Redbull not to use Renault engines in 2016

[NRS]

rdjohn said:

NRS said:

Who are RB going to complain about if/ when the engine is still not as good as the Ferrari and Mercedes engines?

The standard was set during the Ford / Cosworth era.

When the engine wins, it's a Ford, if it goes pop, it's a Cosworth.

RB took 4 championships without mentioning Renault, but the problems in the last two years have all been with Renault.

The die is cast, if it is good it will be TAG who will get a mention, if it blows up, it will be just another Renault failure. RBR exists to sell fizzy drinks and so has to be immune from any criticism.

Yeap, what I would imagine too. Basically a win-win for Tag Heuer probably, since I suspect RB will not want to blame them and so just blame Renault's input (everything) on the engine as they have before when stuff goes wrong. If they do well in a few races then they can claim the glory.

[andyps]

NRS said:

Yeap, what I would imagine too. Basically a win-win for Tag Heuer probably, since I suspect RB will not want to blame them and so just blame Renault's input (everything) on the engine as they have before when stuff goes wrong. If they do well in a few races then they can claim the glory.

I know what you are saying, but Infinti (closely related to Renault) were/are a major sponsor and they were very happy to criticise Renault. I've read today that Red Bull may continue to use Renault engines after 2016, that may well depend on whether they can get a deal with anyone else so maybe they will need to be nice to them in 2016. Honda appear to be their only other option and presumably they would be concerned about potential bad publicity from RB if things don't work to the optimum - at least McLaren have been very diplomatic in their comments this year, just imagine what Horner would have been saying!

[Some Gump]

NRS said:

Yeap, what I would imagine too. Basically a win-win for Tag Heuer probably, since I suspect RB will not want to blame them and so just blame Renault's input (everything) on the engine as they have before when stuff goes wrong. If they do well in a few races then they can claim the glory.

I'm wondering though - is this not a risk for TAG Huer?

I mean, I can see the idea - try to steal the legacy of TAG (Porsche) engines from the bit of the company you no longer own. If it goes wrong, blame Renault.

The thing is, we're in the age of the tinterweb, memes, and wkers on forums who have plenty of time on their hands. Purely due to this engine naming thing, I now know that some TAG watches aren't actually TAGs at all, rather they are Casio movements in a TAG shell. I never knew that. It makes me like TAG Heuer less. Of course, 1 or 2 people on forums don't matter - but if e.g a Sniff Petrol "we put our badge on any old ste" meme / "not an advert" went viral, surely it'd be a hell of a bill for negative publicity...

[groomi]

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/showdown-todt...

A very interesting take on all this engine madness from Motorsport Magazine. Ordinarily, I'd be looking for a tin foil hat to accompany such conspiracy theories - but being F1, this sounds completely plausible and makes an awful lot of sense...

[llewop]

groomi said:

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/showdown-todt...

A very interesting take on all this engine madness from Motorsport Magazine. Ordinarily, I'd be looking for a tin foil hat to accompany such conspiracy theories - but being F1, this sounds completely plausible and makes an awful lot of sense...

except the fundamental flaws in a few places: for instance in the quote from MM Oct 18: And the great strength of F1 from the late '60s until quite recently was that we had Cosworth, Mechachrome, other people making engines, so you weren't in the hands of the manufacturers...' When that should actually read '... we had Ford, Renault, other people...' so actually it was the manufacturers!

The other thing that crossed my mind was the last time mad Max was at the helm, there was very nearly a breakaway of the teams from FOM/FIA, but ultimately it didn't happen in part due to Ferrari not wanting any part in it. If Bernie, Todt and Max (with Red Bull in the background) manage to alienate ALL the manufacturers, it could be this raises it's head again, but without the safety net for Bernie et al of Ferrari being certain to not jump!

I would be amazed if it played out as forecast in that article. Also that Red Bull were playing such a devious long game, I'm far from convinced they are competent enough to manage it!

[Vaud]

llewop said:

it didn't happen in part due to Ferrari not wanting any part in it.

Correction: Bernie bought Ferrari off. They wanted whatever increased Ferrari's strength which they got, including some veto rights and massive amounts of cash for being "loyal to F1"...

I don't blame them but if had wanted no part of it then they wouldn't have participated with the teams in the breakaway threat!

[llewop]

Vaud said:

Correction: Bernie bought Ferrari off. They wanted whatever increased Ferrari's strength which they got, including some veto rights and massive amounts of cash for being "loyal to F1"...

I don't blame them but if had wanted no part of it then they wouldn't have participated with the teams in the breakaway threat!

fair enough - I over-simplified: but the pay off is the corner that Bernie has backed himself and Todt into: Ferrari getting a disproportionate share of income plus veto rights. Tearing that up could push Ferrari into a different decision on another day.

[MissChief]

Todt especially, but also Bernie and Max will all know. Ferrari care about one thing and one thing only. Ferrari.

Edited by MissChief on Tuesday 8th December 12:40

[Vaud]

llewop said:

fair enough - I over-simplified: but the pay off is the corner that Bernie has backed himself and Todt into: Ferrari getting a disproportionate share of income plus veto rights. Tearing that up could push Ferrari into a different decision on another day.

Agreed. Sadly the current commercial model has made many teams too powerful.

[glazbagun]

BBC article mentions conspiracy theory that the whole "Red Bull can't get an engine" crisis was manufactured to give Eccleston/Todt a stick to beat the manufacturers with:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35037357

[Vaud]

glazbagun said:

BBC article mentions conspiracy theory that the whole "Red Bull can't get an engine" crisis was manufactured to give Eccleston/Todt a stick to beat the manufacturers with:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35037357

There is a big problem with that article.

The opening section:

By Andrew Benson
Chief F1 writer

[suffolk009]

^^^I have a friend who says, "Never attribute to conspiracy theory what can in fact be sheer incompetence".

Seems apt.

[andyps]

When I read it I just got the impression that Andrew Benson was pissed off that he hadn't thought through all the connections that Mark Hughes had so decided to discredit the article as much as possible without actually denying it.

[NRS]

llewop said:

groomi said:

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/showdown-todt...

A very interesting take on all this engine madness from Motorsport Magazine. Ordinarily, I'd be looking for a tin foil hat to accompany such conspiracy theories - but being F1, this sounds completely plausible and makes an awful lot of sense...

except the fundamental flaws in a few places: for instance in the quote from MM Oct 18: And the great strength of F1 from the late '60s until quite recently was that we had Cosworth, Mechachrome, other people making engines, so you weren't in the hands of the manufacturers...' When that should actually read '... we had Ford, Renault, other people...' so actually it was the manufacturers!

The other thing that crossed my mind was the last time mad Max was at the helm, there was very nearly a breakaway of the teams from FOM/FIA, but ultimately it didn't happen in part due to Ferrari not wanting any part in it. If Bernie, Todt and Max (with Red Bull in the background) manage to alienate ALL the manufacturers, it could be this raises it's head again, but without the safety net for Bernie et al of Ferrari being certain to not jump!

I would be amazed if it played out as forecast in that article. Also that Red Bull were playing such a devious long game, I'm far from convinced they are competent enough to manage it!

I also think it's a bit sketchy in terms of some of the stuff said. Previously any gossip said Lauda was positive to sharing engines but the Mercedes board was not happy. This one is saying the opposite. It also seems to suggest Mercedes were part of the plan, and yet they have the most to lose with things changing. So I don't have much faith in it.