Brendon Hartley, Toro Rosso, Circuit of the Americas, 2017

Hartley to get fourth grid penalty at fourth grand prix

2017 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Brendon Hartley will collect a grid penalty for the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix as Toro Rosso have again exceeded the maximum allocation of power unit parts.

The team has fitted its ninth Renault MGU-H of the season so far. As this is the first time he’s used the ninth example of a component he will receive a 10-place grid penalty.

Hartley has had grid penalties for all three of his previous F1 starts due to power unit problems. He had a 25-place grid drop at the United States Grand Prix, a 20-place grid drip at the Mexican Grand Prix and a 10-place grid drop at the Brazilian Grand Prix.

Toro Rosso has a strained relationship with engine supplier Renault, who it will part ways with following this weekend’s race.

2017 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

Browse all Abu Dhabi Grand Prix articles

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 2017 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, 2017 F1 season

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

  • 18 comments on “Hartley to get fourth grid penalty at fourth grand prix”

    1. Next year engine allocation is just meant to beat this year grid penalties record right?

    2. I bet it won’t be the last grid penalty he get, Toro Rosso Honda 2018….

      1. If anything else this is good practice for them!

    3. Are McLaren really really sure they want to make the switch to Renault engines.

      1. Bit late for that now :(

    4. Burn ’em Brendon, burn! Dr Marko loves the smell of napalm, oops, sorry, – burning Renault engines in the morning!
      Apocalypse Rosso now!

    5. Yeah, Alonso was right to warn Toro Rosso for next year…….

    6. Penalties like this highlight just how poorly thought out the rules are. In four races Hartley hasn’t put a foot wrong. He’s been consistent, and a safe a pair of hand behind the wheel. Yet he is penalised because after 3 years Renault still cannot produce a reliable engine.

      There are 4.6 million in New Zealanders that probably see Hartley as a hero, a legend, an inspiration, tuning in to see him do his best and race after race he is hamstrung because of hopeless rule writing by the FIA.

      Formula 1 is full of the smartest engineers on the planet, you would think that the FIA could harness some of that intellect to think out the possible scenarios of the rules they write in order to prevent drivers from penalised for stuff they have no control over.

      Meanwhile Liberty Media want to change the logo, all while ignoring the real problems in Formula 1.

      1. @formulales F1 is team sport, I don’t know why many people agree with this but always treat it as driver sport. Hartley penalty is not because the stewards hates him, but because the team (I put the engine supplier as part of team) failed to follow the rules, which in this case, engine allocation limit per year.

        Why people expecting a driver should get out of consequences of the rest of the team mistakes because it’s “out of his control”, but no one ever asking for same treatment for the mechanics if a driver crash the car, because “its out of their control”?

        1. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
          24th November 2017, 18:45

          “F1 is team sport, I don’t know why many people agree with this but always treat it as driver sport.”

          The existence of separate drivers and constructors titles surely

          1. @fullcoursecaution Yeah the drivers probably has the spotlight and their own cup but that doesn’t change the fact that F1 is team sport.

        2. I think you missed the point. He was saying that rule even exists is stupid, not just that Hartley is penalized, but that anyone can be, when essentially it is a rule that WILL be broken, guaranteed. Why write rules that penalize drivers and teams for something that is inevitable. Heck, the teams can’t even beat the 4 engine supply rule for this year, how are they going to cope with 3 next year?

          It is a ridiculous rule for an engine formula that is so complex that the smartest engineers still struggle to build fast and reliable engines.

          1. No, that rule is not stupid. Mercedes and Ferrari can do it as intended, only needing to take the penalty because extraordinary circumstances. It’s just because Renault and Honda failed spectacularly on building something that capable within the rules makes people think its a stupid rule. Next year 3 engine limit is not decided on a whim, it’s part of the roadmap in this era, decided way back since 2013. If a big car company after 5 years of R&D can’t make an engine within that spec, they deserved to get any penalties handed to them.

            It is a ridiculous rule for an engine formula that is so complex that the smartest engineers still struggle to build fast and reliable engines.

            Again, it’s not the rule fault. All the engines are quite reliable (except Honda) and fast (including Honda) as proven by every car able to give relatively equal if not faster performance as another F1 car from previous era. It’s just Mercedes engineers better than everybody else making others looks incapable by comparison. In Red Bull era, Adrian Newey can make his aero so efficient leaving other teams far behind yet no one complains about aero is ridiculous rule.

    7. Jonathan Parkin
      24th November 2017, 12:31

      I want to get rid of engine and gearbox penalties. It’s turning qualifying into a joke. This year’s Italian GP had no one in their gridslot apart from the polesitter

    8. that’s a bloody hearty welcome for Hartley to f1, isn’t it?

    9. The McLaren-Honda-STR-Renault swaps are a textbook example of the phrase
      “The grass is always greener on the other side.”

    Comments are closed.