Redbull not to use Renault engines in 2016
Discussion
Red Bulls horrible behaviour has been part of the problem with F1 though. Awful awful PR. Bernie hasn't helped either. Constantly talking down your own product turns people and money away. Its quite amazing to watch...
If I owned a an engine supplier I would want huge caveats in place before supplying RB. One of which would be the departure of Marko...poisonous man
ETA...just realised I am parroting myself from earlier on this thread... Getting old
If I owned a an engine supplier I would want huge caveats in place before supplying RB. One of which would be the departure of Marko...poisonous man
ETA...just realised I am parroting myself from earlier on this thread... Getting old
Edited by Inertiatic on Thursday 17th September 07:06
I can't help but feel people's dislike for Horner clouds judgement about Redbull here. Redbull pay for a product and for the last 2 years they haven't been getting what they are paying for and unlike say Ferrari there are zero signs Renault are making any progress. For exactly how long is Redbull supposed to stay publicly silent about the cause of their dramatic loss in form?
There also appears to be some glee among the press / fans about the situation, but I think that is mistaken. IMO F1 needs Redbull more than Redbull needs f1..... if they go then the grid is seriously thin on the ground.
There also appears to be some glee among the press / fans about the situation, but I think that is mistaken. IMO F1 needs Redbull more than Redbull needs f1..... if they go then the grid is seriously thin on the ground.
VolvoT5 said:
For exactly how long is Redbull supposed to stay publicly silent about the cause of their dramatic loss in form?
Agree to a point, but they were moaning about the Renault engine last year too. If they`d waited until 2015 I could see their point, but look at McLaren/Honda. I`m sure behind the scenes they are having some huge arguments but the public face is a somewhat strained united front.As soon as it went wrong last year, RB started pointing the finger at Renault and haven`t stopped since.
Wh00sher said:
Agree to a point, but they were moaning about the Renault engine last year too. If they`d waited until 2015 I could see their point, but look at McLaren/Honda. I`m sure behind the scenes they are having some huge arguments but the public face is a somewhat strained united front.
As soon as it went wrong last year, RB started pointing the finger at Renault and haven`t stopped since.
United front, really?! - McHonda are already publicly sniping at each other - with Mclaren instructing both drivers to point out their 'data' showing the car was only losing .3 in the corners and 3 secs on the straights at Monza. Not to mention the calls for the Honda boss to be sacked.... the reported bust up between Boullier and Honda staff, etc. As soon as it went wrong last year, RB started pointing the finger at Renault and haven`t stopped since.
Yes Redbull were quite open about the problems but what are the supposed to say when Renault spent all of last year promising improvements/updates and then failing to deliver?
The main difference between Redbull and Mclaren is that Redbull is not purely a racing brand or engine manufacturer, they don't need f1 and can take their toys home at any point if they can't get a competitive package. Mclaren are f
ked because they have zero other options. VolvoT5 said:
Redbull pay for a product and for the last 2 years they haven't been getting what they are paying for
They won 3 races last year and Renault are still second to Mercedes in terms of engine wins in the new V6 era. Unless the contract states that they are guaranteed a championship winning engine then they are getting exactly what they paid for.Not everyone can win and F1 is and always has been cyclical, they only recently won 4 WCs on the bounce. How you manage those lower periods is crucial in F1, they've been utterly terrible at it and ironically given they only exist in F1 for PR reasons they've made a right mess of that too.
VolvoT5 said:
Redbull pay for a product and for the last 2 years they haven't been getting what they are paying for and unlike say Ferrari there are zero signs Renault are making any progress. For exactly how long is Redbull supposed to stay publicly silent about the cause of their dramatic loss in form?
I think that's a 2 parter, the first one is the paying for a product. I doubt Renault or Red Bull signed a contract that said 'Renault will produce an engine that will put every car at the front' it's more likely they've put together a supply contract that has all manner of technicalities in it, but actuals of what they can do would never be in there. Whether they've got value for money is another story. The second part is how long Red Bull are supposed to stay quiet, and I think the answer is, in a partnership - all the time. Work with your partner to get where you need to be, and if they cant deliver it, find someone else who can. b
hing and moaning is probably the least productive thing possible. I'd imagine if you're in Renault and Red Bull are holding on line 1 at 9am on Monday morning, you'd probably go make a coffee first, take a st, grab a muffin and a paper before answering it In modern day F1 unless you've got a competitive engine you're wasting your time, no amount of aero or chassis work will make a Renault powered Red Bull competitive against Mercedes. So the options for Red Bull are a) potter around in the mid-field and accept their place in the scheme of things, b) get a competitive engine, or c) spend their marketing budget elsewhere and leave F1.
Teams like Red Bull aren't committed racers, they're an offshoot of the marketing division of a successful company, their role is to sell fizzy drinks. If F1 doesn't serve that purpose they'll go elsewhere.
Teams like Red Bull aren't committed racers, they're an offshoot of the marketing division of a successful company, their role is to sell fizzy drinks. If F1 doesn't serve that purpose they'll go elsewhere.
RYH64E said:
Teams like Red Bull aren't committed racers, they're an offshoot of the marketing division of a successful company, their role is to sell fizzy drinks. If F1 doesn't serve that purpose they'll go elsewhere.
They are already elsewhere - in fact it's harder to find something they aren't involved in, from WRC with the works VW team, Worldrallycross with Team Peugeot-Hansen, Red Bull Air Races, Powerboat Racing and pretty much everything in between. 
RYH64E said:
In modern day F1 unless you've got a competitive engine you're wasting your time, no amount of aero or chassis work will make a Renault powered Red Bull competitive against Mercedes. So the options for Red Bull are a) potter around in the mid-field and accept their place in the scheme of things, b) get a competitive engine, or c) spend their marketing budget elsewhere and leave F1.
with respect, that's tosh.if you take out the merc cars from the current grid, (the team, not the engines), who are we left with to fill the podium?
Ferrari, Williams and Red Bull, so 3 different engined teams.
Yes, the engine is important, but so is the car, how else do you explain this?
the current Merc car is probably the best chassis on the grid at the moment, hence why it's winning.
Scuffers said:
RYH64E said:
In modern day F1 unless you've got a competitive engine you're wasting your time, no amount of aero or chassis work will make a Renault powered Red Bull competitive against Mercedes. So the options for Red Bull are a) potter around in the mid-field and accept their place in the scheme of things, b) get a competitive engine, or c) spend their marketing budget elsewhere and leave F1.
with respect, that's tosh.if you take out the merc cars from the current grid, (the team, not the engines), who are we left with to fill the podium?
Ferrari, Williams and Red Bull, so 3 different engined teams.
Yes, the engine is important, but so is the car, how else do you explain this?
the current Merc car is probably the best chassis on the grid at the moment, hence why it's winning.
RYH64E said:
What part is tosh? The part that says a Renault engined car can't be competitive with Mercedes no matter how good the aero/chassis, or the rest?
so, this years results:Vettel did not come 3rd at Melbourne beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not win the Malaysian GP?
Vettel did not come 3rd in China beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not come 3rd in Spain beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not come 2nd at Monaco beating everything including 1 of the Merc's?
Vettel did not come 3rd at Silverstone beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not win at Nagydij?
are we watching the same championship?
Scuffers said:
RYH64E said:
What part is tosh? The part that says a Renault engined car can't be competitive with Mercedes no matter how good the aero/chassis, or the rest?
so, this years results:Vettel did not come 3rd at Melbourne beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not win the Malaysian GP?
Vettel did not come 3rd in China beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not come 3rd in Spain beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not come 2nd at Monaco beating everything including 1 of the Merc's?
Vettel did not come 3rd at Silverstone beating everything but the 2 Merc cars?
Vettel did not win at Nagydij?
are we watching the same championship?
There is no doubt that Merc have the best chassis. I'm sure the aero is as good as or better than anyone else, their packaging of the engine will be the best of the Mercedes powered cars and clearly they have the best engine. That's why they are dominant. Equally, I'm sure Williams, Lotus and Force India have the same basic engine (ignoring the Monza upgrade) but they are not doing such a good job as Merc in the aero and or packaging departments. Red Bull appear to now have a good chassis aero wise and I would expect their packaging to be optimised for their engine. Without the Merc car on the grid they would be competitive - maybe not on all circuits but competitive non the less.
One thing I can't understand - whats the difference between the Red Bulls undoubted aero dominance of a few years ago (when they won a lot!) and Mercs undoubted engine dominance now? No dominant force will last forever and it is clear Ferrari is closing the gap on the engine side. True, Mercs Monza step forward is probably larger than may be apparent but Ferrari are closer than they were 12 months ago.It seems to me that people are quick to forget the aero dominance of Red Bull but equally quick to slate the new engine rules. Formula 1 is a competitive business and teams will do everything to get to and stay at the front. Long may that continue.
I must admit, I like the engine formula now. Its very high tech and all the engine manufacturers should be applauded - even Honda! I suppose I'm just a geek!
Richard.
One thing I can't understand - whats the difference between the Red Bulls undoubted aero dominance of a few years ago (when they won a lot!) and Mercs undoubted engine dominance now? No dominant force will last forever and it is clear Ferrari is closing the gap on the engine side. True, Mercs Monza step forward is probably larger than may be apparent but Ferrari are closer than they were 12 months ago.It seems to me that people are quick to forget the aero dominance of Red Bull but equally quick to slate the new engine rules. Formula 1 is a competitive business and teams will do everything to get to and stay at the front. Long may that continue.
I must admit, I like the engine formula now. Its very high tech and all the engine manufacturers should be applauded - even Honda! I suppose I'm just a geek!
Richard.
935 said:
One thing I can't understand - whats the difference between the Red Bulls undoubted aero dominance of a few years ago (when they won a lot!) and Mercs undoubted engine dominance now?
The obvious difference is that aero and chassis design are within the control of the team, it's up to them to come up with better designs if they can, whereas engine performance is something over which they have no control whatsoever. As it stands, none of the Renault or Honda powered teams have a chance of winning, no matter how good their chassis, aero package or drivers, they're not going to make up the deficit caused by the engine.
Gaz. said:
Mclaren put on a united front for 9 months, despite having their worst season in their history and only now is their relationship breaking down.
RBR were at Renault's throats from day 1 of the Jerez winter test, despite not letting Renault look at certain parts of their car. RBR are utterly shameful.
Nine months isn't really very long. The first race of the season was only 6 months ago and the true horror of the Honda engine wasn't really apparent until it was compared on track with the competition, so 6 months really.RBR were at Renault's throats from day 1 of the Jerez winter test, despite not letting Renault look at certain parts of their car. RBR are utterly shameful.
The bigger question is what will McLaren do if the Honda relationship has truly broken down, where do they go next? They've tried and failed with the best engine on the grid, they're trying and failing with the worst engine on the grid, so McLaren to Ferrari maybe? Can't see that happening...
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff