2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Joel709]

My point is that the device could have existed for a number of legal purposes, not necessarily with the intent to break the rules.
For example:
Optimization during assembly: The device could have been used to help adjust the car’s setup before the car enters parc fermé conditions (i.e., before qualifying). Teams are allowed to make various setup changes during free practice sessions, and this device might have been used to fine-tune the car’s height or floor configuration during those times.

Manufacturing flexibility: It’s possible the device was designed to help with the build process or assembly tolerances. Teams aim to make extremely precise adjustments during car construction, and the device might have helped them achieve that level of precision before the car is locked into parc fermé.

In summary, just because the device existed doesn't necessarily mean it was designed to break the rules. It likely had a legitimate purpose for car setup during legal periods, but after rival teams and the FIA raised concerns about its potential for misuse, Red Bull agreed to modify it to avoid any controversy.

In addition, they were supposedly not even allowed to use it in Singapore, even though their performance there didn't drop, as Max finished 2nd.

Exactly this, I feel this was an anticipatory rule change incase they had managed to find a way to use it during a race. I think the consequences would be much more severe had they used it that way in a past GP

[FittingMechanics]

It could explain Verstappens mega pole lap in Spa, then his very average race pace the following day?

A bit of a stretch. Qualifying was mixed-rainy conditions and Max couldn't really show his best pace on the race because of the starting position.

A race like Singapore is actually more "telling". Max had pretty good pace in qualifying for a car that at points was losing ~1s per lap in the first stint against Lando.

Austria too

0,4 advantage in Qualifying…ends up having to battle Norris!

It could also explain why McLaren was faster compared to Red Bull at end of thr race when you get closest to qualifying weight. For example Imola and Austria.

Red Bull was able to run low in qualy and start ahead, have good pace in early stints but lose pace at the end of the race.

[FittingMechanics]

Btw if this is visible in open source documents that the teams can see then they can pinpoint when that design came into effect. I am very interested whether this is something new or maybe they had it for a while (2023?).

Not sure how to treat it if it ends up being on the car longer. Hard to prove it was used but then again, if you have a "cheating device" isn't that already illegal? If Mercedes wheel could DAS today it would be illegal even if they don't use it.

[Joel709]

Btw if this is visible in open source documents that the teams can see then they can pinpoint when that design came into effect. I am very interested whether this is something new or maybe they had it for a while (2023?).

Not sure how to treat it if it ends up being on the car longer. Hard to prove it was used but then again, if you have a "cheating device" isn't that already illegal? If Mercedes wheel could DAS today it would be illegal even if they don't use it.

Everyone has access to the spec of the bib and such, however if they saw pieces that could be used in a way as described than it would be flagged, it’s likely been seen by the teams being used during free practice and caught people’s imagination

[FittingMechanics]

Btw if this is visible in open source documents that the teams can see then they can pinpoint when that design came into effect. I am very interested whether this is something new or maybe they had it for a while (2023?).

Not sure how to treat it if it ends up being on the car longer. Hard to prove it was used but then again, if you have a "cheating device" isn't that already illegal? If Mercedes wheel could DAS today it would be illegal even if they don't use it.

Everyone has access to the spec of the bib and such, however if they saw pieces that could be used in a way as described than it would be flagged, it’s likely been seen by the teams being used during free practice and caught people’s imagination

You should be able to tell - this part was designed as such since XY. I want to know when they brought it.

[_cerber1]

My point is that the device could have existed for a number of legal purposes, not necessarily with the intent to break the rules.
For example:
Optimization during assembly: The device could have been used to help adjust the car’s setup before the car enters parc fermé conditions (i.e., before qualifying). Teams are allowed to make various setup changes during free practice sessions, and this device might have been used to fine-tune the car’s height or floor configuration during those times.

Manufacturing flexibility: It’s possible the device was designed to help with the build process or assembly tolerances. Teams aim to make extremely precise adjustments during car construction, and the device might have helped them achieve that level of precision before the car is locked into parc fermé.

In summary, just because the device existed doesn't necessarily mean it was designed to break the rules. It likely had a legitimate purpose for car setup during legal periods, but after rival teams and the FIA raised concerns about its potential for misuse, Red Bull agreed to modify it to avoid any controversy.

In addition, they were supposedly not even allowed to use it in Singapore, even though their performance there didn't drop, as Max finished 2nd.

Are you serious? Teams are fighting for grams of weight, and Red Bull is racing with a device that doesn't work?

[SmallSoldier]

They robbed McLaren of valid wins because of the trick

Dude, you could say the same with their double DRS rear wing, it’s all about pushing boundaries in this sport

If ride height was changed inside parc fermé using this device then it isn't similar to the McLaren rear wing. It would be completely illegal, not just a grey area.

Spot on… This isn’t about “the spirit of the rules”… “If” (and that’s a big “If”) this was actually used to change the ride height, there is not interpretation of the rules, there is no boundaries been pushed, this is plain and simply illegal.

[Alex_Z]

Cheating again ole ole

[Joel709]

Btw if this is visible in open source documents that the teams can see then they can pinpoint when that design came into effect. I am very interested whether this is something new or maybe they had it for a while (2023?).

Not sure how to treat it if it ends up being on the car longer. Hard to prove it was used but then again, if you have a "cheating device" isn't that already illegal? If Mercedes wheel could DAS today it would be illegal even if they don't use it.

Everyone has access to the spec of the bib and such, however if they saw pieces that could be used in a way as described than it would be flagged, it’s likely been seen by the teams being used during free practice and caught people’s imagination

You should be able to tell - this part was designed as such since XY. I want to know when they brought it.

This is the odd thing with it however, the device itself and the bib is completely legal and within regulation, it’s what it does that can change that. Redbull was informed and monitored during the Singapore GP and kept the same design, they don’t need to change the bib, just ensure that there is no access during the stage from Quali to race.

The Bib itself I imagine will have the exact same structure this weekend but modified to remove access to its adjustment

[Joel709]

Dude, you could say the same with their double DRS rear wing, it’s all about pushing boundaries in this sport

If ride height was changed inside parc fermé using this device then it isn't similar to the McLaren rear wing. It would be completely illegal, not just a grey area.

Spot on… This isn’t about “the spirit of the rules”… “If” (and that’s a big “If”) this was actually used to change the ride height, there is not interpretation of the rules, there is no boundaries been pushed, this is plain and simply illegal.

I agree, however mclarens rear wing wasn’t a grey area, it was obvious to the fia after Azerbaijan that it wasn’t conforming to the regulations hence its immediate change.

The regulations clearly state that you cannot have the main plane of the rear wing flex to an extent that it allows a a certain gap, the wing didn’t conform

[pantherxxx]

My point is that the device could have existed for a number of legal purposes, not necessarily with the intent to break the rules.
For example:
Optimization during assembly: The device could have been used to help adjust the car’s setup before the car enters parc fermé conditions (i.e., before qualifying). Teams are allowed to make various setup changes during free practice sessions, and this device might have been used to fine-tune the car’s height or floor configuration during those times.

Manufacturing flexibility: It’s possible the device was designed to help with the build process or assembly tolerances. Teams aim to make extremely precise adjustments during car construction, and the device might have helped them achieve that level of precision before the car is locked into parc fermé.

In summary, just because the device existed doesn't necessarily mean it was designed to break the rules. It likely had a legitimate purpose for car setup during legal periods, but after rival teams and the FIA raised concerns about its potential for misuse, Red Bull agreed to modify it to avoid any controversy.

In addition, they were supposedly not even allowed to use it in Singapore, even though their performance there didn't drop, as Max finished 2nd.

Are you serious? Teams are fighting for grams of weight, and Red Bull is racing with a device that doesn't work?

It does work during the legal window of car setup, but not during parc fermé, since that would violate the rules.

[FittingMechanics]

I think it is naive to think it wasn't used.

But it probably can't be proven. McLaren did have a massive race advantage in Singapore so maybe Red Bull had to go heavy toward qualy setup because they couldn't do both.

[Joel709]

I think it is naive to think it wasn't used.

But it probably can't be proven. McLaren did have a massive race advantage in Singapore so maybe Red Bull had to go heavy toward qualy setup because they couldn't do both.

Given the vast amounts of tv footage and sensors that the fia have access too they would have detected erroneous ride height changes. It’s a precautionary step in ensuring it isn’t used.

[_cerber1]

It does work during the legal window of car setup, but not during parc fermé, since that would violate the rules.

It's really weird to put a device on your car that's designed to change the ride height between qualifying and the race and never use it, isn't it?

[Joel709]

It does work during the legal window of car setup, but not during parc fermé, since that would violate the rules.

It's really weird to put a device on your car that's designed to change the ride height between qualifying and the race and never use it, isn't it?

That’s not its original purpose, it’s used to correct ride height settings during free practice to find a sweet spot, they’ve likely had this on the car all year. And given the device isn’t accessible once the car is built for race it would be difficult to do so.

As said, they were told not to use it in Singapore and albeit Norris running away, max seemed comfortably second