Renault at 1000bhp ?

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules
mpls2
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:11 pm

Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by mpls2 »

According to some articles, Renault claims 1000bhp.. any thoughts ?

http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/ ... p_barrier/

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 3954
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

mpls2 wrote:According to some articles, Renault claims 1000bhp.. any thoughts ?

http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/ ... p_barrier/
They only achieve it when both cars are in the same straight. And 500bhp per car isn't that impressive.

AravJ
Posts: 1033
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by AravJ »

Wow, could that mean their race power is equivalent to Merc and Ferrari quali power party modes.
Renault powered chasis must really be only better than Williams in that case

j man
Posts: 3527
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Location: UK

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by j man »

These horsepower figures mean little. It's only the maximum power that the engine produces right on the rev limit, it's not a great indicator of overall engine performance as it tells you nothing about what power is produced lower down the rev range.

Mercedes response of "We would not talk about 1000hp. Maybe Renault calculates it differently to us. What matters to us is the laptime, anyway." is spot on.

Option or Prime
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Option or Prime »

Whether its 950, 970 or 1000 bhp is a detail, the fact is Renault have an engine that at times can match the best. How long before they sort the chassis?
Ricciardo may not be the fastest but he is one of the fastest. The field is closing up.

mpls2
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:11 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by mpls2 »

j man wrote:These horsepower figures mean little. It's only the maximum power that the engine produces right on the rev limit, it's not a great indicator of overall engine performance as it tells you nothing about what power is produced lower down the rev range.

Mercedes response of "We would not talk about 1000hp. Maybe Renault calculates it differently to us. What matters to us is the laptime, anyway." is spot on.
I also like the Redbull response, whether

As for Honda, a source at Red Bull commented, “We are reliable. Renault may be 1000hp, but we still lap their cars in the race.”


I personally think there is elements of truth, but only dirng short bursts during qualifying.. not sustainaable of a race. meaming their average sutainable max power and drivablity for the race is definitely behind the other 3 PUs. Not sure why Renault would want to give out the statement they've made..

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Exediron »

mpls2 wrote:I personally think there is elements of truth, but only dirng short bursts during qualifying.. not sustainaable of a race. meaming their average sutainable max power and drivablity for the race is definitely behind the other 3 PUs. Not sure why Renault would want to give out the statement they've made..
I really don't think they're behind Honda. Red Bull is ahead of Renault - Honda is not.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (6 wins, 18 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

jono794
Posts: 641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:00 am
Location: Running wide at Bergwerk

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by jono794 »

Exediron wrote:
mpls2 wrote:I personally think there is elements of truth, but only dirng short bursts during qualifying.. not sustainaable of a race. meaming their average sutainable max power and drivablity for the race is definitely behind the other 3 PUs. Not sure why Renault would want to give out the statement they've made..
I really don't think they're behind Honda. Red Bull is ahead of Renault - Honda is not.
Spot on. The PU is masking some pretty big issues with the Renault chassis in medium and high speed corners, but it's consistently near the top of the speed traps for both teams.
"Guys I'm coming in, I'm having too much grip"
- Chanoch Nissany

User avatar
Jezza13
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Location: Far side of Koozebane

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Jezza13 »

So the question beckons would the RB be a better or worse car this year if they'd stuck with the Renault?

Or would it be about par?
Only took 7 yrs, 5 mths & 21 days.

Cooper, Arrows, Brabham, Ligier, Lotus, Tyrrell, Minardi, McLaren, Sauber, Williams,

Remember the garagista's. The heart & soul of F1. They raced to race.

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)

Option or Prime
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Option or Prime »

I'd say slightly worse but the question is if Renault sort out consistent power and reliability is the top line higher than Honda? Perhaps, its wait and see.

User avatar
Badgeronimous
Posts: 915
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Location: Scotland & Abu Dhabi

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Badgeronimous »

BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.

Siao7
Posts: 8765
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Siao7 »

Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?

kleefton
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by kleefton »

I thought that 1000 hp figure had been achieved by Mercedes years ago, because there were numerous reports they were very close a couple of years ago.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/mercede ... hp-season/


https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13358 ... hp-barrier

But 2 years later they are saying they're still not there. Ok....

I'd be very surprised if any of the manufacturers were far off 1000hp of combined ice+electrical power in qualifying personally.
But as mentioned before peak power means little. The delivery of the power and the powerband curve itself are more important, and of course how long they can actually deploy the electrical power. I guess we will never know for sure where all the manufacturers stack up. Too many speculations, lies and misinformation out there. In terms of reliability I'd have to say that Honda has surpassed Renault this year though.

AravJ
Posts: 1033
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by AravJ »

We will never know about their claims.
The question we got to ask is why they are making it public unlike Merc and more especially Ferrari who we know are mighty?

Well its really got to do with spinning a positive story to the Renault board, seeing that they are being crushed by their customer team McLaren and now even STR is ahead of them. And renualt has pumped a lot of money into the programme upgrading their facilities. Their narrative is working as some are already believing it despite no evidence.

They cannot deny they built a poor car as the evidence is plain to see. Claiming they have the best engine however is not so clear cut and hard for anybody to argue with their calculations, more so because you don't have access to other manufactures calculations.

Its all political, but they need to be careful as they are indirectly saying that the chasis department are soley to blame, and well we all know how that kind of strategy ended up for mclaren. Speaking of mclaren, Renault are also indirectly saying the mclaren chasis is not as good as they think it is, maybe on par of last year given the claimed gains of the renault pu.
This can end up backfiring badly.

User avatar
minchy
Posts: 5304
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by minchy »

Maybe they have smaller horses in France than Italy, Germany or Japan?
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.

User avatar
Tufty
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:33 pm
Location: Colwyn Bay, North Wales

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Tufty »

Siao7 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?
If I may butt in, my ex has a relative who works for Mercedes in the engine department. Got talking to him at a family party and he did say something similar to Badgeronimous's speculation. He did preface it with "I still think", in fairness ;)

All that said, I can't vouch for the accuracy of said employee's statement, and this is going back more than 2 years.
Organiser of the single most low-tech Robot Wars tournament in history, PM for details!

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

Does everyone remember how RedBull used to cover up for Renault's problems by taking the blame for every one of the partnership's failures on track? I don't. If Honda's engine was as bad as Renault's, we'd be hearing about it after every race.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

jono794
Posts: 641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:00 am
Location: Running wide at Bergwerk

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by jono794 »

Todd wrote:Does everyone remember how RedBull used to cover up for Renault's problems by taking the blame for every one of the partnership's failures on track? I don't. If Honda's engine was as bad as Renault's, we'd be hearing about it after every race.
The point is neither engine is bad anymore.
"Guys I'm coming in, I'm having too much grip"
- Chanoch Nissany

Siao7
Posts: 8765
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Siao7 »

Tufty wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?
If I may butt in, my ex has a relative who works for Mercedes in the engine department. Got talking to him at a family party and he did say something similar to Badgeronimous's speculation. He did preface it with "I still think", in fairness ;)

All that said, I can't vouch for the accuracy of said employee's statement, and this is going back more than 2 years.
Thank you Tufty. Always nice to hear info like this. I wasn't really questioning it, just how would someone know this info if not from an insider for example.

User avatar
Badgeronimous
Posts: 915
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Location: Scotland & Abu Dhabi

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Badgeronimous »

Siao7 wrote:
Tufty wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?
If I may butt in, my ex has a relative who works for Mercedes in the engine department. Got talking to him at a family party and he did say something similar to Badgeronimous's speculation. He did preface it with "I still think", in fairness ;)

All that said, I can't vouch for the accuracy of said employee's statement, and this is going back more than 2 years.
Thank you Tufty. Always nice to hear info like this. I wasn't really questioning it, just how would someone know this info if not from an insider for example.
I don't know would be my answer. The amount of people that do know exactly what Mercs mapping and power graphs look like will be minimal.

I do know a bit about mapping, and do move in motorsport circles. I would say that it's logical Mercedes have focussed their engine development on achieving drivability, rather than maintaining the oomph advantage they once had (it would very much be a law of diminishing return as all will be very close) - and it would also explain why customer teams have fell back into the pack to an extent.

When it comes to power, it would be interesting to see the engine stats at 2500 rpm, 5000 rpm, 7500 rpm (Which we are never going to get to see). I strongly suspect the Mercedes stats would be the most impressive across the whole range, whilst maybe actually be the worst at peak range. Although it is all going to be fractional.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Covalent »

Badgeronimous wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Tufty wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?
If I may butt in, my ex has a relative who works for Mercedes in the engine department. Got talking to him at a family party and he did say something similar to Badgeronimous's speculation. He did preface it with "I still think", in fairness ;)

All that said, I can't vouch for the accuracy of said employee's statement, and this is going back more than 2 years.
Thank you Tufty. Always nice to hear info like this. I wasn't really questioning it, just how would someone know this info if not from an insider for example.
I don't know would be my answer. The amount of people that do know exactly what Mercs mapping and power graphs look like will be minimal.

I do know a bit about mapping, and do move in motorsport circles. I would say that it's logical Mercedes have focussed their engine development on achieving drivability, rather than maintaining the oomph advantage they once had (it would very much be a law of diminishing return as all will be very close) - and it would also explain why customer teams have fell back into the pack to an extent.

When it comes to power, it would be interesting to see the engine stats at 2500 rpm, 5000 rpm, 7500 rpm (Which we are never going to get to see). I strongly suspect the Mercedes stats would be the most impressive across the whole range, whilst maybe actually be the worst at peak range. Although it is all going to be fractional.
Don't these hybrid engines rev at around 5000 rpm at idle?

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 3954
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

Badgeronimous wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Tufty wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?
If I may butt in, my ex has a relative who works for Mercedes in the engine department. Got talking to him at a family party and he did say something similar to Badgeronimous's speculation. He did preface it with "I still think", in fairness ;)

All that said, I can't vouch for the accuracy of said employee's statement, and this is going back more than 2 years.
Thank you Tufty. Always nice to hear info like this. I wasn't really questioning it, just how would someone know this info if not from an insider for example.
I don't know would be my answer. The amount of people that do know exactly what Mercs mapping and power graphs look like will be minimal.

I do know a bit about mapping, and do move in motorsport circles. I would say that it's logical Mercedes have focussed their engine development on achieving drivability, rather than maintaining the oomph advantage they once had (it would very much be a law of diminishing return as all will be very close) - and it would also explain why customer teams have fell back into the pack to an extent.

When it comes to power, it would be interesting to see the engine stats at 2500 rpm, 5000 rpm, 7500 rpm (Which we are never going to get to see). I strongly suspect the Mercedes stats would be the most impressive across the whole range, whilst maybe actually be the worst at peak range. Although it is all going to be fractional.
The engine rules state that below 10,500rpm, the max fuel flow is proportional to RPM - this means one revolution from 0 to 10,500rpm is allowed the same quantity of fuel. At 10,500rpm they get maximum fuel flow, so above that speed they are allowed less fuel per revolution. This makes 10,500rpm the theoretical sweet spot (the point at which they generate the most power) and (theoretically) it should be proportional to engine speed up until that point.

Above 10,500rpm the engine will generate the same explosive energy per second (as it's burning the same quantity of fuel) but the engine will have greater power losses due to the faster engine speed. This is why the cars tend to upshift at 12,000rpm as these losses aren't as significant for the first 2000rpm as they are for above it. (Note, this is not a regulation dependent limit for anyone whining about FIA rules causing lower engine speeds - actually the FIA restriction about fuel flow below 10,500rpm being restricted means the teams have to rev higher to get maximum fuel rates)

Of course, all this comes with a big asterix, and that is "theoretically" - theoretically the power curve should be proportional to engine speed below 10,500rpm but obviously in practice things will never be 'perfect' - I suspect that Mercedes are the team closest to achieving this as their split turbo design is the most evolved and was designed for this engine formula from the outset, and keeps the air the coolest by separating it from the exhaust gases.

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

jono794 wrote:
Todd wrote:Does everyone remember how RedBull used to cover up for Renault's problems by taking the blame for every one of the partnership's failures on track? I don't. If Honda's engine was as bad as Renault's, we'd be hearing about it after every race.
The point is neither engine is bad anymore.
Renault powered cars have more than twice as many mechanical retirements as Honda powered cars this year. STR is competing with the Renault factory team in the WCC with a budget equal to what Renault spends on drivers. Maybe you don't think the Renault power unit is bad, but it surely isn't as good as the Honda power unit.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

Siao7
Posts: 8765
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Siao7 »

Badgeronimous wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Tufty wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Badgeronimous wrote:BHP is important but how the BHP is delivered is more important.

That's why I still think the Mercedes engine is the best. It may not be the most powerful anymore or be head and shoulder above everything as in 14-15-16, but.... it has been developed to compliment the driveability of the whole package, as opposed to focussing on outright, brutish, oomph. I dare say it has a lovely flat torque line, and lovely linear power graph as the RPM increases.
Genuine question, how do you know this?
If I may butt in, my ex has a relative who works for Mercedes in the engine department. Got talking to him at a family party and he did say something similar to Badgeronimous's speculation. He did preface it with "I still think", in fairness ;)

All that said, I can't vouch for the accuracy of said employee's statement, and this is going back more than 2 years.
Thank you Tufty. Always nice to hear info like this. I wasn't really questioning it, just how would someone know this info if not from an insider for example.
I don't know would be my answer. The amount of people that do know exactly what Mercs mapping and power graphs look like will be minimal.

I do know a bit about mapping, and do move in motorsport circles. I would say that it's logical Mercedes have focussed their engine development on achieving drivability, rather than maintaining the oomph advantage they once had (it would very much be a law of diminishing return as all will be very close) - and it would also explain why customer teams have fell back into the pack to an extent.

When it comes to power, it would be interesting to see the engine stats at 2500 rpm, 5000 rpm, 7500 rpm (Which we are never going to get to see). I strongly suspect the Mercedes stats would be the most impressive across the whole range, whilst maybe actually be the worst at peak range. Although it is all going to be fractional.
Ok, thanks mate. I think Alien's answer is very informative!!

mpls2
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:11 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by mpls2 »

jono794 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mpls2 wrote:I personally think there is elements of truth, but only dirng short bursts during qualifying.. not sustainaable of a race. meaming their average sutainable max power and drivablity for the race is definitely behind the other 3 PUs. Not sure why Renault would want to give out the statement they've made..
I really don't think they're behind Honda. Red Bull is ahead of Renault - Honda is not.
Spot on. The PU is masking some pretty big issues with the Renault chassis in medium and high speed corners, but it's consistently near the top of the speed traps for both teams.
Top or near top of speed traps means nothing.. how about downforce, the extra power of Honda allows RB to run higher downforce, hence they can do better laps and even lap Renault powered cars duting race ??
You just need to look at speeds traps, Intermediates speeds, ad finish line speeds of various cars and you see they are all actually very close in top speeds.. what counts is lap times.. and Im sure higher powered PU allows higher dpenforce on cars etc...

Option or Prime
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Option or Prime »

Whilst the Renault chassis needs development the engine cant be too far off. Lando Norris has managed to get it to 6th or 7th in the McLaren. Wouldn't they be concentrating on the new spec engine now rather than this years PU?

User avatar
Mercedes-Benz
Posts: 1070
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Location: India

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Mercedes-Benz »

I think it was French GP where Mclaren was only few tenth from Max but he said he is not worried about Mclaren in the race. He was some 1minute ahead of them which is more like normal 1+sec per lap. Honda has improved their software since then also but it could be still that Renault has a better party mode. In the race Honda is pretty good and probably better than Renault. In race there is not too much difference between the teams now I guess
Sir Stirling Moss "Quite frankly, Kimi Raikkonen is the fastest driver in the world"

User avatar
mmi16
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by mmi16 »

With it coming from Renault I suspect it is 1000 broken horse power - and the horse has broken down.
Image

dpastern
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:45 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by dpastern »

Exediron wrote:
mpls2 wrote:I personally think there is elements of truth, but only dirng short bursts during qualifying.. not sustainaable of a race. meaming their average sutainable max power and drivablity for the race is definitely behind the other 3 PUs. Not sure why Renault would want to give out the statement they've made..
I really don't think they're behind Honda. Red Bull is ahead of Renault - Honda is not.
I have to disagree. Let me explain...

The engine is probably slightly worse than the Honda engine, but the Renault chassis is truly horrid.

Hungary 2019 for instance. Hungaroring is NOT a power track, so HP doesn't really come into it. It does play to a strong chassis though. Hulkenberg and Ricciardo are pretty evenly matched in pace, yet there is a second difference in qualifying between Verstappen and Hulkenberg. That's the chassis. Verstappen and Ricciardo were evenly matched at RBR in 2017/2018. It is logical to deduce that there's not much (at least in qualifying) between Verstappen and Hulkenberg by the common denominator - Ricciardo.

Compare this result to Baku, which is a power track, and obviously suits the higher HP engine - Verstappen was around 0.7 second faster than Ricciardo. The chassis is not particularly important at Baku, so time cannot really be made from that. I think it's safe to say that RBR probably has 0.7 second advantage due to chassis over Renault. This makes me strongly suspicious that Honda is at least as powerful as the Renault engine, if not more powerful. Baku was also pre Honda engine update (introduced at Canada), which imho, has seen Honda's engine pace jump forwards by probably 0.3 seconds per lap on average.

I'll be bluntly honest, I didn't expect RBR Honda to work well this year - Honda had been less than stellar on its F1 return for the past 3 years. Kudos to them for making massive improvements for 2019.

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

Option or Prime wrote:Whilst the Renault chassis needs development the engine cant be too far off. Lando Norris has managed to get it to 6th or 7th in the McLaren. Wouldn't they be concentrating on the new spec engine now rather than this years PU?
Are you suggesting that the McLaren chassis is bad or that Lando Norris is bad? Why is this an accomplishment for the Renault engine?

Why isn't Renault focusing on next year's engine? The first and most obvious reason would be because their chassis is even worse than their engine and resources do need to go where they can do the most good at some point. Reason two would be because next season's Renault F1 presence might not be as certain as you think.

A couple of years ago, McLaren said they had the best chassis and driver and they were victims of Honda's engines. A cursory look at their history with Mercedes and with Renault shows that wasn't the case. Red Bull had a better chassis then, and probably has one now. Honda didn't turn Red Bull into Williams, and Renault didn't turn McLaren into Red Bull. Shocking.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

Option or Prime
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Option or Prime »

Not sure I understand what you are trying to say?

I'll restate my point as I definitely do not think McLaren are bad or that Norris us bad. I'm actually praising him. Anyway my point is that the Renault engine has promise proven by the fact that it is propelling McLaren to 6th and 7th positions. At mid season how much effort do you put into this year's car as opposed to next year's car?

If Renault had a decent chassis they would be closer to McLaren.

Red Bull and Mercedes have nothing to do with what I'm saying.

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

Red Bull matters because they are better than McLaren and Renault while using the engine whose relative merit you're arguing against in favor of Renault's engine. I don't think anyone in the world is arguing that Renault has a better chassis than McLaren. This is a thread about Renault making assertions about their engines that are being dismissed and ridiculed by their competition.

When it comes to discussing F1 outcomes, it helps when people understand the inputs. I've seen someone make the argument that McLaren is ahead of STR. STR has a budget that McLaren would spend hiring a designer for next year's uniforms. It seems that McLaren now has at least some management who understand where to direct some of their resources. Money is speed in F1, and yet STR is competing with the Renault factory team that brags it has the biggest budget when it isn't bragging that it has the most powerful engine.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

User avatar
Lotus49
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Lotus49 »

Todd wrote:Red Bull matters because they are better than McLaren and Renault while using the engine whose relative merit you're arguing against in favor of Renault's engine. I don't think anyone in the world is arguing that Renault has a better chassis than McLaren. This is a thread about Renault making assertions about their engines that are being dismissed and ridiculed by their competition.

When it comes to discussing F1 outcomes, it helps when people understand the inputs. I've seen someone make the argument that McLaren is ahead of STR. STR has a budget that McLaren would spend hiring a designer for next year's uniforms. It seems that McLaren now has at least some management who understand where to direct some of their resources. Money is speed in F1, and yet STR is competing with the Renault factory team that brags it has the biggest budget when it isn't bragging that it has the most powerful engine.
When did Renault brag they had the biggest budget and most powerful engine?
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

Lotus49 wrote:
When did Renault brag they had the biggest budget and most powerful engine?
As for the engine, this thread is about Renault claiming 1,000 hp and their competitors responding by saying that their own power units aren't producing 1,000 hp. Renault also claim 960 to 970 hp in racing trim, which is silly. Why don't you at least read the subject before asking questions?

As for budget, Abiteboul made a number of statements in tv interviews when Daniel Ricciardo was signed for what is thought to be the third biggest pay package in the sport.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s/4331450/
Reflecting on the benefits that Ricciardo will bring, Abiteboul said that one of the key positives of having the Australian on board is that it will quicken its march to achieving success in F1.

"Frankly, we are not limited by finance, we are not limited by budget," Abiteboul told Motorsport.com.
https://www.f1-fansite.com/f1-news/abit ... ricciardo/
Abiteboul said: "Renault can afford it because our turnover is 40 times higher than that of Red Bull. There's no question about that."

He thinks the time is right for the Enstone and Viry-based outfit to commit to a truly top driver.

"Does it make sense to spend such money on Daniel at this stage of our journey with the car and all the other costs? We believe so," he said.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

jono794
Posts: 641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:00 am
Location: Running wide at Bergwerk

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by jono794 »

Todd wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
When did Renault brag they had the biggest budget and most powerful engine?
As for the engine, this thread is about Renault claiming 1,000 hp and their competitors responding by saying that their own power units aren't producing 1,000 hp. Renault also claim 960 to 970 hp in racing trim, which is silly. Why don't you at least read the subject before asking questions?

As for budget, Abiteboul made a number of statements in tv interviews when Daniel Ricciardo was signed for what is thought to be the third biggest pay package in the sport.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s/4331450/
Reflecting on the benefits that Ricciardo will bring, Abiteboul said that one of the key positives of having the Australian on board is that it will quicken its march to achieving success in F1.

"Frankly, we are not limited by finance, we are not limited by budget," Abiteboul told Motorsport.com.
https://www.f1-fansite.com/f1-news/abit ... ricciardo/
Abiteboul said: "Renault can afford it because our turnover is 40 times higher than that of Red Bull. There's no question about that."

He thinks the time is right for the Enstone and Viry-based outfit to commit to a truly top driver.

"Does it make sense to spend such money on Daniel at this stage of our journey with the car and all the other costs? We believe so," he said.
So no one from Renault has ever said they have the biggest budget or most powerful engine. Gotcha.
"Guys I'm coming in, I'm having too much grip"
- Chanoch Nissany

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

How often do you hear a team saying that they aren't limited by budget? Renault does it when they aren't trying to get other teams capped. Odd. If their constant puffery is an exhibition of the sort of character that you admire then this really isn't worth discussing.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

User avatar
Lotus49
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Lotus49 »

Todd wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
When did Renault brag they had the biggest budget and most powerful engine?
As for the engine, this thread is about Renault claiming 1,000 hp and their competitors responding by saying that their own power units aren't producing 1,000 hp. Renault also claim 960 to 970 hp in racing trim, which is silly. Why don't you at least read the subject before asking questions?

As for budget, Abiteboul made a number of statements in tv interviews when Daniel Ricciardo was signed for what is thought to be the third biggest pay package in the sport.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s/4331450/
Reflecting on the benefits that Ricciardo will bring, Abiteboul said that one of the key positives of having the Australian on board is that it will quicken its march to achieving success in F1.

"Frankly, we are not limited by finance, we are not limited by budget," Abiteboul told Motorsport.com.
https://www.f1-fansite.com/f1-news/abit ... ricciardo/
Abiteboul said: "Renault can afford it because our turnover is 40 times higher than that of Red Bull. There's no question about that."

He thinks the time is right for the Enstone and Viry-based outfit to commit to a truly top driver.

"Does it make sense to spend such money on Daniel at this stage of our journey with the car and all the other costs? We believe so," he said.
I did read the link and that's why I asked as neither claim was in there. I checked again and that's still the case. You're other links seem to be talking about Renault the motor company with the 40x the turnover of RB comment rather than the F1 team. Obviously the motor company could spend to the levels of the top 3 if they wanted to, that's hardly news, they just don't want to as they don't see the value in it.

This is from Cyril too....
It was then suggested to Abiteboul that Renault had fallen short in terms of development with their 2019 car, using the example of customer team McLaren whom it was suggested had similar resources.

"[McLaren has] quite a lot more!" he responded.

"Do you know how much we spend here? We operate with the budget of Toro Rosso and we do not believe that putting more money makes the difference.

"Instead of wasting a lot of resources, we can take a look at McLaren because I know their numbers and I can tell you they have a few hundred people more than us. How far are they from us? Makes sense? Not for now.

"And we will never have the [extra] 150m Euros that we need to be like Mercedes because it does not make any sense. It does not correspond to the value of Formula 1 for us."
https://insideracing.com/index.php/form ... an-mclaren

I think you maybe are forgetting Renault's budget is split between the race team (car) and engine department. Their midfield rivals outside Macca who evidently spend more because of their substantial workforce aren't spending that much less when it comes to the actual race team and car, and their rivals are also buying parts that actually have more money spent on them (Things like suspension,gearbox etc) from the top 3's teams own ridiculously expensive R&D so they actually end up with more expensive and generally therefore better parts than Renault and Macca do despite the lower budget.

Hence the small gaps in midfield. All the old advantages of having a bigger budget when everyone built everything themselves are gone. Their rivals often end up with simply better parts from the top 3 so it's only really in aero can Macca and Renault take advantage of any bigger budget but once you've paid you're much bigger staff and paid for all the R&D on every other part of their cars from the race team budget, I'm struggling to see where this massive aero budget advantage would come from so Cyril's comments probably aren't far off. (although I'm aware he, like most in F1, can flip flop with the best of them)
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Todd
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Todd »

Renault did a serious disservice to the sport by spending their limited budget on Daniel Ricciardo if they don't have a realistic plan to mount any sort of challenge for a podium. He's too good a driver to be wasted on them.
Does anyone think that there has ever been a moment of frustration with his father when Max has pointed out to Jos that he was the Pierre Gasly of 1994?

oz_karter
Posts: 307
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 11:29 am

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by oz_karter »

Todd wrote:Renault did a serious disservice to the sport by spending their limited budget on Daniel Ricciardo if they don't have a realistic plan to mount any sort of challenge for a podium. He's too good a driver to be wasted on them.
Makes me think Ricciardo's move was not about going to Renault (although maybe the salary in the short term helped), but instead to strategically make him available for a silver or red seat in 2021.

User avatar
Mercedes-Benz
Posts: 1070
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Location: India

Re: Renault at 1000bhp ?

Post by Mercedes-Benz »

Renault are running out of excuses. They hate the B teams for sure but it is their fault that they are not good enough. They should have cleared the midfield team by now top3 though is out of their reach and they know it as well. Their best bet should have been to partner with RBR. But since that is not possible may be they should join Mclaren and shut this team down or sell it to anyone interested x(
Last edited by Mercedes-Benz on Sun Sep 08, 2019 4:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sir Stirling Moss "Quite frankly, Kimi Raikkonen is the fastest driver in the world"

Post Reply