2025 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Matt-A]

As I said before the race, it's very clear now that this RB is the fastest car. I think the gap versus other cars will only increase now and it will be another WDC winning year for RB.

[organic]

As I said before the race, it's very clear now that this RB is the fastest car. I think the gap versus other cars will only increase now and it will be another WDC winning year for RB.

Saying it more doesn't make anyone agree with you more

[Juzh]

They need to fix the starts. Second race in a row something went wrong and this time it cost a win.

Also, its very annoying seeing mclaren gaining such ridicioulus amounts of time on straights in race trim. I checked a few laps and loses on straights amount to 3-6 tenths every lap which is too much. This equals to around ~20s race time lost on straights.

[Rikhart]

As I said before the race, it's very clear now that this RB is the fastest car. I think the gap versus other cars will only increase now and it will be another WDC winning year for RB.

Being the "very clearly fastest car", that is driven by the best driver in the sport, do you think it would:

A) have managed to build a gap to Piastri, being in clean air

and

B) Gotten closer to Piastri in the end, at least managing to get into DRS range

Did any of this happen? Or could you just be spouting nonsense with zero factual evidence behind it?

I'm going to go for option 2.

[SoulPancake13]

As I said before the race, it's very clear now that this RB is the fastest car. I think the gap versus other cars will only increase now and it will be another WDC winning year for RB.

Being the "very clearly fastest car", that is driven by the best driver in the sport, do you think it would:

A) have managed to build a gap to Piastri, being in clean air

and

B) Gotten closer to Piastri in the end, at least managing to get into DRS range

Did any of this happen? Or could you just be spouting nonsense with zero factual evidence behind it?

I'm going to go for option 2.

I mean, Max was gapping Piastri in free air at the end of his stint. I don't agree with very clearly fastest car but there is a strong argument to make that with a normal start Max wins the race.

[rbirules]

As I said before the race, it's very clear now that this RB is the fastest car. I think the gap versus other cars will only increase now and it will be another WDC winning year for RB.

Being the "very clearly fastest car", that is driven by the best driver in the sport, do you think it would:

A) have managed to build a gap to Piastri, being in clean air

and

B) Gotten closer to Piastri in the end, at least managing to get into DRS range

Did any of this happen? Or could you just be spouting nonsense with zero factual evidence behind it?

I'm going to go for option 2.

I mean, Max was gapping Piastri in free air at the end of his stint. I don't agree with very clearly fastest car but there is a strong argument to make that with a normal start Max wins the race.

Both statements ("RB21 is not the fastest car, certainly not clearly"; and "Max would have won with a normal start") can be true at the same time. Track position and thus clean air, can't be ignored, as we saw yesterday and two weeks ago in Japan. I think Oscar paid the price of being in Max's dirty air at the end of his first stint and Max thus had better tires at that time. I agree that there wasn't much between Max and Oscar in terms of race pace (due to the low deg) and whoever had track position was likely to win. Oscar didn't need to force things as he had the "net lead" due to lap 1, turn 1 as long as he didn't let Max build a gap anywhere close to 5 seconds.

[Seanspeed]

People still arguing the penalty.
Piastri is ahead of the apex in all counts even after Max dive bombs.
Why?
Because he is closer to the apex. F1 fans seem to not look at what ahead really means.
It's the one closer to the apex by distance.

Can you show me where it says that in the rules?

This also ignores the context that there's an immediate right hand afterwards, where Piastri suddenly would not find himself the one closest to the apex. It's a sequence, it cant just be about the first corner alone. The whole point of staying outside is that you'll be in a better position for the next part.

And of course while we dont know that Max could have kept ahead or on-track if they both went through the corner cleanly, Piastri was 100% clearly intending to drive Max off-the-track. Had Max been even more alongside, Piastri was still gonna do what he did, as he did multiple times last year while completely getting away with it every time.

(I'll never in my life understand how they've determined it's ever legal to run another car alongside you off-track. It's dangerous, wildly unfair, and robs us of more exciting racing.)

And lastly, I dont understand why even after they decided Max did something wrong, didn't just order him to give up the position when they had all the time in the world to do this during the safety car.

[AR3-GP]

Being the "very clearly fastest car", that is driven by the best driver in the sport, do you think it would:

A) have managed to build a gap to Piastri, being in clean air

and

B) Gotten closer to Piastri in the end, at least managing to get into DRS range

Did any of this happen? Or could you just be spouting nonsense with zero factual evidence behind it?

I'm going to go for option 2.

I mean, Max was gapping Piastri in free air at the end of his stint. I don't agree with very clearly fastest car but there is a strong argument to make that with a normal start Max wins the race.

Both statements ("RB21 is not the fastest car, certainly not clearly"; and "Max would have won with a normal start") can be true at the same time. Track position and thus clean air, can't be ignored, as we saw yesterday and two weeks ago in Japan. I think Oscar paid the price of being in Max's dirty air at the end of his first stint and Max thus had better tires at that time. I agree that there wasn't much between Max and Oscar in terms of race pace (due to the low deg) and whoever had track position was likely to win. Oscar didn't need to force things as he had the "net lead" due to lap 1, turn 1 as long as he didn't let Max build a gap anywhere close to 5 seconds.

Mercedes had huge thermal deg. Hamilton had lots of deg. It was not an easy low deg race. That was the point of Pirelli bringing the 1 step softer tires.

I still think Mclaren is the fastest car, but that Red Bull improved in warm conditions. Norris was quicker than Piastri all weekend. Piastri isn’t the pace benchmark (but uses his other assets to overperform, like Prost) so if he’s matching Max then Red Bull is definetly still slower, but within a range where driver can take pole by 0.010 when Mclaren drivers underperform.

If Norris keeps making mistakes and Piastri ends up being the true rival, then Red Bull upgrades don’t have to be as big as if Norris was actually driving well.

[ringo]

People still arguing the penalty.
Piastri is ahead of the apex in all counts even after Max dive bombs.
Why?
Because he is closer to the apex. F1 fans seem to not look at what ahead really means.
It's the one closer to the apex by distance.

Can you show me where it says that in the rules?

This also ignores the context that there's an immediate right hand afterwards, where Piastri suddenly would not find himself the one closest to the apex. It's a sequence, it cant just be about the first corner alone. The whole point of staying outside is that you'll be in a better position for the next part.

And of course while we dont know that Max could have kept ahead or on-track if they both went through the corner cleanly, Piastri was 100% clearly intending to drive Max off-the-track. Had Max been even more alongside, Piastri was still gonna do what he did, as he did multiple times last year while completely getting away with it every time.

(I'll never in my life understand how they've determined it's ever legal to run another car alongside you off-track. It's dangerous, wildly unfair, and robs us of more exciting racing.)

And lastly, I dont understand why even after they decided Max did something wrong, didn't just order him to give up the position when they had all the time in the world to do this during the safety car.

Yes it's a sequence. Piastri reached the first apex, then he went for the second apex, which would leave zero room for Max to be there also, because Piastri would be the closest to both. This kind of corner just requires that the attacking or defending car just needs to be the one in the corner first. If both are going through side by side, they outside car needs to be considerably ahead and in the corner itself to be ahead for the 2nd apex.

Anyhow, what's done is done. There will be more debates going forward as Max will encounter Piastri or Lando more often at the starts.

[FittingMechanics]

There are updated driving standards guidelines for this year, which were agreed upon by drivers after the antics of last year. Those documents though, are usually private and available internally for references, however some medias have managed to get some info out of them. Regardless, bringing up past events as counter-arguments is pointless because we are not subject to the same rules anymore. I am glad they're starting to clamp down a bit more on these things.

I always hated the fact that you can just divebomb / ignore the next corner and be fine with it as long as you're ahead at the apex. No, that's not real racing. If you can't keep it on the track at the exit, then being ahead at the apex shouldn't mean anything. Oscar was considered as the "overtaker" in that scenario and that's why Max got the penalty, because Oscar actually kept it on the track at the exit, while being alongside enough at the apex as the "overtaker" to be entitled to the corner. If Oscar had ran wide, there would be no penalty for Max.

Also, if it was the other way around (Max starting P2 and Oscar P1), and we somehow ended up in a situation where Max would attempt to overtake around the outside of Oscar, then, according to the driving standard guidelines, Max would be entitled to racing room on the outside and Oscar would have gotten a penalty for pushing a driver off the track.

Apparently it all boils down to who is the "overtaker" and who is the "defender". The whole point in refactoring the rules was to prevent the car defending from abusing the "ahead at the apex" rule and give priority to the car "overtaking".

If you want to make Max's point, then RedBull should argue that he was the overtaking car and not the defending car. Perhaps in normal racing conditions, that would have been true. However considering this was lap 1 after the race start, Max was the car who was ahead before T1 and Oscar was P2, therefore the justification for considering Oscar as the overtaking car.

I think that at least last year, the rule was not fully as you state. The defender was in a stronger position. The rule was if he is ahead at the apex (and defender can usually get to the apex first because he is on inside and can let off his brakes), then he doesn't have to give space.

But if the defender is behind at apex, then he needs to give space. So the easiest solution was to just defend the inside, slide off the brakes to reach apex first and then push the other car wide. Norris solved it last year by being on the outside and then intentionally releasing his brakes as well, to get to the apex first, not really trying to make the corner but by being ahead at apex as the overtaker now you get the "space" and then if are forced off, it is a penalty to the defender.

So the whole racing between Max and Lando became a game of these "who gets to apex first" and the whole situation became ridiculous with penalties being the major talking point. Why don't the clamp down on that and just say that you always have to leave enough space for the car alongside you? That would make for the best racing and it would remove silly "who can get to apex first".


What happened here I am not sure, Piastri was definitely the overtaker but he was on the inside. He made the corner, but didn't leave enough space for Max. I wonder if the stewards would have made a different decision if Max didn't cut the corner completely and he tried to follow the racing line, perhaps by staying off track for a while but trying to follow the track. The way he cut it completely gained him an advantage (Piastri was now clearly behind) and thus, any wrong doing by Piastri is a lesser offense. Imagine Max trying to stay on track and follow Piastri throughout the turn alongside him? This wouldn't be a clear "gaining an advantage" and you could easily claim Piastri forced him off track.

[AR3-GP]

They need to fix the starts. Second race in a row something went wrong and this time it cost a win.

Also, its very annoying seeing mclaren gaining such ridicioulus amounts of time on straights in race trim. I checked a few laps and loses on straights amount to 3-6 tenths every lap which is too much. This equals to around ~20s race time lost on straights.

I wonder if there is a connection between the starts and the weight distribution which they recently began to play with. The traction is at the ground level so it creates a pitching moment around the center of mass. If weight distribution moves the center of mass, then the dynamics of the launch change (normal force oscillations at the contact patch should be minimized). You also need smooth torque response from the PU. Or it could be driver error. I do not know, but they have to discuss the possibility. Something could just be out of whack due to the changes they have been making to the car.

Regarding the straights, shouldn't the whole laptime be taken into account? We don't know how they are using the deployment and we don't know how much fuel each team uses. In theory, you just do what the simulations say is best. So maybe carrying less fuel and using less engine power is more optimal then carrying more and using more engine power). There are tradeoffs. If you use more power, you need more fuel. If you have more fuel, you are marginally harder on the tires and marginally slower in the corners and braking phases. Each team has its own optimal solution. Overall, despite how much faster Mclaren may have been in a specific part of the race on the straights, it didn't make any impression against Max in the 1st stint. Even with DRS, they were never close to him.

[Juzh]

Regarding the straights, shouldn't the whole laptime be taken into account? We don't know how they are using the deployment and we don't know how much fuel each team uses. In theory, you just do what the simulations say is best. So maybe carrying less fuel and using less engine power is more optimal then carrying more and using more engine power). There are tradeoffs. If you use more power, you need more fuel. If you have more fuel, you are marginally harder on the tires and marginally slower in the corners and braking phases. Each team has its own optimal solution. Overall, despite how much faster Mclaren may have been in a specific part of the race on the straights, it didn't make any impression against Max in the 1st stint. Even with DRS, they were never close to him.

Nah, this amount of advantage is too much for any such shenanigans. I don't believe the whole fuel point stands, there's not all that much discrepancy in the amount of fuel carried by the teams, not in a low deg flatout race such as saudi. And you would never not use full engine power that you at all can, it's always better to carry some more litres, I'm 100% sure all teams are using this tactic. There was no reason not to push the engine flat out.







Honestly, i dont understand why the car was so slow this race on full throttle sections. There seems to be a struggle in both early acceleration and even in energy deployment which is usually honda's strong point, but not this time.

[CjC]

Honestly, I think Mclaren ran with a tad too much rear wing. Max was more often than not quicker in sector 1 where the downforce is required.
Also could explain why Mclaren didn’t have their superior tyre management too

[AR3-GP]

Regarding the straights, shouldn't the whole laptime be taken into account? We don't know how they are using the deployment and we don't know how much fuel each team uses. In theory, you just do what the simulations say is best. So maybe carrying less fuel and using less engine power is more optimal then carrying more and using more engine power). There are tradeoffs. If you use more power, you need more fuel. If you have more fuel, you are marginally harder on the tires and marginally slower in the corners and braking phases. Each team has its own optimal solution. Overall, despite how much faster Mclaren may have been in a specific part of the race on the straights, it didn't make any impression against Max in the 1st stint. Even with DRS, they were never close to him.

Nah, this amount of advantage is too much for any such shenanigans. I don't believe the whole fuel point stands, there's not all that much discrepancy in the amount of fuel carried by the teams, not in a low deg flatout race such as saudi. And you would never not use full engine power that you at all can, it's always better to carry some more litres, I'm 100% sure all teams are using this tactic. There was no reason not to push the engine flat out.

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

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

https://i.imgur.com/0r3TbKW.png

Honestly, i dont understand why the car was so slow this race on full throttle sections. There seems to be a struggle in both early acceleration and even in energy deployment which is usually honda's strong point, but not this time.

Okay I see. I think it is because Mclaren used a smaller rear wing (similar to Spain last year), Red Bull had a full width mainplane and a steep flap (they trimmed the flap edges to shed some drag later on). So advantage to Mclaren when the DRS is closed. For this, Max had a 2-3 tenths advantage in S1 all race which is where the bigger rear wing would benefit (aside from general differences in car potential).

So as I said, the full laptime has to be taken into account. It would be more concerning if they were slower everywhere (straights and corners). Both teams were playing to their weaknesses. Red Bull fear tire degradation. Mclaren fear a lack of straight line speed.

[euv2]

Regarding the straights, shouldn't the whole laptime be taken into account? We don't know how they are using the deployment and we don't know how much fuel each team uses. In theory, you just do what the simulations say is best. So maybe carrying less fuel and using less engine power is more optimal then carrying more and using more engine power). There are tradeoffs. If you use more power, you need more fuel. If you have more fuel, you are marginally harder on the tires and marginally slower in the corners and braking phases. Each team has its own optimal solution. Overall, despite how much faster Mclaren may have been in a specific part of the race on the straights, it didn't make any impression against Max in the 1st stint. Even with DRS, they were never close to him.

Nah, this amount of advantage is too much for any such shenanigans. I don't believe the whole fuel point stands, there's not all that much discrepancy in the amount of fuel carried by the teams, not in a low deg flatout race such as saudi. And you would never not use full engine power that you at all can, it's always better to carry some more litres, I'm 100% sure all teams are using this tactic. There was no reason not to push the engine flat out.

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

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

https://i.imgur.com/0r3TbKW.png

Honestly, i dont understand why the car was so slow this race on full throttle sections. There seems to be a struggle in both early acceleration and even in energy deployment which is usually honda's strong point, but not this time.

Yeah, you might be right, I also checked it across multiple other laps, RB21 loses on non drs sections too, but was equal or faster in qualy in all straights. In Suzuka for comparison the deltas were the same in the race as they were in qualy, so no weird drop off during the race compared to MCL.

I think RB ran with slightly less cooling and therefore couldn't run the engine on full tilt on a more consistent basis as compared to the MCL. I heard this from GP too, he at one point gave MAX more speed on the straights but a worse turn 22 I think and MAX didn't like it so they reverted to the previous mode.