Redbull not to use Renault engines in 2016

[Vaud]

Depends when you define "historic"

http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/engine_rule_cha...

It looks well researched but I can't vouch for it (or remember)

1984-1985
1500 cc with compressor or 3000 cc without a compressor.
Minimum car weight 540 kg,
maximum fuel consumption 220 l/race.

1986
1500 cc with compressor or 3000 cc without a compressor.
Minimum car weight 540 kg,
maximum fuel consumption 195 l/race

For 1988 maximum fuel consumption reduced to 155 l/race for turbocharged engines, no limit for normally aspirated engines.

1987

1500 cc with compressor or 3500 cc without a compressor.
Minimum car weight 500 kg
Maximum fuel consumption 195 l/race
maximum charging pressure 4 bar
3500 cc not compressed. Minimum 500 kg, no fuel-limit.

etc

[rdjohn]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/121347

Seems most appropriate to this thread, but it now looks like more tokens, in-season engine development and no frozen bits.

There now seems a possibility that both Honda and Renault could actually catch up, sometime and that another engine supplier could enter and still make its mark - my conjecture.

I still think that only Ferrari will pressure Mercedes next year.

[RichB]

Vaud said:

Depends when you define "historic"

Ah right, being an old codger I assumes "since the early days" meant Moss, Fangio and Nuvolari

[HustleRussell]

This development will ease the urgency and Red Bull will stick with Renault for 2016.

[Scuffers]

Gaz. said:

Or, Mercedes & Ferrari could leave Renault & Honda for dead. After four years of open & unrestricted development and two years of restricted development Renault are nowhere, I don't see another year like winter14/15 closing the field at all. People keep harping on about diminishing returns but we are nowhere near that point yet, the gap is only getting bigger.

for Renault, yes you are right.

I do think proportionally, Ferrari are closer to merc now than before, but that's not to say they have caught up and that Merc still don't have someway to go yet...

Realistically, without rule changes, I don't think there is another big hike in performance out there, all they have left now I think is incremental improvements in the systems giving better efficiencies for the ERS systems etc.

I think Merc are already pushing hard up against the 2/4Mj limits as they are.

[llewop]

Gaz. said:

Or, Mercedes & Ferrari could leave Renault & Honda for dead. After four years of open & unrestricted development and two years of restricted development Renault are nowhere, I don't see another year like winter14/15 closing the field at all. People keep harping on about diminishing returns but we are nowhere near that point yet, the gap is only getting bigger.

Maybe a way to counter that would be that tokens would be available in inverse proportion to success in the previous year: so the engine manufacturer with the weakest engine has to most scope to change things, the leaders can only use the 'reliability/safety etc' clause? Wouldn't be popular with Merc and perhaps a little 'artificial' but it is not a level playing field anyway as has been demonstrated.

If those not doing so well can't gain ground, ultimately if the engine manufacturers don't see value in being in F1, they will leave (again)(as will teams and sponsors) which almost drags us back to the thread topic: Red Bull to not use Renault engines - so what are they to do? Bernie is claiming 'it's sorted' but that appeared to be news to Horner!

The only options I can see for them for 2016 are whatever Ferrari are prepared to provide or marriage-guidance-councillor-brokered continue with Renault. Unless Bernie has convinced Merc to provide an engine after all? Walk away still seems an option to me, not convinced by Bernie's 'sorted' story until there is some evidence.

[Scuffers]

llewop said:

Maybe a way to counter that would be that tokens would be available in inverse proportion to success in the previous year: so the engine manufacturer with the weakest engine has to most scope to change things,

that's artifical b0ll0cks though..

next we will be having success ballast so the lame sloaks can get a helping hand...

F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing and engineering, not 'after-you' sir, if you can't make a good enough car or engine, quit.

Renault are in F1 to promote their engineering, do we now say it's just not as good as merc and so we have to let them cheat a bit to make it 'fair'?

[RichB]

Scuffers said:

llewop said:

Maybe a way to counter that would be that tokens would be available in inverse proportion to success in the previous year: so the engine manufacturer with the weakest engine has to most scope to change things,

that's artifical b0ll0cks though.. next we will be having success ballast so the lame sloaks can get a helping hand... F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing and engineering, not 'after-you' sir, if you can't make a good enough car or engine, quit. Renault are in F1 to promote their engineering, do we now say it's just not as good as merc and so we have to let them cheat a bit to make it 'fair'?

Yep, handicapping in F1 in any form is nonsense.

[Vaud]

HustleRussell said:

This development will ease the urgency and Red Bull will stick with Renault for 2016.

But under what brand? Nissan? Dacia? Alpine? Samsung?

Actually Alpine or Samsung might be good face saving for all.

Dacia might be the brand RB deserve.

[MartG]

There are still rumours of a Cosworth V6 Hybrid floating around - the ruling about in season development continuing makes it a semi-viable option if true

[Vaud]

MartG said:

There are still rumours of a Cosworth V6 Hybrid floating around - the ruling about in season development continuing makes it a semi-viable option if true

Unless they have found a few hundred mill from somewhere, plus a hidden talent pool...

... maybe a Renault rebranded as Cosworth with a custom Cosworth "map"?

[MiniMan64]

Seems there's a simple one or the other choice here.

An F1 without limits that is the pinicale of Motorsport development but very boring on track action with single manufactures dominating

Or

An F1 with artificial limits and rules that allows teams to compete on track fairly evenly.

[Scuffers]

MartG said:

There are still rumours of a Cosworth V6 Hybrid floating around - the ruling about in season development continuing makes it a semi-viable option if true

Where from?

I call them b0ll0ks

[MartG]

Scuffers said:

MartG said:

There are still rumours of a Cosworth V6 Hybrid floating around - the ruling about in season development continuing makes it a semi-viable option if true

Where from?

From that highly reliable source [/sarcasm mode] http://www.f1today.net/en/news/205924/analysis-it-...

[Vaud]

ROFL.

[Scuffers]

What a pile of crap...

So, on the ofchance of finding customers, cosworth have designed a new powertrain in total secrecy for the last 2 years with a mythical bag of cash?


Yea, right.

[Vaud]

Scuffers said:

What a pile of crap...

So, on the ofchance of finding customers, cosworth have designed a new powertrain in total secrecy for the last 2 years with a mythical bag of cash?


Yea, right.

I believe that it could be a branding exercise. "Renault in partnership with Cosworth, etc" - customer 2015 engine with Cosworth mods (using tokens)? Viable? Or a 2016 engine with a 3 month delay on receiving the latest version?

[Muzzer79]

patmahe said:

MartG said:

Scuffers said:

RichB said:

MartG said:

Scuffers said:

said this before, but set the engine regs to 'you have X Kg's of fuel, do with it whatever you want' then we will see innovation and competition.

Agreed, though replace X Kgs with Y KWh worth of fuel to allow alternate fuels such as methanol or diesel, but all containing the same total energy based on calorific value of the fuel.

There you go complicating it again. The fans would have no idea what the calorific value of petrol, diesel or indeed taurine is so just say x kg of "fuel"...

So what?
They don't Need to understand it just that they all have X fuel to race with.


Then on the on-screen graphic a fuel gauge in %.

Job done.

^ This

Here here,

Then we will see what some of the greatest engineering minds can come up with. Who knows maybe and 800cc twin turboed V12/rotary/electric hybrid will be the solution, but at least we'd see real innovation. For me the WEC is now the pinnacle of world motorsport partially because of the different powertrains, how F1 has let this happen is beyond me.

You'd get innovation yes, but you're (all) forgetting the lengths manufacturers would go to if the constraints of development were removed....

It'd be a money war, with armies of engineers bench testing unobtainium crank shafts and diamond tipped rocker bolts.

The winner would be the manufacturer with the biggest pockets to buy the best ideas and we'd end up in the same situation (one dominant force) as we do now.

[Scuffers]

Muzzer79 said:

You'd get innovation yes, but you're (all) forgetting the lengths manufacturers would go to if the constraints of development were removed....

It'd be a money war, with armies of engineers bench testing unobtainium crank shafts and diamond tipped rocker bolts.

The winner would be the manufacturer with the biggest pockets to buy the best ideas and we'd end up in the same situation (one dominant force) as we do now.

So, what's new?

[RichB]

Scuffers said:

Muzzer79 said:

You'd get innovation yes, but you're (all) forgetting the lengths manufacturers would go to if the constraints of development were removed....
It'd be a money war, with armies of engineers bench testing unobtainium crank shafts and diamond tipped rocker bolts.
The winner would be the manufacturer with the biggest pockets to buy the best ideas and we'd end up in the same situation (one dominant force) as we do now.

So, what's new?

Indeed, I thought that was what F1 was about?