Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 10 votes

Renault problems are catastrophic


  • Please log in to reply
2897 replies to this topic

#2401 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 257 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 March 2014 - 17:15

Bugatti is German owned and Engineered. IIRC it's under the Volkswagen umbrella. Back on topic Red Bull and Lotus problems with the power unit seem related to installation. I would love to know whether they have an engine mode capable of running effectively for the 500km one needs for a race weekend.

Based on what we have seen so far, I would say no. Some teams have gotten close... but... not close enough...

 

Will they be allowed the reliabilty upgrade mid life span of a PU component? or will it have to be replace at the end of the 5 race life cycle weather that be 1,2,3 or 4 races...?



Advertisement

#2402 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,596 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 01 March 2014 - 17:38

LOL!

 

I mean, has a Mercedes PU actually covered the 2,000Km's like is being claimed? if it has how many of the PU components has actually covered that distance?

 

Yes Mercedes have started to have failures but is this more from trying to break it/over stretch the components to the max, so you can find there failure points... and the likely distruction damaged/work-arounds?

 

I know this is testing and we will never actually find out the true answers but its strange how the failures only happen towards the end of the day, when they have covered quite a few laps...

 

Not sure I get your point, I am commenting in this Renault thread and stating my belief based on the testing so far that the Renault engined cars are the ones with the most flawed engine, and that some of the problems they experience are self inflicted, I also state that no team are free of problems. Only that the Renault engined are the worst of.

 

Claiming or not claiming by teams, manufacturers, team managers, team personnel and drivers should never be seen as an absolute truth. Only which will count is the finishing order after each Grandes Epreuves.

 

But think I have said enough by now, have stated my personal views and opinions agree and disagree at will.

 

:cool:



#2403 Andy35

Andy35
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:09

All this talk about reliability is stage 1

 

After the start of the season we will be in stage 2 where we talk about how they compare on power !

 

Then stage 3 comes where it  becomes apparent that it is all down to which engine is most fuel efficient and all the drivers are driving around conserving fuel and there is no overtaking and we all start screaming 

 

"Burn them burn them"

 

That's how I think it will pan out.  The pre season could actually be more interesting than the actual season.  

 

Lets hope not.  But I am worried.



#2404 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:15

Caterham did 117 laps today...

#2405 EthanM

EthanM
  • Member

  • 2,480 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:22

Caterham did 117 laps today...

 

Caterham did a crapload of super-slow laps

 

I don't know if it's strategy (keep MGU-k off hope enough people retire we get some points albeit 5 laps down) or not but I wouldn't use them as an indication the PU can do its job


Edited by EthanM, 01 March 2014 - 18:22.


#2406 MaxisOne

MaxisOne
  • Member

  • 1,254 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:23

Not when you have a totally new engine design and only a couple of weeks to make it work. In 2015 it would be fine since manufacturers have actually had time to sort out everything.


Everyone signed on the approval line at the beginning and knew the consequences of screwing up and the process required to fix it.

If a manufacturer screwed up and knew they could change the rules later then what's the point of the first set of rules?

Edited by MaxisOne, 01 March 2014 - 18:35.


#2407 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 257 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:24

Caterham did a crapload of super-slow laps

 

I don't know if it's strategy (keep MGU-k off hope enough people retire we get some points albeit 5 laps down) or not but I wouldn't use them as an indication the PU can do its job

Could they do a race distance like that, given the fuel limits?



#2408 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:27

I do think 2 months is too short a time-frame to ask the brand new formula of engines to be ready. The teams get to test their cars throughout the whole season. Not saying it should be the same for engines. But for new engines more time would be needed. Instead of Feb 28, we could have had Mar 31 or Apr 15 for this year. Feb 28 or Mar 15 could have been had for next year and Feb 28 for the year after.  Seeing one manufacturer (when you have only three) fail completely does not do any good for the sport.



#2409 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 9,865 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:29

it  becomes apparent that it is all down to which engine is most fuel efficient and all the drivers are driving around conserving fuel and there is no overtaking

 

I don't understand why would there be any less overtaking if they have to drive conserving fuel.



#2410 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:30

I don't understand why would there be any less overtaking if they have to drive conserving fuel.

 

Overtaking will probs use more fuel.



#2411 EthanM

EthanM
  • Member

  • 2,480 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 01 March 2014 - 18:42

Could they do a race distance like that, given the fuel limits?

 

sure they could, they would just be slow



#2412 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 01 March 2014 - 19:27

I do think 2 months is too short a time-frame to ask the brand new formula of engines to be ready. The teams get to test their cars throughout the whole season. Not saying it should be the same for engines. But for new engines more time would be needed. Instead of Feb 28, we could have had Mar 31 or Apr 15 for this year. Feb 28 or Mar 15 could have been had for next year and Feb 28 for the year after.  Seeing one manufacturer (when you have only three) fail completely does not do any good for the sport.

I agree, however they didn't have 2 months to get a brand new engine ready.



#2413 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 01 March 2014 - 19:51

Why do you hate Caterham so much ? They do a far better job than RBR at keeping their car running, at a fraction of the budget.
I think that this should be supported.

#2414 wingwalker

wingwalker
  • Member

  • 6,333 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 01 March 2014 - 20:00

Who hates Caterham? Everybody seems to be supporting them (I sure am) but they are slow, pointing this out is not hating them.



#2415 MustangSally

MustangSally
  • Member

  • 372 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 02 March 2014 - 10:19

"If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong"

(can't remember who the hell said this)

 

 

It was Oscar Wilde who said, "When two people agree, one of them is unnecessary'.

 

However, this thread has now polarised into best and worst scenarios and I can only see that evidence points to the latter. So, what next for Renault?

Pull out or pile everything in?'

 

I thought that Pat Symonds comments were quite interesting when asked about Renault's problems. Along with the general downsizing of Renault Sport, he commented that 'they probably didn't have the budget'.

 

Now, one suspects, Rob White will have to go back to Renault board and ask for the same level of people and resources that its competitors have piled in. However, it's a difficult one. What kind of financial hit is Renault taking for the current debacle? I can't believe that Fernandes or Tost are going to shell out 20m for engines that don't work. Lotus was already trying to negotiate the price down. And in a  catastrophic season, how many customers would defect to other manufacturers? Cosworth decided it needed at least three teams to make an F1 project viable.

 

When KERS came along, Williams bought a hybrid power company. At the moment, Renault is trying to deal with a myriad outside suppliers. Honda is throwing money at McLaren as a dedicated works team, emulating Merc and Ferrari. Is Renault prepared to buy back into Enstone, for example?

 

There is no doubt Renault could fix things, but will take money. Or will Renault simply cut their losses?



#2416 ssilviu

ssilviu
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 02 March 2014 - 10:34

Renaults engines are the most expensive. And they have the biggest number of clients ... How is it possible that ... "they probably didn't have the budget"?


Edited by ssilviu, 02 March 2014 - 10:36.


#2417 kraduk

kraduk
  • Member

  • 303 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 02 March 2014 - 10:44

Renaults engines are the most expensive. And they have the biggest number of clients ... How is it possible that ... "they probably didn't have the budget"?

 

revenue doenst = budget



#2418 turssi

turssi
  • Member

  • 1,556 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 02 March 2014 - 14:25

They need to allocate a fifth of their revenue just for upkeep of their directors and administrators. Another 20% to shareholders. That leaves 60 percent for maintaining the installations and operations.

Also the F1 program is probably running at a deficit and funded partly by marketing. So it's easy to imagine the company president limit the available resources.

Anyway, the Renault power unit problems to me are now identified as linked to the Kinetic ERS and the re-application of the recovered energy. Ferrari pilots have said that they feel that the driveability needs to be improved, while Merc seems to have this under control. I'd say it's catastrophic for Renault not to be able to run the KERS to 100%.

#2419 enotsne

enotsne
  • New Member

  • 3 posts
  • Joined: February 14

Posted 02 March 2014 - 14:42

Hello again.

Like to say it was a great test and we now go to Melbourne full of enthusiasm, but alas - not the case.

To be fair. Many of the problems were not Renault/PU related, but most of the problems we faced involved fire/heat damage which is time consuming to rectify and in our case damaged components we wouldn't normally carry in numbers to a test.

We used a new exhaust system for this test and it failed at the collector on the first day and caused some damage to the bodywork and the cooling system. We fitted the existing exhaust design that had been trouble free and that failed in the same spot causing a bit more damage.

During the break between tests, the internal side pod ducting was changed to duct ambient airflow around the ICE (it was previously 'post radiator' airflow). It appears that by ducting lower temperature air over the engine (and the exhaust), it altered the expansion of the first runner, causing weld failure.

We borrowed Red Bulls vast collection of power tools and hammers and modified the radiator surround and partially blocked the ambient air duct and it seems to have solved that issue. A more elegant solution should be sorted by Melbourne.

Todays running ended early and saw our first ICE failure but we are yet to find out what failed. Its definitely internal and terminal but may be related to fire damage on Friday that damaged the oil cooler resulting in the computer killing the ICE.

On a more positive note, it appears from our limited running that the ERS driveability issues have been improved substantially and other teams have clocked up a few miles without any ERS hardware failures. Our simulations and calculations show we should be in the game as far as pace and fuel efficiency is concerned...

I believe a new coffee machine was ordered back home for the long nights ahead but apparently it caught fire. Go figure.

Edited by enotsne, 02 March 2014 - 14:58.


Advertisement

#2420 OO7

OO7
  • Member

  • 9,379 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 02 March 2014 - 14:52

Thanks for sharing enotsne. :up:



#2421 wingwalker

wingwalker
  • Member

  • 6,333 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 02 March 2014 - 15:13

Enotsne, you're a star. Thanks so much and good luck!


Edited by wingwalker, 02 March 2014 - 15:14.


#2422 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 02 March 2014 - 15:31

Hello again.

Like to say it was a great test and we now go to Melbourne full of enthusiasm, but alas - not the case.

To be fair. Many of the problems were not Renault/PU related, but most of the problems we faced involved fire/heat damage which is time consuming to rectify and in our case damaged components we wouldn't normally carry in numbers to a test.

We used a new exhaust system for this test and it failed at the collector on the first day and caused some damage to the bodywork and the cooling system. We fitted the existing exhaust design that had been trouble free and that failed in the same spot causing a bit more damage.

During the break between tests, the internal side pod ducting was changed to duct ambient airflow around the ICE (it was previously 'post radiator' airflow). It appears that by ducting lower temperature air over the engine (and the exhaust), it altered the expansion of the first runner, causing weld failure.

We borrowed Red Bulls vast collection of power tools and hammers and modified the radiator surround and partially blocked the ambient air duct and it seems to have solved that issue. A more elegant solution should be sorted by Melbourne.

Todays running ended early and saw our first ICE failure but we are yet to find out what failed. Its definitely internal and terminal but may be related to fire damage on Friday that damaged the oil cooler resulting in the computer killing the ICE.

On a more positive note, it appears from our limited running that the ERS driveability issues have been improved substantially and other teams have clocked up a few miles without any ERS hardware failures. Our simulations and calculations show we should be in the game as far as pace and fuel efficiency is concerned...

I believe a new coffee machine was ordered back home for the long nights ahead but apparently it caught fire. Go figure.

 

Is there a real chance that at least one of the cars will hit the chequered flag in Melbourne?



#2423 AlexS

AlexS
  • Member

  • 2,568 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 02 March 2014 - 15:35

 I believe a new coffee machine was ordered back home for the long nights ahead but apparently it caught fire. Go figure.

 

Hahaha!



#2424 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,911 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 March 2014 - 15:46

Enotsne your postings are pure gold! Best of luck for the coming season!



#2425 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,578 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 March 2014 - 15:49

Is there a real chance that at least one of the cars will hit the chequered flag in Melbourne?

Well, i think they keep it next to the starting line and Pastor Maldonado is on the grid, so...



#2426 opplock

opplock
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 March 2014 - 15:56

They need to allocate a fifth of their revenue just for upkeep of their directors and administrators. Another 20% to shareholders. That leaves 60 percent for maintaining the installations and operations.

 

I assume you are talking about Renault. After wondering how I have failed to invest in such a profitable company I looked at the published 2012 accounts for Renault Group. Revenue - EURO 41.3 billion, Net Income after Tax - EURO 1.7 billion, Dividends (payments to shareholders) EURO 0.4 billion.

 

20% of 41.3 billion is 8.25 billion, not 0.4 billion. What is the source of your information?



#2427 turssi

turssi
  • Member

  • 1,556 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 02 March 2014 - 16:08

@opplock: corporate talk in general. If their revenue is like that on the company scale, one can only imagine the internal pressure on better resource management. And we're not even talking about the F1 motor program!

#2428 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 1,098 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 02 March 2014 - 16:54

It shows how much Renault needs a real dynamic dyno that can really put cooling and exhausts in the test... 
 

Hello again.

Like to say it was a great test and we now go to Melbourne full of enthusiasm, but alas - not the case.

To be fair. Many of the problems were not Renault/PU related, but most of the problems we faced involved fire/heat damage which is time consuming to rectify and in our case damaged components we wouldn't normally carry in numbers to a test.

We used a new exhaust system for this test and it failed at the collector on the first day and caused some damage to the bodywork and the cooling system. We fitted the existing exhaust design that had been trouble free and that failed in the same spot causing a bit more damage.

During the break between tests, the internal side pod ducting was changed to duct ambient airflow around the ICE (it was previously 'post radiator' airflow). It appears that by ducting lower temperature air over the engine (and the exhaust), it altered the expansion of the first runner, causing weld failure.

We borrowed Red Bulls vast collection of power tools and hammers and modified the radiator surround and partially blocked the ambient air duct and it seems to have solved that issue. A more elegant solution should be sorted by Melbourne.

Todays running ended early and saw our first ICE failure but we are yet to find out what failed. Its definitely internal and terminal but may be related to fire damage on Friday that damaged the oil cooler resulting in the computer killing the ICE.

On a more positive note, it appears from our limited running that the ERS driveability issues have been improved substantially and other teams have clocked up a few miles without any ERS hardware failures. Our simulations and calculations show we should be in the game as far as pace and fuel efficiency is concerned...

I believe a new coffee machine was ordered back home for the long nights ahead but apparently it caught fire. Go figure.


Edited by Alburaq, 02 March 2014 - 16:57.


#2429 wingwalker

wingwalker
  • Member

  • 6,333 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 02 March 2014 - 17:01

Also, if a toaster catches fire get in touch with Peter Windsor, he has plenty of them laying around.



#2430 paulrobs

paulrobs
  • Member

  • 518 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 03 March 2014 - 00:33

There are actually 4 2-day in-season tests allowed this year (on the Tues/Weds after the GPs in Bahrain, Spain, Silverstone and Abu Dhabi (which isn't really an in-season test now they have moved that to the final race) so that might help them! (although I think they have scrapped all the straight line testing as well as the young drivers test)

 

Yes, realised this when I checked elewhere. Cheers. So many rule changes this year to keep up with!



#2431 paulrobs

paulrobs
  • Member

  • 518 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 03 March 2014 - 00:40

How do we know that Enotsne is someone who has inside knowledge? Sorry to be suspicious but I am I guess. Seemed to be well informed but it could be anyone really.



#2432 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 00:45

Hello again.
Like to say it was a great test and we now go to Melbourne full of enthusiasm, but alas - not the case.
To be fair. Many of the problems were not Renault/PU related, but most of the problems we faced involved fire/heat damage which is time consuming to rectify and in our case damaged components we wouldn't normally carry in numbers to a test.
We used a new exhaust system for this test and it failed at the collector on the first day and caused some damage to the bodywork and the cooling system. We fitted the existing exhaust design that had been trouble free and that failed in the same spot causing a bit more damage.
During the break between tests, the internal side pod ducting was changed to duct ambient airflow around the ICE (it was previously 'post radiator' airflow). It appears that by ducting lower temperature air over the engine (and the exhaust), it altered the expansion of the first runner, causing weld failure.
We borrowed Red Bulls vast collection of power tools and hammers and modified the radiator surround and partially blocked the ambient air duct and it seems to have solved that issue. A more elegant solution should be sorted by Melbourne.
Todays running ended early and saw our first ICE failure but we are yet to find out what failed. Its definitely internal and terminal but may be related to fire damage on Friday that damaged the oil cooler resulting in the computer killing the ICE.
On a more positive note, it appears from our limited running that the ERS driveability issues have been improved substantially and other teams have clocked up a few miles without any ERS hardware failures. Our simulations and calculations show we should be in the game as far as pace and fuel efficiency is concerned...
I believe a new coffee machine was ordered back home for the long nights ahead but apparently it caught fire. Go figure.


Thanks for sharing that, so informative!

Pleased to hear the ERS situation has improved, was hoping that was the case based on some decent times put in by Renault powered teams.

Good luck in Melbourne.

#2433 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 00:46

How do we know that Enotsne is someone who has inside knowledge? Sorry to be suspicious but I am I guess. Seemed to be well informed but it could be anyone really.


His/her last post was too closely aligned with events that followed to be anything other than genuine, IMO.

#2434 wonk123

wonk123
  • Member

  • 966 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 03 March 2014 - 01:16

How do we know that Enotsne is someone who has inside knowledge? Sorry to be suspicious but I am I guess. Seemed to be well informed but it could be anyone really.

He could be santa claus for all I care, his posts are informative, and seem to have explanations that we hadn't heard about (eg reason for exhaust failures). Plus he is funny! :clap:



#2435 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 03 March 2014 - 07:47

How do we know that Enotsne is someone who has inside knowledge? Sorry to be suspicious but I am I guess. Seemed to be well informed but it could be anyone really.

 

If he is not an insider, then he has a crystall ball and great knowledge about F1, cause his posts are simply great.

 

 

 

Ok, on serious matter, his nick says all!!!!! :rotfl:


Edited by Shiroo, 03 March 2014 - 07:47.


#2436 Mercedestorque1

Mercedestorque1
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 03 March 2014 - 08:02

Why do you hate Caterham so much ? They do a far better job than RBR at keeping their car running, at a fraction of the budget.
I think that this should be supported.

:up:



#2437 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 437 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 03 March 2014 - 09:29

How do we know that Enotsne is someone who has inside knowledge? Sorry to be suspicious but I am I guess. Seemed to be well informed but it could be anyone really.

No way. The things he describes are so detailed and fit so well with what have been seen the last days...he is definetly an insider.

 

I'd love Ferrari inside info would go out in the same detail (not that I have anything to criticize, Iridescent's informations are very welcome, but they are much more reserved than Enotse's).



#2438 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 479 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:14

Thanks again enotsne! :up:

 

It seems the actual problems are more or less under control @ Lotus, but the drivers don't look too optimistic right now based on their comments.



#2439 inxs

inxs
  • New Member

  • 7 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:14

I'm shocked anyone was advocating Renault get given more time to fix their engines, when for the last 5 years probably their biggest advantage has been their engines ability to exploit the EBD, which the other teams could not match because of engine restrictions. And now when the shoe is on the other foot, they cry that Renault should have special rules to let them fix the engine? Absolutely hilarious. They must suffer as the other teams suffered for years while Redbull exploited the rules and dominated.



Advertisement

#2440 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 1,197 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:21

His/her last post was too closely aligned with events that followed to be anything other than genuine, IMO.

 

I agree...unlike that other insider which was proven not so reliable.



#2441 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:27

I'm shocked anyone was advocating Renault get given more time to fix their engines, when for the last 5 years probably their biggest advantage has been their engines ability to exploit the EBD, which the other teams could not match because of engine restrictions. And now when the shoe is on the other foot, they cry that Renault should have special rules to let them fix the engine? Absolutely hilarious. They must suffer as the other teams suffered for years while Redbull exploited the rules and dominated.

Ferrari did get special permission to modify their engine to make it more reliable I seem to remember, but this resulted in a slight decrease in power I believe. With the issues affecting so many teams I can see why permission would be granted, although I don't agree with it totally. Renault haven't done a good enough job up until now with their engine development it seems, but that will always be the shortfall in any industry. Success in F1 is very much about the right package at the right time and it is a bit of a kick in the teeth to Mercedes at Brixworth I feel if Renault were to get more time. Then again it could have a massive effect on the season if the Renault teams suffer super bad reliability and won't be fun to watch. I want to see Red Bull fighting and losing, not sitting at the side of the track and waiting for 2015. :)



#2442 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 1,919 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:51

Ferrari did get special permission to modify their engine to make it more reliable I seem to remember, but this resulted in a slight decrease in power I believe. With the issues affecting so many teams I can see why permission would be granted, although I don't agree with it totally.

I cannot see anything wrong with allowing Renault to request/be granted a reliability update - after all it is part of the rules package.
The fact that Ferrari where allowed such an update and the suggestion they lost power as a result shows that if properly policed it should be possible to prevent a performance update to be gained as a side effect. I assume the FIA can request any data they want (such as dyno results) to verify the results of the update do not break the rules.

Edited by ExFlagMan, 03 March 2014 - 10:51.


#2443 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,658 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:58

It was policed in a manner that all engines were practically equal and thus diminishing the role the engine played. Red Bull had lots of fun in this time, but F1 is also about the engines, though anyone watching since mid '00 could think otherwise. I remember Benetton buying Ligier to get a hold of the Renault V10 instead of the Ford V8. Also, you had a lot of engine builders, so the problems of one engine did not affect one third of the grid. 

 

I think Renault will get on top of things, but I'm afraid the FIA will hamper Mercedes and Ferrari (and perhaps Honda) in the process.



#2444 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:52

The fact that Ferrari where allowed such an update and the suggestion they lost power as a result shows that if properly policed it should be possible to prevent a performance update to be gained as a side effect.

Indeed, that was part of the reason I mentioned it :)



#2445 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,225 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 13:37

This may be a stupid suggestion as I don't really know how these things work, but I was wondering if the FIA could collect some kind of telemetry data from the Renault powered teams (well, all teams, for that matter) to provide some understanding of the performance of the PU. Then, if reliability updates are requested, they can check to see that the new version has not been upgraded in terms of performance too. Is that possible?



#2446 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 3,049 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 13:47

So, they will still be able to modify what ever caused it on grounds of safety, nothing effected by homologation [/size]closing.


yep, as I understand it. Safety, reliability or economy are all good.

#2447 oetzi

oetzi
  • Member

  • 3,049 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 March 2014 - 13:50

"The first precept was never to accept a thing as true until I knew it as such without a single doubt." - Rene Descartes
 
Do you have anything to say about the content of my post?  (# 2353)

yep. Descartes never met his own criterion.

#2448 HoldenRT

HoldenRT
  • Member

  • 5,619 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 03 March 2014 - 14:22

I'm shocked anyone was advocating Renault get given more time to fix their engines, when for the last 5 years probably their biggest advantage has been their engines ability to exploit the EBD, which the other teams could not match because of engine restrictions. And now when the shoe is on the other foot, they cry that Renault should have special rules to let them fix the engine? Absolutely hilarious. They must suffer as the other teams suffered for years while Redbull exploited the rules and dominated.

 

People always find new ways to rewrite history.  I'm not talking about this years engines or the rules or not..

 

I'm talking about why RBR dominated.  It's so silly that each person always has a new reason or excuse, and it's always to fit their agenda.

 

Redbull's turning point happened in 2009.. and it wasn't due to anything on the engine side.

 

They were the best team of the non DDD teams and then in the second half of the season, tacked on an improvised DDD themselves and dominated the second half of the season.  Start of the new season, 2010 they now had a car built from scratch to accommodate the DDD.  From then on.. there were lots of 'trick devices' that people used or not.. exhaust blowing, F Ducts and lots of other stuff.

 

But what remained a constant from 2009 until now is that under these regulations with the narrower high rear wing, and the new front wing and everything else.. Redbull have been the most aerodynamic advanced team.  It's the aero that has made Redbull so strong, and that's usually Newey's strong point.  In the first few seasons, the Renault engine was actually classed as a liability and there was talk of switching to Merc.  Last season, the aero had become so advanced that even at Spa and Monza, they had good straight line speeds and downforce.

 

With the aerodynamics that Redbull have had, they would have won championships with Ferrari or Merc engine.. so I don't know where this engine factor comes into it.  It helped in some ways (traction, fuel economy) but as always.. you have compromises in one area and strengths in the other.  Redbull's strength is aerodynamics and what you say only applies to 2011/2012 onwards.. and Redbull have been strong since the rules changed in 2009.
 



#2449 HoldenRT

HoldenRT
  • Member

  • 5,619 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 03 March 2014 - 14:28

It was policed in a manner that all engines were practically equal and thus diminishing the role the engine played. Red Bull had lots of fun in this time, but F1 is also about the engines, though anyone watching since mid '00 could think otherwise. I remember Benetton buying Ligier to get a hold of the Renault V10 instead of the Ford V8. Also, you had a lot of engine builders, so the problems of one engine did not affect one third of the grid. 

 

I think Renault will get on top of things, but I'm afraid the FIA will hamper Mercedes and Ferrari (and perhaps Honda) in the process.

 

Renault and Ferrari and Mercedes all run by the same rules.. and there's even been reports that Ferrari could be down big amounts of HP to Mercedes.  Does this mean it helps or hurts Ferrari?

 

Edd Straw said he expects all teams to make reliability upgrades to their engine during the season and I agree with him.  Regardless of what has happened in the last month.. think about the rule changes, the limited testing and the fact that they all did this last time already.

 

So it seems ESPECIALLY likely.. that they will do it in 2014.  Why?  Because the engines have been frozen and they haven't even run a race yet!  Race feedback?  They don't have any.  The rule applies to ALL teams.. not just Renault.  And most likely.. ALL teams will take advantage of it.



#2450 redviper22

redviper22
  • Member

  • 89 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 03 March 2014 - 15:40

People always find new ways to rewrite history.  I'm not talking about this years engines or the rules or not..

 

I'm talking about why RBR dominated.  It's so silly that each person always has a new reason or excuse, and it's always to fit their agenda.

 

Redbull's turning point happened in 2009.. and it wasn't due to anything on the engine side.

 

They were the best team of the non DDD teams and then in the second half of the season, tacked on an improvised DDD themselves and dominated the second half of the season.  Start of the new season, 2010 they now had a car built from scratch to accommodate the DDD.  From then on.. there were lots of 'trick devices' that people used or not.. exhaust blowing, F Ducts and lots of other stuff.

 

But what remained a constant from 2009 until now is that under these regulations with the narrower high rear wing, and the new front wing and everything else.. Redbull have been the most aerodynamic advanced team.  It's the aero that has made Redbull so strong, and that's usually Newey's strong point.  In the first few seasons, the Renault engine was actually classed as a liability and there was talk of switching to Merc.  Last season, the aero had become so advanced that even at Spa and Monza, they had good straight line speeds and downforce.

 

With the aerodynamics that Redbull have had, they would have won championships with Ferrari or Merc engine.. so I don't know where this engine factor comes into it.  It helped in some ways (traction, fuel economy) but as always.. you have compromises in one area and strengths in the other.  Redbull's strength is aerodynamics and what you say only applies to 2011/2012 onwards.. and Redbull have been strong since the rules changed in 2009.
 

 

aerodynamics and engines are related. If Red Bull had the Merc/Ferrari engine, do you think they would have been able to package the car so tightly? Would those engines have the necessary maps to fully exploit the EBD?

 

You mention the top speed in Monza and Spa last year. Perhaps you noticed that Red Bull were running a much shallower rear wing than anyone else. This is because they managed to generate more downforce through the diffuser (thanks to the EBD sealing the edges).