Max Chilton, Marussia, Monza, 2014

Manor on 2015 F1 teams entry list, Caterham vanish

2015 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Max Chilton, Marussia, Monza, 2014Manor has been given a place on a ten-team entry list for this year’s championship by the FIA.

The updated entry list, issued today, includes Manor Grand Prix Racing Ltd which has taken over the entry previously used by Marussia. They will use Ferrari engines. The FIA also confirmed Will Stevens will be one half of their driver line-up, as the team announced earlier this week.

Their entry is listed as being subject to “full compliance with the 2015 technical regulations”. Stevens, who raced in the final round of 2014, must obtain a super licence.

Marussia was one of two teams which went into administration at the end of last season. The second, Caterham, has been dropped off the entry list.

2015 F1 season

Browse all 2015 F1 season articles

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.

58 comments on “Manor on 2015 F1 teams entry list, Caterham vanish”

  1. There are rumours McLaren might stick Vandoorne in there. That makes it quite a bit more interesting IMO

    1. @njoydesign A more recent rumour places Magnussen there actually. Which makes more sense, as Mclaren have stated that they want Vandoorne to concentrate on winning GP2 this season

      1. it does make more sense, I agree. If that turns out to be true, I wonder if Kev will be able to help Manor improve with what he has learned in McLaren last year

        1. It would make even more sense if McLaren were abel to stick Honda in there! (@montreal95, @njoydesign).

      2. @montreal95 But then again if Magnussen is there and Alonso isn’t in Australia, Magnussen could race for McLaren so they would need somebody else for Australia.

        1. @strontium No way Alonso is going to miss Aus. He barely agreed not to participate in this test as an extra-precaution. Anything can happen of course, but I wouldn’t bet a single penny on it

          1. @montreal95 I certainly hope he doesn’t miss it, but only time can tell

          2. @strontium You were right on the money. I wasn’t. Glad I hadn’t put any on it! :)

      3. Certainly if McLaren want to keep Magnussen sharp, then it’s the most logical option. It’s highly unlikely that McLaren will give him the same Friday running that Hulkenberg and Bottas used to get when they were 3rd drivers. I can’t imagine Magnussen would improve all that much just from spending a year in the simulator.

    2. Would be interesting if Merc Give them a big cheque to put Wehrlein in the car.

      1. why? vandoorne has been relevant for much more time than wehrlein, hasnt he?
        if anything interesting, Id put there de sulvestro! now THAT would be interesting!
        but honestly: no driver, no matter how good he(she) is will be relevant driving a car that is so much slower than the rest!

      2. manor owns Mclaren a lot of money, the rumor is if they sign Vandoorne they don’t have to pay it back.

    3. @njoydesign If Vandoorne signing there allows Ocon to have his seat at DAMS, then it could be a good move all round.

    4. Rumours says that KMAG needs a drive for next year.

      1. Logic says that KMAG needs a drive, not the rumours =)

      2. I saw that as well, and it makes a lot more sense to have Magnussen in the car than Vandoorne who is already planned to do GP2 @dantheman

        1. Mclaren knows what Magnussen can do in F1, Maybe they want to know what Vandoorne can do to make a decision.

    5. Everything seems to point to Vandoorne being an exceptional talent. I’d love to see him in F1. A great talent can shine through regardless of the equipment at their disposal and I’d love to see if he’s got what it takes.

      One of the most important benefits back marker teams bring to the sport is allowing young talent to hone their craft, develop as drivers and make a name for themselves. These teams can hold the same function for other areas such as mechanics, designers and other talent that is vital to keeping the sport healthy. The next Adrian Newey or Fernando Alonso may get their start in Manor or other small teams where otherwise they might never get a chance. Small teams have so many hidden benefits to give to the sport as a whole, it’s a shame more isn’t being done to ensure that Manor are given as much help or leeway as possible to be able to enter F1 this season.

      Manor entering the sport with highly rated young drivers would show if there was ever any doubt that there’s importance and value in having as many teams as possible race, even if they’re at the back of the grid.

      1. He’s a great driver no question. However, IIRC there was a story of him a few years ago being a complete ass in simracing community, being very quick but having a nack for wreaking havoc and ruining races for others. Just not the kind of stuff you’d expect a future champion to do.

        1. I’ve never heard that. That’s interesting. I wouldn’t excuse his behaviour if true but I’d hope that he’s matured a lot since then.

        2. @njoydesign Interesting.. all I’d seen was of him destroying the field in FSR, which is on his YouTube. Stanaway also won the iRacing Pro Series while recovering from a broken back! Those guys are definitely the real deal.

          1. @fastiesty
            I remember someone posting the whole story on 100mbit sometime in 2012 if my memory serves me right. Can’t get to it now since I am banned from there forever =)

        3. @njoydesign – That’s not exactly how he goes racing in reality! He employs a gorgeous Button-esque style of navigating a corner, and, other than the touch with Lancaster in Abu Dhabi and the fresh experience of being midpack in the GP2 Series in the Bahrain sprint race, I can’t remember him ever making an contact with another car.

          1. @countrygent
            From what I remember, it was not about his racing, but just him and someone else messing around with the people online, not actually racing but just crashing around and mocking people. I think it even was on Race07 servers, not rFactor.

            The thing is, this was quite a while ago, and not having access to the details I just don’t want to be making things up. I tried to Google but nothing comes up now, and the thread where I originally read about it is on a forum I have no access to anymore.

          2. @njoydesign – Having followed his non-virtual career from its inception, and having met Stoffel on the odd occasion through work, I am surprised to think he was even capable of mockery. That said, computers make us do the strangest things! My abiding memories of Vandoorne is one of humour, professionalism and intelligence, not unlike a floppy-haired kid I met at the Lausitzring in 2005 as he was climbing out his Red Bull-liveried F3 car…

            The champion’s formula?

          3. @countrygent
            Well I guess I better trust you on this than someone on a forum from few years ago. After all, even if true, I’m sure all of us have something we have done during our youth that we’re not exactly proud of. Doesn’t normally make us the worse people. So maybe I should admit I was a bit harsh in my original comment.

            I’ve got to say, we have a great generation of talented pilots coming in to mount the challenge on current champions and then be the main actors over the next half a decade. Exciting innit. Kvyat, Verstappen, Vandoorne, Sainz (although I rate him less then the aforementioned trio), Nasr, plus those on their way from GP2 and WSR. Right now my pick is Kvyat. Well, first of all, he’s my countryman))) But at the same time, he’s very good. He has talent and the ability to analyze and improve. He’s also quite humble, which I like. Expecting to see great things from him once he properly settles in.

            Overall, in terms of driver talent, I think F1 is at its strongest right now. And if the grid is closer in performance this year, I think we’re in for quite a ride.

      2. @colossal-squid

        I don’t buy this at all… honing young talent ??? How many young drivers with seats in back of the grid also-ran teams have progressed ? Very few. Most get one or two seasons driving at the back and then their career is over. Getting a seat in a back-marker team is like a kiss of death on a promising career.

        1. @marlarkey
          Minardi – Giancarlo Fisichella. Jarno Trulli. Fernando Alonso. Mark Webber.
          Jordan – Michael Schumacher, Rubens Barrichello
          Toro Rosso – Sebastian Vettel
          All teams were ‘back of the grid’ when each of the above drivers began their careers with them.

          Meanwhile a trip through the Champions of F1 shows many got their start in a lower team. Other than the aforementioned Alonso and Schumacher, Hakkinen started in the struggling Team Lotus, Damon Hill in the dying Brabbham, Senna with Toleman. Jules Bianchi was destined for a seat at Ferrari until his tragic accident.

          To say that young talent doesn’t come from backmarker teams is to be ignorant of the history of the sport.

          1. I’m talking about the recent history of pay drivers…

    6. @njoydesign @colossal-squid – Several years ago McLaren would have popped Vandoorne in there without thinking, but GP2 is so expensive now it would equate to throwing over a million pound and a probable GP2 title for Stoffel, for the joy of circulating round at the back of an F1 grid. Also, by deploying the Belgian as the driver for Honda’s Abu Dhabi shakedown, McLaren have told the world that he is an integral part of the future programme: there can be no doubt as to the inevitability of his replacement of Button.

      Marciello is a possible if you cite his and Manor’s ties with Ferrari, but equally I think Ferrari know that he will benefit more from further experience in the junior categories. Vandoorne, by contrast, is as ready for an F1 drive as Nico Hulkenberg was in 2009, and personally I was disappointed McLaren didn’t push harder for a race drive in 2015 for the Belgian. He has just spent two consecutive years in F1’s two premier league categories, and as a rookie was ranked P2 in each season, winning his debut race on both occasions. That is unprecedented. He is probably now worthy of being dubbed a landmark junior talent, as I found myself writing for Hamilton and Hulkenberg in the past.

      In terms of the Manor seat, Chilton, Rossi, Van der Garde, Sutil and Gutierrez remain the only realistic prospects. Meh…

      1. @countrygent
        Great comment mate. I would imagine they didn’t push to replace Button with him in 2015 because
        a) They need a benchmark against their last year with their new chassis. He would be able to tell the team what changed for the good and what didn’t, while with Alonso + Rookie that’s out of the window. With the task they have at hand that’s a pretty good reason in my view. Plus, he’s quite reliable in terms of bringing the car home and getting some points at that.
        b) I know F1 is no place for sentiments, but just imagine how would this look in the eyes of the public. Magnussen did a solid job for a rookie last year, and getting rid of both Button and him in favour of yes, a promising talent, but still a guy who’s only got a season in each of GP2, WSR, WSR2.0 behind his back would not be met with much understanding, IMO. Yes, this is what happened to Kvyat, but RB have the luxury of having ToroRosso to check their new talent before promoting them to the top-tier team.
        c) Not that I think this was really a reason, but some would definitely say they didn’t want a repeat of 2007.

        Regarding the seat at Manor. For any of the drivers dropped from better teams last season, going there is a definition of the end of their career, regardless of the racecraft displayed, because it just won’t matter. Heikki’s and Petrov’s examples are a good illustration to that. Based on that I would take SUT, GUT and possibly VDG off that list. It is more interesting with Rossi. Wasn’t he planned to join Haas team? In that case it would make sense for him to get some mileage. Chilton? If he brings some money that will help the team, why not. But he’s gone suspiciously off-radar. And Marciello you mentioned earlier – he definitely needs to get more experience, and, forgive me for being cynical, I think he still needs to prove himself in the lower formulas.

        1. @njoydesign – I agree to a point with you ideas about Vandoorne. Whilst ostensibly McLaren would have tried to retain some cross-over, that doesn’t necessarily have to be in the form of a race driver. Pedro de la Rosa’s efforts ensured the 2007 transition from Raikkonen-Montoya to Alonso-Hamilton was smooth, and since Magnussen had no other F1 options, he would he been the reserve regardless of a Belgian promotion, and with McLaren’s simulator being far ahead of all others, he could have felt improvements without actually driving the car. Ironically I think the third factor you speak of is actually the most important! Vandoorne is becoming worthy of being labelled Hamilton-esque, and I see no reason why, if indeed Stoffel could challenge Alonso, that the overt circulatory of history would push Fernando out of F1 after years of spoon-feeding Ferrari. Every man has their limit! And why should Vandoorne be different to Lewis? He has been immense in the junior series and outstanding in the F1 tests he’s done.

          Regarding the Manor seat, Rossi is now off the list: my colleague tell me he’s just signed for Racing Engineering (so that’s Vandoorne, Gasly, Lynn, Marciello, Evans AND Rossi in GP2 next year – F1, it’s time to up your game!). So unless you are happy to put Gutierrez, Sutil and Van der Garde back on the list, its time to announce Max Chilton. Sutil and Van der Garde’s careers are over anyway, so the only thing stopping them from signing for a joyride in a Manor is possibly the aspiration to build a career elsewhere in motorsport (Sutil has been linked to Nissan’s LMP1 programme). Gutierrez is different, a Manor drive would only help galvanize the Ferrari links that will ultimately be the basis of his F1 career from now on, and for me that make him the favourite for the seat…which will probably mean that Chilton is announced in the morning…

          1. @countrygent
            Whilst this is a great point you make about PdLR and the simulator, it is important to note that the changes from 2006 to 2007 were by far not as drastic as what they are facing this year. So I think my point still holds some value. And yeah, I don’t think Alonso would have enjoyed a repeat of 2007)))

            Thanks on the info re GP2. I haven’t had much time lately to follow it closely, thus the faults in my rationale. So no Rossi. How long has he been in GP2 now? is it 4th year now? That’s a while. Next, Sutil’s game really is over, I agree. But I just don’t believe he will want to go for a leisure drive, we might end up with some blue flag marshals finding pieces of glass around their throats… he’s a bit more competitive (or stubborn should I say) IMO and going to other series is the best path for him. VDG… to be honest I don’t care one bit about him. Good point about Gutierezz, will see. Although right now I have a feeling he is going to end up like Gene. But who knows. He does deserve another shot I think. And your last sentence just made me chuckle)))))

  2. If Manor really makes it, then perhaps the rejection of their bid to run the 2014 car might turn out to be a blessing in disguise. The 2015 cars are much faster and Marussias/Manors might have struggled to comply with the 107% rule with their old cars. Anyway, F1 now needs any cars on the grid, no matter how quick or slow they are so good luck to them.

    1. @girts I agree, apart from the fact that at least in early races they’ll use their 2014 car still, albeit slightly remade to comply with the regs. There’s simply no time to prepare the 2015 car, until Barcelona, maybe later

      1. I thought teams could only homologate one chassis during the season. If Manor use a modified 2014 chassis I think they are stuck with it for the season. If I’m incorrect please tell me.

  3. Is it normal for entire teams to be getting added/dropped so close to the start of the season?

    1. US F1 were only taken off the entry list at around the same time in 2010. Not a regular occurrence but it has happened.

    2. The FIA were purposefully delaying the confirmation of the 2015 entry list to give Manor as much time as possible to get back on the grid.

  4. I still have doubts they will be authorized to race, at least in Melbourne, due to the compliance to the 2015 regulations.
    But if they at least participate in the Practice sessions it will be great and a sign that they will race during 2015.

    And by the looks of it, they can can finish in front of McLaren :-D

    1. Seems they have their crash tests booked a day or 2 before all parts have to be shipped for the Australian GP, so they might make it in time.

  5. does anybody have a problem with the point system? there will be only 18 cars and ten will earn points!!! in 2009 there where 20 teams and only eight received points! the points system should take this into account! am i the only one having a problem with this?

    1. sorry, meant to say 20 drivers, not 20 teams!!!!
      (imagine that: 20 teams in F1!!!!)

      1. I would love to have 20 teams in Formula 1!!!!!!!!!!!!

        1. It actually happened, in 1989. Mind you, a lot of the teams were struggling to even qualify, but at least the entry list was filled, unlike today.

        2. @ultimateuzair And go back to the days of pre-qualy, a car called the FA1L, pay drivers coming like colonisers, and “F1 drivers” being hit by the medical car?

          ……You know what? Something like that might be better than today’s F1, hmmmm…..

    2. I don’t think they should change it back to how it was in 2009, It wasn’t changed simply because of the new teams anyway & it was a points system that was changed across a lot of the other FIA backed championships.

      If there going to change anything they should extend the points system so that all cars score points.

      As it is any non-points scorer has there drivers/constructors positions determined by highest result rather than overall consistency through the whole season.
      As it is you can be the slowest guy on the grid & finish 20th in 19 races, Then score 1 11th place finish in a crazy wet race & be placed above drivers that have been faster & finishing well ahead of you in every other race.

      With so much money on the line from championship position things been based off 1 off results as it is just isn’t fair.

      1. @RogerA I agree with this post, I think the best way to give a fair championship position to everyone (even those at the back) is to make it so that all cars score points. Or at the very least expand them to something like 15th or 16th which is an achievable target even for a backmarker. I imagine it would give the teams at the back of the grid more motivation as well, as currently, let’s say you finish 11th in the first race, then for the rest of the season you never finish higher than 12th. Effectively all of your results apart from the first race mean absolutely nothing in terms of the championship. If it weren’t for the contractual agreements they could have had the same championship position from not showing up after race 1. Another advantage is that it would make it actually mean something if a car overtook another one for e.g. 14th position, so perhaps the teams at the back would get slightly more TV coverage and therefore possibly more sponsorship revenue.

        The downside is that it would further devalue statistics like points/number of times finished in the points/etc. for past drivers and teams, but let’s be honest, points have already been hugely devalued over time and aren’t a reliable method of comparing drivers/teams between eras anyway. The other downside is that we wouldn’t have the same excitement from big scraps over the final points scoring positions, however we would have battles outside the top 10 having more significance to compensate. We also wouldn’t get exciting moments where a backmarker manages to score points, but that happens so rarely that it’s not really a significant factor IMO.

        There’s also the question of how the ‘purists’ would react, but with gimmicks like DRS around, is an overhaul in the points system really that much of an issue?

    3. @bgp001ruled

      does anybody have a problem with the point system?

      Yes, but not because of the low numbers of cars this year. I’d like to see all finishing positions recognised by the scoring system:

      How to design a better points system for Formula One

  6. Seriously, will Manor be able to make it?

    Missing you Jules.

  7. I know a lot of people are complaining about Manor being allowed onto the grid because they could be so far off the pace etc but there are so many more positives that can come from this. They could potentially help a future world champion make their mark on F1 as many others have said on here. They will employ something in the region of 200? people so that gives people jobs, and who wouldn’t love to see the plucky little English team pull off a minor miracle and make it to the first race!? I certainly would love to see them there, even if they are plodding around at the back, never know, in a few seasons time they might be a strong midfield team!

  8. Stevens, who raced in the final round of 2014, must obtain a super licence.

    Confused by this, did it expire at the end of last year then?

    1. @george Knowing the FIA, anything is possible!

    2. I was thinking exactly the same thing!

  9. Again, we have the sad situation where the necessary expenditure required to be a race qualifiable F1 team (i.e. meet the 107% qualifying rule and pass stewards vetting) just doesn’t match the income generated by advertising. “Ah ha,” you say, “They will get income from F1 management’s end of 2014 season results”. No, the team has a new owner, meaning F1 management don’t have to pay out, and also the team went into administration, also meaning F1 mangement don’t have to payout.
    There have been comments in the media by respected people in this sport along the lines that there are corporates around who could easily afford to pay for an F1 team, but aren’t interested, and the question is why?
    Well, one reason, and my guess (and yes, I know next to nothing about F1) is a big part of the problem, is there are many countries where hardly anyone actually watches the races, and if people aren’t watching a race then they won’t be seeing sponsors’ names on cars or on the side of the track. The reason being is F1 sold the TV rights for those countries to a Pay-TV company. “Well, of course, that generates more income for F1,” you say. True, and what happens to that money? Is it more less fairly distributed out on a basis like that of “appearance” at a race? By that I mean do teams get paid for lining up at the start line, since people pay to watch a race with a minimum of 20 cars? No, F1 pays out on the basis of pedigree and performance, they expect an F1 team to be supported by advertising.
    So, the situation seems to be F1 expect a team to be able to get the minimum finance necessary to line up at the start line from advertising (again, the rules mean if a team isn’t up to standard then they don’t get to the starting grid), but they have restricted the viewing of the races to the point that teams can’t get that the minimum level of finance necessary to be on the starting grid from advertising.
    As I see it, there are two obvious ways to solve this problem: 1) change the payout system so each car on the starting grid gets “appearance” money which covers the shortfall between advertising revenue and the minimum level of finance needed to race, and no, not paid out at the end of the season, paid out once the final race results are declared; or 2) change the TV broadcast system to encourage lots of people to watch the race.

    1. On the basis that copyright law requires every performer at a concert to be paid at the same rate, and I believe Ferrari get paid for just turning up, that means under copyright law all the other teams should be paid at the same rate as Ferrari, regardless of qualifying performance and regardless of the final race result. That doesn’t mean there can’t be a prize money, but an F1 race is essentially a performance, okay, an unrehearsed performance, and one without a script, but Free-to-Air TV channels can’t just broadcast the races when the rights have been contracted to a Pay-TV company because of copyright reasons, so why is it that the other side of copyright law, paying the performers fairly, isn’t adhered to.

  10. So Manor are in the entry list and I’m guessing that as long as they show up with a rule compliant car they will still be able to get their prize money?

    I wonder if it even matters if they qualify within 107%?

    In fact I wonder if it even matters if they pass scrutineering?

    I’m still cynical that we are witnessing a genuine bid to race and not just ticking boxes to collect prize money.

    1. My understanding is when an F1 team changes owners then the new owners have to wait two years before they are entitled to a payout. For example, Brawn GP won both the World Drivers championship and the World Constructors championship in their only year of operation, but didn’t get a cent of prize money for doing so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.