[ 2020 ] Aston Martin RedBull Racing F1 Team - Honda

[langedweil]

Fia changing front wing to simpler ones was a disastrous decision but they knew it was going to hurt high rake cars just look at Ferrari.if Rbr can't fix their usage and rear stability we have to wait for 2022 to something interesting

Now to say it was a disastrous decision for Red Bull is a moot point. Its about how well teams respond to these rule changes that matters the most in the competition. Mercedes went from high rake to low rake, from shorter wheel base to longer wheel base and encountered challenges along the way, but that team found solutions to fix the problems.

Ehm, no .. they've had low rake and longer wheelbase a long time before 2018, and this was entirely clear when this simpler FW directive came about.
It was always going to effect high rake/short(er) wheelbase a lot harder.

[Moore77]

Fia changing front wing to simpler ones was a disastrous decision but they knew it was going to hurt high rake cars just look at Ferrari.if Rbr can't fix their usage and rear stability we have to wait for 2022 to something interesting

Now to say it was a disastrous decision for Red Bull is a moot point. Its about how well teams respond to these rule changes that matters the most in the competition. Mercedes went from high rake to low rake, from shorter wheel base to longer wheel base and encountered challenges along the way, but that team found solutions to fix the problems.

Ehm, no .. they've had low rake and longer wheelbase a long time before 2018, and this was entirely clear when this simpler FW directive came about.
It was always going to effect high rake/short(er) wheelbase a lot harder.

Show me one single credible article or post here on forums with some logic to define why it would hit the cars with high rake that predicted this before the cars hit the ground in 2019. I remember reading hundreds of post justifying High Rake is the way to go with the new, simplified front wing.

Marko, the man from within the team had dismissed the impact of new front wing and had said it was waste of money and they had claimed the lost downforce immediately.
https://www.grandprix247.com/2018/11/ ... ion/amp/

“But it is a waste as far as limiting downforce is concerned, we are already more or less at the current level and the overtaking problem remains, it had no effect. We should not talk about budget caps when we make such decisions.”

[Bill]

Rbr knew they were screwed with these aero regulations here the article
https://thesportsrush.com/toto-wolff-ad ... his-angry/

[McMika98]

I don’t buy that. Last week Norris had much better acceleration at the start and now Sainz. Last year Ferrari had the same. At this moment I feel the PU is ALSO part of the problem. I have never said the chassis is already at peak performance but the RB16 is beating the RB15 (alpha tauri) by a large margin already. I think Albon simply received a higher power mode (To run for a few laps) to combat the attack of Perez.

Albon overtook both Norris and Ocon without DRS. Launch does not equal engine power, all 3 engines are close with Merc having a slight advantage but nothing like they had few years ago. Look at dry quali deficit.
Nope Alpha Tauri isn't RB15 in the same way the Racing point is pink Merc, the aero detail is missing.
One cant run high power mode for 20 laps constantly, the battery would lose its juice in between laps. Perez was a second quicker than Albon.
Fact is the car is still not well balanced and not as fast as pink Mercedes. Maybe they will improve but the back to back showed us that they are no where near Merc at least half a second.

[dxpetrov]

Alex's days in RBR are starting to be numbered...
https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/63097/an ... edes-.html

So similar to what happened with Gasly.

[Revs84]

Good analysis of Red Bull's performance in the Styrian GP by Mark Hughes.

The Mercedes’ inherent pace advantage at this stage of the season was further bolstered by the demands of the Red Bull Ring track.

Its layout consumes all of the electrical energy that can be produced, one of the few tracks on the calendar where the ERS stops deploying – which happens earlier on the Honda than the Mercedes. So as the Honda suddenly loses the extra 160bhp, the Mercedes is still accelerating. Hence the speed trap figures.

Which in turn led Red Bull to run less rear wing than Mercedes which in further turn ensured the Red Bull ran its tyres harder than the Mercedes.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/mark-hug ... ix-defeat/

[Bill]

These just dribble not analysis if you want to know what clipping is like you have to go back to 2015 Mclaren Honda. The is know way RbrHonda could match Mercedes on medium tires if the pu suddenly lost 160hp.

People who are blaming the pu are being emotional and implying the Rbr chassis is perfect.fisrt the car is temperamental it was slow on soft tires fast on medium we already knew that from Friday practice.the car works better in hot conditions.the rear is still tail happy.Max had enough power to hold off Bottas until he ran out tires he was never going to trouble Lewis.u can't overlook damage on both front and rear wing.

[loekf2]

Good analysis of Red Bull's performance in the Styrian GP by Mark Hughes.

The Mercedes’ inherent pace advantage at this stage of the season was further bolstered by the demands of the Red Bull Ring track.

Its layout consumes all of the electrical energy that can be produced, one of the few tracks on the calendar where the ERS stops deploying – which happens earlier on the Honda than the Mercedes. So as the Honda suddenly loses the extra 160bhp, the Mercedes is still accelerating. Hence the speed trap figures.

Which in turn led Red Bull to run less rear wing than Mercedes which in further turn ensured the Red Bull ran its tyres harder than the Mercedes.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/mark-hug ... ix-defeat/

Can you explain what causes this bottleneck in the Honda PU ? MGU-K and MGU-H run less efficiently ? AFAIK, the battery capacity and amount of electrical power being deployed is regulated. I thought that Honda made big changes to their turbo (help from their aero division). First time I hear this (so the the-race article).

[Sieper]

These just dribble not analysis if you want to know what clipping is like you have to go back to 2015 Mclaren Honda. The is know way RbrHonda could match Mercedes on medium tires if the pu suddenly lost 160hp.

People who are blaming the pu are being emotional and implying the Rbr chassis is perfect.fisrt the car is temperamental it was slow on soft tires fast on medium we already knew that from Friday practice.the car works better in hot conditions.the rear is still tail happy.Max had enough power to hold off Bottas until he ran out tires he was never going to trouble Lewis.u can't overlook damage on both front and rear wing.

Broad statements. You only have to look at Ferrari to see what the PU means. Sky pad analysis showed the 2020 car is better then the 2019 and still they are now a midfield team. Last year they challenged mercedes (and were both beaten by Max).

[Bill]

Main point is clipping.but is the Rbr better than last car we know pu is.they is reason why Mclaren and force India dropped that high rake philosophy.Both has made noticeable improvements.

[isullivan]

Good analysis of Red Bull's performance in the Styrian GP by Mark Hughes.

The Mercedes’ inherent pace advantage at this stage of the season was further bolstered by the demands of the Red Bull Ring track.

Its layout consumes all of the electrical energy that can be produced, one of the few tracks on the calendar where the ERS stops deploying – which happens earlier on the Honda than the Mercedes. So as the Honda suddenly loses the extra 160bhp, the Mercedes is still accelerating. Hence the speed trap figures.

Which in turn led Red Bull to run less rear wing than Mercedes which in further turn ensured the Red Bull ran its tyres harder than the Mercedes.

Big allegations with no data to confirm, also the wing on the Mercedes looks shallower than on the RB.

[Revs84]

I haven't double checked myself re. rear wing and deployment so cannot really confirm.

This article in AMuS does say that the RB had more downforce, however there is also a comment about Honda stopping deployment earlier.

The engineers' GPS analyzes clearly show where Red Bull loses its time. On the straights and in the fast corners. The loss on the straight line had two reasons this time. Mercedes was on the road with fewer wings than Red Bull, who still have to protect themselves against output fluctuations in the inefficient way of increasing wing pitch.

And the Honda engine lacks steam compared to the Mercedes V6 Turbo. It has regained its market leadership. At Red Bull, they speak of three to four tenths that remain in full load. Let's see how long the peace between Milton Keynes and Tokyo lasts.

Interestingly, the loss of performance is more important in racing than in training. The Mercedes technicians clarify. "Honda switches off the MGU-K on the straights earlier than we do in the race. They can boost longer over a lap." The Japanese have to retrofit with Elektro-Power. Fortunately for them, the regulations still leave room for development. The Red Bull are faster in the slow corners. Wolff confirms: "In curves 3 and 4, they took our time."

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... chwaechen/

As I've said earlier on, I believe the RB16 is losing both in terms of chassis and engine, although I still believe it might be a little bit more of the former at this point.

[Bill]

Amus has made multiple claims in the past that tend out to be false unless we hear something concrete from Honda it's all speculation.the straights in Austria are to short to worry about running out electrical power .The big test will come in silverstone all shall be revealed even then Redbull will be slower in high speed corners so will have to wait for spa to have irrefutable proof .

[etusch]

Maybe Honda stays conservative compared to Mercedes and Mercedes uses hardened modes (I mean modes already using by merc are resetted to give higher output) because of shorter season.

[Revs84]

Amus has made multiple claims in the past that tend out to be false unless we hear something concrete from Honda it's all speculation.the straights in Austria are to short to worry about running out electrical power .The big test will come in silverstone all shall be revealed even then Redbull will be slower in high speed corners so will have to wait for spa to have irrefutable proof .

That's not entirely correct. Austria, with 3 medium length straights and few corners, is one of the top most demanding circuits on the ERS on an F1 calendar.

There's a chance that the Honda engine, whilst in my opinion mostly on par with the Mercedes engine in terms of outputs, might still not be as efficient in energy recovery - thus having less ERS to deploy over one lap.

The good news is that this should not be a problem in Hungary so I'm really looking forward to see how things pan out there.