Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 8 votes

Renault Technical Thread (R.S.19)


  • Please log in to reply
3168 replies to this topic

#3151 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 460 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 April 2019 - 17:33

Last year the most points a team took from the midfield was by Haas 22 points in Austria (if memory serves.) 10 points is generally considered an excellent weekend in the midfield, but there are days when those out front fall apart and a team can make massive gains. Reliability is a key factor in being there for those days where the top three mess up.

 

Well realistically, the only cars falling apart out of the top 6 last season where Renault power units whether it was manufacturer or operator error. And they don't have those in the top 6 anymore. Bettering 7th on track will more rare this season than last.


Edited by ARTGP, 16 April 2019 - 17:34.


Advertisement

#3152 CharlesWinstone

CharlesWinstone
  • Member

  • 542 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 16 April 2019 - 17:38

If you start posting in other team or driver threads then perhaps you would have less judgement from those here.

"Posting in other team or other driver threads"
Is there a rule i missed? I mean its Renault and i'm not French. Do i have to ask the moderators if its allowed to post anyway?

I am not a fan of Renault. The way they handle things. Excuses, not fullfilling promisses and always pointing at others..yuck.
But a huge fan of Nico. If he had not signed for Renault he would be driving a Mercedes now. Its a harsh world.

#3153 MNader

MNader
  • Member

  • 245 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 16 April 2019 - 18:44

"Posting in other team or other driver threads"
Is there a rule i missed? I mean its Renault and i'm not French. Do i have to ask the moderators if its allowed to post anyway?

I am not a fan of Renault. The way they handle things. Excuses, not fullfilling promisses and always pointing at others..yuck.
But a huge fan of Nico. If he had not signed for Renault he would be driving a Mercedes now. Its a harsh world.

 

 

I am sure Merc had the chance to sign him instead of Bottas (which I would have done), so I don't think he would have been anywhere close to a Mercedes or a Ferrari now. 

 

I thin Nico's best chance is Renault, Daniel on the other hand could have stayed at RBR and be competitive till another seat opens up, or maybe Renault build a beat next year or 2021 and both know something the outsiders don't



#3154 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,384 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 16 April 2019 - 19:32

1)Sainz used H and S. Not H-M. So there goes your argument.

2)Hulk had a MUCH better tire choice in Bahrain. New tires all through the race vs Norris who started on old softs and ended the race on old softs and yet Hulk was just 2.5s ahead of him when he retired. See how I just used your argument against you? Renault was not a better race car on sunday in Bahrain using your argument.

3)Sainz had damaged to his entire boomerang that would disrupted flow to the back of the car AND the leading edge of the floor in the bargeboard area. There is no way a damage that big would have not caused major diffusor performance drop because sealing of the diffusor and rear wing efficiency as well diffusor efficiency would drop. Loss of a major bargeboard component would have affected R-L aero balance.. If anything, he probably lost over a tenth because of that.

So as of now, the facts say that Sainz used Hards and softs, Sainz had significant damage and Sainz was faster than Ricciardo by 9 seconds while being in no man's land for 95% of the race vs Ricciardo who was being pushed by Perez for 100% of the race.

This is not my opinion. I have not passed a judgment on what car was faster. I presented facts and water is wet, you can't argue against that.


Omg... I stopped reading your "facts" when you wrote the H-S is the very same strategy as the S-H. :D

#3155 MrRat

MrRat
  • Member

  • 1,295 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 16 April 2019 - 21:56

Omg... I stopped reading your "facts" when you wrote the H-S is the very same strategy as the S-H. :D

Where exactly did I say that?

Is this one of those “I don’t like what I hear/read so I am just gonna make arguments over things that did not happen” or “I don’t like what I hear/read so I guess it’s fake news”.

If you actually bothered reading my other post, you would have known that I mentioned how they ran a very different race and you can’t really draw conclusions.

It’s funny how you make a statement about Sainz using mediums that can be refuted by a quick google search and then try to accuse someone of saying something that was never said in the first place.


Sigh.


Edited by MrRat, 17 April 2019 - 18:56.


#3156 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,080 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 19 April 2019 - 07:08

Unless all the engines are placed on the bench and are measured by let's say the FIA, all these 'facts' are useless.

 

Speed traps are useless because of config. Williams used to top the sheets and were being lapped while Verstappen was winning races being at the bottom. Not too mention the influence of tows/drs overtakes etc.

 

Driver reactions are useless because none of the Renault drivers are going to say anything bad about their employer, of course they say it's a powerful and great engine. Well except Verstappen for the last 2 years.

 

Year-on-year comparisons are also useless because of new rules and regulations (incl. tyres), external factors such as weather. You could for example say:

 

2019 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.958

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.236

 

2018 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.532

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.795

 

I could say that the Renault engine is worse than last year, while the Honda is step forward.

 

Would I say that? No. Because it's a combination of driver/car/engine. There's no way for us to to make any sense of these performances.

 

The only thing, that everyone can see, is that the reliability of the Renault engine package is abysmal.

 

 

Dont know where to start...

 

1-Qualy speed traps are very useful. I'm a talking about qualy not race or fp... In qualy there is no tow (or rarely - and Renault didnt use that) nor overtake -_-' while drs, engine mode, fuel, tires and conditions are the same for everybody...

2-I'm comparing multiple qualy speeds traps, every 2018 and 2019 qualy. And there is a tendency, a constant change in them. there is a big change and improvement in every speed trap sheet...

3-the drivers can be very objective too, especially Hulkenberg and especially when he talks to other medias, like the german ones. He dont hesitate to pin point the weaknesses of his cars.

4-when this objective driver and other Renault drivers used to downplay/minimise the power gains in the past, they do the opposite this year and talk about big engine gains and no chassis gains.

5-that same driver said in 2018 that Renault's lacking was around 60%chassis and 40% engine or the way around. This year this driver who "isnt going to say anything bad about their employer" is blaming only the chassis. He also pinpointed the engine and chassis lack of development last year.

6-What about Sainz? is he a Renault driver? and he's is also a quite frank driver and talks about huge gains.

7-the rule changes are the same for everybody

8-and we're not talkin about a Williams or a HRT, we're talking about a car with very decent DF level and performances, so a decent drag level.

and there is still al ot of arguments against your load of nonsense

 

 

Year-on-year comparisons are also useless because of new rules and regulations (incl. tyres), external factors such as weather. You could for example say:

 

2019 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.958

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.236

 

2018 China quali

Fastest Renault: 1:32.532

Fastest Toro Rosso: 1:33.795

 

I could say that the Renault engine is worse than last year, while the Honda is step forward. 

Would I say that? No. Because it's a combination of driver/car/engine. There's no way for us to to make any sense of these performances.

 

YOU cant make any sense of the performances because of your very simplistic "reasoning" and anti-Renault posture...

The engine made a big step performance wise and the chassis performance (compared to the top 3) is the problem, those are facts, which are also backed by the gps datas that AMuS and others gathered in every gp... 

Hosnestly only a fool or a troll thinks like you. And judging your record, avatar etc, it's mainly trolling and dishonesty. 

Regarding unreliability, it's not necessarily the "package" like you say. the only problematic part for now is the MGUK.


Edited by Alburaq, 19 April 2019 - 07:41.


#3157 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,080 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 19 April 2019 - 07:51

But dunno what kind of drugs Chester smokes https://www.auto-mot...en-schuss-knie/

But one should indeed wait to see several tracks before judging the pace, as already stated, especially in the situation of Renault this season.


Edited by Alburaq, 19 April 2019 - 07:57.


#3158 Alburaq

Alburaq
  • Member

  • 2,080 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 19 April 2019 - 07:55

:up:  :up:  It's great to hear someone understand and acknowledge the complexity of the matter..

 
:lol: 
"acknowleging the complexity of the matter" do not mean brushing every fact aside, mixing everything together and even pretending that people are lying...
let alone understanding the matter...

 
Now, after seeing the list of the people who liked or approved statsman post (which include arrowslivery and artgp - which harms the credibility of statsman message even more) I'm even more confident that I'm on the right path  :)


Edited by Alburaq, 19 April 2019 - 09:44.


#3159 statman

statman
  • Member

  • 3,937 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 19 April 2019 - 10:32

I'm going to ignore all the insults (that Renault criticism hits you hard!) and just respond to the other stuff:

 



Dont know where to start...

 

1-Qualy speed traps are very useful. I'm a talking about qualy not race or fp... In qualy there is no tow (or rarely - and Renault didnt use that) nor overtake -_-' while drs, engine mode, fuel, tires and conditions are the same for everybody...

 

In qualy there is no tow (or rarely - and Renault didnt use that). No tow, or rarely. Eh yeah.. Red Bull used a tow when they had a Renault engine. And it all became a problem when one driver didn't tow the other on an occasion. McLaren used a tow all the time, the ALO/Stof tow even became a thing. And the ones who were towing were all Renault engines. So yeah, there's no tow in quali, except when there is..

 

2-I'm comparing multiple qualy speeds traps, every 2018 and 2019 qualy. And there is a tendency, a constant change in them. there is a big change and improvement in every speed trap sheet...

 

Again, speed traps don't say jack sh**. Again, car config and external factors play a big role. Verstappen won with low speed traps, Williams was lapped when leading the speed traps. The only relevant splits are the sector times

 

3-the drivers can be very objective too, especially Hulkenberg and especially when he talks to other medias, like the german ones. He dont hesitate to pin point the weaknesses of his cars.

4-when this objective driver and other Renault drivers used to downplay/minimise the power gains in the past, they do the opposite this year and talk about big engine gains and no chassis gains.

5-that same driver said in 2018 that Renault's lacking was around 60%chassis and 40% engine or the way around. This year this driver who "isnt going to say anything bad about their employer" is blaming only the chassis. He also pinpointed the engine and chassis lack of development last year.

6-What about Sainz? is he a Renault driver? and he's is also a quite frank driver and talks about huge gains.

 

4 replies stating that drivers are capable of speaking corporate language. They're very honest! You know when they don't care about being nice, when someone like Prost got fired for bashing his Ferrari car, when Alonso spoke of a GP2 engine, or when Verstappen trashed the Renault engine for its reliability.

 

7-the rule changes are the same for everybody

 

Since you've included 2018-2019 comparisons, in other words year over year, the rules and regulations have changed and thus comparisons are worthless. For everybody.

 

8-and we're not talkin about a Williams or a HRT, we're talking about a car with very decent DF level and performances, so a decent drag level.

and there is still al ot of arguments against your load of nonsense

 

It's not you who get to decide which car or teams have "decent performances". You seems to think Renault is decent, I happen to think not. I might think the Toro Rosso has a decent performance, you might not. See how that works?

 

 

Regarding unreliability, it's not necessarily the "package" like you say. the only problematic part for now is the MGUK.

 

Which is part of the package, to have a fully functioning PU....

Btw, you think it's only the MGU-K, it might be more it might not. Who knows? Did Cyril take you backstage and show it to you? You're always stating opinions as facts.

 


Edited by statman, 19 April 2019 - 10:33.


Advertisement

#3160 Booky36

Booky36
  • Member

  • 138 posts
  • Joined: February 19

Posted 19 April 2019 - 11:15

Renault is still learning, whatever results they get they deserve  respect,  it's just the third GP,  let them fix all the mess (devices and peoples) and be sure they'll be performing well ..



#3161 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,272 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 19 April 2019 - 14:38

Turd GP? They have a hell of a lot more and the PU didn't have much rule changes.



#3162 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 5,151 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted Yesterday, 01:25

Qualifying telemetry comparing Ricciardo to the two Red Bulls

 

PU seems better than Honda. Ricciardo is slightly faster on the straights once out of the traction zones but is running more wing (gap widens quite dramatically when DRS is deployed).

 

Just need to sort the reliability out.


Edited by lbennie, Yesterday, 02:33.


#3163 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,024 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted Yesterday, 05:23

Qualifying telemetry comparing Ricciardo to the two Red Bulls

PU seems better than Honda. Ricciardo is slightly faster on the straights once out of the traction zones but is running more wing (gap widens quite dramatically when DRS is deployed).

Just need to sort the reliability out.


Interesting graph.

I don’t see him being faster in traction zones. The DRS gap is remarkable, but does it necessaraly imply more wing?

#3164 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,689 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted Yesterday, 06:52

Qualifying telemetry comparing Ricciardo to the two Red Bulls

PU seems better than Honda. Ricciardo is slightly faster on the straights once out of the traction zones but is running more wing (gap widens quite dramatically when DRS is deployed).

Just need to sort the reliability out.


Reliability is not Renault’s only issue if, as you suggest, its power unit has more grunt than Honda’s, its rear wing produces more downforce because DRS affects it more than the Red Bull and yet Ricciardo loses almost a second a lap to Verstappen. Also when you say “just”, do you realise these relaibility issues have been going on for years now?

#3165 restless

restless
  • Member

  • 533 posts
  • Joined: August 15

Posted Yesterday, 07:20

Qualifying telemetry comparing Ricciardo to the two Red Bulls

 

PU seems better than Honda. Ricciardo is slightly faster on the straights once out of the traction zones but is running more wing (gap widens quite dramatically when DRS is deployed).

 

Just need to sort the reliability out.

Ric's speed curve is above Vertappen's but he loses time ?!

Gearing is pretty different - RB hits 8th way way earlier - so probably they set it too short?! Can they change it mid season? Renault gears look too long...

In Ferrari vs Mercedes thread on f1technical, tehre were claims that if Ferrari wins big time AFter DRs activation this means they run lower downforce wings...



#3166 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,024 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted Yesterday, 11:29

More tech analysis needed of the graph.

Come on guys, who understands better what is going on here?

#3167 danstheman

danstheman
  • Member

  • 375 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted Yesterday, 14:08

Couple of things I (think) can see. Tell me if I'm wrong

 

- Max much later braking into T1 and carries more speed through 2-3

- Dan carries more speed into T7 but spends more time feathering the throttle whereas Max and Gasly both have a more ubrupt burst then lift through T7-9. Hard to read, but perhaps the better downforce and stability on the Red Bull shows here. 

- Max and also Gasly get on the power much better through T13, whereas again Dan has to fight through the corner making small adjustments on the throttle

- Throughout most the lap Dan shifts down one more gear. Does this indicate slower cornering speed?

- Dan lost most of his time in T2-3 and exiting T12 into the long T13



#3168 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 5,151 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted Today, 01:46

Interesting graph.

I don’t see him being faster in traction zones

 

I said once out of the traction zones, not in them. RB's chassis advantage shows there.

 

 

The DRS gap is remarkable, but does it necessaraly imply more wing?

 

The article it was ripped from claims this is the reason. But i'm not sure myself.


Edited by lbennie, Today, 01:51.


#3169 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,588 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted Today, 06:46

Turd GP?

 

:lol: