F1technical.net

Juzh wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2018, 00:49

PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2018, 22:19

Brenton wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2018, 19:45

What is traction limited mean? Even with 1500hp they'd still be able to be flat out almost the same amount of time as 900.

Wait and see in Melbourne.

I think that's simply false. 950 vs 1000 will make next to zero difference in traction, but will make a whole lot of differece in straight line speed.

If that actually was the case, 950 bhp somehow being a magical traction barrier (completely made up arbitrary number we're talking about here) , then mercedes would have stopped developing their PU long ago.

You can be sure all teams would take the 1000 bhp engine over 950 one.

Isn’t it also to do with the fact that an engine that can make 1000hp peak power with current fuel flow regs can achieve 950 at a lower fuel consumption. Power = more efficiency in the controlled fuel flow era. Cars can fuel lighter, go faster...

bonjon1979 wrote: ↑

23 Feb 2018, 14:49

Juzh wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2018, 00:49

PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2018, 22:19

Wait and see in Melbourne.

I think that's simply false. 950 vs 1000 will make next to zero difference in traction, but will make a whole lot of differece in straight line speed.

If that actually was the case, 950 bhp somehow being a magical traction barrier (completely made up arbitrary number we're talking about here) , then mercedes would have stopped developing their PU long ago.

You can be sure all teams would take the 1000 bhp engine over 950 one.

Isn’t it also to do with the fact that an engine that can make 1000hp peak power with current fuel flow regs can achieve 950 at a lower fuel consumption. Power = more efficiency in the controlled fuel flow era. Cars can fuel lighter, go faster...

Pretty much, yes.

There is suggested a lot by the Renault boss that full power will not be unleashed, and the focus is on reliability. If you have made a 50hp progress I can not imagine why you go with the same performance as last years ending. Why not taking a penalty one race for a fourth engine, and battle for podium all races instead of 2nd best with 3 engines. I guess the first option will add more driver points in the end. Or the progress is not that big as suggested here, or they will run more performance than last years final spec and the Renault boss is sandbagging.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s-1008639/

I see nothing wrong with it. Reliability will be much more important this year, and that's the area where Renault was having most difficulties with, so it's not surprising to see them prioritise reliability before power.

Well 2017 engine wasnt reliable, so it had to be tuned down a bit, and take into acount that engines have to last seven races now.

Engine life has to be increased from 5 to 7 races. Renault stated they started working on that late 2016. Achieving merely prolonged reliability without any added performance over such period of time, is that acceptable?

What ever happened to "reducing the gap by half this year and fully overcome it by next year"..

Squid wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 13:24

I see nothing wrong with it. Reliability will be much more important this year, and that's the area where Renault was having most difficulties with, so it's not surprising to see them prioritise reliability before power.

So they're basically stuck where they were, while mercedes and to a lesser extent ferrari had reliability much more sorted already and would thus continue to be ahead by a similar amount. Nothing's changed then?

radosav wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 13:26

Well 2017 engine wasnt reliable, so it had to be tuned down a bit, and take into acount that engines have to last seven races now.

2017 abu dhabi spec renault PU was so far off mercedes they better hope Cyril's words are PR BS, or else they're in trouble. Or do you seriously think mercedes will have downgraded performance in order to last 7 races?

Seeing as how overhyped mod deleted my post for whatever unknown reason, here is the link we're talking about:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s-1008639/

Juzh wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 14:10

Squid wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 13:24

I see nothing wrong with it. Reliability will be much more important this year, and that's the area where Renault was having most difficulties with, so it's not surprising to see them prioritise reliability before power.

So they're basically stuck where they were, while mercedes and to a lesser extent ferrari had reliability much more sorted already and would thus continue to be ahead by a similar amount. Nothing's changed then?

Both Ferrari and Renault have now stated that they will be starting with 2017 Abu Dhabi performance levels. Honda should have closed the gap somewhat, but they also stated that they will be focusing on reliability for the first half.

Mercedes, however, is bringing a completely new engine, so we have no idea where they'll be starting at. They might have a more reliable but slightly weaker engine, or an engine just as reliable and even more powerful.

I have somehow the impression Renault will never get on top of this Hybrid era.
Every year we hear the same from them.

Squid wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 14:22

Juzh wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 14:10

Squid wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 13:24

I see nothing wrong with it. Reliability will be much more important this year, and that's the area where Renault was having most difficulties with, so it's not surprising to see them prioritise reliability before power.

So they're basically stuck where they were, while mercedes and to a lesser extent ferrari had reliability much more sorted already and would thus continue to be ahead by a similar amount. Nothing's changed then?

Both Ferrari and Renault have now stated that they will be starting with 2017 Abu Dhabi performance levels. Honda should have closed the gap somewhat, but they also stated that they will be focusing on reliability for the first half.

So as I said, balance, or imbalance rather, of performance to stay the same at this rate. When you're behind you have to make double the gains in order to catch-up.

If honda were to say they can reliablity do 7 races at the performance of 2017 abu dhabi spec, they'd be a laughing stock, yet renault somehow is not?

Mercedes, however, is bringing a completely new engine, so we have no idea where they'll be starting at. They might have a more reliable but slightly weaker engine, or an engine just as reliable and even more powerful.

Based on mercedes' past record there's no reason to believe they'll go backwards. None.

i thought renault would have increased power but reliability this season is key i guess

Even Marko says the 2018 Renault is more powerful. I dont know where that Abu Dhabi level story come from.
And a hypothetic reliable 2017 Renault should be automatically more powerful than the real one because the latter was turned down almost all the time.
So they can decrease the gap just by sorting the reliability problems.

The 2018 PU is an evolution of the completely new 2017 PU... Like the 2016 PU. Obviously Viry is struggling to make a good PU straight off and it took them a couple of seasons to make the first gen reliable and competitive but IMO they'll be faster this time with the second generation because Viry has improved meanwhile (technology, headcount, infrastructures etc)

Juzh wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 14:11

radosav wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 13:26

Well 2017 engine wasnt reliable, so it had to be tuned down a bit, and take into acount that engines have to last seven races now.

2017 abu dhabi spec renault PU was so far off mercedes they better hope Cyril's words are PR BS, or else they're in trouble. Or do you seriously think mercedes will have downgraded performance in order to last 7 races?

Seeing as how overhyped mod deleted my post for whatever unknown reason, here is the link we're talking about:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s-1008639/

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13361 ... gine-gains

Blackout wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2018, 14:56

Even Marko says the 2018 Renault is more powerful. I dont know where that Abu Dhabi level story come from.
And a hypothetic reliable 2017 Renault should be automatically more powerful than the real one because the latter was turned down almost all the time.
So they can decrease the gap just by sorting the reliability problems.

The 2018 PU is an evolution of the completely new 2017 PU... Like the 2016 PU. Obviously Viry is struggling to make a good PU straight off and it took them a couple of seasons to make the first gen reliable and competitive but IMO they'll be faster this time with the second generation because Viry has improved meanwhile (technology, headcount, infrastructures etc)

Straight from the horse's mouth:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... s-1008639/

As I said, one can only hope it's all PR nonsense.