Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 4 votes

Red Bull Honda officially announced for 2019


  • Please log in to reply
2031 replies to this topic

#2001 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 85 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 15 January 2019 - 15:57

Mclaren's 2018 performance basically shows how many things have been wrong in their organisation for a long time. Honda is to blame for many issues, but Mclaren isn't blameless at all.

 

If Honda would have come back in 2015 with TR, I'd wager they would have been up to performance speed faster than now. The way of working from Mclaren didn't promote a synergetic cooperation in which both parties thrive. The improvements they were able to make last season stems from a large part from TR's willingness to take penalties, to test out varies things and to accommodate Honda where necessary.

 

Good news is that Franz Tost confirmed yesterday that TR is willing to perform that role again in 2019 for the benefit of RB. With the complete rear end identical, RB basically has a test mule with the TR in 2019. That is a MASSIVE benefit.

 

Yes it is a massive benefit, but one that no team should have. This culture of 'B' teams is one that really needs to be clamped down upon otherwise we risk plunging further into a 2-tier formula. All the top teams are guilty but I think RB really does push the limits by officially having a 'B' team who will sacrifice themselves massively for the parent team. I don't think Sauber would take penalties to allow Ferrari some free testing. 



Advertisement

#2002 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 4,606 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 15 January 2019 - 16:13

Yes it is a massive benefit, but one that no team should have. This culture of 'B' teams is one that really needs to be clamped down upon otherwise we risk plunging further into a 2-tier formula. All the top teams are guilty but I think RB really does push the limits by officially having a 'B' team who will sacrifice themselves massively for the parent team. I don't think Sauber would take penalties to allow Ferrari some free testing. 

 

I agree.

 

To be fair, since its inception TR has never been used as a testing mule. Up until 2018 TR was actually making more own parts than required by the rules. Haas for instances was having more standard Ferrari parts than TR in 2017 and 2018. TR and RB merely copied that model for their benefit.

 

It is a bit like water is always searching for the lowest point to flow to... in a similar vein teams will always search for opportunities within the rule set for their benefit. Without proper testing, all RB can do is 'use' TR. A lot of aero work you can do with CFD or windtunnel. But for engines it's very hard to replicate real life situations on a test bench. Track testing is key.

 

It might also be good for the sport if this structure makes 2019 (and/or 2020) a threeway fight.

 

But in essence I agree with you that F1 in general is taking a wrong turn with this direction.



#2003 mclarensmps

mclarensmps
  • Member

  • 5,710 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 15 January 2019 - 16:50

It still has more value than just forum insults from people unconnected to the project, doesnt it? :)

 

Unless Mclaren and Honda are willing to come together and issue a long winded explanation, which won't happen, what else can we get? At least they are candid about what development avenues they tried on their side and what problems they faced because of them. And they will say things like they are still not good enough.

 

Will you get such candidness or honesty out of Mclaren?

 

By the way, what does it say about Mclaren fans for you to post such a response? Biased? Open-minded? Still bitter? Unwilling to know more? Want to say whatever Honda and its fans say, they are just excuses?

 

Beats me, what I'm sure of, is that it is, as most forum posts are, not quite valuable in terms of learning something.

I have seen the state of this thread. BS is posted as fact on a regular basis, and that is all I am pointing out. The truth is usually always something in between, but the partisan nature of the internet will never let people see it from an unskewed perspective.

But hey, you do you; if it makes you feel better to project your feelings on others, go right ahead. 



#2004 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 15 January 2019 - 16:58

Mclaren's 2018 performance basically shows how many things have been wrong in their organisation for a long time. Honda is to blame for many issues, but Mclaren isn't blameless at all.

If Honda would have come back in 2015 with TR, I'd wager they would have been up to performance speed faster than now. The way of working from Mclaren didn't promote a synergetic cooperation in which both parties thrive. The improvements they were able to make last season stems from a large part from TR's willingness to take penalties, to test out varies things and to accommodate Honda where necessary.

Good news is that Franz Tost confirmed yesterday that TR is willing to perform that role again in 2019 for the benefit of RB. With the complete rear end identical, RB basically has a test mule with the TR in 2019. That is a MASSIVE benefit.

Not a benefit for the TR drivers though. The second drivers get enough stick when they have to move over, what should we say when it's the whole team?

#2005 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 15 January 2019 - 17:01

I agree.

To be fair, since its inception TR has never been used as a testing mule. Up until 2018 TR was actually making more own parts than required by the rules. Haas for instances was having more standard Ferrari parts than TR in 2017 and 2018. TR and RB merely copied that model for their benefit.

It is a bit like water is always searching for the lowest point to flow to... in a similar vein teams will always search for opportunities within the rule set for their benefit. Without proper testing, all RB can do is 'use' TR. A lot of aero work you can do with CFD or windtunnel. But for engines it's very hard to replicate real life situations on a test bench. Track testing is key.

It might also be good for the sport if this structure makes 2019 (and/or 2020) a threeway fight.

But in essence I agree with you that F1 in general is taking a wrong turn with this direction.

At one time didn't TR have more or less the RB car (maybe a year old)? , until the rules precluded it.

#2006 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 4,606 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 15 January 2019 - 17:30

At one time didn't TR have more or less the RB car (maybe a year old)? , until the rules precluded it.


You might be right. 08, when Seb won in Monza.

#2007 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • Member

  • 5,262 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 15 January 2019 - 18:58

Quite sure they ran Red Bulls chassis and aero package from the previous years with a few tweaks in the years 2006-2008, then of course there was the rule change in 2009 and they were no longer allowed to work that way.

Edited by Ivanhoe, 15 January 2019 - 18:58.


#2008 StanBarrett2

StanBarrett2
  • Member

  • 769 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 15 January 2019 - 19:16

Quite sure they ran Red Bulls chassis and aero package from the previous years with a few tweaks in the years 2006-2008, then of course there was the rule change in 2009 and they were no longer allowed to work that way.

Yes, but in 2007 TR continued with the Ferrari engines when RB switched to Renault, thats when the main changes and differences came about..



#2009 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 585 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 15 January 2019 - 19:25

You might be right. 08, when Seb won in Monza.

It was the same chassis as the RB of 2008, only with a different engine.



#2010 Viryfan

Viryfan
  • Member

  • 1,657 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 15 January 2019 - 19:42

It was the same chassis as the RB of 2008, only with a different engine.

 

it was the same car between the two team from 2007 to 2009 (abeit one or two step behind the main team package).

 

STR did their first car in 2010.



#2011 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 15 January 2019 - 21:23

I fully agree.. this what we get for COST saving and CONTROL.  HAAS and TR situations are frankly, a huge black on F1... HAAS i accepted for year 1 and perhaps 2 but its gotta end at some point and let them stand on their own tires.  Same for TR.. 



#2012 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 2,620 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 16 January 2019 - 06:32

I fully agree.. this what we get for COST saving and CONTROL.  HAAS and TR situations are frankly, a huge black on F1... HAAS i accepted for year 1 and perhaps 2 but its gotta end at some point and let them stand on their own tires.  Same for TR.. 

 

I don't understand this (moaning) at all. They do stand on own tires by using the rules. Other teams buy also a lot from other manufactures. Gearboxes, brakes, halo, ECU, titanium screws, Wheels, and can go on and on.

 

Some (outdated) examples. http://www.formula1-..._suppliers.html



#2013 TakataDomeNSX

TakataDomeNSX
  • Member

  • 1,761 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 16 January 2019 - 10:41

I have seen the state of this thread. BS is posted as fact on a regular basis, and that is all I am pointing out. The truth is usually always something in between, but the partisan nature of the internet will never let people see it from an unskewed perspective.

But hey, you do you; if it makes you feel better to project your feelings on others, go right ahead. 

 

 

People see whatever they want to see, on both sides. And having read a lot of your posts, I don't think you should try to make it sound like your statements are always fair and right down the middle. But, I agree the truth is somewhere in the middle, however neither of us are the forum police.

 

Don't forget for three years your favorite thread threw every accusation possible at the PU supplier and came up with every theory (ahem excuse) possible for Mclaren, and continues to do so today, possibly without any interest in finding the truth of the past. Or makes jabs whenever they feel like it. Or tries to explain away in more logical ways, but who are we to think we understand anything without actual information from the team or Honda? That is why I appreciate information from the source, and I will use my own wisdom to determine for myself what is possibly right or wrong. Many in your favorite thread used very strong words and demanded they were right, and where is the team today at the end of 2018, were these people right?  Weren't their strong statements and belief tantamount to BS today? (No I am not saying Honda had no fault, I am not one of those).

 

I hope you dont give me the we have many more points excuse. It is pitifully slow on the track at the end of the year. 

 

There is no less BS in your favorite thread to call out, but I dont see you doing that. And I certainly dont go there to call it out. Why are you here by the way?

 

In any case I am not going to feud with you. As you can see I have very little time for this anymore, and Idont understand why if someone is serious about their careers or jobs, or have something important to do have so much time to write BS in these forums day in day out anyway. I feel sorry for myself having wasted my time on these forums for those 3 years. Tthere is so much more to achieve in real life. My statements are BS to you anyway :), so that will be all from me


Edited by TakataDomeNSX, 16 January 2019 - 11:13.


#2014 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,780 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 16 January 2019 - 10:49

Yes it is a massive benefit, but one that no team should have. This culture of 'B' teams is one that really needs to be clamped down upon otherwise we risk plunging further into a 2-tier formula. All the top teams are guilty but I think RB really does push the limits by officially having a 'B' team who will sacrifice themselves massively for the parent team. I don't think Sauber would take penalties to allow Ferrari some free testing. 

 

Well, in the end, this is what the testing ban gave us. You 'need' a second team if you want to make up a disadvantage.



#2015 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 16 January 2019 - 13:06

I don't think Sauber would take penalties to allow Ferrari some free testing.

https://racer.com/20...0hp-in-hungary/
Sauber and Haas trialled Ferrari’s new engine before they did a race later. So Ferrari did it first and their was no uproar so why wouldn’t Red Bull take advantage of it themselves.

Edited by Danyy, 16 January 2019 - 13:06.


#2016 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 5,472 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 16 January 2019 - 20:19

I fully agree.. this what we get for COST saving and CONTROL.  HAAS and TR situations are frankly, a huge black on F1... HAAS i accepted for year 1 and perhaps 2 but its gotta end at some point and let them stand on their own tires.  Same for TR.. 

 

True. I've got nothing against new teams getting a leg up from a current supplier to get them up to speed. But at some point it has to stop, otherwise how can they call themselves a constructor?

 

HAAS and Sauber I find annoying. TR is a farce.



#2017 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 16 January 2019 - 20:28

https://racer.com/20...0hp-in-hungary/
Sauber and Haas trialled Ferrari’s new engine before they did a race later. So Ferrari did it first and their was no uproar so why wouldn’t Red Bull take advantage of it themselves.

 


No uproar because it was not the same circumstance.

#2018 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 27,836 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 16 January 2019 - 21:44

HAAS and Sauber I find annoying. TR is a farce.


Oh really.
If the teams are given room, they will take it.

Don't blame the teams, blame the rules.

#2019 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted Yesterday, 05:28

No uproar because it was not the same circumstance.


Yes you’re right.. Ferrari did it with two teams Red Bull one, Ferrari owns none and Red Bull owns one. #differentcircumstances

Advertisement

#2020 Reddington

Reddington
  • Member

  • 315 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted Yesterday, 05:40

Don't blame the teams, blame the rules.

Hear hear!
Nothing remotely wrong with it. It’s 100% allowed. If you don’t like it, blame the F1 authorities or find another sport. Any team that operates within the rules should use anything that will help them get a benefit. Staying within the rules and exloring it to the last mm is the pure definition of F1, the pinnacle of motorsport, correct? They would actually be majorly stupid not to use every bit of leeway that they are allowed.

Edited by Reddington, Yesterday, 05:47.


#2021 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 2,776 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted Yesterday, 08:02

True. I've got nothing against new teams getting a leg up from a current supplier to get them up to speed. But at some point it has to stop, otherwise how can they call themselves a constructor?

 

HAAS and Sauber I find annoying. TR is a farce.

 

I just don't get this idea. F1 has had teams running cars made by other entities since its modern inception. And especially during its pre-war days.

There are dozens of F1 teams that ran with customer cars.

The whole notion that only constructors "deserve" to be in F1 is just more bullshit produced by Bernie in order to keep more money for himself.



#2022 ConsiderAndGo

ConsiderAndGo
  • Member

  • 4,992 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted Yesterday, 08:59

I really don't see an issue with it at all, tbh....

 

Just not a factor to my F1 enjoyment whatsoever.



#2023 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted Yesterday, 12:39

Yes you’re right.. Ferrari did it with two teams Red Bull one, Ferrari owns none and Red Bull owns one. #differentcircumstances

 


Nope. All they did was offer their customers the latest spec engine, they did not force them to take it. This was the same as Renault offering their latest spec engine last year, and the only taker being RB. Unless of course you believe Renault are were using RB as their test mule.

#2024 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted Yesterday, 13:48

Nope. All they did was offer their customers the latest spec engine, they did not force them to take it. This was the same as Renault offering their latest spec engine last year, and the only taker being RB. Unless of course you believe Renault are were using RB as their test mule.


Then all Red Bull is doing is offering it’s other team (itself) the latest engine spec. Case closed

#2025 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted Yesterday, 15:29

Then all Red Bull is doing is offering it’s other team (itself) the latest engine spec. Case closed

Do they have the option to refuse the upgrade, or do they have to take it along with any penalties it might entail? I'm sure even you can see the big differences in play.

#2026 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted Yesterday, 16:39

Do they have the option to refuse the upgrade, or do they have to take it along with any penalties it might entail? I'm sure even you can see the big differences in play.


Does Red Bull Racing have the option to defy Red Bull? No that would be stupid right, so would this!

#2027 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 85 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted Yesterday, 18:23

https://racer.com/20...0hp-in-hungary/
Sauber and Haas trialled Ferrari’s new engine before they did a race later. So Ferrari did it first and their was no uproar so why wouldn’t Red Bull take advantage of it themselves.

That's a fair enough point, but not exactly the same. As Clatter points out, they could have said, 'nah, we are good. We'll take the engine next week'. At least that's the impression given but none of us *really* know the politics going on behind the scenes. Maybe they are worse than RB but they just do it more subtly which could be argued is even worse. RB are pretty upfront about TR being their testing mule. I don't like it, but the rules allow it and that where the fault lies. The teams will and should exploit any loophole to get an advantage. That is what F1 is really about.



#2028 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted Yesterday, 18:23

Does Red Bull Racing have the option to defy Red Bull? No that would be stupid right, so would this!

 


So it's completely different to your other scenarios. Glad you got there in the end.

Edited by Clatter, Yesterday, 18:23.


#2029 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,321 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted Yesterday, 20:54

Quite sure they ran Red Bulls chassis and aero package from the previous years with a few tweaks in the years 2006-2008, then of course there was the rule change in 2009 and they were no longer allowed to work that way.

 

It was more than previous years, in 2008 they had the 2008 spec Red Bull only with a fairly significant power bump



#2030 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,700 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted Yesterday, 22:20

The problem is the rules. It should not be up to the teams to decide. The manufacturer should decide a date when the upgrade is ready and at the first event on or after that date, all of their teams should be upgraded. The rules were supposed to ensure that every team of a particular supplier should be using identical equipment. So there should not be one team using spec A and another using spec B.



#2031 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,603 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted Yesterday, 22:30

The problem is the rules. It should not be up to the teams to decide. The manufacturer should decide a date when the upgrade is ready and at the first event on or after that date, all of their teams should be upgraded. The rules were supposed to ensure that every team of a particular supplier should be using identical equipment. So there should not be one team using spec A and another using spec B.

I would agree that all teams should be offered the upgrades at the same time, but teams should not be forced to all be on the same spec. That is just not praticle when the PU's need to do so many races, and they may not all be at the same point in the cycle.

#2032 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,571 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted Yesterday, 23:49

The problem is the rules. It should not be up to the teams to decide. The manufacturer should decide a date when the upgrade is ready and at the first event on or after that date, all of their teams should be upgraded. The rules were supposed to ensure that every team of a particular supplier should be using identical equipment. So there should not be one team using spec A and another using spec B.

 

Not reasonable or possible when taken in conjunction with the rules on limited units etc. Teams have to be able to decide when to replace an engine.

 

What the manufacturer should have to do is make the spec available to all customers at the same time.