Craig Pollock to head new F1 engine manufacturer

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: former BAR team principal Craig Pollock will supply F1 engines in 2013.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Pollock to return to F1 as engine supplier (Autosport)

“[Craig] Pollock has launched PURE, which stands for Propulsion Universelle et Recuperation d’Energie, to provide teams with power-units that comply with the new 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbo engine regulations that come into force that year.”

Leading teams to meet for talks on potential takeover and Formula One’s future (Daily Telegraph)

“Representatives from Ferrari, McLaren , Mercedes and Red Bull are scheduled to meet in Stuttgart a week on Saturday to discuss a range of issues including negotiations over the new Concorde Agreement, various technical regulations including the planned switch to a new 1.6-litre turbo engine from 2013 and, of course, the potential takeover of the sport by a consortium including Rupert Murdoch?s News International and Exor, an investment firm with links to Ferrari.”

Ferrari stresses the need for stability and development in Formula 1 (Ferrari)

“We have no comment to make, partly because we are not directly involved at the moment. All we can do is repeat what has already been said so often in the past: Ferrari stresses the importance of ensuring the long term stability and development of Formula 1.”

Andrew Benson on Twitter

“Re Concorde [Agreement] and free-to-air, have dug up more. There are nuances in the relevant bits, but no doubt it is a requirement in major TV markets. But that is only until 2012 – no one knows what new Concorde will say as talks are only just beginning.”

Via the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

Williams seek to end cycle of decline (BBC)

“In the short to medium term, it is Coughlan who has been charged with turning the team’s fortunes around. The 52-year-old is to be considered for Michael’s soon-to-be-vacant role. And even if they ultimately appoint someone else as technical director, Coughlan is responsible for next year’s car and will clearly remain a key figure in the technical department for some years to come.”

F1’s biggest ?ǣ and lowest ?ǣ spenders (Crash)

“Defending double F1 world champions Red Bull as well as Sauber, Lotus and Virgin are all spending more in 2011 than they did in 2010.”

Dominic Harlow Q&A: ??We?re understanding the new rules of the game?? (Force India)

“Reliability seems to get better and better for everyone, doesn?t it? It?s what we want, but we shouldn?t be under any illusions. It?s always a close-run thing, as any incident could take you out of the race. Adrian had contact with Barrichello in Malaysia and Perez in China, and he might not have finished.”

Terry Fullerton Interview (Torque)

[On being described by Ayrton Senna as his greatest rival]: “Yeah that was in 1994 at a press conference, it was very flattering! I?ll hold on to that one, definitely, until I die. I actually know one of the journalists who were at that press conference and he repeated it word for word to me. He died that same year so that was only a couple of months before he died.”

Yas Marina Circuit Official Fan Page’s Photos – Wall Photos (Facebook)

“Etihad Airways and Yas Marina Circuit joined forces for the very first plane versus car bracket race in the UAE.”

Follow F1 news as it breaks using the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app.

Comment of the day

Tim is concerned about the rise of one-make junior series:

The only problem with GP2 and GP3 as they currently are is that they?re single chassis formulas. The chassis mostly stays unchanged from year to year so part of the key to success is finding a berth in the team with the best handle on chassis set-up. If anything, F2 is worse because the cars are all the same and centrally run by a single organisation.

Getting a good feel for technical and set-up issues is important for up and coming drivers. That comes through best in open chassis series. In GP2, the chassis used by all drivers is generally a known quantity ?ǣ the only exception being when a new car is introduced, as in 2011. Dallara usually produces a very good chassis that works out of the box and then can?t be changed, meaning minimal opportunities for set-up or technical development. Then drivers who graduate often jump into an untried, untested F1 car ?ǣ and if they go badly is it them or the car?

From the forum

Here’s a great idea for a thread: Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, F1 edition.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Sush Meerkat!

On this day in F1

The third running of the British Racing Drivers’ Club International Trophy took place on this day in 1951.

The three-heat event held at Silverstone was won by Reg Parnell in a Ferrari 375.

Image ?? Honda

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories 2011 F1 season

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 55 comments on “Craig Pollock to head new F1 engine manufacturer”

    1. Happy Birthday Shush!

      Wasn’t “Pure” one of the ideas for the name of the team that would become Brawn? In another universe we could have ended up with Pure-PURE GP! Add in the Pollock connection…

      It’ll be interesting to see a brand new engine manufacturer at least.

      1. Yeah, happy birthday Sush (or Sushi lately)!

        1. Thanks guys, but I think I must have messed up the birthday calender thing because my actual bday ins’t till the 13th…

          really Sorry Keith!

          (or Sushi lately)!

          Yep it is, lost my old password and Keith couldn’t reset it so I needed a new account to compete in F1fanatics predictions championship.

          Happy Unbirthday to everyone!:D

          1. LOL, maybe the birthday got messed up with the account as well.

            So enjoy the waiting another 8 days then. As a kid I always counted how many nights sleep were left to our birthday, so now its only 7 nights sleep till the real one :-D

      2. Wasn’t “Pure” one of the ideas for the name of the team that would become Brawn?

        It was indeed. The considered calling themselves “Pure Racing” because that was all they really had going for them. They had no commercial sponsors, no deals or anything – just a chassis and a factory and two talented drivers. Ross Brawn was very hesitant to name the team “Pure” because he didn’t want to overstate the team’s relationship with Mercedes (as the full name would have been “Pure-Mercedes”; ironically, this name would have been very fitting from 2010). They were on the verge of naming the team Pure when his secretary suggested putting the boss’s name above the garage, and everyone liked that idea better because he got them through a very difficult winter.

        1. I love this trivia facts!

    2. hi keith,

      was just wondering if its possible to look at all of the race ratings from the rate the race feature and if so where?


      1. There’s one on here somewhere. It was done late last year, after the fiftieth Rate the Race poll.

    3. I’m becoming increasingly concerned that F1 will not be on free-to-air in future years, which is a crying shame. This sport reaches out to millions (ney billions?) accross the world. I dont know how many of those already have to pay to watch, but I suspect there arent many of those. That said, I’ll bet only a minority of the remaining populations will be willing to pay to watch F1.

      This is a globablly popular sport, but I dont think there will be profits to be made which Murdoch and his crooks seem to think there are.

      1. We only get 4 free to air races each year in the US… Montreal, Valencia, Silverstone, and Hockenheim/Nurburgring. The coverage is incredibly abbreviated compared to the other races which are all broadcast on SPEED. They lack any pre or post race coverage, and have more frequent ad breaks. They’re usually time delayed as well.

        1. Bigredbears10
          5th May 2011, 4:47

          Not to mention a much dumbed down coverage for those not used to F1.

          1. Oh forgot we have that to look forward to as well…

      2. Actually I think we all will have to prepare to the circumstances changing in the next decade or so.

        Getting more possibilties to view F1 (or whatever content) through the internet and on a range of mobile devices, be it videos, written articles or live sports. But paying for it as a package or on a pay per instance basis.
        It might mean the current TV stations as we know them in many countries, where you pay a contribution per year and get more or less free TV will be more marginal. But on the other hand we might get more interesting content to view at the time we want and where we want it.

        Just think about a lot of the current BBC information on F1 being available on the internet, but blocked for non UK users.

    4. Dan Newton
      5th May 2011, 0:14

      What’s this? Red Bull are spending more than last year? Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t they withhold their expences last year for some ‘unknown’ reason. I have a feeling they maybe doing it again.

    5. Happy B-day Shush!!

      1. Sush even.

        1. Thanks guys but its not my Bday!

          Not sure how I messed that one up!.

    6. Happy birthday Sush!

    7. happy bday witty sush meerkat!

    8. Michael Griffin
      5th May 2011, 1:42

      I misread that forum link as “Six Degrees of Kevin Eason”

      Now that I’ve seen Senna, his admiration for Terry Fullerton was very genuine. The fact he even managed to beat him in karting makes that comment from Senna even more special.

      Fullerton’s description of just how ****** off Senna was after that defeat was hilarious too.

    9. Good comment from Tim.

      Motor racing is supposed to be about seeing whose car is best. That’s how it developed. As a spectator, one make series hold no interest for me.

      1. Motor racing is supposed to be about seeing whose car is best

        Which begs the question: Why is it that even F1 fans have more to say about the drivers than they do about the cars?

        Racing is Racing. Is GP2 not a racing series?

      2. Except for when blooding new drivers, then you want them racing in a series where you can compare apples with apples. Take away the car variable, and you get a better picture of who is actually a good driver, cause when it comes to the big leagues, a good car is nothing without a good driver. Have different chassies in development series and it all comes down to whoever has the most money wins, and that person may not necessarily the best driver.

        1. Furthermore what I would like to see in development series is no teams, all the cars owned by the series organiser, drivers come along with an engineer of their choice, rent the car, and direct the organiser’s mechanics on adjustments / setting they want made, such as wing angles, tyre camber, gear ratios, etc, and the mechanics adjust the car to suit. That way the racing would really show who is the best driver / engineer combo, rather than which team has the most resources, or money.

          1. Would a budget cap in the feeder series not address most of your concerns?

            In your hypothetical one owner series, what would be in it for the mechanics, and the many other people who are needed to run the teams? Without their own team identity they just become roadies for the drivers. At least with the teams branded they are more like the band to the driver’s lead singer.

            My point is I like watching motor racing, not driver racing.

            1. Feeder series is only a feeder series. GP2 isn’t meant to stand up on its own. Having different cars will make it difficult to sort exceptional drivers from the good ones.

    10. Some people may not agree with the new engine regulation, but if it brings in new team, manufactures and engine suppliers then I’m all for it.

      1. I was already pretty sure it would have a positive effect and bring more companies to the sport, but I didn’t think they’d appear this early. Hopefully it’ll bring in a new team as well. I’d imagine we won’t see any new teams next year as it would make no sense to develop a car for one year only with really nothing carrying over to the following season.

        1. I agree. But if the FiA wanted to be serious about giving any new team a chance then they’d open the application process for 2013 this year and make an announcement by the end of 2011 giving a new team all of next year to get up to speed – and said new team should be allowed unrestricted testing mileage during 2012 to give them as good a chance as possible of not being several seconds off the pace come 2013.

          1. Agreed. The current process is quite flawed.

            1. seconded. What a stressful procession.

        2. I am looking forward to it as well. Not sure how good this engine will be, but certainly the more the happier.

      2. Is there even room for another engine manufacturer in F1? I seem to remember Cosworth saying it wasn’t financially viable to supply less than three teams?

    11. I wonder which teams will take the switch to PURE engines. I am looking forward to seeing a Virgin-PURE in 2013.

      1. That’s unlikely. Virgin have investment from Marussia, and they’re competing under a Russian flag, which implies Marussia will eventually become the constructor (and Virgin will either stay as title sponsor, move to another team or leave entirely; given Richard Branson’s business model, I suspect they will stay since the entire plan appears to have been to find a promising car manufacturer to join with early on). Marussia’s road cars have engines supplied by Cosworth, so if they increase their involvement with the team, the outfit will likely stay with the Cossies.

        1. Also, isn’t the name “Virgin-PURE” a little redundant?

          1. Maybe having a Marussia PURE Virgin would be even better :-0

            1. Actually, “Virgin PURE” sounds like something I’d expect to find on a bottle of olive oil.

        2. Yeah, I agree with you on that. They chose Cosworth as partners for a wider business (just like Lotus Cars now chose Renault and works with them).

          But if they are good, they might get interest of Caterham. And HRT is bound to be interested if the cost is good. Although they would have to then solve their gearbox themselves offsetting the advantage.

          1. I wouldn’t be suprised if the strike up an alliance with Hispania, who might also get an extra investor (as I’ve said before, I reckon there will be Chinese Yuan involved in funding the team wirh Ho-Pin Tung as a driver).

            I don’t think they’ll go with Caterham. Fernandes can’t afford to. He signed a three-year deal with Cosworth, then squeezed out of it after a year. He signed another deal with Renault, and while I don’t know how long it is supposed to be for, worming your way out of two engine contracts in three years is not a good sign.

            I suspect PURE might try and sweet-talk Williams and possibly Sauber, Force India and Toro Rosso. Really, any team that feels like they’re being held under the thumb of a manufacturer. Any team that wants to be upwardly mobile needs to be independent and cultivate their own talent rather than serving as an incubatot for a bigger team to test out talented drivers.

            1. I am thinking HRT as well, only trouble would be the gearbox, as Williams seems to be close to Cosworth as well.

              But if they get Williams hooked, and involved with both the KERS part and the gearbox as a supplier it might be a very nice package for many.

            2. That’s only possible if Williams is still surviving in 2013

      2. Smoothly done.

      3. I’m not looking forward to seeing Red Bull PURE… I mean, that’s just bull semen.

    12. “Representatives from Ferrari, McLaren , Mercedes and Red Bull are scheduled to meet in Stuttgart a week on Saturday to discuss a range of issues including negotiations over the new Concorde Agreement, various technical regulations including the planned switch to a new 1.6-litre turbo engine from 2013 and, of course, the potential takeover of the sport by a consortium including Rupert Murdoch’s News International and Exor, an investment firm with links to Ferrari.”

      This is good. If News Corporation acquire the rights to Formula 1, it may not be the unmitigated disaster people believe it will be – the teams will do their best to serve the interests of the sport.

      1. Of course. FOTA are likely to make or break that particular issue. I’m confident we will be ok.

        1. My major concern is Exor, because of its linnks to Ferrari. I just can’t help but feel that their involvement is a bad idea. If one team is going to be connected to the purchase of the commercial rights, then all of them should be. Because otherwise, one team is just going to have too much power.

          1. But who says its only Exor that will be into this? If there’s money to be made, I guess the Mateschitzes, Fernandeses, Daimlers, Porsche/Piechs, John de Mols, Peter Müllers, Bransons and V. Mallyas of this world might be interested in joining in with the likes of Slim and Exor to get a deal done.

            1. The teams’ record on purchasing into the sport is not a good one at all. Right now, FOTA could club together and buy some of CVC’s shares. But they haven’t.

          2. FOTA will be well aware of that. There is no way they would agree to Ferrari having any more of a say so than they do now. Ferrari’s priveledges are historical and they really couldn’t expect many favours on paper.

      2. I think it is about News Corp being generally interested for the worth of the content, and counting on using better media coverage to grow it on the one hand and the teams feeling good about getting a bit of bargaining power over Bernie.

        Certainly such a buyer would have to work closely with the teams (and FIA) to design their business model.

      3. I think the teams will try and get the best deal for them, which may not be the same as what is best for the sport as a whole or us fans.

    13. Pretty surprising to hear of a new engine so soon. Exciting stuff however!

    14. Always exciting to hear about a new engine manufacturer, but I do wish it wasn’t Craig Pollock doing it. Right or wrong, I always felt there was a shady (or more accurately: too shiny) side to the guy and I still at least partly blame him for steering Jacques Villeneuve to BAR and keeping up a defiant attitude far too long after it became obvious the venture was a failure. Of course none of that may have any influence on his ability to manage an engine manufacturer, but as a character, I have my reservations.

      1. Fair comment. But you have to admit, on paper, they had all the right ingredients, but when time came to bake the cake, it just didn’t rise.

    Comments are closed.