Red Bull RB7 Renault

[ESPImperium]

I was thinking, and im not sure if this has been covered yet. If the engine over-run mapping (EOM) is to be banned in the future, and if this makes the need for fuel tanks to be bigger, this could mean that Red Bull could still be ontop as they can go to a fuel tank that will still last them, but will mean one thing.

More space under the fuel tank... Meaning that they can put their KERS batteries in a much logical posistion, and still be on top as they will have a relyable KERS system with their batteries in this area. Not to mention this will make Newey go even more aggressive on the rear end aero, and posibly free up some more areas for him to develop.

Say they loose 7 tenths with the EOM being banned, but they could gain 3 tenths back thru KERS and a better CoG.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Extreme speculation there ESPI

Without knowing the figures of what they are losing, its unverifiable. Speculation is mounting as to how this will influence their rake and flexing wing concept. If it so much as dents their overall concept Red Bull will have had their advantage smothered for sure.

The question here is how will it affect the car as an overall concept. Turning to KERS at this stage is not going to get their advantage back. Indeed it would mean a redesign of the packaging when others are looking at performance jumps.

Perhaps the specualtion is OTT and Red Bull will maintian their crushing car advantage? Perhaps they anticpated it and will have somthing to compensate in true Newey fashion.

[PlatinumZealot]

All redBulls of past had large rake angles. This Toning down of EBD will not hamper them one bit! Even the RB5 was a beast without the Double deck diffuser; the RedBull's are just fundamentally good!

[BreezyRacer]

All redBulls of past had large rake angles. This Toning down of EBD will not hamper them one bit! Even the RB5 was a beast without the Double deck diffuser; the RedBull's are just fundamentally good!

I agree with your points about this new rule clarification and how it will affect RB. I see them being clearly better after this change, in relation to other teams. I expect McLaren to be most harmed by it. They have a very bulky body and a beam wing that cannot be as effective as the RB and other units. The diff/tranny sits WAY too high in the McLaren chassis .. a leftover from the double diffuser days.

[rfs]

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/05/18/r ... ing-rules/

This smells a little fishy. Do teams usually do 400km at straight-line tests? That's more than a grand-prix distance.

[CHT]

I was thinking, and im not sure if this has been covered yet. If the engine over-run mapping (EOM) is to be banned in the future, and if this makes the need for fuel tanks to be bigger, this could mean that Red Bull could still be ontop as they can go to a fuel tank that will still last them, but will mean one thing.

More space under the fuel tank... Meaning that they can put their KERS batteries in a much logical posistion, and still be on top as they will have a relyable KERS system with their batteries in this area. Not to mention this will make Newey go even more aggressive on the rear end aero, and posibly free up some more areas for him to develop.

Say they loose 7 tenths with the EOM being banned, but they could gain 3 tenths back thru KERS and a better CoG.

I have strong feeling that the main reason why teams are finding it hard to catch up with the RBR since 2009 is because Newey has designed his cars to take advantage of the slightly under powered but good fuel economy Renault engine, a concept which no rivals team (except Lotus Renault) will be able to copy due to the engine freeze rule.

So you could be right. With the ban on EOM, I think RBR will benefit more because rival teams who have been working hard on EOM to catch the RB7 will suddenly have to look into other area to gain advantage over RB7.

[LionKing]

Can't the other engine manufacturers just trade BHP with fuel efficiency?

[raymondu999]

I think with EOM being banned; the teams will all lose downforce and hence pace and grip (talk about being captain obvious here ) but I think the key thing is; who runs the EOM at a higher level? ie who is running the EOM "harder" to gain more flow from the exhausts and gain more downforce from that? That could be the key performance differentiator as those downforce gains will now be nullified (well 90% of that).

My point being, if Team A uses it more aggressively than Team B, ie runs the EOM at a higher setting, Team A will now lose a lot more than Team B. I suspect that in qualifying, Red Bull might be using their EOM the least; and the others are mapped more aggressively.

[CyleB]

keep in mind it only regulates off-throttle conditions

[raymondu999]

I know it does. But it provides a less consistent level of downforce; and less predictable; and would require a certain driving line to extract the maximum out of the EBD

[bjpower]

the rule states the throttle can only be open 10%
why not just fit a throttle body much larger than the current one?.
everythings controlled by the ecu so im sure its not that hard to do.
you just have to programm it that the 10% opening = 100% flow


come to think of it. i remember working on a audi 100 that ( for some reason) the throttle body had 2 inlets one large and one small. the small would open first then the larger.

there are always ways of thinking around the rules

[raymondu999]

I don't think it will be that arbitrary; I think (I could be wrong) that it's 10% of maximum; ie 1,800 RPM.

[hollowBallistix]

I don't think it will be that arbitrary; I think (I could be wrong) that it's 10% of maximum; ie 1,800 RPM.

It wouldn't translate though would it ? seeing as it depends on what gear the car is in & what the actual corner speed is ? I would imagine most corners are taken at more than 10% throttle.

I was of the understanding that the cars during over-run or braking are having more fuel put into the engine so the excess fuel is being burned off & used to keep a constant flow to the EBD to make the cars more stable, surely this can be done through the ECU without anything showing on throttle input ?

[Dragonfly]

keep in mind it only regulates off-throttle conditions

And the driver can theoretically hold the pedal pressed while braking. Thus not being off-throttle.
I think that the rules do not impose absolute linear function of the pair pedal-throttle. They only say that 0 and 100% throttle must correspond to the pedal position at both extremes.
But I think that actual mapping can be adjusted to driver's preferences - linear or like logarithmic/exponential.

[aral]

I don't think it will be that arbitrary; I think (I could be wrong) that it's 10% of maximum; ie 1,800 RPM.

I understood that tickover speed on an F1 engine was around 4-5k.