F1 needs 1000bhp - but not at any cost

The fans want it. The drivers want it. I want it. Even Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone wants it.

In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone who does not support the plan to get F1's engines spitting out more than 1000 horsepower from the start of 2017.

What's not to like about the prospect of F1 getting back some of the magic that existed in the mid-1980s?

Who could not be enthralled at the prospect of drivers turning up their turbo boost to the maximum for qualifying and threading their rocketships around what must have felt like a very thin strip of asphalt?

Breaking that mythical 1000bhp barrier again would be good for F1 on so many levels.

It gives the sport an iconic power figure; it will make cars harder to drive and therefore more of a challenge for drivers; and it will showcase just how impressive new hybrid technology is.

Wurz currently races Toyota's 1000bhp LMP1 car © LAT

Grand Prix Drivers' Association chairman Alex Wurz, a man who has experience of 1000bhp from his Toyota LMP1 car, thinks F1 drivers would fall over themselves for the chance to get back to the mega power the stars had in the mid-1980s.

But he reckons the biggest benefit of all will be to F1 itself, because being able to sell the headline power figure would be so easy.

"It is a cool direction that we speak about but this is far more than just about the driver," he explains. "There is a big marketing effect too.

"When we announced with Toyota last year that that we were going to have 1000bhp, it was amazing to see the response of the hardcore fans.

"Everyone was talking about it - even people who had no idea about motorsport. Everyone was just going 'wow'."

But there is danger in this water. Not from the fact that more powerful cars could lead to more spills on track.

Instead, it's from the threat that another change to the engine rules could pose to the long-term health of the F1 grid if it is not implemented properly and costs spiral further out of control.

Perhaps the biggest mistake of the switch to V6 turbos last year was not the lack of noise, or the lack of power but that there were no price limits laid down for what customers had to pay.

Lotus chief Lopez is among those concerned by engine costs © LAT

At a time when a majority of F1 teams have been struggling to find the budgets to compete, either through falling sponsorship revenue or the increased costs of going racing, it was a double blow that teams faced a dramatic hike in engine bills too.

Lotus boss Gerard Lopez said last year that his team's annual power unit bill had jumped from eight million to 40 million Euros.

Of course, this increase has come about because of the huge development costs of the new V6s and hybrid technology.

Manufacturers have sought to recoup these by selling their power units to the small teams.

No cap meant manufacturers dictated the figure that suited their business plan. Renault, for example, wanted payback for its investment over a much shorter period than Mercedes - so the cost of its power units was more.

With a potential new change to the engines coming for 2017 - and it is gathering momentum because everyone wants it - F1 cannot allow this situation to get even worse. Limits must be put in place.

Perhaps it needs the FIA or Bernie Ecclestone to wade in, and only allow the change to happen if there are guarantees that any extra costs for manufacturers are not passed on to the smaller teams.

After all, this is a process being put in motion to help make F1 more marketable; to make more fans excited - and to make more of them want to go out on the Monday after a race and buy a Mercedes, a Renault, a Ferrari or a Honda. Why should Sauber, Force India or Lotus be forced to underwrite such an affair?

Manufacturers get the benefits of F1 marketing but customers are lumbered with the costs © XPB

Wurz agrees that F1 has to look at the bigger picture here. He believes that the attraction of a bit more power under the right foot of drivers should not come at the cost of driving outfits out of business.

"We have to learn from the past," he says. "Currently engine manufacturers run their engines under a business model whereby they finance the development of engines by putting the costs back to the customer teams with quite high fees.

"So if the current turbo engines go through their intended business cycle, then in the end the customers, the F1 teams, would have somehow subsidised marketing of the manufacturers. Why should they be a charity?

"There needs to be a quite clear maximum annual cost cap on the whole power unit per team. That way we might make sure that small teams and F1 doesn't pay too heavy a price.

"We can't have more teams suffer, more people made redundant, because of expensive development being priced into the power units."

My colleague Edd Straw raised some of his own concerns about the 1000bhp push this week, and I agree it is not the miracle cure for all of F1's ills.

But I'd argue that a move to 1000bhp provides exactly the kind of marketing benefits that modern grand prix racing needs.

Love it or loathe it, but perception counts for a lot these days: and anything that makes F1 more attractive and silences critics is positive. It has to be done properly though, with thorough analysis of its impact and benefits.

The rewards for F1 making the jump to 1000bhp in 2017 will be great - but it cannot come at any cost.