Toyota out of F1

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SPORT/11/04/motorsport.toyota.formula.one/index.html?eref=rss_latest

For someone who is watching Toyota fairly closely, I'm not that surprised. They are really hurting in Japan right now, and Toyota isn't in such a great posistion that many of you think.

Keep you eye on Toyota over the next 5 years. Will they becore GM, or get back to their core- that's the big question now.

Eric

Japan removes themselves from F1 just as they have a great rising star!

he will drive...they will not. Someone will want him bad enough to lure him from his countries now non existent player in the big dance.

The reqal question is - how will F1 re invent itself to avoid a full on collapse? Its like a full on supernova - its weight crushing itself as it overgrew its own ability to exist. I love F1 - I remember being a young teen, first beginning to enjoy autosport, and there was an F1 race on TV. During a pre-race bit, they explained how Nissan motors in their cars were essentially just modified standard production blocks with some fancy engineering in the head. Even the crank was the same. I thought how awesome was it I could own technology straight outa a race car. Now its sad that F1 has pushed the envelope to the point that theyre crumbling.

It will become a one constructor spec series....All Fezzas.

m

I'd heard about Toyota but not about Bridgestone.

I too loved F1 and it was getting even better, but the F1 teams association had the right idea and FIA the wrong. I removed F1 from my DVR right after Abu Dhabi and don't intend to watch next year at all.

Is my understanding correct in that what has happened to F1 is basically what happened to NASCAR?

By that, I mean that back in the day, NASCAR was pushing the envelope of technology. Then, that technology started getting "too good", making the cars too fast, so they started introducing artificial limitations, and eventually you end up with a spec series based on many-year old tech.

F1 needs to find a way to reduce costs. I haven't watched it since they put the engine out back and made the cars all look the same. They have to go back to a steel tube frame. The engine should be up front where God and Henry Ford intended. How many cars have the engine in the back, 2% maybe? When they move the engine up front they should put carbs on it. Surely some of them can figure out how to make a Weber or 4 work, the Fuel injection is too complicated for my feeble mind to understand. Go back to pushrods and one cam. It's good enough for my car It's good enough for them. And in the back the could go with a live axle, or maybe one of those goofy swing arms that make all kinds of crazy camber changes. And get rid of all those dopey wings. It's not an air show for crissakes. And maybe give all the little sissies drivin the cars names I can saw, like Bob or Fred. If I wanted to watch little pieces of plastic fly around every which way I'd go look in the shredder at the recycling plant.

I say keep the engines out back in F1 BUT use OE transmissions and OE derived engines.

Power should start at 350hp and be limited to 10,000 rpm (yes you can build 1,500hp 9500 rpm engines, you just need to keep that power from not igniting the next idea)

Spec the transmission, Spec the tires and limit the aero to equalize performance.

Spec nothing.

Keep it a Formula series.

It seems like it was a good year for F1 and next year looks better. It will be nice to have a US team. I don't understand the gloom and doom statements above.

Get rid of Bernie and it would be even better.

John Brown wrote: I say keep the engines out back in F1 BUT use OE transmissions and OE derived engines. Power should start at 350hp and be limited to 10,000 rpm (yes you can build 1,500hp 9500 rpm engines, you just need to keep that power from not igniting the next idea) Spec the transmission, Spec the tires and limit the aero to equalize performance.

I was thinking about that, but then they'd go crazy on materials to lose weight, and the better funded teams would have a huge advantage again. Although it would be much better than the current situation...

John Brown wrote: I say keep the engines out back in F1 BUT use OE transmissions and OE derived engines.

Fascist. Hitler put the engine in the back too.

Wally wrote: F1 needs to find a way to reduce costs. I haven't watched it since they put the engine out back and made the cars all look the same. They have to go back to a steel tube frame. The engine should be up front where God and Henry Ford intended. How many cars have the engine in the back, 2% maybe? When they move the engine up front they should put carbs on it. Surely some of them can figure out how to make a Weber or 4 work, the Fuel injection is too complicated for my feeble mind to understand. Go back to pushrods and one cam. It's good enough for my car It's good enough for them. And in the back the could go with a live axle, or maybe one of those goofy swing arms that make all kinds of crazy camber changes. And get rid of all those dopey wings. It's not an air show for crissakes. And maybe give all the little sissies drivin the cars names I can saw, like Bob or Fred. If I wanted to watch little pieces of plastic fly around every which way I'd go look in the shredder at the recycling plant.

Wow, I have a 100% different opinion... I love the technology part. If the teams don't want to pay then they don't need to play. I say get rid of most the rules and let em fly. Make it like another Can-Am type series.

I watched the Monte Carlo race this year. As soon as I found out about the rule requiring teams to run two different tire compounds (the wrong one and the right one!) I lost my respect for F1.

In reply to captainkarl:

Wally is um...not typically...serious. I guess. So smile when you read it but don't get flustered by the things he says. Not saying you were flustered.

Here's another rule change for 2010: No fuel stops.

Carson wrote: In reply to captainkarl: Wally is um...not typically...serious. I guess. So smile when you read it but don't get flustered by the things he says. Not saying you were flustered.

I like the Bob and Fred idea. We need an F1 Champion named Fred.

Carson wrote: Here's another rule change for 2010: No fuel stops.

How about an unlimited budget but limiting the series to electric cars. The greens in Europe would be happy about that.

In reply to Snowdoggie:

They're moving away from that, sort of, no more KERS next year.

LOL pushrods...wtf are those

I dont mean limit the tech, I just think they need to take another look at the limiting factors to entice creativity rather than increasing already ZOMG levels of financial backing.

But I guess in the grand scheme, if you can afford to play, then so be it, if you cant, cya and dont let the door hit ya. I just get disillusioned when the bigger car mfgrs cant afford to play with the exotic boys. Like I said, I thought it was cool that F1 tech was roaming the streets on its way to the grocery store and the movie rental place. Kinda like what made nascr cool before it became the crazy spec series it is now...but thats a flounder for another thread

carguy123 wrote: ... I removed F1 from my DVR right after Abu Dhabi and don't intend to watch next year at all.

Surely you jest. Next season could be the most entertaining in many years, with all the withdrawals, upsets, new teams, and rule changes, the series promises to be one wild fosterclark!

I'm looking forward to it myself.

I really enjoyed the last two seasons for many reasons but mostly because I'm English and my boss is Brazilian.

This thread seems to have drifted from Toyota leaving to what's wrong with F1. I don't think you should limit the technology, instead tighten the parameters in which you can use that technology. Here are MY draft rules I suggested about 5 years ago on another forum.

Engine 1. Normally aspirated only
2. 3L max, this is to prevent torque monsters and keep things high revving, see next rule for explanation
3. Maximum inlet restrictor. Standard part supplied by FIA (or whoever run's the show). This can effectively let you pick your power. Size it to cap power at say 800 hp. Limiting to 3L capacity stops people building 10L big block that only rev to 5,000 rpm to negate this rule. The restriction can go anywhere prior to throttle bodies, but there must be no air inlet paths after it. If someone can build a gazillion liter holding tank into the car to get a momentary increase in the available air without killing the aero. package fine.
4. One extra point if the same engine last the whole weekend, one point deducted if more than two engines are used in one weekend. No engine changes during the race.
5. Fuel, 98 Ron unleaded. Samples checked by FIA at every event. Quantity unrestricted. Refueling by gravity at ambient temperature only.

Electronics. 1. Free with the exception that they must use a standard wiring loom/harness, this is available in any number of cylinders the team asks for. It would have standard terminals to mate with whatever sensors and control unit the team wishes. This would help limit but not eradicate driver aids without stopping electronic development. These harnesses could be handed out (with spares) at each event.
2. Telemetry free.

Gearboxes. 1. Semi automatic, max seven gears (plus reverse) but the driver must select each gear. No pre-programmed up or down shift schedules.
2. No CVT's or torque converters

Aerodynamics 1. Flat floor with a minimum ground clearance measured statically when the car is riding on those solid pit/transport wheels, this takes the variable of tire wear or inflation out of it. Obviously these wheels must be the same diameter as the nominal installed diameter of the tires, this will have to be determined and signed off prior to each event. All tires of different compound would have to be from the same mould.
2. From the center line of the car moving outwards the bodywork may only shape out or down, with the exception of the front and rear wing. This will eliminate winglets, barge boards etc. No part of the body may project below the flat floor. There is a max and min stated radius for the transition between the body and the flat floor. To allow for a raised nose there could also be a max and min radius for that, the important thing is little aero devise can start protruding from it. Some sort of exception is also needed for trailing edges and inlets/openings. These could be specified as a max/min radius with a max number of degrees of arc and limits on distance from the edge of panels.
3 Front and rear wing to have a maximum surface area, not just a plan area. If teams want to make wings that are not in a single plane when viewed from the front fine, as it the surface area that's limited. They may also have as many elements as they whish, but the combined surface area is the same. If they use multi element wings all elements must be within 10% overall width and surface area of each other (front and rear are independent of this). This will effectively limit winglets and mean all elements are full width.
4. End plate max area and must be completely flat.
5. There would have to be some carefully written wording for the mounting structures to prevent teams from using wing mounts as a method of circumnavigating rules 2 & 3.

Brakes 1. Max swept area is the only physical limitation.
2. No brake or pad changes during the race.

Wheels tires, the intent is slicks with much more mechanical grip. 1. Minimum four, maximum six wheels
2. Maximum tire tread surface area to be divided between each end of the car as they like. Think of a cylinder surface area. You can run tall narrow or short wide, probably the later. Whatever the teams and tire companies can agree on. Side to side the car must be the same, compound size etc
3. Any tire company must supply at least two teams. These teams must use engines from different manufactures.
4. Tire changes and qualifying tires free, but put a nominal cap of 24 tires per car per weekend to stop it getting too silly, rain excluded from this.

Suspension. 1. Metallic coil springs are the only allowed spring medium. Anti roll or stabilizer bars are excluded from this, but they must not have any effective bump/rebound rate except in roll.
2. Specify a maximum effective mechanical wheel rate of the spring. This is to stop people getting too creative with infinitely stiff springs and just using the tires or compliance in other components as the spring medium.
3. No active method of changing ride height in motion. Sure the aero package will compress the suspension, but this is limited by the down force. Also the # of parameters in the standard loom prevent active control.
4. Self contained dampers. This means no electronic, mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic etc inputs that could give active control. This does not limit remote reservoirs

Other. 1. Minimum weight obviously
2. Certain improved crash standards with a limit to the number of times a season you can change your tub or aero package.
3. Chassis and aero package must be homologated three weeks prior to it first race. If your not ready tough, run last weeks vehicle.
4. Qualifying is a one hour free for all. I know it could get a bit boring for live TV with 30 mins of no one on track. I loved the old method, it was the strategy thing again, watching track/ weather conditions and trying to get out for the best conditions but on an empty track. You can re-fuel after qualifying as well. No car can exit the pits if another car is within a certain distance of the start/finish. N warm up or slow down lap can be slower than 90% of the cars qualifying time or the qualifying time gets modified accordingly. This stops someone trying to hold up other people.
5. With the exception of rain a max of four pit stops per car. This is meant to be a race, not a series of qualifying laps after all. But if you can make the whole race without stopping great.
6. I'll keep the no tire change with re-fueling as that will make it interesting. What's better, light fuel and make the tires last or heavy fuel and keep changing tires. If you get a flat tire on your fuel in lap tough you should have come in a lap earlier, or you'll just have to go around again.

It's interesting to try an put this lot in words. I've watched F1 since around 1980 and I've had many conversations with my father and other people over the years as to what I would or wouldn't do If I were crowned Grand F1 Puba. What seems simple and straight forward in you head is a whole lot more difficult to express in 'rule' form, even when it's just a fun informal way like this. The truth is actually writing rules for the most expensive, high stakes sport in the world has got to be a tough job.

Adrian Thompson Rule writer in training.

Money cap, no cap on technology.

That's the way I'd like to see it.

Sure F1 lost two teams this year but there are four new teams joining next year. And there are always teams waiting to replace teams that drop out. I don't see losing Toyota as that big a lost. I don't like the direction F1 is going. However the FOTA has done a pretty good job of opposing the craziest rule changes and hopefully with whoever replaces that idiot known as Mosley, things will get better. I thought the last two seasons featured some great racing.