43 replies to this topic

[SophieB]

Renault to start 2018 F1 season in compromised spec for reliability
 

The focus for all its teams will be on ensuring reliability for its Melbourne-spec, before performance upgrades come with the second and third engines on each car.

"We have decided voluntarily to make some compromises for engine number one in order to make sure that we have got the right platform," Renault F1 managing director Cyril Abiteboul told Autosport.
"If you come to the first race and you start to have reliability problems, then that is not just that race - it compromises the whole season. You cannot afford to do that.
"It is about setting the right baseline, having the right platform and building a plan for the season - trying in particular to synchronise development at the factory with the introduction of new engines because we are very limited.
"The fewer engines you have the more rigid you need to be in the implementation of performance. So the focus is very much on reliability."

[FullOppositeLock]

Also said this:

“Our target is more or less to start in Melbourne with the same performance level as we finished in Abu Dhabi – which is actually quite a decent performance baseline,” he said.

“And then we want to make it much more reliable, and make it in a way that we can extract the power in a consistent and sustainable manner – and not have to turn down the engine because of reliability or temperature concerns. That is the baseline.

“Clearly power unit number two will be a step and power unit three will be another step.”

When asked how much potential there was for much talked-about qualifying engine modes, Abiteboul said: “I am really curious to see what is left with the qualifying modes now that there have been a number of clampdowns on fuel and oil. Let’s see.

“We have an extra performance mode for qualifying. Let’s see. I don’t want to say too much about this at this moment in time.”

Kill me now please

[Risil]

So Round 8 of 21 is the French GP in late June. I think they'll be breaking the seals on those engines (or whatever it is you do now) before then. Probably around the time that Fernando Alonso flukes and scraps his way into the championship lead, 2012-style.

 

It'll give us something to talk about, right?

[Joseki]

Abu Dhabi 2017 power with optimal reliability and "magic button" is surely a good starting point, I don't get the negativity (unless someone was expecting miracles in 4 months).

 

Obviously track will tell the truth, but it doesn't sound bad.

Edited by Joseki, 25 February 2018 - 20:39.

[TomNokoe]

I think they are bluffing, just a little bit. I seem to remember similar lines in the past. Renault have never been one to shout from the hills about their engine performance. Even last year, they made giant leaps early on through simple fixes and software improvements, but it was only known after the fact, no "pre-upgrade hype", etc. Just diligent, small steps.

However, this does prove how utterly ridiculous the 3-engine rule is.

Hopefully they have a more positive outlook in Australia after a positive 2 weeks of testing, otherwise the championship fight will be a repeat of 2017.

Edited by TomNokoe, 25 February 2018 - 20:44.

[Redback]

I think they are bluffing, just a little bit. I seem to remember similar lines in the past. Renault have never been one to shout from the hills about their engine performance. Even last year, they made giant leaps early on through simple fixes and software improvements, but it was only known after the fact, no "pre-upgrade hype", etc. Just diligent, small steps.

However, this does prove how utterly ridiculous the 3-engine rule is.

Hopefully they have a more positive outlook in Australia after a positive 2 weeks of testing, otherwise the championship fight will be a repeat of 2017.

There's a reason for that isn't there? 

 

Had it not been for Honda setting a new benchmark for how badly an engine can perform, Renault's efforts would have been in the spotlight.  I hope they sent Honda a thank-you card.

 

The Abu Dhabi 2017 power level wasn't much to write home about either though was it?  As I recall they had to turn the engines down for the whole weekend, just so the the Renault-powered cars could make the end of the race.

 

Certainly it was significantly down on the Mexican level (which was admittedly a reliability disaster).

 

Renault have had a history during this engine formula of over-promising and under-delivering.  All the talk from them during the off-season was about the great gains they've made over winter and yet now they're saying no additional power for the first seven races.

 

They really are full of it.

 

Already they're trotting out the "reasons" (excuses) for lack of improvement.

 

Pathetic.

Edited by Redback, 25 February 2018 - 22:30.

[DanardiF1]

There's a reason for that isn't there? 

 

Had it not been for Honda setting a new benchmark for how badly an engine can perform, Renault's efforts would have been in the spotlight.  I hope they sent Honda a thank-you card.

 

The Abu Dhabi 2017 power level wasn't much to write home about either though was it?  As I recall they had to turn the engines down for the whole weekend, just so the the Renault-powered cars could make the end of the race.

 

Certainly it was significantly down on the Mexican level (which was admittedly a reliability disaster).

 

Renault have had a history during this engine formula of over-promising and under-delivering.  All the talk from them during the off-season was about the great gains they've made over winter and yet now they're saying no additional power for the first seven races.

 

They really are full of it.

 

Already they're trotting out the "reasons" (excuses) for lack of improvement.

 

Pathetic.

 

These two sentences are not linked. Whatever horsepower they were capable of putting out by Abu Dhabi doesn't seem to be linked to the reliability issues they had. It would stand to reason that what they mean now is that they have retained the bhp they were achieving by 2017's end but have focused on making sure reliability is better and more consistent.

[Seanspeed]

This is exactly why I hate these ultra limited engine rules. One misfortune and your entire season and development schedule is thrown off or even heavily compromised.

I also think it plays well into the hands of the one manufacturer that has had exceptional reliability in the hybrid V6 era - Mercedes. They will be a lot more confident in being able to push their engines longer and so will be able to turn up the wick where others cannot.

It also severely restricts the teams' ability to bring in upgrades. Got a good development ready by May? Well too bad, you need to wait another month before you can use it. Have important updates that help not just power but also reliability? Too bad, you will have to wait to use it and maybe suffer in the meantime.

Edited by Seanspeed, 25 February 2018 - 22:43.

[pablo_a]

Current engine format and allocation rules are a joke...Renault are miles off and given the broken record about reliability clearly not in a position to produce a competitive motor (which closes the current performance delta to merc) by the time the new regs come in. Expect RB to start penning a car for a Honda block and the one-make series to continue - Mercedes cakewalk this year and probably next.    

[Redback]

These two sentences are not linked. Whatever horsepower they were capable of putting out by Abu Dhabi doesn't seem to be linked to the reliability issues they had. It would stand to reason that what they mean now is that they have retained the bhp they were achieving by 2017's end but have focused on making sure reliability is better and more consistent.

I agree, - but even if you discount Abu Dhabi as anomalous, Cyril himself said they may have got a bit carried away in Mexico and subsequently turned the units down for Brasil.  So was that detuned level the one to which he is now referring, or the Mexican level?

 

It's unlikely Renault will clarify that.  They like to keep an excuse (or 5) up their sleeve.

[amardeep]

For all the talk about helping new manufacturers and those struggling, the rules are slanted, or at least particularly beneficial to those in front.

 

How about 4-race engines / 20-race season ? That's as long as I can stand on either, wouldn't mind both being reduced even further, 3-race engines / 18-race season would be even better.

[V8 Fireworks]

I agree, - but even if you discount Abu Dhabi as anomalous, Cyril himself said they may have got a bit carried away in Mexico and subsequently turned the units down for Brasil.  So was that detuned level the one to which he is now referring, or the Mexican level?

 

It's unlikely Renault will clarify that.  They like to keep an excuse (or 5) up their sleeve.

 

The level would br adjusted if there is a sniff of a win or podium, surely? 

 

The levels are not fixed, there is a certain allocation of engine stress cycles (certain mileage at various output levels) they can deploy tactically and strategically, I think.

[MustangSally]

 

Had it not been for Honda setting a new benchmark for how badly an engine can perform, Renault's efforts would have been in the spotlight.  I hope they sent Honda a thank-you card.

 

 

Absolutely. Honda power incurred some 500 plus grid place penalties in 2017, Renault 300 plus, Mercedes just 20. 

 

And in 2018 there's one less engine. 

 

Grid penalties aside, Renault were running out of replacement parts at the end of the season, such was the level of attrition.

 

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Renault and McLaren will leap up the table this season. 

[pdac]

Let's wait and see. Testing starts next week and we'll get a hint of how good each 2018 PU is. But it's only a month and they'll be on track proper. It seems the wrong time to make judgement on how good or bad the new Renault will be right now.

Edited by pdac, 26 February 2018 - 00:02.

[Raemius]

I agree, - but even if you discount Abu Dhabi as anomalous, Cyril himself said they may have got a bit carried away in Mexico and subsequently turned the units down for Brasil.  So was that detuned level the one to which he is now referring, or the Mexican level?

 

It's unlikely Renault will clarify that.  They like to keep an excuse (or 5) up their sleeve.

 

My understanding of Cyril's comments is different. My interpretation is that they have decided to start the season with the best performance they had last year (ie Mexico), but with good reliability that has been worked on over the Winter. The performance includes being able to use all power modes, etc. The additional performance steps will come with engines 2 and 3, knowing that they have nailed the reliability.  Not so bad in my view, and probably very sensible. If instead they went for broke from race one, them, Red Bull and McLaren could all find themselves out of the running and the grid penalties piling up before they get going...

[THEWALL]

Formula Conservation, re ,re ,re , re, re-loaded...

[ArrowsLivery]

The guys from Enstone deserve better than this.

[shonguiz]

Cyril should learn to STFU.

[Redback]

My understanding of Cyril's comments is different. My interpretation is that they have decided to start the season with the best performance they had last year (ie Mexico), but with good reliability that has been worked on over the Winter. The performance includes being able to use all power modes, etc. The additional performance steps will come with engines 2 and 3, knowing that they have nailed the reliability.  Not so bad in my view, and probably very sensible. If instead they went for broke from race one, them, Red Bull and McLaren could all find themselves out of the running and the grid penalties piling up before they get going...

If that is indeed the case then great, - but the quote I saw was "Our target is more or less to start in Melbourne with the same performance level as we finished in Abu Dhabi - which is actually quite a decent performance baseline," Abiteboul explained."

 

He could have just said "the same performance level we reached in 2017", but he didn't.  He specifically said Abu Dhabi.  It may have simply been a slip of the tongue, but Cyril is a political animal and he chooses his words.

 

...and as you may have guessed, I don't trust a thing he says!   

Edited by Redback, 26 February 2018 - 01:19.

[gowebber]

Same old Renault excuses different year. Hopefully it's not true.

[maximilian]

Dunno about you guys, but I am really tired of this engine imparity, and good/deserving teams and excellent drivers basically having NO chance of consistent wins or a championship challenge just because they happen to be saddled with the wrong engine package.  F1 is already much too dependent on which car you drive, and WAAAAAYYYYY too dependent on which engine you have in that car these days.  I don't like this.  Rant over.  

[ArrowsLivery]

Dunno about you guys, but I am really tired of this engine imparity, and good/deserving teams and excellent drivers basically having NO chance of consistent wins or a championship challenge just because they happen to be saddled with the wrong engine package.  F1 is already much too dependent on which car you drive, and WAAAAAYYYYY too dependent on which engine you have in that car these days.  I don't like this.  Rant over.  

 

That has always been the case. 

[maximilian]

That has always been the case. 

 

To some extent.  Doesn't change the fact that I am tired of it.

[RECKLESS]

Yeah well, they have to be extra careful at the start of the season. Engine rules dictate this crap.

Imagine your fave driver having an engine failure at the first race.

It will echo disadvantage to whole season. Which is crazy.

[ArrowsLivery]

Yeah well, they have to be extra careful at the start of the season. Engine rules dictate this crap.

Imagine your fave driver having an engine failure at the first race.

It will echo disadvantage to whole season. Which is crazy.

 

I don't think it's that big of a disadvantage. They'll just have to take one extra penalty, probably at Monza or Spa, where a podium is still in reach even if you start last. 

[Jovanotti]

I read this in Alonso's voice.

[jstrains]

Still better than the Honda crap last 3 years...

[Alburaq]

A hypothetic reliable 2017 Renault should be automatically more powerful than the real one because the latter was turned down almost all the time.
So they can decrease the gap just by sorting the reliability problems.
The 2018 PU is an evolution of the completely new 2017 PU... Like the 2016 PU. Obviously Viry is struggling to make a good PU straight off and it took them a couple of seasons to make the first gen reliable and competitive but IMO they'll be faster this time with the second generation because Viry has improved meanwhile (technology, headcount, infrastructures etc)

 

[anyeis]

Renault has never had a engine with equal power to Ferrari/Merc. They had advantange with exhaust tricks but most of that has been banned

[Lennat]

My guess: Most will fail to use only 3 engines anyway. Hence they should just aim for 4 or 5 and focus on power rather than compromising performance for a big part (or all of) the season.

[MadYarpen]

Alonso complaining in 3, 2, 1...

[Slowersofterdumber]

This is exactly why I hate these ultra limited engine rules. One misfortune and your entire season and development schedule is thrown off or even heavily compromised.

Does it? A grid penalty or 2 isn't the end of the World. If you blow one up you take that small pain and keep going with the plan, you don't re-schedule the season for 2 engines.

[BCM]

Sounds familiar.

 

 

27-12-2016

 

"The new engine is being designed at the company's Viry-Chatillon headquarters but its chiefs are adamant that its focus for the start of the campaign is on reliability rather than out-and-out performance."

 

2-1-2017

 

"The Motorsport report states Renault plans to introduce its phase one engine for the season-opening Australian Grand Prix. It will not introduce power units close to full potential until the Spanish Grand Prix in May."

 

How many years before they master reliability before the start of a season?

 

There's no point having a reliable slow engine. By the time they've developed reliability and power it will be time for a new engine in 2019. It's ground hog day with these guys.

Edited by BCM, 26 February 2018 - 08:17.

[mwf1]

Thats RBR title attack over before it started, well done Renault, pathetic and what you come to expect from them.

[GreenMachine]

Reliability?   Really?!   I though they had dynos for that, and not just dumb ones, pretty smart ones!  You don't race to test reliability, not unless you a loser, in every sense of the word.  You race to win!

 

WTF, run the engines as hard as they are designed for, given the 3-3ngine rule.  If they blow up, deal with it.  This is not a race to see who can make reliable engines IT IS A RACE TO SEE WHO CAN MAKE (the most) POWERFUL ENGINES.  If Renault can't make a powerful engine, they can take their marbles and go home, they are no use to anyone, Renault chassis included.

 

Groundhog Day anyone?

 

Sigh.  Merc must be rolling about the floor in pain from all their laughing ...

[sopa]

Sounds modest, but even if you argue it doesn't sound 'too bad', they will be definitely lagging behind Mercedes and Ferrari with that one. So if anyone was dreaming of championships, these are out of the window. But - I think status quo was expected anyway, so no surprises here. That's modern F1 for you. 

[Rinehart]

I call sandbagging! 

[johnmhinds]

The might not be pushing it, but all the Renault powered cars are at the bottom of the list of the speed trap.

[Jon83]

Imagine if they had a couple of test sessions in which the cars with Renault power could focus on reliability....

[SevenTigers]

Hmmm... not convinced by the sincerity of the remarks, if I'm honest. Then again, there are a lot of stakeholder's expectations to manage this season for Renault.

[Henri Greuter]

 

 

 

 

Sigh.  Merc must be rolling about the floor in pain from all their laughing ...

 

 

No: they have a head-ache beyond belief, now they will run even faster out of laughable excuses themselves to assure that they are still so overrated and that their titles are anything but a foregon conclusion. Poor Toto, what excuses are left to be told and put his team in the underdog position this season???

[Boing 2]

I'm as green as a cucumber but 3 engines per year is nuts,  the sweet spot is maybe 1 engine to cover 2 races at a stretch 3 races but no more than that. 

 

Not counting testing or engine failures the old system would have had 3 engines per car per weekend so for a 20 car grid and 21 race calendar that's 1260 engines per grid per year.

 

1 engine per car per weekend brings that down to 420 engines per grid per year, that's about a 65% reduction.

 

1 engine per car for 2 race weekends is 210 engines per grid per year that's close to an 85% reduction in engine consumption and still gives plenty of chances to push the engines hard. Don't see the need to drop beyond that.

[V8 Fireworks]

Dunno about you guys, but I am really tired of this engine imparity, and good/deserving teams and excellent drivers basically having NO chance of consistent wins or a championship challenge just because they happen to be saddled with the wrong engine package.  F1 is already much too dependent on which car you drive, and WAAAAAYYYYY too dependent on which engine you have in that car these days.  I don't like this.  Rant over.  

 

'That's motor racing" 

[GTA]

Same **** different year. Par for the course at Renault. 

 

Cyril Abiteboul: No major Renault update until 2018

 

 

http://www.espn.in/f...ult-update-2018

 

 

After skating by the entire 2017 season with little gains and ending up with spare parts to finish the year, they have set the tone for this season already. They are like the Cosworth spec engine of F1. An average performer which you can put in the back of your car, don't expect any miracles.

 

Renault did the same thing in 2017 , came out with an engine at the start with poor power , escaped the public scrutiny due to Honda's disaster. Promised a major upgrade at Canada/Baku but balked.

 

Feel a bit sad for Max , Daniel and the staff at Red Bull Racing. 5th year stuck with this POS and failed promises. Another year they have to build the best chassis by a long way to compensate.