Redbull not to use Renault engines in 2016
Discussion
MiniMan64 said:
I haven't checked in on this thread for about 20 pages, where do we (they) currently stand?
Ferrari engines?
Crawling back to Renault?
Infiniti badged, RB enhanced Renault engines?
Nothing?
No information released yet, however indications that Red Bull will be present next year so answer must surely be RenaultFerrari engines?
Crawling back to Renault?
Infiniti badged, RB enhanced Renault engines?
Nothing?
Scuffers said:
groomi said:
I suspect you're only interested in furthering your own argument, for which there is no answer because nobody is arguing with you.
I reiterate that it is a shame the Cosworth and Pure engine programmes did not come to fruition, thus giving the teams no choice but to buy customer versions of the works engines (which as Ron Dennis correctly predicted will never be allowed to beat the works cars).
I'm arguing because You keep stating bI reiterate that it is a shame the Cosworth and Pure engine programmes did not come to fruition, thus giving the teams no choice but to buy customer versions of the works engines (which as Ron Dennis correctly predicted will never be allowed to beat the works cars).
ks as fact.So red bull never won 4 WC'S with a customer Renault engine?
I am trying to think of the last time it happened(if ever!) It's the same story with Motogp.
amgmcqueen said:
They did, but not against a works Renault team so not comparable. No customer engined team is going to beat the works team on the same grid imo. Ron was right to take a gamble and use a customer engine that did not have it's own factory team.
I am trying to think of the last time it happened(if ever!) It's the same story with Motogp.
2010 it's debatable...I am trying to think of the last time it happened(if ever!) It's the same story with Motogp.
Renault were still a works team at that point.
MissChief said:
Most of the development and money came from Honda as a works team the previous season so I'm not sure it's comparable to a full customer car/team?
that was not the point being argued.the accusation is that you cannot win unless you are a manufacture with your own engine, and no customer team can.
well, Brawn were a customer of Mercedes, yet they still won.
Same for Red-bull, always a customer team, still managed 4 championships in a row.
Scuffers said:
that was not the point being argued.
the accusation is that you cannot win unless you are a manufacture with your own engine, and no customer team can.
That was not my understanding of the accusation. My understanding of the accusation was that you cannot win against an engine manufacturer who has their own race team and car. So Brawn could win as Mercedes didnt have their own team etc.the accusation is that you cannot win unless you are a manufacture with your own engine, and no customer team can.
Give up.
The debate was "can a customer beat a well funded works team" - as in that was the obvious intent of the question.
However, this is the internet. Special people have found 2 occurrences where a customer team has beaten a works team. The fact that the 2 examples are of where a works chassis has a customer engine, or a works car has been in process of being ejected from the factory are moot, "because scuffers".
You have clearly tried to answer the spirit of the question rather than the pedantry of the words, so you lose the internet. Any attempts to redeem yourself will be overruled using copy/paste from Wikipedia. Don not pass Go, and do not collect 200 pounds.
The debate was "can a customer beat a well funded works team" - as in that was the obvious intent of the question.
However, this is the internet. Special people have found 2 occurrences where a customer team has beaten a works team. The fact that the 2 examples are of where a works chassis has a customer engine, or a works car has been in process of being ejected from the factory are moot, "because scuffers".
You have clearly tried to answer the spirit of the question rather than the pedantry of the words, so you lose the internet. Any attempts to redeem yourself will be overruled using copy/paste from Wikipedia. Don not pass Go, and do not collect 200 pounds.
Vaud said:
Scuffers could argue with a plastic cup.
Font of knowledge and good banter but tends towards argument rather than discussion.
I love the way you seem to think you can point the finger at me.Font of knowledge and good banter but tends towards argument rather than discussion.
Quite apart from the original point being total b0ll0cks, you seem keen to twist it round to focus on me rather than the subject at hand.
Personally, I don't really care, I just find it amazing that when presented with the facts showing a basic premiss is wholly incorrect, you then take aim and the person pointing this out.
To get back to the subject, it's perfectly possible for a customer team to win, it's happened in the past, and will no doubt, happen again at some point.
this whole argument seems to me to be over 2 things, 1 the current winging about Merc being dominant (as if this is some new phenomenon that's killing the sport), and the second over Red-bulls inability to negotiate in a way that does not alienate Ferrari/Merc/Renault.
Let's face it, without the Red Bull issue, none of this would have even come up.
Scuffers said:
To get back to the subject, it's perfectly possible for a customer team to win, it's happened in the past, and will no doubt, happen again at some point.
I thought that the manufacturers had to homologate a single engine then supply that exact same engine to their own and customer teams, with talk of upgrades that are only available in sufficient quantities for the manufacturer team, and supplying last year's engines that no longer appears to be the case.I think that the manufacturer teams will do everything possible to disadvantage their customer teams, from refusing to supply strong competitors, not sharing technical information, keeping updates for their own team, optimising the engine design for their own chassis and not passing on information until it's too late for customer's to do the same, their are many ways for them to maintain an advantage.
That might not make it impossible for the customer team to beat the engine manufacturer's team, but it will make it harder, and if there's any doubt the manufacturer can either refuse to supply or only agree to supply last year's engines.
RYH64E said:
I thought that the manufacturers had to homologate a single engine then supply that exact same engine to their own and customer teams, with talk of upgrades that are only available in sufficient quantities for the manufacturer team, and supplying last year's engines that no longer appears to be the case.
I think that the manufacturer teams will do everything possible to disadvantage their customer teams, from refusing to supply strong competitors, not sharing technical information, keeping updates for their own team, optimising the engine design for their own chassis and not passing on information until it's too late for customer's to do the same, their are many ways for them to maintain an advantage.
That might not make it impossible for the customer team to beat the engine manufacturer's team, but it will make it harder, and if there's any doubt the manufacturer can either refuse to supply or only agree to supply last year's engines.
once again, a reasonable viewpoint based on an incorrect assumption.I think that the manufacturer teams will do everything possible to disadvantage their customer teams, from refusing to supply strong competitors, not sharing technical information, keeping updates for their own team, optimising the engine design for their own chassis and not passing on information until it's too late for customer's to do the same, their are many ways for them to maintain an advantage.
That might not make it impossible for the customer team to beat the engine manufacturer's team, but it will make it harder, and if there's any doubt the manufacturer can either refuse to supply or only agree to supply last year's engines.
the engines are homologated, and if upgrades are then introduced they have to be available to customers (FIA regs again).
If, for whatever reason, a customer decides not to take the upgrade, that's not because it's not available to them.
And, as if by magic...
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/121999
"It now appears a new deal has been done with the French manufacturer, which in turn is hoping to become a works outfit again next season as it completes a takeover of Lotus."
Love the positive spin Horner put's on it.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/121999
"It now appears a new deal has been done with the French manufacturer, which in turn is hoping to become a works outfit again next season as it completes a takeover of Lotus."
Love the positive spin Horner put's on it.
Scuffers said:
once again, a reasonable viewpoint based on an incorrect assumption.
the engines are homologated, and if upgrades are then introduced they have to be available to customers (FIA regs again).
If, for whatever reason, a customer decides not to take the upgrade, that's not because it's not available to them.
Mercedes were definitely running upgrades that weren't available to the customer teams this season, whether the reason was shortage of parts or that the upgrade was experimental doesn't alter the fact that there were different specifications of the same engine on the grid, and Mercedes always had the latest (and presumably the best) version.the engines are homologated, and if upgrades are then introduced they have to be available to customers (FIA regs again).
If, for whatever reason, a customer decides not to take the upgrade, that's not because it's not available to them.
Then there's the whole question of supplying the previous year's engine, if for instance Red Bull were to take up the option of using a 2015 engine from either Ferrari or Mercedes they would automatically have a significant performance deficit to overcome.
There's also the unquestionable advantage of the engine department working alongside the chassis department to optimise the package, then releasing the engine information too late for customer teams to do the same. Imo customer teams are significantly disadvantaged compared to the works team, when the difference between success and failure is measured in tenths of a second it's difficult to see them winning, and if there is any doubt (Red Bull) then they either don't get engines or get year old designs.
RYH64E said:
Mercedes were definitely running upgrades that weren't available to the customer teams this season, whether the reason was shortage of parts or that the upgrade was experimental doesn't alter the fact that there were different specifications of the same engine on the grid, and Mercedes always had the latest (and presumably the best) version.
carefulplease provide the evidence for this statement....
there's a difference between "weren't available" and customers not taking them on at the same pace as the manufacturer, be that due to logistics, lack of budget, etc etc.
(for example, Merc come up with a new upgrade that gives another X HP, but also changes the thermal loadings, Williams whilst wanting the extra power don't have time to re-engineer the installation to deal with the change in loadings so delay it's introduction a race or two.)
to then claim this is because Merc have kept it to themselves is somewhat misleading.
Scuffers said:
for example, Merc come up with a new upgrade that gives another X HP, but also changes the thermal loadings, Williams whilst wanting the extra power don't have time to re-engineer the installation to deal with the change in loadings so delay it's introduction a race or two.
Isn't that rather proving my point that customer teams are at a significant disadvantage?RYH64E said:
Mercedes were definitely running upgrades that weren't available to the customer teams this season, whether the reason was shortage of parts or that the upgrade was experimental doesn't alter the fact that there were different specifications of the same engine on the grid, and Mercedes always had the latest (and presumably the best) version.
Im not 100% sure this is accurate and I think you need to also view what's happening through the prism that is the st sandwich the FIA did with the 2015 engine homologation rules. Merc are currently running 2016 engines; their customers have been provided with 2015 examples (the latest version of which has been available if paid for). They can run both specs because the 2015 rules are stoopid. Providing 2016 engines is different.
Edited by theAmerican on Friday 27th November 09:35
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff