Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Miguel,
if you'd really like to have an academic discussion about that topic without getting personal instead of public penis length comparsion, just pm me. I'd rather admit I was completely wrong than die dumb.
I think this discussion misses the point somewhat. Did Rb run less-than-other-cars levels of wing during the year? Yes. But how do we know these are suboptimal wing levels? Perhaps the RB's sweet spot is at low wing-levels. Perhaps the time gained by decreasing their drag, is more than they gain in the corners. Especially as their engines have reportedly less power.
Just because the RB is running less wing than others, doesn't mean it has compromised its setup to be competitive on top speeds.
Doubt that it would be a "sweet spot" seeing how teams continuously aim for more downforce. I cannot see how this could possibly be a "sweet spot"
Reducing wing angles is simply to reduce drag. Why would you reduce drag? To increase top speed. This is mainly useful on tracks dominated by straights, which is only Monza(and Spa, to a certain extent). Other tracks just bring more in downforce, and seeing how the rules have been limited in terns of Aero apertures, teams generally run max, or close to max downforce on pretty much all tracks.
So, seeing how tracks are dominated by corners the main focus would be downforce.
Another reason why you would cut down wing angles is to overcome a deficit, or to overtake. Certainly in multi-class racing it is common to run a bit less downforce to make overtaking easier. Lowering wing angles would as well be to overcome a top speed deficit, which you would lack because of drag or because of engine power.
Red Bull was the only team to win races next to Mercedes, thus, they needed to be in a position they could catch them in the race, hence lower wing angles.
Another reason would be to reduce fuel consumption. Lower drag equals less fuel consumption. And with a fuel flow limit, this allows you to run more power(to overcome a power deficit) or to consume less fuel, thus start lighter.
Over a single lap the lower wing angles are far from optimal. However, they are quicker over a race as the lower wing angles allows them to overtake, prevent them from getting overtaken as well as consuming less fuel.
You've missed my point too. Cars gain/lose different amounts of drag and df when they crank their wing levels up or down. It might be that the RB wing is made such a way that in fact, the laptime gain from drag loss (lower wing) outweighs the cornering of the df gain.
Teams always aim for df, yes - but they don't always go for df in df vs drag. Then, it's a trade-off.
raymondu999 wrote:You've missed my point too. Cars gain/lose different amounts of drag and df when they crank their wing levels up or down. It might be that the RB wing is made such a way that in fact, the laptime gain from drag loss (lower wing) outweighs the cornering of the df gain.
Doubtful seeing how tracks are dominated by corners. This needs to make the drag gain significant vs downforce loss to make it a benefit.
Also if this was the case, Red Bull would have a pretty bad rear wing that clearly is lacking in LD-ratio.
Teams always aim for df, yes - but they don't always go for df in df vs drag. Then, it's a trade-off.
In current F1, they pretty much always go for max, or near-max df. There are two exclusions to that rule, Spa and Monza because they have straights dominating the track.
