The VW Group will not enter Formula 1 while the ownership of the sport and the technical regulations remain in turmoil, the group’s motorsport boss, Wolfgang Dürheimer, has told Autocar.
“Formula 1 is not on our agenda right now,” said Dürheimer. “The situation is not predictable enough to make the kind of investment required. On the regulations front, there are a lot of rumours around the engine side and the supporting technology side. Before you commit the kind of money needed you must see five years of rules stability – there can’t be the possibility of rules changes, of more or less engine cylinders coming in, or the hybrid system changing away from technology you are developing on road cars. On the ownership side, there are also big questions the sport must answer. If you are a big business making a big investment you expect to have some influence on the set-up, with an assurance the present ownership will last. In F1, it seems the owners will not be there forever and that creates some instability.”
Durheimer says that racing in the World Endurance Championship costs more than running an F1 team for Audi and Porsche. “The technology is greater than that in F1 and the levels of investment are therefore greater.”
The timing of these remarks is most interesting. It may just be a fluke, but it might also be a deliberate ploy to try to get the people in F1 to focus on what is important and to stop messing about and create some stable rules. If that happened, VW might enter the game. One can imagine that Fiat’s Sergio Marchionne would be delighted to see these comments, but then he is very keen to see VW come into F1 with as many brands as they want to use. The more manufacturers the merrier is his rallying cry, which is logical when one looks at the political situation in F1; the more manufacturers there are the less power the Formula One group will have in the post-2020 negotiations. And don’t forget, Aston Martin is still out there somewhere…
joeblogsf1 
That sounds more of an excuse than a reason. They want 5 years of rule stability – but that’s never going to happen. So effectively, are they ruling themselves out for good?
Or is it just because they are currently in turmoil over the emissions scandal, can’t commit financially to F1 bearing in mind how that episode will eventually cost them, and so create a little sideshow that conveniently deflects away from the reality of that?
And like Renault did after the race fixing scandal, do they just want to keep their head below the parapet for a few years, apart from endurance racing, which allows them to work away from the spotlight?
Why not? The rules can easily be stable.
The V8 regs were stable for 6-7 years, right? The V6 Hybrids are ‘supposed’ to be stable for a further 6 (2014-2020).
Yes, there are tweaks, but we’re not expecting entirely new developments or arbitrary changes to the design.
VW basically want to be sure they’re entering at the beginning of a new engine formula, not entering halfway through only to have it wasted.
What a shame that we’re not going to see someone new and fresh challenging the ‘Ferr-cedes’ cartel in the near future. I guess we all need to get used to the current status quo.
Maybe you are…
it might well be an excuse, but the constant goal post changing forced on F1 is not doing F1 any good at all, one thing I am convinced of, when Bernie is gone, most of F1 problems will follow him out.
So it seems fair to assume Bernies comments have had the desired effect.
Such a sad state of affairs when a promoter is actively trying to drive away potential participants.
Maybe I’m being optomistic but I took the most from his last sentence;-
‘If you are a big business making a big investment you expect to have some influence on the set-up, with an assurance the present ownership will last. In F1, it seems the owners will not be there forever and that creates some instability.’
My take on that is it’s a clear message that they want to be involved – not to Bernie but to the manufacturers. Maybe I’m in dreamland
That’s hilarious and hideous at the same time. It beggers belief that the rule makers cannot “get” this. VW are totally correct.
Wolfgang talks a lot of sense.
But the marketing returns? Far lower.
Absolutely…
So the fact VW are ruling out entering F1, whilst admitting they already spend money on more costly marketing activities that are known to be less effective, makes the effect of this announcement even more damning of F1 – by implication, no?
Indeed it is Guy. This is as clear a statement about the governance of the sport as one can get.
These companies are in the business of selling road cars. In 2000 when Audi’s sportscar program was one year old, they sold 649k cars. Mercedes meanwhile sold 1.5m.
In 2014, Mercedes sales had increased to 1.7m, meanwhile Audi sales were now 1.74m. In addition, the Audi sportscar program has fast-tracked development of FSI, a system now fitted to every petrol car in the VAG group, new lighting technology and higher combustion, more powerful & efficient diesel technology now applied to the latest VAG diesel road cars.
Porsche are a similar success story, one of the most profitable brands in the industry, growing their range, and introducing technology to road cars directly developed on the track.
Oh Dear. The FIA, FOM and the strategy group represent Monkeys with guns. Extremely dangerous and produce no value.
All we need now in F1 is Donald Trump. We already have a few Jeb Bushes
Maybe F1 needs Bernie Sanders: all teams receive an equal share of FOM revenue regardless of performance, and if one team still wins too often then that team will have its excess wins expropriated and shared with less successful teams.
Couldn’t have said it better. It would be a better show if all teams were competitive. To do that you need to level the playing field with a more fair and even distribution of wealth. The NFL is a perfect example of how revenue sharing works. Yes, there’s top, middle and lower tier teams, but any team can beat any other on any given day. And this is underlined by it’s popularity. Feel the Bern!
Don’t you think one Bernie in F1 is enough?
🙂
You obviously have Mr. Sanders confused with someone else…
Durheimer says that racing in the World Endurance Championship costs more than running an F1 team for Audi and Porsche. “The technology is greater than that in F1 and the levels of investment are therefore greater.”
Is this correct, Joe? I thought WEC was much less.
No, that is broadly correct about the money (not sure about the technology) and remember that they are running two big teams.
How big do you think Audi & Porche’s WEC budget is? €150,000 each?
I think you have your numbers confused. That is the hire car bill
Yeah, I meant $150 million each for Audi and Porsche’s WEC Budget (it’s been a long day). Sound about right?
More than that I think
Closer to the $200-225m mark, isn’t it?
Depending on what you include
Joe, you see that is what is wrong about F1, the lack of alignment in interests between the different stakeholders is slowly killing F1. CVC wants to be paid, the manufacturers want positive publicity and to test technology, while the public want excitement. They don’t tally. Just look at the most successful sports league in the world at this moment, the NFL. Players, owners and fans’ interests are aligned.
Just out of interest, can you – or, indeed, anyone else – remember when we’ve had a five-year period without rule changes in F1?
Engine wise yes
But, also consider that rule changes are often safety related. There have been many tweaks over the years to increase driver safety, or to bring down lap times that would creep up to what was considered dangerous. Left alone, the technology will evolve to faster and faster results. So, some tweaks are needed to pull it back every so often.
And, innovation and technology changes mean rules can’t be static for too long. Rules have to change to accommodate progress.
and who was constantly pushing those changes in F1?
Disregard emissions stuff, they were probably all at it. So Renault thinks their decision about F1 is good eh. Well I know which car I’d rather drive, and it ain’t got an F1 “pedigree”. A couple of random searches suggest sales figs in favour of VW too
I recall a wise bloke said “Lock down the rules (for a defined period), limit budgets and fairly distribute income”. Might solve most problems in a pen stroke. Hmmm, who said that?
Sounds like something I might have said…
On more than one occasion…
Does anyone know what the thermal efficiency of the Audi WEC engine is?
Whilst the F1 engines had huge gains in this, surely an engine that hasn’t got the weight restriction, has a bigger ERS capability and is in a format where fuel efficiency must be paramount, I’d have thought would be comparable or even better.
Aston Martin is still out there somewhere… looking for money to survive.
Sell more cars, you make more money…
There was some pretty positive news from Aston Martin today
Lost in the ruck. As usual..
Seems pretty spot on.
In general, the bit that confuses me is that every one want cars closer and competitive. That happens with stable rules. Eventually you get close to convergence, and there for closer racing, where the drivers make the difference. Constantly changing the rules almost ensures one team can dominate.
So, this year, the cars should be closer and more competitive, since the rules pretty much the same as last year. But, yet again, 2017 sees another round of rule changes. Which means we have an increased risk of one team dominating.
If I were the biggest car maker looking to recover from a media catastrophe in a year or so from now, after the storm subsides and after I’ve had time to research and prepare for this new marketing exercise. I might look towards preparing the ground work, establishing the way forward. I might desire that the rules that will influence how effective the campaign will be are stable. Or maybe I’ve got a few free minutes so I waste them with a journalist?
Time with journalists, particularly Autocar is not wasted.
As Joe mentions, after a PR disaster, you actually really NEED to spend time with journalists to get a more positive message out!
Sure, you also need to deliver on the actual issue, but without good, positive coverage of what you are doing, you might as well pack up immediately
Joe, looks like this fellow from VW reads your blog, paraphrasing large sections of your past expressed opinions.
Nice to know SOMEBODY is paying attention other than your readers!
Half my readers don’t seem to pay much attention!
they don’t pay attention because all they can do is “coo”
Shameful VW has some nerve to comment on F1, they have no place in F1 & they never had!
Shameful?.You seem surprised!
The automotive world and also the motor trade has always been about making money as quickly as possible by whatever route possible be it emissions, safety clangers or clocking mileage on a dealer forecourt.
So called scandals resulting from some fudge, shortcut or corner cutting have long been a part of this industry.
Such things soon get forgotten and everyone moves on.
What VAG are saying is exactly what everyone (themselves included) said half a decade ago – F1 is a relic of the past and is unattractive UNLESS stable regulations and a forward thinking, road relevant, challeging hybrid small displacement turbo formula was guaranteed.
Bernie had no choice then if he wanted big boys. and othing has changed since then, except Red Bull throwing their toys out and providing Bernie with a desperately thin opportunity to have his cake and eat it,-(keeping the manufacturers and staying in the past.
But the silly troll ended up with the worst of all worlds – an impression of imminent return to the past,unstable regs and an owner easily bribed by sore loser teams (RBR)
The best thing for F1 is to embrace Mercs dominance, and stop changing the challenge to allow the losers to catch up- we should be down to 3 pus and 25 tokens – why would VW leave WEC to come and compete with teams like RBR using a dumbed down equivalence engine?
aero is not road relevant, MGU-H(thermal efficiency) is
So the Audi and Porsche WEC Programmes together cost more than a F1 programme and VAG are saying they are in it for the Technology and (note) not the Marketing and as you have stressed Joe concerning these hybrid engines -” the efficiency of these engines has risen dramatically lately ”
WEC rules seek efficiency without the constraint of engine size or technology equipment (MGU-H,MGU-K, Batteries) and Audi race on Diesel and Porsche race on Petrol plus Porsche have developed a second turbine in the exhaust system, the first is part of a conventional turbo-charger layout in that it is linked to a compressor but the second turbine, which is sat alongside the first is only linked to an electric motor (GU-H), and not to a compressor or the other turbine. This layout allows the Porsche to recover energy at all times the engine is running.
The most dramatic efficiency gains have come from Turbo charging and hybrid technology and the ideal rules for Car makers are “No rules” other than efficiency so the WEC rules closer suit VAG as opposed to rules of dictates on engine size or any other constraints. Hopefully, this new technology, what ever and whenever it will be, will be passed on to the consumer and VAG are betting on this technology as opposed to F1 (dare I say it ) Politics, bickering and expense which is not beneficial to the VAG Group although I’m sure F1 engine technology would be beneficial.( Just not as much as WEC) 🙂
I suspect that The Bolt will soon be extolling the virtues of race cars that look like domestic appliances!
Let’s look at the source of all of this. Here we have a company that is running not one of its brands in a series, but two. The two brands are not working together, but rivles. Despite the fact that they use two entirely different approaches, this is an entirely redundant philosophy and it really makes no sense from an investment standpoint. Now let’s look at another aspect of VW. Here is a company that set out and purposely deceived the public with out and out lies about their product. They designed and built a product with the full intent of cheating and pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes. Not only that, but the results were a flagrant violation of environmental laws, something that effects every single living human and non human on this planet. They did this intentionally. Look, VW has a lot of good people working for them. The people in the factories, the dealerships, the overall infrastructure. However, the people in the ivory tower have shown that they are delusional and dishonest at the same time, as running two of their own teams against each other and duping their customers with lies in order to buy their products, products that vastly exceed the governmental regulations on pollution, which effects the general public at large. This went on for years.
So now, here we are looking at VW and F1. Several years ago F1 punted Flávio Briattori out the door for his instructional doings with Nelson Piquet Jr. and rightfully so. However, what VW did makes Briattori look like a flea in a heard of elephants. Why would anyone even conceive wanting VW in F1? That’s beyond my comprehension. I’m glad VW doesn’t want to enter F1. We don’t need them. They have a long, arduous road ahead of them in re-establishing their credibility and integrity, which they have themselves have distriod whith full knowledge. F1 is not the place to do it. If F1 can ban Briattori, they should tell VW to solve their own problems before even considering name dropping F1 in their press releases.
It was not a press release it was an interview.
Oh I know that Joe, with all due respect, myself, I wouldn’t welcome VW into F1 at this moment.