Subscribe

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe

Mosley stresses need for F1 privateers

FIA president Max Mosley has written to the teams to stress that the F1 rule changes announced last month are designed to protect privateers. He wrote: "If car manufacturers spend large sums producing very high technology engines and chassis, the only way to stop this eventually putting the independent teams out of business is to introduce regulations which make it expedient for each manufacturer to supply its chassis and engines to other teams at fully affordable prices."

Mosley noted that, although there are currently seven automobile manufacturers in F1, that could change. Ferrari, Jaguar, Renault and Toyota are currently operating wholly owned F1 teams, while DaimlerChrysler part-owns a team, and BMW and Honda are supplying engines. All five European-based companies are partners in GPWC, a company they have established to organise their own championship at the expiry of the current Concorde Agreement, if they are not given greater control over their investments and a bigger share of the F1 revenue stream.

Mosley said: "Although their presence is very welcome, the manufacturers will come and go as it suits them - they have always done this and they always will. They are responsible to their shareholders, not to motorsport. Unlike a manufacturer, an independent team cannot just stop racing, because to do so would be to close its business. Thus the way to guarantee long-term health and stability is to make sure there is a solid group of independent teams which do not depend on the presence of the manufacturers for their survival."

In particular, Mosley defended the still-controversial 'long-life' engine provision for 2006, when he wants to introduce a regulation stipulating that a single engine must be used for six consecutive Grands Prix, and believes that this would save substantial costs. "Despite a reduction in engine costs of more than 90 percent, no one in the grandstands or watching on TV will notice the slightest difference," he continued, suggesting that the only real problem with the rule would be to devise a workable scale of penalties for premature engine changes.

Be part of the Autosport community

Join the conversation
Previous article Pook confirms Brands Indy for 2003
Next article Moreno confirmed at Herdez

Top Comments

There are no comments at the moment. Would you like to write one?

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe