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.
User avatar
peewon
1
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:11 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 11:39 am
peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 6:56 am
AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:45 pm


The worrying part is it's not like they are at a class leading performance level when it's working (like the Ferrari). Ferrari is who you point to when you say "we chased performance over reliability". Given the Renault isn't class leading on the ICE (Ferrari) or the MGU-H/K side (Honda), it's not like the numbers they are putting up are pushing the envelope relative to what's possible from 100kg/hr of fuel. It's rather just a design that is not neccesarily class leading in any way, that also happens to be constructed from chocolate.
There is always a possibility of unlocking more performance from the PU once the reliability is there. But given Renault's track record of improvement since their return, it just doesn't seem very likely.
They've always made the PU more reliable with time. They're issue has been more about not being on the cutting edge, inovative. They fare better in a freeze.They don't seem to have the budget to keep up with the other 3.
They resisted the split turbo concept for the longest time when it was known as one of the main innovations behind Mercedes advantage. Even on the chasis side, they were stuck with a sub optimal chasis for years.

They always seem to be 3 years behind where they should be. Budget could be a factor but a team like McLaren showed immediate improvement after Seidl took over under the old regs and seem to be close enough with the new regs. So you have to question if there's something beyond budget.

There's always reasons and it's possible they can get it right going forward but based on what they've done so far, there's no reason to assume they will.

User avatar
diffuser
166
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 2:17 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 11:39 am
peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 6:56 am


There is always a possibility of unlocking more performance from the PU once the reliability is there. But given Renault's track record of improvement since their return, it just doesn't seem very likely.
They've always made the PU more reliable with time. They're issue has been more about not being on the cutting edge, inovative. They fare better in a freeze.They don't seem to have the budget to keep up with the other 3.
They resisted the split turbo concept for the longest time when it was known as one of the main innovations behind Mercedes advantage. Even on the chasis side, they were stuck with a sub optimal chasis for years.

They always seem to be 3 years behind where they should be. Budget could be a factor but a team like McLaren showed immediate improvement after Seidl took over under the old regs and seem to be close enough with the new regs. So you have to question if there's something beyond budget.

There's always reasons and it's possible they can get it right going forward but based on what they've done so far, there's no reason to assume they will.
So that's kind of not true. They had the Split turbo from Day 1(or close to it). They had the MGU-H in the middle of the PU and then the Compressor separate from the turbo with all three sharing a common axle. Not sure why they fought moving the compressor to the front side of the PU. That part of it really wasn't a big deal from them. Not sure that the compressor is that much cooler being in the front and if there is PU power gain from that, it's more of a packaging question. Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

I agree. Their goal isn't to be the best, just close to the best.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
79
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 5:11 pm
peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 2:17 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 11:39 am


They've always made the PU more reliable with time. They're issue has been more about not being on the cutting edge, inovative. They fare better in a freeze.They don't seem to have the budget to keep up with the other 3.
They resisted the split turbo concept for the longest time when it was known as one of the main innovations behind Mercedes advantage. Even on the chasis side, they were stuck with a sub optimal chasis for years.

They always seem to be 3 years behind where they should be. Budget could be a factor but a team like McLaren showed immediate improvement after Seidl took over under the old regs and seem to be close enough with the new regs. So you have to question if there's something beyond budget.

There's always reasons and it's possible they can get it right going forward but based on what they've done so far, there's no reason to assume they will.
So that's kind of not true. They had the Split turbo from Day 1(or close to it). They had the MGU-H in the middle of the PU and then the Compressor separate from the turbo with all three sharing a common axle. Not sure why they fought moving the compressor to the front side of the PU. That part of it really wasn't a big deal from them. Not sure that the compressor is that much cooler being in the front and if there is PU power gain from that, it's more of a packaging question. Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

I agree. Their goal isn't to be the best, just close to the best.
Ferrari have moved their compressor. It's obvious in the images. They are just very secretive.

User avatar
diffuser
166
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 6:42 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 5:11 pm
peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 2:17 pm


They resisted the split turbo concept for the longest time when it was known as one of the main innovations behind Mercedes advantage. Even on the chasis side, they were stuck with a sub optimal chasis for years.

They always seem to be 3 years behind where they should be. Budget could be a factor but a team like McLaren showed immediate improvement after Seidl took over under the old regs and seem to be close enough with the new regs. So you have to question if there's something beyond budget.

There's always reasons and it's possible they can get it right going forward but based on what they've done so far, there's no reason to assume they will.
So that's kind of not true. They had the Split turbo from Day 1(or close to it). They had the MGU-H in the middle of the PU and then the Compressor separate from the turbo with all three sharing a common axle. Not sure why they fought moving the compressor to the front side of the PU. That part of it really wasn't a big deal from them. Not sure that the compressor is that much cooler being in the front and if there is PU power gain from that, it's more of a packaging question. Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

I agree. Their goal isn't to be the best, just close to the best.
Ferrari have moved their compressor. It's obvious in the images. They are just very secretive.
Well, maybe they have moved it but not to the front like everyone else. Really, it had little to do with what I was saying.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
79
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 8:48 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 6:42 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 5:11 pm


So that's kind of not true. They had the Split turbo from Day 1(or close to it). They had the MGU-H in the middle of the PU and then the Compressor separate from the turbo with all three sharing a common axle. Not sure why they fought moving the compressor to the front side of the PU. That part of it really wasn't a big deal from them. Not sure that the compressor is that much cooler being in the front and if there is PU power gain from that, it's more of a packaging question. Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

I agree. Their goal isn't to be the best, just close to the best.
Ferrari have moved their compressor. It's obvious in the images. They are just very secretive.
Well, maybe they have moved it but not to the front like everyone else. Really, it had little to do with what I was saying.
If this is some kind of argument against the importance of moving the compressor, then I think it's not correct because they did move it.
You said:
Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

GhostF1
GhostF1
109
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:11 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 6:42 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 5:11 pm
peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 2:17 pm


They resisted the split turbo concept for the longest time when it was known as one of the main innovations behind Mercedes advantage. Even on the chasis side, they were stuck with a sub optimal chasis for years.

They always seem to be 3 years behind where they should be. Budget could be a factor but a team like McLaren showed immediate improvement after Seidl took over under the old regs and seem to be close enough with the new regs. So you have to question if there's something beyond budget.

There's always reasons and it's possible they can get it right going forward but based on what they've done so far, there's no reason to assume they will.
So that's kind of not true. They had the Split turbo from Day 1(or close to it). They had the MGU-H in the middle of the PU and then the Compressor separate from the turbo with all three sharing a common axle. Not sure why they fought moving the compressor to the front side of the PU. That part of it really wasn't a big deal from them. Not sure that the compressor is that much cooler being in the front and if there is PU power gain from that, it's more of a packaging question. Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

I agree. Their goal isn't to be the best, just close to the best.
Ferrari have moved their compressor. It's obvious in the images. They are just very secretive.
Gotta jump in here for clarification.. Renault have never really had a split turbo (as we know it) previous to this year (in the sense we are referring to) The biggest hurdle to climb is having the entire rotating assembly balanced across the length of the block without it detonating itself regularly (see Honda 2017). Their old layout would of hampered compressor size having it in the valley as well. And I was fairly sure the turbo was combined and the H unit was in the V (see pic).
Image

Renault through the years when asked about splitting the compressor were publicly outspoken of the design thinking there was no advantage... And in typical fashion for them, they end up actually doing it but keeping it hush as to avoid embarrassment. Ferrari did the same thing, thinking it had zero benefit until this year it seems and while the '22 PU isn't identical to the Merc/Honda layout it is 80% there, they have split the turbo but have done something a little more unique on the compressor side.
Last edited by GhostF1 on Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:50 am, edited 2 times in total.

GhostF1
GhostF1
109
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:11 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:45 pm
diffuser wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 9:24 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 8:34 pm


Okay but what about Ocon's water issues in Mexico?

Everyone keeps making excuses for this power unit. It's neither the most powerful and by far the least reliable. The only reason it doesn't appear scandalous is because they don't have any customers (like Ferrari).
They went for performance at the expense of reliability.

Next year, I think they're f8cked regardless if the PU is reliable. Hopefully, I'm wrong but that's my feeling.
The worrying part is it's not like they are at a class leading performance level when it's working (like the Ferrari). Ferrari is who you point to when you say "we chased performance over reliability". Given the Renault isn't class leading on the ICE (Ferrari) or the MGU-H/K side (Honda), it's not like the numbers they are putting up are pushing the envelope relative to what's possible from 100kg/hr of fuel. It's rather just a design that is not neccesarily class leading in any way, that also happens to be constructed from chocolate.
I'm with you on this. They say they've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary, but they aren't class leading in this area either while having all these varied PU issues, the fact it's varied is a bigger worry as well. As far as we can tell, the Renault doesn't currently have a single desirable characteristic over the other three.. You can probably make a strong case the Honda is the class leader at the moment in an overall package sense with rock solid reliability and Renault trail them in all areas even with this "performance bias".
Hopefully they turn it around for '23 but if the issue is rooted in an architecture flaw it might be a painful 3 more seasons.

User avatar
diffuser
166
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

GhostF1 wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:36 am
AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:45 pm
diffuser wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 9:24 pm


They went for performance at the expense of reliability.

Next year, I think they're f8cked regardless if the PU is reliable. Hopefully, I'm wrong but that's my feeling.
The worrying part is it's not like they are at a class leading performance level when it's working (like the Ferrari). Ferrari is who you point to when you say "we chased performance over reliability". Given the Renault isn't class leading on the ICE (Ferrari) or the MGU-H/K side (Honda), it's not like the numbers they are putting up are pushing the envelope relative to what's possible from 100kg/hr of fuel. It's rather just a design that is not neccesarily class leading in any way, that also happens to be constructed from chocolate.
I'm with you on this. They say they've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary, but they aren't class leading in this area either while having all these varied PU issues, the fact it's varied is a bigger worry as well. As far as we can tell, the Renault doesn't currently have a single desirable characteristic over the other three.. You can probably make a strong case the Honda is the class leader at the moment in an overall package sense with rock solid reliability and Renault trail them in all areas even with this "performance bias".
Hopefully they turn it around for '23 but if the issue is rooted in an architecture flaw it might be a painful 3 more seasons.
I remember seeing pictures of the PU. The axle ran through the whole PU and out the rear. The MGU-H was in the ICe. Behind the ICE, we first see the compressed air output that goes to the rads, then the compressor, followed by the air intake to the compressor, the turbo and finally the exhaust intake. The turbo and compressor were separate entities sharing a common axle with the MGU-H that ran the entirety of the ICE. Literally all they had to do was remove the compressor, slide the axle forward and reconnect it to the compressor on the front of the ICE. Obviously, they did stuff to integrate it better, add a water to air intercooler, redesign the intake etc but the essentials where there.

It's easy to measure reliability, without a doudt, Merc has used the fewest PUs.

Measuring power becomes very difficult. All the cars have different amounts of drag and different traction abilities. So you have to start measuring at a speed high enough that you know everyone will be on full throttle and stop measuring at speed where drag becomes too much of a factor. So something like 150kph to 250kph.

[media] [/media]

Image

User avatar
diffuser
166
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 9:35 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 8:48 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 6:42 pm


Ferrari have moved their compressor. It's obvious in the images. They are just very secretive.
Well, maybe they have moved it but not to the front like everyone else. Really, it had little to do with what I was saying.
If this is some kind of argument against the importance of moving the compressor, then I think it's not correct because they did move it.
You said:
Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.
We were initially talking about how Renault seem to be more about being at the dance rather than being the best dancer...if you know what I mean? They've lacked in investment, compared to the other 3.

gruntguru
gruntguru
547
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:43 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

diffuser wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:58 am
Measuring power becomes very difficult. All the cars have different amounts of drag and different traction abilities. So you have to start measuring at a speed high enough that you know everyone will be on full throttle and stop measuring at speed where drag becomes too much of a factor. So something like 150kph to 250kph.
I don't have the time or stamina to do it and others would be far more proficient but it would be possible to extract the drag component of engine power from velocity/acceleration data. At least to the extent of being able to attribute a relative power number to each team. The method would rely on the relationship of drag power loss being proportional to velocity cubed.
je suis charlie

User avatar
peewon
1
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:11 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 5:11 pm
peewon wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 2:17 pm
diffuser wrote:
Thu Nov 03, 2022 11:39 am


They've always made the PU more reliable with time. They're issue has been more about not being on the cutting edge, inovative. They fare better in a freeze.They don't seem to have the budget to keep up with the other 3.
They resisted the split turbo concept for the longest time when it was known as one of the main innovations behind Mercedes advantage. Even on the chasis side, they were stuck with a sub optimal chasis for years.

They always seem to be 3 years behind where they should be. Budget could be a factor but a team like McLaren showed immediate improvement after Seidl took over under the old regs and seem to be close enough with the new regs. So you have to question if there's something beyond budget.

There's always reasons and it's possible they can get it right going forward but based on what they've done so far, there's no reason to assume they will.
So that's kind of not true. They had the Split turbo from Day 1(or close to it). They had the MGU-H in the middle of the PU and then the Compressor separate from the turbo with all three sharing a common axle. Not sure why they fought moving the compressor to the front side of the PU. That part of it really wasn't a big deal from them. Not sure that the compressor is that much cooler being in the front and if there is PU power gain from that, it's more of a packaging question. Case and point Ferrari didn't move their compressor and arguably have the most power.

I agree. Their goal isn't to be the best, just close to the best.
Compressor being in the front vs rear is the essence of the split turbo concept anyway. By all available indicators and analysis, Ferrari also have the compressor at the front. I don't know of it's ego or what that they keep denying they have a split turbo. It's benefits are fairly well understood now I think.

https://hackaday.com/2021/04/06/mercede ... formula-1/

Ferrari are also notorious under performers relative to their resources. Nowhere for the first few seasons of hybrid era. Then they went the fuel flow route in order to gain an advantage and although deemed illegal, at least showed some sense of innovation. Apart from that they've only been on par or ahead of PU performance this season when they have also lacked reliability. While they've mostly failed they at least shown an initiative to be at the sharp end.

Renault always seems to be planning to compete in 3-5 years down the line. And then resetting once they get there. McLaren's arc after the McHonda debacle is far more impressive relative to Renault.

Like I said that anything is possible in the future but their track record doesn't allow for optimistic certainty.

User avatar
Blackout
1310
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:12 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

peewon wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:19 am
Compressor being in the front vs rear is the essence of the split turbo concept anyway. By all available indicators and analysis, Ferrari also have the compressor at the front. I don't know of it's ego or what that they keep denying they have a split turbo. It's benefits are fairly well understood now I think.
https://hackaday.com/2021/04/06/mercede ... formula-1/

Ferrari are also notorious under performers relative to their resources. Nowhere for the first few seasons of hybrid era. Then they went the fuel flow route in order to gain an advantage and although deemed illegal, at least showed some sense of innovation. Apart from that they've only been on par or ahead of PU performance this season when they have also lacked reliability. While they've mostly failed they at least shown an initiative to be at the sharp end.

Renault always seems to be planning to compete in 3-5 years down the line. And then resetting once they get there. McLaren's arc after the McHonda debacle is far more impressive relative to Renault.
Renault always seems to be planning to compete in 3-5 years down the line. And then resetting once they get there
.
It's more complicated than that.
.
.
McLaren's arc after the McHonda debacle is far more impressive relative to Renault.
.
It's the other way around. Enstone started from further back than Mclaren so they had a bigger mountain to climb. So to be neck and neck with Mclaren or better today means Enstone improved at least as much, but faster.
Because when Renault returned, Enstone was in shambles and had 470 employees, while Mclaren had near 800 or more, + a state of the art factory. (+ the budgets Renault put in F1 -the chassis side- is very close to Mclaren)
2019 is the season where Enstone shoot itself in the foot and hampered its own good progression chassis-wise compared to the best team, and it's the only year where Mclaren did a better job fair and square. But still...
Mclaren is one of the biggest improvers yes, with or after Enstone.
.
.
Ferrari are also notorious under performers relative to their resources.
.
Not Renault, who are under-spenders, not underperformers. And the ones who know what Viry spent, regard them as overperformers.
And Enstone is similar.

Yeah they are a manufacturer and a factory team. But their budget is far off the other 3 factory teams and is much closer to MCL if not a bit lower.

Speaking of Viry and the reliability, that's the reason they need time. Not only they dont have as much ressources as the others; they only have 1 car, so less data.
So they will need more time to put everything together, as usual. Like in 2019. The RE19 wasnt reliable at first, but it was very reliable in 2020 and 2021. (Yeah Renault kept the same PU, chassis and gearbox 3 seasons in the row). And still the car and the PU wee very competitive in their second year (2020). Actually they were faster than MCL in average in race and qualy.

And I dont think the Ferrari compressor is at the front or just behind that new round intercooler. IMO it's still at the rear of the V6, partly inside the V like in the last seasons.

User avatar
Blackout
1310
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:12 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

GhostF1 wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:36 am
AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:45 pm
diffuser wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 9:24 pm


They went for performance at the expense of reliability.

Next year, I think they're f8cked regardless if the PU is reliable. Hopefully, I'm wrong but that's my feeling.
The worrying part is it's not like they are at a class leading performance level when it's working (like the Ferrari). Ferrari is who you point to when you say "we chased performance over reliability". Given the Renault isn't class leading on the ICE (Ferrari) or the MGU-H/K side (Honda), it's not like the numbers they are putting up are pushing the envelope relative to what's possible from 100kg/hr of fuel. It's rather just a design that is not neccesarily class leading in any way, that also happens to be constructed from chocolate.
I'm with you on this. They say they've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary, but they aren't class leading in this area either while having all these varied PU issues, the fact it's varied is a bigger worry as well. As far as we can tell, the Renault doesn't currently have a single desirable characteristic over the other three.. You can probably make a strong case the Honda is the class leader at the moment in an overall package sense with rock solid reliability and Renault trail them in all areas even with this "performance bias".
Hopefully they turn it around for '23 but if the issue is rooted in an architecture flaw it might be a painful 3 more seasons.
lol
Firstly, when they say "'We've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary" it's partly PR BS for the medias. It's exaggerated. And the main reasons they have these reliability issues are above (amongst others).
Actually they opted for a less aggressive compromise than what they say in the media, on the performance side too: they carefully postponed some (big) performance steps to 2023, obviously on the areas that are not completely frozen, like the intercooling system etc (and even their monocoque design has taken this into account for 2023). So they are very probably using a basic version for their intercooler this year. (Yes I have even more reliable sources in Viry this year).
And the reliability fixes which are also partly planned should help.

Regarding 2022 and 2023 performance, to say they "are far behind the best PU" is complete BS according to them and the other teams. All PU are extremely close today. And the Viry guys are already very confident regarding their 2022 level, not just peak power.
It's a big mistake to underestimate Viry. If we look at the cost-performance ratio, they're probably number 1, with Merc second and the other 2 far behind.
Better not to boast, Honda fans. In 2020 the brand new Honda PU was at best on par with the 2 years old RS PU that only had minor tweaks. And this could happen again in 2023. Viry simply needs more time to get its sh*t together. They need to spread their development over a longer period of time, but less than pre-2019. Their simulation & testing tools are getting much better.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
79
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Blackout wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 11:57 am
GhostF1 wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:36 am
AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:45 pm


The worrying part is it's not like they are at a class leading performance level when it's working (like the Ferrari). Ferrari is who you point to when you say "we chased performance over reliability". Given the Renault isn't class leading on the ICE (Ferrari) or the MGU-H/K side (Honda), it's not like the numbers they are putting up are pushing the envelope relative to what's possible from 100kg/hr of fuel. It's rather just a design that is not neccesarily class leading in any way, that also happens to be constructed from chocolate.
I'm with you on this. They say they've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary, but they aren't class leading in this area either while having all these varied PU issues, the fact it's varied is a bigger worry as well. As far as we can tell, the Renault doesn't currently have a single desirable characteristic over the other three.. You can probably make a strong case the Honda is the class leader at the moment in an overall package sense with rock solid reliability and Renault trail them in all areas even with this "performance bias".
Hopefully they turn it around for '23 but if the issue is rooted in an architecture flaw it might be a painful 3 more seasons.

lol
Firstly, when they say "'We've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary" it's partly PR BS for the medias. It's exaggerated. And the main reasons they have these reliability issues are above (amongst others).
Actually they opted for a less aggressive compromise than what they say in the media, on the performance side too: they carefully postponed some (big) performance steps to 2023, obviously on the areas that are not completely frozen, like the intercooling system etc (and even their monocoque design has taken this into account for 2023). So they are very probably using a basic version for their intercooler this year. (Yes I have even more reliable sources in Viry this year).
And the reliability fixes which are also partly planned should help.

Regarding 2022 and 2023 performance, to say they "are far behind the best PU" is complete BS according to them and the other teams. All PU are extremely close today. And the Viry guys are already very confident regarding their 2022 level, not just peak power.
It's a big mistake to underestimate Viry. If we look at the cost-performance ratio, they're probably number 1, with Merc second and the other 2 far behind.
Better not to boast, Honda fans. In 2020 the brand new Honda PU was at best on par with the 2 years old RS PU that only had minor tweaks. And this could happen again in 2023. Viry simply needs more time to get its sh*t together. They need to spread their development over a longer period of time, but less than pre-2019. Their simulation & testing tools are getting much better.
@Blackout, I certainly hope you are correct and there is much more to come. This season has not been enjoyable.

It just seems like by the time this current PU is worth a damn, the engine reset will happen in 2026 and it will be back to square one.

GhostF1
GhostF1
109
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:11 am

Re: Renault Power Unit Hardware & Software

Post

Blackout wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 11:57 am
GhostF1 wrote:
Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:36 am
AR3-GP wrote:
Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:45 pm


The worrying part is it's not like they are at a class leading performance level when it's working (like the Ferrari). Ferrari is who you point to when you say "we chased performance over reliability". Given the Renault isn't class leading on the ICE (Ferrari) or the MGU-H/K side (Honda), it's not like the numbers they are putting up are pushing the envelope relative to what's possible from 100kg/hr of fuel. It's rather just a design that is not neccesarily class leading in any way, that also happens to be constructed from chocolate.
I'm with you on this. They say they've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary, but they aren't class leading in this area either while having all these varied PU issues, the fact it's varied is a bigger worry as well. As far as we can tell, the Renault doesn't currently have a single desirable characteristic over the other three.. You can probably make a strong case the Honda is the class leader at the moment in an overall package sense with rock solid reliability and Renault trail them in all areas even with this "performance bias".
Hopefully they turn it around for '23 but if the issue is rooted in an architecture flaw it might be a painful 3 more seasons.
lol
Firstly, when they say "'We've gone for outright performance with reliability secondary" it's partly PR BS for the medias. It's exaggerated. And the main reasons they have these reliability issues are above (amongst others).
Actually they opted for a less aggressive compromise than what they say in the media, on the performance side too: they carefully postponed some (big) performance steps to 2023, obviously on the areas that are not completely frozen, like the intercooling system etc (and even their monocoque design has taken this into account for 2023). So they are very probably using a basic version for their intercooler this year. (Yes I have even more reliable sources in Viry this year).
And the reliability fixes which are also partly planned should help.

Regarding 2022 and 2023 performance, to say they "are far behind the best PU" is complete BS according to them and the other teams. All PU are extremely close today. And the Viry guys are already very confident regarding their 2022 level, not just peak power.
It's a big mistake to underestimate Viry. If we look at the cost-performance ratio, they're probably number 1, with Merc second and the other 2 far behind.
Better not to boast, Honda fans. In 2020 the brand new Honda PU was at best on par with the 2 years old RS PU that only had minor tweaks. And this could happen again in 2023. Viry simply needs more time to get its sh*t together. They need to spread their development over a longer period of time, but less than pre-2019. Their simulation & testing tools are getting much better.
Uhhh. Where did I say "far behind the best PU" lol.. but I will say they are behind, obviously. It's at best close but it is also unreliable. Those are the facts, the rest about it's 2023 potential is all rumour from your side. If it's true, excellent news, like I said, hopefully they turn it around but for the moment there are several problems.

"Best not to underestimate Viry"... I wouldn't say I underestimate them but the entire era they haven't been particularly outstanding. Fine sure, but nothing worth talking about in comparison to what the other three have achieved.

"The brand new 2020 Honda PU was on par with a 2 year old RS PU"... The 2020 PU was not all new.. it was a revised version of the 2017 architecture, as was the 18 and 19 units. The 2021 PU was all new and you'd be foolish to say it wasn't an outstanding jump forward and widely accepted as level pegging Merc last year.

This isn't a p*ssing contest anyway. Merely stating at the moment, the engine isn't particularly reliable and it seems to be across several aspects of the engine. I hope they get it all sorted as parity is ideal, no one wishes for PU related retirements, it's gut wrenching.

Best not to promise the world "Renault Fans". Let's just hope they do have good fixes planned and we have a strong contest through to '26.