Will F1 make it to a 2000th world championship race?

As Formula 1 celebrates its 1000th world championship race this weekend in China, it's inevitable that the focus will be on celebrating some of the great moments that have made the championship a global icon. But the time for reflection will not last long.

F1 has made it this far because in sporting terms it has actually wasted little time in holding on to the past. It's all been about what comes next: whether it is a team chasing a faster car, a driver pursuing his next victory or bosses chasing the next big deal.

Now though, F1 is heading towards an important period that will almost certainly decide not only its shape from 2021, but whether or not it will be sustainable in the longer term.

In a fast-changing world that readily abandons failed projects for whatever else is not in vogue that day, it's interesting to ponder whether or not F1 will make it to a 2000th race. It has taken 69 years to get to the 1000th, but the likelihood is that it will take much less time to get to 2000.

There are currently around 20 races on the calendar, and the idea is to expand to 25 events in the near future. If there are an average of 23 events per season from now on, the 2000th milestone would be hit in under 45 years'.

For F1 to still be around for a 2000th grand prix, it will depend on a multitude of factors, some of which are under the control of the stakeholders, and some of which rely on outside parties.

From F1's perspective, its key challenge is making it sustainable on the cost front. If F1 ploughed on in its current guise - with budgets almost out of control, smaller teams struggling to survive, and a grid that has been split in two - its long term viability would have to be questioned.

The impact of the 2008 financial crisis - when BMW, Honda and Toyota all quit F1 within 12 months of each other - shows that the major manufacturers that pump so much cash into F1 are fickle when it comes to sticking around once the cost/return ratio gets out of kilter.

If F1 were to let budgets creep up from their current $450million peaks, then it would not take long for questions to be asked about the return on that level of expenditure against a team not winning.

Renault, which has invested a pretty hefty sum to commit as a works team in its quest for success, has suggested that the step up it needs to take on Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull may not be justified. And if that resigns its board into accepting it cannot win, that does not lead to guaranteed long-term commitment.

But F1 and the FIA, and even the teams themselves, now accept that costs need to come down. It's most clearly seen by the fact that the arguments at the moment revolve not around whether or not a cost cap should be introduced, but how it should be implemented.

Getting agreement on those details will not be easy, but the successful implementation of a cost cap from 2021 is a key element to ensure the greatest chance of F1 making the 2000th race.

Should a cost cap ensure being competitive in F1 is possible for all the teams then that will change the dynamic.

F1 would not be reliant on manufacturers or big brands to bankroll teams. The potential for profit would make the championship attractive for global companies and it would allow independents to thrive, safe in the knowledge of what the long term plan is.

Get this cost aspect of F1 sorted, and everything else will fall into line easily. After all, just think how many times "increased costs" are used as an excuse to block positive rule changes.

Beyond cost, the other key debate is how much F1 needs to remain road relevant to ensure its future, an aspect put more into the spotlight by the growth of Formula E. Relevancy was a driver in F1's switch from V8s to the current V6 turbo-hybrids back in 2014.

Now, one of the ongoing debates is whether F1 needs to go a step further and go electric to better fit the theory that this is where the road car industry is heading - although to do this it would need to negotiate with FE and the FIA regarding the former's deal to be an exclusive electric single seater series for the governing body until 2039. But road relevancy is only important if F1 is reliant on manufacturers.

"When I speak to some sponsors, they say they prefer FE to F1. I ask them why and they say because it is electric. I tell them: 'Do you know F1 is hybrid?' They said they didn't know!" Jerome Stoll

If the cost cap guaranteed 10 teams on the grid regardless of being independents, fronted by brands such as Red Bull or owned by manufacturers, then F1 is not at the whim of manufacturers who need to justify extravagant spending and in turn determine much of the drive for direct road relevance.

F1 could choose an engine formula that is based solely on what produces the best racing. Fans have followed F1 over the years because it's been about having the best drivers in the best cars. Road relevancy was never a factor that made people tune in.

When Mercedes or Red Bull wins, it's about the benefits of selling its brand to consumers. A full switch to electric doesn't seem pressing.

The current hybrid engines fit in well enough with where road cars are going to be in the short term. The benefits of technology advancement isn't just about hardware either. The knowledge that comes from current F1 can be applied to improve road cars too.

Renault Sport president Jerome Stoll says one of the mistakes F1 had made was not to promote the electrical element of its hybrid technology sufficiently.

"When I speak to some sponsors, they say they prefer FE to F1," said Stoll, when asked by Autosport about the challenges manufacturers are facing in the transition to electric road cars.

"I ask them why and they say because it is electric. I tell them: 'Do you know F1 is hybrid?'. They said they didn't know! So all of us, we have to make the promotion of this technology by talking to the people. F1 and the stakeholders around the competition do not make enough promotion of the fact that this car is a hybrid.

"Also, when you tell people that millions of items of data are exchanged during the race between the car and the engineers, between the factory and the track, they do not realise how this F1 car is really in line with the evolution of the car industry in the future.

"In the new Clio we are going to have a hybridisation of the engine and the energy management. It is something that we are really experts in.

"When you are driving a Clio, if you put on your GPS that you are going to have a journey on the highway and then after that the city, then you can have this engine management. During the highways you take the engine and as soon as you enter the city, you use the electricity.

"That is a simple interpretation, but this kind of management is something that we are already using in our car because we know on a circuit when you have to recover energy and when you have to use it. We are already experts in that.

"The connected car is something that we are already doing in advance. This is one of the reasons I said that Renault is very much interested to remain in this pinnacle of car technology. We have already the experts here in Enstone."

By the time of the 2000th race - scheduled sometime around 2065 - the road car industry will have changed dramatically.

Connected autonomous vehicles may well be the norm. The UK has committed to a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2040, but will electric cars dominate the market place, or will, for example, hydrogen engine technology have advanced so much that it becomes the alternative?

Whether future 1000bhp+ F1 cars are powered by loud V8s, hybrids, electric or hydrogen power doesn't matter. It's the speed, spectacle, competition and action that is of ultimate importance

The business model for manufacturers may not be based on a future where people still buy and own cars.

Last year, a senior company chairman said that clues about car manufacturing's direction come from future megacities such as Xiong'an in China. Just 100km from Beijing, the authorities plan to create a high-tech 'smart' city that by 2035 could be larger than Greater London.

It will host high-level tech companies and become a standard bearer for other city developments worldwide.

For the estimated three million people who will live there, transport will not be about needing to own a car. Instead, there will be a fully integrated network of trains, metros buses and automated cars to get people around in the quickest of times and the minimum of fuss. There will be little benefit from owning a road car. And that's not good news if you want to sell more cars in China.

If by 2065, car sales to individual consumers are no longer the driving force they are today, then the need for F1 to be used as a relevant platform to sell them won't need to the extent that it is now.

The benefit will come from manufacturers being associated with winning. Motor racing will always have an attraction because humans love competition.

You can argue that as Esports racing continues to boom, the chances are that there is a new generation of fans out there who will be attracted to F1 by seeing the world's best drivers in super powerful cars.

Whether future 1000bhp+ F1 cars are powered by loud V8s, hybrids, electric or hydrogen power doesn't matter. It's the speed, spectacle, competition and action that is ultimately important.

And there is no reason to suggest that any of that cannot be maintained over the next 45 years if the business model works for the teams that are taking part. So will F1 make its 2000th race? Almost certainly.

But will it be anything like what we see in Shanghai on Sunday? No way.