Why is Renault in F1?

[kilcoo316]

Why are Renault in F1?


Consider Joe Soap wants to buy a new car...

He doesn't know what to think of, but on sunday sitting down and watching TV he sees Alonso win in his Renault and thinks "hmmm, wonder what they are like".

He goes and test drives one... likes it, and buys it.


Advertising is not meant to seal a deal in itself, only make the potential customer aware of the product, and hopefully make them consider it. If the car was ---, Joe Soap probably wouldn't buy it, but Renault are only aiming to get him in the car so he can see for himself what its like.



Oh, and Renault used to build supercars, the Alpine:

[Saribro]

Bernies reasoning makes perfect sense to me. Would you count only one spectator for the whole season even if he went to 5 races? I dont think so.

So you are watching 396 cars on track this season?

[engin007]

Bernies reasoning makes perfect sense to me. Would you count only one spectator for the whole season even if he went to 5 races? I dont think so.

So you are watching 396 cars on track this season?

Come on guys, lets end this fight and say there are 55 billion VIEWINGS but not necessarily 55 billion viewers.

[DaveKillens]

disinformation . . .

1. Deliberately misleading information announced publicly or leaked by a government or especially by an intelligence agency in order to influence public opinion or the government in another nation: “He would be the unconscious channel for a piece of disinformation aimed at another country's intelligence service” (Ken Follett).
2. Dissemination of such misleading information.

[Ciro Pabón]

Come on guys, lets end this fight and say there are 55 billion VIEWINGS but not necessarily 55 billion viewers.

This means around 3 billion people watching every event. That, cannot be true.

There are 6 billion people in the world, and 2 billion of them are under 15. This leaves a potential audience of 4 billion "adult" viewers, counting the Kalahari bushmen, where ITV reception is not that good.

If everybody in the world had access to TV (ha, ha, ha, ha....) they are claiming over 60% viewer rates (ha, ha, ha, ha.... clapping).

I am an F1 nut. I was NOT able to stomach all races this year. I SLEPT THROUGH A COUPLE OF THEM, BORED TO DEATH.

And let me tell you, I revere guys like Tazio Nuvolari and I know at least a week in advance the time of every qualy and commentary program.

If the people of this forum claimed that F1 races put to sleep 55 billion viewers a year, I would believe them. But 55 billion views?

Besides, if this is true, it could be construed as torture in the greater scale ever devised... specially if you watch British TV (I've been told).

[Scuderia_Russ]

Besides, if this is true, it could be construed as torture in the greater scale ever devised... specially if you watch British TV (I've been told).

That will be British t.v. in general then Ciro!

[Frenchblock]

Well why renault is racing in F1?

because Renault created motorqport 100 years ago with first GP and body FIA..

because renault always raced in motorsports, because renault heritage is the greatest in racing than any others!

because Renault produced successfull sport cars, and because renault always kept ideas to build sporty cars that can be drove by most rather than flashy expensive unreliable red cars for fewers rich thinking "dearer is better"!

and because renault is planing to a Alpine rebirth that will keep the so called germans and italians with french word created by renault "prestige" cars somes pain in the butt!

[Tom]

Renault didn't invent motorsport, a French newspaper did that long before Renault, but they played such a vital part in the early years that I think its fair to say they helped invent GP racing. Le Martin i think challenged competitors to a tour of France in the late 1800s, the only challenge being it must be practical, economical and average over 20km/h. A steam engine won the race but since it required 2 people to drive it was considered impractical, so the internal combustion engine powered vehicle in second was awarded the prize.

[wazojugs]

this is another good reason and i want one







Renault’s sleek new Nepta concept is powered by a bi-turbo, 3.5L V6 engine that generates an impressive 420hp — boosting it from 0-62 in just 4.9-seconds

[jgredline]

Renault is known for producing nothing but junk here in the U.S. This is why they had to leave. http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/532.html

[manchild]

Renault is known for producing nothing but junk here in the U.S. This is why they had to leave. http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/532.html

Renault 5 is one of the best small city cars ever made. Renault was just never like other manufacturers - they just exported or assembled their european models which are not popular in US.

BTW, if 5 or "Le Car" as it was called in US was so bad why was it used as Indy Car series pace car?





*Special bodied R5 Turbo 1. Designed and built by Dick Teague / AMC for 1982 Indy Car Series

[Tom]

Excuse me if I offend anyone but I believe this is one of those situations where someone says 'Its French so it must be crap, after all they're all arrogant.'
Which is just a cruel stereotype. I know it happens here in the UK alot, we have a fasination for British machines, which, in all honesty, are complete piles of crap and have been since the 60s. The build quality is usually terrible and little thought has gone into design, yet because they're British everyone wants to save Rover.

[Alexis]

You are right about Britisch cars, most of them (especially those of the '80s, '90s) were crap. But trust me, french cars are crap too

We had a Renault Safrane here and from the first moment we had that car troubles started. The biggest problem was that when temperature dropped too low in winter, the car just didn't start anymore. We also bought a compass because it was complete disaster when you parked it with the nose towards the west (yes, that's the side where the rain is coming from in Belgium ). Brake disks had to be replaced every 12000 kms, electrical mirrors were rubbish, the roof leaked, powerstearing broke down several times.... It was a very comfortable car with a good ride, but built quality and realiablity were crap.

I think Renault makes decent cars now, realiability became better with the years. But personally I don't really like their design.

Citroën is big crap too, even these days I hear lots of story about them. Only Peugeot hasn't really had that bad reputation.

@ Tom. Indeed not all French are arrogant, but most of them are, trust me. I actally quite like them (I did vacation job in France) but they really think they know everything best . It depends also on wich region you're in of course...

[dumrick]

Citroën is big crap too, even these days I hear lots of story about them. Only Peugeot hasn't really had that bad reputation.

That's very strange to say that two makes that make cars with the same mechanics, made in the same factories have different reliabilty...

Myself and my parents and brothers have had the following french cars within my life span:
- Renault: 4, 5 (Supercinque), Clio I, Megane Scenic -old version- (x2):
- Peugeot: 205, 309, 106, 206, 406, 407, 207 (my current car);
- Citroën: Dyane, Visa, AX (my first car), BX, ZX, C1.

Out of 18 cars, I must say that the Supercinque, the Clio and the Scenics were/are crappy, with loads of small troubles. The 406 has had a difficult life at my mom's hands and developped some problems. The BX towards the end of its life began giving suspension troubles. The 205 had recurrent ignition problems, but it was very old and didn't go to authorized workshops...

The other 11 cars NEVER HAD mechanical problems. Only the Clio made me have to actually stop while driving (lost of cooling fluid).

My experience and some studies actually show that french cars have nothing to be embarassed in terms of reliabilty, comparing to similarly priced cars. In my opinion, mainly PSA (Peugeot - Citroen) cars have a very good construction standard, these days.

Furthermore, I've driven also a lot of japanese and german cars and I can say that the best driving feeling I have (subjective analisys) is usually with the french, due to their road dynamics and active safety.

I would like that people would be objective or, at least, to write out of real experience and not because "I once had a Renault..." or "I heard stories about Citroens...". I could tell you about people that "once had Toyotas" and had bad experiences with them...

[Alexis]

That's very strange to say that two makes that make cars with the same mechanics, made in the same factories have different reliabilty...

Yes indeed, but it's true! Don't forget that most of the software is different. My mate had a citroën C5 1.6HDI and sold it after 6months. Software problems. Also some troubles with temperature sensors, and cooling. But beside that it was an ok car, I admit.

But realiablility also depends from model to model, I know some people experiencing a lot of problems with their C5's (all leasing cars). But on the other side the C2 1.2 my friend got from her mom is a real pleasure to drive, and also very realiable.

Some years ago, citroën really was something special. They had different mechanics, were difficult to repair and waiting for parts could take some time. But indeed now with al the engine sharing everything becomes better.

The Citroën SM e.g. was an engineering masterpiece with it's complex Maserati engine, but was very difficult to maintain and repair.