Adrian Newey, Red Bull, Albert Park, 2015

Mercedes and Ferrari too afraid of Red Bull to give them engines – Newey

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Red Bull chief technical officer Adrian Newey says the team’s rivals are too afraid to supply them with engines.

Snapshot

Mercedes celebrate their second constructors' championship, 2015
Mercedes celebrate their second constructors’ championship

Tweets

Comment of the day

Lewis Hamilton, McLaren, Circuit of the Americas, 2012
Hamilton has won 21 races each for Mercedes and McLaren
@Bleu spotted a noteworthy statistic from last weekend’s race:

Lewis Hamilton now has as many wins with Mercedes as he had with McLaren.
@Bleu

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Randy Torres!

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

Happy birthday to Sauber team owner Peter Sauber who is 72 today!

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

  • 140 comments on “Mercedes and Ferrari too afraid of Red Bull to give them engines – Newey”

    1. Great COTD, @bleu

      That one passed me by…

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        13th October 2015, 8:49

        I think this one was even more noteworthy!

    2. It just never stops with the ego’s at RedBull. Now it’s Newey. Look at what they are saying about Mercedes and Ferrari now and they’re not even working together. Of course, they’re wary of you.
      Build your own engine and join in with the big boys, beg Renault on bended knee or go away.

      1. Arrogant, sure. But he’s not wrong. Ferrari was reported to be even afraid of giving them a 2015 PU for 2016. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, if I were Ferrari or Mercedes I’d be scared of RBR too.

        1. I am not sure that it is because they are afraid to offer Red Bull a 2015 engine. There are reports that suggest Red Bull chose to reject the offer of a 2015 spec engine, having demanded that they be given a 2016 spec engine, which lead Ferrari to then withdraw from negotiations.

          1. Exactly. They gave them a 2015 engine and they refused and instead went slandering Ferrari of playing games etc and Ferrari said “Fine, then no deal, by” and now Red Bull doesn’t even have 2015 engines on the table. They tried to play hardball and go bitten in the ass.
            When will they realize that they will get a little better results with a “thank you” and a “please” instead of threatening everybody.

      2. Well, Ferrari and Mercedes denies the engines on pure commercial and competitive reasons – fear is not an argument.
        If Newey’s opinion is true, every team in the spanish league should argue that Barcelona FC should send them Messi, Neymar, or Mascherano, otherwise Barça was just fearing the competition.
        Sorry, but Mercedes, for 100 years, and Ferrari, for 50 years, had been developing motor racing technology. In the last 10 Red Bull, other than bringing us Vettel, just developed a high sugar stimulant.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          13th October 2015, 8:55

          And if there is fear – it is probably fear of being vilified/mud-slung in the press after the first small mishap with the PU.

          I wouldn’t even supply RBR a valve cap due to their unsportsmanship behaviour towards partners/suppliers.

          1. I totally agree. Ferrari and Mercedes are just not willing to be slandered and humiliated like Renault is by Marko/Mateschitz (I suspect Horner is not as opposed to Renault as these two are). Red Bull has scuttled itsr own ship and I would watch them drown with glee. Fear has nothing to do with it. Newey is just behaving like a bitter spoilt kid.

        2. Well, if there is something this whole RBR saga exposes, is that it’s very clear that having only two engine suppliers is a worst case scenario. The power they have will not only suffocate RBR, but Renault and Honda as well. No other engine supplier will enter, and no other team than Ferrari or Mercedes can go for the championship…

          How can anyone say that they want to see the arrogant (they are arrogant, I can’t stand them as well) RBR leave? We want a competitive field, don’t we. (People don’t want to see Barcelona leave the sport, because they are fans of Real Madrid, they want to see Real Madrid winning the match against Barcelona) .

          1. You do know Renault just bought Team Enstone again, right? So there’ll still be four suppliers next year.

            1. @raceprouk you do know that Renault have bought NOTHING don’t you???? All they have done is signed a letter of intent. They can back out at any time for any reason. They ONLY thing Renault have confirmed is that they will not be solely an engine supplier anymore.

              I quite frankly am sick and tired of Renault. The time to put up or shup up has been here for a while now and they are just dragging their feet in an effort to drive down the value of Team Enstone.

            2. What have you got against Renault? They’ve not been driving down the value of anything; any drop in the value of Team Enstone is due to the debt they’ve racked up. And since they use Mercedes engines, it has nothing to do with Renault.

          2. First we are not advocating Red Bull leaving. No one made a wish for them to leave before such thing was mentioned by them. They are the ones who brought this into the discussion by threatening to leave. We simply replied “we don’t care”.
            Second there aren’t just two engine suppliers. There are 4. Red Bull had Renault and they treated them bad and chased them away and they had a Ferrari 2015 engine offer that they not just rejected but threw the offer in Ferrari’s face with anger.
            And last, Red Bull has the money and power to create an engine ether alone or with collaboration with other non engine building teams.
            Basically they had plenty of options and their current position is the result of their handling.

        3. If Newey’s opinion is true, every team in the spanish league should argue that Barcelona FC should send them Messi, Neymar, or Mascherano, otherwise Barça was just fearing the competition.

          What nonsense. Giving either one of your players to another team means weakening your own.
          Not comparable in the slightest.

          1. No its not, lets say you could clone them players and give them to your opponants, would you? The answer is still no.

      3. He’s right tho… If the Bulls are so strong in places like Hungary, Monaco and Singapore, then it’s obvious the engine is lacking… and with the right engine, that car could do wonders.

        1. @fer-no65 Someone should ask Newey if he’d be prepared to sell Ferrari the RB11’s complete aerodynamic specification.

          1. But that’s a wrong argument. The car belongs to the team, but the engine belongs to the engine manufacturer. That is why we can have Force India-Mercedes. If someone won, it’s the team and also the engine manufacturer that gets the credit. I believe it always works that way. If Mercedes and Ferrari weren’t competing directly in F1, they certainly would try to outbid each other in becoming RB engine supplier.

            1. “If someone won, it’s the team and also the engine manufacturer that gets the credit.”

              Unless you partner with Red Bull. You won’t get any credit. They’ll win everything, but won’t ever mention your contribution unless they lose. Then they’ll slate you publicly while simultaneously absolving themselves of all fault, even when they’re also to blame. Hell, if you have a corporate partner that’s a bit more upmarket, they might even do a title sponsorship deal where that partner (who contributed nothing significant to these world beating race cars) gets more ad space & publicity than the engine manufacturer actually powering the car. Even if said engine & it’s innovative mapping & miserly fuel consumption is one of the main reasons their cars are world beaters in the first place.
              Sounds like a crazy scenario, doesn’t it? You’d be forgiven for thinking I made it all up…

            2. Yes, what RBR did with Renault is wrong. But that is separate issue. The issue here is if RBR is willing to pay the same amount of money (or even more) vs Sauber and Haas, then why they should get 2015 engine? That is absurd. If they don’t want to provide RBR with an engine, might as well say that they don’t want to do it. There might be some technical limitation like they can’t produce enough 2016 engine spec, at least not for the 1st testing, but I’m sure RBR wouldn’t mind receiving their engine late if they’ve got the 2016 spec. If RBR somewhat dis the 2016 Ferrari engine, then they could always stop providing engine to them. Basically make the contract yearly.

          2. Why not make it like formula SAE and share all technical knowledge at the end of each season.

            1. +1
              Been saying that for years. They can have their secrets for a season, then publish.
              Often wondered what use other sectors might make out of published F1 data and designs. If all the info is out there in the public domain, all manner of good and advancement might happen.

          3. This makes me lament the lack of more engine manufacturers in F1. Maybe if there was an “engine” championship parallel to the constructors and Drivers, that could prove appealing for new contestants?

            With a way to promote with a championship win an engine, that could be something manufacturers that do not want to invest in a full formula one infrastructure gain in terms of marketing possibility with going into F1…

            1. Has there ever been more than four engine makers in F1?

            2. @raceprouk, with regards to your question – we had five engine manufacturers as recently as 2009, so we have certainly had more engine manufacturers in the past. On the other hand, whilst the sport has seen an abundance of engine suppliers in previous years, it was rare for there to be a wide range of competitive engines.

              During the recent V8 era, the differences in performance between engines was significantly reduced (which might have been great for figures like Newey, but frustrated the engine manufacturers) – nevertheless, it was still the case that there were three manufacturers who had engines that rendered their teams uncompetitive (Cosworth, Honda and Toyota – the latter two mainly through sticking to the regulations more honestly than their rivals, whilst Cosworth suffered from the perennial problem of a shortfall in funding and therefore a severe lack of development).

              In reality, during the latter years of the V8 engine formula, there were really only two engines that teams would actually want – the Renault and Mercedes engines, which both had their strengths and weaknesses but were, overall, considered to be the best two engines in the field (just look at the lengths that Fernandes went to in order to ditch Cosworth and secure Renault engines).

            3. @daveraceprouk There were something like 9 engine manufacturers in 1985 (Ferrari, BMW, Honda, Renault, Porsche, Ford-Cosworth, Alfa Romeo, Hart and Motori Moderni)

            4. @raceprouk maybe you should start actually watching F1 before commenting on it. In one round up you have said Renault have bought Lotus when they clearly have not (although it seems highly likely that they will) and asked if there have ever been more than 4 manufacturers at one time in F1.

            5. @eoin16: How about you show some tact for once? How about you realise that not everyone has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the sport? How about you don’t attack someone for asking a simple question? And how about you show some decency and apolo- actually, you won’t; people like you never do.

            6. Update: @eoin16 has apologised; the apology is accepted. I therefore withdraw my post immediately above.

          4. @keithcollantine well… they did it with Toro Rosso not long ago and we saw Helmut Marko furiously telling Alguersuari to move out of the way quicker next time after holding up Vettel in practice in Korea one day :P So they use other methods to keep competition behind!

        2. @keithcollantine I think this is a pretty weak bit of reasoning. Teams all have to create their own aero solutions, whereas there are currently only four power unit manufacturers who have to supply all of the customer teams. Until recently, they had to provide current-spec power units to all customers, but the rules were changed ostensibly to allow poorer teams to pay less for older kit. But no poor teams are buying old kit, it’s actually just being used as a means to force RBR out of F1.

          It’s absolutely shameful behaviour by Mercedes and Ferrari. I really can’t believe there are people defending them.

          1. Actually the teams currently still have to provide the same homologated engine to all their teams @mazdachris. Only this year no one actually seems to have homologated an engine apart from Honda.

            For next year that rule has been proposed, and apparently the teams in the strategy group have agreed on it (including Red Bull), but it has not actually been confirmed yet by the WMSC. And RBR could also still block the opening up of token spend, I am sure they are using that vote as a bargaining chip too.

            Its wholly engrained in F1 to want to protect your own advantages (as we have seen from most teams, and certainly RBR too) and try to get your competitors advantages negated by complaints, requests for clarification etc (unless teams were able to copy it or even improve on it themselves).

            Yes, I agree that many have called RBR out for it in the past few years, so it is just as sensible to now call Ferrari and Mercedes out for doing so too. But on the other hand, RBR could have worked intensively together with Renault to try and catch up too, which they failed to do (that is both RBR and Renault failed here). I wouldn’t call it shameful myself.

            1. @bascb There is an assumption that RBR haven’t tried to work with Renault to resolve the issues, but I’m not sure there’s any evidence of that. We certainly saw their frustration last year, understandably so, when the Renault PU turned out to be slow and unreliable, but for all we know RBR have been offering all the support in the world to Renault to sort it out, and Renault have simply proven unable to fix the issues. I don’t know the truth of it more than anyone else does, but I think it’s perhaps wrong to just assume that this is really a case of poor Renault struggling due to a lack of help from RBR. End of the day, Renault had a major part in pushing for these engines, and they’ve done a bad job of coming up with a solution. It’s F1, where there aren’t any places to hide. I’m not trying to ustify the way that RBR have gone about things, and I think ditching your current supplier without a replacement lined up is pretty ill done. But for Ferrari and Mercedes to flat refuse to supply them on the grounds that they aren’t able to beat them using equal power units is very poor. Especially when they’ll be aware that the consequence of them refusing to supply them will be for two teams to go bust – well over 1000 people out of work. It’s short sighted, it hurts F1 very badly, and to me it taints any ‘success’ that Ferrari or Mercedes may go on to enjoy over the next few years.

            2. First of all, I guess you must have seen that “shamefull” is overdoing it a bit @mazdachris.

              Yes, there is an unhealthy dose of everyone wanting to hold onto their own advantages, and its been displayed very nicely by all the Strategy group meetings in the last few years. High cost and all the money going to a few teams is clearly in the interest of those “haves”.

              I think that the latest proposals for the 2017 cars could actually be seen as a bit of an outstretched hand to RBR however, because they clearly put aero back in an inmportant position and would hugely favor Newey-penned rockets from the front row (because the huge FW will surely have difficulty following in traffic).

              As for Renault and Red Bull, I understand that underlying the public outbursts there is also the issue of RBR not awknoledging that Renault helped them a lot in the years before this, including a huge push for improvements in the last months of the 2013 season, while other manufacturers were already focussed fully on 2014 and beyond. And then it seems that Renault was denied a larger part of the money from Infinity by RBR when they discussed develpment and money too. But off course, its a bad show from Renault to bring a clearly underdeveloped engine, and they have been on the backfoot from there on.

              I know from working with dominant partners that their push for solutions immediately often gets in the way of solving issues long term. As Scarbs mentioned, the Renault update late this year could well make the engine have less output, in preparation for new parts that will make it a better package for next year.

            3. @bascb It’s an emotive word to use but I do genuinely think their behaviour is shameful. As it stands right now, RBR have no power unit for 2016. Yes, a situation of their own making, but that’s the situation. No power unit, no Red Bull teams. Factories closed, over 1000 jobs lost. And the loss of a group who have arguably done more for F1 over the past decade than any other team. Ferrari and Mercedes are both in a position to avert that, but they’re refusing. Refusing for the most part on the grounds that they don’t want to have to compete against a Red Bull team using a competitive power unit. They would rather see all of those people lose their jobs, and for one of the best teams ever to compete in F1 to fold, rather than face fair competition. To me, that is a shameful position to take.

            4. The shame of it lies rather with the FIA and with FOM for creating a situation like this however @mazdachris.

              Their short term thinking, lack of urgency to solve the problems, combined with the teams that broke up the FOTA and then got nicely rewarded by Bernie by giving them extra money and then influence on the rules to make sure that their competative advantages stayed as they were.

              Withmarsh lost his job over helping Brawn survive, which played a large factor in Mercedes changing over and buying that outfit, losing McLaren its preferred status with Mercedes. Its likely Horner would have been unceremoniously fired had he agreed to give up the teams advantage with aero. And I think its just as likely that Wolf and Arrivabene had seen their positions put in question had they done the same.

              You can’t put the blame on them, you have to look at the warped system they operate in and what keeps that system in place.

              Mercedes at the time helped survive Brawn. And Ferrari has done a good job of helping keep Manor going. Mateschitz saved Faenza from going bust years back. But currently its Mateschitz and the RBR management who overplayed their hand and put those jobs at risk. Ferrari offered an engine to STR, they might have offered one to RBR too before pulling that offer after RBR mentioned they were not interested.

              I am convinced that its more a matter of what deal RBR will get now, and whether Mateschitz feels enough responsibility to the people in his teams to keep them going while they look for a more interesting long term partner. Afterall, even a horrible engine is better than losing all brand coverage AND having to pay Bernie some half a billion in penalties on top putting a billion of investment into Milton Keynes to the wall. But Mateschitz is rich enough that he could afford to do so, and therefore he might pull out anyway.

            5. @bascb I’m with you there, the FIA and FOM are the architects of this situation. Ultimately, I think this highlights that this engine formula is a failure. Not because of costs or noise, but rather because it has created a situation where there aren’t sufficient suppliers of power units able to supply a full grid of F1 cars. That’s a major bullet point when it comes to judging whether it’s fit for purpose.

              It would be pretty easy to dismiss RBR’s position in the sense that they could conceivably have just stuck with Renault and pottered about in the midfield until either Renault sort themselves out (writing on the wall – this isn’t going to happen under this engine formula), or another supplier becomes available (victims of their own success here – frankly nobody was ever going to willingly step up here). But I don’t think that’s something that you could reasonably expect from Red Bull.

              Just look for a moment at what they’ve brought to F1. Two teams, obviously. Teams which are fully funded, which pay their drivers and their suppliers on time. They’ve got the most comprehensive driver development programme of any team, which supports and nurtures drivers all the way from karts through to F1 (and many other disciplines besides), which has delivered some of the most exciting talents to hit the stage in the past couple of decades. They’ve resurrected a European GP venue – a really good one at that – at a time when even the most historic venues seem to have uncertain futures. And that’s before you consider the huge number of secondary promotional activities they’ve engaged with, to promote their brand and F1 as a whole. Everything from demo events, to designing concept cars for video games. Red Bull have done more for F1 than any other team on the grid. Yes, it’s easy to lazily dismiss them as a fizzy drinks company. They have certainly bungled this situation with Renault. They have been so successful that there is a definite whiff of arrogance about them (though arguably no more so than many other F1 teams) and they have at times come across as pantomime villains from the Dick Dastardly mould. But it’s impossible to deny that F1 is a far richer, more interesting sport with them involved.

              The trade off for that unprecedented level of investment and involvement is that they (not unreasonably) have no intention to simply make up the numbers. Their objective in the sport is clear – they are there to compete at the highest level and challenge for wins and championships. That’s the return on investment that DM demands. In this respect they are no longer masters of their own destiny thanks to the engine formula and the resulting situation where there is really only one manufacturer of power units capable of challenging for championships. RBR can’t change the engine formula. They can’t turn Renault into a company with the technical expertise to deliver a winning product. And apparently they can’t purchase power units from anyone else. What then are they to do? As I say, they aren’t here to make up the numbers, and DM’s position is very clear – if they’re in a situation where winning is impossible because of external factors, they will no longer continue to spend these mind blowing sums of money.

              The point I’m getting at is this. Losing Red Bull from F1 isn’t just a loss of two teams. It’s a huge loss for the entire industry at a time when F1 is losing venues and spectators. When F1 is embroiled in controversy and scandal. The last thing F1 needs right now is for two very high quality teams (and a GP venue) to disappear because of a situation created by the FIA and FOM. But why I feel this doesn’t excuse Ferrari and Mercedes is that they both have the power to avert this situation by simply cutting a deal with Red Bull and ensuring that they stick around for a while longer. We should all dearly want this to happen. Because right now you look at the ‘rate the race’ articles on here and it’s clear that F1 is a dull place without teams competing at the front. That’s what RBR is – a team which can topple the mighty Mercedes, and give us races with some real drama and excitement. As fans, we all benefit immensely from RB’s involvement, and without them, we’ll all have to put up with an even duller grid dominated by just one manufacturer.

            6. I don’t think it is shameful how Merc and Ferrari are behaving, but it is a shame that F1 has allowed things to play out as they have.

              But I don’t know who to blame or if any one entity is to blame. When I say ‘they’ in the following sentences I mean whoever, be it the big teams and/or FIA/F1/BE and whatever combination of those entities are responsible. They decided to create a new chapter with these complicated new PU’s. They knew they’d be expensive. They decided on a token system of stepped development presumably to keep down costs, not to ensure any one team had locked in advantages…they wouldn’t have voted for that I don’t think…unless they all thought they’d be the one with the advantage. Surely they knew a handful of years ago that the marriage of chassis and engine would be by far more important than ever.

              Maybe they didn’t anticipate that the 4 engine makers would be this far apart. Maybe they underestimated the complexity, or the strength or weakness of the value of a token.

              RBR’s beef needs be with those who have set the regs as they are, which have turned out to restrain Renault from catching up, but which never did prevent Renault from nailing their package out of the gate like Merc did. Ferrari is catching up with the same usage of tokens everyone else has.

              If Merc and Ferrari ‘fear’ RBR, it is a healthy fear out of respect for a potent team, and I doubt Merc and Ferrari ‘became concerned’ as Newey puts it…I think F and M know RBR poses a threat and didn’t suddenly discover that. I doubt under the same circumstances RBR would be acting any differently. I think it is shameful to blame Merc and Ferrari for potentially costing 1000 jobs at RBR. That’s on RBR and on ‘they’ who have brought F1 to where it stands now. Maybe Merc and Ferrari are amongst the ‘they’ who have brought F1 to where it stands but those two teams could not have anticipated RBR putting themselves in this jam (with some help from the regs) such that jobs might be on the line, nor is it Merc and Ferrari’s job to save those jobs. Nor could they have anticipated Renault’s performance or lack thereof.

              I also don’t think we have talked enough about the engine/chassis marriage, and to me it is certainly not a given that RB with a Merc or a Ferrari engine would automatically beat the works team. I’m surprised at the number of references I am still seeing that implies RBR who seem to master aero these recent years, with a Merc behind, would trounce the competition. This is no longer the V8 era where you just slap an engine in and away you go.

              I think the likes of Newey et al’s overall beef has not changed…they deplore restrictions from development. Fair enough but the other side of that coin is the money race and even more singling out the haves from the have-nots. RBR has deep pockets and is held back from spending that money to catch up. That bores Newey and makes RBR no longer want to play. For me it’s just that in spite of all the ‘theys’ involved RBR and Renault’s marriage has failed, and now others are supposed to pay for that by not just helping them stay in F1, but by propping them up in a way I’m not convinced RBR would do, situations reversed.

          2. I am sure that there are other reasons why Mercedes and Ferrari have refused Red Bull an engine supply, although being a dangerous competitor is a factor, it would be harsh to conclude it is the only reason. They will be concerned about the details of their engine technology being passed on to a future engine partner of Red Bull, if they can persuade a new manufacturer to link up with them in the future.

            There are also logistical problems, Mercedes have at least three customers next year (if Lotus use Renault engines next year), and I have read that it is now too late for Ferrari to expand their engine programme to supply four rather than two customer teams next year (initial negotiations were just to supply Toro Rosso, as Red Bull were still chasing Mercedes engines) as it would mean employing new staff and increasing their manufacturing capacity in addition to having a detrimental impact on their planned future engine development programme.

            1. yes, I think you are right in saying that by now it might be hard to be able to rack up production and logistics enough to be able to offer engines for next year. And who knows what kind of deals over preferential treatment etc Ferrari and Mercedes already have with their customers.

        3. Supplying a team with engines carries other costs and commitments and it may be the case that Ferrari don’t have the people or resources to supply another team with current engines. In addition to actually making/rebuilding the engines,
          the engine manufacturer embeds a certain number of engine mechanics/engineers with the customer. As most would assume that Ferrari will likely have more people than usual working with Haas, they may not actually have the bodies to spare. So their refusal may not be completely down to not wanting to supply a top team with their current engine.

      4. Ian Laidler (@)
        13th October 2015, 1:40

        Now Adrian Newey is on the moaning bandwagon ……. does he really think that Ferrari or Mercedes want their brand name being tarnished by a company that publicly flays it’s current engine supplier at every opportunity.

        If RBR do follow through on their persistent threats to walk away it WILL be a sad day for the sport, they are without a doubt a great team with a winning pedigree and talented drivers, just a pity their senior management have no real character or PR skills.

        Please, please, please RBR give it a rest, our ears are starting to ache

        1. Now Adrian Newey is on the moaning bandwagon ……. does he really think that Ferrari or Mercedes want their brand name being tarnished by a company that publicly flays it’s current engine supplier at every opportunity.

          Please, that’s not the reason and we all know it.

          1. No… we don’t! Image is an important part and that’s important when you’re producing cars for the standard people but also for motorsport activities. I mean, you could buy a Porsche this year because it won Le Mans instead of an Audi… because lost Le Mans, but I hardly believe there’s someone that buys an energy drink based on their sponsorship activities and/or because the ownership of a different brand. So, yeah, this time I think that Mercedes and Ferrari don’t supply RBR engines because they fear of not getting beaten by their own engine, but I’m pretty sure 20% has to do with RBR’s public rant.

            1. People who hear whispers in the paddock say that is not just that. Yes they see no winning with being a partner with Red Bull because ether Red Bull wins and becomes a problem for their works team or it loses and whines that they are getting second treatment and that is why they lose(this shows how Red Bull put themselves in the corner with their behavior since no one expects them to accept defeat with any grace).
              Bad marketing in both occasions, but other than that there is a clear feeling into the paddock that other just don’t like them. Many teams from small to big have several grudges against them and not simply because they were losing to them.
              Red Bull chose to become Bernie’s lap dog violate spending agreements, backstab everyone and act like a bully and the other teams haven’t forgotten. Merc even holds a grudge over the tyre test thing in 2013. The general way they go about talking and doing things made them unwanted people.

              When Ferrari are probably more willing to provide an sworn enemy like Mclaren with 2016 engine than Red Bull then you know you made yourself really disliked.

          2. It sounds a good reason to me.

      5. It amazes me so many people actually think Ferrari and Mercedes don’t want to supply RB because they are afraid of the bad press when RB opens their mouth. That is simply ridiculous and the most lazy and easy opinion about the matter. They are simply afraid of being beaten with their very own PU.

        Besides let’s say they are afraid for that particular reason, why would RB then complain when both are definitely worth having right now… Going from Renault to either of the two others is such a step up we could see them suddenly out drive both Ferrari and Mercedes.

        It’s pretty obvious the blind hate towards the team of which I agree they sometimes deserve some has gotten out of hand and people are so preoccupied with their own opinion they don’t see the bigger picture.

        1. It would be difficult for Ferrari to double the number of their customer teams from two to four at this late stage, and would hinder their future engine development (due to reallocating resources etc.). Why should they jeopardize their own future competitiveness to help Red Bull?

          1. I brought that up few days ago too. There are plenty of reasons why Ferrari and Mercedes can’t or won’t supply them buy ‘out of fear they might slander them’ isn’t one of them.

            1. Careful; it’s almost as if you approve of Red Bull throwing their toys out the pram

        2. Basically your presenting the same argument made at the outset of this saga: Mercedes (and Ferrari) both supposedly calculated that either they would be beaten by their own engine in a Red Bull, or they’d be publicly blamed by Red Bull for failing to deliver the same kind of engine if Red Bull didn’t win. Only you’re picking one of two possibilities as true because you’re anticipating what would happen (i.e. Red Bull would win). But it would also be potentially damaging for Mercedes and Ferrari if they didn’t. So for them it’s a definite no-brainer, unless they can be persuaded otherwise. Newey’s taunt seems more calculated to wound their pride and provoked them into ‘showing Red Bull’ they can win even when they supply them their engines. As such, it seems a bit of a desperate last resort. Instead why don’t Red Bull eat some humble pie, make up with Renault and show everyone else a partnership that won four championships can still work? So difficult? In the end it’s a question of patience that they seem to lack.

        3. @xtwl I think to say they are ‘simply afraid of being beaten with their very own PU’ is as lazy and easy an opinion as saying it’s about a fear of RBR slandering them, especially after you said there are ‘plenty’ of reasons.

          I don’t believe Merc and Ferrari are afraid…just respectfully leery. RBR should feel complimented by their competitors’ healthy respect for their abilities. But I guess I can understand the rhetoric coming from RBR. I just don’t think goading Merc and Ferrari by calling them fearful is any way to curry favours.

          I do think that there is a chance that if Merc or Ferrari supplies RBR with something just a little under the works spec, as RBR have implied would be fine and understandable, that there is some chance that they’d still rag on them, or at least constantly remind us, for not supplying them with the full spec, if in fact their performance were to be a little inferior.

          RBR is a customer that wants works treatment and from what I can tell there is only one works team for Mercedes and one for Ferrari and only ever will be one. RBR is in no position to demand things other than behind closed doors with BE and F1/FIA. Singling out Merc and Ferrari, like the situation is their fault as are their teams’ potential job instability Merc and Ferrari’s responsibility, is picking on the wrong people…ie. their competitors ie. ones who they can slag at will, while the ones they can’t slag, the ones who rule the show, are really the ones that can affect change and who RBR need to talk to, and I’m sure are.

      6. Mercedes and Ferrari need to be out of their mind to give you their engines. It makes no sense whatsoever.

      7. So basically Red Bull always have to be championship contenders or they are gonna leave the sport. Well then, it’s better if they are gone now.

        1. They should talk to Frank Williams – how many times this guy rebuilt its team.

      8. Red Bull afraid to give Ferrari and Merc all their CFD and wind tunnel data for 10 million a year so they can improve chassis design. Same thing. If we apply a cost analysis from when these engines were 1st designed and the development since next year will be the 3rd year of using the engines so say 600 million divide by 3 plus a profit as why bother making engines and Redbull can have the same engine for lets say 250 million a year, sounds fair to me.

      9. I’m with you…far too much crying, moaning, and wailing from Red Bull this season. It’s not the responsibility of Ferrari or Mercedes to supply Red Bull with an engine. Red Bull created the stew they’re cooking in, and quite frankly it’s a mess of their own making. Become a proper constructor and start producing your own engine, or fix the damage you’ve caused by rolling Renault under the bus. Or get lost Red Bull. Imagine…they expect Mercedes or Ferrari to bail them out of the pigpen they find themselves in. With the way Red Bull has behaved, they deserve their demise, if that’s the way it goes. I would feel badly for the people in the factories, but the head guys at the top can stuff it.

    3. Hamilton has won 21 races each for Mercedes and McLaren

      And he’s done it in less than half the races, 53 as opposed to 110.

      At the end of this season, he’ll probably have won more races and more championships in 3 years with Mercedes than he did in 6 years with McLaren.

      Anyone visit Autosport forum regularly? You might remember this thread:
      http://forums.autosport.com/topic/179389-lewis-mercedes-the-biggest-mistake-of-his-career/

      1. That’s nothing, you should have seen the Spanish AS and MARCA forums when Alonso joined Ferrari, and how he was set to equal/best Schumacher’s records. Funny thing.

    4. Ebraheem Mohammad
      13th October 2015, 0:43

      Up and Down, that is what F1 is about, RedBull need to build for the future, not for next year. They should have given Renault sometime to improve their power. Yet I agree that more engine suppliers should come in. F1 governing body should stop favoritism to attract more engine makers and bring more excitement to the sport. If not, eventually other teams will feel there is no sense of continuing in a sport they will never win or be competitive in.

    5. “F1 published a human rights statement in April this year, which was a welcome step. But, given that shortly afterwards it announced a 2016 Grand Prix in Azerbaijan – where in 2015 the already worrying human rights situation has deteriorated rapidly – it remains unclear how seriously the company is taking these commitments.”

      I hate to get all political, but F1 is political, and the quote begs a comment. There are far worse human rights offenders already on the calendar in both MotoGP and F1, and I am not talking about Russia or China.

      As for Newey, hes right. RBR would probably beat Merc with the same motor. Merc have such an advantage, they would be beaten by RBR in their first year with a like power-train. Electronics and fuel restrictions favor factory interests. F1’s version of progress is putting the power in the hands of the wealthy factories who have a big hand in crafting legislation and the direction of the ‘sport’. This isn’t competition, it’s ad space for Mercedes and Ferrari.

      1. @pcxmerc Same as in 2008-13 engine development was neutralized completely and F1 was an ad board for unseen aero gimmicks that no one can see, and no one in the automotive industry cares about. No complaints from Newey back then eh? I forget, did he offer his exceptional blown diffuser to Merc in 2011? No he didn’t , and why should he have?

        Fact is, throughout history of F1 there was someone stealing a march on the competition, be it engines, aero or mechanical. And you can either fight and try to improve or you can moan and kick your engine partner in the nuts publicly, be surprised that no one wants to work with you, pick up your toys and go home

        1. @montreal95 Genuine question – How can RBR “fight and try to improve” when everyone is refusing to supply them with power units on the grounds that they are scared of being beaten? What exactly are they meant to improve?

          1. @mazdachris Well since they have no other option, the kids should start by improving their behavior. They should crawl back to Renault and apologize deeply for their A$$$$t conduct and say like good kids that they’ll never ever do that again. If Renault accepts their apology, they should work hard together with Renault to improve the engine. There are no excuses. Ferrari proved that it’s possible

            And if Renault doesn’t accept it? Well then goodbye RBR and thanks for the memories! I’ll be sorry to see them go. By them I mean hundreds of fantastic people working there. I won’t be sorry in the slightest to see the backs of the RBR senior management, Horner, Marko, Mateschitz who are 100% to blame for this mess

            1. @montreal95 Ferrari haven’t really proven anything. They’re still, on any given race weekend, miles off the pace of the Mercedes. The only thing that’s affected the order this year is that the Renault PU which was awful last year, is even worse this year, so RBR have slipped backwards and Ferrari have naturally filled the gap. There’s no evidence that Ferrari have improved relative to Mercedes this year at all.

              And I don’t understand this talk of working hard with Renault to improve the PU. Are Renault not the designers and the engineers? Why do they need help from a team of people who build racing car chassis to improve a product they themselves pushed to be able to design and build? Renault are the ones who’ve dropped the ball with their horrendous unreliable power unit, they shouldn’t need the help of an F1 team to fix it since they’re the ones who are meant to be the engine specialists. Perhaps this is why RBR got so frustrated with them in the first place – not only is their engine garbage, they’ve not got the first clue how to make it better. They can’t blame that on RBR, and nor should RBR be blamed for not wanting to continue that relationship with a useless technical partner. What’s the point when they’re never going to improve?

              I’m not going to defend RBR’s handling of the situation publically, but I think it would be absurd to try and blame Renault’s failings on RBR. The only real mistake RBR have made is in seeking to end their agreement with Renault without a replacement already lined up. Perhaps they just made the assumption that Ferrari and Mercedes wouldn’t be so certain of their own inadequacy that they wouldn’t dare supply RBR with power units because they are certain they can’t beat them on a level playing field.

            2. @montreal95 Yes, let’s completely forget Renault most likely guaranteed RB to provide them with a competetive PU not only in ’14 but also in ’15 and that they absolutely failed to produce a proper engine. You’re right it is RB their fault… Take of the glasses mate…

            3. Regardin’ MazdaChris saying “Why do they need help from a team of people who build racing car chassis to improve a product they themselves pushed to be able to design and build?”
              Well, I think that battery pack and a lot of components related to it are designed by RBR. You can’t have hybrid car without batteries, you must agree with that mate. Secondly, what about Renault taking over RBR instead of LotusF1Team? That would be hilarious.

            4. @xtwl Guaranteed RBR to provide them with competitive engines? How’s that even possible? You cannot know what the competition is doing. And yes it’s RBR’s fault. They handled the situation in such an appalling way publicly, a super super way to motivate your partner who helped you win 4 championships just 2 years ago. Why would anyone want to work with such people? I certainly, if I were MB, Ferrari, or now Renault would refuse them just to see them suffer, reap the fruits of their “labor” so to speak.

              But, yeah in your opinion, RBR behaved themselves properly right? Wipe off the disgusting fuzzy drink from your glasses, mate

            5. If I was being really pedantic, I’d point out that not all hybrid cars have batteries – some have flywheel ‘flybrid’ systems, and some have supercapacitors. But I take your meaning.

              However I think you’re mistaken. Red Bull (I believe) did develop the old KERS system pre-2014, but 2014-on it’s all Renault’s tech. The systems are so integrated, one could not be developed independently of the other.

            6. Red Bull have an equal budget to Ferrari and Merc without having to build an engine so they will have to spend less on aero and produce an engine, but they want to have their cake and eat it.

            7. @mazdachris I think F1 is in an era where the integration of chassis and PU has never been more important, so I think you are making light of that by saying RBR has nothing to do with Renault failing to make a good PU. I think they could have worked more closely together back in 13 rather than put everything into Seb’s 4th…ie. they could and should have done both at the same time given their strong run near the end that didn’t seem stoppable. But it seems RBR sat back watching Seb dominate, assuming Renault would come up with gold for them for the new era. That’s not how it works these days. You don’t sit back waiting for an engine to be delivered. So I think that is the first mistake they made, not offing Renault before they had a plan B, which was their second.

              Merc and Ferrari ‘so certain of their inadequacies’? ‘certain they can’t beat them on a level playing field?’ How about…Merc and Ferrari are certain that RBR is a top team fully capable of winning WDC’s and wish them all the best securing the same works deal they themselves have built up at Mercedes and Ferrari, such that one day the 3 of them will all be on a level playing field. Merc and Ferrari doing all the hard work while handing RBR said hard work, would not be levelling the playing field, but would be a gift and a huge shortcut to RBR.

    6. Red Bull’s greed has been a contributory factor in the struggle the small teams face just to stay in F1. It’s so difficult to find any sympathy for them.

      1. @jackysteeg, So true, it was in fact RBR that played “the scabs” to bust the union of teams ability to negotiate a better deal, no wonder the King of Greed regards Horner as his crown prince. What goes around comes around.

        Totally disregarding the above history it’s hard not to agree with Newey, unless they can source a competitive engine they will be doomed to the slow demise of the midfield teams. It is doubtless to late now but I wish it were possible for RBR to build a “bitser” using for example, the Honda ICE mechanicals with a larger turbo/mguh unit and an electrical power unit developed with the help of Tesla or GM, but it would be necessary to allow continual development during the year to make this approach attractive to outside companies R&D departments.

    7. I really wish redbull not leave F1. For all the recent mishaps regarding Renault, they proved that new teams can win multiple championships and that you don’t need to have a racing history and “pedigree”. And they also seem to be extremely good at spotting great talent and giving them a chance.

      1. Red Bull bought out the Stewart Ford/Jaguar team which had a pretty decent factory and an established team structure in place. That team was established in 1988, and the Milton Keynes factory opened in 1990, they won more than a 100 races in various catagories before joining F1 in 1996.
        All Red Bull proved is that if you buy an existing team, hire one of the best designers and give them an unlimited budget they will eventually build you a championship winning car.

    8. Man look at that video of the Mercedes guys celebrating in the factory, it’s full of 20-something year old kids! Not saying it’s good or bad but I find it interesting. I bet there’s more age variety in the machine shop area haha but not as cool as mission control I guess…

      1. 20-something year old kids? Nay, they just look 20 years younger ’cause being happy of doing the job properly ;-)

    9. I think it is absolutely horrible that engine manufacturers can sell outdated engines. I don’t think it should even be allowed to sell anything less than the newest spec engines in f1. And imho there should also be a rule that if your customer teams don’t get the newest spec engine week before the race then nobody can use it. That way manufacturer teams can’t use the engines for their own performance benefit.

      Imagine for example if williams and merc were fighting to win the wdc. Merc has been developing their engines all through the season while williams has been using the engine spec introduced in australia. Yet williams is paying to get the 2015 spec engine. That is just so wrong. I’d almost like bernie wants to get rid of everybody who is not mercedes or ferrari…

      I think for ferrari trying to sell 2015 spec engines to rbr for 2016 season should not be even possible. If you want to sell engines in f1 then the minimum should be that all engines sold must be of the newest spec and all teams including their own team should get the engines at the same time.

      To counter these new limitations f1 could offer something like the engine constructors world championship. The engine makers wins who has most gp wins during the season.

      Wow these new engines are so bad for f1. There are just more and more just bad things about them that we learn as time goes on. Insanely expensive, boring, heavy, bad for competition, sounds like leaf blowers, powerless, unexciting, rules make it almost impossible to develop yourself out of trouble and the two engine manufacturers use their position ruthlessly to gain a competitive adventage while all others are left with running 2nd rate engines at maximum expenses. It couldn’t be worse. Oh it is. One team has designed the rules into such big competitive adventage that newcomer engine manufacturers will only make themselves look like fools when they enter the sport.

      If I was rbr I’d just leave. If I was mclaren I’d seriously start looking at other forms of motorsports where you can actually compete with honda on their side.

      1. Then if engine makers cannot gain any advantage they are not a charity all their customers should share the costs equally so over 100 million a year.

    10. “We’re possibly going to be forced out of Formula One — Mercedes and Ferrari have refused to supply us out of fear.”

      And as much as I’d love to see a competitive Red Bull with a strong engine… they have every right to do so. Though I’m sure, what Newey calls fear, they would call protecting their investments. If a company has sunk hundreds of millions into developing a strong engine, they’d be utterly mad to accept a fraction of what they spent to give it to a rival who they thought had a chance of beating them.

      I mean, can you imagine Christian Horner sidling into the Williams garage, tapping Sir Frank on the shoulder and saying, “Psst, I’ve got a CD here, everything you need to know to build a perfect replica of our 2016 car so you can have all the aero advantages we’ve spent hundreds of millions acquiring. Ten million quid, do you want it?”

      1. yeah, to be honest though, I don’t think Toto would mind :) Williams and Merc are pretty tight. And controllable opposition is better than real competition for Merc.

    11. We’re possibly going to be forced out of Formula One

      Yeah, by cancelling a running contract with your engine supplier. Why would either of your biggest rivals be obliged to help you out of the hole you dug for yourself in the first place, and why would they want to if you’re then going to take points off them while criticising how their engine isn’t as good as whoever didn’t supply you?! The level of self-entitlement from a team only 10 years old feels completely toxic, regardless of their success in that time. I understand that teams are always lobbying to get themselves in the best possible position, but Red Bull take it to another level, to the extent that they burnt bridges with their engine supplier and may exit the sport only 24 months after their last 2 titles and 13 since since their last race win. It’s an attitude which is impossible to respect.

      1. Agree 100%.

      2. They are a customer of renault and after two years they are still miles behind the nr 1 and have shown no signs of improvement. heck, they barely used tokens. They have lost a lot of points, due to engine changing penalties. That is not acceptable in any business. RB are not there to run in the midfield. They have everything in place to go for the wins, only for one part. If your supplier doesn’t deliver, you switch to one that does. When lotus changed to mercedes last year everybody thought that was a pretty smart move.

        1. @thetick, ultimately, Red Bull Racing still chose to break their contract without ensuring that they had a replacement engine deal in place.

          Irrespective of the issues that Renault have had, the only party which had any obligations towards Red Bull, through their existing contract, was Renault – there is nothing that says that Mercedes or Ferrari must supply Red Bull. You cite the deal Lotus made, but Lotus made sure that they had a preliminary agreement in place with Mercedes before they terminated their contract with Renault – they didn’t break the contract first and then worry about getting a new supplier later.

          Equally, you say that Red Bull aren’t there to run in the midfield – to put it bluntly, no team in F1 wants to be running in the midfield (save perhaps an outfit like Manor, given that in itself would be a major improvement). Ron Dennis has made clear that he does not expect McLaren to be here to run in the midfield, but that is exactly where they find themselves (and in a far worse situation than Red Bull were to boot) – no team has an entitlement or a right to be at the front irrespective of how many resources they throw at a team (if that were the case, than Toyota should have been champions multiple times over).

    12. I am just wondering, would Redbull have allowed Newey to design cars for their rivals during 2009-2013, without “fear”?

    13. Keith Crossley
      13th October 2015, 3:46

      Disappointed in Newey and his echo of the Red Bull “we deserve” mantra. Just why do they deserve anything at all from their competitors? Why?!

      I’ve seen F1 grids with a dozen or so cars (I’m old). I’ve seen some favored teams gallantly slip back in the grid (Lotus, BRM…) and some that came back (go Willys!). But I’ve never seen such a shameful display of “we deserve” as this.

      Get lost.

    14. Keith Crossley
      13th October 2015, 3:49

      Addendum to my impatient post about the rubbish Red Bull management attitude. There are some wonderfully talented staff and drivers to whom I extend my very best wishes.

    15. Red Bull chief technical officer Adrian Newey says the team’s rivals are too afraid to supply them with engines.

      Perhaps his team shouldn’t have spent the whole season bashing their current engine supplier to the point of absurdity.

      1. Perhaps their current engine supplier might have actually brought something to the table instead of initially railing against Red Bull for wanting them to deliver improvements.

        First it was “we’ll have an upgrade for Silverstone”, then it was “we’ll have to try to make it more reliable first”.

        Really – did Renault not think the we, the punters following F1, wouldn’t notice that their 2015 offering was not only awful but was unreliable?

        Red Bull didn’t ruin their brand, Renault managed that all by themselves.
        Between them and Honda, is it any wonder there’s no other engine manufacturers lining up to join F1.

        I assume that if Honda fail to improve in 2016 everyone expects Ron Dennis to stay quiet? Not going to happen and nor should it.

        1. Renault helped Red Bull win four Constructors’ and Drivers’ Championships in a row, 2nd in the 2009 Constructors’ and Drivers’ Championship, 2nd in last year’s Constructors’ Championship, and 50 Grand Prix victories. All this within eight seasons, I believe Red Bull can afford to show a little more patience with Renault than none at all. Even this year’s struggles when put in to perspective aren’t all that bad. If Red Bull Racing were safely in 4th place in the Constructors’ Title and had three podium finishes with four races to go in the old days, they’d be over the moon. They have gotten too used to winning and have become spoiled. They have forgotten who they were and lost their way.

    16. Surely if they pull out someone would be willing to buy a team that’s got 4 championships under it’s belt, right?

      1. OmarRoncal - Go Seb!!! - @omarr-pepper (@)
        13th October 2015, 6:23

        Yes. But most of the key talent is gone. Newey and Prodomou or however his last name is. They are still quite strong for the tons of cash RB keeps sending. The super Enstone team could not keep the same level after 05 and 06. So buying an ex WCC cannot guarantee you will become a champion. They would mainly buy a champion name.

      2. all depends on the price, I would guess @joey-poey and the amount of money one would be willing to pump in yearly. I can see Enstone being a better deal because that team has solid facilities but has also learnt how to be effective with the money they do have, while the RBR organisation is too much used to just throw money at it (see 63 crashtests to get a nose cone right).

      3. Possible. But they still wouldn’t have a 2016 engine deal, would they?

      4. ColdFly F1 (@)
        13th October 2015, 9:06

        I’d buy TR.
        Good car, smaller team, good drivers, and no Horner!

        1. They also have James Key who has shown with FI, with Sauber and now with STR that he can do a really good job of getting a good car on track within a limited budget @coldfly.

          The biggest disadvantage is that it seems to be hard to get F1 people to move to italy. Then again, if the team is independant with Ferrari engines, I can see it beeing attractive for engineers who want to show their mettle to then have a chance at getting in at Ferrari.

          1. Since this year CFD/Aero department is based in Bicester UK, in Italy they manage the production, assemby and logistics phases.

    17. So what if Mercedes and Ferrari won’t supply Red Bull with engines out of fear of being beaten? Would anyone expect Man U to loan an extra star player to Man City? Red Bull has botched this situation from the moment Infinity appeared on their cars.

      1. Agreed and this is so obvious that it makes me wonder why this silly debate was not ended a long time ago. Selling your most powerful weapons to your enemy to help him destroy you is not courage, it is insanity.

        1. @girts By that token though, the most logical and sensible approach from the four engine manufacturers is to only supply their associated manufacturer teams. There is no commercial or sporting argument in favour of supplying customers, and there is nothing within the regulatory framework which compels them to do so.

          1. @mazdachris that’s neither logical, nor sensible.
            Mercedes know that Williams and the other teams they supply won’t have anything like the budget they have, nor do they have the benefit of an integrated car and PU design, the same software, or fuel and lubricants that have been designed in conjunction with their PU. So as long as they can charge more for their PU than it costs to manufacture, any profit on the deal goes towards offsetting the development costs.
            As long as your customers are unlikely to be direct competitors in the championships, and you can charge them more for their PU than it costs to manufacture, it makes perfect sense to supply them.
            What doesn’t make sense is supplying a customer that may beat you, that’s why none of the engine manufacturers do so, or want to.

          2. @mazdachris If we are talking about Mercedes and Ferrari, then they supply only those teams that have remarkably less resources and will thus never be able to beat them across a season. It is common to help someone, who is weaker and poorer than you. However, Red Bull have at least the same resources as Ferrari and Mercedes. In fact, they could build their own engines but that would obviously be a very expensive long-term project (you rightly pointed that out recently) and Red Bull are not ready to spend that much and commit to F1 for so many years.

            For sure, their situation is very difficult. Honda are ready to supply only McLaren at the moment, which means that Red Bull have only one option. And if Renault aim to build their own championship-winning team, then sooner or later they will also be reluctant to arm their direct rivals.

            So the real problem is that F1 has not managed to attract more engine manufacturers that would not have their own F1 teams. Cosworth, Renault, Honda, Porsche and others used to fulfill that role in the past. I do not know if Red Bull have actively tried to convince any new engine manufacturer to join F1, perhaps Audi/VW was a real possibility until the recent scandal.

    18. To all those defending Red Bull and Newey saying that all their comments about Renault being bad and Ferrari and Mercedes being scared are not wrong but simply facts:
      The very fact that Red Bull choose to say everything publicly is the problem. That is not how one builds a professional relationship. Yes, none of what they have spoken is false or wrong. But the very fact they have spoken publicly is what is wrong.

      1. Red Bull scared to give Newey to Ferrari and other members of their design team at a 10th of their true value?

    19. Dear God, that Guardian text is horrible. It would be so much better if people who were in these kind of jobs would actually try to learn something and share something really unknown with the rest of the world. Instead, it seems their whole choice of this “humanitarian” calling is so that they could pat each other on the back and feel better about themselves. Ultimate hypocrisy and ignorance.

      1. @brace When people overreact in such an unreasonable way as you have, it serves only to persuade me that the other side of the argument must have something right.

      2. @brace I think that we should appreciate HRW’s work. This might not be a particularly interesting statement but HRW actually do a lot to highlight the human rights violations all over the world and help to improve things. It is not like they only care about the “wrong” countries, they also regularly publish reports on the United States: https://www.hrw.org/united-states Remember that there are powerful elites in basically every country that would like to take our rights away and we have to be thankful to people, who protect these rights.

        As for F1, it can go to Russia, Azerbaijan and other countries where human rights are violated but it should not be afraid to openly talk about human rights abuses in these countries as they need F1 more than F1 needs them. This is how F1 can contribute to a better world.

    20. I am not surprised that Newey is toeing the Red Bull line but I would have expected better arguments. He is basically stating this: “We do not know how to design engines but we know how to design chassis so our competitors should give us their engines or the FIA should balance the engines and let us freely develop the chassis so that we can beat everyone else again.” Does that really make sense?

      However, I think that Mercedes are ready to compromise and agree on new (or altered) engine regulations from 2017. Firstly, they will have reaped the rewards of their work by then. Secondly, Mercedes themselves are probably not too interested in long-term domination as it would turn off more fans and their brand exposure value would decrease. Thirdly, it is true that the new hybrid engines have not been the best possible solution for F1 as they are obviously too expensive, too complicated and a little too silent and Mercedes know that.

      That said, I wonder what Ferrari’s stance is going to be. After a lot of stumbling around they finally seem to be on the right path and if they believe that they can catch Mercedes under the current regulations, then they will probably be reluctant to reshuffle cards once again. Ferrari might prefer free development of the current engines, which is also an option (how will it solve the “too expensive” part though?).

      Anyway, a compromise will have to be found – with or without Red Bull, who seem to have some rather awkward views on what makes a good competition.

      1. I would accept your argument if Mercedes and Ferrari were keeping their engines “secret”, but they are not, they are selling them to other teams. They are also choosing not to sell to particular teams in one market (engines), in order to keep their dominance in another market (F1 races). This is anticompetitive behavior, and if the EU system was fast and efficient, I would suggest RB could lodge a complaint, but it wouldn’t get looked at in time to do any good, and would cause such bad will in anycase that any engines they might eventually get would have a handful of gravel added for good measure. So RB are in a spot of bother but their only crime is brutal honesty with Renault, and naivety in believing Merc and Ferrari when they suggested they would supply their power units.

        1. their only crime is brutal honesty with Renault, and naivety in believing Merc and Ferrari when they suggested they would supply their power units

          I don’t think those are their only crimes. They’ve been terrible neighbours generally – complaining about the engine and exaggerating the power deficit even when they were winning everything; selling out FOTA; the endless dodgy rule-bending; the public slating of Renault which was obviously self-defeating; and then when Ferrari offered them an engine they were instantly slagging it off in public. They lack respect.

          It’s a new era, where they don’t have right to just have the best power plant and yay beat the people who make it.

          They blew the two chances they had of upper-midfield power plants, so now they reap what they sowed. Pride comes before a fall. They thought being in with Bernie made them immortal, and I’m quite pleased to see that may not be the case.

        2. Even if I was Mercedes or Ferrari I wouldn’t sell them an engine. They had a partnership with Renault which they destroyed by themselves. And yes, The Renault engine is not on part so what, work with your partner and find a solution together behind close door. You don’t Air your dirty laundry in public because you’ve a problem with your partner.
          Even worse, they are trying to ditch their partner who has invested millions in this project for a new one because they are not happy with the current situation. Why would any sane business want to work with people like that?
          Let say either Mercedes or Ferrari give them an engine now and in 2017 Renault and Honda are the better engines, what are they going to do now? Are they going to ditch their new partner for Renault or Honda again?
          For me a partnership is like a marriage, you will have up and down but you always try to work it out. You don’t change partner every time there is problem.

          Teams like Williams have endured worse than that but they didn’t threaten to quit. Are they currently in a worse situation than McLaren?

          If they want to quit, let them quit and that extra 200-270 million they get every year will help assist other small teams.

          1. “For me a partnership is like a marriage, you will have up and down but you always try to work it out. You don’t change partner every time there is problem.” – Regrettably most of the people do just that. And now we’re coming down to a pure social behavior analysis. I don’t like to quote social workers but the cruel statistics say that people who experienced parents to divorce are prone to do the same. Sometimes it rubs off on other things as well. So, what to expect from RB’s owner?

        3. I doubt if F1 world championship and F1 engines can really be considered as two different markets. Besides, if that was really considered anti-competitive behaviour, then all engine manufacturers would be forced to sell their engines to any team that wants them. In that case, all teams would undoubtedly choose Mercedes power units so Mercedes would become the single engine supplier. I doubt if that is what Mercedes want so they would probably soon pull out of F1. I imagine that Ferrari are also not keen on supplying everyone else with their engines either so… In other words, such an approach would kill F1, at least the way we have known it until now.

    21. All this angling for the latest spec engines just shows how experienced McLaren is with F1. Yes, they are taking the pain now, but for team like McLaren, finishing 2nd all the time just doesn’t do it. They know they need to take a LOT of pain now, more then they even anticipated, but it’s the only way to even have a chance at getting that No1 spot again in a few years. Being a works team is how you build your race winning operation. Only time that didn’t matter was in 2009 when all manufacturers dropped the ball and engines were all pretty much the same. There was next to none development and there was no constant and big change in spec from one race to another. Today, cars are so complicated that you lose big chunk of your performance by just using a different oil. When Frank Williams gets a chance, you know he will become a works team again. He knows all too well he isn’t going to win any titles with Mercedes PU, unless Mercedes produces such a bad car that they aren’t even in the contention for the championship themselves.

      As for whether it is right or not, to give lower spec engine, it’s something that should be defined in contracts between the teams, not in the rules. So you can decide whether you want it or not. How late can the upgrade be compared to the works team, how many new engines do you get first time they arrive etc.
      No team should be forced to give away their hard earned advantage for some peanuts money. As @neilosjames said, imagine Frank Williams buying a whole Red Bull chassis and aero for 20mil a year, when Red Bull invested hundreds upon hundreds of millions of it over a period of years. It’s a whole philosophy, the ideas, the innovative solutions, everything. You don’t just sell that, not even for 200 millions, when you’ve already invested 500 millions of more to get to that.

      1. All this angling for the latest spec engines just shows how experienced McLaren is with F1. Yes, they are taking the pain now, but for team like McLaren, finishing 2nd all the time just doesn’t do it. They know they need to take a LOT of pain now, more then they even anticipated, but it’s the only way to even have a chance at getting that No1 spot again in a few years.

        @brace Yes, like Williams, except both will never reach P1 again in the real world.

    22. This is starting to get tiresome. If Red Bull are going to quit, they should quit. They are dragging the reputation of their brand, their senior management and the sport as a whole through the mud. It has to stop. For the good of their staff, who must be getting tired of these incessant rumours (or know something we don’t), they should make a call either way…soon.

      You can look at F1 engine supply from two sides, sporting and business. There isn’t a solid business case for Ferrari or Mercedes to offer them engines, Mercedes have spent a fortune (in cash and time) developing their package so they could dominate this formula the way Red Bull did the last and they won’t give it up lightly. They worked hard, so why should they? Ferrari have an IPO coming up, the best way to generate the level of capital they want is by getting results on the track. And let’s not forget that people like to do business with people that have a track record of being easy to do business with, and on this basis Red Bull fall woefully short of the mark.

      So you have to make a fall back on trying to make a sporting case for the supply. The sporting case is clear, give a team as strong as Red Bull a good engine and they will be competitive, their two talented and popular drivers will get results, Mercedes and Ferrari will have someone to play with at the front, the racing should in theory be better and the sport as a whole will be all the better. But on the other hand, why should Mercedes and Ferrari step in on this basis, when Red Bull have been so unsporting in their treatment and so unsupportive of their previous supplier? Why be sporting when the team in question’s idea of “being sporting” is wanting an engine that gives them the ability to win 9 races on the bounce again?

      They really have to make a decision now.

    23. “Unfortunately, our relationship with Renault is pretty terminal — there’s been too much of a marriage breakdown, so we have no engine,” said Newey,

      Not much chance of a reconcilation when you slag off your partner at every opportunity, and then go publically touting yourself around dating sites looking for the latest bit of flusey.

    24. The more you invest in the technology, you take away the driver effect. The people want the drivers fighting.

      That doesn’t speak for everyone. I, for one, want to see both on-track racing and technological development, both at the highest standard.

      If people want to see pure driver-on-driver racing, they need to be watching a spec series. F1 is a team sport, and the engineers (at the track and back in the factory) are just as important as the drivers. While F1 allows (in fact, forces) teams to develop their own cars, there will always be an ebb and flow between driver and car importance, and there will always be the possibility for one car to make a significant breakthrough.

      Now, I am not saying there are no problems with the rules as they stand. But saying “people want to see drivers racing” is an argument for making F1 a spec or almost-spec (severely limited, even more than it is today) series. This would loose my interest pretty quickly.

      1. @drmouse I think there is plenty of room in the middle ground to have both technology AND more driver vs driver competition. They need to improve the ratio of mechanical grip to aero grip and hopefully they will start down that path in 2017 with the tire changes, more emphasis on ground effects, and a neutral zone on the front wing that will decrease the dirty air effect.

        1. @robbie I agree, particularly about the mechanical grip and ground effect. However, comments like that by Briatore (and many fans) will just encourage* a knee-jerk reaction from the powers that be in F1, and could easily swing it too far the other way.

          * I believe there are plenty of examples in F1’s recent history to support this belief. Instead of fixing the problems, they will focus on levelling out the power units, handing the advantage back to aero depts, and fit more gimmicks to make it look like there is more competition between drivers.

          1. @drmouse Briatore, I think, is only echoing the sentiments of many, that the cars are not enough in the drivers hands and it is too much about conservation. I don’t expect any knee-jerk reactions to this unfortunately, as I would love it if they would do what most want. But you may be right. I’m just hopeful that F1 sees the sense in closer racing, as opposed to this years’ comments from some drivers like NR, SV, and LH that at times being within 2 seconds of the car in front killed their front tires.

    25. Basic lesson RBR should have known about: make sure you have a backup plan before you spoil your current one. Ironically, it’s the car being good which has prevented them from agreeing with Ferrari or Mercedes, they should have kept their pride for themselves and rage with Renault to themselves while negotiating away from the spotlight. Renault may be bad but it’s the best they could have, they should have thought about it before leaving them.

    26. “Won more time” might turn out to be as prophetic as “Red Bull RB10”

    27. I have never conducted a successful business venture with any supplier in RBR fashion. Maybe that works in drinks industry… But not in high technology.

      RBR should change their rethoric ASAP, F1 world is forgetful, few months of Renault praise and maybe even Mercedes will give them engines.

      Best bet right now is Honda, but Ron Denis would then go berserk.

      Praise your supplier, especially if you will stop working with them. Then say we really appreciate all the years and championship, but owner decided we should now race with Ferrari, to gain a competitive edge.. Or some kind of Ron Speak…

      Ron is the perfect example of what to do when your engine is of GP2 quality.(Gp2 engines btw sound better)

      When you are in a partnership you win and lose toggether.

      RBR is not fit for a partnership, that is why nobody wants them. If they didnt give out clear reasons why not work with them, engine suppliers would have a harder time justifying their positions.

      What to do now? Get BMW engines for 2018 maybe even 19… Or move entire RBR team to toro rosso meanwhile.

      Or offcorse pull out and do WEC….

    28. F1’s most entertaining driver? Really?

    29. Perhaps Merc/Ferrari could offer an exchange for their engine such as Newey himself going to one of their teams for an engine deal to balance things.

    30. Red Bull may be great at aerodynamics and driver development, but they are awful at politics.

    31. dont know if anyone has said this so far but… If you’ve had any interest in the history of Ferrari then you will know that the engines were always Enzo’s proudest achievements. it is also long standing Ferrari policy that no one gets the latest and greatest engine unless the car has full works support. not a single Ferrari customer, in any form of motorsport, in the history of the company has ever had the same engines as the works team. not one! For Red Bull to demand the same spec as the works team not only reeks of extreme arrogance but shows a shocking lack of awareness of who Ferrari are and the history of the sport

    32. As frustrating as the Red Bull PU situation is from an F1 fan’s perspective, it’s not just Renault they’ve publicly thrown mud at. It’s been every supplier that’s ever caused them to not be “winners”. Anyone remember the Magneti Marelli problems?

      It’s for that reason I have no sympathy for Red Bull, other than the well being of their many employees. They have no-one to blame for this situation than themselves. I hope their skilled employees are getting snapped up by the other teams as we type.

    33. Put any engine in the car and fuel it with red bull “it gives you wings”

    34. Shouldn’t RBR have secured an engine deal before divorcing Renault. Seriously, didn’t that situation run through their heads. Nobody else to blame but themselves.

    35. Funny this comment from Red Bull. I don’t recall them being in such a giving mood when other teams were struggling with the new regulations from 2009 onward. Where was their offer to help Caterham, HRT and Virgin with chassis design then?

    36. When Newey gets trotted out to do the talking then you know they are desperate.

    37. Someone says it’s shameful of Ferrari not to sell engines to RB? Really?! Excuse me Sir, I do whatever I want with what I develop and produce, after I spend 300 million Euro per year to gain half a second over the previous champion. Maybe you don’t know what it means to a manufacturer to invest this money for a F1 title. And as far as Rb is concerned, I said that already, PLEASE LEAVE. For someone it will be as sad as Playboy not showing nudity anymore but for most of us it will be just changing magazine. As long as Williams, McLaren and Ferrari exist, F1 exist. The rest have been more or less beautiful comets coming and going. RedBull not the nicest for sure. GO AWAY, you arrogant bunch of kids

    38. Red Bull really are the new Ferrari ;)

    39. Red Bull have shown astonishing selfishness in their relationship with Renault – they barely mentioned Renault in the successful four title-winning years, relegating the engine supplier to a mere clause. When performance suffered last year – after four very successful years together – Red Bull very publicly shamed and dumped Renault.
      Now, which engine manufacturer in their right mind would want to supply them with engines?
      Let Red Bull build their own engine. After all, no one is obliged to provide them with an engine, right? Or let them leave F1.

    Comments are closed.