Honda to Withdraw from F1 at End of 2021 Season

[Veinz]

https://the-race.com/formula-1/honda-open-to-facilitating-red-bull-engine-project-post-2021/

"Honda’s Formula 1 project leader is willing to discuss Red Bull keeping its engines after its 2021 F1 exit so the team can develop them itself or with a new partner."

This is what I want to see, RBR should not go back to their ex.

 

[shoemaker]

Time for rbr to make a decision, they leave f1, or go back to a current supplier or the best option, find/ build their own, (buy cosworth please) or chuck toyota or bmw lots of cash to sole supply them.

 

[ruestchiva]

Just get rid of the stupid environmentally friendly ****. F1 is never going to be climate conscious in any way. So why bother use those stupid engines with stupid regulations such as fuel flow and fuel quantity. It's all democrat ********.

 

[SlowGrayAudi]

They should allow cosworth to bring in a basic twin turbo v6 as a costumer engine option.

Or steal some gibson V8s from WEC.

**** all this environment ****. We're racing. Not tree hugging

 

[TheCracker]

....or

Go bold and go fully electric. It will likely happen sooner or later anyway. So why not be at the forefront and do it now?

None of that Formula E ******* with temporary road circuits, road tyres and fan-boost. Proper circuits. Racing slicks and perhaps two shorter races per weekend until the technology catches up to do longer races without having to swap cars.

 

[Samus]

....or

Go bold and go fully electric. It will likely happen sooner or later anyway. So why not be at the forefront and do it now?

None of that Formula E ******* with temporary road circuits, road tyres and fan-boost. Proper circuits. Racing slicks and perhaps two shorter races per weekend until the technology catches up to do longer races without having to swap cars.

FE has the exclusivity on FIA single seater electric series until 2038, although Agag said he would be open to talks to merge the two before then.

 

[mustafur]

FE has the exclusivity on FIA single seater electric series until 2038, although Agag said he would be open to talks to merge the two before then.

Surely F1 has the money to just buy out that exclusivity though, considering how tiny FE is compared to F1 in revenue.

 

[Samus]

Surely F1 has the money to just buy out that exclusivity though, considering how tiny FE is compared to F1 in revenue.

More than likely, just saying that as of now on paper they can't go fully electric without some sort of deal with FE.

 

[Veinz]

Full electric would be too slow for F1 atm.

 

[mustafur]

Full electric would be too slow for F1 atm.

not even, it would be heavy to get the big power outputs but with ground effect coming that would be balanced out.

 

[Pupik]

....or

Go bold and go fully electric. It will likely happen sooner or later anyway. So why not be at the forefront and do it now?

None of that Formula E ******* with temporary road circuits, road tyres and fan-boost. Proper circuits. Racing slicks and perhaps two shorter races per weekend until the technology catches up to do longer races without having to swap cars.

This.

Sure, the cars might be only slightly smaller than Saturn IB rockets, but being at the of forefront of technology which drives the industry is genuinely where the series should be placed.

 

[Dotini]

I don't think the idea of Red Bull continuing with the Honda by contracting with Mugen will do them any good, either financially or in quest of championships. IMO, Renault is probably their best bet at this time.

 

[TheCracker]

If the thought of Redbull Renaults is hard for them to stomach after all the bad blood, why not badge them Nissans?

 

[Frank McGank]

This.

Sure, the cars might be only slightly smaller than Saturn IB rockets, but being at the of forefront of technology which drives the industry is genuinely where the series should be placed.

Why? When did F1 become the driving force for road technology? Was it when they flirted with turbine engines? 6 wheels? Stressed engines? Rocket fuel? Ground effect? Independently-sided brakes? F1’s draw was that they were purebred racing machines. That they were NOT road relevant. If you wanted road relevant technology, that’s what touring cars and GT racing is for. F1 was just about building the fastest open wheel car possible, where all innovation was in the pursuit of speed and nothing more. Any road car that decided to try to adapt F1 tech for road use was because they were trying to market the mystique of F1, not because F1 was testing it before the parent company adapted for to road use.

It’s only been since the 90s when F1 became about ‘road relevancy’, and that push neatly coincides with the era when the grid became dominated by OEMs like Renault and Mercedes, and when FOM became enough of a powerhouse to dictate to the FIA what they wanted the regulations to be. Basically, Renault & Mercedes (and later Honda & Toyota) took over the rule book and started demanding the FIA bend to their will or else they would leave. And they demanded road relevancy because it was good for their PR and marketing teams.

 

[Pupik]

Why? When did F1 become the driving force for road technology?

Since 1906, bubba. 1900, if you want to count Gordon Bennett trophies. It's always been about marketing; that's how the first vehicles proved themselves as reliable machinery that could be used under stress and duress in somewhat of a real-world setting against others trying to gain a foothold in a crowded market.

While not every single item that's ever appeared on a Grand Prix car is entirely relevant to road use (abrasive wooden planks, for example) many incremental changes and features have translated to the automotive continuum, though not always in a widespread manner.

It's just that F1 is reaching a point where the returns from such relevance are ever-decreasing, while the road-going industry is shifting away from the internal combustion engine. It can choose to be a series with the fastest circuit times and highest speeds, and it should (until no longer safe to do so), but there may be a day where interest wanes due to what an overwhelming population of fans want. It will become a vastly different series: a niche sport for the "garagistes" when and if the sponsors and manufacturers start leaving in greater numbers. Though it's not necessarily for the worst, if that happens...it can stick to its roots, but I fear implosion or collapse always comes first due to short-sightedness.

 

[Frank McGank]

Since 1906, bubba. 1900, if you want to count Gordon Bennett trophies. It's always been about marketing; that's how the first vehicles proved themselves as reliable machinery that could be used under stress and duress in somewhat of a real-world setting against others trying to gain a foothold in a crowded market.

While not every single item that's ever appeared on a Grand Prix car is entirely relevant to road use (abrasive wooden planks, for example) many incremental changes and features have translated to the automotive continuum, though not always in a widespread manner.

It's just that F1 is reaching a point where the returns from such relevance are ever-decreasing, while the road-going industry is shifting away from the internal combustion engine. It can choose to be a series with the fastest circuit times and highest speeds, and it should (until no longer safe to do so), but there may be a day where interest wanes due to what an overwhelming population of fans want. It will become a vastly different series: a niche sport for the "garagistes" when and if the sponsors and manufacturers start leaving in greater numbers. Though it's not necessarily for the worst, if that happens...it can stick to its roots, but I fear implosion or collapse always comes first due to short-sightedness.

I said F1, pal.
Further, the rules and regulations of that era were.. nonexistent. It was formula libre; the constructors could run whatever their minds could come up with. Organically, the road manufacturers bowed out because it had less relevance to them and the garagistas replaced them.
“A vastly different series” you mean as it was from 1950 until the 80s when OEMs began to dominate? When the biggest legends and most revered eras and most diverse fields of the sport existed?

“I fear implosion will come due to shortsightedness” you mean what’s currently happening after years of pandering to OEMs? Besides, it’s not like it’ll become a ‘niche sport of tiny garagistas’. Ferrari, McLaren, Williams, Red Bull, and their associates will go nowhere. Cosworth, Judd, Ilmor, and Gibson are NOT dinky little shedbuilt engine shops. Your worries are almost completely unfounded and seem to be based mostly in a fear of change. F1 is not GT1. It will survive if Mercedes jump ship.

 

[Pupik]

I wouldn't be a fan* of F1 for 30+ years. if I feared change...if you're going to have a discussion about teams having road-relevance and exclude pre-championship discussion, so magically they conveniently and suddenly don't have sales relevance is jumping ship in the argument. The Alfa 158 and Ferrari's 166 were constants in that gap, for example.

You seem fear the electric motor, the elephant in this thread's room. I don't worry about the "kit-car era" making a return, as I've long thought manufacturers get too much pull in this sport (see the FISA/FOCA Wars) and would be delighted if they go back to popping a Hewland DG300 to the back of a V8 mounted to something made in a woodshed, with the aerodynamics of that same barn door. But that won't happen unless either too many factors fall out, and Big Red F sticks it out through good times or bad, because they can influence a lot of how the formula and tech regs get written.

In the short-term future, if Renault doesn't get their act together, it's going to be a two-engine series, no matter how tough it gets for Ferrari. Besides, the second-tier Ferrari engines are a joke without laughter. It becomes a handful of teams dominating against an ever-shrinking entry list, giving the illusion of tighter competition. If the aforementioned engine-builders are so great, why haven't they jumped into the deep end? Massive development costs, perhaps?

* not the BT46

 

[DemioXDTourng]

So long Honda, you were an amazing engine manufacturer, you had your ups- and downs, but you will always be remembered as being the engine powering the monsters from McLaren, Red Bull and Torro Rosso.

 

[Dotini]

In order to get and maintain itself in its current position of competitiveness, Honda has had to consistently spend in excess of £300,000,000 per year on its F1 engine project. Even though this is only a fraction of their annual global profits, it probably wasn't really ideal for them. It is inconceivable to me that RBR on its own can spend this level of treasure trying to compete with Mercedes-Benz.

There have been periodic eras of racing in the past when, due to wars or economic depressions, top-level racing has had to cut back its cost and technology. IMHO, the new added factor of social relevance and core interest in the personal automobile (and racing) have further eroded the foundation of F1 racing.

For as long as civilization lasts, I believe there will always be some sort of racing. But I see a lean patch coming up.

 

[daan]

So long Honda, you were an amazing engine manufacturer, you had your ups- and downs, but you will always be remembered as being the engine powering the monsters from McLaren, Red Bull and Torro Rosso.

Nah, this iteration of Honda will be forgotten about very quickly and when anyone mentions Honda in F1 they'll revert back to the Honda that powered Williams and McLaren in the 80's and 90's.

 

[Grand Prix]

Nah, this iteration of Honda will be forgotten about very quickly and when anyone mentions Honda in F1 they'll revert back to the Honda that powered Williams and McLaren in the 80's and 90's.

When I think of Honda in F1, I tend to think of their 1960s team first, but I'm weird because Grand Prix Legends was one of my first serious racing games.

 

[Dotini]

When I think of Honda in F1, I tend to think of their 1960s team first, but I'm weird because Grand Prix Legends was one of my first serious racing games.

As a child of the 60's, I agree. In the 60's and early seventies, for young men interested in motor sports vehicles, there were few choices, heavy American iron, or expensive but still slow European cars - motorcycles excepted. Honda inspired my generation with its motorcycles, as did Toyota and Nissan with its small sports cars and sporty sedans like the 510. Certainly Japanese products were no problem at all for young people on the West Coast. The accomplishments of Ginther's powerful Honda (and Surtees's) in F1 were carefully noted.

If I recall correctly, Honda originated as a piston ring manufacturer, and soon learned pistons and internal combustion technology to a supreme degree. Now they seem to be having an identity crisis related to transition to marketing electric vehicles. Good luck with that...it's been nice knowing you.

 

[Pupik]

When I think of Honda in F1, I tend to think of their 1960s team first, but I'm weird because Grand Prix Legends was one of my first serious racing games.

I think of that as well, but their time was short; they had limited experience with building and racing cars (a couple of S600s) before diving right into the deep end of F1. And in a way, they got in at the precisely the right time to make an impact; the 1.5-liter era was coming to a close and engine builders hadn't really developed anything new. Ferrari sort of stopped caring for a bit, Coventry-Climax was the go-to engine that hadn't much recent development, BRM was...well, the Climax Alternative but with 10% less reliability. This era wasn't really about raw power, but car control at the limit of spindly tires.

But Honda wasn't prepared for the new 3.0-liter series, and they entered late in the first year of the new changes. The task of building the engine and chassis was too much to bear; the later cars were Lolas, until the ill-fated RA301 was sent out before it was ready.

All things considered, it was a complete moonshot to develop the car into a decent qualifier, let alone a race winner.

 

[Frank McGank]

I think of that as well, but their time was short; they had limited experience with building and racing cars (a couple of S600s) before diving right into the deep end of F1. And in a way, they got in at the precisely the right time to make an impact; the 1.5-liter era was coming to a close and engine builders hadn't really developed anything new. Ferrari sort of stopped caring for a bit, the Coventry-Climax the the go-to engine that hadn't much recent development, BRM was...well, the Climax Alternative but with 10% less reliability. This era wasn't really about raw power, but car control at the limit of spindly tires.

But Honda wasn't prepared for the new 3.0-liter series, and they entered late in the first year of the new changes. The task of building the engine and chassis was too much to bear; the later cars were Lolas, until the ill-fated RA301 was sent out before it was ready.

All things considered, it was a complete moonshot to develop the car into a decent qualifier, let alone a race winner.

Not just limited experience in racing cars, but in road cars as well. In 1964, Honda had only been in the road car business for 2 years [only having made 360cc kei cars] and had never built a bike with an engine larger than 450cc. Honda going into F1 back then is like if Piaggio announced tomorrow an official full works entry into F1 with their own in-house engine.