Red Bull, Sepang, 2014

Renault to show full potential of engine in Canada

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Red Bull, Sepang, 2014In the round-up: Renault say their engine will be operating at its full potential for the first time in this weekend’s Canadian Grand Prix.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Montreal overview (Renault Sport F1)

Renault Sport F1 head of track operations Remi Taffin: “In the last four races we’ve introduced several new upgrades and we will complete the process in Montreal, effectively giving us the first full opportunity to see where we are versus the competition.”

Pirelli open to Formula 1 grip study (Autosport)

“Pirelli is open to the idea of rebalancing mechanical and aerodynamic grip in order to improve the racing in Formula One, including bringing back wider tyres.”

Q&A: Jules Bianchi (Sky)

“I think [Ferrari are] trying their best [to catch Mercedes]. They’ve improved the engine a lot already, it is much better now. We still have to improve obviously but I think it’s getting there.”

Adrian Newey: “Seb has a very particular way of driving” (Adam Cooper’s F1 Blog)

“We can’t replace the blown diffuser obviously, but Sebastian was quick before they came along. It’s a re-learning curve.”


Comment of the day

The debate over the entertainment value of this year’s cars continues:

I was at Barcelona and I found it boring, due to the almost complete lack of the engine sound, which made for almost no atmosphere. For the first time ever at a grand prix (my 36th) I deliberately missed an F1 session, simply as it did not seem worthwhile getting up early to attend it.

I am enjoying F1 this season on TV, but for me, it is now a ‘TV-only’ sport, since it is so underwhelming in the flesh. I am gutted about this, as it has been my passion since I was nine years old.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Nathan Bradley and Alexf1Man!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Alain Prost took the lead of the 1989 drivers’ championship by two points from team mate Ayrton Senna by winning the United States Grand Prix, which was held on a street track in Phoenix for the first time.

Senna retired with an engine problem while leading on a day when there were only enough cars running at the end to fill the six points-scoring places. Riccardo Patrese was second for Williams, Eddie Cheever was on the podium in his home city, and Christian Danner gave Rial their best ever finish with fourth having started last.

Here’s footage from the American broadcast of the race:

Image © Renault/DPPI

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 119 comments on “Renault to show full potential of engine in Canada”

    1. About time Renault. Looking forward to the full potential of it.

      1. I thought there was a development freeze on engines?

        1. It is understood that there are areas where they can improve without infrgement.

          1. Mercedes have not been sitting around watching the build up to the World Cup, they will be developing their engine too!

    2. Renault to show full potential of engine in Canada

      Except nowhere in the article does Renault saying anything about showing full potential

      1. But it is clearly what the article implies. The headline just summarises the point of the article.

        1. I didn’t get that from what I read, at no point did I find them alluding to full potential, simply that they have made progress since the horrible winter testing

          1. Taffin is talking about “completing the process” and “effectively the first full opportunity to see where we are versus the competition”.

            That, to me, does sound like they will be running full power. In fact, I don’t know how one could read anything else into this than that they will be running full power.

            1. @MattDS

              In fact, I don’t know how one could read anything else into this than that they will be running full power.

              How? Knowing that engineering endeavours of the caliber of F1’s new PU are ridiculously big and insanely complex.

              “Completing the process” could be anything in such a project. Reliability, calibration, and yes, may or may not be power. But it’s never specified as such.

            2. If the process is “complete”, then it has to be all of those, Albert. If they were still forced to run at <100% power, the process would not be complete.

      2. we will complete the process in Montreal, effectively giving us the first full opportunity to see where we are

        It’s right there in the excerpt below the link.

      3. we will complete the process in Montreal, effectively giving us the first full opportunity to see where we are versus the competition.

      4. I think you have overlooked this part then @alabelly74

        In the last four races we’ve introduced several new upgrades and we will complete the process in Montreal, effectively giving us the first full opportunity to see where we are versus the competition.

      5. @alebelly74 Yes it does, in the quote used above.

        1. full opportunity does not equate to full potential of engine though.
          The Renault article reads to me like they’ve overcome a load of setbacks and are now where they should have been at the 1st race and this is now the first opportunity to study where they are in relation/comparison to the other engine manufacturers.
          This page title reads like they will have the engine running at full power in Canada, which may or may not be true.

          1. @9chris9

            This page title reads like they will have the engine running at full power in Canada

            Regardless of whether their article says that, my headline does not. So you’re accusing me of being wrong when I wrote something I didn’t write.

            1. Renault to show full potential of engine in Canada

              Regardless of whether their article says that, my headline does not. So you’re accusing me of being wrong when I wrote something I didn’t write.

              I’m just highlighting the ease to misinterpret the page headline.

              That, to me, does sound like they will be running full power.
              Other readers above have mentioned & implied that Renault will be running full power which i think is a misinterpretation of the headline.

            2. @9chris9

              That, to me, does sound like they will be running full power.

              And they may well be. Neither the article nor the headline discounts the possibility that they might.

    3. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
      4th June 2014, 0:38

      I fully agree with comment of the day. I wanted to go to F1 in the past but I could never afford it although planned to go in the future. However, I am no longer interested in attending a race due to it not sounding much better than the BTCC but still being far far far more expensive!
      I will continue to watch it on the TV (not paying for SKY still though), I think it is easier to grasp what is going on on the TV coverage anyway.

      1. I am still baffled by all this complaining. Cars are not supposed to be loud, they’re supposed to be fast (actually, to be efficient and safe). F1 is also supposed to be a sort of lab for car technology and its advancement. Less noise is better. I’m sure most people who complain it is not ‘loud enough’ used to wear ear protection at the events. That happened because the noise levels were way above what is healthy for your body. If you want to have your ears blasted by good sound, go to a heavy metal concert.

        1. Have you ever been to an F1 race? You’re right – the sound is loud, and it’s advisable to wear ear protection, but it’s an integral part, for me at least. There is nothing more exciting than feeling an F1 car through your chest, hearing it scream somewhere beyond the corner and then finally seeing it.

          I have a good friend who has recently been dipping in and out of F1. He has mentioned in passing about going to a race, maybe Spa. It’s a big financial commitment for us so not a decision we can take lightly. For me, the sound, and atmosphere that comes with that, is a huge part of the experience. The lack of noise is certainly making me think even harder about buying a ticket.

          1. I haven’t been to one, true, though I often am around Interlagos and can hear the engines from afar. I understand this irrational attachment to something that is damaging to your body because “it’s cool” and you’re used to “the atmosphere”, but it’s just that – irrational.

            1. How is something that pleases you on a sensory level irrational? I think the complaints are a bit much, but I can appreciate that the live experience must have changed considerably.

            2. I just made the mistake of watching a clip from 2005. I again realised that this years engines pale in comparison to the old ones.

              If you’ve never been, you will never quite understand what it’s like in the flesh. You can’t claim it to be irrational if you’ve never experienced it.

            3. I’ve never been to an F1 care but I have been to a motogp and even those I found to be too loud to enjoy. 5 laps in and I was fidgeting uncomfortably. The track announcer is also gone in the noise. Definitely not an ‘atmosphere’ I will be subjecting myself or my kids to. This new F1 sound? Sublime.

            4. @flig With all the respect in the world but how can you have this discussion if you’ve never been to a race?

            5. I used to attend Grands Prix before they were really noisy. In the 80’s you could hear the turbo blowing and the tyre’s squeal. I’m told you can hear that again now above the engine noise.

          2. @cornflakes +1.

            The sound is part of the whole thing. And most people (like me) never used protection because listening to that roar is a privilege. It’s easier to get used to the new sound on TV but in loco, those who have experienced those loud beats will certainly miss something, will it put me away of F1 GPs? Probably not.

            1. @jcost

              And most people (like me) never used protection because listening to that roar is a privilege.

              Likewise. And I also agree that the new sound won’t stop me from attending Grands Prix. But I’m sure I’m going to miss the old sounds trackside when I go to Silverstone. I know many people aren’t bothered by the sound, but I just won’t be able to help it when I go. It’s part of the experience of going live. If someone has never attended one live it’s hard to grasp that.

          3. @conflakes with regard to the atmosphere, one good thing about the reduction in noise level from the engines will be fans at the races being able to revel in the atmosphere created by the crowd.

            I’ve been to silverstone on a few occasions to watch F1, and one memory that really sticks in my mind is when I attended in 2008, sitting near the start-finish line, and the natural “Mexican wave” as people rose to their feet and Lewis exited the final corner. The wave swiftly made it’s way towards us, and you could see that everyone in the crowd was cheering/shouting on their favourite driver, and as the wave swallowed us up there should have been a crescendo of crowd noise but it was hard to fully appreciate it due to it being drowned out by the sound of the engines. This was even more the case when we watched a recording of the race when we got home

            The atmosphere will certainly have changed, but the real racing fan circuits where the stands are full of fans, like silverstone, will have the added dimension of the crowd atmosphere coming to the fore.

        2. I attended the World Series by Renault last weekend. They featured (among others) the Formula Renault 3.5 series.
          I watched them starting before my eyes. Now those cars are loud. And it sent shivers down my spine and I got goose bumps like I’ve never had before.

          That is what I want to experience when watching races. There’s no way around this for me. Sound doesn’t make a race in its own but I if I have any choice (which I realize I haven’t), I want it to be there and I’ll complain if it isn’t.

        3. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
          4th June 2014, 11:36

          Look, I don’t mind the sound on TV. It’s fine and I can tolerate it but I am certainly not going to waste £500+ on tickets and travel for an F1 race when there are many alternatives which offer far better value for money. A major USP for watching F1 live has gone and I am going to continue to watch it on TV unless the extortionate prices come down.

      2. For what its worth, I have been to the Melbourne GP over that last few years with my first visit back in 99 with the V10s. So with some intrigue we went this year, not knowing what to expect.
        It took me a day to get used to the new sound on Friday practice. By Saturday Practice and Quali i was fine with it. The nice change was not having to wear ear muffs so you could hear more of what was going on as the cars approached. More so my 9 year old son who is a massive F1fanatic, loved the new sound and was far more comfortable. He said to me “Dad i really really like the new cars”
        The only time when i thought i missed the noise was just in the starting laps when the whole pack was on the other side of the circuit, but once the cars spread out it was not that much different from previous years.
        The cars sound different and what i really really really love about the new engines and hearing them live is that they sound far more mechanically interesting. The V8s were just a screaming mess of a noise which were really only impressive in terms of volume, the V6s are a incredible concoction of sounds, the turbo whine, the induction noise and the bark of the V6.
        The other really great thing that you can tell when a driver has made a mistake with the tyre noise etc. That was all masked by the V8.

        Finally the new engines take away from all the anti Grand Prix protesters we have in Melbourne every year, a major point of their argument. The less complaints from the locals the more likely we will keep this race in this city. The loss of the old noise as far as i am concerned is worth the sacrifice.

        I strongly recommend going to a GP this year and making a sound judgement for yourself rather than making judgements based on posts of people on the internet.
        We have already secured our tickets for next years race.

        1. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
          4th June 2014, 11:39

          Fair enough but I don’t think it is worth the money without the sound being the same. The engines are fine but the BTCC sounds about as good as F1 at the moment and it’s a fraction of the price so if I go and see live motorsport again it will be that due to the lower prices and better atmosphere too.

        2. @theoddkiwi Absolutely agree. Was at Melbourne again this year and loved the new sound – you knew exactly which cars were about to appear and could hear what was happening in the engine and on the road.
          We were also on the other side from the start and those first few laps were the only time I felt something was missing – it didn’t feel like the world was coming to an end! But in previous years I’ve had enough of the noise after a dozen laps and I’d be wanting the race to be over after about an hour so I could get me and my young son out of there.
          Brilliant not having to worry about my son’s ears and my mates have decided that they can take their kids next year – more paying customers for Ron.

        3. Well said. No sound or anything else will put me off F1. In the 60’s and the 70’s the cars were not particularly noisy, but you could hear tyres and suspension squeaks, bottoming out and the engine had a nice rasp to them.

      3. The sound is powerful. It really is a big part of the live event, it’s influence on TV is manageable but on site? I’m sure I will miss it the next time I attend an F1 GP. But again, a good race is not all down to engine sound.

      4. The Blade Runner (@)
        4th June 2014, 10:13

        I can understand where the COTD writer is coming from.

        I was also at Catalunya this year and despite my best intentions to just ignore it, I couldn’t help but feel disappointed by the noise. All of the guys I was with that had attended GPs before felt the same way.

        Interestingly, one of our friends had never been to a GP before and absolutely loved the noise! I guess this proves that in isolation it is a great sound. It’s just difficult for those of us that have followed the sport for years to avoid comparison to previous years.

        I would add though that some of the racing this year has been great. That is the most important thing.

      5. I really look forward to hear those tyres.. Every year I go to Spa, and the noise is nice but doesn’t do that much since the V8. The V10 was impressive, and very noisy. But I go for the cars and drivers and see how they tackle a corner.
        Hearing that you now can hear differences in the engines and hear the tyres gets me excited to be honest! Can’t wait to hear it in real life.

      6. I went to last years Australian GP and the cars were so loud your ears hurt if you didn’t wear ear plugs. Seriously if they are now as loud without having to wear ear plugs then hooray!

    4. There is a lot of tension building at the moment between Renault & RBR, Helmut Marko has recently said that RBR will evaluate the damage caused by Renault at the end of the year in an attempt to obtain a discount on the Energy F1 costs which is far more expensive (more than 20 million euro a year) than both the Mercedes and Ferrari PU. Renault on the other hand cannot make any discount even to RBR which is its works team because the Renault business model is based on 4 teams, if any of them will not pay the furniture costs of this year, it will affect directly Renault’s development plan of the PU for next year. The problem for RBR is that they have to stick with Renault at least for another year, Ferrari and Mercedes will not supply their PU’s to a team that is believed to have always the best chassis, Honda will supply exclusively their PU to Mclaren for next year.
      There is a rumor that suggests that Volkswagen which have a strong partnership with RBR could make a return to F1, but it seems very unlikely at the moment.
      I’ m struggling to believe that Renault will make a big step forward in Canada, they seem to be lost with this Turbo era, maybe it’s due to the lack of resources…. they were unable to solve their software problems which were solved BTW thanks to the effort of the RBR software engineers

      1. I am pretty sure that the VW rumours are brought in here (by RBR/Marko) only to push along negotiations with Renault / Infinity @tifoso1989, because it will be another couple of years before VW AG might seriously consider doing F1 (Also has to do with the top management in place). And I am pretty sure RBR are not going to even want to be a “customer” team behind McLaren.

        As for Renault making a step up, I think that in the last couple of races they have already shown, that the engine is better driveable than the Ferrari and it might be faster overall as well if it holds together.

        1. As you say, VW might consider doing F1 in a couple of years, or another manufacturer could look into supplying Red Bull around that time if the Renault relationship breaks down.

          I heard a few months ago that Infiniti will only be title sponsor until the end of next season, and that could also spell the end of the Red Bull-Renault partnership. 2016 could be a year of a lot of change at the Milton Keynes squad.

          1. I wouldn`t be too sure VW would need that much time. It all depends upon what has allready been going on behind the scenes.

            VW is definitely interested in F1 with these new regulations (and has been an active participant in the new regulations). The only thing VW really needed to go all-in was a way to climb to the top of the three as fast as possible.

            When Red Bull, the winner of the previous 4 Championships has a fallout with their engine-supplier the road is suddenly bright and shiny for VW. The combination of the top-F1 team for the last 4 years and the might of VW seems to be a possible wedding made in heaven. VW allready has most of the technology developed anyway, and I wouldn`t be surprized if they are allready preparing for F1.

            In a way that would be logical, leave WRC (they are not happy with the returns), leave Endurance to Porsche (which is also VW and as such stop competing with themselves), go into F1 and get maximum exposure.

      2. @tifoso1989

        Renault on the other hand cannot make any discount even to RBR which is its works team because the Renault business model is based on 4 teams, if any of them will not pay the furniture costs of this year, it will affect directly Renault’s development plan of the PU for next year

        Sometimes in business you have to pay for your failure. If they need extra money to develop a better PU, their parent company should give the money and those who have been failed (Renault’s customers) have the right to ask for a discount because they have been negatively affected by Renaul’ts shortcomings. It’s like a recall, you pay for your mistakes. Economists call it “externalities”, if they’re positive “the society” should compensate you but on the other hand, if your action cause negative externalities you should compensate the others…

        “C’est la vie”

      3. The problem is the problems haven’t necessarily all been Renault’s fault…

        There have been design failings from the engine manufacturer, design failings from the teams, design failings from the fuel supplier and further to that, abuse of the fuel flow sensors by the teams to make their integration with the engine easier.

        Red Bull flailing about publicly because of mechanical gremlins that could be caused by anything from part design to finger trouble just sounds like more noise to redirect attention away from under performance and/or some other issue.

        Notice how the noise debate has gone away a bit? They failed to offer a solution that was both satisfactory and (more likely) didn’t improve their performance/blunt Mercedes.

      4. @tifoso1989

        I feel like RB made the right decision by choosing Renault. Mercedes and Ferrari probably hold back promising updates on their engine while Renault can give full acces to these updates straight away.

        Why is McLaren a complete failure this year? Because Mercedes doesn’t give them all the info they need.

    5. Can we please stop complaining about the sound! It’s changed, it’s not changing back, get over it! The cars of the 80s sounded great in my view but that was 30 odd years ago, times change, things move on, it’s called progress. The sound isn’t even that bad, it’s just not what were used to. One thing’s for sure, the engine sound certainly sounds better than the constant moaning from so-called ‘fans’.

      Plus, with the state that F1 and the world as it is, we should just be happy we have engines to go racing with at all.

      The complaining is getting boring now, change the record.

      1. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        4th June 2014, 1:26

        @dominikwilde agree and disagree. I mean, this guy complaining in the COTD is so lucky he has been to 36 of them, while I to none. But it’s so expensive that you want the “whole stuff” and that includes getting deaf.
        I’ve been to 2 Metallica concerts and believe me, the louder the better. I would no t pay a nickle if it was only to see the band whispering.

        1. Well F1 and Metallica are not really comparable. You go to the concert mainly for the sound. You go to the race to see great speed and exciting racing… or am I missing something?

          1. Exactly, the sounds good, but it’s not the be all and end all. It’s changed now, no amount of whining will bring it back.

          2. Well, when I see Metallica, I want to see them running really fast on stage, it’s part of the show!

            1. Haha. At their age now, they might have cardiac arrest doing that.

          3. You dont really go to an F1 race to watch the race. You go there to see and hear it with your own eyes and ears. Watching any sport from the stands is visually a bit hectic experience but the sound usually makes up for it.

            The cars moving around during braking and corner exits, the sound of brakes locking, tires squeeling and hearing the audience go wow or get crazy are all good for tv because it adds to the experience. It makes it more exciting to look at and adds new things to the race we did not have before. But overall the experience of being in an F1 race has diminished because the sound of the cars can barely be heard anymore when before it could be heard and felt.

            It is essentially an electric car race. Why would I want to go see (pun intended) an electric car race when it is better in tv? If I want to go see and hear something THEN I’d think about going.

            1. You dont really go to an F1 race to watch the race

              Speak for yourself.

            2. It is essentially an electric car race.

              No, it really really REALLY is not an electric car race.

              It sounds more like you’re trying to convince yourself of your argument.

          4. OmarR-Pepper (@)
            4th June 2014, 3:04

            @Toxic but maybe for a bunch of people (not maybe, definitely) the super-loud sound that makes your heart change its beat is part of the experience in F1. And being so expensive to get the tickets and accomodation, it sounds logical for these people to feel discouraged and to say “no more live F1”.

            1. @OmarR-Pepper I get your point although i just commented on the Metallica comment :) From the other hand though I went this year to the Melbourne race and didn’t mind the sound even after being on the same track the year before.
              I can understand that some people may miss the loud sound. From my perspective though it’s not on top of my list, especially if the racing is great.

        2. @omarr-pepper I saw Metallica at Yas Island relatively close to the F1, I have to say it was a close run thing as to who was louder. Metallica are amazingly loud (and ridiculously brilliant) though to be fair. ;)

        3. I wouldn’t go to a Metallica concert BECAUSE it’s way too loud.
          I even go to the cinema with ear plugs so bad that is…

          So I am one of the lucky few for whom quiet is better it seems…

        4. I want the sound. And Nothing Else Matters.
          Ah forget it, it was just too bad.

        5. Couldn’t disagree more with “the louder the better” when at a gig.

          Surely when mixing a band’s sound, the objective is to get a fairly clean mix that allows each member’s contribution to the overall sound to be clearly heard? Increasing the volume would be a more secondary concern, I’d have thought. After all, you can turn a rubbish mix up to 11, but all you end up with is loud rubbish.

          By contrast, the problems that some F1 critics and fans have with the engine noise all seem to relate purely to the volume of the sound. So I’m not convinced that music gigs make useful analogies for the problems perceived with this year’s engines.

      2. Yeah, I’m over the sound complaints as well…

        Sure, the sound has changed, and the old cars did vibrate your chest in the way only a rock concert could, but I don’t think it’s to the detriment of the spectacle.

        Now instead of sound, we have cars moving around under brakes and power, they’re much more like the turbo beasts of the 80’s with too much power for their tires, and this, for me, is more exciting to watch.

        If you want sound, go to a concert. If you want racing, the cars this year couldn’t be better!

      3. Clucky (@cluckyblokebird)
        4th June 2014, 3:28

        Yes, finally a smart comment regarding this stupid argument.

        Sound is a waste of energy. We live in a different age now, deal with it. I loved the V10 the most but its gone because it is not relevant any more. F1 and its management is not perfect by a long way but it is suppose to be the leader in car technology. I love steam locomotives too but I wouldn’t want to commute to work in one, I just enjoy it for what it is and its place in history.

        I got into F1 because there was a big TV at work always on the same channel which had the repeat of the race, with the sound turned down!

      4. @dominikwilde You nailed it.

        The sound is what it is people, let it go and let’s move on. For the love of all that is good and holy, please let it go and move on.

        1. Why do we need to move on?
          It is to me THE MOST memorable and important part of being at the track for a weekend. I f my tickets weren’t already purchased 1 week after the Canadian GP last year. I’d probably skip going this year. My family, friends & I pay good money to get the whole experience & we all agree the noise is the biggest was the biggest excitement at a GP.
          I’m not looking forward to Friday morning & after 5-10 minutes into FP1. We will decide if we come back to watch a GP or just enjoy it on TV. If people stop buying tickets to attend races. I highly doubt the engine noise will stay as “it is what is & move on”

          1. Why do we need to move on?

            Because you’re delusional if you think complaining about it is going to change anything. If you don’t like the new F1, leave.

            1. I agree with this sentiment. In order for F1 to really capture the IndyCar feel, we need to go beyond the engine sound, and really work to chase away as many fans as possible to get those viewer numbers down to IndyCar levels.

          2. @s2g-unit I’m afraid the engine noise *will* largely stay, because if F1 just ups and dumps the energy recovery and turbo systems, there will be just one engine manufacturer left willing to build engines.

        2. @s2g-unit, @kanil and others who really like the engines to be louder: I really, really do understand why you’re unhappy. I’ve gone through the same type of change with American Football in the NFL. They’ve changed the game so much that my favorite part of the game (a great running back) is almost irrelevant. But they’re NOT going to change it back. I’ve had to adjust and find other things I like about the sport and simply move on.

          They did not set out to make the engines quieter. They set out to make the formula more relevant to the manufacturers. The quiet was a side effect. Had they not done it, Mercedes and Renault would have dropped out. They have to spend their R&D on more efficient cars now and not on normally aspirated V8’s.

          It is what it is and it’s not going to change back again. Probably never. There’s no point in flogging this dead horse anymore. There are still great things about F1 and I’m anxious to see the sport thrive. It has to pull in younger viewers and new fans in general. At the end of the day, it’s about the racing, not how much noise they make.

          We should spend this energy on getting them to do wider tires again so there is more mechanical grip and less aero….for more overtaking. Those are the kinds of things we can talk about that are likely to change so I wish we’d let the FIA here about those types of issues. Tell them to fix the finances so other teams can stay in F1 and be competitive.

      5. The cars of the 80s sounded great in my view but that was 30 odd years ago, times change, things move on, it’s called progress.

        For the record, the cars of the 80’s (also Turbos) mostly sounded the same as these ones. :)

    6. I also attended the Spanish Gp & completely disagree with COTD.

      There is not a ‘complete lack of engine sound’ there still fairly loud & the actual sound they produce is now so much better than the previous V8 engines.

      I heard the gp2 commentators on the Sky GP2 coverage talk about how the V8 engines sounded & I agreed with what they both agreed on. The old V8s just produced a very loud noise, They all sounded the same, They all sounded flat & it was just noise like someone screaming in your ear from point blank range, A constant agonizing scream.

      I always felt the GP2, GP3 & Porsche supercup cars sounded better, All were quieter than the F1 V8s but all of them sounded so much better than the F1 V8s.

      These new V6 engines are quieter, but there not anywhere near been silent, There still plenty loud, they all sound different & They all have a very nice tone to them, A lower pitched but very satisfying sound.

      It was also cool to be able to hear all the extra noises they make now from the turbo & energy recovery systems, A new extra layer which I thought was interesting to hear.

      Something else which the kids really enjoyed was not having to wear ear protection, You could actually discuss what was going on without having to try & shout at one another & without the need for ear protection there was no need to wait until it was safe to remove the ear protection before trying to discuss what was going on.

      As to it putting people off or taking away the spectacle, I didn’t find that. The cars are still fast, They still look fast & the acceleration, braking & cornering performance is just as impressive as its always been.
      We took my son’s friend & his dad with us to the Friday sessions & there not F1 fans but were in awe of the performance of the cars & that alone was enough to see them buy tickets to be able to join us for the rest of the weekend & to see them tune in to watch Monaco on TV.

      If they did find a way to make them a bit louder without hurting the existing sound I would not be against that, But I don’t really see the ‘volume’ as been a problem based on my attending that race & having watched the rest on TV.

      If you liked the dull, absurdly loud scream of the V8s just get someone to sit next to you & scream in your ear all race, Its the same noise you got from those horrible sounding V8s.

      1. “They all sounded the same, They all sounded flat & it was just noise like someone screaming in your ear from point blank range, A constant agonizing scream.”

        Completely agree. Last time i went to a race was with the V8s an that was my thought exactly, just someone screaming into my hear for 2 hours. It was fun for about 10 laps, then i got tired of it. The new engines produce a much more interesting sound.

    7. “Pirelli is open to the idea of rebalancing mechanical and aerodynamic grip in order to improve the racing in Formula One, including bringing back wider tyres.”

      Get out ! how many decisions have been based on that and brought the exact opposite result?!?

      F1 should just stop patching things up…!

      1. Sign of the times, they’ll find besides the PU what makes the Mercedes fast and ban it. Look at the past with Red Bull.

        Double diffuser – Banned
        Exhaust Gases – Change whole exhaust setup
        Engine Mapping – Changed rules

        I agree with Prost about how restricted F1 is, never a season the cars stay still just so the back end teams could possibly close the gap.

        Renault won’t show their full potential, three failures in Monaco, a track not famed for its high engine turnover, but Canada on the otherhand I feel we might be seeing one Red Bull and if lucky one STR/Caterham finishing!

        1. I agree with Prost about how restricted F1 is, never a season the cars stay still just so the back end teams could possibly close the gap.

          It’s because the FIA know they can’t trust the teams to control their R&D spending.
          If the formula was open, we’d be seeing a grid of dangerous, hyper-light, eight-wheeled, 1200bph, trillion dollar-pound monsters with dumbo X-wings driven by the pay drivers who funded them.

          The Double Diffuser wasn’t a Red Bull innovation – they were one of the last teams to successfully integrate it in 2009 and lost it in 2011 like everyone else. Exhaust blowing was limited not because of the performance of Red Bull, but because some teams were essentially running their car at full throttle all the time (even when the driver was off the pedal) to get the full effect – the Renault 2011 car, with its front exhaust being the main culprit – which was deemed wasteful.

          Red Bull’s problem was that they were too clever and developed down a route so far that it was awkward to come back from. Williams did the same in the early 90’s – followed Active Suspension right to the point that it make converting to a sprung car difficult – something that possibly contributed to the death of a racing driver.

      2. @fer-no65 What is wrong about more mechanical grip and less aerodynamic grip? I think wider tyres are a good news and it’s not a patch. It’s something that many fans have been proposing for years.

        1. Not to mention the sheer aesthetic pleasure of watching fat-tyre cars. Will we go wide track too?

        2. Because if you reduce aerodynamic grip, cars go slower! People have been complaining about this year’s cars being slower than 2013, nowhere near most track’s records, and most of it is down to aerodynamics.

    8. OmarR-Pepper (@)
      4th June 2014, 3:14

      I hope Seb relearns things in a more reliable car. Difficult to learn to drive a car if it keeps stalling.

    9. The 2014 sound isnt too bad.
      It’s the pace of 2014 cars that hurts, they are so slow.
      I watched the 2004 Spa race last night and they were total weapons compared to this year.

      1. You need to wait until these new cars have a go at Spa to make a comparison. In China, they finished only 0.5% slower than last year.

      2. You realise they are only slower over a lap because they have less downforce and different tyres?
        That means the driver has to work harder and use more skill.
        On the contrast this years cars are reaching higher top speeds. The speed trap will be really interesting in Montreal.

        1. Err??

          And because fuel/tire savings are forcing them to use lift and coast technique.
          Drivers are complaining they are not driving to the edge all the time, “more skill” is an illusion, it’s certainly not racing skills being deployed

          1. @tvm they never have driven on the edge all the time in a race situation. If they did that, they would run out of fuel and destroy their tyres.

          2. @tvm the Fuel-Saving ‘debate’ is a complete fallacy this year. Having 1/3 less fuel sounds like an economy drive, but people who argue about it never seem to take into account that the engines have 2 less cylinders, lower cylinder capacity and have nearly 200bhp of their total supplied by ancillary ERS systems, which aren’t directly affected by the carried fuel.

            If we still had the V8s with the prescribed fuel usage, then yes, we’d see cars dropping out with empty tanks at the half-way stage if the cars didn’t spend 50% of their time off the throttle, but it’s just not the case.

            The only reason they’re not really being driven on the edge is because of the reduced grip which harms the already stressed tyres (which are worked harder by the increased wheelspin brought about by the increased torque) and because they cannot risk PU failures caused by over-driving.

          3. Are you aware that MGP are only carrying 87kgs of fuel instead of the maximum 100kgs?

            Not surprised they have to lift and coast!

      3. Slow cars are fine as long as he racing is better. I still think they should have cut front wings to 1 element only & tried to find ways to have even less downforce, even at the expense of lap times.

        1. @tvm if you actually read the drivers quotes properly you will see that there not complaining about having to manage this years tyres, There complaining because the harder compounds are proving harder to get upto temperature & keep them there.

          In part because the lower downforce isn’t putting as much load through the tyres in the higher speed corners, The fronts especially.

          If you want to talk about the fuel saving, The teams & drivers have all said its not proved to be the issue they feared it was going to be & it certainly hasn’t negatively affected the racing as people were claiming it would.

          I’ve been following F1 since the early 70s & the drivers having to back off to save some element of the car be it fuel, tyres, gearbox, engine or whatever else is nothing new.

          This constant thing thrown at us about how F1 has in the past been about flat out sprint’s is utter nonsense, Even in the refeuling era they were never flat out all race outside of a small handful of exceptions which is why those small handful stands out above the rest (Hungary ’98, Suzuka ’00 are 2 examples).

        2. Alex McFarlane
          5th June 2014, 11:23

          A fast procession is still a procession. I don’t see why, apart from cost, that F1 couldn’t reintroduce fat tyres and ground effect. It’s probably better understood these days and the chassis are much safer.

    10. Checking out that clip of the 89 U.S. Gp weird to see such a wide street circuit and those long straights with basically no safe run off.

    11. In how many races have not all of the points positions been filled by classified finishers?

      1. @matt90 I don’t know the answer off the top of my head but if we’re compiling a list then the 2005 United States Grand Prix and 1982 San Marino Grand Prix are among the more recent examples.

        1. Thanks Keith (and Girts and Optimaximal). It might be a question for the ‘suggested articles’ page.

      2. @matt90 @KeithCollantine 1996 Monaco Grand Prix is another example, only four cars finished that race!

        1. @girts actually, there were 7 classified finishers in that race and points were only offered down to 6.

    12. If you think that’s quiet, wait until you see this new series, Formula E.

      1. Or until you watch Audi romp to yet another Le Mans 24 hour victory…

        1. There are lots of loud cars at Le Mans.

        2. Er, “The Car in Front is (will be) a ******

      2. Formula E isn’t silent. There’s still the electric motor sound and all the associated noises like tyre roar/squealing.

        It just doesn’t have the constant droan/roar of an ICE.

        1. I think it’s mostly transmission sound, from what I’ve heard on some clips.

          Is there an equivalent for Formula-e to follow?

          1. @mateuss I don’t think so but there’s always the forums on here. I’m sure there will be some previews too.

    13. Firstly, Keith, thanks for the comment of the day!

      It is interesting to see the arguments on here, both ‘for’ and ‘against’ the new power units.

      A couple of points to make. Firstly, anyone who has been to a GP ‘live’ then, with respect, you really can’t make a valid comment on this subject, as it is imperative to have heard both the current cars and the ‘old’ cars in person. As a TV situation, I think the current cars are just fine, as even a really good sound system does not convey the ‘live’ sound of a GP in any way.

      I am a bit disappointed in those who dismiss those of us who are bothered by this subject as ‘whining, moaning and complaining’. There was even one poster a while ago who lumped together people who found the sound important with those who watch F1 to see crashes. As well as being extraordinarily illogical, that is a very offensive viewpoint. Even on here today, one of the posters found it necessary to put the word ‘fan’ in inverted commas whilst referring to those of us for whom this is important. It is very disappointing to see that kind of attitude. We are, after all, on this website because we are passionate about the same sport.

      Another interesting point is that F1 needs to be ‘relevant’. Why? It survived just fine for decades without major manufacturer involvement. It is supposed to be a ‘sport’, IE, ENTERTAINMENT, not some kind of technology development lab. Any development that benefits road cars is indeed a bonus, but it is certainly not the reason for the sport to exist. Professional tennis does not exist in order to make better racquets, we watch it to see the best players in the world playing tennis.

      It was interesting to read from a couple of people who have visited a GP this season and think the new quiet engines are okay as they are. As I said in my original comment, I found them to be totally underwhelming, but if as one person said that that actually preferred the sound of the Porsche Super cup cars to the old F1 cars, well, we are clearly never going to agree!

      1. @paulguitar

        I totally agree with you on the whole sound debate. I just can’t understand where the arrogance is coming from for a lot of people here who seperate those who don’t like the sound and label them as fake fans…

        I don’t mind the sound, I think there’s something cool about hearing the tyres squeel and slide and I love the turbo sound. But to me the V12 will always be the best sounding engines. I’d love to have those back but I also know that is never going to happen anymore.
        But to say to those who don’t like it or won’t go to a GP because of it to shut up or stop watching?! Arrogance at it’s finest. Like being better than the peasants who complain… Ridiculous.
        For several hundred dollars/euros a person has every right to complain if he feels the need to.

        As for relevance. Whether F1 really needs to be relevant to road cars is debatable. But I don’t think it’s a bad thing if done correctly.
        Personally I would like to see teams and engine manufacturers have more freedom to try out technology of the future. That’s real relevance for me.

      2. Why? It survived just fine for decades without major manufacturer involvement.

        Was really only the 70s where there wasn’t much manufacturer involvement & most of the field were running the Cosworth DFV.

        For most of F1’s history its been dependent on having manufacturers, The 50s/60s were full of manufacturer’s with several factory run teams. In the 80s the turbo’s brought in a dozen manufacturer’s & we had several engine manufacturer’s involved in the 90s/00’s as well.

        Also consider that if manufacturer’s were to pull out now there’s not really anyone out there that could replace them.

        I think I’ve said this before but I fully expect MotorSport in general to be going down a similar route to F1. Indycar has already gone to V6 Turbo’s, The engine formula in Sportscar is similar (Small capacity turbos), DTM are likely to be going down a similar route with there next rules change, WTCC have gone for 1.6 Turbos this year & WRC are running a similar rules package.

        The days of N/A V8/10/12 engines in top level Motorsport is coming to an end in line with what the motor industry is general is doing with turbos been used more widely & hybrid systems been introduced.

    14. *has not* been to a GP live. Sorry……..:)

    15. I have to say BRAVO to the COTD! Could not agree more! I haven’t been to 36 Grands Prix, but I have been to 2 which is more on par with the amount of races the majority of commenters have been to. I was at Silverstone last year for my first Grand Prix and, hands down, it was the best weekend of my life. The atmosphere, the fans, the ROARING ENGINE NOTE. To be dead honest, if it wasn’t for the noise, I would have thought much less of the whole spectacle. I don’t buy this, ‘it is only about the racing’ viewpoint in the least. Can I assume that those who keep saying this sort of thing mean to say they find Clio cup just as exciting as F1? I mean, if sound doesn’t matter, it’s all racing, isn’t it? In fact, more goes on in Clio cup so perhaps Clio cup Fanatic should be started or something…. Anyway, I then went to the same race, as the COTD-er, the Spanish GP, this year, and as I sat will my €11 beer for FP2, I nearly burst into tears. And, no, not because I just paid €11 for a pint, but because the F1 I fell in love with had been replaced. Where was the F1 I fell in love with? Not there. Not within those cars.

      It is sort of if your girlfriend’s voice changed from a woman’s to a man’s voice. Same in every other way, but, you see, sound does matter. It’s part of the whole package. (Take this analogy with a grain of salt, please, and try to see the bigger picture :)).

      There is no atmosphere now. Yep, it’s fun to watch the cars dance around the corners, but I’d rather have 2x the downforce and the lion’s roar of the old Formula 1 engines. If this was my first race, I would have laughed and questioned what all the fuss is about. And whoever would say the speed is what matters, then I retort by saying why can’t we have noise and speed? You can have both, so let us have both, and make it not only about advanced technology, fast flat-out speeds, and the best drivers on earth, but also about the one sound that you could never hear anywhere else.

      To hear people talk about the ‘extra noises’ they make this year which supposedly, to them, makes it just as enticing, I ask you if the whistling of a turbo and screeching of tyres is a satisfactory result of the new engines? F1 was never meant to be a sport that is ‘family friendly’ or that catered to the likes of everyone. It started out as a raw sport where motorists put their skills to the tests. So the fact people can take their grandparents and infants to F1 races this year does not mean it has become better.

      If you have ever heard an old F1 engine sound in the flesh and didn’t turn to the person you were with to exchange grins like a 5 year old child, then maybe you would be just as happy with Clio cup…. If so, I salute you, but, for heaven’s sake, don’t call those who miss the thrill of the noise ‘fans’ with inverted commas. You can call us purists.

      1. @rjessalt I have also been to two Grand Prix, both in the V8 era (Silverstone 2008 and 2009) and the noise didn’t do a huge amount for me in the latter race. Okay, the initial roar of the engines from the start of the race was phenomenal but after that it was the EXACT same noise from up to 20 machines for another 59 laps, and I couldn’t care less after that. For 2008 at least there was a bit of variety as different drivers applied very different levels of throttle usage, so you were able to see who was dealing with the conditions better than the others.

        I have said it many times on here before and I will say it again. I don’t miss the V8s and the lack of variety of noises that come with it. I thought the sound of the V8 was quite pathetic compared to the sound of the V10 that I had grown up with. At least with the V6Ts, we have each engine sounding different, the whine from the turbo, the brilliant sound of tyres locking up and occasionally the crowd too.

        In my ideal world, F1 would still have V10 engines, awesome classic liveries and IndyCar-style cameras, but I acknowledge that this is not the route that road cars (or other racing series) are following, and F1 must stay road relevant to have the interest of the manufacturers.

    16. find it hard to believe lots of F1 fans dont want change,
      change makes for new ideas and sometimes/normally better racing,
      also gives other teams a chance to pull new inventions out of the rules,
      this year is a new era all round, so many thing have changed and really only one team has nailed it,
      i get the feeling the complaints are more from Red Bull/Vettel followers as its their team which is not in the front anymore.

      1. I would say Red Bull are my least favourite team. It is about the lack of spectacle at the circuit. There is no agenda here.

      2. Red Bull are my least favorite team as well, and Vettel nowhere near one of my favorite drivers. So very false assumption, I would say.

    17. Michael Brown
      4th June 2014, 17:34

      I support wider tires. They can make up for the loss of aero grip with mechanical grip. Perhaps wider rims to make it easier to heat the tires

    18. I remember watching that ´89 Phoenix-GP on 3sat, an austrian-suisse-german combined tv-channel, which back than broadcasted the austrian F1-coverage to germany, as there wasn´t any german tv-channel interested. The commentator, Heinz Prüller, inspired by Christian Danner´s ride to 4th (which was really last place of any still half-properly functioning car) went on to tell stories of Stefan Bellof and how germany could finally get a regular F1-driver… how times have changed. But would still prefer Prüller over anything that came with the Schumi-Hype and the fanboys suddenly all getting interested in F1. Both BBC and british sky is still better than what one has to endure while watching F1 in Germany since the early 90ies.

    19. Great, so now we finally will se the new F1-engines revving 15000RPM? No? 12000, so nice why not go for 7000RPM to be even more environmentally correct…

    20. I’m just catching up on this round-up and just wanted to say I was absolutely thrilled to at least read such talk from Massa and Pirelli about mechanical grip vs aero, even if nothing comes of it. I am encouraged that at least some entities have this concept in mind and I believe wholeheartedly that they should indeed sway the balance more toward mechanical grip with less emphasis on aero. But then, I have felt that way for years.

    21. We can’t replace the blown diffuser obviously, but Sebastian was quick before they came along. It’s a re-learning curve.

      Seb is really taking quite a while to learn here.
      But we’ll be patient.

    Comments are closed.