The F1 comparison is nonsense anyway, since the car in motorsports is far, far more important to a driver's success than a cyclist's bike or helmet. Beyond the marketing bullshit, there's very little that differentiates the top-of-the-line bicycles from each other. In fact I would be willing to make the hypothesis, that no cyclist in the last 20 years has won a race thanks to his bike, nor lost it because of it. (not counting mechanical problems).
The Team UK bikes are a little different, and I criticised their secrecy during the Olympics also, but I would be shocked if they really made a difference. Do you really think the British know more about aerodynamics and carbon fiber than German, French, American, Korean, etc. billion-dollar multinational companies? Not to mention that the rules what bicycle designs can be in official races don't even allow for any radical changes.