Djos, (politely)djos wrote:
Have a look at reliability and you'll see that the Renault PU was by far the lest reliable of the 2 PU's.
Ps good work ignoring lotus, using them to compare against Sauber would be a much better comparison as both are generally scraping the barrel for funding, Toro Rosso isn't.
How is that any better than unlimited tokens but only 4 engines?FoxHound wrote:Personally I feel its better to keep the token allocation as it is. BUT, allow Renault and Honda to implement the changes outside of the 4 engines a season rule.SectorOne wrote:Maybe the FIA should declare that Honda and Renault gets a whole season with unlimited tokens.
Totally unfair to Mercedes and Ferrari but that would be one way to get them back on their feet quicker.
For instance, Renault have a current issue, allow the fix of the part without incurring a penalty on the engine as a whole.
Its the way forward.
FoxHound wrote:Nope, Factual.Juzh wrote:Nope. Debatable.Kingshark wrote:In 2014 the worst engine on the grid was Ferrari
2 Renault engined cars finished above the factory Ferrari's.
And if we have a look at the like for like comparison that alot of people love to do...
Ferrari customer Sauber 2013 results: 57 points and 7th in the standings.
Renault customer Torro Rosso 2013 results: 33 points and 8th in the standings.
Ferrari customer Sauber 2014 results: 0 points and 10th in the standings.
Renault customer Torro Rosso 2014 results: 30 points and 7th in the standings.
Pretty damming stuff!
Hardly surprising then that red bull racing are furious."With a year’s worth of development it was expected that Renault could reduce that [40bhp] deficit, but the version of the engine delivered for Melbourne, which was expected to have 50bhp more than that used in Barcelona testing, actually had less power and much worse driveability,” Hughes wrote."
raymondu999 wrote:The Renault engine managed even betterdjos wrote:Fernando managed 2 podiums and a stack of top 5 results in the Ferrari.Kingshark wrote:In 2014 the worst engine on the grid was Ferrari, this was highlighted by the fact that Toro Rosso comfortably destroyed Sauber, despite Sauber being clearly the superior team in previous years, and being faster than Toro Rosso so far this year (now that Ferrari have improved their PU significantly).
Renault can map the engine to create another 100 HP, but ..... it blows up.. Seems to be more a realibility issue .djos wrote:Pretty damming stuff!
Hardly surprising then that red bull racing are furious."With a year’s worth of development it was expected that Renault could reduce that [40bhp] deficit, but the version of the engine delivered for Melbourne, which was expected to have 50bhp more than that used in Barcelona testing, actually had less power and much worse driveability,” Hughes wrote."
Thank you JordanJordanFiveOh wrote:
Toro Rosso used Ferrari in 2013, though.
Also, hi, first post!
And vice versa. It still doesn't change the fact that Renault outdid Ferrari as engine suppliers in every metric last year. Whether that was car or engine, we'll never know.djos wrote:you not agreeing with me doesn't mean my opinion is invalid.
True enuf, but not by much.raymondu999 wrote:And vice versa. It still doesn't change the fact that Renault outdid Ferrari as engine suppliers in every metric last year. Whether that was car or engine, we'll never know.djos wrote:you not agreeing with me doesn't mean my opinion is invalid.
I think what may influence our perception of the Renault power unit has a lot to do with RedBull, the top team, struggling as much as it did. This gives the impression that the Renault engine was seriously bad. However, what played against RedBull in 2014 wasn't just the Renault engine in itself - it was also the fact that RedBull once again went to the extreme where packaging was concerned. I would say a lot of their struggles in 2014 were down to that alone and caused many reliability problems. When inside a less extremely packaged Lotus or Torro-Rosso, they worked better. Using the relative performance or WCC standings at the end of 2014 to deduct which of those two power-unit was better is difficult, because there a big differences in talent, finances and ability across the teams. If anything, I think both Renault and Ferrari were probably quite close to each other - and this wouldn't be all that surprising, since they both chose very similar set-ups in how they designed their engines. This tells me that they're output was probably also quite similar. It was only the Mercedes that went a different route with its intelligent design and therefore achieved very different cooling requirements.Juzh wrote:Nope. Debatable.Kingshark wrote:In 2014 the worst engine on the grid was Ferrari
What did they expect when they pushed Renault for parts that had seen no track time or even, quite unfathomably...bench time?djos wrote:Hardly surprising then that red bull racing are furious.
This is a joke, right? Lotus and TR had maybe double the amount of failures last year compared to RB. TR was genuinely faster than RB only once (russia Q), but then got beat badly in the race, so their slick "williams like" car design approach didn't really work, did it?Phil wrote:When inside a less extremely packaged Lotus or Torro-Rosso, they worked better.
