whats wrong with the renault engines?

[FW17]

Definitely a lot of work but it is choice that teams have to make, stick with Renault and wait 6 months or entire season before a full fix is available or jump ship, spend a few million and 2 months to get another engine going.

It is a lot of work because turbo sits between the engine and gearbox and there are a lot of ERS components which will be of different sizes and may require different locations.

[langwadt]

Engine mounting points are standardized in the regulations so gbox would be the major modification.

Someone brought up the possibility of Renault customers defecting to a rivl engine. How technically feasible is that? The closest to that would I guess be the Brawn last minute Mercedes switch?

engine mount, transmission mount and engine length is standardized in the regulations so assuming the shafts
connect up it should be a bolt on

but this year there is a hell of a lot more stuff attached you need find room for

[fasterthanyou]

What Force India/Marussia did that make them deserve to shine more than Toro Rosso or Caterham? I can understand the works teams being punished by their own incompetence, after all they built the engine but I don't think this applies to non-works team.

Customer teams could always switch to other engine manufacturers, Renault is the most expensive engine deal of the 3.

They in the wrong because they made made a wrong choice? I don't think the right choice was that clear early on.

[theTTshark]

Interesting developments. Certainly puts Renault behind a bit, and certainly a bit surprising. But then there's a difference between the fans / media, and professionals. The fans / media love getting spun around by drama and all this crap, and then there are all sorts of theories and speculation and press conferences that people will read into however they please. Blah blah blah it's the end of the world for Renault teams. Professionals go to work, lay out the facts, make a plan, and execute it - cool and collected. Certainly there are very capable people at RBR, Renault, and the like.

In professional motorsports there are organizations who have suffered appreciable engine-related issues early in race seasons and come back to win championships. Ask me how I know...

It's entertaining watching everyone freaking out. "...all models are wrong, some are useful." Renault will get back to work and correct their models and find a solution.

Jersey Tom, I'll ask the question. How do you know?

[FW17]

What Force India/Marussia did that make them deserve to shine more than Toro Rosso or Caterham? I can understand the works teams being punished by their own incompetence, after all they built the engine but I don't think this applies to non-works team.

Customer teams could always switch to other engine manufacturers, Renault is the most expensive engine deal of the 3.

They in the wrong because they made made a wrong choice? I don't think the right choice was that clear early on.

No one said that Renault is a wrong choice, probably they may be the best engine once the issues are sorted out. My point is that the 3 customer teams can get out of the contract and find other engine partners as for some (like Caterham and Lotus) a bad year could be disastrous.

[fasterthanyou]

No one said that Renault is a wrong choice, probably they may be the best engine once the issues are sorted out. My point is that the 3 customer teams can get out of the contract and find other engine partners as for some (like Caterham and Lotus) a bad year could be disastrous.

If you noticed, I was replying to the post that said non-works non-Renault teams deserve to shine through meritocracy. Why exactly they deserve any merit for simply making a choice which happens to be the right one? Clearly the post is trying to imply that all the Renault teams should pay the price for choosing Renault.

And I think changing the power unit this late will going to screw their season regardless.

[321apex]

And I think changing the power unit this late will going to screw their season regardless.

Why is everyone so sure that other engine suppliers have the capacity to take on Renault teams wanting to get out of contracts? I believe that Renault teams have no options and really are stuck for the ride - good or bad.

[Skippon]

It is nigh impossible for customer teams to switch engines at this stage.
1) The engine manufacturers are already geared up for production of their power units for Melbourne and some of their components are on very long lead times!!! They are not going to compromise the availability of engines for the works and existing customer teams
2) There is a lot of secrecy in disclosing who their power units are designed and operating, and they would be reluctant to disclose anything to a team which may take that information to a competitor!!

[henra]

i still think renault would loose too much from failing this, so i'm feeling like it sounds dubious that they couldn't fix it in 20 weeks.

Ditto.
Because it would probably be their end in F1.
RB won't have the patience to hope for Renault to recover some time in the future and probably knock on Honda's door for next year (because Honda is the only other top engine supplier that doesn't have his own car in the field) and the smaller Teams will probably be bankrupt by then.

That said, I have a hard time believing this. At least I expect them to come up with a 95% solution until the final fix.
That might lead to Renault powered Teams lacking some 20 - 50HP or thereabouts.
More critical to the ultimate performance of the car (and painful for Adrian Newey) might be if they require much more cooling than the competition.

[mikeerfol]

Today's news from TJ13 - assign whatever weight to their report as you like...

As I reported yesterday, I have been informed by a source whose reliability is unquestionable, the complete fix for Renault’s woes will take between 15 and 20 weeks, and seeing as it was TJ13 who exclusively revealed the Renault problems on Monday night – days before anyone else – this information is equally solid.

The engines are soon to be homologated, which leaves Renault up against it should this be enforced by the FIA. TJ13 learned from an FIA source that this will be ‘looked at’ in an attempt to cut Renault some slack if necessary.

TJ13 was led to believe on Tuesday that the problem could be a production/fabrication issue only, however as the week has progressed, the French engine manufacturer has been forced to look again at aspects of their powertrains.

So, Renault to have unequal treatment?

[iotar__]

Definitely a lot of work but it is choice that teams have to make, stick with Renault and wait 6 months or entire season before a full fix is available or jump ship, spend a few million and 2 months to get another engine going.

It is a lot of work because turbo sits between the engine and gearbox and there are a lot of ERS components which will be of different sizes and may require different locations.

What choice, what 6 months, what entire season, what change of customers, is it a fact now? Based on "someone said" let's discuss it as reality. OK, hypothetically. Can they? I don't know, I haven't read their contract. Will they be "forced to" - OK, how, by redesigning (?) the whole car and why especially after 6 months or full season? And I thought technical should mean not only naming car's parts but basing discussions on material world, even when predicting sth.

On top of that cherry picked quotes in every second post from the same interview. Yes, they are in "serious" trouble, proof is on track, interviews are secondary and for details but if interview does not correlate with blog's predictions it doesn't matter. Let's say it's 20 weeks for "full fix", fine even if it's too specific considering "various" problems and chassis side from different teams - how about "not fully fixed", like 95%? Possible, when?

So, Renault to have unequal treatment?

It would only be unequal if they'd be the only team allowed to modify, wouldn't it?
Same interview :
"The homologation deadline is the end of February and is fundamental to regulations. Beyond that time, changes are permitted only with prior approval from the FIA. Change is not forbidden, but subject to the sporting regulations and we should not get so hung up on this date."

Previously (engine freeze of V8s) and unofficially AFAIR the logic of allowing reliability updates was based on "it can happen to you too". Teams could veto but didn't because of that. I don't know if it's up to other teams still or only FIA.

[nacho]

Just noticed on some video from 29th that Caterham was whistling sound when entering corners, so probably they weren't harvesting with turbo a lot or perhaps any, blowing the excess gases directly to exhaust

[321apex]

The stakes are high. Too much money and in turn politics is riding on this.
FIA is unlikely to provide any rule concessions on technical matters to help any one engine manufacturer. None of the remaining engine makers would agree to this.

The F1 "sport" has become less of a sport and more of a cut throat business.

Renault will sink or swim.

My prediction still stands - less than 10 cars will see the finish line in Melbourne.

[Jersey Tom]

I could see concessions be made to help Renault get going if things end up being really bleak for them - but going along with something similar to help other manufactures keep ahead as well.

Think of it this way, if none of the Renault-powered cars can make it a lap around Albert Park it's not good for the sport. You want to have a full grid and cars at least capable of racing each other. Having half the field blow up on lap 2 doesn't do anyone any good.

I do think Renault / RBR / whoever will sort their stuff out here in short order and be just fine. But if it came down to it, I wouldn't see anything wrong with giving some "update" concession to all engine manufacturers. Renault can then get their engines at least working, and the rest can move ahead with some power or endurance updates.

[321apex]

I would more likely expect, that a moratorium on some "difficult" aspect of new technology is implemented as a relief measure.

Testing mileage isn't the same as racing. Those teams that are seemingly having little problems are not guaranteed of not having them when the flag drops. I am surprised, that somebody's "wet dream" was allowed to stand as technical revolution in F1 for 2014, without transition periods of diluted versions of each of those technologies extended over 3-6 years.

This revolution should have been divided up in stages, while taking into account the global economic climate:
1. 1.6L Turbo V6 with 80HP KERS - 2 years
2. + MGF-H boost ERS control - 2 years
3. + 160HP KERS w/ integrated rear wheel braking + TC

Instead, this expensive technological hurdle may do in the F1 as we know it.