Start, Singapore, 2014

Same 11 two-car teams on FIA’s F1 entry list for 2015

2015 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Start, Singapore, 2014The same roster of eleven teams which began the 2014 championship remains on the FIA’s official entry list for 2015, despite two of them having gone into administration.

Caterham are listed on the entry list for 2015 along with Marussia. However the latter will undergo a change of name to Manor F1 Team, referring to the original name of the Manor Racing team set up by current Marussia team principal John Booth in 1990.

However it remains to be seen if a rescue package can be agreed to allow either team to compete next season. Manor’s entry is listed as “subject to confirmation”.

Company Name Team Name Name of the Chassis Name of the Engine
Red Bull Racing Limited (Austria) Infiniti Red Bull Racing Red Bull Racing Renault
Red Bull Racing Limited (Austria) Infiniti Red Bull Racing Red Bull Racing Renault
Mercedes-Benz Grand Prix Limited (Germany) Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula One Team Mercedes Mercedes
Mercedes-Benz Grand Prix Limited (Germany) Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula One Team Mercedes Mercedes
Ferrari SpA (Italy) Scuderia Ferrari Ferrari Ferrari
Ferrari SpA (Italy) Scuderia Ferrari Ferrari Ferrari
Lotus F1 Team Limited (Great Britain) Lotus F1 Team Lotus Mercedes
Lotus F1 Team Limited (Great Britain) Lotus F1 Team Lotus Mercedes
McLaren Racing Limited (Great Britain) McLaren Honda McLaren Honda
McLaren Racing Limited (Great Britain) McLaren Honda McLaren Honda
Force India Formula One Team Limited (India) Sahara Force India F1 Team Force India Mercedes
Force India Formula One Team Limited (India) Sahara Force India F1 Team Force India Mercedes
Sauber Motorsport AG (Switzerland) Sauber F1 Team Sauber Ferrari
Sauber Motorsport AG (Switzerland) Sauber F1 Team Sauber Ferrari
Scuderia Toro Rosso SpA (Italy) Scuderia Toro Rosso STR Renault
Scuderia Toro Rosso SpA (Italy) Scuderia Toro Rosso STR Renault
Williams Grand Prix Engineering Limited (Great Britain) Williams Martini Racing Williams Mercedes
Williams Grand Prix Engineering Limited (Great Britain) Williams Martini Racing Williams Mercedes
Manor Grand Prix Racing Limited (Great Britain)* Manor F1 Team MNR Ferrari
Manor Grand Prix Racing Limited (Great Britain)* Manor F1 Team MNR Ferrari
1Malaysia Racing Team SDN BHD (Malaysia) CF1 Caterham F1 Team Caterham Renault
1Malaysia Racing Team SDN BHD (Malaysia) CF1 Caterham F1 Team Caterham Renault

*Subject to confirmation

View the updated list of 2015 F1 drivers and teams

2015 F1 season

Browse all 2015 F1 season articles

Image © Red Bull/Getty

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.

40 comments on “Same 11 two-car teams on FIA’s F1 entry list for 2015”

  1. Should it be read into that Caterham aren’t flagged with “subject to confirmation?” It would be sad if that excuse for an F1 team are on the grid next year while Marussia/Manor who have been punching far above their weight and finally have points aren’t.

    1. I would really appreciate if people stop making comments like “Marussia punching far above their weight” just because they scored points in Monaco. Caterham have beaten Marussia for the past 4 years, and had Bianchi not rather unfairly overtaken Kobayashi at Monaco, Caterham would be the ones with points on the board.

      Please do not let that one lucky race cloud the fact that Caterham have been just as good (or bad?) as Marussia. Of course, this year due to Tony backing out, Caterham have been slightly behind, but they started catching up mid season to Marussia.

      1. Marussia beat Caterham last year and they have, what, a fifth of the budget of Caterham? They’re definitely punching above their weight. Were they lucky in Monaco? Yes, perhaps. However, they were there to pick up the pieces when other teams made mistakes in the same way that Ricciardo has been there to pick up the pieces when Mercedes made mistakes. You could also say that Marussia wouldn’t have scored if Gutierrez and Perez hadn’t ruined their own races. It’s irrelevant. They scored. Caterham didn’t. As for Bianchi’s “unfair” pass on Kobayashi, this was exactly the kind of pass that we all love to see when Kobayashi does it, and that was just for one place. Bianchi finished 9th. If Kobayashi’s Caterham was as quick and capable of keeping up, it would have finished 10th. It didn’t.

        1. They don’t have a fifth of Caterhams budget. Article on the front page of BBC F1 today states there is £10m difference between the two

        2. Agree with most of what you said although I believe the reason Kamui didn’t finish well in Monaco was due to damage from the Bianchi’s pass if I remember correctly

      2. Marussia is beating Sauber. Sauber. Which obviously says a lot more about Sauber, but they are not the ones that got points.

        Marussia started off VERY badly back in 2010. With the CFD car that didn’t work, and even losing to Hispania. But they got round it, and almost beat Caterham in 2012. They did it in 2013 and they are on their way to finish 9th in the championship, a major boost in any sense.

        1. @fer-no65 – It is quite remarkable that the same team that could and arguably should have won the 2012 Malaysian GP with the quite brilliant C31, a car that was probably faster than the Ferrari for the first half of the season, is staring at a season total of rien just two years later, and having been beaten by a team that couldn’t even beat HRT in their first seasons. Such is the marvelous annual renewal of the running order in F1.

          1. @countrygent also consider that HRT only beat Marussia down to pure luck and/or results count back in both 2010 and 2011. They outraced them across the board, apart from one lucky result in each season, IIRC.

          2. I am of course aware of that @optimaximal, but it does rather prove that it was the then Lotus team that was able to poach the higher positions in times of chaos and attrition than Virgin/Marussia.

          3. @countrygent Not really – ‘Lotus Racing’ were significantly more professional, had design and racing talent and seemed to hit the ground running.

  2. Curious to see all eleven teams have entered for next season. Hopefully, that’s a positive sign!

  3. No mention of Forza Rossa then?

  4. If Caterham don’t make it, Renault are effectively only supplying one team next year.

    1. So STR don’t count?

      1. Todd (@braketurnaccelerate)
        5th November 2014, 18:47

        @baron – Hence John’s “effectively” bit.

        1. Well, I believe that STR ARE a separate team, chassis, location, personnel etc, and it is only this year that they have fielded the same power unit as Red Bull, but I get what you’re on about. I doubt if they could go their own route on PU now..

  5. Note the creeping conformity: Force India F1 Team, Lotus F1 Team, Sauber F1 Team, Manor F1 Team, Caterham F1 Team… Haas F1 Team next. It’s like they’re turning into franchises.

    1. @keithcollantine It was much better when we referred to them by Constructor-Engine… but now we don’t really have enough engine manufacturers to do so. Notably, the ‘big 6’ are the ones not called ‘F1 team’, while the whole Lotus-Renault vs. Lotus-Renault debacle probably put paid to that above combo.

    2. @keithcollantine – Minus the “limited” and other commercial add-ons, I find the company names more verbally satisfying. Williams Grand Prix Engineering, eh?

    3. @keithcollantine I note that by saying “Williams Martini Racing” and not mentioning F1 at all, they don’t lose a bit of F1 identity. I mean, if you heard something as “Manor Racing” you could wonder what category they belong to. But you say Williams Racing and of course it’s F1. What else could it be?
      Maybe that’s why it’s “more urgent” for the others to state they are in F1, especially when sometimes results don’t go along with participation.

    4. @keithcollantine isn’t it more an indication that in most cases the backers appear at several levels of competition so have to clearly differentiate?

    5. RB (@frogmankouki)
      5th November 2014, 16:20

      I agree, the “F1 Team” nomenclature seems a bit redundant, it’s understood it’s an “F1 Team” if the are a team racing in F1. I much preferred Haas Formula, it wasn’t a perfect name but still slightly more creative than the name on which they settled.

    6. Remember how a few teams added “GP” to their name for a year or two after Brawn cleaned up… Bring back Racing Organisations!
      I do like “McLaren Honda” – that stands for something.

    7. Sigh….

      You’ve now just made me miss Super Aguri all over again, for the name alone!

      1. Though I’ve just remembered, their full title was Super Aguri Formula 1 Team…..

  6. So Marussia are now called Manor?

    1. Yep, much better if you ask me.

  7. This ‘official entry list’ looks like an exercise in wishful thinking.
    When did entries actually have to be submitted to the FIA?

    1. Errrr….ALWAYS
      It’s the FIA Formula 1 World Championship.

    2. @timothykatz Entries had to be in by 1 November but the entry fee ($0.5m) isn’t due until 30th November so presumably that’s the point when things are firmed up. Teams have to provide an undertaking that they will pay the entry fee, but for a team in administration that’s possibly hard (and also unreliable).

      I think @thebullwhipper may be answering the unasked question “Since when did entries have to be submitted to the FIA?”

      1. Thanks for that @jerseyf1 . So Marussia and Caterham could have sent in their official entries several months ago and as you point out, it will only be at the end of this month that crunch time arrives.
        I’m sure you’re right about thebullwhipper, but as that’s not the question I asked, I’ll ignore his answer.

        1. @timothykatz It can’t have been several months ago as entries only opened on 21st October so entries must have been submitted since Caterham went into administration.

          I would guess that most teams (particularly those on the breadline) would submit their entry form on the deadline date rather than before as there is no benefit to submitting it early as far as I can see.

          1. I also suppose that it could give either teams something to sell – even though the Administrators would have to invest the $500k to ensure their entry. It must be easier to sell a Formula 1 team with with a valid entry, rather than one without.

  8. Interesting that Manor use MNR as chassis name (same as Toro Rosso using STR). I recall Joe Saward saying this was to make it easier to sell the team naming rights at some point in the future (or near future!). e.g. Hispania entering with the ‘HRT’ chassis and changing owners without the hassle of handing over the ‘Hispania’ name

    1. It’s either Mo Nunn Racing back again, or the Muppets…
      MNR MNR, do dooo dedodoo

  9. I hope Manor do race next year and race as Manor. Great name.

  10. Glad to see Honda’s name back in F1. Not so glad at McLaren’s cavalier attitude to their two drivers, and as much as I rate FA as a driver, I am certainly not a fan of his politicking or Dennis’s procrastinations. Dare I say it, but I believe RD is a spent force in F1 – nothing he claimed at the season start has transpired.

    This whole farrago warrants a thumbs down from me….

    1. I actually think Fernando and Ron can work together. We have to remember that both are much older and would have learned from their mistakes. Alonso for instances has definitely matured and he will not be the same entity that he was in 07. 24 years, Double World Champ, moving to Mclaren, I mean wouldnt you be stoked? Ron would have equally enthused, as signing Alonso at the time was a major coup, as he could have gone anywhere. But It all came down to ego at the end of the day.

      You learn mistakes, and undoubtedly, they have learned. Mclaren have one 1 WDC and no constuctors since 07, and Fernando continues to wait for his 3rd WDC. Back in 07, this would have seemed ludicrous! If Alonso-Mclaren had worked beyond 07, he can Mclaren could have won a few more championships.

      1. On one side, you have the driver with the most 2nd place WDC finishes since 2006, then Mclaren, who have made finishing 2nd and 3rd a habit since 1999 before plunging to the depths of the midfield in 2013 (and that horrible season in 2004). As a Mclaren fan it pains me to say this, but I suppose I’m used to it.

        Let’s add more misery to this, I believe the last time Honda were involved in F1, they funded a WDC/WCC winning team that they had just sold, powered by a competitor’s engine but with a chassis based on the work of both Honda Racing and Super Aguri.

Comments are closed.