Alonso drives Renault R25 at Yas Marina Circuit

[haza]

Apparently the Renault r25 did a 1.39 on softs tyres today can anyone confirm?

[PlatinumZealot]

1:40.2 or so.

Add DRS
Lower wider front wing
Better bargeboards
MGUK
More optimized tyres.
More set up time

And it would give these new cars a run for their money.

[Mogster]

With less aero is the R25 faster in a straight line? From the onboard it looks slower in the corners.

Surprising Alonso would push so hard.

[jjn9128]

With less aero is the R25 faster in a straight line? From the onboard it looks slower in the corners.

Surprising Alonso would push so hard.

It's on the Pirelli "demo" compound tyres which accounts for some of the deficit.

[baybars]

Apparently the Renault r25 did a 1.39 on softs tyres today can anyone confirm?

yes

Alonso switched to a soft compound of tyre during his latest run on Saturday, and Renault data suggests that he lapped in the 1m39s region.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/alon ... =widget-22

[Mchamilton]

Apparently the Renault r25 did a 1.39 on softs tyres today can anyone confirm?

Not a massive suprise, turns 4/5/6 it should be better than the modern cars and all of the last sector too.

[Steven]

With less aero is the R25 faster in a straight line? From the onboard it looks slower in the corners.

Surprising Alonso would push so hard.

It's on the Pirelli "demo" compound tyres which accounts for some of the deficit.

Those tyres are still a whole lot smaller than the current ones.
But, exactly that might explain how the car is maybe very quick on the straight as well.
Pity they didn't have a set of Michelins lying around somewhere

In any case, the car looks and sounds quicker than today's cars, imho.

[Mogster]

With less aero is the R25 faster in a straight line? From the onboard it looks slower in the corners.

Surprising Alonso would push so hard.

It's on the Pirelli "demo" compound tyres which accounts for some of the deficit.

Weren’t the narrow 2005 cars the fastest in a straight line ever? Maldo exceeded 270kph at Monza iirc.

[Scorpaguy]

Nice watching the shorter wheelbase/narrower stance twitch and prance around...even in a straight line. I have said it before, all F1 needs today is to chop off a metre in length, half of such in width!

[JordanMugen]

Nice watching the shorter wheelbase/narrower stance twitch and prance around...even in a straight line. I have said it before, all F1 needs today is to chop off a metre in length, half of such in width!

Agreed about the length, but F1 cars are supposed to be 2.15m wide, not 2m and definitely not 1.8m. The narrow cars always looked squashed to me.


Wiiiiideee load coming through.


It just looks squashed and all wrong, don't you agree!?

[jjn9128]

Agreed about the length, but F1 cars are supposed to be 2.15m wide, not 2m and definitely not 1.8m. The narrow cars always looked squashed to me.

It just looks squashed and all wrong, don't you agree!?

You deliberately picked the ugliest narrow track Renault you could find for that comparison didn't you I'd say the 1997 were probably the last well proportioned cars.

I also think the chassis width should never have been increased to 1.6m with the 2017 changes, just amplified the same problems as before with wheel wake and floor - the very reason for narrow track cars was to slow the cars by making the wheel wakes go under the floor. The result is that they need the complex bargeboards to push all that crap outboard making the wake wider. Just the FIA and their lack of common sense/joined up thinking.

[Mogster]

Nice watching the shorter wheelbase/narrower stance twitch and prance around...even in a straight line. I have said it before, all F1 needs today is to chop off a metre in length, half of such in width!

Agreed about the length, but F1 cars are supposed to be 2.15m wide, not 2m and definitely not 1.8m. The narrow cars always looked squashed to me.

https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... t-re40.jpg
Wiiiiideee load coming through.

https://o.aolcdn.com/images/dims3/GLOB/ ... 89_opt.jpg
It just looks squashed and all wrong, don't you agree!?

Agree. I think it depends on when you started to watch the sport though...

As I said earlier the 1.8m cars with skinny tyres looked like F2 cars to me, but I started watching in the 80s when the cars were wider than they are now. For me the 2m cars with the wide tyres look like F1 cars again, they are too long now though, I do agree with that. I think there’s a general acceptance that the cars look pretty good now, you don’t hear the complaints about the cars being ugly that were common 10 years ago.

[Sevach]

With less aero is the R25 faster in a straight line? From the onboard it looks slower in the corners.

Surprising Alonso would push so hard.

It's on the Pirelli "demo" compound tyres which accounts for some of the deficit.

Those tyres are still a whole lot smaller than the current ones.
But, exactly that might explain how the car is maybe very quick on the straight as well.
Pity they didn't have a set of Michelins lying around somewhere

In any case, the car looks and sounds quicker than today's cars, imho.

F1 "evolved" in the wrong direction, with the limos and extra weight.
With the cooler more rubbered in conditions of Q3 and more setup work (the car was never suppoused to run on these tires, with "pirelli safe" pressures), it would probably shave a decent amount of time too, give Latifi a run for his money lol.

[Big Tea]

The answer to cars looking narrow, is to shorten them too

[Scorpaguy]

https://grandretro.com/uploads/2017/11/ ... ?10226[img][/img]

...these dimensions seem just about perfect.