161 replies to this topic

[MikeTekRacing]

Also.... FOM / the F1 teams / Liberty refuse to let Andretti in because they aren't going to use a factory engine (Cadillac) straight away but only in 2028, and now Renault wants to run it's Alpine team with a customer engine, I mean wtf....

 

Liberty and the teams refuse Andretti because they don't want another team on the goodies sharing table.

Anything they say is just bs. The only reason is that.

[Clatter]

A manufacturer like Renault always should race their own engines. They've got more than capable people in their factory in Viry and more important is that it would cost a lot of jobs in Viry if they are going to buy their engine.

Also.... FOM / the F1 teams / Liberty refuse to let Andretti in because they aren't going to use a factory engine (Cadillac) straight away but only in 2028, and now Renault wants to run it's Alpine team with a customer engine, I mean wtf....

Renault's biggest problem with their engine is not reliability but the +-30Hp gap to other teams and more important is that the engine development was frozen for several years. It's the engine freeze that hurt them, not their ability to catch up, I'm sure they would have closed that Hp gap if there was no engine freeze.

We're talking about a manufacturer that won so many world titles (with Williams, Benetton, Renault, Red Bull) as an engine manufacturer. They are more than capable to catch up with development, but they never got the chance because the engine development was frozen for a long time, handicapping them. At one point Renault did ask to open up development for 1 winter, but all the other teams refused.

You can't have a Renault car (Alpine is Renault after all) driving with a Mercedes engine in F1, that is bad publicity. The problems with their F1 car of this year are also not just engine related. Their chassis is not good as well.

The engine freeze hurting them is just a poor excuse. They had from 2014 to 2022 to get their engine up to par, and failed. If we discount the first couple of years of this era, when there were stupid upgrade rules and tokens in place. They have had a good 6 years to get it right. Without the freeze the other manufacturers would be improving their engines, and Renault would be even further behind.

[TennisUK]

Well, no. Because why would Renault always need a lift on the freeze to better themselves? Whilst there are 3 other manufacturers who do not need it? No, they are not fine. And also will not be fine without the freeze, because they are seemingly always running behind the hurd.

Circa 2019c the Renault had decent power compared to other engines, it was certainly not an embarrassment at all. But once the freeze happened they had lost their footing and then that was embedded in for the rest of the formula. It’s a bit like when Mercedes were the only one to take the new engine formula seriously at the start - and that advantage was then baked in for ages due to the freeze/tokens arrangement, but in reverse.

[pdac]

It makes total sense to me. They are in F1 to promote their brand. They need the team to be working towards the sharp end of the grid. If the PU is the weak link and it's expensive to develop and it's not the desired technology for other purposes and they are not supplying any other teams, then I'd think about buying in a good PU for the team and closing down the engine operation too.

 

Why spend so much money developing technology that's not the best and that nobody wants?

[F1 Mike]

The "why spend money on a dying technology?" question is a bit of an odd argument to me.
It's absolutely clear that internal combustion in some form (quite likely hybrid) will continue well beyond the ridiculous targets set by governments

[TennisUK]

It makes total sense to me. They are in F1 to promote their brand. They need the team to be working towards the sharp end of the grid. If the PU is the weak link and it's expensive to develop and it's not the desired technology for other purposes and they are not supplying any other teams, then I'd think about buying in a good PU for the team and closing down the engine operation too.

Why spend so much money developing technology that's not the best and that nobody wants?

Alpine road cars exist to work as a halo for Renault.

Bung a Honda Engine in them and suddenly they are a halo for Honda. A complete waste of time and money.

[danmills]

I think Flavio Briatore rumors are true indeed.

 

What are the rumours...

[FLB]

What are the rumours...

That Luca de Meo has hired Flavio as an advisor for the team.

[danmills]

I thought that was a given! I think he's back for a far bigger role. If anyone can turn that team around and strike a supplier deal it's Flavio.

[pup]

If anyone can turn that team around and strike a supplier deal it's Flavio.

If you’re talking a supply of Flavio branded speedos for the whole pit crew, then yes, that sounds right.

[cbo]

I actually think this would be a good idea by Alpine.

In 2030 they wont be selling any road cars with a pure ICE. Why continue to waste millions on dying technology.

IIRC Renault was aiming for 90% of their cars being EV by 2030. EU is still aiming at 2035 as the end of new fossil car sales, but that goal is already eroding with the allowance of ICE running on "co2-neutral" fuels being allowed beyond that.
In the recent EU-parlaiment elections, we saw some serious backpedalling on these goals from some conservative parties and parties further to the right had a decent election, gaining some places.

As a European car manufacturer, I would not bet the farm on the fickleness of European politics, but keep my options open. As some are already doing, like VW.

So a hybrid running on a "co2 neutral" fuel would not be the worst technology to invest some money in for the next 10 years.

And just for the record, I would like the future of the car to be EVs, but it is not going to happen unless there is a a long lasting political iron will behind it. And of that I'm not really convinced.

But Renaults F1 project is currently a failure and they should either fix it or sell it.

[Beri]

IIRC Renault was aiming for 90% of their cars being EV by 2030. EU is still aiming at 2035 as the end of new fossil car sales, but that goal is already eroding with the allowance of ICE running on "co2-neutral" fuels being allowed beyond that.
In the recent EU-parlaiment elections, we saw some serious backpedalling on these goals from some conservative parties and parties further to the right had a decent election, gaining some places.

As a European car manufacturer, I would not bet the farm on the fickleness of European politics, but keep my options open. As some are already doing, like VW.

So a hybrid running on a "co2 neutral" fuel would not be the worst technology to invest some money in for the next 10 years.

And just for the record, I would like the future of the car to be EVs, but it is not going to happen unless there is a a long lasting political iron will behind it. And of that I'm not really convinced.

But Renaults F1 project is currently a failure and they should either fix it or sell it.

 

The goal itself isnt eroding as it is prohibited to bring vehicles to the market that emit CO2. Meaning in effect that any fossil fuel is rendered useless for the new car market from then onwards. Efuels can very much help this achieve and Ive banged the drum more than once on various threads on this Forum on how I think Efuels are the true future for the automotive industry. EVs will exist next to it, but EVs are not the clear cut answer as people thought some years ago. Which was around the same time the EU came out with the statement that by 2035 all cars had to be electric. They later (silently) changed this to new cars to not pollute any CO2.
Hence Efuels are a great solution to the market then and also it can cater the market now. Because its good that by 2035 all cars are not emitting any CO2, but for the forseeable future, lets say 20 years, older cars that do emit CO2 will exist next to those new cars. So that will be a timeline surpassing 2050. If Efuels are also catered to the older cars as well as the new cars, then all cars will be virtually zero emission.

[cbo]

The goal itself isnt eroding as it is prohibited to bring vehicles to the market that emit CO2.

An engine burning Efuel is still emitting Co2.

Efuels reuses carbon already or about to be released into the atmosphere or captured in biomass, hence the co2 neutrality.

It is still a carbon-based fuel burned in an ICE.

This is not the thread for discussing the pros and cons of Efuels, though.

The point is, that carbon-fuel burning ICE cars, using Efuels and hybrid technology are now considered zero-emission in the EU beyond 2035 so it should be of some interest to car manufacturers. And F1 is aiming towards that exact technology. So current and future F1 technology should still be relevant for a car (and truck!) manufacturer like Renault.

Edited by cbo, 20 June 2024 - 11:10.

[Clatter]

An engine burning Efuel is still emitting Co2.

Efuels reuses carbon already or about to be released into the atmosphere or captured in biomass, hence the co2 neutrality.

It is still a fossil fuel burned in an ICE.

This is not the thread for discussing the pros and cons of Efuels, though.

The point is, that fossil-fuel burning ICE cars, using Efuels and hybrid technology are now considered zero-emission in the EU beyond 2035 so it should be of some interest to car manufacturers. And F1 is aiming towards that exact technology. So current and future F1 technology should still be relevant for a car (and truck!) manufacturer like Renault.

How is efuel a fossil fuel?

[pdac]

The "why spend money on a dying technology?" question is a bit of an odd argument to me.
It's absolutely clear that internal combustion in some form (quite likely hybrid) will continue well beyond the ridiculous targets set by governments

 

That's true. But developing PU's to the specification of F1 is not really beneficial here.

[cbo]

How is efuel a fossil fuel?

Granted, that was badly worded. I've changed the original post.

It is still carbon based, and burning it releases co2 into the atmosphere. So calling it "zero-emission" measured at the tailpipe is something of a stretch. And I believe that was the "zero-emission" definition the EU used for their 2035 criteria.

Hence the argument, that the EU is retreating from its original goals and that F1 tech is likely still relevant beyond 2035, even in the EU.

Edited by cbo, 20 June 2024 - 11:21.

[pdac]

Alpine road cars exist to work as a halo for Renault.

Bung a Honda Engine in them and suddenly they are a halo for Honda. A complete waste of time and money.

 

Maybe they will drop the Alpine name from the F1 team. Maybe they are working towards selling the F1 team at some point that they've not yet reached.

Edited by pdac, 20 June 2024 - 11:21.

[kumo7]

This whole things stinks.

 

F1 dropped MUG-H, the state of the art technology, because AUDI wanted to come in cheaply, so that AUDI can share know-how with Porsche.

Renault has been here long enough to know about 2026 PU with no MGU-H. Renault knows how to make this ICU work? It is not like Renault signed up for new reg where F1 to run H-motor. 

 

It is more likely that Meo trying to sell the "platform" PU-business, where everybody badges an identical PU.

[Clatter]

Granted, that was badly worded. I've changed the original post.

It is still carbon based, and burning it releases co2 into the atmosphere. So calling it "zero-emission" measured at the tailpipe is something of a stretch. And I believe that was the "zero-emission" definition the EU used for their 2035 criteria.

Hence the argument, that the EU is retreating from its original goals and that F1 tech is likely still relevant beyond 2035, even in the EU.

There is a lot of manipulating numbers to make things look better. FIA used to say F1 was emission free because they were planting a lot of trees. That's all gone quite now, so no idea if they are still doing it. Even electric cars are only emission free at point of use.

Edited by Clatter, 20 June 2024 - 12:01.

[pdac]

There is a lot of manipulating numbers to make things look better. FIA used to say F1 was emission free because they were planting a lot of trees. That's all gone quite now, so no idea if they are still doing it. Even electric cars are only emission free at point of use.

 

Also "emission free" is not the same as "environment friendly" or even "low environmental impact".

[lustigson]

This is how I look at it:

• If car manufacturer Aston Martin can have Mercedes (now) and Honda (future) engines...
• If car manufacturer McLaren can have Honda (past), Renault (past) and Mercedes (now) engines...
• Then car manufacturer Alpine can have Renault (past) or any other brand of engine.

It changes nothing for Formula 1, really. But:

• Is it weird to see an Aston Martin–Honda or an Alpine–Mercedes on the grid? Yes.
• Is it a waste of a perfectly good Formula 1 team at Enstone? Yes.

It all boils down to branding, basically. I mean, the Aston Martin team is not owned by the car manufacturer. The same goes for Mercedes, which is only 30% owned by Mercedes-Benz AG.

 

Proper, old-school factory teams don't exist anymore, except for (maybe) Ferrari.

[danmills]

And soon RB to some degree, which actually cements their importance on the grid with who else is currently there and their current constructor and engine manufacturer status.

 

Ferrari have 16 WCC over an eternity in F1.

 

Mercedes have 8.

 

RB are on 6, soon to be 7.

 

The loss of Renault and its heritage as constructor and supplier is pretty significant.

 

Red Bull are pretty epic really, given they're 'just a drinks company marketing project'.

Edited by danmills, 20 June 2024 - 13:41.

[Gravelngrass]

It’s embarrassing, but Renault have really struggled on the PU side for a decade now and clearly don’t think they’ve cracked it for ‘26. So in a way, especially with the team being branded Alpine now - I think from a PR side it would have been far worse to the point of undoable if they were still Renault - it makes sense to stick a Merc engine in there and bump them back up the competitive order. McLaren, on the face of it, are a similar niche road car manufacturer to Alpine, and nobody bats an eyelid that they use Mercedes engines rather than making their own.

Except Alpine is the racy/luxury brand of Renault and McLaren is just McLaren.

[statsguy]

And soon RB to some degree, which actually cements their importance on the grid with who else is currently there and their current constructor and engine manufacturer status.

 

Ferrari have 16 WCC over an eternity in F1.

 

Mercedes have 8.

 

RB are on 6, soon to be 7.

 

The loss of Renault and its heritage as constructor and supplier is pretty significant.

 

Red Bull are pretty epic really, given they're 'just a drinks company marketing project'.

 

That comment will come back to haunt Hamilton in his nighmares for life
 

[Clatter]

This is how I look at it:

• If car manufacturer Aston Martin can have Mercedes (now) and Honda (future) engines...
• If car manufacturer McLaren can have Honda (past), Renault (past) and Mercedes (now) engines...
• Then car manufacturer Alpine can have Renault (past) or any other brand of engine.

It changes nothing for Formula 1, really. But:

• Is it weird to see an Aston Martin–Honda or an Alpine–Mercedes on the grid? Yes.
• Is it a waste of a perfectly good Formula 1 team at Enstone? Yes.

It all boils down to branding, basically. I mean, the Aston Martin team is not owned by the car manufacturer. The same goes for Mercedes, which is only 30% owned by Mercedes-Benz AG.

 

Proper, old-school factory teams don't exist anymore, except for (maybe) Ferrari.

 

The difference though is that neither Aston or Mclaren build their own road car engines, so putting someone else's engine in their F1 car doesn't look quite so negative.

[pdac]

I really can't see that any potential car customer is that concerned about these sort of things. They are interested in the performance and, perhaps, the whole image that is marketed, not by whether or not the manufacturer is using someone else's technology when they could have used their own.

[Clatter]

I really can't see that any potential car customer is that concerned about these sort of things. They are interested in the performance and, perhaps, the whole image that is marketed, not by whether or not the manufacturer is using someone else's technology when they could have used their own.

Yeah, I know only one person who ever bought a car because of an F1 connection, and that was a Ferrari. It's price/performance that concerns most. I've often wondered if the manufacturers really do see an uptake in sales based on their F1 participation.

[DW46]

Yeah, I know only one person who ever bought a car because of an F1 connection, and that was a Ferrari. It's price/performance that concerns most. I've often wondered if the manufacturers really do see an uptake in sales based on their F1 participation.

I think they must impact a bit, I’ve never seen so many Mercs driven by younger folk in the UK since 14. Not expecting a massive uptick in Ferraris next year though 😂

[Clatter]

I think they must impact a bit, I’ve never seen so many Mercs driven by younger folk in the UK since 14. Not expecting a massive uptick in Ferraris next year though 😂

I think the rise of PCP and lease deals plays a big part of it. Youngsters can afford a flash car without really paying for it.

[lustigson]

The difference though is that neither Aston or Mclaren build their own road car engines, so putting someone else's engine in their F1 car doesn't look quite so negative.

 

I understand. But do Alpine?

[Clatter]

I understand. But do Alpine?

In all honesty I don't think it really matters.

[DW46]

I think the rise of PCP and lease deals plays a big part of it. Youngsters can afford a flash car without really paying for it.

Aye, my cousin was explaining to me the other day how his £340pcm payments made his 2024 Mercedes better than my £0pcm 2009 CLC, nonsense I tell him, you only have to bang 3 times on the console to get it to start 😂

[FirstnameLastname]

Gasly now saying he hopes they’ll consider all options

The folk at Viry are gonna feel proper arses seeing this play out. The factory team taking a competitors engine due to their own utter failure

[Gravelngrass]

I really can't see that any potential car customer is that concerned about these sort of things. They are interested in the performance and, perhaps, the whole image that is marketed, not by whether or not the manufacturer is using someone else's technology when they could have used their own.

On a very general level, it gives a sense of quality. Let’s say you are an F1 fan and shopping for your next sporty car. You do all of your due diligence, read the reviews, go for test drives, etc., and at the end you have to chose, say, between a Mercedes, a Toyota, an Alfa Romeo and an Alpine. After your review, they are almost tied in all aspects, so it comes down to a subjective factor; somewhere in your mind you’ll say “but Renault can’t make good F1 engines” and that may be the deciding factor. It’s no coincidence manufacturers go into F1 to try and strengthen their brand. Otherwise, why even use it or their premium brand? It also works the other way: how many Korean cars before, and now mostly Chinese ones, market their engines as being designed by, f. ex. Porsche? A lot of it is more psychological than you think.

[MissingApex]

On a very general level, it gives a sense of quality. Let’s say you are an F1 fan and shopping for your next sporty car. You do all of your due diligence, read the reviews, go for test drives, etc., and at the end you have to chose, say, between a Mercedes, a Toyota, an Alfa Romeo and an Alpine. After your review, they are almost tied in all aspects, so it comes down to a subjective factor; somewhere in your mind you’ll say “but Renault can’t make good F1 engines” and that may be the deciding factor. It’s no coincidence manufacturers go into F1 to try and strengthen their brand. Otherwise, why even use it or their premium brand? It also works the other way: how many Korean cars before, and now mostly Chinese ones, market their engines as being designed by, f. ex. Porsche? A lot of it is more psychological than you think.

I don’t agree. I drive a Volvo because that’s a rational decision, I drove a Mercedes before for the same reason, but based on emotions I would choose a Alfa or a Alpine over a Mercedes or a Toyota (or a Volvo) all day.

[Secretariat]

So, I was interested in understanding more about Renault's overall plan for the business and decided to look at their strategic plan, which they call Renaulution. And within the context of this thread, there are a number of relevant nuggets of information in my opinion. At the moment, I am not that interested in providing a summary of the relevant key points related to this thread as it is worth a full review. I think it provides some understanding to the issue at hand with this power unit discussion and what they might be thinking of doing with their assets.

 

https://www.renaultg...strategic-plan/

[pup]

…their strategic plan, which they call Renaulution.

This fits my theory that Renault is actually an elaborate French parody of corporate life.

Being from the US, I’ve seen no evidence that they actually produce cars, so the thought that it’s really a long standing performance piece makes some sense.

[Grippy]

So, I was interested in understanding more about Renault's overall plan for the business and decided to look at their strategic plan, which they call Renaulution. And within the context of this thread, there are a number of relevant nuggets of information in my opinion. At the moment, I am not that interested in providing a summary of the relevant key points related to this thread as it is worth a full review. I think it provides some understanding to the issue at hand with this power unit discussion and what they might be thinking of doing with their assets.

 

https://www.renaultg...strategic-plan/

An interesting read, thanks

 

I can't see this bit happening though

"

Meanwhile, the Alpine F1 teams are focused on their goal: to be in a position to win the Formula 1 world title by 2026. "

[kumo7]

So, I was interested in understanding more about Renault's overall plan for the business and decided to look at their strategic plan, which they call Renaulution. And within the context of this thread, there are a number of relevant nuggets of information in my opinion. At the moment, I am not that interested in providing a summary of the relevant key points related to this thread as it is worth a full review. I think it provides some understanding to the issue at hand with this power unit discussion and what they might be thinking of doing with their assets.

 

https://www.renaultg...strategic-plan/

 

I peeped into it a bit. de Meo talks about Alpine, but nothing about actual racing program, nor ambition.

de Meo look like a typically successful marketing man who sees that change of company target immediately turn the deficit into profit. 

 

This story sees no actual change in the production, or things it commerce, AFAI see it.

[Gravelngrass]

I don’t agree. I drive a Volvo because that’s a rational decision, I drove a Mercedes before for the same reason, but based on emotions I would choose a Alfa or a Alpine over a Mercedes or a Toyota (or a Volvo) all day.

But I said psychological, not emotional. It’s different to buy a car, or anything, from emotion, than to have a perception, for example of low(er) quality, that ends up influencing your purchase. Will the fact that Renault hasn’t been able to build a good engine for his Alpine team influence customers perceptions about the quality of their road cars? I would say there’s a reasonable probability that it could, even if it may be entirely irrational…

[MissingApex]

But I said psychological, not emotional. It’s different to buy a car, or anything, from emotion, than to have a perception, for example of low(er) quality, that ends up influencing your purchase. Will the fact that Renault hasn’t been able to build a good engine for his Alpine team influence customers perceptions about the quality of their road cars? I would say there’s a reasonable probability that it could, even if it may be entirely irrational…

I don’t think so, the general Renault buyer doesn’t have a clue, they probably don’t even watch F1. Besides that Renault (and most French and Italian cars) historically aren’t exactly known for their reliability anyway.

I don’t think putting another PU in the car and label it as Renault, Nissan or Infinity will effect their sales.

[Clatter]

But I said psychological, not emotional. It’s different to buy a car, or anything, from emotion, than to have a perception, for example of low(er) quality, that ends up influencing your purchase. Will the fact that Renault hasn’t been able to build a good engine for his Alpine team influence customers perceptions about the quality of their road cars? I would say there’s a reasonable probability that it could, even if it may be entirely irrational…

The number of people that would think that way is tiny.

[BobbyRicky]

So, I was interested in understanding more about Renault's overall plan for the business and decided to look at their strategic plan, which they call Renaulution. And within the context of this thread, there are a number of relevant nuggets of information in my opinion. At the moment, I am not that interested in providing a summary of the relevant key points related to this thread as it is worth a full review. I think it provides some understanding to the issue at hand with this power unit discussion and what they might be thinking of doing with their assets.

 

https://www.renaultg...strategic-plan/

 

From the "Alpine"-part:

• Alpine is striving for profitable and enduring growth with a one-of-a-kind business model: it operates as a standalone startup.
• Its organisation is therefore agile, and it has its own in-house technological capabilities:
• Alpine has all the skills to develop its chassis as well as hybrid and electric power units;
• It has its own plant, the Manufacture Alpine Dieppe Jean Rédélé, which has unrivalled expertise in best-in-class highly customised vehicles.

My bet is that Alpine are going to build their own engines because it is such a bad idea so why not!

[pdac]

The number of people that would think that way is tiny.

 

Only because it's the job of each manufacturers marketing teams to steer your emotions and make you think it's your conscious decision where in fact it's something they have planted in your head.

 

For example, I've seen so many demonstrations of "amazing memory foam mattresses" that show how if you drop a bowling ball on it, the ball settles whereas it bounces on the old traditional sprung mattresses. There is no attempt to say why this is better. They imply that the bouncing is a bad and the viewer just believes it must be a bad thing - hence they are steered towards memory foam and away from the traditional sprung ones. They may or may not be better - but the marketing does not have to spell it out.

 

They do exactly the same thing with cars (or any other product). What they do is promote features as things that you need and negatives as unimportant or even positives. All without directly saying so.

Edited by pdac, 21 June 2024 - 07:54.

[Secretariat]

This fits my theory that Renault is actually an elaborate French parody of corporate life.

Being from the US, I’ve seen no evidence that they actually produce cars, so the thought that it’s really a long standing performance piece makes some sense.

 

I as well. I am old enough to remember they did and had a presence here. However, it does not make your point any less valid.     

 

From the "Alpine"-part:

• Alpine is striving for profitable and enduring growth with a one-of-a-kind business model: it operates as a standalone startup.
• Its organisation is therefore agile, and it has its own in-house technological capabilities:
• Alpine has all the skills to develop its chassis as well as hybrid and electric power units;
• It has its own plant, the Manufacture Alpine Dieppe Jean Rédélé, which has unrivalled expertise in best-in-class highly customised vehicles.

My bet is that Alpine are going to build their own engines because it is such a bad idea so why not!

 

A couple of things I find interesting in the context of the thread are:

 

1. identifying Alpine as a zero emission brand and offering an all electric line up in 2026  (Doesn't seem to leave room for hybrids?)

2. Creation of Ampere and HORSE Powertrain Limited, a joint venture with Geely. (How does this interplay with Viry?)

 

It would seem at some point, they would really want to promote this HORSE Powertrains and we have already heard about rumors of Geely for F1. Also, one must consider Alipne's 100 race plan. Those 100 races are coming to end. Perhaps that will be the demarcation for a transition for the F1 operation...whatever they choose to do.

 

Edited by Secretariat, 21 June 2024 - 10:24.

[ATM]

The 100 race plan, I think, was axed with Szafnauer being showed the door; I read somewhere a De Meo interview stating he was not convinced of the idea from the beginning but OK'd it to show he îs willing to try improving the team. Or at least this îs how I recall it.

[Gravelngrass]

I don’t think so, the general Renault buyer doesn’t have a clue, they probably don’t even watch F1. Besides that Renault (and most French and Italian cars) historically aren’t exactly known for their reliability anyway.

I don’t think putting another PU in the car and label it as Renault, Nissan or Infinity will effect their sales.

Maybe because, as someone else has said, Renault already has a low-quality image. It can’t be generalized that people who buy Renault are not interested in F1…

[Joseki]

Just now to Sky Italy Briatore did not deny they are switching engine, and instead confirmed "they are evaluating every aspect to be competitive".

He only confirmed there are no negotiations ongoing with any other manufacturers.

Edited by Joseki, 21 June 2024 - 15:47.

[eibyyz]

I as well. I am old enough to remember they did and had a presence here. However, it does not make your point any less valid.     

 

 

In 1984, I was speccing out a new car, I narrowed it down to the Ford Escort (Mercury Lynx, actually--I was a snob even then) or the Renault Alliance.  It was a near thing, the relative density of the dealer network swung it to FoMoCo.

[Secretariat]

The 100 race plan, I think, was axed with Szafnauer being showed the door; I read somewhere a De Meo interview stating he was not convinced of the idea from the beginning but OK'd it to show he îs willing to try improving the team. Or at least this îs how I recall it.

It seemed to be more of a Rossi thing. I have not seen any recent references to it, but it would perhaps still make sense as time marker, perhaps not.