Marussia confirm Chilton for 2014

2014 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Max Chilton will continue to drive for Marussia in 2014, the team has confirmed.

Chilton’s name appeared on the entry list revealed by the FIA yesterday and the team has now officially announced Chilton will remain with them for a second year.

“You learn such a lot in your debut season, but the second year is when you can really pull all of those new experiences together and show your true potential,” said Chilton. “That has always been the case for me in the junior categories and I’ll be aiming for a similar step in my second year of F1 competition.”

Marussia will retain the same driver line-up as it had last year, following Jules Bianchi’s rehiring in October.

Team principal John Booth said: “In view of next year’s regulation changes, continuity is key, so it is highly beneficial to our technical team that we retain the same driver line-up moving forward.”

“Max had an impressive debut season last year and, of course, achieved a new rookie record for finishing all 19 races. He can be justifiably proud of the progress he made through the course of 2013. With our race driver line-up complete we can now focus all of our attentions on our 2014 car and moving the Marussia F1 team to the next level.”

See the updated list of 2014 F1 drivers and teams

2014 F1 season

Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image © LAT

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.

110 comments on “Marussia confirm Chilton for 2014”

    1. That basically sums it up, really

    2. @npf1 yay! i’m really happy for Max, who deserves a sophomore season in F1, especially after his historic debut and record-setting year!

      for all of Vettel’s WDCs (present, and those to come), he’ll never beat the Chilton’s amazing rookie performance…Mr. Consistency.

    3. Exactly.Meh.Describes it in one word.

  1. It’s quite embarrassing that the news of Chilton staying at Marussia leaked via the FIA entry list. Shows that the deals are done long before a team confirms it.

    1. of course they are

  2. Good to see Marussia giving their drivers a second year now.
    I think they’ve dropped some better drivers than Max in the past, but he’s better prepared for the 2014 F1 season than any of the GP2 field would be.

    1. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
      11th January 2014, 13:34

      @bullfrog – What? Are you saying that Max will do a better job in 2014 than Sam Bird could? Or Fabio Leimer? Or James Calado? Or Felipe Nasr? Or Marcus Ericsson? Or…

      1. Yes, I think its fair to say that he will @william-brierty. Recent past has clearly shown that drivers stepping up (without massive testing available) take half a season just to get to grips with the car and everything, so even if a driver would be a lot faster they would lose the first 8-10 races in the development race, which last year showed to be crucial in the battle for 10th place, so I fully agree with what @bullfrog mentioned, continuity and giving Chilton the chance to develop further is the right way to go.
        And then with Marussia, its not as if they have a good chance to get that much further ahead anyhow even if they had 2 great drivers.

        1. @bascb I’m not that convinced, Bas. If Magnussen hadn’t got the McLaren seat, would he have been a better proposition at Marussia as a rookie, than Chilton as a sophomore? I think so. Okay, we’d be hard-pressed to find another Magnussen in junior formulae, but Calado comes close, and I do believe, would have been able to do better than a sophomore year for Chilton. Vandoorne too, possibly.

          1. Sorry, but I think that is wishful thinking @wsrgo. Sure, for the fans it would have been lovely to see Magnussen in Marussia (if McLaren wouldn’t have taken him that is). And the same for several other drivers who would surely be a more exiting prospect for the future.

            But I would bet on Marussia not getting even close to midfield position next year (not a betting guy though), and all Magnussen would achieve would at best be 1-2 outstanding drives we would actually get to see and maybe an impressive record against Bianchi in qualifying. Not really a great step for his career, and Marussia isn’t helped by it either.
            Right now, they need someone who is familiar with the team to help them catch all technical issues they will have with the new car and brings the budget to fill up the gaps.

        2. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
          11th January 2014, 16:18

          @bascb – I really disagree. With Young Driver Programmes, Young Driver Tests and simulators, it really shouldn’t take rookies long to get up to speed. That’s why we were quite quickly able to see that Perez and Di Resta had potential in 2011, even though both of them were not fully into the stride that they would demonstrate a year later. Hulkenberg started slowly in 2010 and 2012, but was clearly faster than his teammate by the end of each season, with both seasons culminating in incredible Brazilian performances.

          Kobayashi too, can be cited as another driver that quickly found his F1 groove as demonstrated by his wonderful performances at the later races of 2009, and on that basis I look forward to seeing how quickly he will readapt to a very new F1 at Caterham next year (his move is as good as confirmed). In short, although we may not see a driver’s full potential immediately it is almost always possible to judge whether a driver has a long term future in F1, and in Max’s case, I’ve seen no such demonstration.

          As @wsrgo says, McLaren chose a rookie in Magnussen sheerly on performances grounds, and in doing so passed over the opportunity to have Perez, Hulkenberg or Massa. OK, I agree that choosing a rookie, if an impressive rookie at that, over Nico “bridesmaid” Hulkenberg was always going to be one of the poorer decisions of 2013, but it certainly conveys a degree of confidence in the mechanisms used to bring young drivers up to speed.

          It’s not Marussia’s fault, they were clearly looking for another “pay driver” because of the delay in announcing him, but ultimately nobody had a dad as rich as Max’s. What should be happening now is the teams should be elbowing Pic, Van der Garde, Chilton, Gutierrez, Sutil and Vergne, who have all had their chance, and have failed to deliver, and be making way for Da Costa, Bird, Frijns, Leimer and Vandoorne, but no, all of these young talents will be in less illustrious paddocks next year (in fact Frijns will be lucky if he gets anywhere near a racing car at all), whilst Chilton and his dad festoon the F1 paddock loads of dollar marked sacks. I do believe I may have gone a touch overboard there, but you get my drift!

          1. lets have a look at that @william-brierty

            With Young Driver Programmes, Young Driver Tests and simulators, it really shouldn’t take rookies long to get up to speed

            Maybe it shouldn’t but look at the last rookies to enter – the step up from other single seater series is a very big one. Think back at how many Km a Vettel or Hamilton or a Kovalainen were able to make before they drove a race. No Simulator or whatever can really prepare one enough.

            That’s why we were quite quickly able to see that Perez and Di Resta had potential in 2011, even though both of them were not fully into the stride that they would demonstrate a year later.

            Hulkenberg drove quite a few km for Williams, DiResta had won DTM in a very good field of competitors, still it took them a while to get up to speed. What you are saying is no different than what I see. Yes, the good drivers show signs of what is there during their rookie year (Hulk, DiResta, Bottas, Perez, Ricciardo, Vergne … even Guttierez did show that spark last year) but none of them had a stunning rookie year.

            Hulkenberg started slowly in 2010 and 2012, but was clearly faster than his teammate by the end of each season, with both seasons culminating in incredible Brazilian performances.

            And that was exactly the point I was making. Even really good rookies take a while to get used to F1, which should make them shine in their 2nd year.

            But it will not be of much help for their team in the most difficult races next year, when the team is likely to still be struggling to get a grips on their car. Therefore, I can fully understand that next year they keep their line-up, knowing that they know their drivers well enough to help get glitches under control. And they still have one exciting driver in Bianchi, so IMO that is a very solid proposition for a backmarker team.

            McLaren did choose Magnussen, and I am very impressed with them for taking the risk. On the other hand, that is a team that can afford to take a gamble and they do know that they would risk losing him if they did not get him a drive in F1. Their first plan (getting him in at Force India or maybe Marussia) failed, so they had to risk either losing the guy they had invested years in or not giving Perez a second chance. But in JB they still have a solid driver they can rely on the get results if they build a good car.

            Yes, I do agree with you that it would be a better sport if 7 teams did not had to look for money first and for potential only in second spot.

            That said, I have to disagree on your assessment of VdGarde, Guttierez, and Vergne. The first 2 should get a second season to really show what they have got and I think Vergne is better than results show so far.

          2. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
            13th January 2014, 11:55

            @bascb – It appears I have stumbled across a fellow F1 academic! Joking aside, seriously, great comment there.

            I just have a few issues with it. One of the key premises of my previous post is the ease and short time scale it takes to judge a young driver. Although Hulkenberg, Ricciardo, Maldonado, Di Resta, Perez, Kobayashi, Bianchi and Bottas (I’m counting eight successful transitions to F1 since 2009 there – that certainly suggests that young drivers can make immediate impressions) weren’t at their ultimate form straight away in F1, by the end of all of their respected rookie seasons, it was relatively easy to see that each of them had a future in F1. After seeing a season with Gutierrez and Chilton, and two with Vergne and Pic, I have seen nothing to suggest that any of them have the required performance level to remain in F1 for anything other than financial motivations.

            Owing to the fact that Chilton racked up a lot of mileage in pre-season and in previous young driver tests, much like Gutierrez, I see no motive to offer either of them the courtesy of lenience on that basis. Neither does Vergne who received extensive Red Bull backed testing, if perhaps not to the level Hamilton or Kovalainen received, but in the case of all three, junior category performances warranted tests, and if that provides top drivers with an advantage over GP2 midfielders like Gutierrez, Chilton and Van der Garde (who, yes, I may be judging a tad prematurely – he may have some potential) then that is fine by me, because frankly talented drivers deserve preferential treatment of some form in this era of pay drivers. Vergne, a driver who was fabulous in the junior series, very fast in the tests he did and to some a champion in the waiting, has unquestionably failed to fufil his potential. Yes, he has had a extraordinary helping of bad luck, but even when the car is in the window and he is on form, the lap-time is always a tad disappointing. He appears to have a fundamental aversion to the way an F1 car handles in the dry at peak grip, and unless he finds his feet with the new cars in 2014, I would wager that he will be replaced by Da Costa before the season ends.

            Talking of young Red Bull drivers, Kvyat’s signing, whilst in my opinion a very poor decision in that it leaves a ready made F1 star in Da Costa high and dry for 2014, certainly serves as evidence as per the receding importance of mileage when signing young drivers. At the time of signing the contract, Kvyat had only done the Young Driver Test, and was rather underwhelming compared to Sainz, and had several spins. His signing, like teammate Vergne’s, was based sheerly on his junior category performances, and, in my opinion a rather knee-jerk reaction to Da Costa’s difficult FR3.5 season.

            In essence, there are too many fast kids out there for a “mediocre rookie” to be justified. If you are not good enough to make an impression in your first season, as Gutierrez and Chilton haven’t, then surely you aren’t good enough for F1? Doesn’t Pic and Vergne prove that a second season is no guarantee of progress? Why should we give additional chances to those that probably don’t have the potential, when there are drivers like Frijns who does have the potential, but will never receive a chance? Oh, right, it’s all to do with money…

            But what, surprisingly, isn’t to do with money, is the promotion of Kevin Magnussen. As I have said, Magnussen, who compared to some drivers, has not had overtly extensive F1 testing, is being promoted purely on performance grounds: the ultimate demonstration of confidence in young drivers. However, I personally think it was a terrible decision based on a naive assumption that features Magnussen on a list of drivers with Hamilton, Raikkonen and Hakkinen, and with Perez, who I thought easily did enough to retain his seat, on a less illustrious list with names like Michael Andretti and Kovalainen. The original decision to promote Perez was a knee-jerk at best, and twelve months later, when they have been given a second opportunity to have Hulkenberg in their car, they make another knee-jerk decision that was apparently based on an absurd vote from the engineers based on Magnussen’s testing data. Does this set a new precedent? Do McLaren need pages of data on a driver before they promote him? Well I think we can safely assume that they a) didn’t have any data on Hulkenberg, and b) if they did it would be rather more impressive than Kevin’s. And really, now much persuading would Force India have required anyway if Magnussen is as good as McLaren thinks he is? Do McLaren driver now have to come from the McLaren driver programme? Shortsightedness epitomized.

          3. Seems we disagree on whether Guttierez and Vergne showed enough promise to warrant a further season @william-brierty, I guess we will see how they develop next season.

            I certainly think that the sport would be better off with higher quality drivers in the field than a Chilton, a Sutil. Massa I am not that thrilled to see continue, although maybe he does deserve a chance to show whether he can do some great driving in a midfield car.
            Funny enough, maybe Magnussen to McLaren does have to do with money (because of McLaren not offering Marussia and FI enough to take him on), taking on Perez and dumping him after a year does reflect badly on them, I will be curious to see how he holds up against Hulk at FI now.

            For Marussia, I think the money is crucial and having a driver they know can prove to be very important. Especially as they do not have the budget for exhaustive Simulator time (although maybe McLaren would let them run Magnussen in Woking) to iron out any problems with the car. I do think Chilton will be better than he was at the start of the season, but I would be surprised if he started snapping at Bianchi’s heels more than occasionally.

          4. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
            14th January 2014, 15:48

            @bascb – I guess my main problem with Gutierrez and Vergne is that they’ve been given opportunities that better drivers, say Kobayashi or Di Grassi, weren’t given. I think we should see more of the kind of attitude that Red Bull showed when they ousted both Buemi and Algersuari, who frankly weren’t performing, and I think a tolerance of mediocrity should not happen in F1, or at least when there are other options (so for instance Sauber need Sutil because of his Medion sponsorship – he is not a special driver, as Sauber probably know, but they have no other options because of financial necessity). Because Gutierrez, Chilton, Massa and Sutil combine sponsorship and F1 experience, the teams are given no alternative, and that is the only reason they are all still in F1. However Pic and Vergne, would have now had two full seasons of utter anonymity, don’t bring much in the way of sponsorship. So why are they still here?

            Magnussen certainly brings no sponsorship, or at least as far as I know (I doubt that they will be a huge “Lurpak” decal on the MP4-29’s rear wing). However, yes, it is to do with money in that McLaren were not willing to subsidize Magnussen’s Force India move whilst they had a sheet of paper saying that Magnussen was quicker than Perez and a room full of engineers voting against a guy that had done as good a job they could have hoped for after they failed to sign Hulkenberg after Hamilton left. From what I heard, McLaren paid Force India to take Perez, probably because they felt duty bound to find him a seat after a perfectly respectable season from him.

            What you must bear in mind is that I don’t at all blame Marussia for keeping Max. Now that OGX, the company that sponsors Felipe Nasr, the driver I was convinced would take Max’s place, has filed for bankruptcy, Marussia had no other choice. Unless you want a Pietro Fatin, a Johnny Cecotto or a Sergio Canamasas, there are no more pay drivers left out there. Put simply, with Nasr ruled out, Marussia took the only remotely feasible option. However I do blame the FIA and CVC for distributing the massive profits F1 makes so selectively that we arrive at a situation where there are no pay drivers left in the junior categories. Max shouldn’t be in F1, but because of the selfishness of both the FIA and CVC we find ourselves with a diluted grid.

        3. So, the guy who was soundingly beaten by another rookie (in Vet-Web or Alo-Mas scale), who drove a 2013 car, will be categorically better than any other young drivers in a car that is radically different to the previous one?

          1. @austus why would Chilton be better? That has nothing to do with my comment.

            But he WILL be better than he was last year because by now he has some experience and knows the team and the team knows him. And for Marussia that could well be far more critical next year in the early months of the championship when they are likely to have all sorts of issues with the new car.
            Yes, Chilton wouldn’t be in the car if not for his fathers money. But his replacement would have had to bring the same budget, because otherwise the team just cannot afford to go racing.

        4. There is no point, he plain and simple not good enough for F1. He should become a financial adviser or insurance broker like his dad.

      2. Narain Karthikeyan? Y’know he does have experience with him but I daresay Chilton might (probably) be faster though.

        1. It’ll be a good contest. We’ll have a battle for the lead and battle for last.

          1. At least Chilton is a good test driver, he gets mileage for the team and hasn’t broken too many brakes. But that the only positive from Chilton, that makes one more car on track for one more year …

  3. Another grid satellite.

  4. I’m all for rookies getting a second chance but Chilton was just bad. Sure he finished every race which is a decent achievement but Bianchi will just run circles round him like he did last year.

    1. He finished every race?

      He was just still running at the end of every race, He never actually completed a scheduled race distance. How can you measure Bianchi’s performances when he has Max (AON) Chilton as his team mate.

      It annoy’s me greatly when a driver of Chilton’s capabilities is in F1 and continues to get a race seat and a driver like Valsecchi who for three consecutive seaons in GP2 thumped Chilton does not even get an F1 race seat opportunity.

    2. I think Chilton is a steady driver, a safe pair of hands but he’ll never win anything without he improves a lot.

      Bianchi is touted at being something pretty special for the future so it could be making Max look a little worse than it is.

      He ain’t terrible, but there’s better drivers not in Formula one. The finances of F1 dictate this is the way it is, rubbish.

  5. It’s not that hard to finish every race when you’re so far behind the rest of the field you’ve lost sight of them by the time you reach the first corner. Not much to crash into.

    1. Yeah, and I think its pretty hard to crash a car which goes only up to 100 mph :p

      1. Which leaves it down to the wheel nuts and reliability, which are both beyond the driver’s control.

        Sad to hear about this really, given that so many others deserve a shot in F1

    2. When overtaking with DRS open is considered to be hard, finishing one race, let alone 19 races is not going to be easy, isn’t it @roald?

      Jokes apart, Let us not forget he got his opportunities to crash into other cars when getting blue flagged. ;) Remember VDG’s crash into Webber when getting lapped? So Max can be considered a safe pair of hands. And given the expected decrease in reliability coupled with the fuel load restriction, who knows bringing the car home safely and slowly could fetch you invaluable points!

  6. I know that pay drivers are a thing, and that they have always been used… But this is a joke.

    1. If Chilton’s presence means that the team can retain Bianchi, then so be it. It’s a necessary evil, and while no-one is enthusiastic about pay drivers, there is no quick or easy solution to the problem they pose. For now, Max Chilton is probably the best driver for that seat.

      1. I see the point. But this should not be the case, it just further degrades the standard. Similar to team lost their touch in working hard to get proper sponsors and opt for pay drivers.

    2. But isn’t it better than the Sauber line-up @philereid? ;)

      1. @prisoner-monkeys A good point, in Fairness Bianchi is that good to counter-balance Chilton.

        @seahorse Bianchi makes it better indeed :P It wouldn’t have mattered who else was in the Marussia. But still, I’d rather have seen it go to another rich driver who had an ounce more talent that Chilton.

      2. @seahorse – I suspect Sauber took on Sutil to act as a yardstick to measure Gutierrez against. Gutierrez did show flashes of potential late last year, and it was a cruel fate for him to be a bystander in the first-lap melee in Korea, robbing him of his best shot to perform.

        Sutil is also a fairly conservative, safe choice. If reliablity becomes an issue this year, I suspect he will be able to keep his head down and nurse the car home to a stronger position than it would normally be capable of if everyone else finished.

        1. @prisoner-monkeys He was the best choice for them, regardless of Gutierrez. Other teams took the few better drivers. Of the remaining drivers, I think di Resta was the best choice, but Sutil isn’t much worse and also brings sponsorship. So in that respect, as average and unexciting a driver Sutil is, I doubt Sauber had a better option.

          1. @enigma add to that the value of experience for this year which is a must have (at least for one of your 2 drivers) and that leaves Sutil of going back to Rubens (or Nick Heidfeld, the driver you call when you are out of options). They probably made the best choice at the end even if it remains totally unappealing.

  7. I agree that it’s kind of uninspiring, but at least Marussia is being kind of consistent in a way that a lot of smaller teams have failed to be over recent years. Keeping the same lineup may attract more investors, and may even lead to the advancement of the team.

    But yes, I agree that it would have been better to have someone other than Chilton.

  8. A completely unexceptional driver, with tons of money. And Marussia are proud to announce this? They should be embarrassed to announce this.

  9. Why not VDG? Or Pic? Or Kobayashi? Or a billionaire’s dog? I am sure the latter could bring much money to the team and probably drive faster than Chilton.

    1. @nickf12013 – if chilton was really such a poor choice for their needs, Marussia wouldn’t’ve contracted with him for a year_2.

      what qualifies you to know better than john booth who Marussia should employ? Just curious…

      1. The statistics my friend. Chilton is there only because of his rich daddy.

  10. Marussia have also said that they plan to be at the first test.

  11. Chilton gets far, far too much criticism on this website. He’s driving a MARUSSIA, what else did you expect him to do other than be at the back. He’s bringing the car home safely, with minimal brain fade (except Monaco), and that’s all he needs to be doing IMO. Just because his team mate is highly regarded doesn’t mean he’s crap.

    In fact, the Chilton brothers get far too much criticism anyway.

    1. In the races his team mate beat him 15-1. If you start virtually every race last it isn’t so difficult to bring the car home safely.

    2. Welcome to Formula 1. It’s not his local karting club championship. Sadly lately it seems to be heading that way though.

  12. FlyingLobster27
    11th January 2014, 13:00

    That’s last place booked for the year then.

  13. If the cars are really going to be that much harder to drive, Chilton will probably equal the record of finishing all races last year by finishing none this time around.

  14. What number will he be running?

      1. @verstappen – That has been taken by Jenson Button.

    1. What number was his kart? Seems to be a popular way of choosing among the drivers.
      I’ve seen pictures of him racing with number 4, and that’s still available.

      1. He could use #23, his brother’s number, or he could use #16 or #61, the numbers he carried in his first season of British F3.

        1. @prisoner-monkeys And he of course had it last year.

  15. Such a heart-warming tale of triumph.

    If people still don’t believe that anyone can achieve anything, take a look at this man right here. Makes me all warm and fuzzy inside…

    1. Max Chilton gives hope to us all! What a hero! :)

      1. And it only requires for your dad to be a millionaire.

  16. While Chilton was definitely one of the worst drivers of 2013, this continuity should be a good thing. If Caterham switches both their drivers, Marussia could end up ahead again in the standings, especially if the results are once again decided by one lucky finish early in the season: experienced drivers should be able to capitalise on such opportunities better than rookies still trying to get familiar with the car and the team.

    1. He can continue to be the worst, nobody can beat that

    2. @kaiie
      I dont know, I think Caterham basically didn’t spend anything on last year to concentrate fully on this year, so that would explain how Marussia beat them. I expect they’ll hire at least one exciting driver for this season.

      1. @george I don’t think they dint spend much on last season. Dint they bring an upgrade package which pushed them ahead of Marussia as the season progressed?

        1. They both decided to do very little work on their 2013 package to stay alive for this year and allowing themselves to develop a bit.
          And I had the same feeling than you, Marussia almost did nothing while Caterham brought an upgrade putting them ahead for the second half of the season which worried Marussia quite a lot apparently.

  17. “you can really pull all of those new experiences together and show your true potential”

    You have none Chilton. Go Home.

  18. How disappointing.
    I’m not against teams hiring pay drivers as they are often needed and they are usually decent drivers at worst, but the likes of Chilton just degrade F1 and that is frustrating.

  19. Give him 1 more year, if he fails to pull something out the bag, CHOP HHHHHHIIIIIIMMMM!

  20. What I hate is that the British press make him out like he is brilliant.

    1. No they don’t. That’s not true at all.

      they have an obsession with JB and don’t seem to like Hamilton, but Chilton is so inconsequential he never gets a mention.

      1. @ukphille

        I see him being mentioned all the time!

        1. Ok then, maybe you read different stuff to me.

          As far as I can tell in the publications, websites and shows I watch, he might as well not exist.

          Sky try and feature him more than anyone cares to see him, thats about as much exposure as I see him get.

      2. @ukphillie Actually, they do, and it’s a running gig among F1 fans as to how the British press fawns over Chilton. I can think back to Croftie, who mentioned that Chilton finished all the 19 races last year so many times that I lost count.

        1. Yeah, I would agree if you replace the words ‘British Press’ with ‘Sky’

          Sky do seem to have a little twinkle in their eye for Max, but I’m sure the Indian Press featured Narain Karthikeyan a lot, and he was no better.

          1. Karthikeyan was awful. Chandhok was good though.

          2. @ukphillie It’s funny you should say India, but evidently, you know where I live..:)
            Yeah, Karthikeyan is featured a lot, and the Indian press did tend to focus on his wet-weather racing ability and his few good races with Jordan. But it was more to do with the pride of having an Indian driving an F1 car in the Indian GP etc., rather than raising him to the skies. Unlike Britain, India isn’t the home of motorsport, so we like to see the country venturing into things it isn’t renowned for. It’s different from Britain, which is the most-represented country in F1.

      3. yes they do, you only have to watch bbc f1 brazil 2013 forum. they went to the maurrasia garage and praised max for getting 10th place in constructors because of finishing every race, they failed to mention that it was bianci who got them 10th and the fact that bianci smashed chilton.

    2. I think they’re so embarrassed they just ignore the bad points and focus on the one good thing he’s managed.

    3. @full-throttle-f1 (and @force-maikel below) I never know what to make of comments like this as they’ve obviously been posted here and while I suspect you’re not referring to F1 Fanatic (for example, because you may have read this) you haven’t said who you are referring to.

      1. @keithcollantine I’m sure they aren’t referring to you Keith, you weren’t showing any particular leanings towards Chilton. This site is fair and I’m sure they know that too.

      2. @keithcollantine My appologies for the late response Keith. I was certainly not referring to you, I was targeting the bigger British media like BBC of Sky (not that F1Fantic is small). The only reason I post here on F1 fanatic is because this is one of the most objective media websites out there concerning F1. I have nothing but the highest respect for the way you bring us the news, sure nobody is perfect but you come very close to being a 100% objective reporter!

    4. @full-throttle-f1 Like all the drivers in F1, he’s a really nice guy. So that somewhat explains why he’s admired by the british press. And his driving is nowhere near as bad or as slow as people make it out to be. After all, he does bring with him some financial backing which definately helps Marussia and at the same time, he does a solid job. Yes, maybe there are some drivers who perhaps would do a better job if they were in the same seat as him. But I find it amazing how people say he is absolutely rubbish.. after all, could any of us even come close to driving an F1 car as well as he does? Of course not. He, like a huge number of professional racing drivers have sacrificed and done so much in regard to training, fitness, practice etc. and this is overlooked a lot of the time by many. So please people, lay off on the extreme bashing and criticism.

      1. Like all the drivers in F1, he’s a really nice guy.

        Erm…Kimi. Pasta.

  21. Absolutely ridiculous criticism of Chilton as usual from people. Marussia have nothing to gain by getting a driver a few tenths faster, since they’d be finishing 20th-22nd anyways, so getting a driver that keeps them financially afloat is perfectly fine. From the way people talk about him you’d swear he’s the next Jean-Denis Deletraz or something…

    1. Melbourne 2014: half the field has retired. A Caterham (let’s say of Pic’s of VDG’s caliber) is in 11th, Chilton is 12th. The Caterham keeps running away from Chilton. Another car retires. Marussia rejoice. ‘We’re so glad we didn’t get another driver of Bianchi’s caliber, could you imagine us scoring points? No way, dude.’

      1. @npf1

        Actually Chilton did win a couple of scraps with VDG, even as early as the race in 2013… but yes, still very underwhelming.

        1. the first race*

  22. In other news, water confirmed to be wet.

    1. There is dry-ice, why shouldn’t there be dry-water?

      ..J/k ;)

  23. I’m a bit like surprised. Virgin/Marussia never gave its “another driver” a second season. di Grassi, d’Ambrosio and Pic had to leave after their first and only season, they only retained their leader driver Glock and now Bianchi. Chiltons argument that his second year will be “it” can easily cost him his seat I believe, as long as he won’t be able to perform well. And to be honest, we don’t really know how good he is, as he drove basically invisible. The only comparison could be his teammate Bianchi, but that’s also a bit tricky as the Frenchman had plenty of experience in F1 cars before. Let’s just hope that Marussia will be able to deal with the back of the midfield and both their drivers can show what they really capable of.

  24. People seem overly negativ about this announcement. I can fully understand why Marrusia hired Chilton for another year. The money he and his familiy bring, are worth more than a tenth or two on track. Marrusia needs to thing about their financial position, rather than being to eager to go fast. A good car is worth more in this case. Besides, Chilton was rubbish at the start of 2013, but in the end he was closer to Bianchi.

    1. @me4me – thank you for your very fair, rational comment. it’s a pleasure to read reality-based comments such as yours, rather than the typical anti-Chilton, anti-reality braying.

    2. No they dont need to stabilize anything. If they can’t compete they should just cease as a team and as result drop the F1 public value, instead of inflating the bubble F1 already is.

      No one should be subsidized for be kept in F1. I’m all for fair distribution of F1 profits but team must be competent, not really on pay-drivers to keep operating. This is why we end up in this situation now, teams dont have brains or brain power to actually find marketing opportunities.

  25. It will be interesting to see if Chilton can challenge Bianchi now and then as the second half of the 2013 season wasn’t actually that bad for him. Still, I believe that there is more than one driver left outside, who would deserve this seat more.

  26. I guess he will run the number 0

  27. Zero would be cool!

  28. Pretty expected, but unlike the Gutierrez announcement, I’m a lot more disappointed. At least Gutierrez went up against a driver who was more experienced and is hailed as the next big thing. Chilton went up against a fellow rookie, a driver who has been exceedingly fast in junior formulae, but has been prone to mistakes under pressure. The net result was almost the same…
    Chilton was undeniably the slowest driver in the field last year. It’s pretty obvious that there are two reasons of taking Chilton. The first one is the financial reason, and it does seem that despite the loss of Aon, Chilton’s financial consortium is still strong.
    The second one is continuity, coupled with the lack of feasible choices. There aren’t many drivers in junior formulae who have the power of both money and sponsors, alongwith a strong dose of talent. Nasr fits the bill only to some extent, his 2013 season proved, if anything, that he is still far from a finished product. OGX filing for bankruptcy has not helped his financial side either. From last year’s GP2 field, Calado has talent, but RSF are not strong by themselves to bring a driver into F1. Leimer is reasonable, but not great, and his backing is limited. Bird is probably F1-ready, but at 27, is getting on and one wonders he has reached or is approaching his peak, He has little funding, apart from the scanty support he gets from Merc. In WSR, Vandoorne is talented, and given an F1 chance in 2014, wouldn’t’ve struggled, but I think he’s better off with another year of junior series to make him a complete, consistent machine that Magnussen was this year. Nobody else is really ready or has funding and talent or both. So, I can understand that Marussia want to be going with Chilton.
    What I cannot agree with, though is the fact that taking anybody else would not have been able to make much of a difference. Next year, we are entering an era of unpredictability and unreliability. There is, thus far, nothing concrete that the Ferrari turbo will be poorer compared to their rivals. Marussia might find themselves in a pointscoring position. New changes being new opportunities, and their is no use sinking to cynicism, that the team will NEVER break their duck. They might be in a position to do so next year, and the odds for have never been heavier. And that is where the difference between a Chilton and say, a Calado might come to the fore.
    Continuity, in my opinion is overrated. We have rookies saying their job next year will be easier since the rule changes will be a new thing for experienced drivers, and that might be an opportunity for them to prosper. That’s a stark contradiction to continuity. Either way, the decision is probably largely down to ‘$’ and that Marussia had more on their mind than spending much thought on whom to take alongside Bianchi.

    1. +1

  29. It was to expected I guess but some of the British media really need to turn down a bit on the protectionism. Max Chilton was neither fast nor will he ever be. The only reason he is still at Marussia is the money he brings, which is apparently more than the others that were up for the seat.

    It is disapointing because there are other drivers out there (even if they are pay drivers) that deserve a chance, for instance Fabio Leimer, it seems like he will not be getting into F1, not even as a reserve or test driver, that means that F1 is either most definitely stocking it’s seats up with pay drivers or that GP2 is seriously losing its status as a feeder series.

  30. marussia really have absolutely nothing to gain from him. a driver that is constantly a few tenths slower than his (fellow rookie!) team mate throughout a whole season should not be retained, regardless of how much money he brings with him.

    unfortunately it’s the way f1 works nowadays.. it’s quite a shame really.

  31. The team know what they’re doing and they’re going to choose the driver that they think will do the best job in their car. There’s no point saying he’s ‘a crap driver’ or ‘the worst driver currently in F1’ (which he could be, no one knows) because you stating that is not going to change anything; it’s just going to make fans that are just getting into F1 think us as fans are very negative, which is not the case.

  32. Not an inspiring announcement this. But I understand the two prime reasons behind retaining Max: 1) Money & 2) Continuity. Yes, I agree that Max was beaten by his fellow rookie teammate fair and square last season. But let us not forget that Jules had better and more experience of driving a F1 car when they were partnered (in a way similar to Guti being paired with The Hulk). Also, as the season progressed, some improvement was observed in Max’s driving. I wish to highlight the positives out of this move: 1) Max brings good load of money, so it is plausible that Marussia bring a competitive car at the first few rounds vis-à-vis Caterham and his cash helps them develop the car over the season. 2) He has been a safe pair of hands. By this I am not hyping his moderate achievement of completing all 19 races. Yes, he was lucky not to have a technical failure, but imagine as rookie drivers like Guti & VDG had memorable crashes, Max could also have crashed well at least with those front runners when getting blue flagged. He didn’t.

    I am not saying he is going to set the lower midfield ablaze with his performances, but at least I hope his consistency to get the car home gets coupled with some good performances which could obviously make a difference this season.

  33. I believe all drivers deserve at least a season and a half in F1 to show what they have. Yes Chilton wasn’t exactly quick, but he did show signs of progress as the season went on. Also nice to see Marussia actually keep a driver lineup for once…

  34. I definitely did not expect this. Marussia were spoilt for choice at this stage..they had Kobayashi, Petrov (Russian team,made sense) maybe Kovaleinen, Van Der Garde, Frijins, Calado…they even had a chance to get Magnussen when Force India and McLaren were unable to get an agreement. And they still get Chilton.

    Fine, he finished the whole season, much of it a few seconds behind the other backmarkers. But it was almost matched by Bianchi-a mechanical failure and a first lap crash. In this era of reliability its not really difficult to get a 90-95% record. Kimi did it last year after a two year hiatus.

    He might get a few million pounds for Bianchi to salvage something but if they wanted a pay driver, why not for the richest one? Go for Sirotkin then. Russian backers might pay more for a Russian team anyway.

    Marussia had a good balance this year. A driver much better than his car-Pushing it as much as possible getting the points-or in this case, higher placings and a driver getting money to finance the team. Atleast he isn’t Maldonado and respects the other drivers and is good for PR. But then, when going for bucks, why not go for someone getting the most money and having speed?

  35. Most importantly – WHAT’S HIS NUMBER GOING TO BE?!


  36. Chilton could be a good decision, the tenths that his money brings to the team could even rival or even exceed the tenths that Bianchi talent brings

  37. aaaarrrrrrgghghhghg god damm! What a tedious, slow, nauseating choice! I could rant for pages on why Chilton leaves me feeling so angry, but I have just a few.
    1. He’s unbelievably SLOW, never won a single seater championship EVER, out qualified Bianchi just once in a whole season, in a team he’d been part of for a whole year and a car he’d tested for 8 and a half days, and Bianchi for just a day and half, yet in Australia he was 8 tenths slower than him! That gap came down a bit as the season went on, but come the final races, Bianchi still dominated.
    2. He’s a Daddy’s pay driver. His dad owns a stake in Carlin, and Chilton just happens to race for them in F3 and GP2. His dad is a Marussia board member (I believe) and has been very well supported to get his seat. A driver of his talent would never get a seat if he brought no money.
    3. The British media make excuses for his terrible lack in speed. Hearing Ben Edwards say “Chilton did well, just 4 tenths behind Bianchi” is beyond a joke, always interviewing him to catch up with the “Brits” while hardly ever mentioning his teammate, who basically carried the team. The fact he finished every race last year has no relevance, as he largely finished last, and slowest. The only retirements Bianchi suffered were mechanical or not his fault, so the 19 finishes is honestly meaningless, it just shows that Chilton is slow enough not to crash, and that Marussia build a tidy little car.
    4. He prevents, to an extent, better young drivers, such as Nasr, Calado, Bird, Frijns, Da Costa etc getting a foot in the door, by wasting a seat with his tepid awfulness. Entitled little boy, I hope his F1 career is over extremely soon!

  38. I would wager that somewhere in Scotland, Paul di Resta is curled up in the fetal position and bawling his eyes out right now.

  39. I hope diresta gets seat at caterham F1 team. i wish to see him alongside kobyashi, both of them really a good drivers who deserves to be in F1.

  40. As much as I disagree with this decision it makes sense.Consistency is the key here and a driver who finishes races can be invaluable,especially with the stupid new regulations.

Comments are closed.