Well if you put it that way the lighter car of course. But why state the obvious when there are other factors to consider, like suspension geometry, weight distribution, tyre pressures, gearing, aerodynamic efficiency etc etc etc etc.

I'm only responding to the chap on the previous page who stated that he believed weight had nothing to do with the starts.

It is so obvious that a lot of variables influence through the factor F the acceleration of the car that it is superfluous to even mention it. I only pointed out the selfevident fact that mass does play a role.

H2H

Yes, the weight has nothing to do with start, moreover even this season, when difference in the weight minimum between all cars.

And for your question - the car with more weight would have more stability on the straight, launch control would not provide better downforce and if heavier car would get more torque it would have better acceleration.

So let me see: You suggest Red Bull should put 50-60 kgs more at the beginning of the race for better start?
Get serious.

Where I suggest to put 50-60 kg for better start?

I just said the tiny difference in weight because of better fuel consumption has nothing to do with starts.

If you think that F1 is all about first grade physics low - I would not argue with you.

So you saw the car at exactly the same point in qualifying vs the race?

Such scientific and conclusive "proof" there.

I think the point you are trying to make (and the point that is lost) is not that weight has NOTHING to do with the starts, rather weight deltas based on engine fuel consumption variance has LESS of an affect than the driver's abilities off the line.

And that I would agree with you.

In F1 all cars has more or less the same weight, so we can exclude weight from equation. That's why I said weight has nothing with starts. Of course it has impact in some global sense.

Just google a bit to remember the stuff - start depends (and the whole velocity) on traction. Which is extremely complex thing so I don't bother even discuss it. Who wants could google it.

Correct me if I am wrong but the minimum weight in the regulations refers to the "dry" weight, ergo not all F1 cars would start with the same overall car weight given the differences of fuel levels owing to the variance in engine fuel consumption.

So if this is the case then fuel weight WILL make a difference to the start performance, though as I mentioned, I agree that it would have LESS of an effect than the driver's launch abilities, especially given the weight deltas would be marginal.

The whole point H2H brought up zergutmikael was that because of Renaults (alleged) lower fuel consumption, the RBRs are infact lighter than most at the start of the race, which would be part of the reason that we're looking better off the line this year. The rest is just straw man stuff as far as I can see, no ones tried to say how much it actually, erm, weighs into their launch "advantage" (if we can even call it that this early).

Yes, and obviously ceteris paribus it makes a difference but isnt the point that weight is less of a contributor than say the driver's clutch paddle skill.

I would say RB has good starts because of traction, which depends upon suspension, transfer load, downforce, weight distribution, gearing, friction, etc. And Kubica said Renault has a good traction too.

Newey worried about F-duct safety

...
Despite his worries, Newey is working on getting an F-duct onto the Red Bull as soon as possible, because of the straightline speed advantage the concept offers. The team does not yet know when its own version will be ready though.

"It's a tricky question," said Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner. "It will be incorporated into an update at some point. The guys are looking at it.

"But it is a complicated piece of technology and it is important you get it right. We will introduce it when we are happy with the solution."

Newey added: "Many cars, including ours, have been re-designed around the double diffuser. The rhythm of development is high and the speed at which you bring new things remains fundamental.

"We are looking at the F-duct. We have understood how it works, but to get it to work properly is another thing. We don't know when we can take it to the track.

"The difficult thing is that McLaren has designed the chassis around that system, but the rules prevent you from modifying the chassis. Every new thing has to be included in the current structure."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82736

It would not be that quick, I think about second half of the season. Except Canada all speed tracks will be in the second half.

Is there nothing Red Bull won't whine about it?

Considering that RBR have the same driver lineup as last year, then it's probably not the drivers that have changed their skillset for 2010. Unless you want to say something nice about Mark and say how he's improved in this area, rather than lay the foundation for a jibe at him *shrugs*

As for zergutmikael, sure, I have no problem with that, doubt anyone does.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you assumed we've all studied Latin/law/whatever.....and not that you were trying to impress people.

Is there actually any skill involved with the clutch paddle? I was under the impression that it it's an either on or off system and all they do is release the paddle when the the lights go out. Do the drivers actually slip the clutch with the paddle?

Where exactly do you think most of the English languge comes from? What relevance does your post have with this thread?

I believe it's linear rather than a switch but I recall from a few years ago that the system would remember where the bite point is rather than the driver having to find it. For this reason I don't believe there would be any driver skill involved and therefore Webbers wheelspin would be more about a heavy right foot.

Brundle briefly talked about the launch procedure on the BBC lead up show - specifically, there are two clutch paddles, one is released when the lights go out the second is released progressively as the car builds up speed off the line.

He is actually doing a piece in 2 weeks time in the lead up show which outlines the parade lap procedures the drivers follow, am hoping he follows this up with a piece detailing the launch procedure itself.

Why would anyone say anything nice about him re: this area when there has been no improvement, rather the opposite, confirmation that Mark is extremely poor off the line given how well his team mate gets the car going. You cant blame "the car" anymore now, can you?

This will be fun.


Red Bull denies active suspension claims


"We haven't got one, it is as simple as that," said Horner about the continued 'active ride' suspicions that have circulated the paddock.

"If McLaren have one in China we will protest them, because theoretically they are illegal. The FIA had a good look at our car [in Malaysia] on Saturday night and they are happy with it – they will struggle to find anything because there simply isn't anything there."

I must admit to having the slightest suspicion you used a Latin phrase to impress people, and not for the purpose of being understood. If you think that "most of the English language" comes from Latin and therefore we (or most of us) would understand your point, then I concede you weren't being pretentious but are merely ignorant, or worse.

You're not suggesting Newey was whining about the f-duct are you?

That's not proof. Tyre pressures can produce that effect.

To generate optimal grip coefficient at the tyre, you need to get the correct temperature... which you you can get via the correct loading. By al means the car may get better bite off the line with 100kgs placed over the rear axle, as the tyres could be worked harder and get to the right temperature and therefore generate more grip coefficient, potentially. It is not impossible, certainly implausible in F1, but not impossible like the formula student example!

Renault's rear weight bias when they had the Mild Seven colours for example, they always produced super starts.

Horner returning the favour to Whitmarsh who originally returned the favour to Horner for questioning McLaren's car.

Yes it is improper to use phrases not certified by the central English language authority in the day. That they kept 'thy' etc in the translated english Bibles * so opposed by the churches (which their strict historical Latin a must) - for the purposes of greater "authority" and "oldness" in the english version ! - is most comical!

* [even though the central board had already!!! certified the current moderns ways of spelling]

As you say, it's possible but implausible. I think every team would choose the lightest weight, every time, but I concede there may be some instances where this would be wrong.

And the Renault V10 was usually praised for it's torque - would this have something to do with good starts?

*never really understood the difference between torque and power

Yes the rear weight bias helped the starts but it was more to do with balancing the car on the Michelins.

I would say the championship Renaults start line traction came more from its punchy engine and launch control software, which was still legal back then.

Hope he covers that as well. I'd prefer to see a system where the driver has to do all the work and not have anything pre-programmed.

We will see how RBR/Renault perform during the start of the Chinese GP. So far they did pretty well considering how much RBR struggled in some races of the last season.


H2H

In relative terms it looks better this year because they are not being swamped by KERS cars behind them.

Since its an electronic throttle, what other conclusion can there be? Its ridiculous for people to claim Webber wasn't pushing the throttle down all the way.

Webber said:


There was either a software issue with the telemetry or the throttle control, or perhaps the radio call mean't something else and we don't know what their message really mean't. Who knows?

Nonetheless if Renault saw that the throttle wasn't opening fully, its reasonable to think that Webber's start would have been effected somewhat.

ON another issue perhaps, IMO though the best thing for the team was for Seb to win the race, due to his first two race performances (if he did use too much fuel in the first race that would have been the team's fault anyway IMO), his marketing appeal, his youth, his RB driver background, and his qualifying too. Seb didn't loose qualifying to Webber due to skill at Sepang, it was due to tyre choice, hence a team issue separated the drivers (although Seb drove worse than Rosberg did in Q3). If the competition's cars are equal in speed then WDCs can only be won by favouring one driver IMO. Logically Seb should get the team supporting him therefor. It seems anyway that Webber and Seb drive the cars with pretty much the same setups, so favouring Seb would not hurt Webber IMO.

Even Webber doubts the suggestion that the throttle wasn't opening fully - perhaps it was a faulty throttle sensor, and the throttle was working fine. Mark's speed seems to indicate this...

Is it just me who thinks there was perhaps nothing wrong with Mark's throttle and it was just a coded message to turn the engine down and hold station for the 1-2?

Could be - the team was in the perfect situation running 1-2 and they wouldn't really have wanted one or both cars taken out/breaking down. Perhaps Mark thought we should know...

It cost Webber 2.5s in the pit lane and it did not affect the outcome of the race. It was a minor glitch, if you ask me.

Their starts in comparison to non KERS cars were fine last year.

A minor glitch being behind, but if he didn't let Vettel have the corner it would have been a major issue. So regardless of actual effect its potential the team needs to look at, if the team is telling itself its ok because it didn't affect the race someone there needs to give themselves an uppercut.

No chance of that occurring.

keep an eye out for updates to the RB6 at both China and Spain

Do you have a link? Which updates exactly?

Anyone know when the "reliability" updates to the engine will be made?

Those were made before the season.

Hats off to Red Bull Racing! They have a damn fast car. It's so fast, it's not even funny, for a McLaren fan.

newbie is an insider.

I reckon Redbull will adopt the McLaren/Renault type diffuser interpretation with those massive inlets under the car.
McLaren and Renault have found yet another loophole which allowed them create these massive inlets.
Surely most teams are rushing to implement these as well. RedBull included.

Really? Damn...

I guess mirror placement and changes to the aerodynamic part they are now mounted on