2023 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[kediown]

I thought they were front limited . Wasn't that why Australia, Austria, Brazil was so bad?

To be fair on Austria and Brazil there were reports saying Redbull were getting heavier (in Austria because of upgrades, in Brazil because of using spare parts, also them being sprint weekends didn't help them as well) and Australia they messed up their set-up, at least that's what they told to the press.

Austria and Aus were setup problems. Brazil was heavier parts due to component life

Ferrari had superior rear tyre deg at Spain due to rear limitation there for the rb18

You're right, it wasn't spare parts but heavier parts due to component life, I mixed the words up. I recall seeing an article from AMuS talking about they gained weight again by the upgrades they brought in Austria, also some things about floor not working well with the RW they had in Austria.
Anyway, now our time is RB19, let's see how awesome this car is compared to RB18

[dialtone]

I thought they were front limited . Wasn't that why Australia, Austria, Brazil was so bad?

To be fair on Austria and Brazil there were reports saying Redbull were getting heavier (in Austria because of upgrades, in Brazil because of using spare parts, also them being sprint weekends didn't help them as well) and Australia they messed up their set-up, at least that's what they told to the press.

Austria and Aus were setup problems. Brazil was heavier parts due to component life

Ferrari had superior rear tyre deg at Spain due to rear limitation there for the rb18

Wasn't it the front tires even in Spain? Spain isn't very rear limited, except for some traction and mechanical grip in S3, however where Max was losing pace was in S2 with the fast front limited corners. For the first few laps he could hang, but then started losing performance primarily in S2 and fell back until Charles engine blew up.

[AR3-GP]

What I recall all season was the front tires being the first to go on the RB18. It's what Checo said as well.

[chrisc90]

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYfS3pdt/

Nice little ‘tour’ of RB HQ.

[AR3-GP]

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYfS3pdt/

Nice little ‘tour’ of RB HQ.

Thanks for the rabbit hole

[MDrop17]

Rb18 didn't do too well at rear-limited tracks and it seems the rb19 is a bit of a monster here so far - very impressive development

I thought they were front limited . Wasn't that why Australia, Austria, Brazil was so bad?

Perez made a comment about destroying the front tires last season.

"I think the rear has just taken a step in a worse direction. But I think at the end of the day, it's good, because I think last year, the tyres were really terrible.

"The front was degrading, while the rear was staying fairly consistent, and it was just getting worse and worse.

-https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/pe ... r-AA18aRJj

The RB18 really was relatively confusing/poor at the start of last season. In both traction and understeer.

I also think that the reason they performed poorly at Austria and Brazil were because those were sprint race weekends and they only had FP1 to find the right setup before going into Parc Ferme. Maybe the RB18 had a relatively small setup window, and when they're not in it, they are eating up their tyres.

[organic]

Keeping up with AMR in a development race will be tough with how much wind tunnel time they have. Need to make the early races count in that regard. Hopefully their strategy/pitstops aren't up to scratch and that will help

One thing that does give me hope is that quite a lot of the car is an obvious carryover from last season. They have saved budget doing that so hopefully a bit more freed up for updates

[taperoo2k]

Keeping up with AMR in a development race will be tough with how much wind tunnel time they have. Need to make the early races count in that regard. Hopefully their strategy/pitstops aren't up to scratch and that will help

One thing that does give me hope is that quite a lot of the car is an obvious carryover from last season. They have saved budget doing that so hopefully a bit more freed up for updates

It's the production of parts that costs more than the design and testing process in the wind tunnel. You have to be sure the design is the right way to go before you commit to building the parts given the cost cap.

[AR3-GP]

Keeping up with AMR in a development race will be tough with how much wind tunnel time they have. Need to make the early races count in that regard. Hopefully their strategy/pitstops aren't up to scratch and that will help

One thing that does give me hope is that quite a lot of the car is an obvious carryover from last season. They have saved budget doing that so hopefully a bit more freed up for updates

It's the production of parts that costs more than the design and testing process in the wind tunnel. You have to be sure the design is the right way to go before you commit to building the parts given the cost cap.

Yes but does AM look like they are struggling with correlation?

[PhillipM]

What? Parts are peanuts compared to testing and development. The labour alone would bury production costs. That's what makes you laugh when people complain about crashed cars affecting their budgets, it's peanuts compared to operational and dev costs.

[taperoo2k]

What? Parts are peanuts compared to testing and development. The labour alone would bury production costs. That's what makes you laugh when people complain about crashed cars affecting their budgets, it's peanuts compared to operational and dev costs.

I've seen parts being made in an F1 factory, the carbon fibre process is complex and takes a lot of time. Then you have the cost of running the autoclaves to cure the resin etc, get that part of the process wrong then it costs even more. The estimated cost of a front wing is around $150,000 (could be less, could be more than that) and they have to be replaced several times during a season. What teams don't want is parts damaged beyond repair before they reach the end of use. They need parts to last for as long as possible under the cost cap. Which is why they complain when a driver crashes a car and multiple parts have to be binned. You could quite easily have to spend several hundred thousand dollars or even more if the Tub is cracked beyond repair and needs to be replaced if it's a big crash.

If a design doesn't work as intended, not only has a team wasted time and money on CFD and the wind tunnel, they've also wasted it on the production of parts that don't work.

[organic]

Right that may all be true, but you said the production costs more than the design/testing which isn't true

[mendis]

What? Parts are peanuts compared to testing and development. The labour alone would bury production costs. That's what makes you laugh when people complain about crashed cars affecting their budgets, it's peanuts compared to operational and dev costs.

No. People work 40 hours a week (plus overtime) and round the year. They cost the same. The development tools like wind tunnel, CFD and everything else keeps running throughout the year and costs the same. Crashing loses valuable time on the track and data. Losing parts, is an overhead to reproduce spares, which would compromise other development part manufacturing and forces overtime labor to produce the development components . Yes, crashes pinch an unnecessary hole in the pocket.

[AR3-GP]

What did RB say after the session?

[kediown]

There is some optimism at Red Bull regarding yesterday's long runs, with an eye on the race. Tire degradation Alonso was much higher.

So they really think Alonso will be faster than Ferrari boys?