The Lotus F1 team needs to perform better than it has been doing. The year was somewhat compromised by an awful money-free winter, which meant delays with the new car, job losses and a complicated ownership/management situation. That was no bad thing as the people now in control understand that you need to cut your coat according to your cloth and cannot live forever on the never-never. The season was it helped by having a Renault engine as the French firm made a bit of pig’s ear this year and has consequently been under pressure to fix the problems and give the teams more usable power. These things are complicated this year because pure horsepower is not al that is required and you to understand how to get the best out of all the different energy recovery systems, and how to balance all the energy flows. The result of this is that teams are looking at the future and seeing that Mercedes is offering a better engine at a cheaper price. It’s a win-win for a team and a lose-lose for Renault, because losing customers means losing revenue.
Thus there is a bit if a tussle going on as last year Lotus signed up for Renault engines for a number of years, not just 2014. If the team is to switch to Mercedes, there now needs to be a bit of a contractual sort-out. Obviously Renault is keen on compensation if the team runs off to Mercedes, although one can argue that the French firm has only itself to blame. Clearly all is not hunky-dory at Viry as Jean-Michel Jalinier has “retired” to make way for new management and Cyril Abiteboul has arrived to try to get things back on track. It is not an easy issue to solve because Renault does not want a court case in which Lotus argues that the Renault engines were no good and over-priced. Not great PR. Getting a settlement out of Lotus will not be easy because the team is not exactly drowning in cash.
The truth is that if it isn’t Lotus it would be someone else: a Sauber, a Caterham or a Marussia. If I were Gene Haas I would be down in Stuttgart with my chequebook rather than being at Ferrari. I am not sure there is a tidy solution: any racing team that is worth its name will always go after a better engine (all the better if it also saves money) so the only way out of such a mess is for the folk at Viry-Chatillon to come up with a winning engine le plus vite possible…
joeblogsf1 
I know engines are homologated but is there a rule that stops Renault from starting again completely?
Money
And if they lose Lotus it’s another €20M off their budget. Wonder what RB would think of that. They seem to be bullying Renault into a corner at the moment.
LOL sorry couldn’t help myself.
Tin foil hat firmly on: they’re bluffing it so that a sale makes sense, so a new manufacturer can come in with the assets and remainder of staff…
Presumably there is a big advantage to be had coming in fresh, or fresher. MB weren’t new, but they got the advantage as a new PU. Maybe this is the next game, assuming money can be found? In the long game, what’s skipping a year or two and buying back?
No, they are not bluffing
Their issue was far more than just the design route they took. (They still say their design layout is the one they would go for if they did start again) What should really have worried them more than how far off they were at the beginning of the season was that they had no idea that they even had a problem! And each ‘fix’ they brought to each team only revealed how many other problems there were. Like Joe says in his management article, the Renault engine management was not seeing how the pieces did not fit together and no one was aware of this, they did not know they did not know. To fix the engine they must fix the company.
Also with RBR so aero centric with Newey, are RBR so good at giving the feedback for PUs? Just wondering how such possible imbalances may count..
Joe the thing I find slightly odd is how both Ferrari and Renault came up short on power. Last year there was a bit of a shove and push between the 3 power unit makers and Pirelli over the specification of the 2014 tire. Both Renault and Ferrari didn’t want the increased specification of both diameter and width suggested by Mercedes. If ever there was a pointer as to the expectation of power this was it. Did the other 2 think it was a bluff? Who knows but the superiority of the Mercedes unit certainly proves that they were not.
I believe at least some power deficits can be attributed to the electric recovery and drive, quite firmly. I think teams have a lot more influence on those components, so not all just the combustion motor is no good. Time due for better on television graphics, by the by, showing the different power use.
To be fair that is irrelevant – I just said a power advantage – not where it came from. What Mercedes were indicating was they were expecting a level of torque at the rear wheels while the others were saying no, we don’t need more tire contact patch. Now we know why. I thought it was crystal clear that Mercedes had more power/torque almost 9 months ago.
Hi Robin,
I’m just thinking aloud, because I wasn’t disagreeing with you..
I think what had gotten into my mind was the thought, not even mentally fully expressed to myself, that there may be less restrictions on non combustion power components.
In the context that teams might have design input and choices in those, and Renault require customers to source components from RBR effectively, as I understand it, I considered whether there are things a team can do to circumvent a fading engine manufacturer’s underperformance.
I don’t see how our arguments are mutually exclusive. I thought I was adding something about what may come in improvements. There may be other augments against wide wheels other than not wanting the extra contact. Lots of aero and packaging changes required, to start with. Then, on a pure power argument, we’re reading the same Psalm, if not the same verse, there is not a linear correlation between power and grip increase from tire contact. If you know your rival has more power, especially as Ferrari did concerning their lack of electric power which matters in low rev torque, you do not want to let them have a multiplier of that advantage. I’m harping on about low revs as grip mechanical vs aero design there with the sheer power thrown down now is the much harder job this year. Adding area to tire contact is no way a equal improvement to all.
Still can’t figure out how I could have been disagreeing with you, except you said it doesn’t matter where the power comes from, which is globally true, and I said there’s a subset of that power that matters also, along different lines. Wasn’t contradicting your overall argument, anyhow!
Anyhow, cheers & best from me ~ j
I think that one has to now accept that the Renault can only go about optimising this years design and concentrate that effort on Red Bull. The customers will have to wait for the handed down iterations as they become available.
I would be expecting the 2015 updates to address the performance disparity issues and jumping ship now is perhaps not the smartest move. I would say the Lotus issue is as much about a poor car as the power train. Caterham are on life support so their plight has little to do with the power train as even with a Mercedes power they would be at the back.
Next year Honda will be back and perhaps there will be customer supply of their power train in 2016?
I think if I were a team manager considering my options I would let this year play out and concern myself with better chassis development. Renault are gradually improving with Red Bull so it’s not a dead duck by a long way.
That’s what I thought they already did, with unhappy consequences. Concentrating on RBR, i.e.
“If I were Gene Haas I would be down in Stuttgart with my chequebook rather than being at Ferrari.”
I’ve read where Haas says he wants a “technical partner” to supply the engine + gearbox, + suspension pieces, as apparently he feels that will be permitted in 16, and apparently Mercedes isn’t willing to do that much, and Renault is just making engines now, so they’re out.
BTW, any idea of what Haas will be supplying Ferrari, as their newest “Official Supplier” ? Besides cash that is. 😛
They are willing to do it. They are not going to give him staff.
CNC cutting machines
ty for the replies.
So, am I reading that right, in that Ferrari is willing to farm out some staff to Haas, while Mercedes isn’t willing to?
If so, then I’d imagine Ferrari has some staff they aren’t exactly overjoyed with atm, while Mercedes is more than likely very pleased with their staff. 😛
But is it any more than a contra deal: some new lathes for a sticker and a bit more access around the paddock? There are more notable partnerships of the same ilk, DMG Mori are all along the back end of the Porsche 919, a prominence that I don’t think would happen in F1 for a machine tool company, but nevertheless is hard not to notice.
Omitted that DMG Mori are RBR’s lathe supplier, FWIW.
Oh, if the Mole still has a line across the pond…. I wonder what backdoors could be put into the control software of a lathe, somehow to upload suspension designs back to Oxnard? 🙂
If I was Gene Haas I’d be talking to whoever owns Ligier now about a WEC Le Mans challenge with say Ford/Chevrolet or another USA make for the engine, ( built by Cosworth ) and utilising French and USA drivers….the WEC is a great series now and he would gain more advertising attention from a USA/French WEC entry than from bogging around in 11th – 12th or 13th-14th in F1 for the next 5-6 years or more!
I agree with that totally. For the business Haas is in, I cannot see it doing them less good than F1, if used right. ~ . ~ there I go again, if used right… if done right … if you actually go promote it, you know *tell someone* about it. And lots of recent F1 drivers with oodles of experience who may be at liberty to talk to you about F1 in ways that will help you, if you’re set on F1. I don’t know how many F1 engineers are in WEC, but it can’t be a rarity. Oh, and oh, and gaining a name that’s recognizable in F1, Ligier, is not a stupid idea. There won’t be any Ligier vLigier court cases anyway, I hope…
I have said before Haas should use Merc engines, but a couple of points to consider. 1) haas doesn’t need a engine next year so I expect he won’t want to pay for it and this leaves Merc with one less engine supply for 2015.
2) One would think that by 2016 Ferrari and Renualt would have it all sorted and on par with Merc.
Not that F1 bosses give a damn about such things, but from a fan’s perspective replacing arguably the most popular driver in F1 with arguably the least popular wasn’t the greatest PR move either.
Well they couldn’t afford to pay said popular driver.
They have to be so careful now Lotus. They appeared to didn’t pay Kimi Raikkonen last year, if they have to pay a fine if anything goes wrong then how long can they stay in F1
Kimi has been paid
Thank god for that.
Still don´t understand why Ford isn´t joining the new engine formula. From a marketing point of view Ford is very close to needing Formula One. With the constant push of the ‘Eco-boost’ turbo engine range both in Europe and progressively more so in the United States, the new F1 turbo rules fit perfectly into the image of both performance and efficiency. In US, they have the USCC engine, but Europe and abroad??
I don’t understand why Redbull might not considering jumping. If the engine is a bit of a turkey (presently) getting it for free is not a lot off use.
Thanks
Rob
Notwithstanding your good advise Mr. Hass will neither listen to good business advice nor yield to good old fashion common sense. A stated aim of his venture into F1 is to both raise the profile of his Automation business and increase revenues from$1 billion to at least $2 billion annually.
He probable feels that realizing his goal will best be achieved by appealing to the Cartier crowd via an association with Ferrari. Hence his decision to sponsor Ferrari in 2015 while pursuing an engine and supplementary component deals with Ferrari. It seems that he has somehow, mistakenly, convinced himself that the Cartier crowd gravitate only towards Ferrari. Evidently, he may have been influenced by the fact that a Ferrari is the only car that appears in one of the current Cartier brochures.
Are you a Cartier PR man?
Shirley real watch PR people know better than to imply rich people have only one watch? The only ones who do that are Pâté Philippe (auto correct sometimes brings me a puerile smile) and good for them in their sweet dreams of horological monogamy. For myself, I can look at my Casio under a pocket microscope for hours. (no one has found yet how to bring me back from my hypnotic state) Quite the similar tools producing it, I imagine. If anything, mine I feel simply exudes the life affirming feeling of money, in a way Cartier just can’t rub two coppers together, whenever I look at it. Money firmly in my pocket…
I think Alex is fair in saying Gene H won’t sell his tools to Tifosi and latterday jetset. Misses the point, though, by a elegant offset cantilevered tourbillon ratchet moon phase…