RBR 2016 Power Unit

[jure]

what is "politics" is renault 11 tokens for 0.2s to my view!

on a french website Ghosn has already gave bless on new deal with red bull !

apologise? who care red bull telling renault did a P.O.S ICE is true , there 'r smouther ways to say it , anyway

I still don't understand this potential you are talking about. What happens if total is unable to make fuel that Renault expects to actually unleash this 6% potential? Can we expect more than 0.2s gain in Brazil?

[zztopless]

Hey this is just a rumor...

" 2008, when STR was a faster car than RBR because of the better Ferrari "
WTF. STR was faster in some races for many reasons but certainly not because of a "better" Ferrari... and the STR and RBR that year were different cars... and RBR stopped the development quite early to focus on 2009, and was experimenting some technical solutions that didn't work at the beginning...
In 2009 both cars were identical... where was STR with its 'better' engine?

The 2008 RBR and STR were the same Newey designed chassis, hence the like for like engine comparison. Regulations were changed shortly after to prevent two teams sharing a chassis design. Their performance, however, was pretty similar (I would argue that Vettel was where the extra performance of the STR came from).

[NL_Fer]

Also the engines were frozen for performance. But Mercedes and Ferrari kept installing new parts for more reliability, which was allowed. But also increased performance as a side effect. So in 2008 Renault was seriously down on power.

They were allowed to make up for it in 2009, then the engines were frozen for real. From 2010-2013 Renault was probably the most drivable and mappable engine from that time, looking at Lotus' performance. With some help from the FIa.

[Tommy Cookers]

given that Mercedes and Renault are these days brothers in commerce .....
and the current issues with a somewhat 'frozen' set of engine rules
(that always seemed to me an European stitch-up)

when did the M and R common interest via commercial connections develop relative to the various episodes of N/A 'engine freeze' ??

[ReoPTy]

Also the engines were frozen for performance. But Mercedes and Ferrari kept installing new parts for more reliability, which was allowed. But also increased performance as a side effect. So in 2008 Renault was seriously down on power.

They were allowed to make up for it in 2009, then the engines were frozen for real. From 2010-2013 Renault was probably the most drivable and mappable engine from that time, looking at Lotus' performance. With some help from the FIa.

just looking at Alonso win in suzuka laps times, the renault wasn't that severely "under powered" !

renault scoring more than twice more points than red bull means red bull did a bad job, and toyota engine rated as the most powerfull wasn't wining alot

[ReoPTy]

given that Mercedes and Renault are these days brothers in commerce .....
and the current issues with a somewhat 'frozen' set of engine rules
(that always seemed to me an European stitch-up)

when did the M and R common interest via commercial connections develop relative to the various episodes of N/A 'engine freeze' ??

Mercedes diesel 1.5l 1.6l engines are renault , infiniti and mercedes new suv will share platform in mexico , its a lil more than "commercial" but full industrial partnership !

[dans79]

They were allowed to make up for it in 2009, then the engines were frozen for real. From 2010-2013 Renault was probably the most drivable and mappable engine from that time, looking at Lotus' performance. With some help from the FIa.

This is incorrect, They all continued to make "reliability" updates.

[taperoo2k]

It does look as if there will be a Red Bull team on the grid, using the same as what TJ13 has said as a pretty much a Renault/Mechachrome/Red Bull 'Son of a Bitch' engine that is looking like this:

ICE: Renault (Block) / Mechachrome (Head)
TC: Outsourced (Honeywell?)
MGU-K: McLaren (Red Bull switched to them in 2013 with their Alternators i hear)
MGU-H: Red Bull
ES: Red Bull (Toshiba Batteries?)
CE: Red Bull (Red Bull Software)

However... There is a political issues, the issue is will this be considered a Homologated engine by the FIA and be granted just 4 PU Elements per driver for the season or will it be granted the same as Honda this year and the rest last year and be given 5 PU elements per year? Id give them 5 as its essentially a different PU. However, i will say this, id think it will be initially towards the Honda end and unreliable... BUT... Its Illien and Ilmor design that will eventually become vastly reliable and be quick, bloody quick. Ill give them a year and they will be on the pace, building to 2017 where the engine will be more or less on Mercedes/Ferrari terms and that leaves what Renault/Honda will be line in a year or so?

This goes into a few scenarios including the remote possibility that Red Bull or Ilmor might have floated the idea of producing the cheaper PU Bernie and Todt seem to want http://www.somersf1.co.uk/2015/11/a-red ... -bull.html
That would be the sweetener to get the Red Bull Frankenstein PU classed as a new PU and not be restricted by Renault's design and use of tokens thus far http://www.somersf1.co.uk/2015/11/a-red ... -bull.html

I'm not entirely sure if Red Bull will go the DIY route, but they don't appear to have a lot of options at the present time.
Ilmor has been working on a different combustion concept and other bits and bobs, one which Renault appear to approve of but don't want to use, rather they want to follow their own development plan. Which is what may have made Red Bull a tad cheesed off, but who knows. As for TJ13, he is usually fairly accurate with rumours spilling out of Milton Keynes, but I think he's probably reported on a mangled version of the truth. It seems the relationship with Renault is dead, other than the possibility of a short term customer supply deal, the works deal is likely dead as a dodo now. I don't think Bob Bell would have gone back to Lotus if Renault were not buying the team.

[ReoPTy]

oh shhhhtt , i was so right

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/121722

it seems that juge sommers stuffs gossip was plain BS , still !

[Matt Somers]

Firstly, have you read my article? I'm simply fleshing out the possibility, adding history to understand how it could happen. Secondly I've also gone on to debunk certain things in the comments section, simply because with time to think and do the necessary public information searches things don't stand up.
Furthermore, Noble/Motosport ran a piece yesterday which intimated, from an interview with Marchionne, that a similar arrangement could come to fruition with Ferrari.
I haven't said it is happening, rather, as usual I've sat on the fence and argued both sides. However, I'm not the only one who wrote about it the same day and was quoted in the Judges follow up article too..

[turbof1]

Firstly, have you read my article? I'm simply fleshing out the possibility, adding history to understand how it could happen. Secondly I've also gone on to debunk certain things in the comments section, simply because with time to think and do the necessary public information searches things don't stand up.
Furthermore, Noble/Motosport ran a piece yesterday which intimated, from an interview with Marchionne, that a similar arrangement could come to fruition with Ferrari.
I haven't said it is happening, rather, as usual I've sat on the fence and argued both sides. However, I'm not the only one who wrote about it the same day and was quoted in the Judges follow up article too..

I remember Joe Saward doing a similar article. Although I do feel the article from JT13 is pure garbage speculation (I'm sorry of that comes across as strong), yours and Joe's articles are actually good pieces. Joe's article started outright with "let's assume for a moment..." and then went on with explaining the obstacles and solutions to those explanations. It looked at the situation as a possibility.
Your article starts with a historic view on the events that led to today, first mentioning their KERS adventure, then the ES debacle in 2014, then the rushed upgrades in 2015 together with Renault rejecting Illien's work which led to the current situation. Your article then clearly went on to the second part with the not to be mistaken "what if...".

There's a difference between making claims and working from points of view. I never deemed it likely, I even describe it as nonsense, that Red Bull would really build their own engines for 2016. But it is great to evaluate the possibility none the less. I especially see time as an issue. Even with a full transfer of IP, Red Bull would still need to find suppliers in time who need to able to produce the parts in time for 2016. This would also delay production and development of both chassis and cooling since those would need to be changed towards the needs of Red Bull PU.

I also like to note there's a distinct difference between running unbranded PUs, and developing those unbranded PUs on your own.

This is also why it doesn't sit right by me that TJ13 used your article to justify a wild claim he made. He also outright tried to minimize Mario Illien's clear reply on the matter that he is not involved.

[Cold Fussion]

Firstly, have you read my article? I'm simply fleshing out the possibility, adding history to understand how it could happen. Secondly I've also gone on to debunk certain things in the comments section, simply because with time to think and do the necessary public information searches things don't stand up.
Furthermore, Noble/Motosport ran a piece yesterday which intimated, from an interview with Marchionne, that a similar arrangement could come to fruition with Ferrari.
I haven't said it is happening, rather, as usual I've sat on the fence and argued both sides. However, I'm not the only one who wrote about it the same day and was quoted in the Judges follow up article too..

Why should extraordinary claims from proven non credible sources warrant any discussion at all?

[SKI2]

... There's a difference between making claims and working from points of view. I never deemed it likely, I even describe it as nonsense, that Red Bull would really build their own engines for 2016. But it is great to evaluate the possibility none the less. I especially see time as an issue. Even with a full transfer of IP, Red Bull would still need to find suppliers in time who need to able to produce the parts in time for 2016. This would also delay production and development of both chassis and cooling since those would need to be changed towards the needs of Red Bull PU.

I also like to note there's a distinct difference between running unbranded PUs, and developing those unbranded PUs on your own.

This is also why it doesn't sit right by me that TJ13 used your article to justify a wild claim he made. He also outright tried to minimize Mario Illien's clear reply on the matter that he is not involved.

Couple of points:

1) Is it not possible RB made a decision about a DIY engine longer ago then we understand from the current news? If so, is it not possible that they've already ordered and have been supplied the necessary ERC assembly's as "Illien's ICE changes call for" and are already stocked?

2) I believe that TJ13 (and some other people) parse Illien's "denial" as not quite as complete or definite as you. I can read it as a denial that "his IP" is being used by Renault in their current or updated (Brazil) ICE. Or that he is / was directly involved in the "dispute". Not necessarily that "his IP" would never be used in some form as a result of his consultancy work. And for the future, he is interested in a possible new "spec" engine.

All separate subjects ?

[turbof1]

TJ13 was pretty clear in claiming Red Bull would run a PU of their making, based on the Renault PU, next year. What you said is possible, but highly unlikely given how desperate Red Bull was looking for a supplier next year. They went knocking on Honda's door. With all respect to the employees of Honda because they had to design and produce a complex piece of machinery within little time, but they are in worse shape then the supplier Red Bull leaves/wanted to leave. That's usually a good indication where things stand. Some call that a smoke screen, while I think it's because there's either no plan at all for their own PU, or there is a plan but it can't be done for next year.

I like to compare the situation at Red Bull with mass hysteria: people are left without anything decisive about their plans next year. That results now in a massive amount of speculation around the team.

[dans79]

I like to compare the situation at Red Bull with mass hysteria: people are left without anything decisive about their plans next year. That results now in a massive amount of speculation around the team.

I fully expect RBR to be eating a massive piece of humble pie next year when they have a 2016 Renault motor in the back!