Red Bull RB8 Renault

[raymondu999]

But the second pic is from today's testing right?

No. That's from Canada practice. It's Vettel in the helmet, and the sidepods are Canada-spec, as you can see.

So there's does state that on thursday and Friday the car will be scrutinised, which means ur car must be legal

Scrutinised, just that there's no penalty for an illegal car on Friday.

[krisfx]

Aero rakes? You lost me there

An aero rake is just a name for the metal fencing I think, because it looks a bit like a rake, you're just fighting for something not worth fighting for, in any case there's people proving your points wrong so let it go so we can get back on topic.

Also RE: Flexi nose cone, if Red Bull have found a loophole in the regs that allows this, let them exploit it rather than criticising the engineering. I'm in no way a fan of Red Bull, but the whole flexing wing debate just completely destroys every thread on here these days.

[hollus]

Nobody is criticizing the engineering, quite the opposite!
There might have been a point in questioning the legality of flexing front wings one or two years ago, but since then the FIA has been quite clear: if you pass the deflection test, you are legal, and all teams had time to redesign their wings according to this constraint. Obviously Red Bull has made the most of it, whether that nose tip is bending or not, broken or not.

[JackHammer]

In the 2012 tech regs

2.4 Compliance with the regulations :
Automobiles must comply with these regulations in their entirety at all times during an Event.

And from my RB6 Haynes manual, page 160
"The car must be 'race-legal' during Friday practice, so no parts or data-logging systems can be fitted that do not conform to FIA regulations"

[aral]

This thread seems to have descended into total farce. First of all, all the theories about a bendy nose, now discussion on testing equipment.

Why can there not be sensible discussion about the actual car, as raced?

[Intego]

I just want to put one last thing, because I wondered how MGP could test their FW f-duct last year with the illegal use of the nose hole (for driver cooling only). As so often I found the info on Scarbs' blog:

It could be legally run in a Friday practice session, as teams are given some leeway to test parts which might otherwise be unacceptable to the scrutineers. As long as the parts aren’t run for qualifying, then apparently illegal parts can get limited Friday running.

[siskue2005]

I just want to put one last thing, because I wondered how MGP could test their FW f-duct last year with the illegal use of the nose hole (for driver cooling only). As so often I found the info on Scarbs' blog:

It could be legally run in a Friday practice session, as teams are given some leeway to test parts which might otherwise be unacceptable to the scrutineers. As long as the parts aren’t run for qualifying, then apparently illegal parts can get limited Friday running.

thanks that sums it up

and also ends the speculation that RBR run illegal hydrolics suspension/ ride height adjuster in free practice....coz surely FIA wont allow such gizmo, they can give some leeway but this is too much of an ask

[Forza]

You mean this?
...
I have never seen anyone run this in free practice

I mean something like these: (images from Canada 2012 Friday practice)
http://www.formula1.com/wi/gi/0x0/TSCM/ ... cdn428.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Dp68yk1Ww_c/T ... roRake.jpg

Ok so now I get it
But the second pic is from today's testing right?

No these are from ABD testing today and they've used bigger version of that aero rake:

[Shrieker]

Great post by bhallg2k here

I've been thinking the same for a long time. He sums it up really nice.

http://postimage.org/image/6cphjyq2z/

I think what we see here is not only because of contact damage (assuming Vettel actually hit the DRS sign with the nose and/or camera - Siskue arguably has some evidence that he hit with the camera). But as I said, I think what we see in the gif is not only contact damage. The nose probably has a quite dramatic built in flex, it's just been exaggerated(broken) when Vettel hits the DRS sign. Quite plausible imho.

[CottrellGP]

What it this does anyone know? or has it already been shown?

...

[Mazdaboy]

Full video in italian:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGX8dXPoXvI[/youtube]

[mx_tifoso]

Every gif and video has already been posted multiple times.... check the last few pages.

[siskue2005]

What it this does anyone know? or has it already been shown?

Check pages from 258

[Matt Somers]

Since Singapore I've had the urge to float the idea that Red Bull were using their new Nose/Front Wing in a way that could replicate the Mass Damper effect. I held back as I couldn't find any substantial proof, however after watching the GP yesterday (was working Sunday) I went off to work on article looking at the potential for it: http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/ ... -fall.html

[f1316]

Since Singapore I've had the urge to float the idea that Red Bull were using their new Nose/Front Wing in a way that could replicate the Mass Damper effect. I held back as I couldn't find any substantial proof, however after watching the GP yesterday (was working Sunday) I went off to work on article looking at the potential for it: http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/ ... -fall.html

So under what ruling was the mass damper deemed illegal and how, if at all, does this relate to the RB FW?