Aston Martin Red Bull Racing TAG Heuer RB14

[i70q7m7ghw]

Definitely the best chassis of 2018. I was genuinely scared of RedBull in the last races. They get so much more life out of the tyres than anyone else.

"Last Races" and "Best chassis of 2018"... doesn't make sense, surely it's most improved, or best at the end of the year?

[PlatinumZealot]

Definitely the best chassis of 2018. I was genuinely scared of RedBull in the last races. They get so much more life out of the tyres than anyone else.

"Last Races" and "Best chassis of 2018"... doesn't make sense, surely it's most improved, or best at the end of the year?

How did they improve the chassis when RedBull only ran one design for the year? Think about what you just said.

The chassis is designed to enable the other sytems to work. RedBull chassis allowed them to improve their aero, suspension, cooling etc. over the course of the year more than any other car. Their operating windows was the widest of all the cars too. That has always been the hallmark of a good chassis ever since I been watching f1.

[Sieper]

the last 2 years? (just to be clear, just kidding eh, I like to read your input and quite often come away having learned something)

[i70q7m7ghw]

Definitely the best chassis of 2018. I was genuinely scared of RedBull in the last races. They get so much more life out of the tyres than anyone else.

"Last Races" and "Best chassis of 2018"... doesn't make sense, surely it's most improved, or best at the end of the year?

How did they improve the chassis when RedBull only ran one design for the year? Think about what you just said.

The chassis is designed to enable the other sytems to work. RedBull chassis allowed them to improve their aero, suspension, cooling etc. over the course of the year more than any other car. Their operating windows was the widest of all the cars too. That has always been the hallmark of a good chassis ever since I been watching f1.

So when you talk about the chassis, what are you referring to exactly? Are we talking about everything that isn't the PU? Everything except the drivetrain?

[Just_a_fan]

I think most people would use the word chassis in this context to mean the mechanical side of performance rather than the aero side of performance.

So you have three things making up the car's performance: PU performance, the chassis (including the stiffness of the PU/gearbox installation), and the aero.

[PlatinumZealot]

The chassis is the chassis. It is a part or system if you look on it that way. That part of the car that carries the engine suspension, wings, floor, driver cell, cooling etc. The "backbone" of the car.

If that is designed in the best way the potential of the car will shine through. See also Sauber 2018.

[PlatinumZealot]

I think most people would use the word chassis in this context to mean the mechanical side of performance rather than the aero side of performance.

So you have three things making up the car's performance: PU performance, the chassis (including the stiffness of the PU/gearbox installation), and the aero.

Those days are long gone when chassis used to mean "mechanical handling." where one used to use a cars perfromance at some slow street track to judge who had the best "handling." these days in F1 the chassis is inextricably linked with aero and even aero is also closely linked to the suspension. For example McLaren's and William's poor aero performance this year was limited by the geomtry of chassis. They couldn't afford to divert time and resource to make a "B chassis" to correct the aero and so they just called it a bad year and done.

[godlameroso]

So would a good chassis have modularity built in some areas to make upgrading the aero easier for instance? Ferrari made their bargeboards modular, they did not have to change the entire floor to upgrade theirs. Red Bull had a good chassis but perhaps required more effort to change certain things. As with all things in life there are certain compromises. By making things less modular you can make them lighter, but more time consuming to upgrade.

[i70q7m7ghw]

The chassis is the chassis. It is a part or system if you look on it that way. That part of the car that carries the engine suspension, wings, floor, driver cell, cooling etc. The "backbone" of the car.

If that is designed in the best way the potential of the car will shine through. See also Sauber 2018.

So we are talking about the true definition of the word, it's the tub and the structural components of the engine & gearbox. It's a bit of leap to say that RB had the best chassis in 2018 on the basis of some strong results at the end of the season, isn't it? As pure spectators, how could we possibly determine the performance of a "chassis" on it's own?

[PlatinumZealot]

The chassis is the chassis. It is a part or system if you look on it that way. That part of the car that carries the engine suspension, wings, floor, driver cell, cooling etc. The "backbone" of the car.

If that is designed in the best way the potential of the car will shine through. See also Sauber 2018.

So we are talking about the true definition of the word, it's the tub and the structural components of the engine & gearbox. It's a bit of leap to say that RB had the best chassis in 2018 on the basis of some strong results at the end of the season, isn't it? As pure spectators, how could we possibly determine the performance of a "chassis" on it's own?

Google... no seriously. That cannot be a serious question diesel. haha.

This is Horner, but his comments echo's my sentiments when I watched certain races. You make comparisons of different parameters in different conditions and also you look at the car itself.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red- ... r/4316075/

[turbof1]

Usually when they say "chassis", they mean the performance of the car as a whole without the power unit. We are talking about aerodynamic performance, suspension, weight distribution,... . It's been applied mostly in media, basically to say nothing with something.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Usually when they say "chassis", they mean the performance of the car as a whole without the power unit. We are talking about aerodynamic performance, suspension, weight distribution,... . It's been applied mostly in media, basically to say nothing with something.

Agreed. And my original comment stands, the RB "chassis" (i.e. car excluding the PU) was possibly the most improved of 2018, but certainly not the best of 2018.

[ME4ME]

With an additional 50 hp or whatever might have been the difference I think Red Bull would have destroyed its competition all year long - on pure performance. They would however never have been champions; too many failures on their own watch.

[Wouter]

It's a bit of leap to say that RB had the best chassis in 2018 on the basis of some strong results at the end of the season, isn't it?

And my original comment stands, the RB "chassis" (i.e. car excluding the PU) was possibly the most improved of 2018, but certainly not the best of 2018.

Strong results at the end of the saeson?

These are the results of Max Verstappen after the 4e race of the season with a car that had more than 50 HP less power than Ferrari and Mercedes. I think that says enough.


SPA. 3... MON. 9 ... CAN. 3... FRA. 2... ÖST. 1... GBR. 15†... GER. 4... HON. DNF... BEL. 3... ITA. 5... SIN. 2... RUS. 5... JPN. 3... AUS. 2... MEX. 1... BRA. 2... ABU. 3...

[PlatinumZealot]

Usually when they say "chassis", they mean the performance of the car as a whole without the power unit. We are talking about aerodynamic performance, suspension, weight distribution,... . It's been applied mostly in media, basically to say nothing with something.

Context is important, my friend.
Lest you forget, this is f1-technical, not some casual media page.
Go one level up and you will observe that this very site has an "Aerodynamics, CHASSIS, and tyres" section. Separate terms in the context of this forum. As a moderator you must be consistent to avoid confusing other users. In fact, going by the rules of the site, I am obligated to down-vote you for your post, but I wont (this time)