F1 2014: A casualty of the casual fan?

03/04/2014
FEATURE BY MIKE LAWRENCE

Bernie missed the Australian GP, he had been winning a law suit in London while having his credibility as a witness disparaged by a judge. Win some, lose some.

He had seen Melbourne on TV and had issued a statement criticising the sound of the engines and demanding that something had to be done.

It is reported that, when Bernie arrived at Sepang, and heard the cars, he said they were not as bad as he had thought and that a small increase of sound was all that was needed.

To me, that sounds like a man in retreat because he knows that he can do nothing. The impresario is no longer running the show. For good or ill, the FIA has resumed the task for which it exists, which is to be the governing body.

Bernie has to be conciliatory because there is nothing else he can be. The show he runs is dependent on the show the FIA runs and, for the first time in more than thirty years, they are not identical.

We could have more sound because the engines are running at only about 12,000 rpm whereas they are capable of 15,000 rpm were they permitted the fuel. Only two things could make that happen in the short term: fuel stops or a major redesign of the cars to have bigger tanks and it is unlikely that either is an option.

The FIA, and its technical advisors, have decided on a green agenda and the only way that engines are going to reach 15,000 rpm is by careful, detailed, long-term development. That is a fascinating challenge for the boffins, but it does tend to exclude most of us.

Grand Prix racing has never been about mainstream technical innovation. Our road cars do not have wings or bargeboards and we certainly expect our tyres to last more than 50 miles.

During the turbo era there were advances in F1 engine management systems, but so there were across the board. McLaren employed Bosch to deal with its TAG engines, but Bosch was already on the case and was also exploring the microchip in other ways, like electronic ABS and traction control.

The huge advances in road car engines were not made though racing, they came about because of computer technology, particularly in machine tools. Engines in even the most humble cars are made now to tolerances that once were the preserve of Rolls-Royce. Kia has come from nowhere to being the first company to offer a seven year warranty.

Road cars are now offering unprecedented levels of economy and performance from small engines. In Europe, there are some outstanding diesel engines which are economical and durable and have the sort of torque that can uproot tree stumps.

In Formula One, the turbo era was a dead-end. For a while some manufacturers boosted bogmobiles by adding turbos and large decals. The turbo found its real niche with the diesel engine and, more recently, with small capacity two and three cylinder engines of outstanding performance.

In the late 1960s, some F1 teams explored four wheel drive and that was another dead-end. A 4WD car was heavier and it had to be wider to accommodate the front to rear prop shaft. Aerofoils and improved tyres solved the traction problems which 4WD was supposed to address.

The first modern car with all-wheel drive was the 1967 Jensen FF, which was also the first road car with anti-lock brakes, no matter what Mercedes-Benz claims. It was Audi and the Quattro which made the case for four-wheel drive and did so in rallying.

All-wheel drive is just an embarrassing footnote in Formula One history. It cannot be repeated too many times, Grand Prix racing is not about technical advance which may benefit you or me.

At Sepang, Bernie said that the F1 engines sounded worse on TV rather than trackside. I thought we TV viewers were important. We are why there will be double points at Abu Dhabi, to keep us on the edge of our couches. We are why sponsors throw millions at teams so we will notice their presence.

Formula One exists in its present corpulent state because of television; not the technology, but we, the viewers. It is the audience which decides whether a show will be a hit or a flop.

There are some positive changes this year and one is watching drivers handle the massive torque they have at their disposal. We used to call that 'grunt' because we could hear the engines work, now it is a 'woosh' from the battery pack.

Sebastian Vettel has called the new sound 'shit', but then he watched most of the race in Australia. Jenson Button has defended the noise, 'because you can hear the fans', but he has not watched a race. Like any driver, at any time, Jenson has been concentrating on extracting the best from the machinery he has been given. Clearly, Jenson likes the new challenges he has been set.

Both drivers have called it as they see it and there is no definitive answer. I happen to think that the new cars are a mistake, not least because of their sound.

I could not find much to celebrate at Sepang. We did have more information about how much fuel each driver had used, but I am not sure what that means when the flow of fuel is regulated. Am I really supposed to be excited by fuel economy in Grand Prix racing?

The people who matter are not we dedicated enthusiasts, but those who comprise the broad television audience, the people who discuss sport at work on a Monday.

It is the casual viewer who counts because the casual viewer makes up most of the audience. We devotees may make an effort to grasp the new rules, but that is not necessarily true of the casual viewer who may watch in his local bar. Neither race so far has been particularly exciting to a casual viewer.

This I am assuming by the fact that I watch most sports as a casual viewer. Quite often I will watch stages of the Tour de France and much that will fascinate an informed viewer is lost on me because I am really only interested in the last few miles of each stage.

Truth to tell, I am really only interested in how my fellow countrymen are doing, because I am a casual viewer.

In Malaysia, we devotees were intrigued by Massa refusing to yield to Bottas, but I can understand why a casual viewer would not be bothered, they being down the order. The casual viewer saw Lewis Hamilton dominate from pole to flag and making the exercise look easy. It wasn't, but we can only judge by what we see.

My guess is that Bernie is more worried than he will admit. It is the television audience which matters to sponsors. It is the size of the audience which matters when negotiating television contracts, and most of the audience are casual viewers.

Mike Lawrence.

Learn more about Mike and check out his previous features, here

Article from Pitpass (http://www.pitpass.com):

Published: 03/04/2014
Copyright © Pitpass 2002 - 2024. All rights reserved.