- 717
- United Kingdom
LEARNING FROM RENAULT'S EARLY 2000s FAILURE
Instances where giving priority to the chassis over the engine actually worked have been few and far between. When Renault returned to F1 in 2001, first under the Benetton moniker then as the Renault F1 Team one year later, the French manufacturer developed an intriguing 111-degree V10 engine. The rationale behind engineer Jean-Jacques His’ design was to lower the car’s centre of gravity.
Again, the project looked good on paper, but it did not translate in practice and turned out to be a disaster in terms of results. Renault learned its lessons from the failure and reverted to a more conventional architecture ahead of the 2003 season after it became clear that recurrent vibration issues could not be overcome. However, Patrick Faure, who was Renault F1 president at that time, did no regret exploring that avenue and even encouraged the French manufacturer to think out of the box.
“We didn't expect such a difficult year,” Faure was quoted as saying in June 2001 by grandprix.com. “But if we had to, we would do it again because we had a choice: either to build a Supertec engine and fight for the third row, but have no chance to overtake McLaren or Ferrari, or to really go for it with a totally new architecture, but accept that we have more difficulty.”
That sounds quite familiar, doesn’t it?
Sources:
f1i.com
Instances where giving priority to the chassis over the engine actually worked have been few and far between. When Renault returned to F1 in 2001, first under the Benetton moniker then as the Renault F1 Team one year later, the French manufacturer developed an intriguing 111-degree V10 engine. The rationale behind engineer Jean-Jacques His’ design was to lower the car’s centre of gravity.
Again, the project looked good on paper, but it did not translate in practice and turned out to be a disaster in terms of results. Renault learned its lessons from the failure and reverted to a more conventional architecture ahead of the 2003 season after it became clear that recurrent vibration issues could not be overcome. However, Patrick Faure, who was Renault F1 president at that time, did no regret exploring that avenue and even encouraged the French manufacturer to think out of the box.
“We didn't expect such a difficult year,” Faure was quoted as saying in June 2001 by grandprix.com. “But if we had to, we would do it again because we had a choice: either to build a Supertec engine and fight for the third row, but have no chance to overtake McLaren or Ferrari, or to really go for it with a totally new architecture, but accept that we have more difficulty.”
That sounds quite familiar, doesn’t it?
Sources:
The delicate balance between F1 engine and chassis
F1i technical expert Nicolas Carpentiers reviews the concept and philosophy of each F1 engine manufacturer’s power unit/chassis package
f1i.com
2001: A Benetton Odyssey - Grand Prix Rejects
In 1995, the Benetton Formula One team was on top of the motorsport world, and bagged both World Drivers’ and Constructors’ championships that year. Six years later, the Benetton name left the sport having scored a measly ten points all year long. Where did it all
gprejects.com
