Red Bull RB11 Renault

[lio007]

Comparison from an other angle: new vs. old

[Jolle]

I was watching some onboard shots from the RB11 with the camera at the front inner wheel. I don't know if anybody else noticed the big rotation of the upright under braking. At first it looked like torsion from the wishbones, but because it was so consistent (the same amount of degrees of rotation every time and quite instant), It looks like some kind of anti-dive system

[f1rules]

this is a big update from rb, that bulge on the engine cover, seems to disrupt the clean airflow they where trying to achive before ? a total change in rear aero concept, by the looks of it?

theyve actually followed the mclaren route more with the new sidepod layout, except they had to increase the engine cover size, to deal with the heat, since theyve reduced the sidepods,

[lio007]

Nice view on the new shaped cooling exit at the rear:

[henra]

this is a big update from rb, that bulge on the engine cover, seems to disrupt the clean airflow they where trying to achive before ? a total change in rear aero concept, by the looks of it?

Indeed weird. Looks almost like an un-improvement. Atleast I have some difficulties understanding how it would improve airflow to the critical central diffuser area.

[f1316]

this is a big update from rb, that bulge on the engine cover, seems to disrupt the clean airflow they where trying to achive before ? a total change in rear aero concept, by the looks of it?

Indeed weird. Looks almost like an un-improvement. Atleast I have some difficulties understanding how it would improve airflow to the critical central diffuser area.

Whilst I'm reluctant to comment on how an upgrade *looks* (I don't have Cfd eyes) the comment from ricciardo that they are lost (http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/ ... ll-is-lost) makes me inclined to agree that this may not be the best direction. Reminds me of Ferrari in recent years: lots of updates but no real benefit .

The shot of the rear there actually reminds me of the Williams; perhaps they're thinking of an aero efficient/low drag approach (rather than max downforce) in order to reduce engine deficit?

[Blackout]

[FrukostScones]

[scarbs]

http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Red ... 871077.jpg

You can't see it here but there are two flaps joining the rear of the new turning vanes

[timbo]

Comparison from an other angle: new vs. old

http://i58.tinypic.com/2w4edtu.jpg

Hmm, the differences are surprisingly little. Of course Newey has always relied on refinement and iterative development, and the resolution of the image makes finding details hard, but it does not look like they made a lot of development compared to last year's car.

[JDC123]

Was Kvyat only running the updated sidepods?

[lio007]

Was Kvyat only running the updated sidepods?

In FP1 only Kvyat ran the new sidepods, from FP2 onwards both cars.

[Morteza]

Red Bull RB11 - revised turning vanes



© Giorgio Piola

Red Bull introduced various updates in Canada, particularly on the brakes to improve reliability and also to help on the aerodynamic side. In the end, their two cars qualified and raced with different specifications of turning vanes under the front part of the chassis. Both drivers tested the new one on Friday, but only Kvyat qualified and raced it. This version is quite a similar solution to that on the Toro Rosso and is designed to channel airflow under the chassis to the rear of the floor where most of the downforce on an F1 car is generated. There are three elements to the new design. Ricciardo used the standard configuration (inset) with only two elements and a curved end to the turning vane.

[tomazy]

I war reviewing the results of the Canadian qualification times and compared them with last years times. Only 2 teams had slower time this year than last year and one of them is Red Bull by 0.3s. The other one is McLaren by 0.1s.

I think it is safe to say, that it is not only the engine that is the problem... or is it? Toro Rosso was only 0.1s faster than last year, Lotus that made a switch to Mercedes this year was 1.5s faster...

So I went and compared Monaco qualifying where engine is not as important and Red Bull had the least faster time of all the teams exept Marussia that was slower this year.

So what was my conclusion of all this?
The engine is bad, but the chassis is not so good as one would expect from Red Bull either.

[rayden]

I war reviewing the results of the Canadian qualification times and compared them with last years times. Only 2 teams had slower time this year than last year and one of them is Red Bull by 0.3s. The other one is McLaren by 0.1s.

I think it is safe to say, that it is not only the engine that is the problem... or is it? Toro Rosso was only 0.1s faster than last year, Lotus that made a switch to Mercedes this year was 1.5s faster...

So I went and compared Monaco qualifying where engine is not as important and Red Bull had the least faster time of all the teams exept Marussia that was slower this year.

So what was my conclusion of all this?
The engine is bad, but the chassis is not so good as one would expect from Red Bull either.

I don't know. I mean, looking at how they went at monaco I think they have a very good chassis this year too.