El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Completely agree. F1 is the cutting edge of technology and it would naturally appeal to younger people who are probably more likely to care about the future and green technologies. But it's focused on the older market and people who can afford sky spirts f1. I started watching in 1997/8 because the lads were all talking about it in school on Monday morning. They watched it because it was on RTE and ITV and I watched it because it was popular and easy to watch, and easy to find people to chat about it. Now it's not popular, not easy to watch and not easy to find people to chat with. Do the fans are getting older and want less change and tend to prefer the good old days and the sport is on a path that would appeal to younger people who aren't exposed to it.
Harika wrote: » Williams say chief technical officer Paddy Lowe “is taking a leave of absence from the business for personal reasons”. Comes after the car was not ready for testing, missing 2.5 days, and was slow when it ran
Cool_CM wrote: » Autosport are reporting that Paddy Lowe has taken a "leave of absence". Have to feel for the guy.https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/141929/lowe-takes-leave-from-troubled-williams-team
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » That's what I was trying to say except you actually had the correct information. So McLaren won some races between 2010-14. Fair enough
Peyton Lively Tiller wrote: » Between 2010 - 2014 McLaren bought back Mercedes 40% share in the team.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I don't think McLaren won many races while Mercedes was on the grid as a works team. McLaren was the works Mercedes team until 2014. Mercedes owned a share of the team.
mickdw wrote: » It's McLaren and all possibilities are there considering the facilities etc. Customer engine is a problem but they won alot of races with mercedes power while mercedes were on the grid with the works team.
Jordan 199 wrote: » McLaren are no longer attractive to top drivers. Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull are. Same with Renault. Three factory teams and a team with factory power units. McLaren are a midfield team, and they will continue to be for quite sometime.
mickdw wrote: » To be fair, Williams have branched out and perhaps that is their saviour right now. A business that is a struggling f1 team will fold whereas a group that has a struggling f1 team might survive. McLaren are too strong to stay at the back. They still have the ability to fund huge numbers of staff, still have the deep pockets and the name to attract top drivers. I don't think this years car is going to be so bad and if Renault give them a fair package, they might go well.
AMKC wrote: » Why? Also anyone got anything more on the Williams wing mirrors and suspension and the reason why the FIA banned them from using them.
Gintonious wrote: » https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-motor-f1-ferrari/ferrari-to-drop-mission-winnow-branding-at-australian-gp-idUKKCN1QM28Y Ferrari are to drop the Mission Winnow branding from their cars for the opening race.
Gintonious wrote: » When I saw that FE is more relevant, I mean more so in the manner that more and more manufacturers are going electric, Tesla, Volvo, Porsche, Dyson, Nissan etc
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » FE is 5 years old. Bit harsh to judge how well the technology is being a dapten and applied to Road cars. I'd say some of it might be beginning to filter through to Road cars but I would expect that to be a much longer term and gradual trickle of technology from racing cars to Road cars. But the point stands. If F1 wants toobe away from relevant e it could become like the Red Bull x races. Lots of fun but totally inconsequential. To be fair the world is moving away from internal combustion engines. So f1's time as the cutting edge in technology is probably limited anyway.
