The FIA has revealed that Ferrari vetoed plans to introduce a cost cap on engines.

The FIA has made the revelation as it seeks to introduce a low cost independent engine to the sport, a move revealed by Bernie Ecclestone at the weekend.

In a brief statement issued this evening, the FIA said:

The FIA has studied cost reduction measures for teams participating in the FIA Formula 1 World Championship which were not conclusive, including:

A global cost ceiling,

A reduction in costs via technical and sporting regulations,

An increased standardisation for parts.

The FIA, in agreement with FOM, suggested the principle of setting a maximum price for engine and gear box for client teams at the last Strategy Group meeting.

These measures were put to the vote and adopted with a large majority.

However, Ferrari SpA decided to go against this and exercise the right of veto long recognised under agreements governing F1.

In the interest of the Championship, the FIA has decided not to legally challenge Ferrari SpA’s use of its right of veto.

Therefore the FIA will initiate a consultation with all stakeholders regarding the possible introduction of a client engine, which will be available as of 2017. Following this consultation a call for tenders for this client engine, the cost of which would be much lower than the current power unit, could be undertaken.

Supported by FOM, the FIA will continue in its efforts to ensure the sustained long-term development of the Championship and look for solutions enabling it to achieve this. It asks all of the teams to make a positive contribution to the success of this approach through proposals and initiatives in the interest of the Championship and its continuation over the long term."

The move highlights not only Max Mosley's recent claim that the engine manufacturers now control the sport, but the vast power Ferrari enjoys in terms of vetoing virtually every decision concerning the sport.

Speaking at the weekend, Ecclestone, who has been frustrated by the costs of the new formula and Red Bull's much publicised failure to secure an acceptable engine deal, revealed: "The FIA will put out a press release on Monday or Tuesday.

Referring to the new engine supply, he said: "They will probably have more power and use more fuel. It means, I suppose, that there would be regulation changes, which have already been anticipated for 2017 so there's nothing new."

Asked whether the move was merely a scheme to get the major manufacturers to reduce the cost of their engines, he said: "Not really, it’s very simple. If we don't, we'll probably lose a few teams.

"It's nothing to do with us what people charge,” he added. "We have no control, and don't want it. They can charge what they like. What is being introduced will be an awful lot cheaper than what it currently costs.

"There's a couple of interested parties on the horizon," he revealed, admitting that Cosworth is one of them.

LATEST NEWS

more news >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

Click to go to the main galleries section

READERS COMMENTS

1. Posted by nonickname, 29/10/2015 5:42

"A true democracy would only need 51%"

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by Will Fly, 28/10/2015 7:43

"F1 is more like Communism than a Democracy, basically the Ferrari International Assistance won't do anything to p*ss of Ferrari, so we'll end up with regs to suit what they want so they can win again. Make it a true democracy with all teams having a vote and 75% needed to put a change through."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by Darvi, 27/10/2015 9:58

"Why on earth do the teams get a say on what goes into the regulations? We need to get back to the FIA setting the rules, FOM promoting the races and the teams turning up and racing and getting paid part of their fees for turning up as well as performance related payments.

Bernie has led F1 down a blind ally, largely through self interest, where there are massive issues that need to be sorted out, but nothing can be done, because he has created up a decision making process that allows teams to protect their own self interest. Someone needs to be brave, take that all apart and get back to something that is workable. Sadly, I don't think that JT has the appetite, it isn't in Bernies interest to and the larger teams won't do anything that changes te status quo."

Rating: Positive (6) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by Canuck, 27/10/2015 0:47

"If I remember correctly, was it not Max who wanted more manufacturers involved/involvement? I think his wish has been realized. It is often said -- be careful of what you wish for, a perfect example. Also the FIA has lost respect and authority under JT he has given too much up to the teams. How much are they putting into FIA pockets?"

Rating: Positive (2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

5. Posted by scf1fan, 26/10/2015 22:20

"It would still be interesting to see what the true costs are for a "customer" PU as a part of a team's overall budget . . .
.
Though there are many parts to the NASCAR scoring system I loath, I still feel that one way to help the situation in F1 would be to find a way to more equally distribute the "prize" portion of the purse; particularly if nothing is going to be done to physically equalize the field performance wise. This could be done by spreading the points across the field, with last place (assuming they actually start) getting a point. So, you make the start, you get a point, you complete the race, you get a point. At the end of the season, the monies earned through these "participation" points could go a long way to funding the next seasons PU costs. (Or for what ever else the need may be.) We do watch the scraps at the back of the pack, why should they essentially get 0 for the entertainment value they provide?
.
This would also mean somewhat less money for the front runners, and this might also help to limit the performance spread as well. Few teams ever spend less money than they can get their hands on . . . so less money in hand will mean less spent. (Though in reality, those teams at the front will still have a lot more money to spend due to their sponsorship deals.)
.
This type of strategy would help keep the more technical issues of the sport (what kind of power units should be used, etc.) separate from trying to control the more financial issues through unenforceable caps and limits.
.
On a side note, why is it that BE sometimes cares about losing teams . . . and then sometimes he wanting to help slam the door on them? I would have said it's because of the money a particular team might bring in . . . but the RB teams don't need and probably wouldn't use a PU from "Economy Motors Ltd.""

Rating: Positive (3) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Ferrari vetoed engine cost cap

LATEST NEWS

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

POST A COMMENT

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

Share this page