Renault's Cyril Abiteboul has revealed that the French manufacturer aims to continue its ascent in the engine department as the company is preparing a completely new platform, including novel technology that has not yet been seen on the track.
Top speed could have something to do with the missing power from the ICE.Juzh wrote:To demonstrate just how utterly bad renault's ERS was in monza:
https://vimeo.com/138892993
7:50
Also, If you watch entire vid you can compare any end of straights speeds when the speed shows up and you'll see how much of a difference there is between renault and ferrari. RB also carried only like half the wing angle.
No, the efficiency will not get better with higher rev rate. The ammount of energy you can harvest with the MGU-H is the problem. This reduces the energy for the MGU-K on the straights. Looking at the video above, you can see that the Renault runs out of battery power at the end of the straight.Long term F1 Fan wrote:Looking at the on board speed and revs it seems that Kimi was able to rev to just past 12K while the Renaults were limited to around 11,250-11,500, so it would seem the Ferrari's are able to rev higher for the same amount of fuel flow... more efficient combustion at a higher rev rate = more power, right?
The pressure drop should be neglectable. What do you mean with "runs out of air sooner..."? The turbo pushes air at a certain pressure into the engine. How can anything run out?Long term F1 Fan wrote: It seems to me that the ridiculous length and path of the charged air intake feeding the ICUs is proving less total boost (runs out of air sooner...) than the Mercedes or the Ferrari for the same amount of fuel flow. It is not really efficient compared to its rivals.
If I see it correctly, than Renault doesn not want external input. So no Ilien input, no copying, no external engineers. You can read all on this on the last page of this thread.Long term F1 Fan wrote: Why can't they just spend the majority of the tokens on finally splitting their turbo or at least copying the Ferrari layout (air to liquid intercooler in the V, MKH in between the compressor and turbine)?
Come one guys... properly fund the engine group, hire more engineers and run a parallel design program to fix this layout.- the current layout clearly does not work or others would have gone down the same development road - stop trying to make it work it is a losing battle - the charged air needs to take the path of least resistance and distance- it seems so obvious.
djos wrote:Show reliable sources or I call b.s.ReoPTy wrote:AMuS is full speculating and lies!
in fact renault 12 tokens upgrade is ready for 2 weeks from sources close enough, but the policy toward red bull changed, and to FIA 2016 engine rules change too, it seems that renault prefert to sandbag theirs advancements and wait till last moment to shape it even engine more efficient than uncovering it to red bull for the next GP, especially if they change the baker in 2016 . As the second wish is sorted FIA allows 32 tokens change in 2016, the first is still not, its up to red bull to know what futur engine they want
basti313 wrote:No, the efficiency will not get better with higher rev rate. The ammount of energy you can harvest with the MGU-H is the problem. This reduces the energy for the MGU-K on the straights. Looking at the video above, you can see that the Renault runs out of battery power at the end of the straight.Long term F1 Fan wrote:Looking at the on board speed and revs it seems that Kimi was able to rev to just past 12K while the Renaults were limited to around 11,250-11,500, so it would seem the Ferrari's are able to rev higher for the same amount of fuel flow... more efficient combustion at a higher rev rate = more power, right?
The pressure drop should be neglectable. What do you mean with "runs out of air sooner..."? The turbo pushes air at a certain pressure into the engine. How can anything run out?Long term F1 Fan wrote: It seems to me that the ridiculous length and path of the charged air intake feeding the ICUs is proving less total boost (runs out of air sooner...) than the Mercedes or the Ferrari for the same amount of fuel flow. It is not really efficient compared to its rivals.
If I see it correctly, than Renault doesn not want external input. So no Ilien input, no copying, no external engineers. You can read all on this on the last page of this thread.Long term F1 Fan wrote:
especia
Why can't they just spend the majority of the tokens on finally splitting their turbo or at least copying the Ferrari layout (air to liquid intercooler in the V, MKH in between the compressor and turbine)?
Come one guys... properly fund the engine group, hire more engineers and run a parallel design program to fix this layout.- the current layout clearly does not work or others would have gone down the same development road - stop trying to make it work it is a losing battle - the charged air needs to take the path of least resistance and distance- it seems so obvious.
Renault never used the illien solutions and that work was done outside of Renault so once again I call b.s. On your claims!ReoPTy wrote:djos wrote:Show reliable sources or I call b.s.ReoPTy wrote:AMuS is full speculating and lies!
in fact renault 12 tokens upgrade is ready for 2 weeks from sources close enough, but the policy toward red bull changed, and to FIA 2016 engine rules change too, it seems that renault prefert to sandbag theirs advancements and wait till last moment to shape it even engine more efficient than uncovering it to red bull for the next GP, especially if they change the baker in 2016 . As the second wish is sorted FIA allows 32 tokens change in 2016, the first is still not, its up to red bull to know what futur engine they want
Autosport, though, reports that the French manufacturer has used a "significant amount of tokens, close to its full allowance" ahead of the race in Austin.
my source says about 8 tokens, they was ready for russia but renault prefered to wait a lil more dynos, Amus is wrong on burnt ice on dynos, wrong on evolution number of tokens , 2 for brazil, lol!
my source says 6% gain on ICE, all token was used on Turbo and ICE ! 6% is about 50bhp !
thier willing is to close thier mouths and show on the track , they lost alot of time with RB illien pushed unreliable "solutions" at the start of the season
From reports, Ferrari have revverted to teh Renault style this year - turbine and compressor together, MGUH ahead of the compressor in the vee.Long term F1 Fan wrote:Why can't they just spend the majority of the tokens on finally splitting their turbo or at least copying the Ferrari layout (air to liquid intercooler in the V, MKH in between the compressor and turbine)?
Long term F1 Fan wrote:Looking at the on board speed and revs it seems that Kimi was able to rev to just past 12K while the Renaults were limited to around 11,250-11,500, so it would seem the Ferrari's are able to rev higher for the same amount of fuel flow... more efficient combustion at a higher rev rate = more power, right?
It seems to me that the ridiculous length and path of the charged air intake feeding the ICUs is proving less total boost (runs out of air sooner...) than the Mercedes or the Ferrari for the same amount of fuel flow. It is not really efficient compared to its rivals.
Why can't they just spend the majority of the tokens on finally splitting their turbo or at least copying the Ferrari layout (air to liquid intercooler in the V, MKH in between the compressor and turbine)?
Come one guys... properly fund the engine group, hire more engineers and run a parallel design program to fix this layout.- the current layout clearly does not work or others would have gone down the same development road - stop trying to make it work it is a losing battle - the charged air needs to take the path of least resistance and distance- it seems so obvious.
Fixed that for you.PABLOEING wrote:50 BHP MORE WOULD BE A BIG UPDATE......
"We'll take what we can get," said the Australian. "It's not going to be 40 horsepower.
"It's better than what we've got now, but I wouldn't get too crazy about it.
"From what I've heard it's not that much, so it's on the cusp at the moment."
Illien proposed turbo and some ice update, red bull pressured renault to get it while winter testing , renault started with the mess, illien proposed others solutions meanwhile and renault found it was a draw back, they stopped to put illien "updates" and kept illien as test bed on renault solution !djos wrote:
Renault never used the illien solutions and that work was done outside of Renault so once again I call b.s. On your claims!
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... edit-text=PABLOEING wrote:50 BHP MORE IS A BIG UPDATE......
Renault themselves said the delay was because they wanted to fully validate the new PU.ReoPTy wrote:on the 11 tokens used to austin 6 was ready since 1 mounth , but policy about red bull looking at benz and ferrari slowed their introduction, all Amus stuff gossip are a plain P.O.S
The torro Rosso charges at the exact same part of the track. Interesting.Juzh wrote:To demonstrate just how utterly bad renault's ERS was in monza:
https://vimeo.com/138892993
7:50
Also, If you watch entire vid you can compare any end of straights speeds when the speed shows up and you'll see how much of a difference there is between renault and ferrari. RB also carried only like half the wing angle.
