It's plainly obvious to me that you've not given my thoughts the courtesy of your consideration. And to imply it's in any way my fault for drawing you in is patently absurd.
Because I have made so abundantly clear?
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 80#p608280
I'm dying to know: what part of the article below made it an acceptable confirmation of your view, yet unacceptable as a confirmation of mine?
It doesn't. I reject the premise:
turbof1 wrote:Yes, and I concluded that that section is not quoted from Illien. Just more meaningless speculation.
It stands and falls with the assumption that Red Bull would be getting normal but unbranded PU supply from Renault. Is it a problem that I agree with one part of the article, the part where Illien was quoted, and don't agree with the part where AMuS writes its opinion?
turbof1 wrote:I have explained it in previous posts - no need to repeat. I'm limiting myself to posting personal quotes and I'll be giving my opinion on it. I'll be eager to avoid going to endless loop discussions. Again, might I be proven wrong in the end I will accept that. Guess we'll find that out soon, possibly within 3 weeks.
I'll accept I should have readed a bit more thoroughly your comments. You deserve that respect. But in my defence, when you quoted this:
I hope it's enough to shake people of Illien-engine wonderland. It's not going to happen, not next year.
You choose to ignore this:
turbof1 wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/121683
I think we will take what we can get because we want to be racing
I know some people will read that as "that points towards their own engine" (I sincerely do not know how, but these last few days have proven people are very creative with reading). No, it doesn't. The underlining message is that they still have no solution towards next year. It fumes with desperation. You'd expect that Red Bull would atleast be more quiet and a bit more confient if they were developing an engine of their own. The fact is that Matechitz, Renault and Illien have denied the rumors in person. Ricciardo is now in person stating "we are still looking for a power unit; we are desperate so we'll take anything."
Also:
Unless no one gives us an engine, that is the only thing that will stop us from racing.
Reads very much like "if we can't anyone to supply us with an engine, we will have to quit". Not a smitch of hint towards their own PU.
That's a bit of hypocrity on your part too.
I'm dying to know: what part of the article below made it an acceptable confirmation of your view, yet unacceptable as a confirmation of mine? I'm capable of absorbing vast arrays of subtlety and nuance. But, I can't make myself see this as anything more than rank hypocrisy.
First of all, do we agree atleast that Ricciardo is a better source then for instance JT13. A driver directly quoted is going to be the better source, right? Not that a driver is constantly informed of everything, but we can safely assume that given Red Bull pulling through or not decides if Ricciardo races next year or not, so it's in his best interests to know.
Second, he made this very comment:
"Unless no one gives us an engine, that is the only thing that will stop us from racing.
Everything is of course open to interpretation, but the most straight forward one is that to assume he means with "us" is red bull. This implies if nobody supplies Red Bull, they will not race. Further implying they don't have their own engine plans because if they did they would be racing.
Now as far as your quote from Mark Hughes goes, Illien denied the rumors explicitly today. I can safely assume that if a development bearing someone's name, is denied by the same exact person, that it probably is not going to hold much reality right?
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 34139.html (thrown through the google translator, so be careful with reading)
So far, so bad. Only Mario Illien has strangely heard himself not. The Swiss Motor Pope responded surprised at the rumors and clarifies:.. "I know nothing of a dispute I also have no idea what upgrades Renault has incorporated in its modified engine Also, I can not imagine that a large company like Renault, the arrives risk, secretly install my development. "
Mario Illien had in the summer at the expense of Red Bull the cylinder head of the Renault V6 Turbo modified and achieved encouraging results, according to Red Bull so. However, Renault would rather bring its own development at the start. She ran in parallel with the Ilmor project.
Red Bull has taken the job to Ilmor nearly 2 million euros. Again, the story deviates from reality. She speaks of work on the block instead of the cylinder head. "If we had to block even touched, we would not have come with 12 token to make ends meet," Illien already told us in the summer.
Illien also denies that he would have received an engine department in Milton Keynes and that there are plans, along with Red Bull to revise the Renault engine next year. After your project has been rejected in September by Renault, Dietrich Mateschitz declared that it makes little sense to build a complete drive unit on its own it. It would take far too long in the complexity of the technology, until you reach a level of Mercedes would or Ferrari.
It is safe to say that Illien is not in the picture. It's a direct source, he is the source, so I'm rather believing that. I'll however accept Mark Hughes note that Red Bull made "key elements" of the ERS systems, while inmediately making the note that one can describe screws as key elements if they want to sound a bit more sensational. It'll probably be much more crucial parts, but it also implies Red Bull is at the same time very much dependent on Renault for most other parts, most likely some of those parts are other key elements too.
AMuS further said this:
The real part: In fact, Red Bull could compete again with a Renault engine next year. The would likely not bear the name of Renault on the cylinder heads. That Red Bull operates on the electric side-house development, is not new. The troops in Milton Keynes can be incorporated in the battery and software for energy management for two years their expertise. It is the only part that worked perfectly. A foreign development moreover, Renault is unlikely to allow. The disgrace Imagine if an outwardly developed Renault engine would be better than their own.
Emphasis on "could" of course. I don't believe that either. Matechitz denied this, in person. I'm not bothered to link to it again, you know just as well as me that's true he said that.
I also categorize the article from Somers the same as Joe Saward: a very nice theoritical exercise. But again I dispute they'll get supply from Renault, in any form. Red Bull is with empty hands in that case. Still, he makes quite a bit of sense. I'm willing to consider this further, despite that Matechitz was quite clear.
May I also point out that your quote from Somers does not speak in your defense. Red Bull showed they could not even built a reliable ES. The ES usually is the least taxed part of the whole PU, it is the part that breaks down the least. If Red Bull cannot even design the battery properly, then I have to question their capability to design the whole ERS system, if they don't have a Renault PU to built around, something which again Matechitz denied they were looking for.
I'm capable of absorbing vast arrays of subtlety and nuance.
I'm sorry? Have I been subtle or nuanced?
My friend, I'm neither of that. I still stand with what I said earlier: I see unfounded rumors in general contradicting what involved people are being directly quoted. I hope you see that contradiction as well, or atleast a paradox. I think that's neither the issue. I have quite a black and white standpoint on that.
The issue here is not whether or not it's going to happen, but if it's possible at all. I'll admit I might have been too quick to draw lines here. I still think it's not possible without a Renault ICE, and difficult with one, but that's something completely open which indeed you were correct considering it. Going to happen? For me that's a black and white no. is it possible? Difficult, but difficult can work.
.
