Aston Martin Red Bull Racing TAG Heuer RB14

[GPR-A]

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...

You are mixing qualifying and race performances. So called 50 HP disadvantage is in quali mode where Mercedes and Ferrari turn up their engines to the max. In races, that difference is much lesser as Merc and Ferrari can't use the same power mode in races. Race results are a combination of various different factors and doesn't reflect the actual performance of a car, all the time. For instance, Vettel took out Bottas in France that allowed the good result to Verstappen. In Germany, Vettel crashed out allowing one higher finish for Ver. So, essentially, the RB won on merit towards the end of the year.

On a circuit like Singapore which is all chassis, which is tailor made for Red Bull and a nightmare circuit for Mercedes, the RB14 finished behind Mercedes. Especially, when Mercedes had struggled in Monaco where RB was dominant.

[dfegan358]

The red bull had fresher Renault power units at the last few races whereas Ferrari and Mercedes were on engine 3 with a lot more mileage! Definitely had an impact on relative performance.

I’m sure RB improved car performance in latter races but if all had the same engine mileage it would have been slightly different.

[carisi2k]

The red bull had fresher Renault power units at the last few races whereas Ferrari and Mercedes were on engine 3 with a lot more mileage! Definitely had an impact on relative performance.

I’m sure RB improved car performance in latter races but if all had the same engine mileage it would have been slightly different.

I think you should think again about this statement. Renault was just putting spare parts in the engine at the end of the year for red bull and no actual fresh engines. Also even with these supposedly fresher engines they were still 50hp down on old ferrari and mercedes engines. Max also didn't have an engine change since the russian grand prix.

[Wynters]

If I recall correctly, Verstappen used a third more ICE, TC, MGU-H and MGU-K components than the Mercedes and Ferrari leaders and fifty percent more ES and CE components.

Just because you take a fresh engine in Russia, doesn't mean you aren't consistently rotating and using your pool of engine parts throughout the rest of the season. That's a significant edge on your opponents.

The Red Bull undoubtedly has a very good chassis, but it's very hard to be certain that it was the best given the vast number of varying factors that contribute to performance.

[carisi2k]

If I recall correctly, Verstappen used a third more ICE, TC, MGU-H and MGU-K components than the Mercedes and Ferrari leaders and fifty percent more ES and CE components.

Just because you take a fresh engine in Russia, doesn't mean you aren't consistently rotating and using your pool of engine parts throughout the rest of the season. That's a significant edge on your opponents.

The Red Bull undoubtedly has a very good chassis, but it's very hard to be certain that it was the best given the vast number of varying factors that contribute to performance.

you can't rotate stuff that is burnt and/or broken like most of the parts in the back of the rb14 in 2018. Anything that would have been changed late in the year in the pool would not have been young and had some mileage on it or else he would have been forced to take new parts which he didn't post russia aside from a gearbox. I believe that Daniel could have won bahrain if his battery didn't expole on the second lap and Max could have won singapore if he didn't have a misbehaving engine and should have won brazil. That would have left red bull with 7 victories.

[Juzh]

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...

You are mixing qualifying and race performances. So called 50 HP disadvantage is in quali mode where Mercedes and Ferrari turn up their engines to the max. In races, that difference is much lesser as Merc and Ferrari can't use the same power mode in races. Race results are a combination of various different factors and doesn't reflect the actual performance of a car, all the time. For instance, Vettel took out Bottas in France that allowed the good result to Verstappen. In Germany, Vettel crashed out allowing one higher finish for Ver. So, essentially, the RB won on merit towards the end of the year.

On a circuit like Singapore which is all chassis, which is tailor made for Red Bull and a nightmare circuit for Mercedes, the RB14 finished behind Mercedes. Especially, when Mercedes had struggled in Monaco where RB was dominant.

Since you've brought up singapore, Verstappen had engine problems with poor driveability troughout quali (another renault trait), on top of that 10hb is worth 0.1s even in singapore. This would make RB start at least 0,5s on the back foot.

Hear it from someone who knows what he's talking about:

This was back in 2015, I'd say with 2018 cars having lots more drag across the board, the differences for any given HP advantages are even higher now, especially since the amount of time on full throttle has gone up probably like 30% with laptimes like 8s faster than in 2015.

We've also seen in mexico RB was easily the best car when engine disadvantage was at least somewhat pulled back and also interestingly enough in brasil.

[GPR-A]

Since you've brought up singapore, Verstappen had engine problems with poor driveability troughout quali (another renault trait), on top of that 10hb is worth 0.1s even in singapore. This would make RB start at least 0,5s on the back foot.

Hear it from someone who knows what he's talking about:
https://streamable.com/r2zgz
This was back in 2015, I'd say with 2018 cars having lots more drag across the board, the differences for any given HP advantages are even higher now, especially since the amount of time on full throttle has gone up probably like 30% with laptimes like 8s faster than in 2015.

Well, the problem that Renault has is, peak power deficit, which gets exaggerated on circuits like Baku, Spa and Monza. But on circuits like Monaco, Hungary and Singapore, the peak power doesn't play such a big role as there are no long straights asking for too much from the hybrid systems, where Renault lacks.

The increase on throttle percentage, is not on straight lines, but on cornering, where Renault doesn't have a disadvantage. Marina bay is full of slow corners and there are only a few corners where cars corner around 200kph. On qualifying speed trap, Hamilton was 308.7kph and Verstappen was 301.2 kph and on Finish line, Hamilton was 266.0kph and Verstappen was 262.5. Due to such high breaking performance, it's not that hard to recharge the batteries, which means the batteries can get charged quickly, though they hardly get empty on this circuit.

Until 2017, RB was ahead despite facing the same parameters of increase in drag, low on PU power.

We've also seen in mexico RB was easily the best car when engine disadvantage was at least somewhat pulled back and also interestingly enough in brasil.

In qualifying, on a such a short circuit, RB was still half a second behind. In races, Mercedes had pulled out their new rims in US, Mexico and Brazil, that caused the tire life issues. So comparing performance in races doesn't make sense due to various changeable parameters.

[Juzh]

Since you've brought up singapore, Verstappen had engine problems with poor driveability troughout quali (another renault trait), on top of that 10hb is worth 0.1s even in singapore. This would make RB start at least 0,5s on the back foot.

Hear it from someone who knows what he's talking about:
https://streamable.com/r2zgz
This was back in 2015, I'd say with 2018 cars having lots more drag across the board, the differences for any given HP advantages are even higher now, especially since the amount of time on full throttle has gone up probably like 30% with laptimes like 8s faster than in 2015.

Well, the problem that Renault has is, peak power deficit, which gets exaggerated on circuits like Baku, Spa and Monza. But on circuits like Monaco, Hungary and Singapore, the peak power doesn't play such a big role as there are no long straights asking for too much from the hybrid systems, where Renault lacks.

Yes, it doesn't play a SUCH role, but it still does, or did you intentionally skip over my entire point of the post? On tracks such as singapore it plays a role in the region of 0.1s per 10 bhp. So you can just imagine the role it plays on tracks such as baku, russia, monza, silverstone, suzuka.. to name just a few.

Anyway I fully expect you're not gonna take a single thing into consideration from my argument, so i'm gonna end the discussion from my side. No point in spinning in circles.

[GPR-A]

Yes, it doesn't play a SUCH role, but it still does, or did you intentionally skip over my entire point of the post? On tracks such as singapore it plays a role in the region of 0.1s per 10 bhp. So you can just imagine the role it plays on tracks such as baku, russia, monza, silverstone, suzuka.. to name just a few.

Anyway I fully expect you're not gonna take a single thing into consideration from my argument, so i'm gonna end the discussion from my side. No point in spinning in circles.

Sarcasm doesn't add any value to a post. What points are you talking about that I did not counter?

0.1 Second for 10 hp was being used a reference since V8 days, when the cars were over 100 kilo lesser in weight than what they are today. Increased weight of the current cars naturally reduces the impact from 0.1 second that 10 hp creates. Plus, increased drag due to added downforce of the current generation cars reduce the impact of 10hp even further. So you need to recalculate that better.
Here is a 2015 article from JamesAllen that talks about the advantage of 30hp. The article still uses the 10hp equals to 0.1, which was used by Gary Anderson a couple of years before that.
https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2015/06/ ... nt-engine/
FERRARI HOPING TO CHALLENGE MERCEDES WITH 30HP BOOST FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT ENGINE

It will be interesting to see how much closer the new Ferrari power unit brings them to the Mercedes cars. The gap in qualifying has been around 7/10ths of a second and there should be around 3/10ths in the power unit upgrade, if the indiscretions on the extent of the update are accurate. The gap in races, however has been less (apart from Spain, where Ferrari struggled with the tyres)

Assuming you do believe 10 hp equals 0.1 seconds, especially in Singapore, then that should compound and reach around a second on power hungry circuits! Which of course, is not the case.

You are either not paying attention OR do not want to. The fact is, by Red Bull's own admission, they lack 40kw (which translates to 53hp - Link below) on peak power! They cry out loud that it hampers their straight line performance on long stretches. You seem to be averaging out that 40kw throughout a lap to support your argument, which is plain wrong.
Link -> Red Bull: Extra 40kW from Renault could've changed 2018 F1 season

[Wynters]

Anything that would have been changed late in the year in the pool would not have been young and had some mileage on it or else he would have been forced to take new parts which he didn't post russia aside from a gearbox.

If I have to do 7 races on one component, and you do two races on one component (which then blows up during the third race) and the last four races using a replacement component, you have a fresher component than I do for those last four races and, not only is it fresher, you only have to worry about stretching it over 4 races worth of mileage so you can run it at an even higher setting.

It's also simplistic just to focus on one factor to define chassis quality. The ICE is a significant contributor to pace but there are other factors that seem to be ignored at the moment.

For instance, looking at fastest laps (car pushed to the maximum under race conditions), Bottas was much faster than Hamilton last year. Is this an accurate reflection of their ability? Or, indeed, the relative performance of their chassis (as they will have used the same mapping)? Or are there many other factors and context involved that defined their performance?

[Juzh]

Yes, it doesn't play a SUCH role, but it still does, or did you intentionally skip over my entire point of the post? On tracks such as singapore it plays a role in the region of 0.1s per 10 bhp. So you can just imagine the role it plays on tracks such as baku, russia, monza, silverstone, suzuka.. to name just a few.

Anyway I fully expect you're not gonna take a single thing into consideration from my argument, so i'm gonna end the discussion from my side. No point in spinning in circles.

Assuming you do believe 10 hp equals 0.1 seconds, especially in Singapore, then that should compound and reach around a second on power hungry circuits! Which of course, is not the case.

I believe it is. 80 hp for 6.67s from the old style KERS (2009,2011-2013) was worth 0.3-0.5s. This ofcourse when deployed optimally troughout the lap, but we're talking only 6.67s after all. Now take monza for example. In 2018 it was around 58s full throttle. So that's 58s of 40kw deficit and we're not even talking about renault's inferior ERS deployment time.

In the race deficit is decreased but remains significant. Below are screenshots of typical speeds achieved on some laps. Vettel has some distant cars in front of him in this case, however when he was actually close to any cars in those locations his speed was at least 10 kmh higher than in these screenshots. And for monza there is absolutely no doubt who ran the skinniest wings of the top 3 teams.

Plus, increased drag due to added downforce of the current generation cars reduce the impact of 10hp even further. So you need to recalculate that better.

What? It's the other way around. The more drag the more higher power will benefit you, because inherently you will spend more time on the straight than with less drag.

You are either not paying attention OR do not want to. The fact is, by Red Bull's own admission, they lack 40kw (which translates to 53hp - Link below) on peak power! They cry out loud that it hampers their straight line performance on long stretches. You seem to be averaging out that 40kw throughout a lap to support your argument, which is plain wrong.
Link -> Red Bull: Extra 40kW from Renault could've changed 2018 F1 season

I just don't understand what you mean by this peak power figure and where seems to be the issue? Yes, whenever cars are on full throttle in Q2 or Q3, renault is 40kw down. At the end of straights, they're down even more power because their ers is garbage compared to merc/ferrari.

this post is probably going to be deleted by mods for being offtopic, but I always seem to get trapped in these kind of conversations in the wrong topics.. Maybe because we're talking about an old car it would be allowed to stay?

[LM10]

Yes, it doesn't play a SUCH role, but it still does, or did you intentionally skip over my entire point of the post? On tracks such as singapore it plays a role in the region of 0.1s per 10 bhp. So you can just imagine the role it plays on tracks such as baku, russia, monza, silverstone, suzuka.. to name just a few.

Anyway I fully expect you're not gonna take a single thing into consideration from my argument, so i'm gonna end the discussion from my side. No point in spinning in circles.

Assuming you do believe 10 hp equals 0.1 seconds, especially in Singapore, then that should compound and reach around a second on power hungry circuits! Which of course, is not the case.

In the race deficit is decreased but remains significant. Below are screenshots of typical speeds achieved on some laps. Vettel has some distant cars in front of him in this case, however when he was actually close to any cars in those locations his speed was at least 10 kmh higher than in these screenshots. And for monza there is absolutely no doubt who ran the skinniest wings of the top 3 teams.

https://i.imgur.com/hiA66SP.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/AOy1EhS.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/pjTUK6k.jpg

Ferrari obviously went for a low drag concept in 2018. To only blame the engine for lack of speed on the straights is therefore a bit unfair.
Of course the Renault engine is inferior to the Ferrari one, but I think RBR would have still been slower on the straights if they had the same engine. Their downforce level is amazing, but this comes with other negative aspects. When RBR dominated back in the V8 era they did not have one of the fastest straight line speeds either.

[Capharol]

Ferrari obviously went for a low drag concept in 2018. To only blame the engine for lack of speed on the straights is therefore a bit unfair.
Of course the Renault engine is inferior to the Ferrari one, but I think RBR would have still been slower on the straights if they had the same engine. Their downforce level is amazing, but this comes with other negative aspects. When RBR dominated back in the V8 era they did not have one of the fastest straight line speeds either.

but the difference wouldn't have been 15-20 Km/h, due to there downforce level, maybe 5-10 Km/h

[carisi2k]

Anything that would have been changed late in the year in the pool would not have been young and had some mileage on it or else he would have been forced to take new parts which he didn't post russia aside from a gearbox.

If I have to do 7 races on one component, and you do two races on one component (which then blows up during the third race) and the last four races using a replacement component, you have a fresher component than I do for those last four races and, not only is it fresher, you only have to worry about stretching it over 4 races worth of mileage so you can run it at an even higher setting.

It's also simplistic just to focus on one factor to define chassis quality. The ICE is a significant contributor to pace but there are other factors that seem to be ignored at the moment.

For instance, looking at fastest laps (car pushed to the maximum under race conditions), Bottas was much faster than Hamilton last year. Is this an accurate reflection of their ability? Or, indeed, the relative performance of their chassis (as they will have used the same mapping)? Or are there many other factors and context involved that defined their performance?

anything that would have been put on max's car at the end of the year would not have been new since he never took penalties and so therefore it would have been old parts used again and not nice new fresh parts as you have suggested.

[carisi2k]

Ferrari obviously went for a low drag concept in 2018. To only blame the engine for lack of speed on the straights is therefore a bit unfair.
Of course the Renault engine is inferior to the Ferrari one, but I think RBR would have still been slower on the straights if they had the same engine. Their downforce level is amazing, but this comes with other negative aspects. When RBR dominated back in the V8 era they did not have one of the fastest straight line speeds either.

The speed disadvantage in the v8 era did not matter because of Red Bulls huge cornering advantage with the blown, double, off throttle and coanda exhaust systems. So the hp difference makes a bigger issue these days because they don't have anywhere near the cornering advantage they had in the v8 era from mid 2009 to the end of 2013.

Those Red Bull cars were often 10-20 km/h faster in the corners which the current cars are not compared to mercedes and ferrari. To suggest the ferrari is a low drag car is silly since they were dominant early in the season on many of the circuits that required good downforce as well as straight line speed. Ferrari just lost there way in the middle of the season when lewis went on that run.