Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

All that has to do with the power train, gearbox, clutch, fuels and lubricants, etc. Generally the mechanical side of Formula One.
GhostF1
110
Joined: 30 Aug 2016, 04:11

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

I am actually impressed with how many, clearly ill informed, F1 fans there are on this forum. Can we please stick to facts, not veiled half truths to prove points? Honda has had 1, count it, One DNF from a PU issue. Round 1. In Australia. On Gasly's car. After a pretty big jump over a curb to boot. Anyone using "look at Honda's PU total count" as evidence they lack reliability... it proves nothing except for that person is foolish and most likely trolling. Anyway. back to and staying on Renault..

Saw this on Renault's twitter. Top Trumps with the RS18 against the Shinkansen.

https://ibb.co/nc1opK

683kW... 916hp. I know crude but frighteningly close to those "estimates" AMuS made.. but let's discuss..

Benii6
3
Joined: 03 Feb 2018, 16:32

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

GhostF1 wrote:
04 Oct 2018, 09:26
I am actually impressed with how many, clearly ill informed, F1 fans there are on this forum. Can we please stick to facts, not veiled half truths to prove points? Honda has had 1, count it, One DNF from a PU issue. Round 1. In Australia. On Gasly's car. After a pretty big jump over a curb to boot. Anyone using "look at Honda's PU total count" as evidence they lack reliability... it proves nothing except for that person is foolish and most likely trolling. Anyway. back to and staying on Renault..

Saw this on Renault's twitter. Top Trumps with the RS18 against the Shinkansen.

https://ibb.co/nc1opK

683kW... 916hp. I know crude but frighteningly close to those "estimates" AMuS made.. but let's discuss..
Of course you can say they lack reliability. Maybe Reanult should use a new engine for every race, that way they'll have perfect reliability since there'll be no PU issues on track.
But then again I'm just an ill informed fan.

GhostF1
110
Joined: 30 Aug 2016, 04:11

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Benii6 wrote:
04 Oct 2018, 16:15
GhostF1 wrote:
04 Oct 2018, 09:26
I am actually impressed with how many, clearly ill informed, F1 fans there are on this forum. Can we please stick to facts, not veiled half truths to prove points? Honda has had 1, count it, One DNF from a PU issue. Round 1. In Australia. On Gasly's car. After a pretty big jump over a curb to boot. Anyone using "look at Honda's PU total count" as evidence they lack reliability... it proves nothing except for that person is foolish and most likely trolling. Anyway. back to and staying on Renault..

Saw this on Renault's twitter. Top Trumps with the RS18 against the Shinkansen.

https://ibb.co/nc1opK

683kW... 916hp. I know crude but frighteningly close to those "estimates" AMuS made.. but let's discuss..
Of course you can say they lack reliability. Maybe Reanult should use a new engine for every race, that way they'll have perfect reliability since there'll be no PU issues on track.
But then again I'm just an ill informed fan.
Jesus. Sour.
It's been well documented that Gasly used the same PU for 6 race weekends (Silverstone through to Singapore) before taking the upgraded Spec 3 unit but then reverting back for Sochi Saturday/Sunday. Hartley used the same PU from Australia through to Monza (albeit with an MGU-H upgrade in Bahrain) before taking the Spec 2 unit in Canada.
Proof enough for me the thing is vastly more reliable than before.
Should they not of taken advantage of the following severe crashes or low grid qualifying results to take new PU's just to appease you?

Renault's problems have been notable and varied. Not to mention in Austria as soon as they reveal a new "qualifying mode", Hulk's turbo went boom. McLaren had their fair share of turbo issues from testing through to race weekends, they've had heat issues, there's been power loss problems. Need I mention RBR's list? Yes there's more on the field so we see more Renault issues just because of that. But the inconsistency of the actual issues is of concern still.

On a side note. Do we know if RBR is running the Spec C in Japan?

MMMMMMMM
-2
Joined: 24 Mar 2018, 10:34

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

They ran B spec on Fri, but are switching to spec C for Sat.
The 25x is just to give you an idea, could be 24.5 or 24.8x in reality :D
What I can rely on is their official site which says “more than 960 hp” right off the bat with spec A.
Let’s see, Suzuka is 71% full throttle, really looking forward to qualy.

MMMMMMMM
-2
Joined: 24 Mar 2018, 10:34

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

When asked if he feels Renault would have been better off taking the C-spec engine as its third powerunit with the benefit of hindsight, Sainz responded: "If it comes without reliability, no.

"The team is fully sure that with our fuel it is just not reliable enough, so I fully back the team with whatever decision they take.

"I just think we need more power, which we don't have, and we don't get it for whatever reason. If we wanted to be in Q3 in Japan we just needed more power, and Honda has showed that it is possible."
source: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13926 ... ault-slump

To me this is clear indication that Spec B has less power than Honda's latest evolution.

User avatar
gandharva
252
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 15:19
Location: Munich

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

MMMMMMMM wrote:
09 Oct 2018, 12:21
To me this is clear indication that Spec B has less power than Honda's latest evolution.
I hink this is generally accepted now, especially in terms of peak power and quali mode.

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

MMMMMMMM wrote:
09 Oct 2018, 12:21
When asked if he feels Renault would have been better off taking the C-spec engine as its third powerunit with the benefit of hindsight, Sainz responded: "If it comes without reliability, no.

"The team is fully sure that with our fuel it is just not reliable enough, so I fully back the team with whatever decision they take.

"I just think we need more power, which we don't have, and we don't get it for whatever reason. If we wanted to be in Q3 in Japan we just needed more power, and Honda has showed that it is possible."
source: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13926 ... ault-slump

To me this is clear indication that Spec B has less power than Honda's latest evolution.
How did you get that conclusion from an article with Sainz talking about Renault?

Maybe with last Honda qualy mode that´s true for saturdays, but watching STR fall from 6th and 7th to both cars out of the points on sunday.... I´d say on race trim they´re still down on power, specially after watching Renault passing STR even when Renault is the slowest Renault powered car (ironically)

User avatar
HPD
198
Joined: 30 Jun 2016, 16:06

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Friends, we have to stop drawing conclusions because one team overtakes another on the track.
A clear example is Williams. That does not mean that the PU Mercedes is the weakest in the field. Come on guys..

User avatar
gandharva
252
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 15:19
Location: Munich

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Andres125sx wrote:
10 Oct 2018, 17:34
Maybe with last Honda qualy mode that´s true for saturdays, but watching STR fall from 6th and 7th to both cars out of the points on sunday.... I´d say on race trim they´re still down on power, specially after watching Renault passing STR even when Renault is the slowest Renault powered car (ironically)
TR completely messed up the tyre strategy in Suzuka. Therefore you cannot make any good predictions about the spec 3 race pace. Wait for the next races.

User avatar
Andres125sx
166
Joined: 13 Aug 2013, 10:15
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

HPD wrote:
10 Oct 2018, 19:23
Friends, we have to stop drawing conclusions because one team overtakes another on the track.
A clear example is Williams. That does not mean that the PU Mercedes is the weakest in the field. Come on guys..
Even when there´re obviously more factors, acceleration and top speed are still some important factors to evaluate a PU, don´t you think so?

User avatar
rscsr
51
Joined: 19 Feb 2012, 13:02
Location: Austria

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Andres125sx wrote:
11 Oct 2018, 08:57
HPD wrote:
10 Oct 2018, 19:23
Friends, we have to stop drawing conclusions because one team overtakes another on the track.
A clear example is Williams. That does not mean that the PU Mercedes is the weakest in the field. Come on guys..
Even when there´re obviously more factors, acceleration and top speed are still some important factors to evaluate a PU, don´t you think so?
Acceleration is the only important factor to evaluate a PU. Top speed isn't telling you anything (other than a datapoint to evaluate your model).
If your drag figures are only 1% false (for a guessed figure, that is different for every track, often almost every day and both cars of a team), the power you get is wrong by about 0.3% (for a given topspeed).
Or when you compare different cars to estimate the difference in engine performance your error scales linearly with the error in the drag estimation.

Walkman
1
Joined: 05 May 2018, 15:23

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

rscsr wrote:
11 Oct 2018, 09:52
Acceleration is the only important factor to evaluate a PU. Top speed isn't telling you anything (other than a datapoint to evaluate your model).
If your drag figures are only 1% false (for a guessed figure, that is different for every track, often almost every day and both cars of a team), the power you get is wrong by about 0.3% (for a given topspeed).
Or when you compare different cars to estimate the difference in engine performance your error scales linearly with the error in the drag estimation.
Correct me if I'm wrong but a 1% deviation in drag would create a 1% deviation in power.

P=.5*rho*frontalarea*Cd*Speed^3

User avatar
rscsr
51
Joined: 19 Feb 2012, 13:02
Location: Austria

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Walkman wrote:
11 Oct 2018, 13:31
rscsr wrote:
11 Oct 2018, 09:52
Acceleration is the only important factor to evaluate a PU. Top speed isn't telling you anything (other than a datapoint to evaluate your model).
If your drag figures are only 1% false (for a guessed figure, that is different for every track, often almost every day and both cars of a team), the power you get is wrong by about 0.3% (for a given topspeed).
Or when you compare different cars to estimate the difference in engine performance your error scales linearly with the error in the drag estimation.
Correct me if I'm wrong but a 1% deviation in drag would create a 1% deviation in power.

P=.5*rho*frontalarea*Cd*Speed^3
yeah, of course you are right.
I kinda didn't write what I meant. What I meant was, when you want to know the topspeed for a certain power/drag you are taking the 3rd root of that quotient. This means that the top speed is not really sensitive to power/drag. At least much less sensitive than acceleration.

Jejking
1
Joined: 19 Jan 2011, 02:38

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

MMMMMMMM wrote:
05 Oct 2018, 22:05
They ran B spec on Fri, but are switching to spec C for Sat.
The 25x is just to give you an idea, could be 24.5 or 24.8x in reality :D
What I can rely on is their official site which says “more than 960 hp” right off the bat with spec A.
Let’s see, Suzuka is 71% full throttle, really looking forward to qualy.
Make that 950+ please ;) In F1 a measly 10 hp still makes a difference, especially with the midfield so close together.

Source: https://www.renaultsport.com/-formula-1 ... ine-modale

User avatar
ringo
225
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 10:57

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

rscsr wrote:
11 Oct 2018, 09:52
Andres125sx wrote:
11 Oct 2018, 08:57
HPD wrote:
10 Oct 2018, 19:23
Friends, we have to stop drawing conclusions because one team overtakes another on the track.
A clear example is Williams. That does not mean that the PU Mercedes is the weakest in the field. Come on guys..
Even when there´re obviously more factors, acceleration and top speed are still some important factors to evaluate a PU, don´t you think so?
Acceleration is the only important factor to evaluate a PU. Top speed isn't telling you anything (other than a datapoint to evaluate your model).
If your drag figures are only 1% false (for a guessed figure, that is different for every track, often almost every day and both cars of a team), the power you get is wrong by about 0.3% (for a given topspeed).
Or when you compare different cars to estimate the difference in engine performance your error scales linearly with the error in the drag estimation.
Then there is differences with traction.. so it will be difficult to assess the difference between two different engined cars. I believe the effect of traction is a bigger performance differentiator than the power difference currently. The corner exit speed leading onto a straight tends to get half the job done of a drag race type overtake.
For Sure!!

Post Reply