ENGINE TUNER wrote: ↑07 Aug 2025, 20:47
TimW wrote: ↑21 Jul 2025, 16:44
Red Bull seemed to have excellent correlation. Got it right in 2021 with the floor changes, and again in 2022 with the biggest aero ruleset changes in a very long time. Even avoiding porpoising.
Yet within a year they lost their way,
even without any rule changes
The 21 changes were written specifically to hinder long wheelbase cars, which is why the floor cut was made relative to the front axle rather than the rear. In 22 they overspent
The "exclusion volume around the rear wheels" (3.7.2, 2021 ed.) was a triangle bound by the rear axle, the edge of the floor, and a forward point aligned with the rear face of the cockpit entry (plane "C-C"). Generally speaking the area ratio of a triangle section of a rectangle scales proportionally with the rectangle. That could be read as fairness: an attempt to reduce floor area by percentage not by an absolute value. Your claim should read something more like: "cars with gearboxes and/or fuel tanks longer than or equal to those of a Mercedes W12 will suffer more from a ~5% loss of floor area while cars with gearboxes and/or fuel tanks shorter than those of a Mercedes W12 will suffer less from a ~5% loss of floor area."
$400k wouldn't have salvaged the W13 concept. $5m wouldn't have salvaged the W13 concept. $50m wouldn't have salvaged the W13 concept. Merc and everyone else now run an RB18 series car--and they got it for free, courtesy RB. Think of how slow they'd still be if not for RB F1 charity design services.
