Hi,
can someone explain to me how can it be that basically two identical cars are virtually first and last
difference in pace is huge considering all the simmilarities
please explain thanks
Now, I know STR is few steps back, but still, it is too much
Full Version: STR last, RBR first ? how?
Is this a joke?
First of all, STR are much smaller and run a much less experienced team.
Secondly, they are not identical cars - they get upgrades, but only when Red Bull wills it. They are essentially forced to the back of the grid as a breeding ground for new drivers. At least they were allowed to compete when they were known as Minardi. now they're just a glorified GP2 team.
Secondly, they are not identical cars - they get upgrades, but only when Red Bull wills it. They are essentially forced to the back of the grid as a breeding ground for new drivers. At least they were allowed to compete when they were known as Minardi. now they're just a glorified GP2 team.
Unexperienced drivers
QUOTE (crashgate @ Oct 29 2009, 13:26) 
Hi,
can someone explain to me how can it be that basically two identical cars are virtually first and last
can someone explain to me how can it be that basically two identical cars are virtually first and last
Look IndyCars, GP2, etc. There you have identical cars, yet some team-driver combinations are far ahead, while others are far behind. Explain.
QUOTE (dank @ Oct 29 2009, 13:33)
Is this a joke?
Vettel won in Monza 2008
was that a joke?
QUOTE (crashgate @ Oct 29 2009, 12:46)
Vettel won in Monza 2008
was that a joke?
was that a joke?
No. But where does he drive now? Oh that's right, for the Red Bull 'A-Team' in a car where 500 employees plough hundreds of working hours into and is constantly several development steps ahead of its Toro Rosso equivalent.
QUOTE (crashgate @ Oct 29 2009, 23:46)
Vettel won in Monza 2008
was that a joke?
was that a joke?
No, he won. But qualifying had been an absolute washout, and the likes of Hamilton and Massa and Raikkonen mde a bad tyre choice early on. Vettel took pole and led from there. And wile the circuit eventually started to dry out, he just stayed in front the entire time. It's not like he was racing everyone else in a straight fight, or came frm behind the way he did in Brazil this year: he played his hand very well right from the start, and it paid off.
An experiment I would like to see, is that the last race of the season is at the same track as the first race of the season.
Then we would be able to quantify in season development (assuming similar weather)!
Basically, the Red Bull of now is much faster than the Red Bull of March 2009. So if STR lags behind in terms of team infrasturcture and development, there's your answer.
Then we would be able to quantify in season development (assuming similar weather)!
Basically, the Red Bull of now is much faster than the Red Bull of March 2009. So if STR lags behind in terms of team infrasturcture and development, there's your answer.
theyre was also a report in the middle of the season that they were used by ferrari to evaluate engine efficiency at different mileages i-e they were made to run older engines throughout the weekend to test when the performance drop occured.
QUOTE (crashgate @ Oct 29 2009, 10:46)
Vettel won in Monza 2008
was that a joke?
was that a joke?
You answered your own question. RBR will make sure they don't look silly again.
Well, what are the differences between the 2 teams: engines for one, drivers, team members, management, and budget, especially after Red Bull Racing emerged as a race winner and championship contender. The chassis' are the same for RBR and STR, but that's about it.
It's most probably down to three things mainly - tyres, drivers and testing (lack of).
Firstly, STR achieved better results than the senior team last year, mainly down to its wunderkid (who is now driving for Red Bull) and down to a different weight distribution which had been built into the car by Giorgio Ascanelli. That allowed them to work the tyres more effectively than the Red Bull did. I'm not sure exactly what the change was that they made, but it was fairly early-on in the design stage and Red Bull weren't able to - or weren't inclined to (defer resources from the 2009 car) copy it. The Renault engine's relative lack of power also exacerbated the problem it is fair to note.
This year they have a more complex car to work with, something which STR doesn't have the resources to get its head around as quickly, they have also - as you mentioned - been playing catch-up on new development items. Bear in mind that Red Bull have been wasting more carbon fiber in new aero-pieces this season than Crazy Dave Coulthard managed to smash-up last season with all his accidents. For each race they come up with an average of 3.5 aero packages - evaluated either at the wind tunnel, with CFD, in straight-line tests or in Friday practice - then using this constant production approach they've chosen the best one to go racing with.
STR have subsequently inherited upgrades once Red Bull has evaluated them (raced them in other words) meaning that by the time STR puts a part on its car Red Bull are at least 7 steps ahead of them and have more wind-tunnel time/simulation tools to be able to understand how those parts are working with the rest of the car.
This year's tyres are notoriously sensitive to temperature (Brawn a prime case study), so even slight variations in how the car manages its tyres and basically a good car becomes un-drivable. Note Jenson Button's comments on the team radio at (was it Silverstone or Germany?) 'how can this car have got so bad' and that was at least in part, the result of (the team who had the best car over the balance of the season) putting an upgrade on the car that had a side-effect of making it almost impossible to get heat into the tyres. Imagine how difficult it must be therefore, for the least well resourced team on the grid, using aero-pieces which (quite often) were designed specifically for a another race track and who either don't have any tyre-modelling (matlab, simulink etc) capability, or at best quite basic facilities.
There are many other reasons, but I think these are probably the main ones.
Firstly, STR achieved better results than the senior team last year, mainly down to its wunderkid (who is now driving for Red Bull) and down to a different weight distribution which had been built into the car by Giorgio Ascanelli. That allowed them to work the tyres more effectively than the Red Bull did. I'm not sure exactly what the change was that they made, but it was fairly early-on in the design stage and Red Bull weren't able to - or weren't inclined to (defer resources from the 2009 car) copy it. The Renault engine's relative lack of power also exacerbated the problem it is fair to note.
This year they have a more complex car to work with, something which STR doesn't have the resources to get its head around as quickly, they have also - as you mentioned - been playing catch-up on new development items. Bear in mind that Red Bull have been wasting more carbon fiber in new aero-pieces this season than Crazy Dave Coulthard managed to smash-up last season with all his accidents. For each race they come up with an average of 3.5 aero packages - evaluated either at the wind tunnel, with CFD, in straight-line tests or in Friday practice - then using this constant production approach they've chosen the best one to go racing with.
STR have subsequently inherited upgrades once Red Bull has evaluated them (raced them in other words) meaning that by the time STR puts a part on its car Red Bull are at least 7 steps ahead of them and have more wind-tunnel time/simulation tools to be able to understand how those parts are working with the rest of the car.
This year's tyres are notoriously sensitive to temperature (Brawn a prime case study), so even slight variations in how the car manages its tyres and basically a good car becomes un-drivable. Note Jenson Button's comments on the team radio at (was it Silverstone or Germany?) 'how can this car have got so bad' and that was at least in part, the result of (the team who had the best car over the balance of the season) putting an upgrade on the car that had a side-effect of making it almost impossible to get heat into the tyres. Imagine how difficult it must be therefore, for the least well resourced team on the grid, using aero-pieces which (quite often) were designed specifically for a another race track and who either don't have any tyre-modelling (matlab, simulink etc) capability, or at best quite basic facilities.
There are many other reasons, but I think these are probably the main ones.
And since the loophole that allows both teams to run the same chassis is being closed at the end of this year, Toro Rosso have most likely thrown more money at their base of operations in Faenza to allow them to build their own car rather than putting it into the 2009 warchest.
QUOTE (egg1980 @ Oct 30 2009, 00:10)
It's most probably down to three things mainly - tyres, drivers and testing (lack of).
Firstly, STR achieved better results than the senior team last year, mainly down to its wunderkid (who is now driving for Red Bull) and down to a different weight distribution which had been built into the car by Giorgio Ascanelli. That allowed them to work the tyres more effectively than the Red Bull did. I'm not sure exactly what the change was that they made, but it was fairly early-on in the design stage and Red Bull weren't able to - or weren't inclined to (defer resources from the 2009 car) copy it. The Renault engine's relative lack of power also exacerbated the problem it is fair to note.
This year they have a more complex car to work with, something which STR doesn't have the resources to get its head around as quickly, they have also - as you mentioned - been playing catch-up on new development items. Bear in mind that Red Bull have been wasting more carbon fiber in new aero-pieces this season than Crazy Dave Coulthard managed to smash-up last season with all his accidents. For each race they come up with an average of 3.5 aero packages - evaluated either at the wind tunnel, with CFD, in straight-line tests or in Friday practice - then using this constant production approach they've chosen the best one to go racing with.
STR have subsequently inherited upgrades once Red Bull has evaluated them (raced them in other words) meaning that by the time STR puts a part on its car Red Bull are at least 7 steps ahead of them and have more wind-tunnel time/simulation tools to be able to understand how those parts are working with the rest of the car.
This year's tyres are notoriously sensitive to temperature (Brawn a prime case study), so even slight variations in how the car manages its tyres and basically a good car becomes un-drivable. Note Jenson Button's comments on the team radio at (was it Silverstone or Germany?) 'how can this car have got so bad' and that was at least in part, the result of (the team who had the best car over the balance of the season) putting an upgrade on the car that had a side-effect of making it almost impossible to get heat into the tyres. Imagine how difficult it must be therefore, for the least well resourced team on the grid, using aero-pieces which (quite often) were designed specifically for a another race track and who either don't have any tyre-modelling (matlab, simulink etc) capability, or at best quite basic facilities.
There are many other reasons, but I think these are probably the main ones.
Firstly, STR achieved better results than the senior team last year, mainly down to its wunderkid (who is now driving for Red Bull) and down to a different weight distribution which had been built into the car by Giorgio Ascanelli. That allowed them to work the tyres more effectively than the Red Bull did. I'm not sure exactly what the change was that they made, but it was fairly early-on in the design stage and Red Bull weren't able to - or weren't inclined to (defer resources from the 2009 car) copy it. The Renault engine's relative lack of power also exacerbated the problem it is fair to note.
This year they have a more complex car to work with, something which STR doesn't have the resources to get its head around as quickly, they have also - as you mentioned - been playing catch-up on new development items. Bear in mind that Red Bull have been wasting more carbon fiber in new aero-pieces this season than Crazy Dave Coulthard managed to smash-up last season with all his accidents. For each race they come up with an average of 3.5 aero packages - evaluated either at the wind tunnel, with CFD, in straight-line tests or in Friday practice - then using this constant production approach they've chosen the best one to go racing with.
STR have subsequently inherited upgrades once Red Bull has evaluated them (raced them in other words) meaning that by the time STR puts a part on its car Red Bull are at least 7 steps ahead of them and have more wind-tunnel time/simulation tools to be able to understand how those parts are working with the rest of the car.
This year's tyres are notoriously sensitive to temperature (Brawn a prime case study), so even slight variations in how the car manages its tyres and basically a good car becomes un-drivable. Note Jenson Button's comments on the team radio at (was it Silverstone or Germany?) 'how can this car have got so bad' and that was at least in part, the result of (the team who had the best car over the balance of the season) putting an upgrade on the car that had a side-effect of making it almost impossible to get heat into the tyres. Imagine how difficult it must be therefore, for the least well resourced team on the grid, using aero-pieces which (quite often) were designed specifically for a another race track and who either don't have any tyre-modelling (matlab, simulink etc) capability, or at best quite basic facilities.
There are many other reasons, but I think these are probably the main ones.
the main reason STR was beating RBR last year was the ferrari engine and lackluster renault engine. Even Bourdais was beating Webber/DC, it wasn't Vettel.
QUOTE (LukeM @ Oct 29 2009, 13:15)
the main reason STR was beating RBR last year was the ferrari engine and lackluster renault engine. Even Bourdais was beating Webber/DC, it wasn't Vettel.
Read the fifth line.
QUOTE (Captain Tightpants @ Oct 29 2009, 14:10)
And since the loophole that allows both teams to run the same chassis is being closed at the end of this year, Toro Rosso have most likely thrown more money at their base of operations in Faenza to allow them to build their own car rather than putting it into the 2009 warchest.
+ smaller team + less experienced drivers + the back of the grid isn't as far behind the front as it used to be.
QUOTE (egg1980 @ Oct 29 2009, 14:20)
Read the fifth line.
You thought it 'fair to note' but LukeM is suggesting it is 'the main reason'.
QUOTE (Buttoneer @ Oct 29 2009, 14:12)
You thought it 'fair to note' but LukeM is suggesting it is 'the main reason'.
OK, I accept your point.
I disagree with the statement though. I don't think there was one main reason, I think it was a combination of several factors.
Unfortunately I can't find any of the quotes I've read from Ascanelli which I'm basing my reasoning on, so I will have to leave it purely as my opinion.
I don't buy the drivers argument at all because Webber is your control driver. Vettel blew DC and Webber away last year and at some races so did Bourdais. This year Webber is far closer to vettel than last year with broken leg and all.
it doesn't make sense, STR stumbled onto something that made the car work.
it doesn't make sense, STR stumbled onto something that made the car work.
There was an article about it which I m afraid I can't find but the jist of it was that the Ferrari package allowed STR to modify the car's weight distribution and that had a huge effect on performance, made the car alot more stable under lateral load.
This is from memory so don't sue me if it's not 100% accurate, but that's what I remember of it.
This is from memory so don't sue me if it's not 100% accurate, but that's what I remember of it.
QUOTE (EthanM @ Oct 29 2009, 15:03)
There was an article about it which I m afraid I can't find but the jist of it was that the Ferrari package allowed STR to modify the car's weight distribution and that had a huge effect on performance, made the car alot more stable under lateral load.
This is from memory so don't sue me if it's not 100% accurate, but that's what I remember of it.
This is from memory so don't sue me if it's not 100% accurate, but that's what I remember of it.
That's what I was trying to find! Thank you, I thought I was going nuts...
@ egg1980 
nice explanation, thank you
nice explanation, thank you
QUOTE (crashgate @ Oct 29 2009, 15:10)
@ egg1980
nice explanation, thank you
nice explanation, thank you
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.