Dispute over new customer team rule
Self-build penalty for too much success?
Haas' success is a thorn in the side of the competition. The opponents want a racing team to have to produce more parts in-house. If a team is too successful, it should be forced to do so in future.
Michael Schmidt
15.11.2024
The dispute is as old as the Haas model in Formula 1. The US racing team used a loophole in the rules to enter the premier class in 2016. All parts that did not have to be built in-house according to the regulations were ordered from engine partner Ferrari. This saved costs and reduced the risk. The team boss at the time, Guenther Steiner, had thus made the premier class palatable to CNC machine king Gene Haas.
The concept was controversial from the outset. Force India, Williams, McLaren and Sauber felt cheated. They took the view that you have to work hard to earn your place in the formula. In their opinion, this was not the case with Haas. 60 percent of the car came from Ferrari. Steiner countered the critics at the time by saying that the Haas team would not have existed without this special approach.
Toro Rosso is also planning the Haas model
After Haas plunged deeper and deeper into the basement from 2019 onwards, the criticism fell silent. That changed abruptly this year. The US racing team currently has the fifth-fastest car in the field and is battling with Alpine and Toro Rosso for sixth place in the Constructors' Championship. To make matters worse, the team that finished last in the previous season has now also formed an alliance with Toyota.
At the same time, Toro Rosso is also moving closer to the Haas solution. The synergies with its brother team Red Bull are growing from year to year. From 2026, external production will be utilized to the maximum. The engine, gearbox, suspensions, hydraulics and steering will then come from a single source. From next year, the engineers will also be working in their own building on the Red Bull campus in Milton Keynes. This fuels mistrust.
These joint ventures are suddenly a thorn in the side of the teams that produce everything themselves. Aston Martin, Alpine and Williams in particular are campaigning against this rule and demanding a higher percentage of in-house production. The problem is that Haas would not be in a position to design and manufacture everything itself from one day to the next. This would require a new factory, more people and tools.
Three years' lead time to do it yourself
In the dispute over the customer teams, a compromise has recently emerged that will be included in the regulations for 2026 if it receives the necessary majority. According to this, a so-called customer team that finishes fifth or better in the Constructors' World Championship must then build everything itself with a lead time of three years - including the so-called “transferrable components” (TRC). Success is therefore penalized.
While Toro Rosso is open to the proposal, Haas team boss Ayao Komatsu has already announced his opposition. “That would be a killer for the small teams. If Formula 1 wants as many teams as possible to be competitive, then it will reject this rule. What better thing can happen to the sport when David wins against Goliath?”
Komatsu is also of the opinion that the in-house production of certain parts is overrated: “What fan cares whether the gearbox or suspension comes from Ferrari or ourselves?” The accusation that Haas has a competitive advantage by purchasing certain parts bounces off Komatsu: “We are given a nominal equivalent value in the budget cap for the components we buy. This is so high that we have no advantage.” In fact, Sauber returned to producing the gearbox in-house two years ago because it was cheaper than buying the transmission from Ferrari.
www.formula1.com
www.planetf1.com
www.libertymedia.com
www.auto-motor-und-sport.de
