is a very tiny small hope they could.

With the Renault motors I wonder how the chasis can make that much of a difference because in racing terms, it is indeed massive. I'm sure it is something complicated or other teams would replicate similar solutions for their own cars.

 

[cheesepuffs]

Aston does not have any influence over the design of the Red Bull whatsoever. Nor is Aston footing the bill for the entire construction of the car. Red Bull, the drink company, owns and operates the team and puts more money into the team than anybody else. They are mostly self sponsored, and Red Bull is run by some very strong personalities that know what they are doing. The Aston deal is just some extra money coming in, not the main source of cash. It’s the same with Alfa Romeo branding on the Sauber, it’s just a sponsor. And it makes perfect advertising sense because look at all of us talking about it. How many times has Aston Martin already been mentioned in this thread? A lot. That’s the whole point. And they’re getting all of this exposure without even having to run a team. It’s pretty genius.

The halo is never going away.

Chassis and aero design is highly complex. One reason why McLaren is so slow right now because a few years ago they changed the management style of the team to where it is basically run by committee where too many people have to agree on what direction they want to go in with car development, so nothing is really getting done because people veto the ideas of others. Historically the best F1 teams have been run with a very strong leader that tells everybody else what to do in order to complete their vision. This is why Toyota and Honda struggled in the sport so much, because they were trying to decide on everything unanimously, but by the time something is decided like that the competition has already made their next move in development and gets a step ahead.

 

[stratogustav]

Aston does not have any influence over the design of the Red Bull whatsoever. Nor is Aston footing the bill for the entire construction of the car.

Yeah, the oher guy said that. I answered to that already i said I believe it

Red Bull, the drink company, owns and operates the team and puts more money into the team than anybody else. They are mostly self sponsored, and Red Bull is run by some very strong personalities that know what they are doing. The Aston deal is just some extra money coming in, not the main source of cash. It’s the same with Alfa Romeo branding on the Sauber, it’s just a sponsor.

That's also good to know because that way theybcan't make any philosophical claims.

And it makes perfect advertising sense because look at all of us talking about it. How many times has Aston Martin already been mentioned in this thread? A lot. That’s the whole point. And they’re getting all of this exposure without even having to run a team. It’s pretty genius.

Yeah, thay's pretty much tge same conclusion I stated in the previous comment when I was talking about how people thaf don't know tye sport will ask the same questions.

The halo is never going away.

That's what it looks like, the possibilities of that changing are pretty much zero, but at least the other guy said they are not related to the death of Jules, maybe there is a chance if we want to dream a little. In the face of reality it looks impossible though

[quore]Chassis and aero design is highly complex.[/quote]

Yeah, that's what I said I imagine is the case because other teams would be easily replicating that.

One reason why McLaren is so slow right now because a few years ago they changed the management style of the team to where it is basically run by committee where too many people have to agree on what direction they want to go in with car development, so nothing is really getting done because people veto the ideas of others.

That sucks because Fernando Alonso appears to be a great driver.

Historically the best F1 teams have been run with a very strong leader that tells everybody else what to do in order to complete their vision. This is why Toyota and Honda struggled in the sport so much, because they were trying to decide on everything unanimously, but by the time something is decided like that the competition has already made their next move in development and gets a step ahead.

What are the best F1 teams historically? I always thought Ferrari and McLaren were the ones.

Also someone told me Williams used to win championships, but that changed in recent years with Mercedes and Red Bull.

I'm surprised I don't see other popular brands competing like Maserati, Alpha Romeo, BMW, Citroën, and even engine makers like Renault.

Someone said BMW was, but they left recently because of costs I believe.

I also remember seeing a very good documentary of Ayrton Senna where there were some Lotus cars, but way back in the day.

 

[cheesepuffs]

Ferrari is best historically with McLaren having done very well too, but yes Williams back years ago was very strong. Renault does have their own team, they are the yellow cars. The reason why you don't see more car brands involved is because the cost is very high to be competitive. Ferrari for example has a budget of $500 million per season. McLaren is more like $200 million and they haven't won a race since 2013.

 

[stratogustav]

Yeah, that's a lot of money. I don't blame them. You have to sell quite a few cars to get that, and those are brands that usually don't strive for quantity as much.

 

[Zerkfitting]

I was wondering about the use of the safety car in F1. It appears that teams can gain an advantage when the safety car comes out. In NASCAR the pits are closed until the pace car gathers the field. What is the rule in F1?

 

[Marcingak]

I was wondering about the use of the safety car in F1. It appears that teams can gain an advantage when the safety car comes out. In NASCAR the pits are closed until the pace car gathers the field. What is the rule in F1?

NASCAR is different because when the yellow flag comes out your position is frozen and pit road is closed. You can still gain an advantage if you pit right before pit road closes but that mostly works on road courses and bigger tracks. In F1 pit road remains open and if you pit you lose less time because the cars on the track are going slower.