RBR expect Gap to Mercedes to increase in 2015

[wnut]

http://www.f1reader.com/#/news/039-r...-039-15-112493

Is there any point in even pitching up for the 2015 season?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by wnut

http://www.f1reader.com/#/news/039-r...-039-15-112493

Is there any point in even pitching up for the 2015 season?

Red Bull scare tactics. If they paint a dire picture then maybe someone will feel so sorry for them they will get extra concessions so they can gain an 'unfair advantage' in the battle for the lead.... as though they didn't have one for the previous 4 years....
"Oh that was because we had done more homework......"

But this is now.....

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Red Bull scare tactics. If they paint a dire picture then maybe someone will feel so sorry for them they will get extra concessions so they can gain an 'unfair advantage' in the battle for the lead.... as though they didn't have one for the previous 4 years....
"Oh that was because we had done more homework......"

But this is now.....

Agree entirely.

My bet is the Renault power plant will be a big step forward and while it still may not have the outright power of the Mercedes or Ferrari (they haven't in recent years), the driveability of the engine and the total RBR package will be competitive.

[wolfhound]

I suspect that Renault will be a lot closer to Mercedes than Ferrari. The revolving door at Maranello is spinning too fast for any real improvement.

[steve_r]

It all sounds like bluff and political manoeuvering all related the the engine development limitiations that all three engine manufacturers previously agreed to, but now two of them are wrangling to get out of because they have not done a very good job.

Hormner has been saying the exact opposite recently - and claiming that he is confident that Renault will close the gap. So, what has changed exactly?

[Mike Harte]

This is all part of RBR's "demands" that they be allowed to develop their power-unit beyond the parameters laid out in the rules and regulations.

According to Autosport, they are attempting to get the FIA to allow them to run two differently homolagated power-units next season, the 2014 unit for the first few races before changing to an upgraded and uprated unit later on. They were trying to convince the FIA in Abu Dhabi that because the regs were badly drafted that they could do this, but the FIA refute RBR's view of the regulations, and have turned down their request.

RBR and/or Horner sure is/are sore loser/s.

[bella]

i thought being sore losers and trying to extract as much as possible from the car as per the regulations will allow is part of competitive motorsport....

[Greem]

Look back at previous seasons, substitute practically any other team name, team principal, bit of technology for RBR, Horner and engines and you have a non-story from days past.

Everyone moaned about RBR's aero
Everyone moaned about the DDD
Everyone moaned about Merc's magic rear wing trick
Everyone moaned about McLaren's trick brakes

The constant? Someone is always moaning.

[chillibowl]

the constant in those examples is that the moaning resulted in bans or rule changes limiting the advantage. remains to be seen what will happen here.

not sure i fully understand Horner's current suggestion though. if he is suggesting that 2014 spec engines get used for half the season and then new engines be allowed then i think thats a fair compromise. merc get their advantage of doing a better job and we get to see more competitive teams.

anyways its not like Merc did a better job in real terms anyways.

according to the pitpass article that Mike Harte posted in the 'costs' thread, didnt Merc's advantage just come from a massive amount of (deficit) spending?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

not sure i fully understand Horner's current suggestion though. if he is suggesting that 2014 spec engines get used for half the season and then new engines be allowed then i think thats a fair compromise. merc get their advantage of doing a better job and we get to see more competitive teams.

From what I understand, Horner was proposing that the rules/regulations concerning the power-units should be relaxed for, maybe, RBR and possibly Ferrari. However, those same rules/regs state clearly that only one homologated unit is permitted per season. This would seem to be aimed at disadvantaging Mercedes, who, leaving costs out of it, have just produced a better designed and engineered power-unit.

It also seems as though all the "pleadings" come from RBR, not actually from Renault! Is there any significance?

But as an aside, was it not Renault that negotiated the delay in the introduction of the new power-units by a year? And even after that extra time, they still came up short compared to Mercedes.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

the constant in those examples is that the moaning resulted in bans or rule changes limiting the advantage. remains to be seen what will happen here.

not sure i fully understand Horner's current suggestion though. if he is suggesting that 2014 spec engines get used for half the season and then new engines be allowed then i think thats a fair compromise. merc get their advantage of doing a better job and we get to see more competitive teams.

anyways its not like Merc did a better job in real terms anyways.

according to the pitpass article that Mike Harte posted in the 'costs' thread, didnt Merc's advantage just come from a massive amount of (deficit) spending?

Assuming the German team had equity, it had every right to do so.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Assuming the German team had equity, it had every right to do so.

of course. i guess im just of the opinion that in sports the advantages that money brings should be similar to the benefits that tech brings. it should be fleeting and as such so should the benefits being derived from it.

i get that all the teams agreed to this new format with each one probably thinking how they would be unbeatable for several years if they were the ones that got it right.

in perfect world they should have to pay for their greedy self interested points of view but unfortunately its the fans who suffer when there is a lack of competition imo.

[smellysocks]

Just let these rules be repealed, this FIA protected performance gap is sapping the life out of the sport. A long lasting, arbitrary rule based domination could do permanent damage to F1 fan base when so much is already threatening to series.

The whole idea that first production engines would have an annual development freeze right from the beginning is flawed and no one can be surprised by the wide variance in performance. A variance that will be spread over many seasons as development/competition is stifled.

Rewrite these rules asap please!

[wnut]

Originally Posted by smellysocks

Just let these rules be repealed, this FIA protected performance gap is sapping the life out of the sport. A long lasting, arbitrary rule based domination could do permanent damage to F1 fan base when so much is already threatening to series.

The whole idea that first production engines would have an annual development freeze right from the beginning is flawed and no one can be surprised by the wide variance in performance. A variance that will be spread over many seasons as development/competition is stifled.

Rewrite these rules asap please!

Ditto this, and G4Js excellent post above!

Well put!

[steve_r]

Repeal the engine laws completely, and we will end up with an unrestricted money spending competition, and the losers will be the small teams who already struggle to pay for the power units, and potentially even more teams going to the wall.

[Greem]

So damned if they do and damned if they don't then.

What a time to be an F1 enthusiast.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Greem

So damned if they do and damned if they don't then.

What a time to be an F1 enthusiast.

No - it is all good. Just sit back on your couch, with your Mercedes T-shirt and cap on and enjoy the show!


There must be a sensible way of the under-performing engines manufacturers closing the gap. It's just that throwing out the restrictions all-together is probably not the answer.

[Knowlesy]

I wonder what Horner's opinion on the rules was when they had Newey's EBD expertise and nobody else could figure it out? OK, so there was no freezing in that instance, but there may as well have been let's be honest.

Look in the mirror Horner. Who do you think you are?

Seems like Mr Halliwell is a bit bitter at not having life easy. He actually has to do something now, he must work for his money and, if he can't work this equation then I guess Mateschitz will have to show him the door.

But as Daniel Ricciardo would say: smiling, dancing, everything is free. All you need is positivity.

Look for the rainbow in every storm.

Stop right now Horner. Get your head down and build that team up again if you want 2 to become 1 any season soon.

Take or leave it or just don't even bother. The race is on to get out of the bottom. You gotta keep it strong before the pains turn into fears.

Holler.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

I wonder what Horner's opinion on the rules was when they had Newey's EBD expertise and nobody else could figure it out? OK, so there was no freezing in that instance, but there may as well have been let's be honest.

In all those years there was no impediment to anyone pulling the same trick apart from having the brains to do it, the engine freeze is something else altogether. The freeze if to be applied should have been put in place after one full season of competition for that is basically what happened with the V8's. It was more than one season for them but the same idea should have been applied, at least a full and free development year allowed to bed down all the issues. What happens if a manufacturer comes on the scene in two more years from now having seen all the problems and the engine architecture and belts all of them around the ears, MB will be screaming then as will Renault with a slight smirk I suspect.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Casper

In all those years there was no impediment to anyone pulling the same trick apart from having the brains to do it, the engine freeze is something else altogether. The freeze if to be applied should have been put in place after one full season of competition for that is basically what happened with the V8's. It was more than one season for them but the same idea should have been applied, at least a full and free development year allowed to bed down all the issues. What happens if a manufacturer comes on the scene in two more years from now having seen all the problems and the engine architecture and belts all of them around the ears, MB will be screaming then as will Renault with a slight smirk I suspect.

A homologation for engines was considered to be necessary for cost containment. Regardless the dispute whether banning further developments indeed reduce costs, it is absolutely ridiculous to homologate engines for more than one season. At least, engine manufacturers should be allowed to start a new season with a totally renewed design.

[Knowlesy]

Well, they all agreed to it so it is hard to sympathise.

I disagree with a freeze on principle, but hey-ho.

[Paradise City]

I find Horner's antics and ploys irritating - but he is right. Merc should be a bit more flexible.

And yes the restrictions are silly. Funny if Mclaren swept the board next year.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Well, they all agreed to it so it is hard to sympathise.

I disagree with a freeze on principle, but hey-ho.

Personally I disagree with any regulation forcing teams to use any component longer than just one race weekend. However, with regulations only allowing four engines per season and hence effectively mandate the engines will last five weekends, an engine homologation is a necessary evil.

[Tucky]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Repeal the engine laws completely, and we will end up with an unrestricted money spending competition, and the losers will be the small teams who already struggle to pay for the power units, and potentially even more teams going to the wall.

A way round this would be for the FIA to repeal the engine laws and allow the engine manufacturers to spend as much as they like, but they're not allowed to charge the teams any more for an engine. If they want to spend the money they can spend their own.

I know this would further push away independent engine manufacturers from ever entering the sport, but I think they've probably gone for good now the way the engines are.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Tucky

A way round this would be for the FIA to repeal the engine laws and allow the engine manufacturers to spend as much as they like, but they're not allowed to charge the teams any more for an engine. If they want to spend the money they can spend their own.

I know this would further push away independent engine manufacturers from ever entering the sport, but I think they've probably gone for good now the way the engines are.

And I am not certain that that would work either.

It would seem to me that it is really only Horner who is complaining about the so-called inequity between the power-unit providers. From what I have heard and read, Renault themselves have been virtually silent throughout this "debate", and I really do wonder whether their board of directors want to embark on a spending war with the other manufacturers.

It must be born in mind that both Renault and Nissan are losing market share in the car industry, and both are having to make economies in their respective factories. That means redundancies amongst the work-force, and it would surely not sit comfortably with the directors if they where spending (hundreds of) millions of Yen/Euro on an engine that had a maximum lifespan of about 20 to 30 hours before being discarded.