Red Bull RB8 Renault

[Robbobnob]

If it has something to do whit the exhaust resonator chamber it could effect Ferrari as well!????

No it has to do with the torque supplied by the engine in the mid range is less than the maximum torque that the engine can produce in this range. As previous RBR engine maps have proven that the engine is capable of delivering more torque in this specified rpm range it is seen as a breach of 5.5.3. (which is posted earlier in the thread).

IMO this is certainly a modification made to either reduce the wear on the tyres, or a wet weather engine map.

[amc]

I don't understand how the 'wrong engine map' can be human error. It takes a couple of minutes with a laptop connected to the car to upload an engine map. With the rules as they are this map should not exist, so 'accidentally uploading' it is somewhat suspicious.

Let's not forget though that when they put a hole in the floor in front of the rear tyre they went through three races with a car that broke the regulations. In this case the rules were 'clarified' so if Red Bull can claim they didn't understand the rules (yeah right) they will again get away with it.

I'm not surprised Christian Horner denied all knowlegde, as what else is he going to say: "Yes, we deliberately tried to gain an unfair advantage and still only qualified second and third well behind a legal and much faster car."

[bill shoe]

What does 5.5.3 mean by "maximum torque"? Does it mean max torque possible by the engine at that rpm, or does it mean max torque allowed by that specific engine map at that rpm?

If you assume the latter then 5.5.3 doesn't really have any purpose for existing. Therefore, the existance of 5.5.3 implies that "maximum torque" means something like "max torque possible".

However, we all know it's OK to lean out an engine map for fuel savings, and this obviously results in the engine making merely the "max torque allowed" by the engine map rather than the "max torque possible".

I think once again the rules are poorly written and internally inconsistent. This is not RB defence, just noting that it's not really possible to interpret or enforce most of the rules much less the technical bulletins.


NonNewtonic you described the possible aero benefit quite well, I was confused until I read your post.

[funkyfreddy]

Wish we knew the full wording of the TD! it seems how it is mentioned in the technical report, that Jo Bauer believes that this engine map when combined with other elements of the car is in breach of this TD.

This possibly means that other aspects of the car also could be considered to breach the TD - such as the new exhaust chamber.

[CottrellGP]

I thought i could hear the engine blowing when i was watching yesterday.

[turbof1]

If it is a technical infringement, they will be most likely disqualified. We can remember the Sauber cars last year being stripped off their points b/c of a blatantly small infringement which didn't gave any advantage, so I fear Red Bull will get the same treatment.

Or of course a changement in the mappings and starting from the pitlane.

[Joie de vivre]

this engine mapping is realy annoying. if everyone can do it without it, why cant they?

i hope they get punished

[Dragonfly]

this engine mapping is realy annoying. if everyone can do it without it, why cant they?

i hope they get punished

Yeah, bring back carburetors and and spark distributors

[alogoc]

Autosprint says on twitter that it's almost certain that Red Bull will be forced to start from the pitlane.

[mep]

I wonder how the FIA wants to know for sure how much torque the engine produces at a certain rpm?
A sound recording is not enough in my opinion. However I agree that the engine has a special sound in low rpm's. I noticed that in Silverstone and heard it again yesterday. Where this can be caused by a wet engine map where less torque is required to keep control of the car. Other than that it can be caused by the helmolz resonator. Therefore I wonder if a sound proof can be valid.

[alogoc]

The FIA ​​has published the grid unchanged

[thestig84]

I dont think the grid being published unchanged means this is over.

[alogoc]

Niki Lauda says he talked to Marko and he said there was no problem for Red Bull

[myurr]

I wonder how the FIA wants to know for sure how much torque the engine produces at a certain rpm?
A sound recording is not enough in my opinion. However I agree that the engine has a special sound in low rpm's. I noticed that in Silverstone and heard it again yesterday. Where this can be caused by a wet engine map where less torque is required to keep control of the car. Other than that it can be caused by the helmolz resonator. Therefore I wonder if a sound proof can be valid.

Would the ECU not be recording the torque produced by the engine? I'm presuming there is a sensor on the car capable of measuring that...

The FIA letter specifically mentions comparing the torque produced in that engine map as that produced at other venues, so the FIA must have a fairly accurate way of measuring the engine torque.

[mep]

The way to measure that is putting the car or engine on a dyno which I have never seen on an a GP. There is no sensor on the engine to measure torque directly as this is also not so simple to do.