Quote:
Originally Posted by five_timer
Both of you are claiming a relationship between passenger cars and F1 teams that doesn't exist. The AMG Mercedes F1 operation is basically identical to Scuderia Ferrari F1. The clientel for a Mercedes or Honda road car (as always) is immaterial. The people who design grills for Acuras aren't involved with Honda F1 engines.
Plus, Ferrari F1 has a long history of sucking. From what I can remember, the period between my earliest viewership of F1 (late '80's) to Schumacher's 2nd or 3rd year with the team (around '97 or '98) consisted of poorly performing Ferrari teams. So there's no law that Ferrari has to be a top team.
As for the state of F1, how is now any different than the Williams steamroller years, the McLaren years, Ferrari years, Renault years, or Red Bull years? In my mind, F1 today is so restrictive that there can't possibly be very many variants causing Mercedes to be dominant. Which means that other top teams can come up at any time. There's no magic - they're all subject to the same laws of power and aerodynamics.
Besides, Rosberg won't let Hamilton run ahead for long before he starts crashing into him again.
|
Same brand, the connection exist wether you like it or not even if no technical personal or materials or technology are shared and for Ferrari the F1 team has always been the brands priority. Racing involvement and the effort spent are tightly connected to wanted brand image for all brands. If Ferrari sucks in racing it's really bad for their cars But for Benz it's really no big deal. Honda is doing fine being a grey mouse volume brand and it will take a lot of board "want" to keep feeding resources into the disaster they now have on their hands. Toyota bailed when they failed.