Infiniti Red Bull Racing 2015

[djos]

If the Front wing is broken why it wasn't replaced at first place

That is the question.

I guess they thought there was more time to be lost replacing it versus staying out.

[aleks_ader]

If the Front wing is broken why it wasn't replaced at first place

Because they dint lose more than a 10s+(change in the pitstop)+deficit until pitstop (to not pit early and compromise tire strategy). Let say he could lose on overall race distance "just" 14s and that could easily be justified not to change it...

[djos]

Djos

Your point would be more valid had Red Bull changed the wing. They didn't.

Its also an issue that didn't affect the other Red bull car.
The only problem worth discussing are the brakes.

Because from this weekend, you say its Ricciardo's wing, Renault's engine, Kvyat not being as good as the 2 rookie Torro Rosso drivers, brakes (some substance here), strategy... basically anything but the obvious.

Those Torro Rosso's looked quicker, better balanced with more traction. That simply does not happen in the hands of 2 rookies in comparison with 2 other guys with a combined 5 seasons experience.

Basically, this thread got interesting because Red Bull pointed the finger at Renault as the raison d'etre for all their problems. I think yourself and Juzh still believe Renault to be the cause of all Red bulls problems.

If it weren't for Torro Rosso, We'd have no reference point for Renault.
But we do.
And the sorry fact is, Red Bull are not any better chassis wise than Torro Rosso.

Therefore any remarks pointed into Renaults direction due to their failings, whilst giving Red Bull a free pass can be construed as hypocritical.

I'm afraid our opinions continue to be divergent - i still contend we need a clean race to properly judge the rb11 against the TR.

[Harsha]

If the Front wing is broken why it wasn't replaced at first place

That is the question.

I guess they thought there was more time to be lost replacing it versus staying out.

Ok if we take that into equation that means the Loss was minimal on entire race than the time to change in the pits. But we heard that its getting worse on the same lap or previous lap where Kvyat was tagged and spun by Nico Hulkenberg. (Lap 26 iirc). So why they haven't changed it if the damage is getting high.

[FoxHound]

I still don't understand why someone from the Red Bull/Renault camp hasn't just come out and said:

"We were too busy winning four straight World Championships to go all-in on the 2014 regulations like Mercedes did."

It's (mostly) honest, nothing to be ashamed of, and, perhaps most importantly, it's a vastly superior PR strategy than whining to whoever will listen.

Credit where it's due, Ben.

I heard no Renault bashing this weekend. I think Red Bull were tardy in realising the distaste fans had for this debacle.
Check any comments section of an online newspaper, and there was a massive backlash.
Adam Cooper, Pablo Elizalde and loads of other notable F1 journo's all tweeted stories surrounding Red Bull's public criticism of Renault, the comments to the tweets were....Well lets say Red Bull may have reading the gist and have changed tack PR wise.

[djos]

Regardless of whether or not Renault deserved an ear boxing, rbr did go a bit overboard.

[FoxHound]

I'm afraid our opinions continue to be divergent - i still contend we need a clean race to properly judge the rb11 against the TR.

My post does not absolve Renault. They are well behind at this stage and it is affecting both Red Bull and Torro Rosso.

[Phil]

Regarding RedBull and the Renault power unit:

My take is that turning on RedBull and dismissing their criticism towards the power unit because Torro-Rosso is doing a better job currently to be a bit too simple. The power unit is a major component of the car. That means that a lot of planing is made around it - from how it is (needs) to be packaged into the car, the cooling requirements etc. Now, Torro-Rosso may have a good package which probably makes them perform great relative; on the other hand, I think it is clear RedBull are underperforming relative to their potential. The reasons for that are probably quite deep; IMO, I think they once again are pushing the limits in regards to packaging and thought the Renault unit would handle it. As a result; RedBull + Renault as a package are not performing.

Anyway, I don't think Malaysia was a particular good race to judge Torro-Rosso vs. RedBull. RedBull had huge issues with the brakes for what ever reason and if the brakes don't work properly, you can't expect their drivers to perform at the expected level because they are battling in a severly compromised car. At such, the criticism towards Ricciardo vs. TorroRossos two inexperienced glorious drivers is ridiculous.

I expect RedBull to perform better as the season progresses - their expertise in building good cars is undisputed and I think they'll iron out their issues. At least I hope. Much depends on how the relationship between RedBull and Renault continues. If Renault is starting to be more interested in aquiring a team like TR, they might be less focused on making sure their current "works-team" sorts itself out, which, would be bad for RedBull. It's key now for the both of them to work together and find a solution to what is causing them to underperform.

[Juzh]

I'm afraid our opinions continue to be divergent - i still contend we need a clean race to properly judge the rb11 against the TR.

My post does not absolve Renault. They are well behind at this stage and it is affecting both Red Bull and Torro Rosso.

At least we got that sorted.
But I hate to break it to you, RB IS faster than TR. Not by much (in malaysia anyway), but it is. Race result might not show it, but guess what, merc was also ultimately faster than ferrari and look how that turned out

[rgava]

In my oppinion, the Red Bull approach to the desing of the car was the best in the "engine frozen" era, where the instalation requirements were well known and they had to maximize chassis and aero desing while dealing with very well defined cooling requirements.
Today, as the performance of the engine is closely related to its installation, their approach is not working and I think it will not change soon.

[FoxHound]

My post does not absolve Renault. They are well behind at this stage and it is affecting both Red Bull and Torro Rosso.

At least we got that sorted.
But I hate to break it to you, RB IS faster than TR. Not by much (in malaysia anyway), but it is. Race result might not show it, but guess what, merc was also ultimately faster than ferrari and look how that turned out

This is precisely why the mods get involved. How can I respond cordially to the above?
I'll try.

Of course Renault have blame, we have all known this since last year. But you are absolving Red Bull of any blame, with Renault the target for your vitriol. This is not accurate in the slightest.
As for the breaking it to me that Red Bull is faster than TR....well, over a lap they are JUST, by a gnats ball hair.

Kvyat's fastest lap of the race was 1m44.510 lap 41
Verstappen's fastest lap was 1m44.580 lap42
Ricciardo's fastest lap was 1m45.370 lap 36
Sainz fastest lap was 1m45.500 lap 37

Both headline times are separated by a difference of of 0.070 seconds. Is this your justification that Red bull are quicker?
Over a lap, this difference is so negligible that other factors than outright pace come into play.

Torro Rosso's lap charts look far more linear than the spiky Red Bull lap charts. But I'll be gracious here and cede that to Red Bull's brake troubles.
But overall, there is nothing between these 2 teams, that both use the same engine.

So my point regarding Red Bull and their chassis/aero having some part of the problem is clear.
As another poster said prior to me(somewhere here or on the GP thread),
Either Torro Rosso have made unheard of progress in chassis/aero development that puts them on par with Red bull, OR Red Bull have in fact got chassis/aero troubles of their own which has seen them fall back to Torro Rosso.

And rather neatly, the Mercedes Ferrari times are also dealt with on the link that shows all the lap data:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2015/03/29/m ... t-ferrari/

I'm playing nice, so leave the personal bullshit out of it that we can at least find some common ground here.

[Juzh]

But you are absolving Red Bull of any blame, with Renault the target for your vitriol. This is not accurate in the slightest.

I'm really not. Precisely because of TR. And I haven't done so at all this season. I was merely pointing out renault's deficiencies, but I never said they're "slow" JUST because of it. I already pointed out TRs aero performance in the race thread.

And rather neatly, the Mercedes Ferrari times are also dealt with on the link that shows all the lap data:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2015/03/29/m ... t-ferrari/

They couldn't sustain pace, but their ultimate pace was obviously better. Much like I said.

[FoxHound]

What of Red Bull's chassis and aero performance?

Would you say that it is up to the Red Bull norm of 2010/11/12/13/14?

[Juzh]

I never said that, did I. It's obviously not.

[miguelalvesreis]

But you are absolving Red Bull of any blame, with Renault the target for your vitriol. This is not accurate in the slightest.

I'm really not. Precisely because of TR. And I haven't done so at all this season. I was merely pointing out renault's deficiencies, but I never said they're "slow" JUST because of it. I already pointed out TRs aero performance in the race thread.

And rather neatly, the Mercedes Ferrari times are also dealt with on the link that shows all the lap data:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2015/03/29/m ... t-ferrari/

They couldn't sustain pace, but their ultimate pace was obviously better. Much like I said.

That's probably the interesting point! Different strategies may lead to different best laps. Combination of usage of tires and fuel levels, different moments in the race were the've used the option tire may lead to that. If not, if we are only seeing best laps, the Ros would be the winner. A full second faster then Ham! 2 laps before!
Exactly, Ros was on option on is last stint and Ham was on primes. Vet was on primes too.

I really do not know if with different strategy Ham or Ros would be able to win this one. Probably so but, most likely was 33% chance on any of those 3.

Was one of those races were everything played favorobly towards Ferrari, that's for sure. On raw pace on "normal" conditions there's still a gap!