2026 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[AR3-GP]

Yeah now I remember it fully. It was in 2024 that they changed the standard from 5s to 10s. The choice to give leniency in Saudi was the decision of that steward group, not guidance for all future incidents. Given how far away Max was going into the first corner in Madrid, and then proceeding to pass Kimi afterwards, expecting anything but a standard 10s would be a reach IMO. Either way, with a time penalty in the pit stops Verstappen was never winning that race.

The race was lost at the start. All of the RBPT cars suffered sluggish getaways. They were in the bottom half of the grid on the 0-50km/h metric. Nothing specific to any of the drivers unless all 4 of them colluded to have bad starts... Mercedes and Ferrari cars were in the top half.

This is why I said there are just too many issues to get a win this year. You can maybe win a race with only 1 of the problems that RBR has. You cannot do it with worse deployment than Mercedes in Q3, bad grid starts, degrading car performance in the race, dodgy rear wings (that looks to be in the past though...), and not even having a top 2 car...Overperform in qualy? Immediately surrender the positions at the start. Make an opportunistic pass? Rear axle says no.

[Wouter]

Much funnier the Max vs 100 thing than Madring GP.

.
Indeed it was. It was 2 hours pure fun! Everybody who watched it was having a better time than watching F1.

[AR3-GP]

@Laptime_f1 has computed the total time on straight for best laps in GP qualifying for R4 to R13. Mercedes spent the least amount of time on the straights, and this was the average time difference (shown as percentage deficit) to Mercedes for the rest of the teams:



Top 3 are Mercedes powered (no surprise...). Next are the RBPT teams. Williams is an outlier because their additional weight reduces the straight-line acceleration. Simply put, Mercedes obviously have the best PU. They have the most power going to the wheels, and therefore they and their customers spend the least amount of time on the straights.

[Valeo]

The second issue may be even more fundamental. Red Bull refers to it internally as car degradation, not ordinary tyre wear but a loss of mechanical and aerodynamic balance over the course of a session or race. The RB22 performs at its best with a full fuel tank.

As fuel weight decreases, the car becomes relatively weaker rather than stronger, exactly where teams normally expect improvement. Rear-end instability increases and the tyres overheat quickly.

It is the opposite of how a race car should behave, and it is a problem Red Bull has been wrestling with for years.

In conclusion, there remains plenty of work to secure regular victories, but the progress made since the season opener leaves Verstappen and Red Bull firmly on the right trajectory.

https://racingnews365.com/inside-red-bu ... t=14431757

[gearboxtrouble]

That would indicate some sort of rear end design limitation. This would also explain why they need to run so stiff to control this degradation.

[avantman]

Verstappen didn't gain any positions in Mexico 25, he gave them back. Leclerc may have gained one, he should have let two cars back past and only let one go, but the stewards missed that in all the chaos of that start. Anyways, you can't rely on the stewards making mistakes. With Hamilton and Verstappen shouting on the radio no one was missing the one in Madrid.

Even with a 10s penalty which is far from certain, it could have been worth it... hard to say, but if there is any doubt I personally would always prefer to stick it out and take the chances.

It was certain. You guys behave like RB are amateurs who haven't read the rules when in fact it's you guys who haven't read the rules, hence your misguided takes on this.

They aren’t amateurs, but we know even professionals make mistakes under pressure, and so do FIA stewards. You’re a typical amateur though, thinking you know far more than you actually do.

The Mexico 2025 example, and the lack of any penalty for Leclerc, who cut the corner completely unforced and gained a position off the track, far more blatantly than Max did, already proves that your claim that a penalty for Max would have been guaranteed is simply false. It sets a precedent showing that these incidents don’t necessarily result in an automatic penalty, especially when it’s a Turn 1, lap 1 incident, which is a completely different scenario from a normal one-on-one battle in the middle of the race—the situation those guidelines are intended to cover.

And let’s hear from Mekies himself:
“The decision of the stewards is never to give back positions in that case, we would have simply been penalised, either five seconds or ten seconds at their discretion.”

That proves your other statement—that under the current tweaked rules, it could always only be 10 seconds and never just 5 seconds!—was wrong as well.

We all get your point and understand where you’re coming from. Just leave your massive ego at the door, be a bit more humble, and probably go and read the rules yourself.

Best regards!

[avantman]

Yeah now I remember it fully. It was in 2024 that they changed the standard from 5s to 10s. The choice to give leniency in Saudi was the decision of that steward group, not guidance for all future incidents. Given how far away Max was going into the first corner in Madrid, and then proceeding to pass Kimi afterwards, expecting anything but a standard 10s would be a reach IMO. Either way, with a time penalty in the pit stops Verstappen was never winning that race.

The race was lost at the start. All of the RBPT cars suffered sluggish getaways. They were in the bottom half of the grid on the 0-50km/h metric. Nothing specific to any of the drivers unless all 4 of them colluded to have bad starts... Mercedes and Ferrari cars were in the top half.

This is why I said there are just too many issues to get a win this year. You can maybe win a race with only 1 of the problems that RBR has. You cannot do it with worse deployment than Mercedes in Q3, bad grid starts, degrading car performance in the race, dodgy rear wings (that looks to be in the past though...), and not even having a top 2 car...Overperform in qualy? Immediately surrender the positions at the start. Make an opportunistic pass? Rear axle says no.

When your team’s leadership apparently doesn’t want to win badly enough and refuses to grab every single opportunity with both hands and roll the dice, trading a genuine chance of winning for a few safer points, that doesn’t help either.

It’s somewhat similar to Brazil last year, where many people questioned, quite rightly in my opinion, the decision to play it safe and stop Max again, refusing to give him any chance to try to keep Norris behind. Especially given how weak and one-dimensional Norris can be when it comes to overtaking, even with a significant pace advantage.

Say what you want, but I personally don’t like the way that race team has evolved under Mekies’ leadership.

[Badger]

Even with a 10s penalty which is far from certain, it could have been worth it... hard to say, but if there is any doubt I personally would always prefer to stick it out and take the chances.

It was certain. You guys behave like RB are amateurs who haven't read the rules when in fact it's you guys who haven't read the rules, hence your misguided takes on this.

They aren’t amateurs, but we know even professionals make mistakes under pressure, and so do FIA stewards. You’re a typical amateur though, thinking you know far more than you actually do.

The Mexico 2025 example, and the lack of any penalty for Leclerc, who cut the corner completely unforced and gained a position off the track, far more blatantly than Max did, already proves that your claim that a penalty for Max would have been guaranteed is simply false. It sets a precedent showing that these incidents don’t necessarily result in an automatic penalty, especially when it’s a Turn 1, lap 1 incident, which is a completely different scenario from a normal one-on-one battle in the middle of the race—the situation those guidelines are intended to cover.

And let’s hear from Mekies himself:
“The decision of the stewards is never to give back positions in that case, we would have simply been penalised, either five seconds or ten seconds at their discretion.”

That proves your other statement—that under the current tweaked rules, it could always only be 10 seconds and never just 5 seconds!—was wrong as well.

We all get your point and understand where you’re coming from. Just leave your massive ego at the door, be a bit more humble, and probably go and read the rules yourself.

Best regards!

So I was right on the procedure, the FIA doesn't hand out warnings before issuing penalties. Thanks for confirming. 10s is standard for that infringement, hoping for the stewards to go easy on you is not a wise gamble, nor would it have changed the outcome of the race for RB if they got lucky with a 5s. They were getting a penalty, it was going to cost them any chance at the win, end of story.

The Leclerc incident is a poor example as it was never even noted or investigated, race direction simply missed it in the chaos of several other cars going off. No one was missing the Madrid incident with all that radio chatter from Max and Lewis.

Professionals can make mistakes, but amateurs make mistakes far more often. The person with the biggest ego is the casual fan who in their infinite widsom thinks they know better than the pros without even justifying their dissent with actual arguments. In other words, you. I read your analysis of the incident, you just ignored the inconvenient part which is that Max as the outside car wasn't entitled to space according to the rules of engagement. RB knows how that rule works intimately after the shenanigans of last year, hence their call to cede the position. Maybe you ought to get the basics right before thinking you know better than the people who do it for a living, just a thought.

Humbly,

[Badger]

The second issue may be even more fundamental. Red Bull refers to it internally as car degradation, not ordinary tyre wear but a loss of mechanical and aerodynamic balance over the course of a session or race. The RB22 performs at its best with a full fuel tank.

As fuel weight decreases, the car becomes relatively weaker rather than stronger, exactly where teams normally expect improvement. Rear-end instability increases and the tyres overheat quickly.

It is the opposite of how a race car should behave, and it is a problem Red Bull has been wrestling with for years.

In conclusion, there remains plenty of work to secure regular victories, but the progress made since the season opener leaves Verstappen and Red Bull firmly on the right trajectory.

https://racingnews365.com/inside-red-bu ... t=14431757

Interesting, that does line up with what we've seen. On tracks like Silverstone the car was decent in the first stint and then totally uncompetitive later on. Even last year it was notable on many tracks that McLaren was better late in races, think about Austria for example.

[f1isgood]

Yeah now I remember it fully. It was in 2024 that they changed the standard from 5s to 10s. The choice to give leniency in Saudi was the decision of that steward group, not guidance for all future incidents. Given how far away Max was going into the first corner in Madrid, and then proceeding to pass Kimi afterwards, expecting anything but a standard 10s would be a reach IMO. Either way, with a time penalty in the pit stops Verstappen was never winning that race.

The race was lost at the start. All of the RBPT cars suffered sluggish getaways. They were in the bottom half of the grid on the 0-50km/h metric. Nothing specific to any of the drivers unless all 4 of them colluded to have bad starts... Mercedes and Ferrari cars were in the top half.

This is why I said there are just too many issues to get a win this year. You can maybe win a race with only 1 of the problems that RBR has. You cannot do it with worse deployment than Mercedes in Q3, bad grid starts, degrading car performance in the race, dodgy rear wings (that looks to be in the past though...), and not even having a top 2 car...Overperform in qualy? Immediately surrender the positions at the start. Make an opportunistic pass? Rear axle says no.

When your team’s leadership apparently doesn’t want to win badly enough and refuses to grab every single opportunity with both hands and roll the dice, trading a genuine chance of winning for a few safer points, that doesn’t help either.

It’s somewhat similar to Brazil last year, where many people questioned, quite rightly in my opinion, the decision to play it safe and stop Max again, refusing to give him any chance to try to keep Norris behind. Especially given how weak and one-dimensional Norris can be when it comes to overtaking, even with a significant pace advantage.

Say what you want, but I personally don’t like the way that race team has evolved under Mekies’ leadership.

Everyone is smiling though, that is very important for the morale (doesn't matter if you win but morale is a must) and Verstappen is happy to get the bag at this point. It's all good.

[aMessageToCharlie]

They were getting a penalty, it was going to cost them any chance at the win, end of story.

Repeating a wrong statement confidently will not make it true. Do you really not understand that there is variance of outcome based on the discretion of the stewards? Have we ever seen the stewards missing an incident or making a wrong decison? - yes. Therefore you're wrong with your ignorant yapping in absolute terms.

And I think you're even missing the whole point.
Slowing down by 4sec(?) and letting 2 cars past at that point would most likely lose them the race win.

Keeping position would LIKELY get them a penalty and lose them the race win, but NOT CERTAINLY. Therefore it makes sense to go for the option that at least leaves you a chance to get away with it and fight for the race win.

RBR are not in a position where they have to conservatively opt for some secure points. They're not fighting for a championship, but for race wins. So this would be the time to take some calculated risk and go for it. It's really not that hard to follow.

[WardenOfTheNorth]

Much funnier the Max vs 100 thing than Madring GP.

.
Indeed it was. It was 2 hours pure fun! Everybody who watched it was having a better time than watching F1.

I was there watching and it was absolutely fantastic!!

[WardenOfTheNorth]

Can they upgrade the electronics at the beginning of 2027 season? Or must it remain exactly the same as it is now?

.
It must remain the same because there won't be another ICE which is 2% better.

I think they can change as there is a different ratio required .

They're free to upgrade the software any time as well. Frankly if they didn't design the car with hardware capable of the maximum charge, discharge and regen rates permitted under the rules, then they've only got themselves to blame. The software is what makes the big difference on the electrical side.

[Wouter]

Much funnier the Max vs 100 thing than Madring GP.

.
Indeed it was. It was 2 hours pure fun! Everybody who watched it was having a better time than watching F1.

.
I was there watching and it was absolutely fantastic!!

.
I envy you!! I really enjoyed every minute. Everyone at home and at Silverstone was just having a great time!

It must have been great you were there!

[AR3-GP]

I haven't yet located the original source from the-race, but...

These are the CHANGES that the FIA is studying for the PU in 2027

1. Better measure the ICE

2. Measure the ENTIRE Power Unit: ICE + MGU-K + battery + efficiency

3. Allocate extra development based on position in Constructors', like with wind tunnel hours

These are the changes in the measurement. The changes in the distribution of aid and all that is a separate matter about which, for now, there isn't much information. But it is known that it will be addressed this week in the committee and that if it goes through, it will be voted on in the PUAC (4 out of 6 votes are needed).

https://x.com/Nachez98/status/2102049654053470582


"better measure the ICE"? go figure.