2019 Aston Martin Red Bull Racing - Honda F1 Team

[GPR-A]

Well, it's arguable isn't it. You bolt barn door rear wing and every available opportunity to bolt downforce and be fastest in corners and then pay the penalty on straights with loads of drag penalty. On the other hand, you can compromise a bit on cornering speed and NOT be so much handicapped in straights with the shedding of drag penalty. One can choose what compromise they want. Red Bull are obsessed with downforce since 2009 and they would be happy to blame the PU by showing that they are faster through corners.

In fact the opposite was the case most of the time. In a lot of races during 2018 they reduced wing induced downforce from friday to saturday because they didn't want to be vulnerable on the straights.

Also Red Bull works the diffuser harder than others and that obviously induces a bit more drag.

This is not correct. Diffuser downforce is the most efficient way to generate downforce. This is why RedBull is able to drive such shallow wings on some tracks and still are on top in corners. E.g. Monza.
https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... acin-1.jpg

Look I am not an aero expert, but I do understand some fundamental things. Any downforce is an aerodynamic effect and comes with drag penalty, unlike the Mechanical grip that a car generate for cornering speeds. It's not like Diffuser on RB gets activated in yaw and there is no impact of the diffuser's functioning in a straight line. That is why teams try hard to reduce the impact of diffuser functioning in a straight line. If a diffuser is working hard (relative to another car) and producing more downforce, it does impact more (relative to the other car) in straight line too, unless there is some magical solution to make the diffuser ineffective in straight line, which is not the case and we are talking about top 3 teams.

I am going to compare him Max to Lewis' time as it has been debated that, Kimi got benefited in S3 from Vettel's toe.
Here are quali times from Monza. Max, was 4 tenths down in S1 compared to Lewis , 3 tenths down in S2 and half a second down in S3. I am not sure where is RB's highly effective downforce with ultra thin wing playing a role here.


Here is a nice comparison image from Monza GP. Arguably, if Mercedes would have bolted the same RB wing, they would have matched RB in S2 and would have probably been close to a second faster in both S1 and S3.

[gandharva]

Any team that would be able to extract more downforce from diffuser would do it. ANY! Because it is, and probably will always be the most efficient way to generate downforce. Here is a small graphic that shows downforce/drag ratios of a modern F1 car. The picture is from 2009 so nowdays, due to wider rear wings, the downforce from the rear wing will be higher but also it's impact on drag. Same goes for tires in terms of drag. In contrary the diffuser generates huge amounts of downforce while still having a much lower impact of drag.



Slapping a bigger wing on the car is always last resort, as it simply is more inefficent. Merc and Ferrari can allow themself this, because of their superior engines compared to RedBull.

[Nonserviam85]

Well, it's arguable isn't it. You bolt barn door rear wing and every available opportunity to bolt downforce and be fastest in corners and then pay the penalty on straights with loads of drag penalty. On the other hand, you can compromise a bit on cornering speed and NOT be so much handicapped in straights with the shedding of drag penalty. One can choose what compromise they want. Red Bull are obsessed with downforce since 2009 and they would be happy to blame the PU by showing that they are faster through corners.

In fact the opposite was the case most of the time. In a lot of races during 2018 they reduced wing induced downforce from friday to saturday because they didn't want to be vulnerable on the straights.

Also Red Bull works the diffuser harder than others and that obviously induces a bit more drag.

This is not correct. Diffuser downforce is the most efficient way to generate downforce. This is why RedBull is able to drive such shallow wings on some tracks and still are on top in corners. E.g. Monza.
https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... acin-1.jpg

Look I am not an aero expert, but I do understand some fundamental things. Any downforce is an aerodynamic effect and comes with drag penalty, unlike the Mechanical grip that a car generate for cornering speeds. It's not like Diffuser on RB gets activated in yaw and there is no impact of the diffuser's functioning in a straight line. That is why teams try hard to reduce the impact of diffuser functioning in a straight line. If a diffuser is working hard (relative to another car) and producing more downforce, it does impact more (relative to the other car) in straight line too, unless there is some magical solution to make the diffuser ineffective in straight line, which is not the case and we are talking about top 3 teams.

I am going to compare him Max to Lewis' time as it has been debated that, Kimi got benefited in S3 from Vettel's toe.
Here are quali times from Monza. Max, was 4 tenths down in S1 compared to Lewis , 3 tenths down in S2 and half a second down in S3. I am not sure where is RB's highly effective downforce with ultra thin wing playing a role here.
https://i.imgur.com/BF8YA2A.png

Here is a nice comparison image from Monza GP. Arguably, if Mercedes would have bolted the same RB wing, they would have matched RB in S2 and would have probably been close to a second faster in both S1 and S3.
https://i.imgur.com/QoIU0WO.jpg

The relationship is not always linear so teams try to get the best downforce/drag ratio. The diffuser/underfloor due to their position and shape are the most efficient aerodynamic device so if you can exploit it you always get the better ratio

[ME4ME]

Buemi confirmed as reserve/simulator driver agian for 2019. Good, continuity.

[Hammerfist]

Wow. That slow corner speed of the RedBull. The only car coming remotely close is the Merc. Bit surprised that the Farrari looks relatively bad in this discipline.

Remember, ferrari was absolutely atrocious in japan in slow speed, regularly losing up to 3-4 tenths in the final sector, which is just a single chicane and a straight. Probably their untimely q3 laps have contributed to poor showing a bit more.
Also looking at RB being the fastest car on every bit of track that's not full throttle, yet still 1.3s down tells you a lot about the engine performance (lack there of).

Well, it's arguable isn't it. You bolt barn door rear wing and every available opportunity to bolt downforce and be fastest in corners and then pay the penalty on straights with loads of drag penalty. On the other hand, you can compromise a bit on cornering speed and NOT be so much handicapped in straights with the shedding of drag penalty. One can choose what compromise they want. Red Bull are obsessed with downforce since 2009 and they would be happy to blame the PU by showing that they are faster through corners. Also Red Bull works the diffuser harder than others and that obviously induces a bit more drag. Whereas Mercedes and to lesser extent Ferrari are happy to choose the compromise to take full advantage of their PU.

I always suspect the Red Bull claims of best chassis because of the fact that they bolt so much downforce and it's not like others can't, but it's about the compromise the others choose.

Look at the Rear wing in Suzuka.
https://formularapida.net/wp-content/up ... -JAPAN.jpg
https://maxf1.net/wp-content/uploads/20 ... jpg?x78659
https://i.imgur.com/ULc8MT1.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/6QuJTgI.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/giqNMhy.png


Another factor for Mercedes is, when they go for Spoon wing, they cut down on it's depth too, which reduces the surface area. Which is not the case for Red Bull.
https://i.imgur.com/TIqSrZr.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW9pYlNW4AAo-P7.jpg:large

They are making a meal out of other Renault powered cars, so their high downforce philosophy seems to work?
Perhaps I am reading you wrong, but you are making it sound like it's a bad thing.

[bill shoe]

Wow. That slow corner speed of the RedBull. The only car coming remotely close is the Merc. Bit surprised that the Farrari looks relatively bad in this discipline.

There's a thread somewhere with onboard video of RB vs. Merc vs Ferrari around one of the tight chicanes at Monaco last May. It was conspicuous that the RB was neutral and could be actively driven thru every mm of every corner, in contrast to the other cars which always had too much understeer and had to be passively driven thru the tight corners as fast as the understeer would allow.

I understand that aero is important at all speeds (even the Lowe's hairpin), but the RB advantage was so large I think it must be due to non-aero handling. Something going on with the suspension or the way the car uses the tires. The shorter wheelbase doesn't hurt. Really impressive.

[GPR-A]

They are making a meal out of other Renault powered cars, so their high downforce philosophy seems to work?
Perhaps I am reading you wrong, but you are making it sound like it's a bad thing.

The comparison was only between the RB, Merc and Ferrari for this debate and my argument is that Red Bull is NOT the best chassis and the compromise that other big teams choose to adopt.

[Bandit1216]

Wow. That slow corner speed of the RedBull. The only car coming remotely close is the Merc. Bit surprised that the Farrari looks relatively bad in this discipline.

There's a thread somewhere with onboard video of RB vs. Merc vs Ferrari around one of the tight chicanes at Monaco last May. It was conspicuous that the RB was neutral and could be actively driven thru every mm of every corner, in contrast to the other cars which always had too much understeer and had to be passively driven thru the tight corners as fast as the understeer would allow.

I understand that aero is important at all speeds (even the Lowe's hairpin), but the RB advantage was so large I think it must be due to non-aero handling. Something going on with the suspension or the way the car uses the tires. The shorter wheelbase doesn't hurt. Really impressive.

I also think there is more to it then aero only. In some speed comparisons I've seen (esp Silverstone) RB was not much faster in fast corners, slower in top speed, jet seem to reduce time lost to Merc and Ferrari somewhere. I think this can only be from apex to the 1st half of the straits and during breaking.

To me it looks like that is where they win, and we know they are good with tires. Seems to me they manage to load the tires with more radial force as apposed to merc and Fer who put more axial force into the tires. Guess RB manages to load the tires more the way the where designed. I also see pics on which the rake of RB seems to be gone at high speed and or acceleration and back under breaking.

This makes me suspect they have some mechanical trick the rest do not know of. Some sort of fric without the link from front to rear orso. All highly hypothetically

[Hammerfist]

They are making a meal out of other Renault powered cars, so their high downforce philosophy seems to work?
Perhaps I am reading you wrong, but you are making it sound like it's a bad thing.

The comparison was only between the RB, Merc and Ferrari for this debate and my argument is that Red Bull is NOT the best chassis and the compromise that other big teams choose to adopt.

Then you must also think the Renault pu is equal to a Merc or Ferrari.
To me Redbull has proven again and again they have the best chassis; they are able to run less wing than the others and still match or exceed their performance in corners. They have outperformed both Merc and Ferrari in some races too, or whenever the engine power had a lower effect.

[GPR-A]

They are making a meal out of other Renault powered cars, so their high downforce philosophy seems to work?
Perhaps I am reading you wrong, but you are making it sound like it's a bad thing.

The comparison was only between the RB, Merc and Ferrari for this debate and my argument is that Red Bull is NOT the best chassis and the compromise that other big teams choose to adopt.

Then you must also think the Renault pu is equal to a Merc or Ferrari.
To me Redbull has proven again and again they have the best chassis; they are able to run less wing than the others and still match or exceed their performance in corners. They have outperformed both Merc and Ferrari in some races too, or whenever the engine power had a lower effect.

Can you provide some data to back your claims? I did that in previous posts. For the ease of reference, I would put it out here again.

I am going to compare Max to Lewis' time as it has been debated that, Kimi got benefited in S3 from Vettel's toe.
Here are quali times from Monza. Max, was 4 tenths down in S1 compared to Lewis , 3 tenths down in S2 and half a second down in S3. I am not sure where is RB's highly effective downforce with ultra thin wing playing a role here.


Here is a nice comparison image from Monza GP. Arguably, if Mercedes would have bolted the same RB wing, they would have matched RB in S2 and would have probably been close to a second faster in both S1 and S3.


Below are images from Suzuka, a track that requires great deal of downforce. Can you tell me, where is RB running less wing?







Another factor for Mercedes is, when they go for Spoon wing, they cut down on it's depth too, which reduces the surface area. Which is not the case for Red Bull. Look at the size difference between two wings for main plane of Mercedes! The main plane in Spoon wing is almost half of their full downforce wing!




And here is the graph that Juzh posted in the previous page. This is qualifying comparison in Suzuka. (Open the image link in a new window to view full size).

[McMika98]

The comparison was only between the RB, Merc and Ferrari for this debate and my argument is that Red Bull is NOT the best chassis and the compromise that other big teams choose to adopt.

I am going to compare Max to Lewis' time as it has been debated that, Kimi got benefited in S3 from Vettel's toe.
Here are quali times from Monza. Max, was 4 tenths down in S1 compared to Lewis , 3 tenths down in S2 and half a second down in S3. I am not sure where is RB's highly effective downforce with ultra thin wing playing a role here.

Here is a nice comparison image from Monza GP. Arguably, if Mercedes would have bolted the same RB wing, they would have matched RB in S2 and would have probably been close to a second faster in both S1 and S3.

Below are images from Suzuka, a track that requires great deal of downforce. Can you tell me, where is RB running less wing?

Another factor for Mercedes is, when they go for Spoon wing, they cut down on it's depth too, which reduces the surface area. Which is not the case for Red Bull. Look at the size difference between two wings for main plane of Mercedes! The main plane in Spoon wing is almost half of their full downforce wing!
And here is the graph that Juzh posted in the previous page. This is qualifying comparison in Suzuka.

Ok dude stop ure BS arguement. Its embarrassing. Guess u dont appreciate neither aero nor mechanical grip. So Merc can gain half a second by taking more downforce off their wing what logic is that?
Its well known that Redbull makes most of laptime gains in braking, Danny Ric has mentioned it in lot of interviews. They also gain in most corners, traction off slow speed corners and marginally lose out in straights.

[GPR-A]

The comparison was only between the RB, Merc and Ferrari for this debate and my argument is that Red Bull is NOT the best chassis and the compromise that other big teams choose to adopt.

I am going to compare Max to Lewis' time as it has been debated that, Kimi got benefited in S3 from Vettel's toe.
Here are quali times from Monza. Max, was 4 tenths down in S1 compared to Lewis , 3 tenths down in S2 and half a second down in S3. I am not sure where is RB's highly effective downforce with ultra thin wing playing a role here.

Here is a nice comparison image from Monza GP. Arguably, if Mercedes would have bolted the same RB wing, they would have matched RB in S2 and would have probably been close to a second faster in both S1 and S3.

Below are images from Suzuka, a track that requires great deal of downforce. Can you tell me, where is RB running less wing?

Another factor for Mercedes is, when they go for Spoon wing, they cut down on it's depth too, which reduces the surface area. Which is not the case for Red Bull. Look at the size difference between two wings for main plane of Mercedes! The main plane in Spoon wing is almost half of their full downforce wing!
And here is the graph that Juzh posted in the previous page. This is qualifying comparison in Suzuka.

Ok dude stop ure BS arguement. Its embarrassing. Guess u dont appreciate neither aero nor mechanical grip. So Merc can gain half a second by taking more downforce off their wing what logic is that?
Its well known that Redbull makes most of laptime gains in braking, Danny Ric has mentioned it in lot of interviews. They also gain in most corners, traction off slow speed corners and marginally lose out in straights.

Living a fairy world of "RB is the best" is called BS. So stop the nonsense if you don't have anything to back your FEELINGS. Why being so touchy feely? Remember this is technical forum and your BS feelings carry no value for any argument. Post some data or just shut up. Putting out some words like "aero" or "mechanical" doesn't add any value for your post. Explain the terms with some material, let's see how knowledgeable you are. Huh.

[Capharol]

The comparison was only between the RB, Merc and Ferrari for this debate and my argument is that Red Bull is NOT the best chassis and the compromise that other big teams choose to adopt.

I am going to compare Max to Lewis' time as it has been debated that, Kimi got benefited in S3 from Vettel's toe.
Here are quali times from Monza. Max, was 4 tenths down in S1 compared to Lewis , 3 tenths down in S2 and half a second down in S3. I am not sure where is RB's highly effective downforce with ultra thin wing playing a role here.

Here is a nice comparison image from Monza GP. Arguably, if Mercedes would have bolted the same RB wing, they would have matched RB in S2 and would have probably been close to a second faster in both S1 and S3.

Below are images from Suzuka, a track that requires great deal of downforce. Can you tell me, where is RB running less wing?

Another factor for Mercedes is, when they go for Spoon wing, they cut down on it's depth too, which reduces the surface area. Which is not the case for Red Bull. Look at the size difference between two wings for main plane of Mercedes! The main plane in Spoon wing is almost half of their full downforce wing!
And here is the graph that Juzh posted in the previous page. This is qualifying comparison in Suzuka.

Ok dude stop ure BS arguement. Its embarrassing. Guess u dont appreciate neither aero nor mechanical grip. So Merc can gain half a second by taking more downforce off their wing what logic is that?
Its well known that Redbull makes most of laptime gains in braking, Danny Ric has mentioned it in lot of interviews. They also gain in most corners, traction off slow speed corners and marginally lose out in straights.

Living a fairy world of "RB is the best" is called BS. So stop the nonsense if you don't have anything to back your FEELINGS. Why being so touchy feely? Remember this is technical forum and your BS feelings carry no value for any argument. Post some data or just shut up. Putting out some words like "aero" or "mechanical" doesn't add any value for your post. Explain the terms with some material, let's see how knowledgeable you are. Huh.

1. Both calm down, we aren't in on the playground where 1 stole the other's plastic spade
2. this is a general thread not the technical part, in this thread (at least that seems likely to me) everybody can discuss about Aston Martin Red Bull Racing - Honda F1 Team, if you wanna get technical look here viewtopic.php?f=6&t=23606 for example

So if someone wants to go with his "gut" in here, it seems, he can do so freely and without always being asked for evidence.
I for myself know some "technical parts" but not that much that i can speak about it, so most of my knowledge comes from what i read or how i feel (gut feeling)

but please keep the discussion civilized

[GoranF1]

I feel so sorry for Pierre Gasly.
Reading his interviews it really seem that he expects equal treatment in RB.

[Alexf1]

Let's see how quick he is in the first race weekends