No one did. It's not typical to run a brand new PU at 100% from the first weekend.
No one did. It's not typical to run a brand new PU at 100% from the first weekend.
Yeah, I expect it will be incredible to see him slice through the field. Not sure how far he can get but with the likely safety cars and red flags, could be quite high. Hopefully his car does not break down.Badger wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 11:01Back of the grid Verstappen may be FOM's saving grace for the debut race of these regs.FittingMechanics wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:57Honestly this is a great result for Red Bull. With Max it would probably be second row lockout on the debut of their new PU. I think most of the negativity is because the gap looks big and because Verstappen crashed out.
I expect Max to be a menace tomorrow, he will school most of the drivers because he will skip recharging and then defend against them in following corners. Should be easier than in previous years, there is always opportunity to do a big power difference. You should enjoy it.
Yeah, but Mercedes has always been different in that regard, far more conservative than their rivals. I mean not literally always, let’s say over the span of past decade, since Toto took over.
Max Verstappen if they can fight Mercedes
“The gap is eight-tenths… that’s still a very big gap, and we know that we have to improve the car to fight Mercedes, because, at the end of the day, we’re not here to be P3 to P6 or whatever. We’re here to win. So yeah, step by step, hopefully we can get closer.”
@Fred__18- #RedBull a positive surprise despite Max's Q1 exit, both because #Hadjar slots in P3, but especially because the PU data feedback we're seeing is impressive—the closest to Mercedes without a doubt, and that's something you just can't help but be surprised by.
Man, educate yourself on the matter. Aero Efficiency ≠ drag.Emag wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:34That's literally what it means to have bad efficiency but okay.avantman wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:31Nothing has been removed between t8 and T9 today, the idea has been abandoned as far As I know. The rest of the bodywork produces a lot of if not the most of drag, mot just the wings. The difference between this years active aero and last year’s DRS is only the front wing which is itself far less draggy component than any rear wing.
It’s obvious m Karen has more downforce. It’s obvious they have more drag in this current configuration. That's it.
Badger wrote: ↑15 Feb 2026, 16:21I disagree, their deployment is superior to Ferrari on the long run data and there is no indication of a meaningful ICE deficit. We should not sell them short just because they are new.AR3-GP wrote: ↑15 Feb 2026, 15:39Engine is not second best. It’s 3rd. Both Merc and Ferrari are ahead. No one at RBPT and RB are under any illusions. There will be problems (durability) on PU side. We just haven’t seen them yet.
It’s somewhat dissapointing that they don’t make any progress in low and medium speed corners, as if these deficiencies are baked into their design know-how.
If Red Bull couldn’t figure out how to turn a medium speed corner over the last 2 years, regulations changed, and they still are no good in medium speed…![]()
A more efficient car generates the same amounts of downforce with less drag compared to an inefficient one. You dont have to overcomplicate it and be condescending about it.avantman wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 11:44Man, educate yourself on the matter. Aero Efficiency ≠ drag.Emag wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:34That's literally what it means to have bad efficiency but okay.avantman wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:31Nothing has been removed between t8 and T9 today, the idea has been abandoned as far As I know. The rest of the bodywork produces a lot of if not the most of drag, mot just the wings. The difference between this years active aero and last year’s DRS is only the front wing which is itself far less draggy component than any rear wing.
It’s obvious m Karen has more downforce. It’s obvious they have more drag in this current configuration. That's it.
Google “ formula 1 aerodynamic efficiency ratio”.
The Engineering Behind Formula 1 — Born To Engineer
Formula 1 aerodynamic efficiency, often called the L/D ratio (Lift-to-Drag) or simply efficiency, is the ratio of downward force (downforce) produced to the drag created. Modern F1 cars aim to maximize this ratio, typically achieving a ratio of around 2.5 to 3.5:1. This means for every 1 unit of drag, they generate 2.5–3.5 units of downforce, maximizing cornering grip without sacrificing too much top speed.
So, when you see McLaren generates more downforce at expense of more drag compared to Red Bull car, that says absolutely nothing about their relative aerodynamic efficiency. If those two were running very similar aero package generating exactly the same downforce but one would be clearly faster Down the straights due to less drag, then one could safely declare that car is more aero efficient.
I know lots of muppets and so called experts confuse these things these days often calling simply less draggy car more aero efficient, but that is wrong. McLaren had better aerodynamics - more aero efficient car last couple of years. We’ve no reason to believe that same team would suddenly fall behind Red Bull in that department, despite working on this car a whole lot more than red Bull.
Good qualifying for him, but a bit premature too say he is the best paring Max has ever had. Max didn't even qualify, it is the first race, the cars are easier to drive vs the GE cars, they don't go on the edge in high speed because they are recovering there etc.Chuckjr wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 08:58+1
Finally got a decent #2 on this team. Great to see.![]()
If this is correct, and there are other sites reporting this as well, Redbull are very much in the ball park.f1isgood wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:26I don't necessarily trust the original source. But interesting.AR3-GP wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 10:22They had software issue so energy recovery system locked the rear wheels. Wache said easy fix.
viewtopic.php?p=1332555#p1332555
Of course he would speak in such manner. Not only he is naturally the next to follow Horner, but also someone should take on Helmut’s role and talk delusional overoptimistic rubbish to the media.Valeo wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 14:38https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... melbourne/
Wache says the gap to Mercedes can be overcome and repeats the expected deficit of 0,3 Max might have had.
Also says (again) there is more time to find on the chassis side, not engine.
Of course, nothing can be done to improve engine performance in season, since they'll be under the FIA deficit limit.Valeo wrote: ↑07 Mar 2026, 14:38https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... melbourne/
Wache says the gap to Mercedes can be overcome and repeats the expected deficit of 0,3 Max might have had.
Also says (again) there is more time to find on the chassis side, not engine.