[www.autosport.com]

Good news!

---

Admin@racingbulls.net
www.racingbulls.net

Unbelievable news!

*edit*

Well, maybe unbelievable was too stronger word =), but great news!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19/03/2010 16:20 by blight.

friggin' awesome. Totally surprised, but very pleased.

great news for RB and Renault.hopefully will keep renault interested in staying in F1.


a pic of the renault engine with the new upgrades

lol boci :-)

Looks like the purely performance related upgrades were rejected, slight bummer, but at least with the reliability stuff we should be able to run the engine a bit harder. Too bad it didn't say if these changes would be ready for Australia.

---

http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

Didn't Mclaren do their performance upgrades under the 'Reliability' banner??

Hopefully they have some unavoidable performance increases with that extra reliability.

Quote:

LoudHoward
Looks like the purely performance related upgrades were rejected, slight bummer, but at least with the reliability stuff we should be able to run the engine a bit harder. Too bad it didn't say if these changes would be ready for Australia.

Not really a bummer at all, because the RB6 is already the fastest car this season, and i am sure the Merc engine is where it is NOT because it was allowed performance upgrages but it was allowed reliability upgrades like the ones Renualt are allowed here....so all good.

---

----Webber versus Alonso----



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 20/03/2010 03:25 by Whitey*~@.

I think there will be some in there. Not any less than Mercedes I would guess.

I think there will be some in there. Not any less than Mercedes I would guess.

I agree blight, it is just that they don't call them 'performance upgrades' they call them 'reliability upgrades', the exact same thing happend to Merc over the last couple of years they were called 'reliability upgrades' but look at the Merc 'reliability upgrades', they actually improved engine performance....so all good that Renault have been allowed 'reliability upgrades' *Wink Wink*

---

----Webber versus Alonso----



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 20/03/2010 03:55 by Whitey*~@.

No you're right Whitey, I can't see any request for something that would make us faster getting denied being a bummer at all.

Wait, WHAT?!?

---

http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

No you're right Whitey, I can't see any request for something that would make us faster getting denied being a bummer at all.

Wait, WHAT?!?

lol Loud, but that is just my point,the request for something that would make us faster has not been denied at all, it is just called another name 'reliability' instead of the name 'performance'...just like what Merc called their upgrades,...hang on a minute,...Wait, WHAT?!?

---

----Webber versus Alonso----

But really Loud on a serious note without the 'Wait, WHAT?!?' i thought it was the 'reliability upgrades' that gave the Merc engine more performance than the Renault engine...wasn't it

---

----Webber versus Alonso----

I'm not privy to internal FIA memos. The point is, not all the upgrades we requested have been approved, which is what I was saying was a bummer.

---

http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

OK

---

----Webber versus Alonso----

By the sounds of it we tried to sneak some fuel efficiency upgrades which got fizzed.

Good news, but presumably this rule only applies to new engines out of their 8 allocation, or can they retrospectively upgrade their Bahrain engines (other than changing Seb's spark plugs?).

Similarly, if they can't get the changes in place before Melbourne (where they will presumably use new engines?), does that mean that the reliability upgrades will only apply to the remaining 6 engines?

Perhaps there are some upgrades that would be easy to apply retrospectively to old engines without deeming them to be unfair refurbishment of sealed engines, whereas more structural changes can only be made to new engines?

---

They probably already have these upgrades ready to go, and were just waiting for approval. Might already have four engines to spec ready for Melbourne.

I can't see them having any engines ready to go prior the decision. They would have no idea of what parts were going to be approved and what parts weren't. Hopefully these engines will be in place for the next race!

I'd say this is a big process. I do not believe we will be able to change our current engines. I just hope we can get the last 6 or 7? each changed... When do teams build their engines? How many manufactured engines do they stay in front? I have no idea.

I guess they knew they had the request being assessed, so they would have had the minimum prepped, but how many os this? And, would Red Bull buy new ones to replace the old engines they had in store?

---

apparently already implemented

Motorsport

That sucks.

---

http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

That sucks.

I see what you are saying Loud, but it doesn't really suck when you look at the big picture, because Red Bull are still very much at the sharp end in 2010.

---

----Webber versus Alonso----

meh, who thinks the requested 'performance' upgrades were a red herring?

"Oh look over here, performance improvements"

DENIED

*snickers at the fact we got through the changes we really wanted*

Would be what i would do.

Of course. Thats what we are all hoping. Not that we would have to be very sneaky, since the FIA are obviously in the habit of giving them out to other teams.

I read this Renault statement slightly differently!

Yes the upgrades were done in the winter BUT they didn't make clear if we had used or raced with the upgraded power plant yet...

i'm wondering if the 'green light' has now been given to use these upgraded units...

We may have run the older spec in Barhrain???

Fingers crossed...

---

Looking at the press release, I reckon they had full approval to do the upgrades over the winter and we're currently racing on upgraded engines.

As noted above, it would be too hard to implement these changes part way through the season, so I'm sure Renault would have pushed hard to get this issue fully resolved and approved in the off season.

---

If power levels of all the engines are to be believed how far ahead would we have been if the Merc was in the back????

1/2 second min would have been a consertive number one would think!!!!!

---

Mark's comments in Malaysian post-quali conference confirming that no change in engines since winter testing:

"We know we have a freeze which is quite tough on us, so we’re doing everything we can to close the gap to the guys who have a bit more power. In the end, we had a failure and we hope that we can learn from it and go forward but obviously we can’t change the spec of all the engines now. They’ve been the same since winter testing."

[www.autosport.com]

---

so not till next year?