2024 Season Bickering and Moaning

[chrisc90]

They were using a loophole (and possibly other teams too)

Not entirely sure how they it worked aside from the plank moving when it was close to the ground.
Surely teams can look at what height the floor needs to be to produce reliable downforce and work from there?

It does beg the question though, did RB’s previous massive rake help them in knowing how to generate downforce at a floor height that might be higher than others? Seems some teams need to deck the car in order to be fast (COTA 2023 with Mercedes) whereas RB can run high and still be fast/downforce.

[dialtone]

TD39 wasn’t about floor flexibility but ride height and acceleration.

And Ferrari was fastest but with RedBull being fairly overweight.

Ferrari was also less reliable, thanks in large part still to after effects of the 2020 decisions they pushed engine development quite far to bridge the gap.

In general, there really is no reason to stand up there and call everyone else bad, just shows arrogance for no reason.

[JordanMugen]

In general, there really is no reason to stand up there and call everyone else bad, just shows arrogance for no reason.

I think the other cars are quite good, very fast. It's odd that people then complain about Red Bull winning if the cars that they are against are really great, fast, well-developed cars like the Aston Martin, McLaren, Mercedes and Ferrari?

In that case (IMO routine just as Mercedes wins were routine but others can say it is better than that) the Red Bull wins should be very impressive against such strong opposition, little wonder Horner's toe tapping every time, such is the tension! RBR obviously don't take any "routine" win for granted, hence their focus on correct car preparation, execution and strategy every time and cheering as the car crosses the line.

[dialtone]

People complain the gap is big and it’s hard to catch up because rules make it hard. Just like token system for engines had frozen Mercedes advantage for years in 2014.

[JordanMugen]

People complain the gap is big and it’s hard to catch up because rules make it hard.

I don't think this is correct. You just need the right ideas. It's all about ideas.

2% inspiration, 98% perspiration. Have the right inspiration then bring it to the CAD model, wind tunnel and fruition.

Not about brute force developing 10 designs and picking the best one for a super rich team, while teams like Williams are unable to do that -- not anymore, thank goodness for that.

2nd place team has more wind tunnel time than Red Bull, 3rd place even more and so on and so forth down to the HAASes who have lots of wind tunnel time but perhaps don't use it particularly efficiently.

[dialtone]

People complain the gap is big and it’s hard to catch up because rules make it hard.

I don't think this is correct. You just need the right ideas. It's all about ideas.

2nd place team has more wind tunnel time than Red Bull, 3rd place even more and so on and so forth down to the HAASes who have lots of wind tunnel time but perhaps don't use it particularly efficiently.

‘Need the right ideas’ is wild. In case of Ferrari they had the rebuild the car from scratch. Mercedes design also didn’t work and had to restart.

Rebuilding from scratch, even with the right ideas then, is going to take a lot of time and budget. And then you still need to test.

And the wind tunnel advantage is just worth 0.1s.

I think what the rest of the field needed was better catering options.

[chrisc90]

That 400k is was the best 400k that any team has ever spent it would seem.

A 3 year ‘advantage’ doesn’t come off such a small sum of money (in F1…. I wouldn’t mind 400k!! )

[dialtone]

That 400k is was the best 400k that any team has ever spent it would seem.

A 3 year ‘advantage’ doesn’t come off such a small sum of money (in F1…. I wouldn’t mind 400k!! )

I totally agree, Ferrari wasn't really violating the engine rule by that much in the end if we really look at it.

[f1isgood]

Ferrari as with many other things just simply did not know what to do with the engine exploit. They Ferrari'ed it although this comment will obviously not sit well with some highly sensitive people.

[dialtone]

Ferrari as with many other things just simply did not know what to do with the engine exploit. They Ferrari'ed it although this comment will obviously not sit well with some highly sensitive people.

I agree as well, I think other teams should just have had better ideas about their engines, no point being sensitive about such a small advantage. Who knows what this formula was going to be if Ferrari didn't need to replace their engine.

[Chuckjr]

People complain the gap is big and it’s hard to catch up because rules make it hard. Just like token system for engines had frozen Mercedes advantage for years in 2014.

Bingo. This exactly.

The 2014 regs basically ensured no one would catch Merc and it stayed that way through many painful years watching them cruise to championship after championship after championship since by regulation nobody could catch them. Merc fans kept joyfully touting “Bummer bob! You guys should have done better!! Hahaha!!” I read similar here year after year.

Well, Mercedes gets to enjoy their own medicine for a few years now and possibly on into and past 2026 if Newey has any say about it — since he seems much more cunning and resourceful than the entire Mercedes engineering team and leadership.

So suck it up Merc. Do better!

[RonMexico]

Ferrari as with many other things just simply did not know what to do with the engine exploit. They Ferrari'ed it although this comment will obviously not sit well with some highly sensitive people.

The entire way though the Binotto era Ferrari lived in a grey zone or were planning on being in a grey zone in a design sense. The constant strategy issues just rubbed salt in the wound. Ferrari could have spent $750m on a development cycle and would have conspired to mess it up through that period

[Farnborough]

They were using a loophole (and possibly other teams too)

Not entirely sure how they it worked aside from the plank moving when it was close to the ground.
Surely teams can look at what height the floor needs to be to produce reliable downforce and work from there?

It does beg the question though, did RB’s previous massive rake help them in knowing how to generate downforce at a floor height that might be higher than others? Seems some teams need to deck the car in order to be fast (COTA 2023 with Mercedes) whereas RB can run high and still be fast/downforce.

I see this in the same "light" as I feel you've put it here.

There's simply huge back catalogue within RB of running unconventional floor angle, rear suspension travel etc etc. Absolutely no "catering budget" can even begin to cover this level of experience/ expertise/ exploration in that knowledge bank created and living within RB.

Wolf even took the "pizz" about the RB "running around like it's doing a handshtand" in those days.

Yes to the pedantic, I know it was a flat floor era, yes I know about the floors now, critical experience though is hugely valuable even if it works or not, it still forms a significant experience of characteristic behaviour of what happened.

Often a failure is just as valuable as acknowledged success, thats IF its learned from. It demonstrates a more full understanding of the task demanded, allows competent development analysis, can point a way forward in new rules, to keep repeating the mistake is how some teams remain static. Thats MB "bouncing" McL slow speed understeer and others like that

[dialtone]

Ferrari as with many other things just simply did not know what to do with the engine exploit. They Ferrari'ed it although this comment will obviously not sit well with some highly sensitive people.

The entire way though the Binotto era Ferrari lived in a grey zone or were planning on being in a grey zone in a design sense. The constant strategy issues just rubbed salt in the wound. Ferrari could have spent $750m on a development cycle and would have conspired to mess it up through that period

But we'll never know. Ferrari isn't allowed gray areas unlike other teams.

[Cs98]

TD39 wasn’t about floor flexibility but ride height and acceleration.

And Ferrari was fastest but with RedBull being fairly overweight.

Ferrari was also less reliable, thanks in large part still to after effects of the 2020 decisions they pushed engine development quite far to bridge the gap.

In general, there really is no reason to stand up there and call everyone else bad, just shows arrogance for no reason.

How good you are is always relative to who is the best. Ferrari, Merc, McLaren, they are not bad and certainly not stupid, but at the same time they have not demonstrated that they are good enough to win currently. Shifting the blame onto the rules and acting offended at people saying they haven't done a good enough job is deflection.