Ecclestone: Honda wants to supply Red Bull but Dennis is blocking it

Bernie Ecclestone says that Honda wants to supply Red Bull in 2016 – but Ron Dennis is blocking the deal from happening.

Ecclestone added that he and the FIA agreed with Honda that they would expand to two teams in their second year. However, McLaren has a veto on the identity of who that team might be.

The honest answer at the moment it would appear that Honda are happy to give them an engine and Mr Dennis thinks they shouldn’t,” said Ecclestone. “Although Honda have got an agreement with the FIA and myself that they would allow them into F1 to supply to engines to one team for first year, two teams second and three teams the third.

And they somehow got involved and made a commitment to Ron that he had a veto on any engines, and he doesn’t want Red Bull. He doesn’t want them. I think he believes they may be competitors.”

Asked how McLaren could have a veto given the Honda/FIA agreement he said: “In fairness to Ron, he probably didn’t know. I am not blaming anybody. They are the facts.

At the time when they came in the FIA said if we let you into F1 you have to supply three teams, they said as we are brand new into F1 we don’t think we can do that. We supply one team for the first year and after that, second and third year.”

Ecclestone was non-committal on whether or not the deal would go through.

I don’t know…Ron has said definitely not. As far as he is concerned, so I don’t know if his veto will stand up.

They can only run Honda if Honda agreed and they won’t agree obviously and have an argument with Ron, because Ron will suit them.”

Asked if Honda would really represent competitive engine that Dietrich Mateschitz wants he said: “At the moment… But you don’t know what next year’s Honda is going to be.”


Filed under F1, F1 News, Grand Prix News

11 responses to “Ecclestone: Honda wants to supply Red Bull but Dennis is blocking it

  1. petes

    Stand your ground Ron.
    Really suspect it’s just more weasel-speak from the troll.

  2. Mick

    As Bernie doesn’t believe in democracy or equality in F1 he shouldn’t sh*t stir when a team exercises it’s right to protect itself from a competitor.

  3. peterg

    I really struggle to have any sympathy for Red Bull, talk about being the author of their own obituary. Four WC’s on the trot with Renault, and then, not only the biggest dummy spit in F1, after one poor season………….but the gall to feel they are entitled to a Mercedes PU.

  4. Ron is being a Fonda. Although I’m very much looking forward to the independent woman, pardon madame, engine 4 2017. Hybrids suck.

    • Brent

      The problems with F1 have nothing to do with the use of hybrid power units, unless your one of those that think noise has something to do with speed. It is not the PU’s or their manufacturers that are sinking F1, it’s money and rules, it’s the FOM, the FIA and the big teams. If the free money Ferrari and the other big teams get was divided fairly the cost of the PUs wouldn’t be an issue. Red Bull’s problems with engine supply are of their own making, they had a priority manufacturer engine supply and threw it away. Ecclestone wants cheap engines so he doesn’t have to deal with the unfair division of money, he could buy the Pus for 5 teams with the money Ferrari get just for showing up.
      Make a fair division of revenue, put a spending cap in place and then look at how to change the rules.

      • I don’t see a lot of interest from consumers in hybrid cars in real life. Sorry mate, hybrids won’t last, it’s a Hollywood fashion. Electric or hybrid is wrong, too expensive & not practical. IndyCar does it better. I prefer ELMS model to be honest. F1 is a passing interest. Fair distribution of muny & blaming RBR for global warming comes straight from fan forums, nothing to do with F1 reality. I agree that F1 PU is amazing technology but nothing more than a fancy engineering exercise. Hybrids still suck.

      • Brad Ford

        The problem with hybrid power units is that they are not mature technology. If you obtain an advantage (even a small one) like Mercedes has, you have locked in dominance for years. Even if the rules allowed you to make “upgrades,” things like patents will prevent teams from gradually catching up.

        In contrast, V6 turbos are mature technology. Any engine builder worth his/her salary could build a competitive product with enough money. Within 2 years, Merc, Honda, Renault and Ferrari engines would be cranking out similar HP/Torque/Fuel Economy numbers. For customers, companies like Cosworth or Illmor could likely offer reasonably competitive engines at reasonable prices.

  5. Brad Ford

    Only Formula 1 could allow a situation to arise where a key team could be forced to take an underpowered Renault or Honda engine because competitors don’t want to compete with them.

    • MW

      F1 did not ‘allow a situation to arise’ – Red Bull sprinted head long into the corner that they find themselves in whilst at the same time throwing their toys out of the pram at anyone who may have been willing to help.

      Their demise (as Red Bull) cannot come soon enough – although I hope for the best for all of the ordinary team staff when the inevitable takeover occurs.

      • Brent

        I agree. It’s Milton Keynes and Faenza that are the race teams, Red Bull is a decal, a bank account and a group of managers that are poisonous.

      • Brad Ford

        As long as F1 enforces rules that effectively lock in the Mercedes engine as dominant, the other teams have legitimate beef.

        If my company was spending hundreds of millions of dollars to “compete” in Formula 1, I wouldn’t settle for a 2nd rate engine any more than I would settle for having a 2nd rate driver behind the wheel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s