For me, it means that JV was slow (if Hei didn't noticed any differences between a rookie in his first steps in F1 career and an experienced WDC). I dont want to bash him but i think that it will be better for him not to come back.

D'Ambrosio is best of them, I think. He was Kobayashi's teammate last year and beat him in the points 29-13


Vietoris might be name of the future thou, we'll see

Heidfeld has nothing to lose. Possible no 1 status in Kubica's contract is useless in the season when they won't be fighting for the championship. No 1 status in mid-field car is rather ridiculous. ...As if there would be huge difference between 11th and 12th places...

D'Ambrosio? isn't he from Devon?


I'll get my coat.

Megan Nick must have done something terrible to you...maybe frightened your cat or shouted you a warm beer ...

What kind of authority is Nick? You can't trust anyone who in nearly all interviews says "I'm better than *put the name of teammate here*

http://confidential-renault.fr/Eric-Boulli...s-pouvoirs-i394

Did Eric Boullier resign from Gravity or did Renault just do something completely retarded from a business ethics standpoint? This seems like a textbook conflict of interest.

December - top3
January - top4
February - top5
March/Bahrain GP -top6

sounds realistic for me

Top 4 TEAMS that its. That means getting low points on merit, not a very encouraging goal for such a team :/

The Team is in very bad shape. That's their reality.

You call me troll? Use your brain, man.

You, on this forum, called me a troll when I first wrote here that Piquet crash in Singapore was on purpose.
And... who was right?

According to "Confidential Renault":
-The exact date and place of R30 presentation will be decided in coming days
-probably it will be in late January in France or before first test session in Spain
-Robert Kubica is in Enstone this week to meet with Eric Boullier and his new engineers, as well as to see a R30, which is almost ready.
-Robert probably will be behind the wheel all the days on first test session on Ricardo Tormo.

Is this mean that presntation of 2nd driver won't be on time?

Top 4 would be a tremendous success for Renault. That would mean they are faster than at least one of these team: Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull, Mercedes - which is very unlikely IMHO.

Good point , in current circumstances, being in top4, means for a team that they are very strong.

I agree. I mentioned it somewhere else I can't recall but I'm pretty sure the FIA rewrote the rules to exclude team manager cum driver manager positions - as was the case with Briatore, and a possible scenario with Boullier.

Remember Honda in 2008?
Then the Brawn car in 2009?
Renault stopped development of the R29 early in 2009 to focus on the R30.
I wont be surprised if the R30 is a solid, quick car. With Villeneuve and Kubica driving.

Honda spent an entire year building the car. Renault haven't.

Honda also had the advantage of in-season testing to check their results. I won't be surprised if the R30 is no better than the R29.

True.
What im saying is that Renault stopped development on the R29 early, to concentrate on the R30.
I dont think the R30 will run at the front, but i still think it will be a solid car.

if they pick Villeneuve i cant imagine more unfair scenario for heidfeld, though i don't like him. But being beaten TWICE by some old returning pricks;)... that is too much.

Last big package to R29 was introduced in Germany, after this R29 no longer had any concrete improvements. Nonetheless R29 was pretty competitive in Singapore and even in Spa, then look at BMW F1.09. In Singapore germans had a major improvements(because they pushed very hard to the end of the season) and look at their pace. R29 was not a totally poor car, it's just because they abandoned further development of this car.

Those "pricks" have 8 WDC between them!

When the season started it was at least 0.5 faster than the MP4/25 and at the German GP when both teams were still bringing in stuff, the MP4/25 suddenly appeared a mile faster.

Then you're gonna say that Alonso made a mistake during the rain in Q2 and that he scored the fastest lap of the race but so did Glock in Valencia and he still finished 14th. And at that moment the Brawns had no tyre temperature, the RBRs were cruising and Hamilton was driving with a destroyed diffuser after running a lap on 3 wheels.

So what Renault really lacked was some focus and perhaps some ability within its engineering team. If they really dropped any development on the R29 since July (more or less what Ferrari did), they should be looking at fighting for the crowns in 2010 and not having a look at the top 3-4.

Maybe - but we have no way of knowing how many designs Honda went through for the RA109. And Renault were not the only team who ended development early; Ferrari did, too. The 2010 cars will be based on 2009 machines, since everything before last year is effectively useless on account of the change in regulations. The R29 and F60 were not very good platforms to build upon, and both teams will be competing against the Red Bull RB6, McLaren MP-4/25 and Mercedes Whatever, all of which will be built on very good platforms. I think the best Renault can hope for is to regularly score points and maybe get a podium - but not on a regular basis.

The engine's said to be suited to the new rules, too. I think there's plenty of room for hope, if not for confidence.

The Renault engine advantage is HUGE. (requires 18Kg less fuel for the race).
But to avoid Ferrari from being a complete embarassment, I expect the FIA to "equalize" this somehow.

sure, nobody denies! But their time has passed in my opinion;)

The advantage is greatly exaggerated. It won't help them in qualifying, and the weight equalises over the course of the race.

I don't quite follow your statement. If a car is always going to weigh 18k less than the competition or have 18k strategic ballast how does that advantage equalize over the course of a race ? Also, how does the advantage of being gentler on the tires (Due to less weight) factor in and get neutralized in this case ?

It's not always going to weight 18kg less, only at the start of the race, at the end the weight will be the same, and in the middle Renault will be 9kg lighter. Of course if the figures are true.

This is correct.
Still, 9Kg of non-movable weight, on average, is very significant.
But 18Kg from a standing start, where most of the passing happens, is also a huge advantage.
I would think as significant as KERS, without the disadvantages.

But it´s certainly no disadvantage for Renault...???

The downside, as I understand it, is lower HP.

This is not true at all. At the Hungarian GP Webber started the race with more fuel than Hamilton and pitted a lap earlier.

When both engines are running at full swing you might be close to some reality, but each engine has its own ability to save fuel over different maps and also drivers different styles count a lot for that.

it was cos of tyres.

Slow (to mid) qualy position and lighter car, Kubica wil lstart from mid pack banging tyre to his front runner, risky scenario to crash.

You are wrong. Explanation for that is simple: Red Bull's cars consumed more fuel than McLaren's

Just look at this:

First of all - it's not huge. It's small. Proved last season.
Second of all - was... It was advantage, but teams are going to develop engines further this winter.

We already had that discussion...

You cannot compare the fuel consumption of a KERS- and a non-KERS-car...you must compare for example Red Bull with Brawn or Force India...voila...

Grosjean unlikey to be Renault's second driver

Yeah, that's true, so the others will loose also power to reach lower consumption Engines are basically freezed. They can't redesign the whole engine to get lower consumption while keeping the 2009 level power or increase it more. There won't be big miracles: higher power = higher consumption, lower power = lower consumption.

RF1 dropped KERS after some races. So you can easily compare RF1 vs Force India, Brawn GP, Toro Rosso etc.

He should never have had the drive in the first place. Completely out of his depth. The only thing he has going for him is a stunning girlfriend and now he's out of F1, she'll be gone too.

So assume a mid-field qualification, but big advantage on the start of the race, combine that with:
http://www.mototube.pl/film/1000/grand-pri...art---powtorka/
http://www.mototube.pl/film/2823/gp-belgii...kubica-onboard/
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-UWm61DNoz...in_italy_monza/

But then at Suzuka, somehow Vettel managed a better fuel mileage than Hamilton.

I don't think you're getting what I mean: each car/engine package has its own properties. For instance, Brawn was reported to have 20bhp less than Mclaren and Force India on the driveshaft due to a worse combo than the Mclaren one (which Force India has too), although all of them had the same engine.

And one of those important properties is the ability of saving fuel: for instance, at 100% power, Renault might have a 2-3% fuel consumption advantage, but when they are running at 98% Mercedes and Renault are equal and then at 96.8% of full power Mercedes gets a 3.1% fuel consumption advantage. That's not as any simple as some of the people here try to mean.

And finally, saying that KERS helps you saving fuel is plain BS. On a road car, the engine propulsion is partly substitued from a combustion one into an electrical one, which helps saving fossil fuel. On an F1 car, KERS only adds power (you´re only allowed to go for KERS with at least 90% of the throttle valve open) to the driveshaft and makes the engine speeds to increase faster than it normally would. So, it increases fuel consumption instead of decreasing it.

Have not Mosley said in the past that the teams are allowed to make his engine greener?