Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 8 votes

Renault Technical Thread (R.S.19)


  • Please log in to reply
3671 replies to this topic

#101 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 February 2019 - 07:01

Mathew Carter on Missed Apex podcast said he was told by people in the know @ the final race in Abu Dhabi about what went down with Ricciardo & Red Bull before he chose renault.
 
It's a good listen.
 
He says that Red Bull have always paid their drivers very low retainers but filled them out with great bonus's but this changed with Max's new deal. Ricciardo asked for the same sort of deal (but not quite as much as what Max was on) and Red Bull said no, and left their original offer on the table believing he would swallow his pride and take it, they ended up offering him what he asked for at the last moment, but the whole ordeal was enough to show Dan he would not get the support Max would be getting going forward & he actually ended up accepting less money from Renault than Red Bulls final offer.


It's a tough business. Maybe Ricciardo could have gotten what Max got if he was the one showing confidence in the team extending the deal long before the contract was over. But Ricciardo wanted a one year deal after waiting for Merc and Ferrari and apparently for the same money as Max? Doesn't work like that buddy...

Nothing to do with swallowing his pride IMO, the situations were completely different.

Edited by A3, 05 February 2019 - 07:03.


Advertisement

#102 v@sh

v@sh
  • Member

  • 1,204 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 05 February 2019 - 07:13

It's a tough business. Maybe Ricciardo could have gotten what Max got if he was the one showing confidence in the team extending the deal long before the contract was over. But Ricciardo wanted a one year deal after waiting for Merc and Ferrari and apparently for the same money as Max? Doesn't work like that buddy...

Nothing to do with swallowing his pride IMO, the situations were completely different.

 

How does that even make sense?

 

If he extended the deal long before the contract was over:

 

a) The deal on the table at the time was not the same as Max

b) Extending the deal before Max got his new deal would have meant that Ricciardo still would have got paid less than what Max would have been offered and probably would have been even less than what he originally negotiated

 

End result would have been that he still would have been in a worse position than Max for both. If anything, it should be the other way around, RBR should have showed to Ricciardo that he was on an equal footing to Max and accepted the same sort of deal that Ricciardo was after.

 

Ultimately, both Ricciardo and RBR may be worse off as a result. Ricciardo to Renault in a less competitive car (this may change in the long term) and RBR robbing themselves of one of the best driver lines-ups on the grid.

 

How can you say if has nothing to do with swallowing his pride when you've just listened to a podcast where they've said the complete opposite of your opinion who are far closer to the F1 community. Bottom line is if you get paid for a job where you are doing as good as another co-worker and you see them get a pay rise, you ask for the same because you feel you have done enough to justify the same amount of money. RBR thought that they held the aces because of where they were in the F1 pecking order so he would give in and accept the lower deal but it didn't work out that way.

 

EDIT: Also why would Ricciardo show confidence in a team that has openly spoken to build the team around Max, pretty much taken Max's side in the Baku incident, was clearly their new golden boy and want him to be youngest ever for every single record there is out there?


Edited by v@sh, 05 February 2019 - 07:23.


#103 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 February 2019 - 07:26

Renno these days are like the DC of Constructors....

 

"This year is my year"

 

I'm only expecting a slight improvement on last year, probably not enough to affect the pecking order.

 

Wrong.

They have realistic and 'modest' objectives. They're okay with a 4th place and they want to reduce the gap to todays top 3.

And in theory, the 'slight improvement' was for 2018 because the car was just a slight evolution of the 2017 one and because viry and enstone didnt spend too much energy on it. But this year's car should be a bigger improvement, on the paper, thanks to better ressources and commitment and because it's completely new (according to Budkowski).


Edited by Alburaq, 05 February 2019 - 07:30.


#104 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 February 2019 - 07:48

Ok I'll admit I hadn't listened to the podcast yet, I was going with lbennie's comments.

I am saying that Max went up to Red Bull and negotiated a better deal. If not, he was going elsewhere.
Ricciardo literally said at the time he was going to wait and see what other options he had. He obviously couldn't go to Mercedes and according to the podcast Max could. That's not a strong position.

They guys in the podcast said that Red Bull shifting more towards the Verstappen camp was not based on actual track results. I think we all know that is not true, but I don't want to turn this into a Max vs Dan shitshow again.

Why would Red Bull pay the same to Ricciardo if Ricciardo was not going to be a problem for Red Bull at Ferrari or Mercedes? Hamilton and Ricciardo at Mercedes? That's a problem for Red Bull and Verstappen. Hamilton and Verstappen at Mercedes? Problem for Ricciardo and Red Bull.
So yeah it was about swallowing one's pride after all. As I said, it's a tough business. Ric did not have any leverage, Verstappen did.
Even Vettel did didn't get this sort of deal, but they were willing to pay Ricciardo much more than usual, but because it wasn't the same as Max it wasn't good enough.

So Ric took less money than he was offered at Red Bull and probably won't be on the podium anytime soon. Not sure if he did the right thing.


Puts all those posts about Ric's big salary in perspective. Because this would mean that Max is getting payed even more than Ric would have gotten at Red Bull. Which is more than the $35m (or what was it) he's getting now.

 

Edit: fixed a mistake


Edited by A3, 05 February 2019 - 11:53.


#105 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • Member

  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 05 February 2019 - 10:12

Either way, not very credible Carters sources (the "people in the know") know exactly what Red Bull offered Ricciardo and what Max is getting paid. The only three people who know both are probably Mateschitz, Horner and Marko.


Edited by Ivanhoe, 05 February 2019 - 10:13.


#106 rootten

rootten
  • Member

  • 826 posts
  • Joined: October 16

Posted 05 February 2019 - 10:14

one more week  :clap:



#107 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 February 2019 - 10:21

Either way, not very credible Carters sources (the "people in the know") know exactly what Red Bull offered Ricciardo and what Max is getting paid. The only three people who know both are probably Mateschitz, Horner and Marko.

 

According to Marko and Horner, Ricciardo (eventually!) was offered what he asked. 

 

Ricciardo never said this was not true. Instead he said:

 

 

 

When quizzed on if he felt ‘unloved’ at Red Bull, he replied: “I never said I was unloved. That wasn’t the case. There was no real highlight other than, probably the routine. We don’t have a 9-5 job or go to the same office every day.

“But I guess after years of going to the same factory – that kind of routine – I felt at times my enjoyment of the sport was coming a little bit numb at times. I felt part of the routine was causing that.

Edited by Requiem84, 05 February 2019 - 10:21.


#108 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,071 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 February 2019 - 10:32

Renno these days are like the DC of Constructors....

"This year is my year"

I'm only expecting a slight improvement on last year, probably not enough to affect the pecking order.

You mean continually quoted about something they didn't say?

#109 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 05 February 2019 - 11:14

 

 

Mathew Carter on Missed Apex podcast said he was told by people in the know @ the final race in Abu Dhabi about what went down with Ricciardo & Red Bull before he chose renault.

 

It's a good listen.

 

He says that Red Bull have always paid their drivers very low retainers but filled them out with great bonus's but this changed with Max's new deal. Ricciardo asked for the same sort of deal (but not quite as much as what Max was on) and Red Bull said no, and left their original offer on the table believing he would swallow his pride and take it, they ended up offering him what he asked for at the last moment, but the whole ordeal was enough to show Dan he would not get the support Max would be getting going forward & he actually ended up accepting less money from Renault than Red Bulls final offer.

Money demands are very rarely about money. It's about showing how valuable you are to a company. Selfishly, I'm really happy about Dan's move as it shakes the grid up a bit and provides an interesting dynamic to watch next season. I'm hoping he does well.

 

Sorry the quoting has gone wrong!


Edited by sgtkate, 05 February 2019 - 11:16.


#110 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,279 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 05 February 2019 - 11:29

Why would Red Bull pay the same to Ricciardo if Ricciardo was not going to be a problem for Red Bull at Ferrari or Mercedes? Hamilton and Ricciardo at Mercedes? That's a problem for Red Bull and Verstappen. Hamilton and Verstappen at Mercedes? Problem for Ricciardo and Red Bull.
So yeah it was about swallowing one's pride after all. As I said, it's a tough business. Ric did not have any leverage, Verstappen did.
Even Vettel did get this sort of deal, but they were willing to pay Ricciardo much more than usual, but because it wasn't the same as Max it wasn't good enough.

Prior to the Dan-Renault announcement being made last year I'd emphasised the worth in Red Bull offering the same money to Dan as they gave to Max. Ultimately we know that Max got the deal that he did because of the interest coming from both Mercedes and Ferrari. However when Red Bull are, as has been revealed, trying everything to keep Dan, a known performer, then surely they should have put the leverage Max had to the wayside and understand that the best outcome for the team, particularly in what could well be a very trying period, would be to show Dan they value him just as much as they do Max. A key component of my argument at the time was that while I do support Gasly, I do not have the confidence in him to bring in consistent points as Dan did if Red Bull find themselves in a spot this season where they are tussling for points in the mid-field.



#111 rootten

rootten
  • Member

  • 826 posts
  • Joined: October 16

Posted 05 February 2019 - 11:56

thread about the car? 



#112 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 February 2019 - 12:02

Prior to the Dan-Renault announcement being made last year I'd emphasised the worth in Red Bull offering the same money to Dan as they gave to Max. Ultimately we know that Max got the deal that he did because of the interest coming from both Mercedes and Ferrari. However when Red Bull are, as has been revealed, trying everything to keep Dan, a known performer, then surely they should have put the leverage Max had to the wayside and understand that the best outcome for the team, particularly in what could well be a very trying period, would be to show Dan they value him just as much as they do Max. A key component of my argument at the time was that while I do support Gasly, I do not have the confidence in him to bring in consistent points as Dan did if Red Bull find themselves in a spot this season where they are tussling for points in the mid-field.


Oh I agree about Gasly, Red Bull would have been much, much stronger with Ricciardo.

But in the end it's about business. Apparantly Max made himself an extremely good deal, maybe the best in Red Bull's history. But as I said, Dan was not going to a stronger team and he always said he wanted to fight for championships, that fighting for wins was more important than money. Then he signed for Renault.
Honestly, if you have to really step up your game and still get out qualified by your team mate and you know Mercedes wants your team mate but not you. Can you still ask the same as your team mate? All in all, from a business perspective I can understand why Red Bull didn't give in. And as I have said before, I believe Dan made an emotional decision and I think he's going to regret it.

#113 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 05 February 2019 - 12:06

thread about the car? 

Unfortunately there is so little news on any of the cars it's not surprising it's gone off topic a bit. :(

 

What are you hoping for/expecting this year?



#114 Thatfastguy

Thatfastguy
  • Member

  • 757 posts
  • Joined: April 18

Posted 05 February 2019 - 12:34

Going by Dan and Hulks new outfits I don't have much hope for a cool new livery for the RS19. Looks very much like last years outfit but even more black so that might be the same for the car. Renault cars have gotten progressively more black since 2016.



#115 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 February 2019 - 12:52

Actually they used atleast two outfits last year. First one had much more yellow.

https://img.sportaut...070c1b06855.jpg

This "new" outfit, is like the late version... except the "Alpinstar" shoulder pad is yellow instead of white, and the yellow lines become white  :stoned: .

57651610.jpg

Similar to the early 2017 outfit shoulder pads  :drunk:

https://cdn-1.motors...ort-f1-team.jpg


Edited by Alburaq, 05 February 2019 - 12:53.


#116 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 05 February 2019 - 13:03

Going by Dan and Hulks new outfits I don't have much hope for a cool new livery for the RS19. Looks very much like last years outfit but even more black so that might be the same for the car. Renault cars have gotten progressively more black since 2016.

I think a black car with flashes of yellow and white could look quite smart, for example:

6b4c8d73261389.5c04156538954.jpg

But with Haas likely to go black/gold this year, maybe Renault should go back to more yellow to stand out?



#117 vtpachyderm

vtpachyderm
  • Member

  • 1,108 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 05 February 2019 - 13:13

It'll be really interesting if Renault can make up any ground with the aero changes for this year.  I expect some improvements to the motor, but I feel as though any improvement (if any at that) will come from their interpretation of the new aero rules.  It'll also be very interesting to see what Dan brings to the team this year.  I also feel that the teams focus will be on giving Red Bull a run for their money, as there is no love lost between the two - should make for an interesting season.  4th-6th will be up for grabs, and depending on Honda, maybe 3rd is also not a guarantee either.



#118 Thatfastguy

Thatfastguy
  • Member

  • 757 posts
  • Joined: April 18

Posted 05 February 2019 - 13:16

I think a black car with flashes of yellow and white could look quite smart, for example:

 

But with Haas likely to go black/gold this year, maybe Renault should go back to more yellow to stand out?

 

This is pretty much identical to the RS18 (from the side). All personal of course but there's something about this I just don't like. 

Yellow should be the dominant color in the yellow/black combi or it just looks weird. Maybe its because I associate Renault with yellow. I thought the RS16 was the best looking car despite the black stain on the back of the bodywork and the yellow being way too orangy. They should go full Jordan en put a sharknose on the front. 1998 - 2001 jordans where some of the most awesome looking cars of that era imo so it proves the black/yellow combi can work. 

 

Black is for Minardi only   ;)


Edited by Thatfastguy, 05 February 2019 - 13:20.


#119 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 February 2019 - 13:25

It'll be really interesting if Renault can make up any ground with the aero changes for this year.  I expect some improvements to the motor, but I feel as though any improvement (if any at that) will come from their interpretation of the new aero rules.  It'll also be very interesting to see what Dan brings to the team this year.  I also feel that the teams focus will be on giving Red Bull a run for their money, as there is no love lost between the two - should make for an interesting season.  4th-6th will be up for grabs, and depending on Honda, maybe 3rd is also not a guarantee either.

 

In the Autosport podcast, the experts predicted that the new rules could close the gap a bit. The top teams generally had a big advantage in Aero, mainly due to their understanding of directing airflow from the front wing to the most important places. Slower teams had a lesser understanding of this concept. 

 

Let's say that RB had a 75% understanding and that Renault had a 50% understanding. RB will now lose 25% of their advantage due to the limiting new rules. 

 

However... the top teams like RB also have the infrastructure, staff, capacity and funding to quickly research how to get this advantage back...

 

It's a double edged sword. 



Advertisement

#120 rootten

rootten
  • Member

  • 826 posts
  • Joined: October 16

Posted 05 February 2019 - 13:41

yeap, Y250 vortex is the key to RBR's high rake design, no other team was at the level of RBR in that area

 

I expect those new rules to level the playing field 


Edited by rootten, 05 February 2019 - 13:42.


#121 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 February 2019 - 13:59

yeap, Y250 vortex is the key to RBR's high rake design, no other team was at the level of RBR in that area

 

I expect those new rules to level the playing field 

 

Still Renault did use a high rake philosophy. Can't find the number for this year but in 2017 they ran at 1.8 degrees and Reb Bull this year at 1.9. We'll have to wait and see if teams have to let that go.



#122 shonguiz

shonguiz
  • Member

  • 3,709 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 05 February 2019 - 16:49

Renno these days are like the DC of Constructors....

 

"This year is my year"

 

I'm only expecting a slight improvement on last year, probably not enough to affect the pecking order.

No that's BS. They said since day one it was a 5 year plan. (Marcin is talking about 6)



#123 rootten

rootten
  • Member

  • 826 posts
  • Joined: October 16

Posted 06 February 2019 - 14:26

6 days left



#124 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 06 February 2019 - 14:44

6 days left

Now this is a quality post suited to the topic.

#125 Neno

Neno
  • Member

  • 1,703 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 06 February 2019 - 15:03

Renault announced they passed crash test as late as possible they could while still meeting deadline. To get maximum performance out the car, which includes producing parts to have car ready just in time for I guess Feb 12. 

 

I hope i translate it well. 


Edited by Neno, 06 February 2019 - 15:05.


#126 FordFiesta

FordFiesta
  • Member

  • 224 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted 06 February 2019 - 15:37

Terrible silhouette. And I don't mean that because of the HALO or the Renault car specifically but in general.

#127 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 February 2019 - 15:47

?



#128 DogEarred

DogEarred
  • Member

  • 8,884 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 February 2019 - 16:30

Renault announced they passed crash test as late as possible they could while still meeting deadline. To get maximum performance out the car, which includes producing parts to have car ready just in time for I guess Feb 12. 
 
I hope i translate it well.


There are many impact and squeeze tests which most teams undergo over a period of time.
They mostly prefer to pass them with time to spare. Failures lead to re-designs, which can upset the build schedule.

#129 pryanjack

pryanjack
  • Member

  • 366 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 06 February 2019 - 18:58

any teaser pics? anything at all?



#130 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 06 February 2019 - 21:44

Well yeah, that’s because they didn’t use the spec 3 engine, because of its unreliability.


There are at least 3 problems with this post... It seems you have no background info about Renault.

#131 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 06 February 2019 - 21:48

any teaser pics? anything at all?


https://twitter.com/...0368345089?s=09

About the car: no :)

Edited by eREr, 06 February 2019 - 21:48.


#132 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • Member

  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 06 February 2019 - 21:57

There are at least 3 problems with this post... It seems you have no background info about Renault.

Care to share? And at least 3 problems with my post?

Assume you are not nitpicking and one of the ‘problems’ isn’t that Renault calls its 3rd spec, spec C and not spec 3

Edited by Ivanhoe, 06 February 2019 - 21:59.


#133 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 06 February 2019 - 22:09

There are at least 3 problems with this post... It seems you have no background info about Renault.


Oh how I hate these type of posts. Just try to have a normal discussion and say what you think he said wrong in stead of just stating so. Barf.

#134 FNG

FNG
  • Member

  • 4,490 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 06 February 2019 - 22:25

I look forward to Renault's liveries. I thought the last few years have been the nicest on the grid.



#135 gowebber

gowebber
  • Member

  • 3,240 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 07 February 2019 - 03:47

 

Good pic of the lads   ;)


Edited by gowebber, 07 February 2019 - 03:47.


#136 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 07 February 2019 - 06:19

There are at least 3 problems with this post... It seems you have no background info about Renault.


You’re right, Renault did a good job with the C spec. But their fuel supplier completely messed up.

#137 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 07 February 2019 - 08:14

They didnt spend much energy on that engine like Prost said... but do RB deserve a good engine/service? Nope, even with an awesome engine (like in the V8 days for example) all they do is to whine, minimise its qualities to glorify their chassis and blame all the reliability problems on Renault anyways (and lie through omission like Marko does), when a big part of the problems are RB problems... since 2007  :kiss: 
It's a shame because Renault is known for treating its customer well, not because Renault is nice but because they usually look at the engine from the chassis and driver perspective too, and want the best package (power/torque/driveability/weight/size/cooling/fuel consumption) and the most chassis-friendly/driver-friendly engine. That's why Renault customers are often regarded as semi factory teams and get many bespoke solutions for their engine. Sadly they lost that quality (to look for the best package) a little bit with the hybrid engines, or didn't push it far enough, because they simply didn't work good enough and didnt invest the right amount of money and time for them, so it's primarily their fault and RB aggravates that.  :yawnface: 

Renault shouldn't have estimated the new task and should have bought Enstone and built a factory team before 2014 in preparation for this new engine era.
 


Edited by Alburaq, 07 February 2019 - 08:21.


#138 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • Member

  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 07 February 2019 - 08:23

They didnt spend much energy on that engine like Prost said... but do RB deserve a good engine/service? Nope, even with an awesome engine (like in the V8 days for example) all they do is to whine

So as a customer paying EUR 20 million a year, you are not allowed to ‘whine’ if you don’t get a competitive package for that amount?

#139 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 07 February 2019 - 08:28

After 11 years of whining and bitch*ng, no matter the quality of the product? yes, they deserve the minimum. 

RB did even blatantly omit the fact Renault was SPONSORING them during the factory team days (so giving them much cheaper engines) when Marko, and even Horner, said in the medias they were paying the V8 100% fair and square. And that's one of the reasons the relationship deteriorated and made some team members leave.


Edited by Alburaq, 07 February 2019 - 08:38.


Advertisement

#140 rootten

rootten
  • Member

  • 826 posts
  • Joined: October 16

Posted 07 February 2019 - 09:46

5 more days



#141 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:24

Care to share? And at least 3 problems with my post?

Assume you are not nitpicking and one of the ‘problems’ isn’t that Renault calls its 3rd spec, spec C and not spec 3

 

Yeah, this is the 3rd one ;) :D

 

So 1st one: Renault didn't take spec c, because they didn't want to spend money, efforts (redesigning the internal architecture of the car, spending dyno time optimizing it with BP) to integrate it to RS18. They were concentrating on this year's car/PU. Same is true for Mclaren. Yes, Abiteboul said at that time that they think spec c is less reliable and they want to rather finish races with spec b instead gaining 2-3 tenths (in qualy) with the less reliable spec c. But we know there is much more behind of this spec b -> spec c upgrade than reliability.

 

2nd one: spec c was not unreliable. Actually it didn't cause any DNFs to RB boys. There were driveability issues, that's true, but it was reliable.



#142 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:28

Yeah, this is the 3rd one ;) :D

 

So 1st one: Renault didn't take spec c, because they didn't want to spend money, efforts (redesigning the internal architecture of the car, spending dyno time optimizing it with BP) to integrate it to RS18. They were concentrating on this year's car/PU. Same is true for Mclaren. Yes, Abiteboul said at that time that they think spec c is less reliable and they want to rather finish races with spec b instead gaining 2-3 tenths (in qualy) with the less reliable spec c. But we know there is much more behind of this spec b -> spec c upgrade than reliability.

 

2nd one: spec c was not unreliable. Actually it didn't cause any DNFs to RB boys. There were driveability issues, that's true, but it was reliable.

 

Why did Renault make a C-spec? 



#143 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:29

Oh how I hate these type of posts. Just try to have a normal discussion and say what you think he said wrong in stead of just stating so. Barf.

 

He stated incorrect things and wrong assumptions. And it was a short post. I guess it was clear what I wanted to say with my initial reply.

 

(Anyway I just replied to it with more info.)



#144 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:33

Why did Renault make a C-spec? 

 

To make RB happy. ;) They thought the gains will be bigger. But it was not the case.



#145 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:41

Yeah, this is the 3rd one ;) :D
 
So 1st one: Renault didn't take spec c, because they didn't want to spend money, efforts (redesigning the internal architecture of the car, spending dyno time optimizing it with BP) to integrate it to RS18. They were concentrating on this year's car/PU. Same is true for Mclaren. Yes, Abiteboul said at that time that they think spec c is less reliable and they want to rather finish races with spec b instead gaining 2-3 tenths (in qualy) with the less reliable spec c. But we know there is much more behind of this spec b -> spec c upgrade than reliability.

Abiteboul:

"It's coming with a couple of additional reliability risks, so basically we are leaving it up to the discretion of each team whether they want or or not, based on their sensitivity to the trade-off between power and reliability.

"At Renault we are more concerned about what's going on behind us, and therefore the risk of reliability, and an extra one tenth or two tenths is not going to make a difference because we are not going to catch Red Bull.

https://www.motorspo...d-bull/3164469/
Abiteboul states that the reason they didn't take the C spec was reliabitity risks. You say they didn't take it because they didn't want to spend time and money on it. Please provide proof for that, because for now it seems you are wrong and Ivanhoe was correct.

Just look at Renault's case and their fight for 4th in the WCC: Had they taken the C spec, would the engine have held on for enough races? Red Bull didn't use the C spec in all of the remaining races, so we don't know if it was reliable enough.

Edited by A3, 07 February 2019 - 10:47.


#146 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:43

To make RB happy.  ;) They thought the gains will be bigger. But it was not the case.


Nope.
Abiteboul:

"But we can see it's capable of delivering a healthy increase of 15kW, which was the expectation, and that's exactly what's happening.

https://www.motorspo...spec-c/3179484/

So either you are wrong or Abiteboul was lying. Tough one.

Edited by A3, 07 February 2019 - 10:48.


#147 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:44

To make RB happy.  ;) They thought the gains will be bigger. But it was not the case.

 

They thought the gains would be bigger and they thought the reliability would be better. 

 

They failed on both accounts. In addition, the way they made the upgrade required a totally new installation.

 

That is a triple failure from the company who is taking over the crown in failing the hardest in the engine department in F1. 



#148 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 07 February 2019 - 10:57

Wrong, they knew there were some reliability risks and the calculated gains were there; even RedBull (Horner and Marko and Ricciardo) acknowledged that in Monza. 

Red Bull says Renault's new Spec C engine has delivered as promised
https://www.autospor...e-has-delivered

And again they didnt put too much effort on that engine, maybe Mobil did.  :)


Edited by Alburaq, 07 February 2019 - 11:01.


#149 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 February 2019 - 11:00

Abiteboul:
https://www.motorspo...d-bull/3164469/
Abiteboul states that the reason they didn't take the C spec was reliabitity risks. You say they didn't take it because they didn't want to spend time and money on it. Please provide proof for that, because for now it seems you are wrong and Ivanhoe was correct.

Just look at Renault's case and their fight for 4th in the WCC: Had they taken the C spec, would the engine have held on for enough races? Red Bull didn't use the C spec in all of the remaining races, so we don't know if it was reliable enough.

 

Please reread my post. I involved this part also. Communication/PR is one thing, what is happening behind is a different one.

 

Anyway sometimes Abiteboul handled as a clown stating always false, laughable information. Now, when it fits to your theory he is the one and only who provide facts which can be taken without any question. Please be more consequent.

 

Anyway just think it over the whole thing logically...

 

On high altitude races spec c was not used. Same was true for Honda (I don't know what was the case for Ferrari and Merc). Spec c had no reliability issues in the tightly packed RB.



#150 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,596 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 February 2019 - 11:09

Please reread my post. I involved this part also. Communication/PR is one thing, what is happening behind is a different one.
 
Anyway sometimes Abiteboul handled as a clown stating always false, laughable information. Now, when it fits to your theory he is the one and only who provide facts which can be taken without any question. Please be more consequent.

Yeah well I have to choose between what you say and what Abiteboul siad. It's a tough one. I'm inclined to believe Abiteboul so that should tell you enough.
 

Anyway just think it over the whole thing logically...

Renault didn't want the risk of penalties and they knew the engine ran crappy on their own fuel. And to Renault's own surprise the c spec did pretty well in the Red Bull.
 
If the reason Renault themselves didn't want the C spec was that they didn't want to change their car, why design the c spec that way anyway? I will not believe Renault designed the C-spec just for Red Bull.

Edited by A3, 07 February 2019 - 11:12.