Red Bull RB6

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Confused_Andy
Confused_Andy
0
Joined: 08 Jul 2009, 02:11

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

I think the Cossy is actually a pretty grunty cow, think it had simelar horsepower to the Ferrari but I cant remember the figures. Its problem was durability.

wesley123
wesley123
204
Joined: 23 Feb 2008, 17:55

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

Indeed, from what i know the Cossie had around 760HP, it had the most power, but it lacked durability and drivability. Those where mostly fixed with the mid season update, which in turn also showed a much better williams performance. Afaik Cossie is allowed much more to be developped then others, so imo the Cossie is the way to go, it has already proven to be very reliable(I cannot remember any failure of their V8, i believe it happened once in 2006, but that was all)
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

User avatar
raymondu999
54
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 07:31

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

Wasn't there a period where every race/championship won was with a Cossie? And a year where the Cossie bagged all the fastest laps?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法

segedunum
segedunum
0
Joined: 03 Apr 2007, 13:49

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

marcush. wrote:it is a simple thing :you got twenty HP more and you will need fuel to produce it ..
No, because you'll use the twenty extra horsepower when you need it (certainly in qualifying) and conserve elsewhere - usually when you're out in front and the less powerful engines are having to conserve as well which means you're not losing anything.
...simple physics or would you dare say Renault is less capable than Ferrari or Mercedes in producing efficiency out of a mandatory package? that would mean they used the same amount of fuel to produce less power to propel the car
The Renault is more efficient, but it makes a negligible difference for the gain in performance and contribution to track position from the engine. Put simply, slightly greater fuel efficiency is outweighed by the overall performance benefits.

There's a reason why Red Bull want the extra power. If what you say is true then they wouldn't be clammering for a change.

User avatar
ringo
230
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 10:57

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

True, and the idea that the Renault has more torque than the other powerful engines is not really supported by facts.
The Mercedes can be more likely to have more torque since it has more power at the same engine speed. At least that's what can be infered; no one truly knows.

I was wondering where some get the idea the engines balance out each other, one has the torque while the other has the power. It's possible one can be simply more superior in most performance aspects.
For Sure!!

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

we simply cannot derive from what we see on the track taht Renaults is down everywhere.
In fact chassis/Aero will mask any proand con avaialable from the negine.It is a factor but only one of several to performance.
As RB is leading in all other aspects .they still have the Engine to find soem advantage.

User avatar
ringo
230
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 10:57

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

Force india made the WO1 look like it was down 2 cylinders at spa. :lol:
A good or crappy car can give completely different impressions about the same engine.

But if Renault think the mercedes is up 30hp, it's likely it has more torque as well, since the engines are virtually the same dimensions. Power and torque are functionally related with engine speed. So it can be safe to say mercedes is the better engine on these 2 fronts. When it comes to drive-ability,cooling, response, torque spread etc. no one knows.
For Sure!!

SoliRossi
SoliRossi
0
Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 09:43

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

The engine disparity is actually a pretty big issue. THere is so much talk about the Renault having other advantages, drive-ability (surley the large amounts of DF from the rb6 help 'driveability)heat requirments etc... but all of these other points are only there because the engine is down on power.

As Horner pointed out, they would happily trade a slight differance in fuel consumption for more HP as you dont have to run your engine at full power all the time, turn the revs down to produce 30hp less and all of a sudden the Merc engine has the same fuel consumption as the Renault. Same can be said for cooling requirments etc...

If you have more HP you have more options and more room for strategy. But the biggest factor is the extra HP is there to be used when you need it.

The problem that many people have is that the engine is not meant (under the current regs) to be a performance differentiator. Its frozen you cant really develop it. But there is a frozen advantage. Its all well and good to say the RB6 makes it up in other places or its up to them to make a better car or whatever, but the chassis/aero is not frozen so that is what is meant to be the performance differentiator.

User avatar
raymondu999
54
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 07:31

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

I'd have thought this should be in the RBR complaining about engine disadvantages thread :P

Also, the RB6 should fare the best in fuel conservation mode, shouldn't it? Its corner pace shouldn't be affected as it still has the downforce and mechanical grip, while the McLaren, slippery as it is, when conserving fuel in an engine mode, would lose their topspeed advantage?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法

ell66
ell66
2
Joined: 30 Jun 2010, 13:05

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

raymondu999 wrote:I'd have thought this should be in the RBR complaining about engine disadvantages thread :P

Also, the RB6 should fare the best in fuel conservation mode, shouldn't it? Its corner pace shouldn't be affected as it still has the downforce and mechanical grip, while the McLaren, slippery as it is, when conserving fuel in an engine mode, would lose their topspeed advantage?
not really, you could ust turn it round the other way and say redbull's allready average top speed would be even worse, at the end of the day the decrease in laptime would be the same.

i do sometimes wonder if this issue of mercedes having with out question the most powerfull engine is true. last year it was flattered by just how slippery the force india car was, and also mclarens KERS system and the brawns all round effiency. and this year force india's car has remained slippery, whilst mclaren obviously innovated the f-duct, but look at the merc....hoplessly slow in a straight line. i can gurantee the renault is no where close to being 30bhp behind id imagine it would be 10-15 at most.

KoenCalleyl
KoenCalleyl
0
Joined: 24 Aug 2010, 14:21

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

Does anyone have a medium to high-res picture of the steering wheel? An image of it is hard to find, and it would come in extremely handy for me !

Thanks in advance,
Sorry for interrupting the discussion :oops:

Koen

User avatar
Morteza
2308
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 18:23
Location: Bushehr, Iran

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

Image
"A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool."~William Shakespeare

User avatar
zgred
9
Joined: 16 Mar 2009, 13:02

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

Image

User avatar
horse
6
Joined: 23 Oct 2009, 17:53
Location: Bilbao, ES

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

This is not a new diffuser. So they must be testing the effect of changes made in light of the new floor tests.
"Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words." - Chuang Tzu

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: Red Bull RB6

Post

much helps much...that is a lot of vlowviz..are they expecting rain this weekend?