The quietly announced F1 change with big implications

Last week and without any ceremony the FIA quietly slipped a new link onto the 'invitations to tender' section of its website. The confirmation of plans for a standard Formula 1 gearbox for 2021 and beyond was hugely significant, since it's the first clear signal of what direction the rules are taking.

There has been a lot of talk since Liberty Media took over a little over two years ago, and the occasional statement that summarises the overall goals.

But until now, aside from the plans for 18-inch wheels, we've seen virtually nothing in the form of concrete proposals - in public at least. That's despite the huge effort being made by the technical teams of the F1 organisation (under Ross Brawn) and the FIA (via Nikolas Tombazis) to move things along.

Last week's tender, which covers the seasons from 2021 to '24, is for a standard gearbox cassette to be used by all teams.

It indicates that each team will have to design and manufacture its own casing or outer housing: "In order to retain [the] competitor's own freedoms for suspension and for the gearbox aero surfaces, the outer housing will remain team specific (designed and produced by the competitor) with the common, self-contained gearbox cassette mounted inside."

The tender is the first attempt to address the issue of costs for 2021 by moving towards standardisation of parts, or specifically those that fans don't see and that in theory are not significant performance differentiators. Although clearly gearboxes play a role in terms of weight and packaging and so on.

The plan's success replies upon there being a successful bidder whose proposal makes sense both technically and commercially, and therefore whose price for sale or lease of an annual supply (both are options) ensures that there are clear savings for every team.

As the FIA notes, it "reserves the right not to select any supplier if no offer is finally deemed capable of being beneficial for the championship and its competitors." In other words, this is in effect a fishing exercise, launched to evaluate in a formal way if a common gearbox really will save money.

If it goes ahead it will be a big change. While it's true that everyone already uses some common parts determined by FIA tenders - the McLaren ECU and Pirelli tyres for example - some teams may have concerns that such a key part of their car is supplied by a third party, and that its reliability is potentially out of their control. Under the sale model teams will do their own servicing, but with a lease arrangement the supplier will take responsibility.

A further twist is that by making teams produce their own outer housings Liberty and the FIA are taking the first step away from the model that allows a team like Haas to buy a huge chunk of its car from Ferrari

The other significant factor is that currently four teams used gearboxes sourced from elsewhere. Toro Rosso uses the same unit as Red Bull Racing, provided via Red Bull Technology, while Alfa Romeo and Haas are supplied by Ferrari, and Racing Point by Mercedes.

Until this year Toro Rosso had its own bespoke casing, so if making your own does indeed become compulsory, it won't be a stretch for the Italian team to step back. But for Racing Point, Alfa Romeo and Haas it will be a major change. The first two haven't had to make their own casings for many years - even in Sauber's BMW days gearboxes came from Munich - while Haas has never had to.

The cost of setting up to design and create those casings has to be added to the cost of the cassettes, and those teams may well be able to claim that they are actually worse off than they are currently.

A further twist is that by making teams produce their own outer housings Liberty and the FIA are taking the first step away from the model that allows a team such as Haas to buy a huge chunk of its car from Maranello. The gearbox obviously includes suspension mounting points. At the moment it's not clear if a team will still be allowed to use a rival's suspension parts, because by definition that would mean cooperation on gearbox casing design.

So what do the teams think? Surprisingly perhaps, a couple of the best-equipped outfits are open to the idea of outsourcing their gearboxes.

"It's been discussed in the strategy group and other meetings," says Red Bull team boss Christian Horner. "It was decided to go ahead with the tender to see if what comes back is actually cheaper than teams' current solutions. We're ambivalent to it, and wait with interest to see what the outcome of it is.

"It's really up to Liberty and the FIA. They've got a pretty good overview of what the teams are spending individually, so it will be interesting to see what the tender comes in at."

Renault's Cyril Abiteboul is happy to see some progress being made on 2021 - even if gearbox supply is not not necessarily high on the lengthy 'to do' list that F1 has to tackle in the coming months.

"Knowing F1 I don't think that the issue of a document will stop any debate," says Abiteboul. "I'm sure it's just the start of the debate, if anything. But it's good to see some action, see some traction, some reality, because things need to take shape now.

"We have always said that we were generally supportive of the vision of Liberty and F1, and that is now to become a reality.

"We are extremely concerned about time, about planning, since these things take time, if you want to make an impact on 2021. So it's good that it's now. But the timing is super short, so hopefully a supplier will be found that can meet the challenge of the documentation.

"A gearbox tender - is that the most pressing and strategic topic for F1's future? Probably not. But it's probably one of the things with the longest lead time, together with the engine, so I understand why this is probably where we need to start."

Like Horner, Abiteboul says Renault is open to the idea of a common gearbox, if it makes sense: "We are capable of doing a gearbox, and we can for sure purchase another one. So we are bit agnostic, we will be going with the flow.

"What matters is that there is a flow, that there is momentum, that there is traction, to implement the vision. And again, the vision is not just the standard gearbox."

Naturally the teams that currently buy in a complete gearbox from a rival have some concerns, particularly about the requirement to design and manufacture their own housings.

"Nothing is clearly defined so far," says Alfa Romeo's Fred Vasseur. "If they want to move in one direction or the other we need to know quite soon. I'm not sure that doing something like this will reduce the costs drastically.

"We will stick to the regulations - if we have to do it, we have to do it. But it wouldn't be the best scenario if we want to reduce the costs.

"It would be a shame to impose on the teams to do the casing. I'm not convinced that it's a performance differentiator, and it will cost us a fortune."

Racing Point long ago switched to the customer gearbox model, first with McLaren and latterly Mercedes, in its Force India days.

"I'm a bit sceptical over its ability to save money," says the Silverstone team's technical director Andy Green. "It's not going to save us any money, that's for sure. It does seem a bit strange that all teams are going to be supplied by a single supplier, in an area that's absolutely critical to the running of the car.

"But let's see what happens, we've only seen a tender go out, we don't know what's going to happen after that. So we'll wait and see. It's got a big challenge to it - whoever picks up the tender has got a big challenge."

So who will be bidding? In theory there's nothing to stop one of the teams trying to win the contract, as McLaren's electronic division did with the ECU.

But even the biggest teams have limited production capacity - for example Ferrari is currently set up to supply six cars, Mercedes four, and Red Bull Technology also four. Upgrading to the full grid, even with the casings excluded, would be a huge ask. Having said that it could be a useful revenue stream, and potentially a good way of absorbing excess staff capacity when any form of cost cap starts to kick in.

Horner has no objections to the principle of being supplied by another team, but says Red Bull Technology won't be bidding.

"McLaren supply the ECU," he points out. "So if it's the gearbox internals for all teams, as long as it's reliable and fit for purpose - and cheaper - then why not?

"A gearbox is not a key performance differentiator, or the internals of your gearbox. If it's the same for everybody, that's what it is. But we're not equipped to make gearboxes for the whole grid."

Abiteboul says that Renault won't be in the frame either: "It's not our core business. So what we need to do is focus on what we do, which is racing. We are already struggling enough to get a car ready in time, it was challenging to do the shakedown and do the test."

The logical favourite to land the deal has to be Xtrac, a company that over the years has supplied gearbox components to much of the F1 grid, and at times has created complete units. An F1 supply contract would be a huge boost for the Berkshire company.

"I think it would be expected for us to submit a tender," says managing director Peter Digby. "I think it's a great idea, I really do. There's a big cost saving that can be achieved if the right product is supplied to all the teams, which offers reliability and saves a lot of ongoing development that the teams inevitably do when they're competing.

"The tender has asked for a contemporary gearbox and the ability of suppliers to supply. I think it's a very good tender, they've asked all the right questions, and it's an impressive bit of work that's gone into it, although it's a little bit later than we would have hoped."

Xtrac may have anticipated that the FIA and F1 were moving in the direction of a common supply, and was potentially able to do some homework in advance. Nevertheless, like other tenderers, it will have just a month from the formal publication of the full details on the FIA website to the submission of its completed bid.

"It's a tight timescale to work to. We have to submit everything by March 15, so it's a short amount of time. But that's motor racing, and we're used to tight timescales.

"We've got a lot of work to go through, we have to consult our lawyers, etc, to make sure that everything is OK, but it looks like a sensible document. We're quite excited about the concept if it proceeds - and it may not."

The price for sale or leasing of an annual supply that Xtrac and any potential rivals pitch at will determine whether the plan goes ahead - as stated earlier, if smaller teams believe they will end up spending more than they do now, it will make no sense. Digby is convinced there will be financial benefits.

"In 2013 we provided Marussia with the whole gearbox and hydraulic system when Max Chilton finished every race, which we're very proud of" Xtrac's Peter Digby

"It should be possible to achieve a cost saving when you look at the fact that you're producing one gearbox for 10 teams - there are six different designs for gearboxes at the moment. It should be more cost effective, but we'll have to see how it works out.

"F1 teams typically do a new gearbox every two or three years, so you'll be saving on that cost. The tooling, which is quite substantial, you'll be saving on that across all the different teams. The savings are in various areas."

One of those will derive from a simple switch from eight gears to seven: "It clearly offers a cost saving and a weight saving. And the engines do seem to have a lot of torque, so it seems like a very sensible decision."

Teams will trust Xtrac to come up with the goods, since many are currently customers.

"We've worked in F1 since 1988, so we have a great pedigree there," adds Digby. "Mostly we've supplied at least half the grid over the years, and sometimes it's been a lot more than that. And we did a common gearbox for the new teams that entered in 2010.

"In fact in 2013 we provided Marussia with the whole gearbox and hydraulic system when Max Chilton finished every race, which we're very proud of."

There is one potential snag which could spark further debate. In order to ensure that the common cassette reflects current technology, the teams will be asked to pool their knowledge to help the tender winner.

The FIA notes: "The unit will need to be designed in conjunction with all the existing competitors and PU suppliers to ensure it can function as well as possible in all cars, and best endeavours should be made to satisfy as many competitors and PU supplier requests as practical in a unit for everyone.

"Clearly, the competitors that currently produce their own gearboxes will have knowledge built up that should be sought and taken account of if possible. In particular, their best design practices should be sought and a coherent set of design practice actioned during the process."

Will teams really be willing to share such hard-won knowledge, even if they can assume that they may never again have to design and manufacture their own gearbox internals? That's just one of the intriguing twists to what promises to be a fascinating case study of how the FIA and Liberty want to proceed - and how the teams deal with proposed change.