It's more like we are seeing the ceiling of their car concept. RB18 was a fresh project, RB19 was an evolution of 18, RB20 is evolution of 19. In an era where good chunk of the parts is now standardised, tech regulations are tight and limited with volume boxes.. There is now less space for them to find something new. I don't thing that cost cap really hurt them? I mean of the top teams they seem to spend less because they are the only ones sticking to the same concept.
I remember Red Bull saying at the beginning of season that they went with this aggressive concept as it opened new areas for them to develop on. So Red Bull did exactly that, just something was obviously misjudged.F1NAC wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 10:09It's more like we are seeing the ceiling of their car concept. RB18 was a fresh project, RB19 was an evolution of 18, RB20 is evolution of 19. In an era where good chunk of the parts is now standardised, tech regulations are tight and limited with volume boxes.. There is now less space for them to find something new. I don't thing that cost cap really hurt them? I mean of the top teams they seem to spend less because they are the only ones sticking to the same concept.
Mclaren had to switch, Mercedes had to switch concept plus overhaul complete on suspension. Ferrari switched their concept and start from blank, and now it seems for the final year of regs they will also need to overhaul suspension. I think for them it's time for new ideas. If there is any scope for them.
Cost cap just impacts their ability to have multiple development streams going on at once, so yes I would say they could be impacted by that, in the same way Mercedes and maybe Ferrari have done as well where they had some fundamental issues that needed correcting.F1NAC wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 10:09It's more like we are seeing the ceiling of their car concept. RB18 was a fresh project, RB19 was an evolution of 18, RB20 is evolution of 19. In an era where good chunk of the parts is now standardised, tech regulations are tight and limited with volume boxes.. There is now less space for them to find something new. I don't thing that cost cap really hurt them? I mean of the top teams they seem to spend less because they are the only ones sticking to the same concept.
Mclaren had to switch, Mercedes had to switch concept plus overhaul complete on suspension. Ferrari switched their concept and start from blank, and now it seems for the final year of regs they will also need to overhaul suspension. I think for them it's time for new ideas. If there is any scope for them.
It is very clear that the inbalance is not deliberate, as they don't see it in windtunnel, it came as a surprise.rgava wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 11:31Can it be that they took a development path trusting in Max's hability to cope with certain degree of instability that ended up in a dead end?
I remember reading here some coments regarding the difficulties of the second driver at RB and some team member (not shure if it was CH) saying this was making the car faster than the others.
I'm thinking they probably took that development path and the last evolutions just increased the instability (to the point MV cannot cope with it anymore) not reducing lap times.
This is not instability in the ”Max driving style” way. The RB19 and RB18 were predictable cars. They knew that they would be unstable, just like the RB20, but they also knew how the instability would manifest. The issue with the RB20 is that they don’t know how the instability will manifest, to the point that even Max struggles to predict it and handle it.rgava wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 11:31Can it be that they took a development path trusting in Max's hability to cope with certain degree of instability that ended up in a dead end?
I remember reading here some coments regarding the difficulties of the second driver at RB and some team member (not shure if it was CH) saying this was making the car faster than the others.
I'm thinking they probably took that development path and the last evolutions just increased the instability (to the point MV cannot cope with it anymore) not reducing lap times.
Definitely not the case. They lost something and its 99% the brake trick as ScarbsF1 mentioned before. It's not that McLaren is faster now, even Ferrari and Mercedes are the better car right now.DDopey wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 08:11This could definitely be the case. Budget allocation (which is primarily done by Horner) could have been wrongly defined from a wrong perception of the seasons start. That will take time and politics to get adjusted.ing. wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 00:22Interesting to hear Max in post-race interviews say the team will NOW—I emphasize the NOW part—have to develop the car.
Could it be that based on the large performance advantage RBR had at the beginning of the year, they miscalculated that they could slow down development on the ‘24 car and focus on the ‘25 car—if not the ‘26 (whatever is allowed)—and so now they have too few things in the development pipeline and have been overtaken in the development race and on track?
The only source that says that is Scarbs/Windsor, there is no other source for that. And besides that, it looks like the most downside is the top speed of the RB20, this has less to do with braking.yener wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 12:17Definitely not the case. They lost something and its 99% the brake trick as ScarbsF1 mentioned before. It's not that McLaren is faster now, even Ferrari and Mercedes are the better car right now.DDopey wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 08:11This could definitely be the case. Budget allocation (which is primarily done by Horner) could have been wrongly defined from a wrong perception of the seasons start. That will take time and politics to get adjusted.ing. wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 00:22Interesting to hear Max in post-race interviews say the team will NOW—I emphasize the NOW part—have to develop the car.
Could it be that based on the large performance advantage RBR had at the beginning of the year, they miscalculated that they could slow down development on the ‘24 car and focus on the ‘25 car—if not the ‘26 (whatever is allowed)—and so now they have too few things in the development pipeline and have been overtaken in the development race and on track?
Please dont forget teams always said in all previous seasons that a gap of 0.4 tenths is almost impossible to close in a season. McLaren improved over a second compared to RBR.
And offcourse McLaren did a great job, but RBR has lost an advantage over something, thats crystal clear.
Stop it. Even Kravitz (not someone known for being particularly sympathetic to Max or Red bull, to say the least) said in his notebook, he had multiple talks with different engineers from teams up and down the grid, asking them the same question about red bull potentially using that trick in their rear brakes. None of them told him they believe it was the case, none of them heard anything about it. So, paddock basically knows nothing about this, so tell me, why would Kravitz make that up? Would he want to protect Max image? And if it was really like that, do you really believe, we wouldn't have heard Zak, Toto or Vasseur mentioning that, talking about their suspicious at least once? Only thing we heard was Allison mentioning once, RBR upgrades might potentially be downgrades and it does look he was right on the money. Now Red bull themselves are echoing that.
James Allison even put a name to his comments too and said the braking thing wasn't it it and they just went down a bad design path and called the upgrades downgrades.avantman wrote: ↑02 Sep 2024, 15:04Stop it. Even Kravitz (not someone known for being particularly sympathetic to Max or Red bull, to say the least) said in his notebook, he had multiple talks with different engineers from teams up and down the grid, asking them the same question about red bull potentially using that trick in their rear brakes. None of them told him they believe it was the case, none of them heard anything about it. So, paddock basically knows nothing about this, so tell me, why would Kravitz make that up? Would he want to protect Max image? And if it was really like that, do you really believe, we wouldn't have heard Zak, Toto or Vasseur mentioning that, talking about their suspicious at least once? Only thing we heard was Allison mentioning once, RBR upgrades might potentially be downgrades and it does look he was right on the money. Now Red bull themselves are echoing that.
If there is any truth to that story about asymmetrical rear brake system whatsoever, most likely, one of top teams(probably even Red bull) invented such system, and as Mercedes in 2019(with regards to their DAS) came to the FIA to get an approval it would be deemed legal to introduce in the 2025 or 2026. And the FIA absolutely didn't like the Idea, and on this occasion, unlike 2019, they took a decision to change the rules immediately to close the loophole and prevent anyone else coming up with such system. This is what most like it was all about, and that could be indeed Red bull that came to the FIA to seek an approval, which they refused to give.
Media manipulates the narratives incredibly well these days.
Perception is reality in F1, whether there is truth to the story or not, people will believe things if they are written in enough places.
Joe Saward
Maybe someone can find the below but this doesn't seem to hold.saviour stivala wrote: ↑03 Sep 2024, 05:33Common sense points to what advantage Red Bull lost was taken away from them by the FIA. Something that when 'taken away - not permitted anymore' reverting to the car in its prime configuration without-it, they lost the advantage they held. In short, it points to the advantage they had having been taken away from them by the FIA.