So Audi won Le Mans for the nth time. This year’s event hit the headlines because of an accident that led to the sad death of Denmark’s Allan Simonsen, an incident that should lead to questions about safety at the French circuit because it is hard to see why such a crash should have been fatal. Beyond that, however, the race made little impact around the world. It is, one might argue, like the WRC has been in recent years: a foregone conclusion and thus not as news-worthy as it would be if there were different winners each year. This is not to criticize Audi. Someone has decided this is the strategy and the team has brilliantly shown that but the German marque has established that it builds solid cars, filled with innovatory bells and whistles. However, the fact that they keep on winning the same race over and over again, has less and less value. It would be far more impressive if Audi demonstrated its abilities by entering F1 with its new hybrid rules and winning… It is a problem that Red Bull will soon encounter in F1 because after a while it is only failure that warrants coverage because success is the norm. Perhaps the explains Christian Horner’s continued daft remarks about the tyre test issue. Is he just keeping in the spotlight while also trying to disrupt the opposition? If the team does not accept the results of the Tribunal, it is perhaps in the wrong sport. You have to respect the rules whether you like them or not. If Red Bull is now stupid enough to go testing privately, they will find out what happens when one deliberately breaks rules. I doubt that will happen. The Tribunal was not a green light to allow testing, it was the sorting out of a cock-up caused by unclear signals. The whole interlude is best forgotten. Horner would do well to sit quietly in the corner for a while.
- Comment
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
joeblogsf1 
Very sad about Allan. Would SAFER barriers be more appropriate there? I seemed to read on my twitter feed “barriers undergoing extensive repairs” more times than I should have. I get that it’s a temporary circuit – but even temporary circuits need to look at their crash barriers – Monaco’s barriers seemed to work effectively this year.
I’d love to see Audi drop Le Mans & move to F1. It’d allow others to win the prototype class and represents a big challenge to their engine building program, if it ever happens.
Simple tires would be better there, as it was a high angle impact zone. SAFER barriers are meant for low angle glancing blows at much higher speeds.
From what I saw discussed on Eurosport’s coverage it appears that he hit the barrier at a point just in front of a decent sized tree. The barrier, being less than firmly rooted in the sandy soil in that part of the world, simply bent backward and so Simonsen’s crash was in effect a head-on collision with a tree. Again, this is as reported on Eurosport.
I am sure that this will be investigated fully, but it is hardly the first time that a driver has suffered fatal consequences from the close proximity of trees and other hard objects to the Sarthe track. Gartner’s accident in 1985 was very similar, and Bonnier met his end when he was propelled over the barrier and directly into the trees. F1’s own Mark Webber talks of his surprise at having missed any of the trees during his aborted launches into orbit. Much as I love the very “route nationale” feel of Le Mans, I can’t help feeling that such complacency about run off, barrier and catch fence provision wouldn’t be tolerated at other tree-lined circuits.
Sorry, typo, Gartner’s accident was 1986.
I think the trees have always been an issue. Even AJ Foyt – who is hardly a coward – was taken aback by the proximity of the trees on his first and only trip to Le Mans in 1967. He is quoted as saying, “I guess the idea is that by the time a car reaches the spectators, it won’t be in big enough pieces to hurt them.”
I understand what happened, but there should have been tires there. Retaining walls are for retaining. That’s it. It’s what’s in front of them that’s supposed to absorb energy. It was a high angle impact zone and there should have been tires, Tecpro barriers or foam blocks there. There should have been some crush structure on the sides of the car. Simple stuff would have saved this man’s life.
Yes, that was one of mine.
Time to translate some F1 safety standards (track safety would be a no brainer) to these other series. These standards should have been universal to any high profile professional racing series with corporate budgets. Does the FIA govern the Lemans event? If so time to stop playing politics and get back to work on safety, how is it still possible that a car can run into an immovable object on a predictable trajectory (without energy absorption protection for obstacles) in this day an age?
Great piece, as always, Joe. Statistically, I doubt any team principal has made himself SO available in front of camera as Horner. Given his recent award in the Queen’s birthday honours list (given, as you rightly pointed out, that the great Patrick Head – realise he was never TP – has been overlooked for any such award) perhaps he is out to self-promote as a core focus?
Horner isn’t even in the same league as Brawn when it comes to outright breaking the rules, reaping the rewards and getting away with it even when caught!
100% agree. Le Mans has not been interesting for a very long time. It’s just successive manufacturers that blow an enormous amount on dominating the sport.
Quite honestly the only time I was ever interested in it was back in ’90 when Mazda got a Wankel to win it. I’m sure it’s great to be there over the weekend but as an armchair fan…it’s dull as hell.
Well Josh, then you’re obviously not watching the race or were never a sports car fan to begin with.
huh. In the last decade, we’ve seen Peugeot, Bentley, and now Toyota putting up decent competition to Audi… and, since you apparently missed it, Porsche is jumping back into LMP1 next year. Audi is pushing the boundaries of TDI diesel engines with hybrid tech, while Toyota is going hard with petrol hybrid tech, and Porsche will no doubt be bringing some serious fight, much as Peugeot did. If the world economy ever gets back on track, I’d expect BMW and Mercedes, or even an American manufacturer to step into the fray.
Bentley was Audi in drag. If you don’t know that then all your arguments are undermined.
Tell that to Peter Elleray.
The diminishing returns argument is questionable if to take into account the changing technology that Audi has been able to use at Le Mans, which it wouldn’t be able to use in F1. It also has much more freedom to choose what technology to use, partly throughinfluenceing the ACO.
It may be true, that as a Brand promotion it may be dimishing retruns, but as a technology demostrayor for a premium road car maker, it knocks spots off F1.
Audi have used a number of motorsports series to promote their technology, and if they view LM as being exhausted, then they will probably move on to another series, but it’s not obvious that F1 would be the best answer to that question.
The diminishing returns argument is based on the man in the street not knowing – nor caring – about the changing rules of Le Mans. How many keep up with this?
It’s not just about the changing rules, Joe. It’s not like F1 where the technology of the car is almost entirely defined by the rules. There are engineering choices that can be made due to the greater freedom within the LMP rules.
For example, could Audi build a 4wd (albeit only very part-time) F1 car and call it a “quattro”? They can use LMP to promote their quattro and TDI technologies.
The man in the street cares about Lewis’s dog.
There is also a large number of punters who car about the bragging rights that having high-technology on their road cars. They may not be the man in the street, but they are the folks in the Audi, BMW and Mercedes showrooms buying their new R6’s etc.
It’s a technological ‘halo effect’ on their road cars which difficult to see them getting in F1.
It’s also beneficial in the US, more so than F1.
F1 is the top of the tree, but only one monkey (brand) can be at the top of that tree. There are other trees to climb. 🙂
F1 is not the answer to all maunfacturer’s motorsport needs.
thank you for this opportunity to filip you sir.
using your logic then you must speak from experience about ‘ in drag ‘ phenomenon because like anyone who is over the age of fifty ( 50 ) this means that you have been in this type of situation before in your own role as reporter / blogger and man about town in the XXIst century.
being a natural person who occasionally becomes a virtual one using this world wide web device in a public library is awakening to me.
be well people and ” thanks for all the fish.” copyright Douglas Adams
Bentley is part of the same group but the car was never any thing to do with Audi it was not a R8
No technology transfer at all… In a Piech company. Hmm…
Drivetrain was Audi, Chassis was TOMS.. sorry, Bentley. 🙂
From what I’ve read, Joe is correct. It had the same drive train. It was basically a Coupe version of the R-8, (the LM prototype at the time, not to be confused with today’s R-8 production car; Why did they do that, anyway? It would be like calling Porche’s next road car a 917, or a 962; to some that would be confusing).
With the exception of 2009, you have to go back to the 90’s for when Audi didn’t win it. As Joe said, Bentley essentially was Audi.
How on Earth is that *not* dull?
As for the guy that said about how much Audi have gained from this…Audi have undoubtedly gained from Le Mans but BMW still sell more cars around the world.
well all you need josh is radio le mans. com a timing screen and I sure you would not find it dull at all
Here you can see the car leaving the track. He then went straight into the barrier. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaPx4cknI2Y
Guess this fatal accident leaves some questions for the safety of the track as well as the crash structures in GT cars.
Crash structures in GT cars… please tell me you are joking. The impact zone was bloody armco butted right up against large trees with ZERO crush zones!!! How is that the design flaw with the GTE Aston Martin?
Absolutely.
If you see the photo of the car with no door on, you’ll see bare bars. That’s it. There should be a crush zone in there.
Yes, the circuit should have had tires there, but if Corvette can put big crush zones there, so can Aston Martin.
Didn’t mean it was the cars fault. Putting up decent barriers is blindingly obvious. But things go wrong in a unexpected way. You try to prevent this from happening again. Two objects collide – you look at both for optimisation.
Count the times commentators in F1 said something along the lines “Well 20 years ago he wouldn’t have walked away from that crash” in the last 5 years. There are constraints on finding a solution for GT cars such as regulations, money, etc…. but not trying?
Horner sitting quietly… you’ve got more chance of Bernie saying nothing derogatory about Silverstone this week!
It looks like Vettel isn’t the only RB member behaving like a child. It seems to be a family problem.
Spot on Joe
To be fair to Horner, he hasn’t actually said on record (yet) that Red Bull will be testing privately. The newspaper report which apparently broke this story cites only sources rather than Horner himself or an official Red Bull spokesperson.
In fact, they have denied it in the German press , thought their detractors don’t seem too interested in the truth.
Horner has much to distract attention from. His shameful handling of his drivers being just an example.
It also sells Audi short. They have seen off every challenger, some particularly strong and through changes of rules in virtually every set of conditions barring snow.
Simonsen’s death reminds us that safety is a never ending pursuit but also showed the spirit that is shared among competitors via his family’s wish that Aston Martin continue in the event.
So Audi has won again, congratulations. The way they won was impressive. The PR value may be limited, but a company that races to push itself and show their expertise showed their ability to meet the challenges of the longest day and that is worth as much as the victory itself.
The last time the VAG group entered another of their brands at Le Mans (Bentley), they withdrew the Audi works entries. What will they do in the coming years, given Porsche’s LMP1 project for 2014? If Audi doesn’t show up next year and Porsche wins, people are either going to claim that they only won because Audi didn’t take part, or that they simply transferred their expertise from Audi to Porsche, ho-hum. So ideally, Audi leaves only after coming a close second to Porsche in 2014 …
…while Toyota stands off to the side, right?
Schmorbraten I sorry to say you do not understand sportcar racing Audi will not withdrew next year and hand car over to Porsche’s . Audi sport did not come back after 2002 till 2006 when it built the r10 . you also forgot that both could come 2nd to Toyota ( oh you did not know they was race Toyota this year )
Next year, I believe Porsche will bring a new level of competition to test Audi’s mettle, and the Toyota’s will undoubtedly step up their game. Beyond the LMP1 class the competition has always been intense.
A great race with many levels of interest. Tom Kristensen winning his NINTH Le Mans title is an unbelievable accomplishment, considering he’s done for three teams over the years.
Simonsen’s death is a tragedy who’s cause deserves a serious track inspection and course modification to minimize future tragedies.
Just curious, but did you ever write a blurb suggesting Ferrari pull out of F1 and try their hand at Le Mans, because they just kept winning and it was less and less meaningful? 🙄
The law of diminishing returns worked as well then as it does now.
Joe, are you planning to include their denial of the Times story?
I don’t read The Times.
But did you write that Ferrari should leave back when they were dominating for years? $10 says you didn’t…
Prove it!
I don’t think you understand what I’m saying. You prove you wrote that Ferrari, Mclaren, Williams, etc. should leave F1 because they were so successful, they were not getting a proper return on their participation in the series, and I send you $10.
Krusty the clown mode on: Checks will not be honored. 😛 😛 😛
You are the one making the point. If you have the time to go looking to see what I write in all the places I wrote then I leave it to you. I have more fruitful things to do.
Why do these people insist on challenging your every word. Get a life. Keep up the great work Joe.
$10 for a quick link man, easy and quick buck! 🙂
I thought they have teams at Le Mans and added Kobayashi in to their line up, alongside Fisichella and Bruni? I can understand if they are teams just running with the Ferrari banner, or cars, but Kobayashi did test an older Ferrari F1 car pre-Le Mans (2010 car?) at Fiorano.
Maybe here?:
http://www.grandprix.com/race/r719racereport.html
Or was that not one of Joe’s?
Whoever’s it is, it’s a great piece of journalism.
WEC as a whole is covered less by the mainstream media but that’s different of saying it doesn’t have a huge following. F1 and WEC viewership overlaps. It’s also a lot more open and events themselves are not only more fan friendly they’re also exciting to watch. The fact that Audi won doesn’t mean it was a dull race. Far from it. Simonsen’s death was truly tragic.
In today’s NYtimes edition, I couldn’t even find mention of LM24, AT ALL. Nope, there’s a short piece on the Nascar race, and something on how deadly dirt track racing can be (because another Nascar driver was killed a few weeks ago racing the dirt), but in America’s largest daily newspaper, NOT ONE MENTION OF LE MANS. Not winners, not the death, nothing. So, to correct your comment, ‘WEC as a whole is not covered at all by the mainstream media’.
They’ve also apparently given up reporting on F1, as the last ‘Herald’ piece was pre-season, so Joe, you might want to get rid of that link you run. The NYT doesn’t care much about the top levels of auto racing.
To be fair, the media in America doesn’t care about any racing unless it is NASCAR. I think that says more about your country than how it reflects on the health of Le Mans.
I would tend to agree with you about the value of Le Mans for Audi, although I may be easily convinced since I cannot raise much interest for this type of motor sport in the way it is dished out today. Similar to WRC, that’s for sure.
As you say, brilliant works efforts by the factory teams involved but… so what? What’s really achieved and against what competition? Cracking a nut with a sledge hammer. Yawn.
With reference to the tragic accident to Allen Simonsen, I read that he suffered a double, big G impact. The first almost head on but the 2nd a massive 75G to the side. This was on the eurosport.fr web page yesterday. I only say this because if it’s true, it would seem to explain how little chance the poor guy had – bearing in mind how the barriers look there…
With regard to the testing saga, I’m also of your opinion. Again quoting the eurosport.fr web page, they seem to say that RB and maybe also Ferrari will “defy” the FIA by boycotting the young driver tests and running for 3 days on their own. If that’s a serious consideration for these 2 teams, would Pirelli go for that do you think bearing in mind what has just happened?
Seems crazy to me.
Joe, although you say you don’t crtisise Audi for winning Le Mans for Nth time – you have done so just saying in a derogatory tone – Audi with their “Bells and whistles” + questioning their “Strategy” saying it is no longer news worthy …….. isn’t this is part of a Journalists responsibility … not to just look for the immediate glaring headlines but to report those things which makes our Sport human and enjoyable and not be part of the “Bullshit Headlines” – Actually, this is exactly what drives manufacturers away but supporters will always be here ………. In rain, shine, cloud, mist and through the sad deaths – I suppose with Porsche returning…. another arm of the VAG empire looks set to take up this mantel as Audi may possibly retire to keep “Things Fresh” as you say – Congratulations Audi, who have done their job superbly, and the German Marque has been brilliantly established alongside Porsche – Le Mans isn’t about “Flash in Pan News” it’s about longevity and actually making it and continuing to make it – If Audi had won Le Mans once then they would be another Mazda but they are not and have won 12 times – What an amazing historical legacy going into the future. ( and…. Joe you like Motor Racing history. )
( Horner – I’d like to know what he was actually doing at the IT ???? plus all this blustering just seems a trifle contrived to me !! )
‘he stuck in his thumb & pulled out a plum and said; “Stuff you all we are going to do our own 3 day test.”
I’m not sure which is more remarkable – Audi’s success or their tenure. They’ve been fielding prototypes since ’99. I can remember in the U.S. when an Audi road car was a rarity; kind of an eccentric choice that very few people made. Now they’re EVERYWHERE. I have to think that Audi’s willingness to remain exclusively in sports car racing is motivated by a bottom line: the sale of road cars, especially (?) in the U.S. market.
BTW, I’ve seen the Audi team at Sebring every year since ’99 and there could not be a more fan-friendly outfit, despite their size and prestige. They would never be able to interact with the fans like this in F1. Contrast this with the secretive nature of, say, Peugeot…
Love the irony in that last bit…..
Because unlike F1, WEC is much more road relevant as Audi can use technology (or derivatives off) that they use on the road. In case you didn’t realize whinging and blown diffusers really arent that useful when doing the shopping run (looking at u red bull). Guessing you are a bit bh at not getting an invite this year ?
This goes beyond childish, then boorish, to cynical, callous and.and open insult to all fans, teams, and supporters.
They need to stop reading their own in-house magazines that tell them how good they are and get into the real world.
Joe, tell them where to go – out of F1.
To be honest I never saw such a crowd on a circuit at le mans than for a F1 race! Maby there was not as much coverage over the world … but the fans were there! You can’t say that for F1! Empty circuits, empty stands … In my opinion F1 lost sinds 2 years a lot of credibility to!
I was a big F1 fan, but I’m slowly starting to get away from it! Where are the real drivers? Where is the sport!? All is about the tires … and money! Sur in the endurance there is also money but it’s not the driver with the most of money that gets the seat! F1 is becoming pathetic!
Sure maybe my disgrace is about Belgian drivers (jérome d’abrosio) that didn’t get the chance to prove them because they had no money! And this really pisses me off!
Personally I’m looking forward to stoffel vandoorne (now in F2.5) if he not gets to the F1 .. than I’m sorry!
So to be honest! You compare Endurance (le mans) to WRC but I think that F1 gets in the same pile of sports that lost their attractiveness. Not due to the same winners but about pathetic rules, money and …. scandals. Where is the time that my parents new F1 drivers? They don’t know any of them anymore…
Ask them they say: trulli, montoya, couldhard, …. 5 years ago!
On the belgian new they don’t even say who wins the race! lol!
My dislike of Redbull / Horner grows and grows…..
Lets talk about how many cars Redbull has on the grid? No info exchanged between the two…? I also feel they ride the rule book far closer than anyone else in whats acceptable, they are blocking the RR, they moan moan about others even when winning.
The people in charge have made a decision – now pull in your neck and get on with it.
Merc have done wrong but I feel no badness about them purely because it’s over shadowed by Christian Horner and Redbull’s crying and ranting.
You obviously don’t understand the significance of Le Mans or what the wins mean to Audi. Stick to F1 champ.
I fully understand the significance of Le Mans, but the same story over and over and over creates a situation where there are diminishing returns. It is not even a point that can be argued.
Tell that to Porsche, they’ve been 16 times and built their business around it and now they’re back in 2014 aiming for more wins. Diminishing returns? Yeah right!
If you do not understand the concept, you will not understand the argument.
Trying to tell me I don’t understand the concept of marketing via road relevant racing and winning year on year to try and end an argument is weak, got anything better?
I’m trying to tell you that there are more arguments out there than you
Might have considered. I don’t get why Audi does it, except that everyone knows that Piech does not like a certain party in F1. As a result he has limited choices for sport. Obviously others understand this as they talk about VW brands maybe coming to F1 but, of course, Piech is the boss and they are all terrified of him.
I’ll go with terrified. First deal done with VW AG crossed his desk, and we reckoned only way to have returned the contract in the time was to have woken up a director in their subsidiary . . . never before had anyone pestering us about details to pay the next day, either (our bank cocked up something, receiving / routing and they were mean hacked off, told to close it full offerance- acceptance I guess, and it was a sweet one, and it was on offer to a certain company they’re not find of) . . . as for F1, there’s enough talk – nigh forever – about that rhubarbed about VW to gain the effect they are maybe maybe, and still get a effect for free. Nothing like a almost lover to tease a deal . . Peach trades on his terms.
Audi’s prefernce for LMP might be historical.
Google* Piech 917
*(Other search engines are available)
The point is that they have not been competing for a while – younger people who have just come to the sport will not know of any success for Porsche at Le Mans unless they dig through the history books. Sounds to me like you are older or have followed Le Mans for quite some time (or dug through the history books like I would have to).
If Ferrari now won a championship in F1, they haven’t won one for so long that it would be seen as a nice respite from Red Bull spending the most money and dominating as they have done since late 2009. If they won in 2007 and 2008 (they almost did with the drivers), it could’ve been seen as a continuation of 2000-2004’s domination periods (despite 2007 being McLaren’s to lose).
I think F1 would have been well served by a new champion, such as Montoya or Raikkonen during this era, but it didn’t happen for whatever reason, and arguably Schumacher is possibly a better champion for PR reasons (track controversy aside), as was Button and Vettel.
I think Porsche are doing it cleverly. They don’t go there year after year after year. So they’ll make a come back and they’ll play it as a comeback against the new dominant teams under new regulations and there’s good publicity in that. If they win….
Then they can disappear again for a few years and have another comeback.
Audi, OTOH, are expected to win. Joe is right: The only publicity now will be when they DON’T win.
Correct analysis for me. Porsche’s last outright win was 1998 wasn’t it with Allan McNish in the gorgeous GT1 (nice link to the weekend there!).
They disappeared coinciding with the Audi arrival in 1999 (though having had a look on Wikipedia as I write, I’d forgotten all about the R8C with the roof!). Having scanned back, apart from Peugeot in 2009 and 1993, we’ve had German involvement in a win somewhere along the line for most of the past 20 years (Audi, BMW in engine and full works, and same for Porsche).
Thanks to Le Mans and the LMP1 cars being included in a lot of computer games (that do not include Formula 1), there is a generation of kids (and quite a few adults) growing up learning that Audis are the fastest racing cars in the world.
I’ve no idea whether that has any value to the people at VW-Audi, but it might well do.
I would say that this impression cannot be underestimated in the current ‘coolness’ of Audi’s brand amongst the younger demographic. My sister is 21 and already on her second Audi.
Working well on a *2 of years demographic here, both genders, actually.
I can’t get the female of the species I know to sit up and watch, but AUDI’s Truth In 24 documentary series does get more than a glance.
I understand Joe’s point, but there’s really neat marketing slung around their holster that gets girls cooing “can I hold your gun?”*
(*The Matador, Brosnan, Kinnear, Hope Davis, Philip Baker Hall on top form, proper giggle.)
For pure Motorsports, I see the way this is a looser amongst fans, but they’re not quite selling to Sunday track drivers, let alone even enthusiasts.
LIttle Chris Horner sat in a corner, eating his Christmas pie…
he pulled out his thumb
said “there’s no smoking gun”
and I’d never tell a lie” . .
Probably still smarting from the contrast with Brawn and the respect his drivers show when he talks.
Red Bull have still some way to go to match Ferrari’s 8 in 10 years including Michael’s 6 from 6. It will be interesting to see if Red Bull sticks around for a long time given that their business is primarily selling ‘soft’ drinks rather than selling cars.
Did you watch the race, Joe?
No.
How can you try and comment about something you didn’t even watch?
Audi have had tough battles and close races over the past decade. Just because they’ve won lots does not mean there wins are worth less now then they were at the start. 2011 is a great example.
Stick to F1.
See replies to other people who have not read the story properly.
Hang on .. This years race was a great event. Audi was expected to pile off into the distance and leave Toyota floundering around grubbing it out with the private LMP1 teams. But that didn’t happen. Toyota took the fight to Audi and they had a real race on their hands.
It wasn’t like the good old Ferrari days where Mikey walked off and the rest scrapped for the minor points. Audi had to really work for this one and it was a well deserved victory.
An i speak as someone that is sick and tired of German teams winning at LM, I desperately want someone else to win, But i respect what Audi are doing and appreciate that without Audi there might not be a Le Mans. They pretty much bankrolled the ALMS and ELM series when there were no other manufactures backing it. They were the ones that turned up year after year against rubbish competition with customer cars to make a race of it.
I appreciate what you are saying, that to keep on winning kind of gets boring and pointless. But to win against solid opposition, when the rules are constantly changed to help said opposition, is to be admired.
Audi, or more precisely Joest Racing. Have come to define what a professional Le Mans teams should be these days. They win because they do it right. And they do it with right attitude towards their fans and competitors.
before launching a withering article about one of the most professional teams ever at Le Mans, please check the target and oh… watch the race.
Read the article again.
I’m always quite interested with the le mans 24hr. More so that f1 this year actually but I’m a Mclaren and Audi fan so that would explain it
I thought the telecast of Le Mans was well done. Interesting to see cars than do run for 24 Hours, rather than the boring 90 minutes or so, that are current F1 Races.
So
Audi : Le Mans =
Overtaking : F1
Both inflated but for different reasons.
Typical clueless F1 fan boy.
You know the reason why Audi doesn’t, and won’t, enter F1? It is because the regulations are so damn restrictive that innovation in the so called “pinnacle of motorsport” that innovation is a thing of a pass. It is the same for Porsche, and many other manufacturers who are choosing sports cars over Formula One. Instead, Formula One these days is just about the show, with tyres are useless and a button that drivers use to overtake, rather than using the skill that these supposed “best drivers in the world” are blessed with. If that’s motorsport these days, frankly, Joe, you can keep it. Just don’t talk about motorsport you clearly know nothing about.
Audi won, and have won twelve times, because they’ve been the best team. A lot goes in to winning a 24 hour race, from getting the strategy right, to being reliable enough, to staying out of trouble. None of their wins have been as easy as you obviously think they were.
And, if you find it such a problem that the best team won, why don’t we apply the same idiotic logic to Formula One? Ferrari dominated for years with Schumacher, but I bet you didn’t find that boring. Equally, why has a fizzy drinks company won for the last three years?
Personally, I’d love to see what Adrian Newey can really do in the technical freedom that sports car regulations allow, rather than being stifled by a sport that bans any and all innovation these days.
And if you really think the race made “little impact” around the world, you should go check both the TV/online coverage viewing figures, plus the number of people who are at the track. It is a fact that more British people attend Le Mans than they do the British Grand Prix.
With that in mind, and the well documented lower-than-before ticket sales Silverstone has endured this year, plus a drop in TV viewing figures, perhaps the sport that is making “little impact” right now is Formula One…
Doubtless, you’ll say otherwise though.
Typical clueless F1 hater … and you don’t even know enough about the sport you love, obviously. No buttons in LMP1 to activate their hybrid systems? Has to be a lever, then. Or a pedal. Or a switch. Whatever, it’s the same … you didn’t know that, did you? Lucky you … I guess it would be less fun vomiting some hate if you knew the facts …
The hybrid systems are automatic. they are triggered at certain points on the circuit by the car. Not the driver. The ACO set these points not the teams.
Audi’s flywheel system can only be used about 120kph, Toyota’s super capacitor system is free us within the defined zones.
It’s not a push to pass system, unlike the F1 system,
Check facts before speaking..
In fairness, this is mainly because the F1 rule makers didn’t want it to be an automated system because they made a concrete decision that control of the system should remain in the hands of the drivers.
It’s two different philosophies, nothing more.
Please stop squabbling.
Little Chris Horner
Sat in the corner,
Eating a Humble pie.
With you 100% on the Red Bull comment. Mercedes should not not have done what they did – but part of what contributed to the issue arising was doubtless the Red Bull led carping about the tyres this year and although it’s not easy to win an F1 race as you say once one team (RB) wins a lot of the time boredom quickly sets in – in fact the parallels between Schumacher and Vettel in quite a few areas are pretty close. I didn’t see the fatal crash (although youtube is full of the beginning of it) but it seems that in a circuit of this length you are always going to have this potential and the budgets for the various cars are not in the same league as even the poorest competitor in F1
Marko just denied that they plan to illegally test to sportbild.de, so either it is mixed signals, one of those deniable statements you regularly allude to or a fabrication.
As for WEC, I think they would also benefit from a budget cap for P1 teams, Audi was reckoned to be spending about the same as a midfield F1 team on that one race last year. I would love if Le Mans had GT1 as its main class instead of sports prototypes, I think BMW has a point about the attraction of silhouette race cars as a great form of advertising.
Now then, where have I heard “. . . Horner sat in the corner” before?
Yes RBR still working under the any publicity is good publicity and being the bad boys of the sport. It will blow up in their faces one day! I can imagine that Todt and the FIA would throw the book at someone who then willfully tested rather than got ambiguity from Charlie Whiting and went and tested. My guess is the complete lack of tires (because Pirelli wont want in) means that it is all hot air to get headlines.
I thought initially that this can’t be real (and made up by some media to stir the pot), but since Joe reported it too, I must assume that RBR really came out with this nonsense.
There are rumours RBR wanted a 100M fine for Mercedes, now they want to go testing. Testing using which tires? Somehow they must have “saved” some used Pirellis from previous races as they won’t get any new tires outside any official race or testing events.
This is becoming more tiresome and pathetic by the minute. A ruling has been made by an independent entity. Now RBR, shut up please and focus on racing.
I’m sure there is a Tribunal waiting for you if you feel like going testing. Or if you continuously keep expressing your dissatisfaction with a FIA sanctioned decision.
If only his name were Jack! (Come on you were thinking that admit it)
(I can see mischievous deliveries of dairy products arriving from other teams ;-))
Has Murdoch sold the Sun to Red Bull? They seem to be reacting in a very “tabloid” way.
Deliberately misunderstanding and now misrepresenting, the facts or choosing to ignore them almost completely, on the principle of shout loudly enough and some will believe you; unfortunately this is being bolstered by the no doubt hyped up, emanations from Ferrari ranch.
Try it sunshine we dare you!
I’d take a friendly wager there is “below the line” spend on tabloids promoting the awfulness of RB drinks. Grown-up (ish) me says “agh, forfend!”, but I know the pubescent me was drawn to risky things, fortunately mostly vicariously, and in that you have their racing d’etre.
Oh dear, mixed my nursery rhymes! It would be deliveries of plums and no fear of the FIA spider.
I disagree that ‘The whole interlude is best forgotten’. The biggest concern in the whole circus was the obvious lack of clear communication. Far from being forgotten, lessons need to be learnt and the FIA’s procedures tightened up. The general consensus seems to be that the test shouldn’t have taken place, yet Mercedes asked the FIA and apparently nobody really, definitely said no.
On the other hand, Christian Horner and Red Bull should be in front of a tribunal on a charge of bringing the sport into disrepute (again). The constant moans about tyres are becoming wearing. They should design a car for the boots they were given.
Maybe “noted but otherwise forgotten”?
As in forget the faff and guff and silly talk, but chalk that up as a point to note. Most of this fracas is forgettable, in my book. Too many hot heads failing to get a claim on a real contention to moan about and bore us with. That’s why Ross won out with his No BS retort. Where’d I leave that draft Honors list??
I understand the sentiments of this story (especially in regard to Red Bulls current behaviour), but to someone who follows sportscar racing this assessment of Audis accomplishment at Le Mans seems unfairly underwhelming. Audi have seen off the full force of Peugeot and currently Toyota, who put up a good fight this year. Furthermore, why would Audi join F1 even with the incoming hybrid regulations? In comparison to the 2013 and 2014 WEC regs, the 2014 F1 regs still seem constrictive with not much room for powertrain and energy recovery variation and innovation. Add to that the mess we currently have with Pirelli and testing why would any sensible road-focused marque consider using F1 as a platform for true innovation? With Porsche, Nissan and other makers promising fully focused efforts for Le Mans next year, sportscar racing – to me at least – makes more sense for a manufacturer than F1.
F1 is like a marketing machine, whereas sports cars are like a marketing tool. A tool never does the work for you, but makes the work you do much easier. Audi can use it in all of their publications, showcase how they’re advancing technology, and they can win prestigious races. They have shaped the tool in such a way that they can get the leverage in the directions they want.
The F1 marketing machine runs on money; you feed it money and it does most of the work for you. That’s all well and good, but F1 is just about winning. It does a car brand very little good if you’re running mid pack, whereas with sports cars, you can spin that as technology development or even run in a lower class. Honda and Toyota would have stayed in F1 if they were fighting for wins. As it was, they were fighting for points and that’s not enough to justify the budget.
Realistically, with Porsche joining the party, that just ramped up Audi’s exposure. If they win, they beat Porsche at their own game. If they lose, well, it’s Porsche after all, and they can claim their main aim is to develop technology. They still come out ahead.
I completely disagree with your statements about the 24 Heures du Mans. It is the pinnacle of endurance racing, and Audi have proved themselves to be masters in this discipline.
Why on earth would they want to compete in F1, a category that has very little to do with development relevant to their road cars? That would make no sense.
The 24 Hours is (in my opinion) the greatest motor race in the world, and to disregard its importance to racing fans, drivers, teams and manufacturers worldwide is a mistake. Recent attendances at the race are in the region of 250,000 people. Do you think that Audi’s achievements are really going unnoticed?
The safety record at La Sarthe had been excellent, with no fatalities for over 2 decades, prior to this weekend, and I think it is crass to bring the tragic death of Allan Simonsen into any argument you want to make.
I am not bringing the accident into an y argument. I am mentioned what happened.
Yet you admit you didn’t even watch the race. Basically, this drivel can be summed up in “I don’t like Le Mans. Audi should race in F1. F1 is better.” That is the type of argument a 12 year old would make…
Read the story I wrote and don’t be rude and stupid.
See my other comment below – oh, and talking of children do you really think your comment is grown-up? Sometimes I think Joe’s incredibly patient.
I’d argue that we’ve been lucky there hasn’t been any other fatalities. Just because there hasn’t been any for 17 years doesn’t mean we should sit and wait for one. We were very lucky last year after an Audi went through a fence.
IMHO safety definitely needs to be looked at and it already should have been
I was watching on the Le Mans official site, live, and he showed around 45,000 attendance at the finish. 250,000 maybe the whole week including those same spectators day in day out. Are you trying to say that these cars, which are effectively single seaters with a ‘wrap around’ body (like the DTM) are like road cars! As far as TV is concerned it’s a big bore, which is why ‘mainstream’ tele don’t show it are even mention it – sorry, that’s fact.
Agreed – No mention of LeMans on BBC News on Sunday evening!
“The safety record at La Sarthe had been excellent, with no fatalities for over 2 decades, prior to this weekend, and I think it is crass to bring the tragic death of Allan Simonsen into any argument you want to make.”
1997 was less than 2 decades ago.
However from Le Mans it is worth noting that all the Audis and the Toyotas, who took the top places, were hybrids.
Strangely I was able to watch the race on the internet quite legitimately for free interrupted only very rarely by Rolex ads. (Via F1fanatic.com and Dailymotion)
I was alarmed at how loose some of the drivers had their shoulder straps, this is based more on my passenger experience than as a driver I must admit. After strapping in to the passenger seat and pulling the straps fairly tight as advised, one found after the first corner at race speed, an extra 3 inches of slack and looked for something brace knees and feet against.
As I remember, a lot of the Armco is unprotected, as it is in a number of LMS or WEC circuits, these being several times the length of modern F1 circuits, and more like those of the 60, 70 and 80s. I would guess that the cost of tyres and conveyor belts is prohibitive. Particularly now that old tyres have disappeared from the UK and all been shipped to China as raw materials, I assume the same has happened in France. Also of course there are an alarming number of trees near the track some close behind the Armco.
The Dailymotion broadcast was, I think, the same official feed as per 24h-lemans.com and le-manstv.com , with the RadioLeMans team giving the English commentary all night long (between the Ro|ex ads).
p.s. of the LMS/WEC circuits, most *are* F1 or otherwise FIA Grade 1 circuits, and of those that are not:
* only Le Mans is longer than Spa;
* only Sebring is also longer than all the rest of the current F1 circuits;
* only Brno and Alcaniz are also longer than 5km. (and Alcaniz is F1-test standard already)
No idea what the cost of upgrade for a random sub-5km circuit from only-just FIA Grade 2 up to FIA Grade 1 might be.
I haven’t seen the Times article but, at first, Christian Horner had appeared to accept the FIA’s decision, from what I read. So it looks like a bit of ‘stirring’ somewhere in the system don’t you think?
Re Le Mans, I believe as well as the repetitive success factor it’s the lack of mainstream TV coverage – something F1 might well reflect on if it goes down the subscription-only route. Rallying is quite difficult to televise anyway and build an audience. However I was surprised when I heard MotoGP are moving to BT cable – risky move that, and a real shame for its BBC fans.
Christian Horner is indeed daft. Mercedes Benz supply 1/3 of the field with engines. It’s going to take something far more significant than a highly questionable test to have the FIA do more than what the tribunal called for. On the flip side, thumbing one’s nose in direct knowledge and defiance of the FIA is another thing altogether. Go on Christian, do it! It certainly would make the World Championship more interesting this year…..
Dear Joe, and all.
The profile of LeMans is not helped by how bloody difficult it is to get coverage.(I am writing from Canberra, Australia). As far as I can ascertain, there was NO 24hr coverage of the race on free to air, or, pay per view.
I tried to get it on the web, and, searching high and low, all I could manage was a video feed with French voiceover, (mostly in car cameras)and, opening a second window, to listen to LeMans radio, or radio LeMans- and, after an hour of trying to marry the two, putting up with intermittent signal, courtesy of mobile broadband, I gave up. It was about 18hrs after the accident that ABC 24hr News finally reported the accident, and, his death.
I have only viewed youtube footage of the accident (having taken until lap 4 to to get radio LeMans up and running), which only showed (a) in car footage from a vehicle following the Aston, as it suddenly speared left, and, trackside camera footage of the vehicle immediately after it had hit the barriers. Looking at the crumpled roof, I found it impossible to form a picture of what happened off camera. I cannot agree or disagree with your view that it is difficult to understand why such an accident should prove fatal. whatever the “should” or “should not”, it just did.
Allen Simonsen had visited Mount Panorama, Bathurst, a good few times- driving in oth the 1000km V8 Supercars race, and, the 12 hour sports car race, and, was well respected, as one who acquitted himself well on a very challenging circuit.A tragedy, as any death which is not a relief from terminal suffering is, I sincerely hope it was instantaneous, and, that his suffering was minimized. I hope it is some solace to his loved ones that he died doing something that he loved. There is no good way to die, just bad and worse.
MarkR
I must admit I found it by accident, but it was on http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-information/f1-live/live-2013-le-mans-24-hours/
which linked to http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x10uqt7_live-2013-le-mans-24-hours-lemans-tv-com_sport?start=17
Mark, there was multiple in-car feeds with commentary in French and English for the whole 24 hours, and it was free!
http://live.fiawec.com
All of the races have similar streaming: for free!
The difference between the free streaming and broadcast feed is that the ‘world feed’ as it was called shows more footage from around the track from trackside cameras.
However, it was wonderful to sit and watch 24 hours of sports car racing (emphasis on the racing) for free without any bloody commercials (apart from a 1 minute Rolex ad each hour, on the hour).
F1 and LeMans are patently different and I consider Audi’s record there to be nothing short of amazing, and the technology feeds directly into their road cars. Watch the free movie ‘truth in 24 hours’ (iTunes) or the follow up to it. For sure they are marketing plugs by Audi, but they are so well done.
Audi understands marketing in a different way to F1 and the WEC obviously satisfies their demand (and I think they are quite a demanding company).
Ultimately, F1 and LeMans/WEC are very different. I enjoy both, but I think LeMans is a stand alone event that many current and past F1 drivers recognize as being one of motor racing’s ‘blue ribband’ events. Look at the number of them who have tried to win (and failed). It takes something special to win there: ask Derek Bell, Jackie Ickx, and Tom Kristensen.
To make comparisons like this between series is somewhat superficial and pointless: each has its merits and its detractions.
Currently, F1 is not so much about sporting prowess, and it is suffering as a result. For sure, the numbers stack up, but I wonder if, in the long term, all the new fans will stick with it in the way that LeMans continues to attract people to the circuit. And don’t forget, the ‘historic’ Le Mans is a wonderful spin-off that just doesn’t work in F1.
F1 is all about bling and bluster, for me, LeMans and WEC is racing in a purer form, with many levels of competition: against the clock, against your team’s other car(s), against your class competitors, against the traffic, against the weather. On many levels, it is a true testament to the harmony of man and machine and it grieves me a little that the achievements of so many are apparently being belittled here.
You do know that channel ten had live and uninterrupted feed on their website, and foxtel had both the eurosports and speed tv feeds on for the whole 24hrs??
Fair point, but the fact that a small percentage of a country with 22 million people will now be very well informed is not really much in comparison to a fortnightly global live audience of 100, 200 or 300 million, is it?
Maybe Herr Doctor has seen the fate of Theissen and Haug and he isn’t quite ready to join them at the beer tent yet… The hybrid component is surely very interesting but the other rules are so restrictive and the series so aero dependent, I suppose in an effort to “cut costs”. In reality it has only focused spending in certain areas, which doesn’t really have any relevance to anything else that has 4 wheels. I think it would be much more attractive if they can find a real way to contain costs and open up the technical regulations to innovation once again, so that if Marussia picks up the next Newey out of university he can come up with the one big idea that lets them compete with Red Bull. Maybe a salary cap model like the NBA is the answer?
Le Mans was ‘flat’ this year owing to the Simonsen news. I watched loads on Eurosport, but my heart wasn’t in it. I agree about Audi, but that will change with Porche’s entry next year. Toyota have always been nearly men in sports cars. Porche are winners. A fourth LMP1 manufacturer (Jaguar?) would put Le Mans back where it should be.
Ferrari used to play with the big boys at one time.
As someone who doesn’t particularly care for the ACO or FIA I must disagree, Joe. Audie’s victories at Le Mans continue to reinforce why they compete and the brand image that they have built since 2000 on the back of Le Mans victories, and domination in the ALMS, LMS and WEC.
In the mind of the Audi consumer and Audi fan the brand sits as the benchmark for German high performance luxury cars – which is true. BMW and Mercedes have not matched up consistently in terms of quality of their road cars and have not come near to equalling Audi’s brand as they lack a flag-bearing global staple like Le Mans. Sorry, but Grand Prix racing has lost its global relevance as a showcase for auto manufacturers. For crying out loud, a drink kids mix with alcohol on Friday nights is dominating!
Say what you will about the marketing power of F1 relative to sports cars, but Audi has launched into the limelight using Le Mans as its springboard. I can’t think of a brand that has used Formula 1 to do anything near as effective in the last decade. Furthermore, sports car’s rules are far more road relevant than “F1’s new hybrid rules”.
F1 = entertainment with a global audience. Has lost it’s technical relevance.
Sports cars = technical exercise that adds a level of legitimacy that F1 cannot equal.
This has got nothing to do with Le Mans. It is to do with the law of diminishing returns. It gets to a point at which Audi’s victories will only be reported when they DON’T happen. It is not good for the sport. Just like Sebastien Loeb’s success, amazing though it is, has done more to kill WRC than anything else. Do you honestly think that any person considering buying an Audi makes the decision because Audi has won 12 rather than five times? And I disagree about the rules. They are in any case fiddled with to balance the manufacturers, which I think is wrong. F1’s hybrid rules will be very valid.
I can agree with this, the first thing I saw about the rules this year was controversy over diesel vs. petrol details and which had the advantage under the current rules. Not sure what they can do when these differences could have a large impact on who is favourite to win the race, one manufacturer or the other. I’m glad that an experimental car gets a grid slot though, this can only be positive for the 24hr race.
I also disagree with the rule to balance out the petrol engined Toyota but then they do the same with the F1 V8’s now don’t they? So I think both are equally guilty. I agree with the diminishing returns but on the other hand, from the perspective of Toyota, if Audi was not there the victory would be totally hollow wouldn’t it?
Joe
At what point do you calculate ‘diminishing returns’ to kick in? Whilst some fans departed F1 during the Schumacher/Ferrari years of domination, ultimately, there was a queue of sponsors trying to get into the sport, a long line of drivers wanting to step up to F1, teams wanting to enter, and many, many countries trying to host.
I find your argument doesn’t stack up that well when you add in many relevant factors.
And I do think that the reliability and success of Audi’s on track exploits has a direct correlation to their road car sales. It might not be overtly exploited in the “look at me” way of, say Red Bull, but it speaks volumes as to their engineering. It is a subtle reinforcer of some brand attributes and I think that their record of success, like any record, means something of value to them that they are prepared to make sacrifices for.
Rather than ‘pontificate’, why not do an interview with Wolfgang Ulrich about their involvement in the race and do a marketing strategy comparison piece with Red Bull in a forthcoming GP+?
Just an idea!
It was not pontificating. It was an opinion with nothing more to it than that. It has dragged some real mouth-breathers out of the woodwork.
As someone with continual colds & hayfever I object to being lumped in with some of the people commenting on this article.
Keep up the good work Joe 🙂
[i]”Do you honestly think that any person considering buying an Audi makes the decision because Audi has won 12 rather than five times”[/I]
More people will do so than have likely purchased a Renault/Infiniti because Vettel has won 3 and a half WDCs driving one?
Many of the people buying Audis based on their brand value as 12 time winners weren’t prospective Audi buyers when they started winning… the marketable value of a win or some wins has a life span, which makes continued winning more valuable than quitting and resting on laurels? Do people still buy Lancias because of the Delta Integrale or Stratos’ historic success?
Plus I’d imagine that Audi have a rather large and talented marketing department who report to the board on the value of their LeMans participation… rather than relying on an F1 scribbler’s opinions of what they should do?
Well don’t read the scribbler’s thoughts and don’t waste you’re own time being rude about him!
I wasn’t being rude. I just think you’re wrong. Do you only want or expect people who unconditionally agree with your opinions to read your blog? DO you think you better understand the value of Audi’s Le Mans participation better than their marketing department and board… that’d be an awfully bold statement if you did.. bordering on a foolish statement actually..
The term scribbler is derogatory – which is exactly why you used it. So don’t try to play the innocent.
I’ve just heard the soundtrack for the Renault F1 engine next year and I really hope it (and the rest of them) isn’t actually going to sound like that!! – sounds like a high-pitched fart
Damn right we think about Audi dominating the SportsCar world , when buying a new car. Quality on the track translates directly to the sales showroom.
I say good for them, and many more victories. They truly deserve it.
If your theory on “diminishing returns” is true, it sure doesn’t appear to hold water, around these parts. Audi have done a fabulous job of marketing every aspect of their racing into the market place.
I give up. If you think Audi’s success at Le Mans is what has made the company commercially successful then there’s no helping you. It is a tiny part of a very big picture. The thoughts about diminishing returns are perfectly acceptable. I am sure Audi marketing people have discussed it as well.
What, Audi’s marketing brains are saying.”Wait, we have to stop winning races or it will affect our bottom line.” Or is it, “We need to meet every challenge on the track to show the world what a great company can do to produce and market vehicles on the cutting edge of technology.”? Honestly!
Meeting every challenge on the track woulds have them in F1, no?
How about meeting every safe / predictable challenge in our comfort zone – not quite as sexy.
Joe, I don’t think it is a tiny part of a very big picture. I think that it has been the pillar of Audi’s branding exercise over the last decade – thus crucial. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on the program and will continue to be. They have defeated all comers, Cadillac, Chrysler, Peugeot, Toyota and will continue to hold the belt because Le Mans continues to hold marketing value for them. Jaguar’s are no longer considered sports cars as they were in the 50’s (and briefly in the 80’s) because there is nothing in the brand to back that statement up. Audi’s are sports cars because they are the big dog at Le Mans and to get the glory, you must go through them.
I don’t think the law of diminishing returns has kicked in dramatically yet – at 12 wins. In fact, Audi is now a dynasty that is beneficial to the brand. Kind of like Ferrari as a stalwart in F1.
Yes, but it is different because if Audi was free to choose where to go racing, it might choose F1. It is not free to do so, as I understand it, so it has to make do with Le Mans. There is NO WAY that coverage of sports car racing can be compared statistically with F1 and I am not a great believer in the idea that people but their road cars because the company wins Le Mans. I was an Audi owner for years because it was a great car, not because it won Le Mans.
I would argue it was a great car because of their efforts at Le Mans!
hummm.., Joe, it sounds like you are writing from a very sharp point of view maybe even a silo perspective in my experience.
I’m beginning to feel sad…, so sad that this virtual experience is turning quite visceral in my opinion.
breathing deeply now…, …, …, okay. I’m over it and ready to sign off.
Ciao tutti!
I am writing sharply because people are reacting without reading the story properly. And too many of them are just plain rude…
who cares about prototype sports cars??? Either race proper prototypes (F1) or proper sports cars. I agree that F1 rules should be less restrictive, but that can only happen after a budget cap is enforced
As far as I can see, Horner hasn’t been quoted as saying he is going to have an illegal test, the newspapers seem to be putting words in his mouth, as they usually do.
If he has threatened to do that, (along with Ferrari it seems), then I think they may find it very difficult without tyres as I think that Pirelli will want to keep away from any more trouble and bad publicity!! We are dealing with multi-national companies who hate bad publicity and I should imagine that both Mercedes and Pirelli are getting rather tired of the shenanigans of a jumped up fizzy drink maker.
I have to disagree with your assessment of Le Mans, Joe. The story has not been the same every year, with Audi having to fend off genuine challenges from Peugeot and now Toyota. The competition will only intensify next year with Porsche’s return. It would also be wrong to trivialise the impact of projects such as DeltaWing, which had a far greater impact among young audiences than many older fans may realize.
The hybrid rules for F1 are simply too constrained to offer companies like Audi, Toyota, and Porsche (plus Nissan from 2015) the platform they want for free experimentation with hybrid systems and related chassis packaging and design opportunities. The guiding principle of the next generation LMP1 rules is free engine design subject to limits on energy (hydrocarbon and electric) consumption — it’s pretty obvious which series is more road-relevant.
Finally, there is no contradiction in VAG allowing Audi and Porsche to compete against each other if you understand the key importance of the R&D factor. An inside source has said, “Of course we are part of the same group. But we are pursuing different approaches to hybridization, and this way we will find out that much faster what works.” So it’s about a lot more than marketing, folks.
Peter, do you not think that car manufacturers would be better off testing their stuff in road car prototypes in various parts of the globe – like many actually seem to do – rather than spending vast amounts on racing (whatever category) to test something which has to end up in a road car anyway ?
I can only see marketing in its purest form at work in motor racing.
Which is why Joe’s original comment has mileage in my opinion since losing becomes a better story than winning. And when you’re actually after winning it would be a bit unfortunate to lose and get world attention for doing so.
No wonder Dr Ulrich seemed more happy than on previous occasions at 15h on Sunday.
Sounded like the last time there for Audi to me…
I hear that Audi are in for at least another five years. Why? Because nothing beats motorsport for the rapid, intensive development of both technology and engineers. Audi Sport is deeply integrated into the road car company’s R&D operations, with responsibility for delivering on projects assigned by the road car people as well as proposing projects themselves.
I’m not saying Audi think the marketing side isn’t important. They spend a lot and say they get a lot back. I think they’ve been able to keep their success fresh thanks to the periodic introduction of new technologies, beating back Peugeot and Toyota, and some genuinely thrilling races (2011 was hard to beat for excitement in my book).
In the strongest, longest-lived manufacturer racing programs, it seems to me the R&D and marketing sides reinforce each other…
And F1 development is fastest of all.
But what you can do – the range of technological solutions you can try – is clearly more constrained in F1…
After following F1 for 50yrs, it’s my fervent wish that Red Bull, McLaren and Mercedes move over to WEC and contest LMP1. They might provide excellent competition for Audi, Toyota and Porsche in a class which is both exciting and relevant – and help keep it so.
As for ‘diminishing returns’, F1’s present stultified formula may be paraphrased:-
‘…because after a while it is only controversy that warrants coverage because conservatism is the norm.’
WEC is the epitome of motor sport.
F1 is the epitome of motor entertainment.
Regretfully the latter has had its day.
I understand Mr Saward’s point about diminishing returns and agree with it up to a certain point. But the flipside is that often to get noticed by casual fans, you need consistent winners. Here in the U.S.A. people will point out the NBA was in the doldrums in the 1970s when there was a different champion every year but very popular in the 1980s when it was Boston or Los Angeles virtually every year or in the 1990s when Chicago won six titles in eight years. Of course there were stars like Jordan, Bird and Johnson to promote. But 11 titles in 14 years, while deserving of respect, may not get many eyeballs for long periods.
One other thing I will say about Audi is they have made available for free download at places like itunes and amazon “Truth in 24” and “Truth in 24 2”. Imagine that, trying to promote your brand with well made films about your 24 Heures du Mans race.
Deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Allan Simonsen.
I feel you wrong on many levels joe I listen to most of the race on radio le mans.com and was grip from first min one slip my audi number 2 car and Toyota would have won as for audi been built to run and run well what happen to car 1 and 3 ?? well you will not know as I sure you did not watch the race
What are you on about? Did I say the race was no good? Did I criticize the racing? No. I simply made the point that I did not understand what Audi has to gain from winning the same race over and over and over again. I fully understand that sports car racing has its own fans, some of them who have been rude to me, but that does not change my reflection on this matter!
I call myself a motorsport fan and will be watch all the F1 race as many BTCC rounds as I can , listen to Indy car on the net as well as ALMS and GT so hope you not saying I was a rude sportcar fan ,I also be listing to midweek motorsport on Wednesday night for many view on our sport
….which is a million times better than a certain “other” podcast.
Maybe its a long term view,….you could argue that Jaguar are selling cars to people today using the legacy of racing in the 1950,s,…..It seems that the Audi brand are doing well now,…and after their achievements at LeMans they will hope to be doing well in 60 years time!
Me too, but I don’t think it is really helping them.
It’s ironic that you bring up Jaguar as I think they perfectly illustrate Joe’s point. Jaguar won a total of four Le Mans races in the 1950s, and only two of those were with works cars. They then decided that enough had been done and withdrew, only really having a presence in saloon car racing until the 1980s and even that was mostly through works-supported privateers.
Bill Lyons was many things, but he was not a chap to spend money with no return.
Dang, got to get these typos sorted. There was also the Peter Whitehead entered (but very much works effort) C-type maiden win in 1951.
Jaguar raced IMSA GTP in the states in the 80’s; that was NOT a saloon car!
See the line that says “until the 1980s”? They also won Le Mans a couple of times with the TWR cars, but again that was 1988 and 1990, and following that 10 year stint they again pulled back to production-based racing until they bought out JYS and launched their F1 effort. Typical manufacturer profile: in-out-in-out. Joe raises an interesting point about Audi and I’ll be interested to see how long they stick around if Porsche start winning as they have in the past.
I’d just like to point out that both Eurosport (which is received all over the continent) and Dutch RTL broadcast the entire (!) 24-hour race live. So TV coverage was pretty good at least in Europe.
All in all, I’d say Le Mans draws far more attention than most other motorsport events, aside from F1.
And while Audi may have been dominant the last couple of years, it goes a bit far to call a 24-hour race a foregone conclusion (all the more so as there is a lot going on in the classes not in contention for the overall win).
I do fully agree the FIA should reassess the circuit’s safety, there have been a lot of scary accidents in recent years, sadly Allan’s was one too many.
Why would Audi quit WEC for F-1 now ?
Technical relevance is more important for big manufactureers than global coverage.
There will be more manufactureers coming to Le Mans than to F-1 in next few years…
Joe, you say it has everything to do with “Diminishing Returns” and as I said in my first piece – You Sir are one of the Journalists who job it is report the facts whether a Team wins once ( Big Deal !! ) or 12 times ( Boring !!! ) so you are the Professionals who make it into “Diminishing Returns” therefore you are criticising your own Industry.
No. I am simply pointing out the illogical nature of Audi’s continued involvement. That is not criticism, but rather reflection. In any case, the job of journalists is not to be PR men for the sport. We tell the truth as we see it, whether it is critical of the sport or not.
I respectfully diagree with this. Regardless of the rights and wrongs you were critical of the recent claim that Silverstone is selling fewer tickets this year. That made you seem to be acting in favor of Silverstone and not being in line with the criticism. We are all human and have opinions so it is nothing to shy away from. Your view seems to be in line with Silverstone, against its critics and against Le Mans. Commentators need strong views so why hide from them?
Read the story again. I am not against Le Mans. That is in your head.
I am reading an exchange about this on twitter from Mr Mark Gallagher who is a F1 insider to my knowledge. He asks Mr Leigh OGormon if he has told Tom Kristensen that his event doesnt have much worldwide impact and that 9 wins diminishes its status. Here is the link to the talk
https://mobile.twitter.com/MarkGallagher62/status/349249399819468800
They are talking about your comments! My view is based on this and on your story
Mark has not been around for a while now. I believe he is running a team in the junior formulae.
But he is knowledgeable about F1 isnt he? Why would Cosworth have hired him if not? They are pros so he must know what he is talking about. I have no knowledge of Mr Gormon but he seems to be a business contact (Cosworth?)
This is all relevant to what?
Mark also co-runs an LMP2 team.
re·flec·tion – noun
1. the act of reflecting or the state of being reflected.
2. an image; representation; counterpart.
3. a fixing of the thoughts on something; careful consideration.
4. a thought occurring in consideration or meditation.
5. an unfavorable remark or observation.
You seem to have had everything here Joe ( HaHa …. laughing with you )
I do notice a massive response from all the Sportscar Supporters whenever you mention Sportscars ….. PS – Yours is a brilliant blog … Thanks.
PS – The Race was available on approx five free Internet channels including Audi TV and Eurosport – and I personally watched with “Vin Rouge” and cheese with my good mates but as we’ve now moved round the world I got them together on Skype Conference where we shouted about the race ….. and watched the box ….. so a bit like being there. ( But Jeeeez – It looked cold this year … What’s happened to Europe ??? )
I thought by far the biggest winner at the Tribunal was the Tribunal process. And that means that anyone who truly cares about the sport for its own sake has come out as a winner too.
Even if this ends up being pretty much the whole of Jean Todt’s legacy at the FIA, he’s looking pretty good this morning.
I’m sorry Joe but this is some muddled thinking; you are way off…lost in space.
Opinions are subjective. I’m happy for you to have your own opinion, but just because you do agree does not make your’s right and mine wrong. Who is to say who is way off. If you look at the feedback some agree, some do not.
The important bit being that Audi itself does not agree
Did you ask them?
The important thing is: did you?
No, because the piece that was written was simply a reflection no more than that.
I don’t need to, they have yet to pull out so they vote with their feet, right?
Disagreement is the crucible of knowledge, but rudeness accomplishes what exactly that contributes to this forum?
Joe,
I completely agree with you about Horner’s reaction to the tribunal outcome. It seems willfully designed to make the sport look bad and undermine the FIA. His comments alone, in many other sporting leagues, would be enough to warrant a large fine from the league office.
F1 intrigue seems always about naked self interest, but Horner’s statements in this regard feel like a whole different type of naked; more exploitive than fun. Perhaps he was inspired by Vettel’s Malaysian antics to reveal how single-minded and brazenly competitive he truly is. That might be overstating things, but it feels about right.
In the end though I find it difficult to imagine that Red Bull would actually risk what is looking like another driver/constructor championship sweep.
In regards to the notion of diminishing returns, I can’t see it being an issue for Audi at LeMans or Red Bull in F1. Domination can certainly dampen interest in any given year, but history does look kindly on dynasties. They build mystique for the brand/team and also help define different eras of the sport.
The fact that Audi have continued to dominate in a time of significant technological change (petrol, diesel and now hybrid drivetrains) reflects very well on them. The technology at LeMans is pretty easy to link to the street. Not bad for a manufacturer today. If people think Audi when they think LeMans the returns should always be pretty good for the company.
As for Red Bull, they followed up on Brawn GP’s 2009 championship to thoroughly put an end to a thirty-five year period (beginning in 1974) that saw Ferrari (14 constructors, 9 drivers), McLaren (8 constructors, 12 drivers) and Williams (9 constructors, 7 drivers) dominate the sport…but for a little Benetton/Renault spice thrown into the mix. I can’t imagine them getting tired of adding more championships to their resume anytime soon. The Red Bull brand is all about getting an edge on life. Winning will continue to reinforce that.
What puzzled me a little was why Horner did not request to speak at the tribunal. As an interested party I believe he had the right. (ok I will have to read the rules again, at times an editic memory must be very useful.)
Well, I am astounded at some of the comments people have left here. Joe expressed an opinion, an INFORMED opinion. Disagree? Fine. But disagree politely, and disagree with the argument he put forward, he DID NOT attack LeMans or Audi. I seem to remember Renault did a marketing awareness study before and after they left F1 in 97-98 and it showed that more people thought they were in F1 AFTER they left than before. I believe Joe’s point is about MARKETING awareness and value, not RACING value.
Trying to stay on message here…Joe you make a good point, which is why I do not view Tom Kristensen on the same level as other multi-LM24 winners. He did it against thinning competition with a no-holds-barred manufacturer. Winning any race, let alone a 24 hour race, is an achievement. Doing it repeatedly against weak or non-existent competition, with the occasional Pug or Toyota to trouble you, is not quite epic.
You are clearly not following sportscars. If anything, even if someone doesn’t rate Toyota or Peugeot, an Audi crew has to beat two other team crews and they are all pure quality
Read the post again.
I’ve been following sports cars closely for long enough to know that the prototype class has been far more competitive in the past than it is today. Only three manufacturers have supported factory P1 programs over the last 10 years (Audi, including Bentley’s foray, the Pug, and Toyota), although this changes going forward. Look at the race results from 1980-1989 for comparison. Audi is indeed quality. The question is one of placing the achievements in proper context.
I respect your point of view however when someone talks about good old times one has to remember that reliability was not what is now. Records of the past had way more to do with luck than today. In any case I wouldn’t belittle any legend, old or new. Tom K anyway proved his worth as a driver wherever he raced
It is very apt that Joe writes this piece in relation to F1. Theoretically Red Bull could say ok we have now put our name out there long and far enough, let’s pack in the F1 team. But actually I don’t think they are there yet. Coca Cola must now only advertise to keep the punters away from Pepsi, it has no need of further brand recognition.
(JoJ will probably jump in here and in only two or three thousand words demolish my point)
Paradoxically F1 is itself, an example of diminishing returns, with tightly restricted development of the cars, every fraction of a second off of a lap time, costs more. The first few seconds probably cost only thousands of dollars each, now just hundredths, cost tens of thousands. I am sure someone somewhere has done a graph of this, it must be an exponential curve.
With new engines in 2014, again we resort to lower costs per second improvement, but once engine development is curtailed the costs will rise again.
The law of diminishing returns could have been written just for F1, but it applies to everything in terms either of money or effort.
I miss JoJ’s big posts. They were like a blog within a blog. A barmy stream of consciousness littered with interesting anecdotes and some incredibly insightful points.
I agree with diminishing returns point but to the man stepping off the Clapham omnibus and into the Audi showroom, 13 Le Mans winners’ trophies and all the surrounding promotional material are pretty impressive, especially compared with what BMW and Mercedes (at the moment) have to show for their recent, very expensive stints in F1.
Toyotas returns from their investment in F1 didn’t look very good either. Guess where they see it best to race for greatest returns now …(WEC for all the F1 scribblers) 😉
Toyota did everything that one can do wrong in F1. Like most big companies they felt they knew all the answers far better than this to whom F1 is a core business (ie the teams) and they spent a huge amount of money finding out that they were wrong.
So when they went to Le Mans, they contracted an experienced team (Oreca) to run the cars for them. Just like Audi contracted Joest racing to run theirs.
Joe,
Audi staying in the WEC is quite a simple proposition. You’ve mentioned it yourself on many occasions, when people talked about the lack of consumer brand sponsors. F1 is now about the movers and shakers in finance, and other big business. Audi uses WEC participation as a means to push their brand value directly to the customer. Whilst the Paddock Club and hospitality units might be good places to do business. Car manufacturers still need to sell their product – cars. Through smart vehicle design, combined with clever and relevant marketing, Audi is now seen as a cool brand. Mercedes is still considered a bit old-fashioned. Currently it’s UK advertising uses urban music lifestyle in an effort to reposition the brand. Audi is ahead in global sales in the last quarter, and Mercedes is showing a profit slow down. But BMW is leading both in sales and profit. So one might ask if motor racing is really the driver of sales. Of course not. It’s all about image, lifestyle and product quality, for their market sector. F1 has many obvious negatives in a time of economic slow down and austerity for the many. More and more people of all social groups are either uneasy with, or positively against the ‘in your face’, big money and celebrity image of F1. WEC looks modest by comparison. For a car company, marketing communication based on F1 participation is really a mixed message. Yes, the style and glamour is an easy sell. But the link to the car product is much harder to develop or even see when looking at points of relevance. Customers are more savvy. Racing for 24hrs or doing rallying like VW, is a no brainer. “Look our vehicles can race for ages, and not break down.” Or, “look how our little Polo survives those rough roads”. No diminishing returns here. Keep pushing the message and get the mind space. Success breeds success. Better to be a big fish in a fairly big but economically viable pond, than a big fish in an ocean of sharks and non viable and unsustainable budgets.
For me, F1 is losing considerable relevance, in terms of both marketing and engineering. As an engineer the real excitement seems to be in WEC/GT and rallying. Even the new rallying R5 rules seem to make more sense. Of course there might be something technically interesting going on in F1, but we never really get to know, because of the wall of secrecy. The gradual move from free to air, to pay sat is not helping the cause.
Agree with your comments about Horner.
However, I don’t agree about Audi. The reason I believe this is because by entering F1 will it really help them any further? I don’t think it will they already have an established market share. I think F1 is good for brands like Vodafone or Red Bull but not for car manufacturers. I would argue that at the moment Mercedes is doing more damage to its brand for example. Also, the same for BMW who ended up pulling out.
Audi in my view are becoming like the Ferrari of F1 in that even by not winning they are still Ferrari and they still are F1. Audi is creating a similar niche at Le Mans for a fraction of the price.
The value of multiple Le Mans wins is a legacy that manufacturers can live off for decades, think Bentley, Jaguar and Porsche have all built lasting legacies based on multiple LeMans victories.
Another difference in marketing terms between LeMans and F1 is in F1 the driver is the most recogniseable winner to the man on the street where as with LeMans it is the manufacturer who gets far greater recognition.
Your second point was something very interesting that struck me as I went through this thread, glad someone else got there first.
I suspect all my petrolhead friends can tell me that Audi has gobbled up Le Mans constructors trophies recently but few of them will know the name Tom Kristensen.
I have to confess, I’m struggling to see what all the fuss is about here with Joe’s post? I must be missing something? Let’s see;
‘So Audi won Le Mans for the nth time’. Factual; don’t see a problem with that.
“This year’s event hit the headlines because of an accident that led to the sad death of Denmark’s Allan Simonsen”. Very sad but, unfortunately, that’s probably true. Let’s be honest, the darker side of racing (whatever it’s form) does tend to attract media attention and grabs some unwanted headlines, just like it did at Imola in 94 and, more recently when poor Dan Wheldon died is the US.
“an incident that should lead to questions about safety at the French circuit because it is hard to see why such a crash should have been fatal’. Agree with you 100% here Joe. From the little bit that I’ve been able to see on YouTube (poor footage I’ll agree), it seems surprising that the crash was fatal (I’m thinking about Allan McNish’s crash in a previous race at the same event which ‘looked’ awful at the time. So, let’s hope that something is taken from this tragedy and used to try and make the event safer in future”.
“Beyond that, however, the race made little impact around the world”. Again, it’s only an opinion but it’s difficult to argue against it. Certainly the sports news over the weekend seemed to be dominated (in UK at least) by rugby, cricket and looking forward to Wimbledon!
“It is, one might argue, like the WRC has been in recent years: a foregone conclusion and thus not as news-worthy as it would be if there were different winners each year”. Again, an opinion but not contentious surely? It’s rather reminiscent of F1 during the Schumacher/Ferrari years?
“This is not to criticize Audi. Someone has decided this is the strategy and the team has brilliantly shown that but the German marque has established that it builds solid cars, filled with innovatory bells and whistles. However, the fact that they keep on winning the same race over and over again, has less and less value. It would be far more impressive if Audi demonstrated its abilities by entering F1 with its new hybrid rules and winning”.
Again, I can’t see how this would upset anybody. Just imagine Audi coming into F1 and doing what Joe suggested – shaking things up a bit? If there IS a relationship between on-track success and road car sales then the vehicles would be flying out of the showrooms. They’d have to increase their sales force!
“It is a problem that Red Bull will soon encounter in F1 because after a while it is only failure that warrants coverage because success is the norm.” Again, correct analysis. Yet again, very difficult to argue against this; reminiscent of the Schumacher/Ferrari years? How times have changed with the world is now ‘willing’ Ferrari to do well!
As for the last bit about Horner, I don’t really have much of an opinion on him. I guess that he’s just reminding everyone that he’s the team principal.
Finally, I was pleased for Allan McNish. I’ve been a huge fan of his for years. My personal encounters with him when he was a kid in the lower categories showed me that he’s as good a human being out of the car as he is a fantastic racer behind the wheel.
Last, and perhaps, most important, RIP Allan Simonsen. You died doing what you loved.
so joe, let me get this straight, ‘you don’t understand why audi keep going back and winning and you state that they,audi, are acting ‘illogically’ . as others have alluded to, talk to audi i’m sure they know what they are doing and why. as to being illogical. that is simply arrogance masquerading as informed comment/subjective analysis.
yes, your blog, your opinion but being so dismissive of other opinions simply weakens your own approach. very few issues are black and white. try to understand.
It is not arrogance at all. It is a simple question. Maybe they do understand it. I do not. I am not dismissive of people who are polite. You are not polite.
Judging by the presence at the circuit,
I’d guess Nissan will build an Lmp long before Jaguar do. My guess would be a GT from Jaguar, rather than an Lmp. But that is just a guess.
Nice comedy piece. ” You have to respect the rules whether you like them or not.” Mercedes didnt respect the rules after all. So maybe its Mercedes who should take your advice and take a hike ?
“The Tribunal was not a green light to allow testing, it was the sorting out of a cock-up caused by unclear signals.” What is unclear about waiting 3 days after the race is over and everybody left town to go testing a current 2013 car with your race drivers, disguised with helmets they never used before and let them twitter about the nice weather in Miami at the same time ? All this without informing your competitors and without FIA overseeing the test !! Mercedes cheated and knew full well what they did. If you believe Mercedes/Ross Brawn acted in good faith and the whole matter is just a big misunderstanding you must also believe in Santa Claus.
Let the others test as well, at least Red Bull are transparent about it and didnt Pirelli said this week they needed more tire testing anyway. Just call it Pirelli´s test then, worked for Mercedes as well. A reprimand is just empty rhetoric from the FIA kindergarten.
Interesting to see the various reactions and responses, from a bunch of folk who are by their presence on here pretty much motorsport fans.
No, DRS is fake because you gain an advantage whether you are behind, alongside or even ahead of the other car. It doesn’t allow teams to decide whether to run a skinny wing for speed or a big wing for downforce… and it doesn’t matter because the car in front is a sitting duck.
With slipstreaming, you had to time it perfectly, and at best you’d be slightly ahead on the inside at the braking point, whereas with DRS you usually end up two car lengths ahead. The FIA wanted more overtaking, but instead of making overtaking possible, they made it inevitable and removed all suspense and excitement. “Catching him is one thing, passing him is another”… that saying no longer applies. It’s almost impossible to defend now.
The statistics say there is more passing, but the obvious impact is that they’re all fabricated drive bys that don’t elicit any excitement.
One thing with the DRS that bugs me is that when one car is coming into the DRS zone less than 1 second behind another car that it is about to lap, it still gets to use the DRS. Drivers should only have use of it when racing for position. It shouldn’t be used as a lap time enhancer.
And I also don’t think it should be allowed in qualifying. Qualifying should be to determine the fastest car over the lap. DRS is to enhance overtaking for position. There’s none of that in qualifying.
“they will find out what happens when one deliberately breaks rules.” Yeah, absolutly nothing.
I have to disagree with this article. Le Mans has been great in recent years. Sure, it hasn’t been the same since Peugeot’s exit, but the Audi/Peugeot battle was incredible for so long. For instance, in the 2011 race, Peugeot finished 14 seconds (!!!) behind the winning Audi after 24 HOURS of racing. You rarely see that close of a finish in F1 with 1.5 hour long races…
This years race was closer than anyone expected it to be, and I suspect next year with Porsche entering, it’s going to be amazing to watch if everyone is competitive.
Please don’t misunderstand me, F1 will always be my favourite form of motor racing, but it has been very painful to watch the races this year because the cars are going so slowly because of the tyre issues.
Read the post.
It’s incredible how many people wrongly perceive this blog post as devaluing Le Mans as a whole, without getting the point about diminishing returns at all, just because it’s written by a journalist wrongly perceived to be, within all of motorsport, only immersed into F1. Credits to you for allowing this gibberish to be seen.
What is going on? Why are people commenting on an article they clearly haven’t read properly?
I’ve read a few articles on what Red Bull will do when the law of diminishing returns kicks in, and plenty have suggested they may leave the sport simply because it won’t be an effective marketing platform any more. At the end of the day, they want to sell fizzy drinks!
Audi in F1? Bring it on!
From various conversations with various people involved with Audi in the UK, Germany and globally, the answer to the perfectly valid points and questions that Joe makes is simple:
Audi continue to compete at Le Mans and globally too now in the World Endurance Championship because it sells cars.
It also continues to grow its market share whilst promoting its products heavily around its sporting achievements.
The rules at Le Mans allow the display and promotion of innovation and technology that other areas of the sport simply don’t allow. There have been a number of very important innovations utilised in the Le Mans cars that have been relevant to the road car products that the parent company sells. There are good ways to utilise a sporting programme and bad ways too (ask anyone at Jaguar!)
The surprise I think Joe is not that they have carried on for so long, but that others spending much more elsewhere haven’t followed their lead earlier!
Next year Porsche will be joining Toyota, I’m pretty sure Nissan will be there too contesting the overall wins in 2015. I’d be pretty sure that all three have crunched the numbers to see whether Le Mans and the WEC provides a better investment than elsewhere just as I’m sure that Audi continue to analyse their own alternatives.
A solid and reasoned comment. Thank you. I am sure you are right about the number-crunching, but if the company knows it cannot do F1 – for reasons other than numbers – then it could be a case of having to make do with the best of the available choices. F1’s numbers are undoubtedly better than sports car racing but sports cars are probably better than everything else, at least with regard to the kind of series Audi wants to be associated with.
“…but if the company knows it cannot do F1…”
Or maybe they just do not see the value in it… I’m sure Audi have a better idea of what they are doing.
No. They cannot do F1 because the management won’t allow it.
Word is that Nissan will be occupying Garage 56 with an electric car next year. I expect that’s the kind of “display and promotion of innovation and technology” to which you refer.
Yes, Le Mans has a special Garage 56 entry for now technology. If the people show up. This year’s entry failed to appear. It is a good idea, but it is not really part if the race. As the Garage 56 entry is not in a specific class.
Audi wouldn’t have been able to use the Quattro marketing in F1 for starters, so there is some extra returns already without having to dig too deep.
Mind you, it was only last year that they could use “Quattro”. From 1999 to 2011, they were all RWD. If Quattro meant everything to them, they would have run in WRC.
Wow Joe, I never seen so much interest in a comment piece by you! Who knew that there were all these Sports Cars Fan Boys, who just want to attack you for voicing a opinion! There was me thinking we had free speech!
Porsche’s domination of WEC in the ’80s didn’t stop me enjoying it. But that was because the privateer entries could also win in their 956/962s and there was decent competition from the likes of Lancia and Jaguar. I hate to think what it would cost for a privateer to pick up an R18, but perhaps if Audi make the car available to selected teams when Porsche come back in in a couple of years. The R18 is a great looking car though.
Do you really think F1 can offer anything close to the returns garnered by a company like Nissan, whose GT academy, closely linked to their WEC program, engages fans and car buyers so incredibly well and at a fraction of the cost. F1 is an increasing irrelevance, both as a spectacle and as a way to sell cars. It is stuck in the old model, perpetuated by the interests of a select few, becoming more and more detached from the modern world. When was the last time F1 really innovated? Always behind the curve.
Read the 2014 rules.
The same watered-down compromises that happen with any rule changes in F1. There is a crucial disconnect between F1 technology and road cars. Fuelled by ego and out-moded opinions that don’t see past TV viewing figures. In the current financial environment, what self-respecting motor company would want to get involved in a bottomless pit of money that doesn’t even guarantee success? Toyota found out to their cost and have embraced the WEC instead.
Have you looked at the 2014 regulations? No, probably not…
Do you seriously think the average road buyer on the street is really going to be swayed by regulation changes? It’s the air of exclusivity and elitism that disconnects F1 from the public, not the rules. They just see driver personalities and cars that all pretty much look and sound the same. Nothing that would influence their next choice of family car. The whole culture of F1 is an anachronism, always behind the curve. Just look at how slowly it has taken up social media.
well joe, there you are. graham goodwin’s post does spell out a lot of what is a reasoned approach to understanding audi’s position, hardly illogical at all. as a postscript i happen to drive an audi and the dealership which looks after me are always well and truly informed of their latest prowess on the track. their promotional material ensures that they are on message most times.
winning le mans is no short order and the margins are perilous at times. to be able to rack up so many wins is a testimony to superb engineering and this is reallyl the audi mantra. it is quite obvious why they persist and not hard to understand at all.
It is easy to understand why they continue when you know they have no other choices available, but I hold with my view that the impact of what they achieve is reduced by the number of times they have done it.
Joe,
Rafa at Roland Garros, Tiger Woods in his prime, Fed at Wimbledon, Manchester United, Barcelona, Phil ‘The Power’ Taylor, Michael Jordan and the Bulls, the NY Yankees, Schumacher & Ferrari, Valentino Rossi.
All hugely popular, and they (& their sports) got MORE popular with repeated success.
The ‘law of diminishing returns’ is not a law. It is a simplified concept that sometimes applies in certain situations. The constant reminder of Audi’s success is not necessarily a bad thing – I am impressed by them every year.
There may be negatives to continued success, but there are positives also, and it is very hard to determine if the actual result is positive or not. Audi clearly still think it is positive…
Up to a point, there is logic in success attracting people, but my point is that too much is too much. That is it. It is not an attack on anyone. It is a reflection on Le Mans. It is really scary that there are so many people who come piling in, fists flying just because one reflects on their tiny little corner of the sport.
Sometimes one might say that is the reaction of some F1 people when another series gets any attention.
joe, you are again missing the point here. ‘piling in/fists flying’ . no one is questioning your right to express an opinion. it is ‘attitude’ that is your problem. i can only presume that there are many posters here that have an exceptionally good grasp of the F1 business but when you adopt an ‘holier than thou’ position you leave yourself wide open. vigorous debate is fine and all opinions are equally vaild in a democratic sense.
your last line says it all, when you allude to, ‘their tiny little corner of the sport’. derisiveness is this context is totally impolite….IMO.
No, it is not derisive, it is a reality. Open your eyes.
Surely you’re joking? You didn’t watch Le Mans (have you ever once in your life?) and now you’re calling it a tiny little corner of the sport? What planet are you on?
Using your ‘law’ why don’t McLaren stop racing? Why don’t Ferrari stop racing? Why doesn’t Red Bull stop racing after their 3 WDCs? I’m sorry but your attitude towards the world outside the bubble of F1 is seriously misguided. You’ve clearly just got no idea of what’s going on…..
Read the article again
Read the post properly.
Joe, the simple problem is that you said “the race made little impact around the world”. This is highly derogatory of Le Mans, particularly since you did not even watch the race.
But it is a fact! Whether I watched it or not is irrelevant. Go out on the street and ask the first 10 people you see who win Le Mans…
Joe.you are a wonderful F1-journo but your knowledge of LM is poor. Your knowledge about VW and Porsche/Piech family is worse than poor. As long as Ferdinand Piech is alive you will not see any VW/Porsche brand in that second rate tech game called F1.
You really need to read the biographies of Ferry Porsche and the two made of Ferdinand Piech. Then you understand that Le Mans is much more than just a race to THE family.
Isn’t it funny that the two big best profiting car makes (Porsche/VW, BMW) in this world are not in F1. What does it tell you? Why would Audi go to a toy car class? Why would Porsche go to a toy car class and carry bag fulls of money to the West-London crook?
Now, a real journo would connect the name Eduardo Michelin to two criminals. But, in certain circles journos are lambs. They rather eat from the hand.
Joe, get your feet back on the ground.
What a rude person you are. And not very well informed. I have written that Piech is why all the VW brands stay clear if Le Mans. So before throwing mud, open your eyes, read what is written, don’t jump to conclusions, take off your ridiculous blinkers – and learn to be civil. If you cannot do all that, go a pester someone else.
A unusual take:
http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3547-ambition-can-be-poison
“I just finished 2nd in the ultra-competitive LMP2 category of the greatest motor race in the world: 24 hours of Le Mans. That’s a monumental achievement by almost any standards, yet also one of the least enjoyable experiences I’ve had driving a race car — all because of ambition.”
Hmmmm…
Very poor journalism to say that the results at Le Mans over the last several years have been foregone conclusions. I am sorry that you did not enjoy covering Le Mans (or so I’ve been told), Joe, but that is no excuse for such shoddy journalism.
Wrong on every count, but imaginative: ie you must have made this up. I thoroughly enjoyed reporting Le Mans, as I wrote in a comment in the last 24 hours. Secondly, this is a blog. Go and read the blog rules and discover what a blog is. Once you have done that all you then need to do is to learn how to behave in a civil manner and perhaps one day you might become a worthwhile commenter to this blog. Thus far, it has been a very poor effort.
” It would be far more impressive if Audi demonstrated its abilities by entering F1 with its new hybrid rules and winning… ”
Really? More impressive? Not to anyone tying the brand to the product, Joe.
Have you actually looked at the 2014 F1 rules? Seriously, they are very smart and absolutely linked to what manufacturers want.
Yes Joe I have, in depth and I speak as as a retired Engineer. I think in principle they are far reaching, at least as far as the engine regs. There is lots of room for the future in that changes shouldnt be too hard to make. If there is a loophole, or at least something missing, it is the Williams style of energy recovery using rotating flywheels. There is mileage in this without the issues relating to the MGU-K at least.I think this IS a loophole.
Pardon my ignorance Joe, but might that certain party in F1 that Mr. Piech does not like be a certain octagenarian?
Might be.
So when Piech retires and said octogenerian departs the scene, perhaps for a German prison (though I don’t see that happening with the kind of Lawyers he can afford) the situation may change?
As you say, it’s diminishing returns for both Audi in LMP and Red Bull in F1. At least in Brand terms. As only a thick engineer I see the technology as more interesting than the marketing. If you look it from a brand rather than selling car technology, then what you say is perfectly true.
The difference I guess is that VW/Audi/Lamborghini/SEAT/Skoda/Porsche/Bugatti/Bentley have other barnds and prodcurts to sell, whereas red Bull has one, essenitally.
If one were a internet pundit, you could add the two factors together and get a new team onwer…
I was fortunate to see Allan run some years ago in GT3 class in Australia. He was head and shoulders above the field. I was very sorry to read about his death. I take some consolation that at least he was doing something he loved. RIP.
As much as I think you are spot on with your remarks about safety at the Sarthe as much do I think that your involvement with F1 has made you a bit operationally blind to the faults that F1 has for manufacturers. They are numerous:
1. Bernie takes out all the money they have to put in there and gives it to the bankers.
2. The constructors dominate the rule making and make it aerodynamics sport instead of motor sport.
3. Ecclestone and Ferrari can destroy good concepts like the I4 turbo engine at will and delay the turbo technology for years. Hence F1 is unsuitable for road relevant developments.
4. WEC and Le Mans do everything right that F1 does wrong except for the TV rights. LMP1 will have the same basic world engine that will also run in DTM, GT500 and DTM America. What an opportunity to get a return on one engine design.
It is not only the dislike of Piech for Bernie that drives the manufacturers away but solid reasons like those above. Why should a company make a significant investment if the power is always in somebody else’s hand and they do not even get a fair chance to compete, even with a megabuck commitment and engineering talent? BMW have tried it in F1 and had to realize that against all promises of Max Mosley to the contrary F1 is still ultimately controlled by Bernie, Ferrari and two other top teams and their preferences.
This is all true to some extent, although it is not Bernie taking the money. However it does not change the fact that F1 has the audience, which is the key point.
True F1 may have the direct audience but your argument appears to be based on the presumption that the only value of winning is the number of words written in the papers and publications the following week. This, I believe is not why Audi goes sportscar racing – it does not feel it needs that to gain from its achievements.
I believe the value in what Audi does is not based on this but rather on the gradual build up of brand strength and clever use of indirect marketing and the increased perception of quality, endurance and strength which are the current hallmark of Audi’s brand that it did not have in the ’90’s before it started at Le Mans.
I agree that Le Mans is not the only reason for that shift, but it is a not insignificant part of a global marketing and product strategy that has seen Audi turn the order of the hierarchy of German car manufacturers on its head.
I see your argument about diminishing returns and this would help explain why Audi is quick to encourage and welcome new competition and the lack of other manufacturers arriving may explain the current shift to competing against other brands within the group, but I do not believe that the number of words written in the papers is the only key to measuring the value of success on the race track.
Joe,
First I want to say thank you for the excellent night you hosted in Montreal (I was the Mclaren shirt guy that did not like DRS). It was a pleasure to attend and one of my highlights of the Montreal race weekend.
Now about Audi at Le Mans. The reason Audi continues to stay at Le Mans is because of the innovation that is allowed and the real world relevance in comparison to all other racing series including F1. Audi won their first 5 Le Mans with just a normal petrol car. Due to that maybe becoming a diminishing return, Audi innovated to become the first to win Le Mans with a diesel and helped change the worlds view of diesel power. Before Audi won Le Mans with a diesel, nobody associated speed and performance with diesel engines. This has allowed Audi to market and sell luxury performance cars powered by diesel engines with great success. Where before no luxury or performance auto manufacturer had any success selling diesels. After another 5 victories and a fierce rivalry with Peugeot, which was the best racing rivalry of the last decade, Audi has moved on to Hybrid power as another new challenge and innovation showing that Hybrid technology can be associated with speed and performance, not just fuel economy. Audi has also shown that hybrid and diesel technologies can be integrated together.
Yes you are right that this year might not have been as noteworthy or as important as the previous years because they had already proven that they can win with a diesel hybrid last year. But these things go in cycles, In the next couple of years Audi will find another new innovation that will change peoples views on auto technology which in turn helps them sell cars. Audi right now is benefiting by sticking to there guns and supporting Le Mans throughout the last 15 years showing that they are a company that thinks long term and builds lasting relationships. In comparison BMW looks like a company that is lost as one year they put all their effort at F1, then the next its Le Mans, or World Touring Cars, and now all they seem to focus on is DTM, That is a company that shows little loyalty, and no long term strategy. BMW has tried to win everything, and in the end has accomplished almost nothing,
In the end its about innovation that Audi could never accomplish by being in F1. As you talked about in Montreal, F1 right now is all about the development and innovation of aerodynamics. Next year there will be development and innovation in engines, but even that will only last for a short time before the engines freeze again, and everyone just focuses on aero once more.
Where as in sportscars, Audi has been able to innovate almost every single component that makes up a car. From the engines, to the lightweight chassis, to the LED headlights, to the quick change body sections, to the rear view camera systems, to the windshield wipers, and even to the drivers water bottles. All of these things have much more real world relevance than the innovation in F1. So while right now Audi won their 12th Le Mans, and yes it may have not been as impressive as some of their previous victories. They are going to be gunning for Porsche in the coming years to take over the all time Le Mans victory record. And that is by no means a diminishing return if they get that record, and I’m sure they will continue to innovate as they try to accomplish it.
Patrick
It would be nice to have some proper manufacturers (other than Merc) back in F1, to compete for my road car allegiance. I can’t get 3 kids and a dog in a Caterham!
I am sure that Renault and Ferrari will be willing to sell you a car.
Buy two Caterhams and teach the dog to drive –
Problem sorted.
If I could afford a Ferrari, I would also buy a Renault for the kids and the dog:)
In all seriousness though, whilst I accept that there are road cars called Ferrari, McLaren, Caterham, Lotus and Marussia, none of these are what I would call mass market, mainstream cars – ie that would serve the need of the average F1 fan. Yes, Renault (and soon also Honda) supply engines, but does this really give them the brand exposure to promote road car sales? I recall reading (possibly on these pages) that the Renault car company were unhappy with the scant amount of publicity they were getting despite Red Bull dominating for the last few years using their engines.
Which brings me back to my original point that Mercedes is the only mass market, mainstream road car manufacturer currently running a team in F1. It would be nice to see the likes of Audi/VW entering, or BMW and Toyota returning, or Renault and Honda stepping up from being engine suppliers to running teams again.
The whole point of the new F1 rules is to improve the connection between F1 and the car industry. It is what the manufacturers wanted as they were involved in the rule-making process.
I guess this does apply to the LMP class too, but I always figured that after the end of the Cold War, it was sporting competition such as F1 where the money was spent on R and D for technology that could benefit the average consumer/man in the street instead of things like the space program.
So just out of curiosity, how wide is the gulf between Audi’s R&D budget for LMP and say a top F1 budget?
They want it so much than only one has entered, while others like BMW, have said they have no interest. Going really well, isn’t it?
Yes, that was supposed to be the point, but it got watered down and delayed while LMP1 is showing what is possible. They will have ten times the innovation of F1. The Porsche engine in 2014 will be a marvel of technology with variable geometries, no limits on injection pressure, unlimited ignition technology, variable valves and no restrictions on cylinder numbers or layout. It will be a wet dream for development engineers. On top nobody will try to freeze it.
Oops, and did I forget to mention that the chassis will be equally innovative? All wheel drive and recuperation on all four wheels. Wheels that have a decent diameter and put the suspension back into function. No silly tyres that last seven laps but relentless racing for three or four stints of 12 laps and 13 kms each. A sensible application of tyre technology.
Two good post, Werner. I agree completely with your views regards opening the technical side up to innovation. If only…….
Joe is also correct; manufacturers were involved in the rule making. Honda at least is joining in.
Good. Let’s hope it works.
Fair comments Joe. I agree that LeMans makes little impact as a sporting event across the world. There will be far far more column inches about a single F1 race (not jut this weekends British GP) in the UK than LeMans.
It sort of said it all that the BBC website had the smallest link you’ve ever seen to a short article about it and that was it.
I dare say you could straw poll people at the GP this weekend and not even get 25% picking one of the three drivers who won in LMP1.
Thus I see little value in it really for anyone other than hardcore motorsport fans. Audi’s recent wins are tainted to casual fans too – they’re using a diesel against a petrol Toyota. Sure that’s a design choice from both parties, but to the layman it’s ‘not a fair fight’. It’s like what happend in WTCC & BTCC with diesels to them – a massive car advantage.
BTW what ‘daft’ comments has Horner made? As far as I saw he seemed fairly reserved, certainly compared to Ferrari !
Joe,
I watch the WRC with great interest every year. In many ways I prefer it to F1 less politic at the fore front. I will admit that I would find a battle of the Sebs more interesting this year, yet with the return of VW, Hyundai next year it will become more interesting. Le Mans was a thrill when Peugeot was there, racing at Le Mans with a French squad and them being the underdog made it so. Next year Porsche is coming, Nissan in 2015(rumors) and new top shelf drivers will make it good again. This year the race was much more interesting than last year, 2 Audi faultered and the Toyotas were much more competitive. Allan McNish and Anthony Davidson are so agressive and risk takers that they keep you on the edge of your seat.
The issue with WRC is similar to F1 was with Schumi a driver in the class of his own who just won everything and drove perfectly. After 72 career wins it was also getting boring for him I guess and Citroen now is hoping he will come back from retirement on the 2nd 1/2 to save their season.
The Seb in F1 is doing the same thing. But the tires are making the first few races unpredictable, until the teams figure them out then it is back to business as usual. Just like Schumi made it a little boring according to Bernie we run the same risk with Vettel.
Not sure about Vettel, but out of the car Loeb is a super nice guy, so even if he wins everything you are still happy as a fan!
In any case … Pikes Peak this weekend, it will be a tight race!
You really cannot be serious?
Go to Le Mans. Go to a WEC race. It is a million times better than the dull homogenised drivel you see served up at a grand prix every week. You have great access to the drivers, paddock and circuits. There is no “mind control” or dictatorial style product control, like you get in F1.
Le Mans this year was fantastic and watched around the globe by all of us who love sportscar racing. Remember, F1 is now a feeder series for the WEC and not the other way round. That should tell you everything you need to know.
This is the most ludicrous thing I have ever read from someone who really has no understanding of endurance racing..
Read the article again.
am amazed at all the comments about christian horner
am I the only person who thinks he says and does what he is told ?
maybe by the same person who tells vettel to complain that the tyres are unsafe …how many sudden deflations have taken a car into an accident this year ?
No, you’re not. He strikes me as a cypher.
The Law of Diminishing Returns…
3 good drivers finish first in an Audi at Le Mans in a great car = “Audi Wins”..
1 good driver finishes first in a Mercedes at Monaco in a great car(for that particular track) = “Rosberg Wins”..
Fernando Alonso wins in Spain = “Genius”..
Fernando Alonso finishes next race in Monaco 7th = “When will Ferrari give Alonso a decent car”..
German car company basks in glory following winning prestigious world famous motor-race..
German car company hauled before FIA hearing following winning prestigious world famous motor-race..
If there is a point that you are trying to make here, it might be wise to actually make it. An assorted collection of thoughts does not help.
F1 is a very privileged world, so few in sport reach this level and have a long lasting career. As journalists and fans we should be doing all in our power to encourage the likes of sportscars, touring cars and rallying to regain their past importance, it isn’t healthy for the sport to have the money and publicity focused on the F1.
Since the end of the World Sportscar Championship at the close of 1992, this area of the sport has been centred around Le Mans, with series such as the American Le Mans Series, European Le Mans Series and FIA GT (in various forms), providing manufacturers and teams with their seasonal dose of racing.
None of the above has been entirely satisfactory, hence the ACO, in partnership with the FIA, re-launching the World Endurance Championship last season,
Despite difficult economic circumstances, the series is rapidly gaining prominence, attracting major manufacturers, constructors, high profile drivers and increasing TV, media and fan support.
In 2014 there is the prospect of a three way manufacturer LMP1 battle between Audi, Porshce and Toyota, GTE fights between, Porsche, Ferrari, Aston Matin, Dodge and Chevrolet, and privateer prototypes coming on the scene from the likes of ORECA, Onroak, Dome, Honda Performance Development, Catherham, Alpine and others.
On the engine front Toyota Motorsport Group, Nissan (Zytek), Honda Performance Development and Renault Sport, amongst others, will be suppling LMP1 and LMP2 motors.
The series itself is hitting key automotive and emerging markets, the UK, France, central Europe, Brazil, China, Japan, the USA and middle east, with interest coming from promoters in Russia, India and beyond.
The Chinese round in particular is being sold to manufacturers and sponsors not only as a race event, it is being used to launch new cars and products, last season the Chinese launch of the Audi A1 (?) was carried out before race day.
On the technology front, a token ‘hybrid’ system is not what LMP1 is about, the regulations from 2014 will focus on energy, a car can use any form of propulsion with a set amount of energy.
In Toyota’s case, they are using supercapacitors that produce north of 300bhp, this is being developed in Japan in conjunction with the road car hybrid engineers. The original system weight many hundreds of kilograms, downsizing has been a key part of the race program, and had direct technological pass on to road car development.
In Audi’s case, engine guru Ulrich Baretzky has stated on many occasions they too work with road car engineers, the FSI system developed for the R8 LMP1, was used in Audi road cars in near identical spec, saving the many millions in development, but equally important, improving the efficiency of Audi petrol engines by a significant percentage.
In the case of Audi diesels, the first interation was in the R10, it was a V12 of 5.5l capacity, developing 650bhp, todays motor is a V6 of 3.7l capacity, a highly sophisticated motor, running boost pressures etc. that few thought were possible for a 24hr spec endurance motor. Once again, Ulrich Baretzky has stated Audi road car engineers were staggered by these developments, some of which are now being used in more ambitious diesel road car engines.
Porsche is another interesting example, a new motorsport dpt. has been constructed at Weissach, Porsche are the manufacturer who epitomise more than any other racing imprving the breed. The new 918 hybrid road car uses tech from the RS Spyder LMP2 from a fw years ago, this road car will be to future Porsche road models what the 959 was in the 1980’s……..the first of a new breed of Porsches.
The LMP1 program, with it’s heavy emphasis on efficiency, and freedom to develop whatever technology they feel is the best solution, will be at the forefront of developing systems an solutions to be passed onto road car development. I’m sure everyone will agree, road car hydrids and low emission vehicles are still far behind the curve.
Then we come to Nissan, the entrant into Garage 56 for innovative technology not yet within the regulations. They, in conjunction with the ACO, will be developing and evaluating all electric power, this technology can then be classified and incorporated into the LMP1 regulations, which Nissan intends to enter using a development of this drivetrain.
So, as you can see, sportscar racing is progressing at a rapid rate with road relevant technology, a forward thinking World Championship, and not to mention super racing with, in my humble opinion, the coolest cars on the planet.
F1 has it’s place, it’s great for brands like Red Bull, it’s obviously still the ultimate goal for drivers, but as far as being the pinnacle for manufacturers to develop real world technology that will feed down into their core business, well, I don’t think so.
Thanks for your informed and factual observation.
Very well informed and very insightful…
One further point, you need to make a distinction between the average F1 fan who is interested in a particular driver, or just enjoys a bit of ‘car racing’ on a Sunday afternoon, and the car enthusiast that is the core market for performance brands.
F1 has a soap opera narrative that dominates mainstream press coverage of the sport, trouble is, this narrative is personality driven, to the exclusion of manufacturers……….Ferrari aside.
In fact, we probably have to go back to the Chapman Lotus days for a manufacturer to get their due regard. Honda had a great relationship with Mclaren, but again, so much of that was wrapped up with the Senna mystique, those perfect partnerships where everything clicks come along so rarely.
Today we have Vettell domination with Red Bull, I dare say, even amongst F1 fans, a significant proportion aren’t aware Renault powered them to victory. Even more damning, how many of those in the know are even bothered?
That’s the very real difference between F1 and sportscars, F1 is all personalities, sponsors and Ferrari……….. Sportscars is entirely about the manufacturers and the technology they bring to the sport, when a driver does become well known in their own right, it tends to be because of their association with a brand, i.e Stuck and Bell at Porsche, McNish and Kristensen at Audi.
Volkswagen Audi Group have been the absolute masters of production car brand management over the past decade. They have every single major market and niche covered by a marque in their stable. Where they don’t they snap one up (Ducati being the latest). They even created a brand for people who ‘don’t do brands’ in Skoda, which is genius. Each of their products are positioned to appeal to quite a specific demographic – with huge success.
I would suggest VAG are very aware of the law of diminishing returns and the challenge of maintaining the Audi brand sporting prominence. No other manufacturer has successfully been able to challenge the Audi dominance (although there have been some valiant efforts – including Toyota this year).
So rather than look for a different series to go racing in such as F1 (requiring massive investment, personnel and technology changes) my take is that VAG has given the green light for Porsche to go and compete. Two brands from the same stable slugging it out – both with massively impressive racing heritage and inherent brand value. It should make for very compelling and competitive racing. And titanic on track battles are a brand and marketing dream.
Hopefully in 10 years time we’ll look back on the classic Porsche/Audi LMP1 battles of 2014/15/16. Whilst over in F1 we’ll be enjoying the different yet equally worthy tussles of McLaren Honda, Ferrari, Mercedes, Lotus, Williams etc. But perhaps, (and I have to admit I secretly hope) not RedBull, because maybe they will have left F1 by then. Their recent exhibitions of petulance make me think they are just bored with it.
I’d also like to say – Joe – I really enjoy the interesting perspectives and observation. For all the challenge and occasional rudeness you get in these comments there are an army of people enjoying (and sometimes respectfully disagreeing) with what you write.
For those that have read and/or understood the article properly it’s quite clear you weren’t denigrating Audi’s achievements.
The next couple of years at Le Mans might be the most important for Audi yet.
Beating Porsche (who built their brand almost entirely on sportscar racing/Le Mans) will sell more cars via brand reputation, for longer, for less than entering F1. Ask Renault what F1 is doing for their brand right now on the back of (another) 3 world championships….. zero, Or perhaps BMW could also explain what they got out of F1, them the company who never failed in motorsport.. failed utterly.
It’s easy to get carried away with F1s (rapidly diminishing and anyway historically incorrect) self proclaimed status as the utmost pinnacle of motorsport and fail to recognize it might very well not be the best or most rewarding game to play in if your core business is designing and selling road cars.
Just look at the numbers… Spouting about the end of F1 as we know it… Bla bla bla is just silly. F1 is big.
I STILL don’t see what all the fuss is about regarding Joe’s post, I really don’t. Correct; F1 IS big. This seems to have developed into a ‘battle’ between F1 v Sportscar/endurance racing? I’ve loved F1 for the best part of 3 decades or so and have, in the past, attend F1 races all over Europe, seeing the likes of Senna (my all-time favourite), Prost, Schumacher, Piquet et al at their very peak. I have also attended sportscar races in the past (not Le Mans, I’ll admit) but at Spa/Brands/Silverstone. It was great; thoroughly enjoyed it and glad I did it. However, I still love F1 much more but that doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t jump at the chance of seeing/experiencing Le Mans and watching McNish win. I admit, it’s one of THE races in the world of motorsport to experience. My biggest regrets in watching the sport are not travelling to Monaco to see Senna win there and not being at Le Mans to see the famous TWR Jag win there. Had the chance to both. It IS possible to like all forms of the sport – assuming you keep an open mind.
F1 is huge, is anyone seriously suggesting otherwise?
The question is, who is gaining from this profile, is it the personalities within the sport, the sponsors, the manufacturers?
When I speak to friends with a passing interest in the sport, they talk to me about Schumacher returning to F1 or Hamilton changing teams. These two individuals are/where driving for Mercedes, as iconic a brand as you could imagine, yet Mercedes-Benz never crossed their lips, they may as well have been driving for Joe Blogg’s Motors for all they cared.
Renault is another brand with a strong F1 history, but as stated themselves, powering the F1 World Champions, for however many years, has garnered them negligible marketing benefits.
The mere fact motoring enthusiasts are aware Audi are competing with a diesel (whether they like it or not), and in latter years, a hybrid, is credit to their messaging. Being able to use the iconic Quattro name is gravy, a dream for the marketeers to link their modern hybrid tech with their rallying and touring car history.
The Le Mans program has a halo effect on the entire road car range, all the way down to a humble diesel A1. FSI, TDI, e-tron, Quattro, these are the buzz words the marketing men want you to associate with their cars, it’s the race program that helps to spread the world, but equally, to make such tech cool, perceptions afterall can be a huge barrier to the adoption of new technology.
Renault are struggling to message they are even F1 World Champions, the Infiniti branding adds to their troubles. Even so, how can Renault seriously connect their F1 engine and technology to the wider road car range…………it’s a stretch too far.
So then, we are well aware F1 is massive, we know Ferrari are intrinsically linked with the sport, but what of the current World Champions?
It would be fair to say Vettel, an energy drink supplier, and maybe even Newey and Horner, have more column inches written about them than the manufacturer powering then…………….Renault Sport.
… and here’s a reall world research project for you.
Go into your local Renault dealer (or even just visit their www). any sign of F1 involvement, their 3 most recent driver and 3 constructors championships? Nope.
Now go to Audi dealer or their www.
Who is getting best value out of motorsport. Who has been over past the decade? Which brand has most improved perception, legacy and sales?
The one with four rings.
Exactly. Audi and Toyota are at least trying to advance technologies that will some day improve our everyday road cars. In 5 or 10 years, I’ll bet we can buy better cars from them than we ever will from Red Bull…
And Audi uses the Williams flywheel…
…that is not permitted in F1.
Is this article an example of diminishing relevance by commentattors 🙂 Couldn’t resist.
I was thinking the barrage of comments might reflect the law of unintended consequences
I am a MASSIVE fan of F1 and always have been since, as a child, I saw Jim Clark win at Silverstone (64) but ……
Over the years as publicity has been used more and more, as opposed to honest racing then I have also found a change in my close friends (lay viewers) – I have found it virtually impossible to defend any of the F1 shenanigans which “Make the Headlines” as my friends now have said they now only have a fleeting interest in F1 these days – they’ve had a bellyfull of F1 bullshit. F1 is not honest and is like a delivered “Tabloid rendition of Motor Racing” (my interpretation) and actually I’m terribly sad to say I cannot disagree with them.
In discussing Le Mans or Sportscar racing the Public are not “Turned Off” by any Tabloid Hysterical headlines and therefore any win and (be it only a few column inches) will be thought more of and ultimately be worth more to the winning manufacturer / team / driver.
Perhaps the above outpouring of support for Le Mans is not so much a huge support of Sportscar Racing as a sad reflection of the state of F1 racing.
Or perhaps it is just a few people making a lot of noise..,
Reading is one thing, comprehension is another….
“However, the fact that they keep on winning the same race over and over again, has less and less value”
Not sure how the above statement made you guilty of slagging off LeMans in copious ways, It was a specific business related comment for the manufacturer and could accurately apply to any racing series. I don’t need to see another Red Bull WDC in F1 – predictably dull, I’d admire them more if they lost and fought back to win-your comment is valid here also.
You may have inadvertently proved that attention spans are getting shorter though or that people skim without reading as many commentators seemed to fly off the handle taking your comments out of context.
Helpful instructions
1. Read (beyond the first couple of sentences!!)
2. Comprehend (this ones important)
3. If you feel a Rant coming on repeat steps 1 & 2 before going directly to 4
4. Comment (imagine yourself on the receiving end of this wisdom / Bulls**t here – before pressing send)
Joe,
You’re P1 in the patience department, The mark of a true pro.
Touch’e ……………. a bit like Audi then ???? ( HaHa ! 🙂 )
Nobody talks about the 24 hours of Le Mans the day or week after the race has run…. it has always been that way.
Yet everybody knows about Le Mans. That’s why manufacturers do Le Mans, even if they win it 12 times.
Manufacturers can build their marketing around those two words: Le Mans.
I wonder how you can build your marketing around a win in the Korean Grand Prix or third place in the Formula One World Championship…
I was reading Le Monde yesterday, the major French newspaper and was shocked to see its Le Mans report. One paragraph. Audi had taken a double-page advert to try and make an impression.
That’s exactly the point I was trying to make. F1 does the marketing for you if you do well and don’t court too much controversy. Endurance racing is just a tool by comparison, but as you can see, it’s an effective tool.
Rather than relying on a journalist that will just relay the facts and perhaps focus on a driver’s accomplishment, they can portray the image and story they want. They can emphasize their technology advancement, however major or minor it was in reality. Of course, they couldn’t do that if they scored their first points two seasons into an F1 program, or even if they won, it’s not because of diesel technology, or that they used turbos and their competitors did not… and they couldn’t declare superior technology if the two preceding pages are devoted to Rosberg’s Mercedes walking away with the race.
The value of their Le Mans wins may be diminished from a decade ago, but it may have only diminished from extremely effective to very effective… and perhaps still more effective than the alternatives available to them.
That’s all fine, but the number of eyeballs is still what really counts. You can have a brilliant marketing strategy but if your audience is a million, it does not make sense if the alternative is a race watched by 300 million every time!
Joe, but the point malcolmstrachan is making and that I made above is that it is not only about the number of eyeballs reading the report written by the journalist, it is how it is used in advertising and in building the brand value. This can take years and is part of an on going strategy. If Audi didn’t see any value in it they would not do it.
There is no point having 300 million eyeballs watching if 299.5 million of them are never likely to buy or be able to the product you are selling.
Inches in the media are not the only measure of success.
So why would anyone spend so much money in F1? I fear that your love of the sports car may be interfering with logic.
I am sure it does to a point, but why then are there far more car manufacturers spending money in Sportscars than in f1. F1 these days is more the domain of global drinks companies, phone and computer companies where the response of the 300 million viewers is more immediate and direct.
The number of eyeballs is one factor, I’m sure these viewers have been great news for the Red Bull brand, and the casual viewership that tunes into F1. I’m equally sure Renault have garnered next to no marketing benefits seeing as they are rarely mentioned in media reports, with little visible branding on the car, with no technology transfer or marketing terms race passed onto the road car program.
Jaguar spent three, four, five years in F1, they didn’t have huge success, but they where one of the high profile teams of the time. Today, a decade on, even amongst Jaguar enthusiasts, the program is near forgotten, I’m sure people reading this will be saying “oh yeah, Jaguar where in F1 once!”.
A racing program costing hundreds of millions, in front of “300m” TV viewers every other week, and it’s been wiped from most peoples memories………..
When Jaguar want to evoke their sporting heritage they bring out the C-Types, the D-Types, and the “Silk Cut” Jags.
If you want to know what just one Le Mans win can do for a brand, look at Mazda, all these years later, the Renown 787B is an iconic machine, a symbol of Mazda’s sporting heritage.
That’s what you get with a Le Mans win, years of residual marketing opportunities, magazine and TV features, the star draws in multi-million selling videogames like Gran Turismo and Forza Motorsport.
The cars are the stars in sportscar racing, unlike the great majority of F1 machines. While we celebrate Fangio, Clarke, Senna, Schumacher et al, the cars they achieved their wins in rarely engenda the same ferver.
For your information, Europsport published they had 18m viewers for their Le Mans coverage, in addition there where muliple other Euro broadcasters, Speed in the US etc. But as stated above, one race viewership doesn’t tell the whole story, Audi will be in many dozens, if not hundreds of TV, magazine and internet features in the next 12 months and beyond, together with games, apps, models etc.
At the end of this F1 season, if it’s another repeat victory, it will be Vetell and a soft drinks company garnering the headlines. They’ll tick it off and continue trying to re-write the record books, Renault won’t even be a factor.
As I said, nobody talks about the 24 hrs the day or week after the race has been run. The rewards are reaped in the marketing efforts afterwards in the ads and the motorsport and auto weekly’s or monthly’s.
Le Mans as an event still stands as a rock and therefore it is worth to win it. I don’t think the 12th win gathers the same interest as the first, at least not with the general public.
But Audi’s image as bullet proof is proven once again and if the company is after that the’ve accomplished the mission. With Porsche joining next year, Toyota staying and Renault provinding their engine to P1 contenders next year promises a lot
The lack of French newspaper coverage might have something to do with the absence of French manufacturers?
It was a simple illustration of the point.
But if the one million are tuning in to see if Toyota can beat Audi, as opposed to 300 milion tuning in to see if Kimi can beat Sebastian…
In my experience of F1 about 10 percent are madly keen on the technology. So… at worst… F1 would be 30 times more useful as a marketing tool. However there is no point in getting into such speculation. They are what they are. They are supported by those who want to support them. End if story.
thank you for this virtual experience in discovering the value of my time as a natural person using this virtual entertainment platform branded as http://www.joeblogsf1.com everyone.
Joe, let me start by saying I enjoy your written insights and podcasts immensely. I have followed F1 and international motor racing since hearing of Jim Clark’s sad passing on the car radio.
For some time I have felt that F1 and F1 people have got too insular for their own good, wasting money and feathering their own nests without any real concern for those of us who love good motor racing.
Thanks to the internet, live streaming and particularly the good folks at Radio LeMans it is now possible to enjoy sports prototype racing as it happens rather than as a post race report in Autosport. I find it most refreshing, a totally different experience to the over hyped, precious, nit-picking and artificial panto currently masquerading as Grand Prix racing.
I think that you have been too one-dimensional in your critical observations of Audi’s continued participation in Le Mans. Yes, they have been winning that blue riband event but by god they have had to fight; which is what they seem too love about it. And in the other WEC races they have been beaten regularly. So they learn and work harder. In Dr Ullrich they have a team principal who seems to be from a different breed to the current F1 prima donnas. He stands in his overalls and follows the action as if he was a fan, he’s eloquent and always has a good word for his competitors, congratulating or commiserating in good humour, with a ready smile.
I like the way they go racing, they are funding their own efforts to improve their technology and people, their drivers are immensely loyal and in turn the company is loyal to them. How wonderful to see Dindo Capello, in retirement, just buzzing to be back supporting his mates.
The current cars are fantastic and the drivers efforts (3 + hours per stint) mixing it with much slower cars and some amateur drivers are mind boggling. How pathetic a F1 driver sounds when he moans about one of the other 21 drivers momentarily blocking the one (F1) racing line.
I have no connection with Audi, don’t drive one and never have.
I do not disagree with some of what you write, but – in global terms – you are in a small minority. People sometimes think that F1 folk live in a bubble. It is an easy criticism, but in reality the F1 folk travel the world so much and see so much more than others that often they have a much bigger picture about many different subjects (Europe falling behind… The power of China and so on). It is not unlike a famous argument on this blog about the value of F1 to Texas. The college football fans said that no way was F1 more important than a college game with Oklahoma, because their horizons were limited to what they knew, while I was trying to explain that college football did not tell the man in Hangzhou High Street about a place called Austin…
But Joe, just out of curiosity, how many other race series do you go and see besides F1 each year in person. I am not talking about the GP2 and Porsche Supercup series that support F1 on the same weekend. I mean series like Indycar, WEC, MotoGP, NASCAR, World Rally etc that run completely separate of F1. Or is it pretty much solely F1 for you these days.
See my reply to LordJim
Joe, Ultimately ……..
– I CANNOT disagree with you concerning the old American Advertising adage “More is better”
– I CANNOT disagree with you about the march of the Global spread of Advertising and it’s Power to shrink the World.
– I have to admire your World understanding of the Global Reach of this Sport ( as it pulls in the likes of Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, Emir of Qatar ) or somewhere like Austin , Texas. (This type of responsible Journalism is desperately needed and respected.)
I just feel that the “Blade Runner” image of the future isn’t very human or necessary. I personally admire the likes the City of San Paulo which has banned all Advertising Images. San Paulo may, in the future, financially, fall behind China but I think they have gained a Quality of Life which is ultimately, more rewarding. Subjectively this is a purely personal view.
Additionally, in Good Advertising ( That even those in the Advertising Business know ) it very important to know what is “Selling Out” and what is not.
I do feel that a certain amount of F1 advertisers may have “Sold Out” by hitting 300 million faces but honestly, the viewers still have no idea what the product is.
It’s hitting that fine line between accepting as much Advertising as possible into F1 and sometimes not delivering quantifiable benefits, but we can’t decide that, only the Sponsor can decide that.
QED
Audi, thank the lord, are happy to go motor racing. F1 are putting on a show for commercial gain.
Personally I do not believe that F1 has improved, in motor racing or sporting terms, as the global TV audience increases. Indeed I can see the risks of further decline as F1 tries to compete with football (soccer) for the filthy lucre.