Red Bull hit out at Renault - again

[jens]

Well yeah, Bezza.

Mercedes domination in my book has been worse than Red Bull or Ferrari in the past. At least they never dominated for two consecutive years. Red Bull dominated 2011, 2013, but 2010 and 2012 were close enough. Ferrari dominated 2002, 2004, but 2003 was close and 2001 half of the wins went to other teams too. But Mercedes already has two consecutive seasons of utter domination. And guess they'll get third one too.

As for Red Bull. I am unsure what they are gambling on. Sure enough the relationship with Renault has been unsatisfactory, but it seems they have competely burnt bridges and played themselves into the corner. Some pretty heavy political game, but interesting to see, what comes out of it!

Basically if Red Bull wants to have a long-term future in the sport, they must hope Honda comes good or another manufacturer joins. Because Mercedes and Ferrari will never give them equal opportunity to beat the works teams. Before 2014 there were lots of arguments, how important it is to be The Works team in the new era and everything points to this being the case.

Of course, it demands that the engine of the works team is up to scratch too (looking at you, Honda, and to a lesser extent Renault). So basically... there are not many options to choose from if you want to win. McLaren gambled with Honda and look what happened. Only Mercedes and Ferrari can have a reasonable expectation of fighting for wins next year. All others know at best they can get (a) podium(s).

[jens]

Mercedes is the new Ferrari, they use every thrick in the book and some Moore.

That's politics. In interviews everyone likes to claim that "close competition would be good for F1", but regardless of whether it is Ferrari, Red Bull or Mercedes at the front, they use every possible mean to keep their advantage. So nothing new under the sun, business as usual.

[The Black Knight]

So people feel it is a good idea for Mercedes to supply an on par Engine to RBR so that RBR can possibly beat them? The logic here is incredibly flawed.

It would be a PR disaster for Mercedes. It would send out the following statement "We make great Engines, but even a drinks manufacturer can build a better chassis than us".

If you think this is good for Mercedes, you're completely off your game.

[zako85]

Well yeah, Bezza.

Mercedes domination in my book has been worse than Red Bull or Ferrari in the past. At least they never dominated for two consecutive years. Red Bull dominated 2011, 2013, but 2010 and 2012 were close enough.

Indeed. We used to think that 2011 was bad, but McLaren and Ferrari managed to win seven races! 2013 was very bad after the European leg of the season, but that's because pretty much every team gave up on beating Red Bulls and wrote the season off, including Ferrari who said that they were going to stop car development after Belgian GP if there was no progress.

As for Red Bull burning bridges with Mercedes, I am guessing that Red Bull is probably thinking that achieving the current Williams F1 level of performance, with either Ferrari or Mercedes engines is still better than fighting for points outside of top 5. I don't know what Ferrari or Mercedes think about engine supply for Red Bull, but Red Bull being very important for F1 success, I think Bernie E or FIA will try to pull some strings in the backrooms in order to coalesce those factories to provide Red Bull with a better engine.

I think it's a pretty exciting stuff if Renault resurrects its factory team. That's one more well-funded team, which is good for F1.

[zako85]

So people feel it is a good idea for Mercedes to supply an on par Engine to RBR so that RBR can possibly beat them? The logic here is incredibly flawed.

It would be a PR disaster for Mercedes. It would send out the following statement "We make great Engines, but even a drinks manufacturer can build a better chassis than us".

If you think this is good for Mercedes, you're completely off your game.

Mercedes did play a second fiddle to McLaren-Mercedes in 2010-2012, which did look embarrassing. At this point though, I think Red Bull would probably be happier to be in position that Williams is in right now, than to be fighting for points outside of top 5 spots in most races. If Red Bull car could regularly finish on podium, that would still mean something (like a good marketing exposure to the brand of drinks they promote).

[Bezza]

So people feel it is a good idea for Mercedes to supply an on par Engine to RBR so that RBR can possibly beat them? The logic here is incredibly flawed.

It would be a PR disaster for Mercedes. It would send out the following statement "We make great Engines, but even a drinks manufacturer can build a better chassis than us".

If you think this is good for Mercedes, you're completely off your game.

To an extent I agree. But we are at the point now where Mercedes are effectively controlling F1 as they have the superior overall package. This is negative for F1 and the lack of competition is leading people to switch off. And with the current regulations and restrictions on development, effectively what you see in Australia in the first race just carries on for the season.

F1 needs a massive shape up and 2017 is key to its future.

And honestly, who cares if Mercedes are unhappy with any potential changes that harm them. F1 has done well enough when they weren't involved.

[The Black Knight]

To an extent I agree. But we are at the point now where Mercedes are effectively controlling F1 as they have the superior overall package. This is negative for F1 and the lack of competition is leading people to switch off. And with the current regulations and restrictions on development, effectively what you see in Australia in the first race just carries on for the season.

F1 needs a massive shape up and 2017 is key to its future.

And honestly, who cares if Mercedes are unhappy with any potential changes that harm them. F1 has done well enough when they weren't involved.

You know we were having this same conversation 12 years ago when Ferrari were dominating and we're likely to be having this conversation in another ten years as well when another manufacturer dominate. Mercedes have given a lot to F1 since they returned to F1 as an Engine supplier and I think should they decide to quit F1 it would be a big loss. I think they've given a lot more to F1 than the likes of RBR. They may not have two teams but they have invested an awful lot and, in my opinion, completely deserve their success. As Ron Dennis said "You can't punish a team for doing a good job". It's not their fault that the other teams didn't do as good a job as they did. Honda, RBR, Renault, they were all aware of the rule changes for 2014 at the same time.

RBR could have worked with Renault instead of throwing the toys out of the pram, which probably would have been the best solution for them, except they threw the toys out of the pram.

Does F1 need Mercedes? No, but I'd wager that F1 needs Mercedes supplying their Engines to four teams on the grid a lot more than Mercedes needs F1.

[AndyL]

With the Renault-Lotus deal not yet finalised, Lotus have nevertheless decided to retain the only guy on the grid who has retired from more races than the McLaren drivers. Curious. You'd think manufacturer backing would remove the need for a crash-happy pay driver. Instead it seems Grosjean may be the one to leave.

As also noted in that James Allen article, Renault have still not used a single one of their 12 remaining engine tokens. I wonder how much that has to do with the falling out with Red Bull. Red Bull performance in 2015 is surely no longer a priority for Renault. I'm guessing those tokens will be used at the last possible date, and on changes that are more focused on laying groundwork for 2016 engine development than on immediate performance improvements.

[jens]

With the Renault-Lotus deal not yet finalised, Lotus have nevertheless decided to retain the only guy on the grid who has retired from more races than the McLaren drivers. Curious. You'd think manufacturer backing would remove the need for a crash-happy pay driver. Instead it seems Grosjean may be the one to leave.

The more I think about it, the more Renault involvement seems like the 2010 one - part-ownership, Renault name, yellow livery, but underfinanced and Petrov as a paydriver.

I have not been convinced Renault is prepared to make a FULL commitment to F1 in the new hyper-expensive power units era.

[dj_bytedisaster]

So people feel it is a good idea for Mercedes to supply an on par Engine to RBR so that RBR can possibly beat them? The logic here is incredibly flawed.

It would be a PR disaster for Mercedes. It would send out the following statement "We make great Engines, but even a drinks manufacturer can build a better chassis than us".

If you think this is good for Mercedes, you're completely off your game.

Aren't they sending that message anyway? They already said that they won't supply their engines to RBR to avoid creating a strong opponent. So basically they already told the world that they don't trust their own chassis to be competitive with an RBR built one.