347 replies to this topic

[Grundle]

Simple question.
In my opinion Honda has been better in terms of reliability, Renault may have a small horsepower advantage.
If you had a team, which engine would you pick?
I have to give props to Honda, they would be my choice. The only time they looked vulnerable was Paul Ricard, at the start of the race.
BUT, could that alledged horsepower advantage of Renault made the difference in Monaco and Hungary for example? I guess we will never know, one thing for sure is Max was right, if the engine is so good, the Renault car must be terrible.

[Marklar]

Renault has better performance, Honda better reliability

[Lights]

Honda has so much better reliability that any performance gap is negligible.

 

There's no way Verstappen would be 3rd in the championship with a Renault engine. He'd have retired from at least 2 races.

 

Looking at the Renault and McLaren drivers, they've all had PU issues. Both Renault's in Bahrain, Sainz in Melbourne, Norris in Hockenheim, Ricciardo also in Hockenheim. And that's just from what I remember.

 

Honda > Renault.

Edited by Lights, 09 August 2019 - 10:58.

[Whatisvalis]

Impressed by Honda this season - well done Honda!

 

That's the one thing I never understood about Dan's move - he had such unreliability in 18 and that has continued this year.

[pup]

Definitely need a third thread on this.

[A3]

Renault has better performance, Honda better reliability

So what did you vote?

[Jon83]

I might be missing something here as think it is quite clearly Honda (total package of performance + reliability) and surprised to see a few saying Renault!

 

Edit - number of voters actually quite small at the point of positing!

Edited by Jon83, 09 August 2019 - 11:54.

[BelievableNonsense]

I feel Honda has been much stronger than the Renault this year. Not even close really 

[Anja]

Both seem to have closed the performance gap to Merc/Ferrari and by most accounts are pretty comparable to each other in that aspect, but Honda is far more reliable. Not a hard choice, is it?

Edited by Anja, 09 August 2019 - 12:31.

[Stephane]

Toro Rosso in front of Renault in the standings, that should mean something.

[JacobRPP]

Hamilton commented that the Honda engine had the same amount power as the Merc, but with Max comments about their throttling issues, they are probably half a season behind Mercedes and Ferrari in terms of drivability, but on point with power.

 

I'd say they have the better engine over Renault on all points.

[Clatter]

Toro Rosso in front of Renault in the standings, that should mean something.

And behind McLaren, so what does that mean then?

[statman]

Honda results > Cyril PR talk

[Claymore25]

To me is Honda. In terms of power, Renault is better by a small margine. In Reliability, Honda is way better than the french engine. The result should be obvious.

[Sunnny]

Easy Honda.  

 

 

If RB has the Renault they would had got a few retirements already and Max wont be high up the points  and possibly no wins. 

[Clatter]

Easy Honda.


If RB has the Renault they would had got a few retirements already and Max wont be high up the points and possibly no wins.

Or possibly better results and more points.

[NixxxoN]

I think Renault is more powerful but it seems Honda reliability has improved a lot and its better than Renault, but still, the Red Bull is an amazing car and has been for some time.

[Talisman]

Simple question.
If you had a team, which engine would you pick?

 

Power and reliability apart I wouldn't want to have either engine supplying my team.

 

If I was supplied by Honda I would have negligible clout with them compared to the vast Red Bull empire which is supplying them with much waited for wins and podiums and potential championships.

 

If I was supplied by Renault I would be a very distant third in line behind the works team and McLaren (which is likely providing a degree of technical partnership).

 

I would have to wonder whether either company has the capacity to provide first class support once their primary two teams are provided for, mapping etc or being able to accommodate a different fuel supplier if my team was fortunate to have such a deal.

 

Honda has supplied two teams for the first time this season, although they've done it well I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig to see if they can stretch to three.

 

Renault has a poor history when supplying three teams.  Reconditioning components and presenting them as new to STR doesn't fill me with confidence.

 

I wouldn't have so many doubts about a Mercedes supply IMO.  Not so sure about Ferrari.

Edited by Talisman, 09 August 2019 - 12:58.

[Roadhouse]

Or possibly better results and more points.

 

RB had chassis problems untill Austria, so doubt a more powerful engine would've netted better results.

Austria itself is a nice example, would a Renault engineer have given the thumbs up to risk their engine for a possible RB victory?

[Gambelli]

If this question was asked 5 races ago, I would have said Renault, despite reliability concerns.  They clearly made a jump in power and Canada and France showed all 4 Renault cars to have quite racey top speeds, where in Canada the Honda powered cars were struggling, but their reliability was utterly commendable.

 

But now, knowing that Red Bull's chassis was every bit as much of the the problem, I have no doubt its Honda, purely because of the remarkable turn around in reliability, they just seem to finally have their **** together, and I think if Red Bull were still with Renault then Verstappen would more than likely have less points, and wouldn't be sitting 'turd' in the championship.

[Clatter]

RB had chassis problems untill Austria, so doubt a more powerful engine would've netted better results.
Austria itself is a nice example, would a Renault engineer have given the thumbs up to risk their engine for a possible RB victory?

Agree about the chassis, but we will never know for sure. Don't think Renault have held back settings in the past.

[Arundo]

Honda as they had less issues, I believe both engines are close in performance these days. 

[goldenboy]

I think Renault is more powerful than Honda, and more than some are suggesting here, but it's all for naught without reliability. So for now it's easily Honda. This poll thread has come a few.months too early though!

[JimmyTheFox]

Voted Honda due to its superior reliability and race performance.


Honda replied to the Renault 1000bhp claim - not sure if their PU ranking is just out of the top 3 teams, maybe one of the Japanese speakers on forum could give a more accurate translation?

Google translate - https://www.as-web.jp/f1/510837/2

―What are your thoughts on Ferrari, another team of 3 strongest?

Yamamoto MD: When you look at all 10 teams objectively to some extent, it is the impression that two teams, Mercedes and Red Bull, can watch the race closely and adapt to the situation flexibly in a good way.

　On the other hand, Ferrari's power unit (PU / engine) is the performance of Pikaichi, and the car body is never bad. However, in comprehensive power, it does not reach Mercedes. Ferrari and Red Bull in 2nd place. However, is it a feeling that Red Bull is slightly above? Regarding the power unit, Ferrari, Mercedes and Honda.

-Renault seems to have 1000 horsepower.

Yamamoto MD: Max also said that (laughs).

Seriously, we are working hard to carry out our plans, so we are desperate to balance performance and reliability rather than what Renault, Ferrari and Mercedes are doing. Everyone has only the perception that they are losing to their rivals.

Edited by JimmyTheFox, 09 August 2019 - 15:39.

[Garndell]

Voted Renault purely on the basis that Honda has been abusing TR for development and I think that is wrong.

[Talisman]

Voted Honda due to its superior reliability and race performance.


Honda replied to the Renault 1000bhp claim - not sure if their PU ranking is just out of the top 3 teams, maybe one of the Japanese speakers on forum could give a more accurate translation?

Google translate - https://www.as-web.jp/f1/510837/2

 

 

He didn't reply to the 1000bhp claim.  He ignored it completely.

 

With Ferrari he says that the PU is first class and the chassis isn't bad but overall is not in Mercedes' league and is also probably just behind RBR.  He ranks the PUs as Ferrari>Mercedes>Honda.  

[A3]

Voted Renault purely on the basis that Honda has been abusing TR for development and I think that is wrong.

Ok.

[MikeTekRacing]

Renault clearly has more reliability issues. For pace, I find McLaren's jump pretty impressive, The Renault engine in the back of that car is surely helping them also.

So performance I would say Renault, by a small(ish) margin, reliability Honda by a greater margin

[Requiem84]

Voted Renault purely on the basis that Honda has been abusing TR for development and I think that is wrong.

Allowibg moral principles to change facts?

[DanardiF1]

Voted Honda just because their reliability has taken a very good step forward this season. In terms of performance I don't think there's really that much difference between any of the 4 manufacturers now...

[Quickshifter]

Renault already has a stronger Qualifying mode than Honda and is closer to Merc/Ferrari in race mode than Honda. Honda has had less reliability issues however Renault have promptly addressed every single issue faced so far. The MGU-K and Con rod issues have been dealt comprehensively. There are minor niggles but they have been very proactive in dealing with issues.They will be bringing yet another performance step after summer break. As a Mclaren fan i am satisfied with the kind of  boost the PU has provided after the horror show from 2015-17. Honda have made steps since then so good for them and Red Bull but objectively looking at it the Renault PU is still ahead in the performance game. Renault have been very fair and proactive with Mclaren so far when it comes to the service and for a customer deal that's very impressive.

 

Ferrari PU is the benchmark now. Mercedes is marginally behind in race but Ferrari has a clear edge in Qualifying. Renault is now a lot closer to Mercedes in qualifying and almost up there in race. Whatever deficit currently Mclaren has is more to do with chassis/aero than with the engine. If i have to guess it would be 80% chassis and 20% PU.  Reliability will get better for every manufacturer due to stable regulations, so it is all about performance till the gap is closed to Ferrari. As far as things stand Renault still has the legs in performance both in qualifying modes and race pace which is all that counts with a decent level of reliability after fixing their issues early on in the season. One more thing all Renault powered cars make  great starts, only behind Ferrari in that department and that makes a big difference too.

Edited by Quickshifter, 09 August 2019 - 17:49.

[pdac]

Going on the number of PU components that have been used this season, I would say that there's little between them in terms of reliability. However, I get the impression (and it's only really an impression) that the Renault-powered teams have changed more units because they've failed rather than because they are trying out upgrades.

[Paco]

Neither actually.

 

Renault hugely disappointing this year, but in the PU and in the Chassis to boot.

Honda - pretty much as expected, maybe a bit better.  However, only flattering when not HP dependant tracks.. we'll see how the 2nd of the season unfolds and how they at places like Monza.  That said, the reliability of Honda has been surprising..

 

Honda lucky to have RB moreso then they other way around.  I think RB would have had even better result had the stayed the course but at least they have been better then what could have been with HOnda and have a good option long term.

 

Didn't vote as Neither have been impressive and frankly its probably tit for tat.. only RB making the difference.

Edited by Paco, 09 August 2019 - 18:35.

[FullOppositeLock]

Voted Renault purely on the basis that Honda has been abusing TR for development and I think that is wrong.

Renault have previously abused Red Bull for development for four years ;)

In all seriousness, I don’t know how anybody could really compare the performance levels of the power units without access to very advanced data including GPS and knowledge of aero efficiency of the cars involved. Renault powered teams seem to have higher top speeds but that could quite easily be related to design decisions (more power allows teams to introduce more aero/drag without the risk of being a sitting duck on straights). To my untrained eye I can’t say one power unit is definitely more powerful than the other by a significant margin and Red Bull seem to be heading in the right direction with Honda in terms of qualifying and race pace (despite claims from a few on here that the Honda was supposedly very inefficient and required carrying more fuel on Sundays). So I would say they’re about evens in the performance department, which leaves reliability. And this is where Honda clearly edges this contest so far. Renault’s power units have seen far too many issues or have had to be run in safe mode costing them valuable performance. Honda by contrast have hardly suffered any significant issues even when they are running less conservatively in recent races.

Edited by FullOppositeLock, 09 August 2019 - 18:51.

[Clatter]

Voted Renault purely on the basis that Honda has been abusing TR for development and I think that is wrong.

Honda haven't abused anything, the owners are the ones willing to sacrifice the junior team. Good move in my book and they are now reaping the rewards of the additional testing they can do.

[Ivanhoe]

Honda - pretty much as expected, maybe a bit better.  However, only flattering when not HP dependant tracks.l

Silverstone?

[Spillage]

Who can really tell where engine performance ends and chassis performance starts?

[Laster]

I do think Renault has more power, but it’s reliability has been in the toilet.

[Ivanhoe]

Honda probably could have more power with poor reliability as well.

[Garndell]

Honda probably could have more power with poor reliability as well.

 

Might explain Max asking for more power all the time, he knows it's there but he can't access it yet.

[Reddington]

Might explain Max asking for more power all the time, he knows it's there but he can't access it yet.

 

That's totally fine though: 2 races won, all races finished within the top 5 (which no other driver can say this year), no retirements, I don't see Max complaining. And if it has spare power, they'll unlock it soon enough, hopefully while maintaining the reliability.

 

I would like to see them work on better starts and acceleration out of slow speed corners though, that's where Renault has shown some real grunt.

 

Anyway, I know which engine supplier I'd like to work with. I voted Honda. TBH, I was pretty nervous at the start of this year regarding Honda, but they've impressed me big time.

 

Renault's engine made great strides too though, however it is still not reliable enough and seems to have slightly worse drivability characteristics than the Honda does.

Edited by Reddington, 12 August 2019 - 00:44.

[CoolBreeze]

Obviously Honda.

 

Renault can't even finish a race, while Honda is beating the so call 'best pu' Ferrari rather comfortably.

[Clatter]

Obviously Honda.

Renault can't even finish a race, while Honda is beating the so call 'best pu' Ferrari rather comfortably.

McLaren have been able to finish races with the same engine. And it's RB who are ahead of Ferrari, not Honda, unless you think TR are getting inferior units.

Edited by Clatter, 12 August 2019 - 09:22.

[SenorSjon]

McLaren have been able to finish races with the same engine. And it's RB who are ahead of Ferrari, not Honda, unless you think TR are getting inferior units.

 

Not all of them. Norris had a Renault failure in Hockenheim, just as Ricciardo (exhaust... yeah right).

[Raest]

Just a general observation, I think all polls should have a "don't know/care" type of answer in there... 

[ArrowsLivery]

Honda! Results speak for themselves! As soon as F1 goes to a high aero efficiency track, McLaren and Reno crumble. That tells me their so called great top speed is due to low downforce/ low drag settings and nothing to do with the PU. BTW, neither team has gotten a top 4 finish in the past 2 years, while STR has multiple.

[TomNokoe]

It's pretty even. Renault clearly have more power but are slightly less reliable.

 

Both are respectable PUs for F1 2019.

[rabbitleader]

Honda! Results speak for themselves! As soon as F1 goes to a high aero efficiency track, McLaren and Reno crumble. That tells me their so called great top speed is due to low downforce/ low drag settings and nothing to do with the PU. BTW, neither team has gotten a top 4 finish in the past 2 years, while STR has multiple.

Don't ever apply for a job as a statistician.

[Tsarwash]

In terms of performance I don't think there's really that much difference between any of the 4 manufacturers now...

This is the most important thing, for the sport. 

[Tsarwash]

Honda! Results speak for themselves! As soon as F1 goes to a high aero efficiency track, McLaren and Reno crumble. That tells me their so called great top speed is due to low downforce/ low drag settings and nothing to do with the PU. BTW, neither team has gotten a top 4 finish in the past 2 years, while STR has multiple.

 

While what you said is technically true, it is highly selective and misleading. The Renault team had nearly quadruple the points of STR last year and  Renault powered cars had far more top four results than Honda did. I don't understand why somebody would try to distort easily verifiable history in such a fashion.