Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 10 votes

The RB9 - Red Bull Racing's challenger for 2013


  • Please log in to reply
1490 replies to this topic

#1 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 04 January 2013 - 18:29

With this...

Red Bull playing catch up with RB9 - Newey

And this...

as the RB9 topic is closed, I'm posting this one here:
http://www.auto-moto...fotoshow_item=5
AMuS says that red bull won't do the nose job on the RB9, but keep the letterbox inlet in a similar way to last year.



I hope we have enough concrete info to get an RB9 thread rolling...

Advertisement

#2 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 04 January 2013 - 19:26

With this...

Red Bull playing catch up with RB9 - Newey

And this...




I hope we have enough concrete info to get an RB9 thread rolling...



I smell something fishy about that letterbox. Maybe no one got round to understanding what it was for.

#3 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 5,417 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 05 January 2013 - 07:31

I hope we have enough concrete info to get an RB9 thread rolling...

The cosmetic cover is compulsary isn't it?

I can't see FIA being too pleased at "rule bending" to find an advantage in Newey-style, if there was a clear instruction for all teams to run cosmetic covers.

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 05 January 2013 - 07:31.


#4 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 05 January 2013 - 07:41

The cover is optional. It's going to take getting the bulkhead heights inline to get a mandatory solution.

#5 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,792 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:35

With this...

Red Bull playing catch up with RB9 - Newey

And this...

I hope we have enough concrete info to get an RB9 thread rolling...


“We will be ready later than we would like,” Newey is now quoted by Spain’s El Mundo Deportivo.

“We had to focus until the last moment on development of the RB8 in order to retain the two titles."

“But it’s not a serious problem, because the RB9 is an evolution of the [RB8].”


#6 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:40

“We will be ready later than we would like,” Newey is now quoted by Spain’s El Mundo Deportivo.

“We had to focus until the last moment on development of the RB8 in order to retain the two titles."

“But it’s not a serious problem, because the RB9 is an evolution of the [RB8].”


Even if its an evolution, Im wondering how much the ban on the DDRS is going to, god willing, hurt the RB9's qualy pace.

#7 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,877 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:20

The cosmetic cover is compulsary isn't it?

I can't see FIA being too pleased at "rule bending" to find an advantage in Newey-style, if there was a clear instruction for all teams to run cosmetic covers.

it is not mandatory, and teams will use it only if it is more beneficial than stepped nose I think.

#8 sv401

sv401
  • Member

  • 740 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:23

I would expect more teams to drop the cover if it makes the car slower by even a small fraction of a second per lap.

#9 jstrains

jstrains
  • Member

  • 1,464 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 07 January 2013 - 14:23

The article further says that they might appear with the 2012 car for the first test runs in Jerez. It also shows nice pics of all Newey's winning cars
http://www.auto-moto...fotoshow_item=1

Edited by jstrains, 07 January 2013 - 14:23.


#10 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 14:51

Even if its an evolution, Im wondering how much the ban on the DDRS is going to, god willing, hurt the RB9's qualy pace.


Now that's what you call "Playa hating" :)

#11 Gfhuus

Gfhuus
  • Member

  • 118 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 07 January 2013 - 15:34

Even if its an evolution, Im wondering how much the ban on the DDRS is going to, god willing, hurt the RB9's qualy pace.


My guess is not much. They were able to cope with EBD ban, which had far more severe design implications. DDRS is a small detail compared to that and it wasn't even incorporated in the original design (or do I remember incorrectly?).

#12 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,792 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 January 2013 - 17:13

My guess is not much. They were able to cope with EBD ban, which had far more severe design implications. DDRS is a small detail compared to that and it wasn't even incorporated in the original design (or do I remember incorrectly?).

DDRS was only incorporated into RB8s in Singapore. But it coincided with Vettel's run of 4 straight wins.

#13 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 07 January 2013 - 22:45

Using DRS on only the 2 designated areas will have a big effect for them though.

#14 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 07 January 2013 - 23:45

Using DRS on only the 2 designated areas will have a big effect for them though.


in most GP's its only 1 designated area.

#15 Rikhart

Rikhart
  • Member

  • 581 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 January 2013 - 23:52

Dont think the drs change will hurt red bull much, with their gearing they were hitting the rev limiter in qualy already.

#16 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,773 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 00:29

in most GP's its only 1 designated area.


FIA plans two DRS zones at most tracks in 2013 F1 season. Is this not the thing anymore?


#17 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,862 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 08 January 2013 - 02:30

I think FPV GTHO means in qualy

#18 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 08 January 2013 - 07:39

Yes i did mean qualy. Didnt really think it needed explanation, but anyway...

2012 regs had unlimited DRS use outside of the race. As such Red Bull built their cars around qualifying that could survive a race so long as they were 1+ seconds ahead in first. Anything less than that theyve suffered.

2013 they can only use DRS in the designated zones, which is intended to be 2 zones at most tracks. That will likely mean the car will need to have more genuine top speed to be competitive as they wont be able to build a high downforce draggy car with DRS as a top speed bandaid to get it on the front row.

#19 jstrains

jstrains
  • Member

  • 1,464 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 08 January 2013 - 09:00

Absolutely true, would have Ferrari qualified higher, the WDC would have been a different story. But only 2013 will tell...

Advertisement

#20 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 11:47

FIA plans two DRS zones at most tracks in 2013 F1 season. Is this not the thing anymore?


Apologies, but this is the first am hearing of that.

#21 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,476 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 10 January 2013 - 14:13

Red Bull Racing ‏@redbullracing

The RB9 will be unveiled on Sunday 3 February in Milton Keynes ahead of the first test in Jerez. More details to follow...

#22 Rikhart

Rikhart
  • Member

  • 581 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 January 2013 - 23:09

Yes i did mean qualy. Didnt really think it needed explanation, but anyway...

2012 regs had unlimited DRS use outside of the race. As such Red Bull built their cars around qualifying that could survive a race so long as they were 1+ seconds ahead in first. Anything less than that theyve suffered.

2013 they can only use DRS in the designated zones, which is intended to be 2 zones at most tracks. That will likely mean the car will need to have more genuine top speed to be competitive as they wont be able to build a high downforce draggy car with DRS as a top speed bandaid to get it on the front row.


You are getting this all wrong. Its the fact that they are the car with the most downforce that allows them to qualify better than others, and usually have better race pace too. Downforce is everything in the current F1. And everyone had access to DRS during qualy, and its arguable red bull, with their gearing not optimized for it, like I wrote above, might not even be the ones that benefited more from DRS anyway.

Edited by Rikhart, 10 January 2013 - 23:11.


#23 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,438 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 11 January 2013 - 02:18

You are getting this all wrong. Its the fact that they are the car with the most downforce that allows them to qualify better than others, and usually have better race pace too. Downforce is everything in the current F1. And everyone had access to DRS during qualy, and its arguable red bull, with their gearing not optimized for it, like I wrote above, might not even be the ones that benefited more from DRS anyway.


Red Bull were getting a quali advantage by using DRS in the twisty bits, where other cars couldn't use it.

They have now been prevented from using it in those areas, so they will suffer a disadvantage from this rule change.



#24 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,862 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:01

Tick!



#25 Rikhart

Rikhart
  • Member

  • 581 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 January 2013 - 15:53

Red Bull were getting a quali advantage by using DRS in the twisty bits, where other cars couldn't use it.

They have now been prevented from using it in those areas, so they will suffer a disadvantage from this rule change.


I know that, what I am saying is I dont think they will be disadvantaged at all, because they used to choose gear ratios for the races, and not optimize it for constant drs during qualy (or even the drs zones at all). They were hitting the rev limiter. Race pace will be closer to qualy pace, and red bull are always amongst the strongest race pace cars...

#26 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,438 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 12 January 2013 - 01:50

I know that, what I am saying is I dont think they will be disadvantaged at all, because they used to choose gear ratios for the races, and not optimize it for constant drs during qualy (or even the drs zones at all). They were hitting the rev limiter. Race pace will be closer to qualy pace, and red bull are always amongst the strongest race pace cars...


When Red Bull are using DRS in the twisty bits, gearing is irrelevant because those are not the fastest parts of the track. They had an advantage, they will lose it, that is what is meant by being 'disadvantaged'.

Sigh..



#27 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 837 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 12 January 2013 - 04:09

Race pace will be closer to qualy pace, and red bull are always amongst the strongest race pace cars...

What about 2011, when they qualified quite a few times 1 second clear of the Mclarens but only go a tenth or so quicker in the race?

#28 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:35


The only thing we know is that this partial ban will have a considerable impact on the specific setups of the cars. Off-hand I would tend to say that the relative performance impact will be negative for RBR, especially considering they actually got their unique DDRS working pretty well. If we consider how narrow the field was every bit mattered a lot.

Maybe we will see a bit more racey RB setup. In any case aerodynamic efficiency will be key and not having a guy like Lewis in the successor of the fastest car at the end of the 2012 season might be one of the biggest relative performance gains of the RBR package.

#29 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 4,981 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 12 January 2013 - 11:35

When Red Bull are using DRS in the twisty bits, gearing is irrelevant because those are not the fastest parts of the track. They had an advantage, they will lose it, that is what is meant by being 'disadvantaged'.

Sigh..

I think his point was that they were not gaining as much in straights with open DRS as others, so they are not losing that much/at all with the new DRS rules.
though if they'll introduce 2 DRS zones every race, those will most probably be in straights where they were hitting the limiter... then I think we will see a new setup philosophy from them.

#30 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,438 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 12 January 2013 - 18:48

I think his point was that they were not gaining as much in straights with open DRS as others, so they are not losing that much/at all with the new DRS rules.
though if they'll introduce 2 DRS zones every race, those will most probably be in straights where they were hitting the limiter... then I think we will see a new setup philosophy from them.


Red Bull are losing with the new DRS fules, because the places they were gaining were not the straights, but certain corners where they alone could open the DRS. That is the advantage they will be losing, gearing and top speed is another issue entirely.

I think that Red Bull will be forced to change their approach if they can no longer be reasonably sure of pole, and might therefore expect to have to do some overtaking. They will have to use higher gearing, as they did in Abu Dhabi for Vettel, and maybe remove a little downforce. That revised car was still pretty quick, but they are obviously quite certain that they get an advantage in race pace from the lower gearing, otherwise they wouldn't persist with it.

Some people will say "OK, but Vettel has proved he can overtake, so where's the problem?" The problem is that a low-geared car really struggles to overtake other cars which have similar pace and are on similar tyres, because it can't fully utilise the DRS That is the situation Vettel will most often be in if he can't put it on pole. Being able to overtake slower cars, or cars which are on much older or harder tyres, is not going to be relevant most of the time.

Edited by BillBald, 13 January 2013 - 14:52.


#31 jstrains

jstrains
  • Member

  • 1,464 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 13 January 2013 - 07:21

Newey talks about exhaust trick for 2012 which was banned in the last minute
http://translate.goo...d...tml&act=url

Original article
http://www.auto-moto...ck-6400509.html

#32 Rikhart

Rikhart
  • Member

  • 581 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:56

Newey talks about exhaust trick for 2012 which was banned in the last minute
http://translate.goo...d...tml&act=url

Original article
http://www.auto-moto...ck-6400509.html


So it´s quite clear now that the ramp design was a blatant copy of sauber´s invention, although with a little twist. Interesting.

#33 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 13 January 2013 - 17:58

So it´s quite clear now that the ramp design was a blatant copy of sauber´s invention, although with a little twist. Interesting.


Ah... no.



#34 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,940 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 14 January 2013 - 00:52

So it´s quite clear now that the ramp design was a blatant copy of sauber´s invention, although with a little twist. Interesting.


lol what? how did you come to that conclusion?


#35 mtknot

mtknot
  • Member

  • 646 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 January 2013 - 02:02

So it´s quite clear now that the ramp design was a blatant copy of sauber´s invention, although with a little twist. Interesting.


Sauber never invented the coanda effect. It's kind of an obvious solution too...

#36 plumtree

plumtree
  • Member

  • 712 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 01 February 2013 - 20:35

To warm up the thread :D

Posted Image

The sound of the RB9's FIRST FIRE-UP!!! http://audioboo.fm/b...7-first-fire-up

Two more days to go!

#37 ApexMouse

ApexMouse
  • Member

  • 909 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 01 February 2013 - 21:06

Only one frontwing pylon?

Wow, Newey is so radical and aggresive!!

#38 JRizzle86

JRizzle86
  • Member

  • 2,087 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 01 February 2013 - 21:16

Only one frontwing pylon?

Wow, Newey is so radical and aggresive!!


That was my first thought too, well he does like his front wing to bend, it could only help i suppose.

Edited by JRizzle86, 01 February 2013 - 21:16.


#39 chumma

chumma
  • Member

  • 960 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 01 February 2013 - 22:17

To warm up the thread :D

Posted Image

The sound of the RB9's FIRST FIRE-UP!!! http://audioboo.fm/b...7-first-fire-up

Two more days to go!

That front wing is from 2010, look at the long cascade

Advertisement

#40 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,435 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 February 2013 - 04:36

For those in the USA, the launch time for the Infiniti Red Bull Racing RB9 is:

8:00 AM Eastern
5:00 AM Pacific

Which is 13:00 GMT.

Launch at: youtube.com/redbullracing

Edited by bourbon, 03 February 2013 - 04:38.


#41 muramasa

muramasa
  • Member

  • 3,025 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 03 February 2013 - 09:53


oh no, I'm fed up with half open garage with a car peeking inside it. no more plz :o

#42 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 3,505 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 03 February 2013 - 10:08

oh no, I'm fed up with half open garage with a car peeking inside it. no more plz :o

They have a very nice video on the RB story at youtube.com/redbullracing to gap the time. (I like Neweys: "The level of sniping at us after 2010 got silly.")

It is also interesting that there is hardly any talk about the RB9, nor about engineers moving somewhere etc. That gives me the good feeling that they are not distracted. I don't really expect any surprises for the RB9 launch though. What I expect is that there will be some major differences between the car at the first test, the first race and the 5th race - especially since they did not have that much time to develop the 2013 challenger due to the intense WDC battle last year.


#43 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 4,981 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 03 February 2013 - 10:25

about vanity panel: we heard previously that red bull could (would) go with the letterbox step nose this year as well, after seeing the C32, could we see the RB9 with a similar solution? remember, RB8 already had those sidewalls on the edge of the nose:
Posted Image
they just have to make them as long as the nose with the vanity panel, and not stop at the pirelli logo. would be an aesthetically good solution, and still having the function of the letterbox, whatever it is. :D

#44 JRizzle86

JRizzle86
  • Member

  • 2,087 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 03 February 2013 - 10:58

I very much doubt Newey sees the benefits of a modesty panel, i can only assume it will remain with a stepped nose.

#45 plumtree

plumtree
  • Member

  • 712 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 03 February 2013 - 11:05

To avoid any confusion - I guess people have little tolerance for that now. :lol:

http://www.redbullra...021243308503474

…For the first glimpse of our other car, head to our YouTube channel for a short preview on Sunday 3 February at 1300hrs GMT.

Then come here, to redbullracing.com where we'll be posting images, team reactions, written Q&As and a web clip of the day's action.

As the RB9 bursts out of its secret lair deep in Milton Keynes we’ll be feeding you live updates from 1400hrs GMT onwards.

We’ll have videos of the car, interviews with Seb and Mark, news, views and reactions… basically all the stuff we can't talk about right now.



#46 D.M.N.

D.M.N.
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,183 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 03 February 2013 - 11:32

Please use the linked thread for discussion of the launch: http://forums.autosp...howtopic=180634

This thread will be re-opened once the launch has finished.

#47 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 2,922 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 03 February 2013 - 18:19

From the other thread it was mentioned that RB run with a 40kw KERS rather than 60kw. Is this true? I can't imagine them hampering themselves that much. Helps with cooling I suppose.

#48 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 4,981 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 03 February 2013 - 18:25

From the other thread it was mentioned that RB run with a 40kw KERS rather than 60kw. Is this true? I can't imagine them hampering themselves that much. Helps with cooling I suppose.

I think that is old news (2011), maybe was outdated by 2012 already.

#49 olliek88

olliek88
  • Member

  • 4,044 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 February 2013 - 18:33

Posted about this on the launch thread but seems appropriate here. The back end of that is extremely small, very little there and it makes me wonder if it was influenced by the FW33 and they've shrank/moved/altered the gearbox to get that area so small?


#50 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 908 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 February 2013 - 18:39

I think that is old news (2011), maybe was outdated by 2012 already.


They run a less powerful KERS system to allow for smaller batteries - this is due to packaging requirements.