Why not Ferrari in top tier Endurance racing?

[DanVB]

Why isn't Ferrari in the top tier of sports car endurance racing - classes like LMP1, Group C, GTP, etc? A purpose-built, just for racing prototype like the Lola Aston Martin B09/60 or Peugeot 908. Sleek, powerful beauties!
They haven't flelded such a car since the 512.
Sure, they have the 430 in GT2, but that's a roadcar class. F1? Limited appeal that does not directly relate to the publicly sold road cars. F1 is dead in the states also.
I heard possible Ferrari participation in the Rolex DP series.
Any thoughts?

[LeonOfTheDead]

Prototypes are out of questions, period.
At best they have GT1, with the Maserati, which made more sense than racing with the Ferrari name.
In the future it will still be so, after all prototypes don't generate enough profits as an ad campaign especially in Europe, which is a shame.

[Ferrer]

By the way the last Ferrari prototype was the 333SP, wasn't it?

[cmcpokey]

not the NART 512 BB?

edit: you are right, i am wrong. i was thinking of the BB LM, and the 333 was several years after it.

[csl177]

Pure economics. If your brand doesn't require slogging it out in a NASCAR-fied DPT series and you have good participation in the customer based Ferrari challenge, why spend where you don't need to?

Ferrari currently has customer teams running GT, and that's enough. And yes, the 333SP was the last factory effort, though most cars were run by privateers.

[DanVB]

You are correct, the 333 was the last Ferrari entry, albeit an open top.
Most Americans, including me, cannot understand the importance of F1. It costs a HUGE amount of money and bears no resemblance to road cars. Is there a direct payback?
Too bad about no Ferrari LMP1. It would probably be an awesome looking, screamingly fast red car!

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by DanVB

Most Americans, including me, cannot understand the importance of F1. It costs a HUGE amount of money and bears no resemblance to road cars. Is there a direct payback?

Just think about the name of their gearbox: F1.

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead

Just think about the name of their gearbox: F1.

Did paddle shifting originate in F1? If it did, then I guess that paddle shifters coming to road cars was the last piece of technology to migrate from F1 to road cars. Maybe traction control before that?

[DanVB]

F1 has not been popular in the USA. With a lengthy absence in the US market, and now once again, a majority of the fanbase was lost. The new American F1 car will probably not change this much especially if a non-American is signed as driver and the power being a British Cosworth. A race in the states needs to added again to bolster success.
Besides, all F1 cars look almost identical these days, blurring the identities of he cars. The different prototypes on the contrary are easily recognized because of their distinct looks.
Again, its sad that more manufacturers especially Ferrari don't invest in LMP1 or similar. Its a logical, high-tech extension of the products they sell.

[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

Did paddle shifting originate in F1? If it did, then I guess that paddle shifters coming to road cars was the last piece of technology to migrate from F1 to road cars. Maybe traction control before that?

Yes. It debuted in the late eighties (89?) in a Ferrari and the rest is history as they say.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by DanVB

F1 has not been popular in the USA. With a lengthy absence in the US market, and now once again, a majority of the fanbase was lost. The new American F1 car will probably not change this much especially if a non-American is signed as driver and the power being a British Cosworth. A race in the states needs to added again to bolster success.
Besides, all F1 cars look almost identical these days, blurring the identities of he cars. The different prototypes on the contrary are easily recognized because of their distinct looks.
Again, its sad that more manufacturers especially Ferrari don't invest in LMP1 or similar. Its a logical, high-tech extension of the products they sell.

You see , if Americans need an american team with an american driver and an american engine to be interested in F1, maybe they aren't actually interested in F1.

Regarding the look of the cars, yes they do seem all the same, to an untrained eye. Surely the livery makes the main difference, but honestly that's the same for many prototypes for someone who isn't that much into Le Mans, LMS or ALMS.
I don't think that's the problem with F1, but rather the lack of action and genuine motorsporting.

As they sustained during the summer, F1 and Ferrari are closely tied, and so Ferrari's rivals.
Enthusiasts or fans don't follow the series but the teams and the drivers.
So it isn't a matter of people following F1 and so Ferrari receiving enough exposition, but rather people following Ferrari (and other teams) and giving a reason to be watched to F1.
After all, if I want to watch some real motorsports I'd watch something else.

So, at the end of the day, F1 still makes a lot of sense.

Yes, American people don't bother so much about it, but they still buy for a Ferrari or a Lamborghini (which basically always lacked of a decent racing program) when looking for a new exotic.

[togos452]

Ferrari doesn't want spec engine/chassis formula in F1. They might build another Le Mans Prototype, but they didn't update the 333 SP enough earlier this decade.

1993 - 2000 Ferrari 333 SP - Images, Specifications and Information

US Grand Prix Engineering (USGPE) will use Cosworth engines.

USF1

Cosworth - Heritage & History

[henk4]

Some people attributed rather much importance to the fact that the LeMans 24 Hours was started this year by nobody else than Luca de Montezemolo, sparking the rumours that Ferrari was considering a comeback. IMHO the days of F1 the way Ferrari wants it, are numbered, although the arrival of tiny Todt at the helm of FIA may delay the process a little.

[DanVB]

The Rolex series, either the DPs or the GTs is a prime example of great competition involving several different makes of engine and chassis manufacturers. It makes for great racing and any combo is capable of winning any given race day. It is for this reason I watch and also I enjoy seeing Ford or Chevy beating Porsche or Lexus or whoever.
The formula of displacement, weight, engine restrictors has equalized the competition and has resulted in great racing at a very reasonable cost.
Should I expect the same for F1? No, of course not, but I can’t see how spending $300 to $500 million a year benefits a company like Ferrari in the long run. They are rumored to be having financial problems and I wonder if they are getting their money’s worth in F1 or is it just a super expensive social club for the elite.
Ferrari is entrenched in F1 and will probably go broke and close before they pull out of the series.
BTW, most Americans who buy Ferraris or Lambos do so because of the prestige, a status symbol, not because of they love the brand or are motorheads. Most don’t have a clue about the pedigree or racing history for that matter.

[LeonOfTheDead]

Originally Posted by DanVB

No, of course not, but I can’t see how spending $300 to $500 million a year benefits a company like Ferrari in the long run. They are rumored to be having financial problems and I wonder if they are getting their money’s worth in F1 or is it just a super expensive social club for the elite.
Ferrari is entrenched in F1 and will probably go broke and close before they pull out of the series.

Precisely the spent about 450 M $ every year, so far.
This year they are going to earn less money because of the market, but they don't have financial problem at all. It's a tight situation right now, for everyone, and that's all.

Originally Posted by DanVB

BTW, most Americans who buy Ferraris or Lambos do so because of the prestige, a status symbol, not because of they love the brand or are motorheads. Most don’t have a clue about the pedigree or racing history for that matter.

That prestige came from motorsports, and mainly F1 for as regards Ferrari.
Talking about Lamborghini, that's a funny argument. Without considering what Lamborghini is and what that it's selling now, I think a good part of its fame, exactly among those who look for a status symbol, was just related to the fact they were the pricer alternative to the other Italian supercar maker.
I remember when I saw a documentary about rich people from LA I think, and there was this gentleman insulting a Ferrari passing on the street, yelling "not enough rich to buy a Lamborghini?!"
Now, some Lamborghini may even be more expensive than a Ferrari, I suppose that has much to do with the fact they also sell way less and demands for a mostly by-hand assembly, which costs a lot.
Having visited and knowing both, I think the price it's the last thing you need to compare those cars.
But I digress.

My point is that even if right now people buy Ferrari just because of the "prestige", that status symbol comes straights from their racing heritage, even if people don't watch the F1 races, I guess they did their homeworks before of deciding to call the gearbox "F1", or a limited edition model "16M", or again writing on each car how many F1 constructor championships the won lately.

iirc, despite the current situation, 2 billions people watch every F1 race, can we say the same for any other form of motorsports? Unfortunately not.
I'm pretty sure that if (in the unreal realm) Ferrari would have officially joined ALMS or LMS next year, the audience would have been twice as much as it is now, still way lower than F1's.
It would take some years of sponsors paying less and F1 still being perceived as the pinnacle of motorsports before people start considering other form of motorsports to watch, and therefore demanding more sponsors, more money, more costs and here we go again.

Ferrari doesn't spend (didn't) all that money for the sake of it, it could do that because much more was coming in, between sponsorships and revenues.
IIRC at the time of Marlboro, Ferrari gained about 250 M € each season from that brand. So half the cost is covered in a snap.

Does it make sense? Rather then Ferrari spending all that money, I think the tobacco company had even more reasons to spent them, as they knew they were going to earn much more out of it. So much more, that eve after the ban of tobacco sponsorships, Marlboro payed Ferrari even for the following season, as people were used to see a bar code instead of the brand logo, and so the ad would have still worked.

Just move the interest of a main automaker to a cheaper for of motorsports, and that category will instantly become more expensive. Just have a look at the FIA GT after the entrance of Maserati.
I'll have a look to find out how much it cost to design and run the MC12, now I'm pretty curious. Surely a good point is that the design last many seasons.