Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 4 votes

Red Bull Honda officially announced for 2019


  • Please log in to reply
2098 replies to this topic

#2051 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,479 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 18 January 2019 - 13:29

Wouldn’t even be logical to have that rule:
Say Hamilton blow up an engine at the sixth race. The engine should last 7. The planned upgraded engine is ready to be put in because it was planned as the second engine to tun after the 7th race. But since you made up a rule that everyone needs to run the same spec, he must use a spec one.
One race later the rest of the MB drivers get the planned spec 2, and therefore Hamilton must change as well after one race because you want the same spec for everyone.
And Hamilton is forced to start at the back in race 8 and abandon an perfectly good engine which is used only once.

See how silly this is?

 

Not only that.

 

This would escalate costs for the customers.

Renault's spec C required the car to be modified so that the new shape engine would fit.  RBR was prepared to spend this money to fit it in.  Renault and McLaren clearly didn't want to go down this route.  According to pdac's rules the two other teams would have been forced to modify their cars to fit the spec C.  Not an existential problem for Renault and McLaren perhaps but it could be for a low budget team (such as Force India mid-season before the buyout).  Honda's never deployed final spec in 2017 also required McLaren to modify its car to fit which they weren't prepared to do so this is a more common issue than you might think.

 

Also PU contracts often stipulate how many units the team has access to.  Additional units on top (as long as the failures weren't due to manufacturer error) cost a substantial amount extra which is why customers often husband their engines extremely carefully and are prepared to run them in detuned form to maximise mileage.  According to pdac's rules an inconveniently timed engine failure could result in one or two extra engines having to be purchased, again significantly increasing costs.

 

The rules were never intended to have all cars running the same supplier engine to have the same spec.  They were introduced to improve reliability and limit the scope for upgrades with each one with the since abandoned token system.


Edited by Talisman, 18 January 2019 - 14:05.


Advertisement

#2052 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 5,502 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 18 January 2019 - 14:03

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.


I’ve nothing against customer teams, but the implication is that the two parties are independent. TR are not independent. A single owner runs both TR and RB.

And no I don’t blame RB for going down this route, I blame the other teams/fia for letting them.

#2053 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 17,688 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 18 January 2019 - 17:28

"Honda aims to start 2019 with third-best Formula 1 engine" link

Edited by TomNokoe, 18 January 2019 - 17:29.


#2054 aportinga

aportinga
  • Member

  • 8,323 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 18 January 2019 - 18:00

Hope so.

 

Anything that gets McLaren back to a competitive nature and pushes Renault to push forward works for me.

 

Frankly the latter will get killed this season (IMO). Zach will be ousted with accomplishing zero and head back to ICS where he will be a champion for bringing over McLaren to Indy along with Fred.

 

Guy's full of ****!


Edited by aportinga, 18 January 2019 - 18:00.


#2055 Otaku

Otaku
  • Member

  • 1,339 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 18 January 2019 - 19:08

"Honda aims to start 2019 with third-best Formula 1 engine" link

 

So basically the want to start 2019 in the exact same place where they ended 2018... sound fair. 



#2056 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • Member

  • 6,008 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 18 January 2019 - 19:57

So basically the want to start 2019 in the exact same place where they ended 2018... sound fair.

Not necessarilly, you can be third-best, but closer to Ferrari/Mercedes and increasing the gap to Renault or further away from Ferrari/Mercedes and Renault reducing the gap, etc. Several scenario’s possible. Being in exact the same position seems like a very unlikely scenario to me.

Edited by Ivanhoe, 18 January 2019 - 19:58.


#2057 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,863 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 18 January 2019 - 20:43

Not necessarilly, you can be third-best, but closer to Ferrari/Mercedes and increasing the gap to Renault or further away from Ferrari/Mercedes and Renault reducing the gap, etc. Several scenario’s possible. Being in exact the same position seems like a very unlikely scenario to me.


And if Renault have indeed made big gains and Honda ends up still ahead that would be a good step and probably both will be closer to Mercedes/Ferrari

#2058 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 10,491 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 19 January 2019 - 11:15

They don’t have to worry about going conservative, they have Toro Rosso to test out all the ideas before Red Bull adopts the best ones. And to that article speculating about the RB15 - watch them turn up with the same rake as last year.

 

Maybe.... Apart from F1 designers with the simulation and wind tunnel data, who knows how much rake is possible in 2019 with the revised regulations intended to thwart front tyre wake management?  :stoned:



#2059 statman

statman
  • Member

  • 4,136 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 19 January 2019 - 11:27

"Honda aims to start 2019 with third-best Formula 1 engine" link

 

Sounds more realistic than the dumb boasting about the title.



Advertisement

#2060 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,863 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 19 January 2019 - 11:55

Maybe.... Apart from F1 designers with the simulation and wind tunnel data, who knows how much rake is possible in 2019 with the revised regulations intended to thwart front tyre wake management? :stoned:


Merc have already claimed to have regained the outwash stream they lost so Red Bull doing the same isn’t a reach

Edited by Danyy, 19 January 2019 - 12:03.


#2061 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,863 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 20 January 2019 - 01:15

I’ve nothing against customer teams, but the implication is that the two parties are independent. TR are not independent. A single owner runs both TR and RB.
And no I don’t blame RB for going down this route, I blame the other teams/fia for letting them.


So you want less teams in F1 and less chance of young talent being able to join, because that’s what happens if you get rid of Toro Rosso. I don’t get this sudden “concern” for Toro Rosso, it’s like people just found out yesterday they’re a junior team. Why the hate? Is it because people don’t like the idea of Red Bull and Toro Rosso working together to make both stronger and in turn make Honda stronger? Why is that a bad thing? Do you want a boring championship or something? Let’s be real Red Bull/Max is the best chance we got if Ferrari keeps on playing musical chairs of a proper championship

#2062 JimmyTheFox

JimmyTheFox
  • Member

  • 318 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 01:21

Already HRD Sakura has almost completed RA 619 H, and it is said that it exerts a considerably high performance. In addition to securing reliability, there is also information that the output is further extended from spec 3. It is said that the remarks such as "closer to 2 strongly", "targeting the title" and so on from Red Bull side are not simply optimism but received data from Honda.


https://sportiva.shu...split/index.php

#2063 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 09:25

So you want less teams in F1 and less chance of young talent being able to join, because that’s what happens if you get rid of Toro Rosso. I don’t get this sudden “concern” for Toro Rosso, it’s like people just found out yesterday they’re a junior team. Why the hate? Is it because people don’t like the idea of Red Bull and Toro Rosso working together to make both stronger and in turn make Honda stronger? Why is that a bad thing? Do you want a boring championship or something? Let’s be real Red Bull/Max is the best chance we got if Ferrari keeps on playing musical chairs of a proper championship

 

I doubt those who object to Red Bull owning two teams in the manner that Peter Perfect describes have suddenly come to that feeling this year. They've probably held those objections since about Spa 2005.

 

If we're going to allow teams extra advantages for the sake of a less boring championship, then we start losing the sport.



#2064 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 20 January 2019 - 10:02

I doubt those who object to Red Bull owning two teams in the manner that Peter Perfect describes have suddenly come to that feeling this year. They've probably held those objections since about Spa 2005.

 

If we're going to allow teams extra advantages for the sake of a less boring championship, then we start losing the sport.

 

But, that's not the case. No reason others can't do what Red Bull does. And, imo, when budget cap comes, most likely teams with over-budget will start 2nd and possible even 3rd teams with their other brands. Non of these teams and executives want to loose a part of their total budget. How it's distributed isn't that important, you want to keep your high budget on your CV and in your control. 



#2065 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:01

https://sportiva.shu...split/index.php


More power than 2018-spec 3... that shouldn’t be news, that should be normal. Ferrari and Merc will also improve a fair bit. Honda is aiming at a moving target. Their improvements should be massive to catch up.

#2066 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,590 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:32

If we're going to allow teams extra advantages for the sake of a less boring championship, then we start losing the sport.


They already allowed that, so apparently I've been following a sport we've lost.

#2067 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:36

But, that's not the case. No reason others can't do what Red Bull does. And, imo, when budget cap comes, most likely teams with over-budget will start 2nd and possible even 3rd teams with their other brands. Non of these teams and executives want to loose a part of their total budget. How it's distributed isn't that important, you want to keep your high budget on your CV and in your control. 

 

 

They already allowed that, so apparently I've been following a sport we've lost.

 

I think you've both missed the point I was making. The idea that we should not complain about unfair advantages because it can potentially make things more exciting.

 

At the moment Red Bull has four cars on the grid while the rest of the entrants have two. They may have done it within the letter of the law but I can understand why someone may object to it. Those that have objected have been doing so pretty much since Minardi was sold. Similar arguments have been made against Haas' arrangement. It's allowed by the rules, but should it be allowed?

 

Not every entrant can afford to run another entire team, and when you start down the road of satellite operations you start moving towards the farce that DTM often is.



#2068 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,863 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:41

I doubt those who object to Red Bull owning two teams in the manner that Peter Perfect describes have suddenly come to that feeling this year. They've probably held those objections since about Spa 2005.
 
If we're going to allow teams extra advantages for the sake of a less boring championship, then we start losing the sport.

They already lost the sport when they gave OEMs the power to choose and influence their customers. It should have gone the FE route by making sure that if a manufacturer was going to come in and spend 1 billion they had to be prepared to sell that tech to anyone for 400k so they would think twice. Red Bull is doing what it has to now within the rules, Ferrari is already doing it with two teams but nobody is talking about that.

#2069 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,479 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:43

To be fair to Red Bull they’ve made an effort to make the STR operation independent, even running different manufacturer PUs with minimal parts sharing for many years. They could have exploited the rules HAAS wise many seasons earlier but chose not to.

#2070 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:44

I don't think you're understanding what I was saying so I'll leave Peter Perfect to defend his words should he want to. It's not my argument.



#2071 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,479 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 20 January 2019 - 12:57

I don't think you're understanding what I was saying so I'll leave Peter Perfect to defend his words should he want to. It's not my argument.


You’re very thin skinned.

My comment was aimed at the general tone of this thread, hence why I didn’t quote you.

#2072 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,590 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 20 January 2019 - 13:04

I think you've both missed the point I was making. The idea that we should not complain about unfair advantages because it can potentially make things more exciting.
 
At the moment Red Bull has four cars on the grid while the rest of the entrants have two. They may have done it within the letter of the law but I can understand why someone may object to it. Those that have objected have been doing so pretty much since Minardi was sold. Similar arguments have been made against Haas' arrangement. It's allowed by the rules, but should it be allowed?
 
Not every entrant can afford to run another entire team, and when you start down the road of satellite operations you start moving towards the farce that DTM often is.


I'm not sure if it should be allowed, it's surprising that Red Bull didn't take more advantage of these rules earlier.
It's not an "extra" advantage though, just look at how Haas had gotten their cars.

The extra advantage was given to Renault and Honda in 2015 when they were given the chance to catch up, right? The only reason Mercedes agreed to that was because they were afraid Renault and/or Honda would leave, if I'm not mistaken.

#2073 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 13:04

You’re very thin skinned.

My comment was aimed at the general tone of this thread, hence why I didn’t quote you.

 

That wasn't aimed at you. You must have posted while I was typing.



#2074 Neno

Neno
  • Member

  • 1,694 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 20 January 2019 - 13:15

They already allowed that, so apparently I've been following a sport we've lost.

Well in my case F1 stopped being a sport with 2008 after 2009 circus rules made for 'muricans and become tv reality show with KERS, double diffusers, coanda's, pirelli tires, DRS etc to "improve overtaking" and get more people in front of tv. So it was dead decade ago. 



#2075 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 20 January 2019 - 13:15

I think you've both missed the point I was making. The idea that we should not complain about unfair advantages because it can potentially make things more exciting.
 
At the moment Red Bull has four cars on the grid while the rest of the entrants have two. They may have done it within the letter of the law but I can understand why someone may object to it. Those that have objected have been doing so pretty much since Minardi was sold. Similar arguments have been made against Haas' arrangement. It's allowed by the rules, but should it be allowed?
 
Not every entrant can afford to run another entire team, and when you start down the road of satellite operations you start moving towards the farce that DTM often is.


But, the 3 engine manufacturers have a advantage by making the engine ideal for their car and philosophy, and having all the needed data for the car earlier. Same with personal, having Newey is seen as a advantage, not all teams can afford him, is that fair?

#2076 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,863 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 20 January 2019 - 13:23

I don't think you're understanding what I was saying so I'll leave Peter Perfect to defend his words should he want to. It's not my argument.


It’s not an unfair advantage.

#2077 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,049 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 20 January 2019 - 20:17

I'm not sure if it should be allowed, it's surprising that Red Bull didn't take more advantage of these rules earlier.
It's not an "extra" advantage though, just look at how Haas had gotten their cars.

The extra advantage was given to Renault and Honda in 2015 when they were given the chance to catch up, right? The only reason Mercedes agreed to that was because they were afraid Renault and/or Honda would leave, if I'm not mistaken.

 


What extra advantage?

#2078 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,452 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 20 January 2019 - 20:41

So basically the want to start 2019 in the exact same place where they ended 2018... sound fair. 

Huh? Were they not 4th last season or I'm obviously missing something...



#2079 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,452 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 20 January 2019 - 20:44

Well in my case F1 stopped being a sport with 2008 after 2009 circus rules made for 'muricans and become tv reality show with KERS, double diffusers, coanda's, pirelli tires, DRS etc to "improve overtaking" and get more people in front of tv. So it was dead decade ago. 

KERS bit a brilliant concept IMO.So too MGH  etc. That is the future of our world. And F! ought to reflect that.



Advertisement

#2080 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 20 January 2019 - 21:40

Huh? Were they not 4th last season or I'm obviously missing something...


The only team who could compare rated Honda 3rd.

#2081 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,479 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 20 January 2019 - 23:05


What extra advantage?


He probably means 2008/9.

#2082 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 2,664 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 22 January 2019 - 20:30

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

 

I thought it was pretty clear.. I do not blame the teams persay(albeit HAAS did say when he bought in it was a short term thing and they wanted to build their own chassis after acclimatizing to F1) but the fact F1 setup rules to allow for it.  is the issue and its gotten out of hand IMO.   I appreciate Williams and McLaren trying to stay fully independent but it should be the norm not the exceptions.



#2083 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 22 January 2019 - 21:11

I thought it was pretty clear.. I do not blame the teams persay(albeit HAAS did say when he bought in it was a short term thing and they wanted to build their own chassis after acclimatizing to F1) but the fact F1 setup rules to allow for it.  is the issue and its gotten out of hand IMO.   I appreciate Williams and McLaren trying to stay fully independent but it should be the norm not the exceptions.

 

Give it some time, they are still so relative young in F1 team's terms. It's a 10/15 years plan they had/have. The start of it is impressive. 

 

It would be nice if their was some documentation which team made what parts themselves and what was made by outside parties.



#2084 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,784 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 22 January 2019 - 22:12

The  source of all parts is definitely documented and approved. The info is probably even available if one cares enough to dig.



#2085 Reddington

Reddington
  • Member

  • 423 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 23 January 2019 - 00:30

...albeit HAAS did say when he bought in it was a short term thing and they wanted to build their own chassis...

Every team builds their own chassis. That is mandatory. Haas just chooses to have that done by an outsource party, who doesn’t even have anything to do with the Ferrari chassis for all that matters. When talking about hardware (building stuff) supplied to Haas by Ferrari, we’re talking suspension and gearbox. The design and building of the chassis is done by all teams themselves.

In what manor might be debated, but the assumption that Haas has a Ferrari chassis is far from the truth. Compare the two: they are pretty different.
And if we look at wings, barge boards etc, you’ll see that they’re not even close in some cases.

Most armchair specialists are just repeating each other and creating a narrative they stick to without actually knowing to what extent this whole thing goes.

Edited by Reddington, 23 January 2019 - 00:32.


#2086 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,784 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 23 January 2019 - 02:23

Most armchair specialists are just repeating each other and creating a narrative they stick to without actually knowing to what extent this whole thing goes.

 

I'm not sure Otmar Szafnauer and Andrew Green are 'armchair specialists'

 

I would accept that officially Haas do design their own car except for specifically allowed parts, and no-one has proven otherwise.



#2087 Reddington

Reddington
  • Member

  • 423 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 23 January 2019 - 02:58

I'm not sure Otmar Szafnauer and Andrew Green are 'armchair specialists'

 

Ah, you seriously want to state that these men don't have a bone in this fight? Come on!



#2088 kumo7

kumo7
  • Member

  • 1,743 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 23 January 2019 - 05:26

I am yet again watching Grand Prix Driver on Amazon, reporting on McLaren honda's 2017 season.

There were lots of talk about this divorce but I can say Honda can only be forever be thankful to McLaren for its current form.

Truly, these three years were pure disaster. None team want to start the GP season three times with broken PU.



#2089 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,784 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 23 January 2019 - 06:01

Ah, you seriously want to state that these men don't have a bone in this fight? Come on!

 

Bring those goalposts back out of the car-park and put them on the pitch.

 

Of course those people are rivals with their own axes to grind, but they are not remotely 'armchair specialists', they are real specialists who are suggesting and in some cases outright accusing Haas of using Ferrari designs or at least working with Ferrari on designs. People's comments are based on this kind of talk coming out of the sport, not fans ' repeating each other and creating a narrative '



#2090 Reddington

Reddington
  • Member

  • 423 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:13

Bring those goalposts back out of the car-park and put them on the pitch.

 

Of course those people are rivals with their own axes to grind, but they are not remotely 'armchair specialists', they are real specialists who are suggesting and in some cases outright accusing Haas of using Ferrari designs or at least working with Ferrari on designs. People's comments are based on this kind of talk coming out of the sport, not fans ' repeating each other and creating a narrative '

 

Again, I wasn't referring to them, I was referring to air chair specialists.

My goalposts are set up just fine, thanks, I'll leave them just where they are. Have Haas, or any other team actually been found guilty of not operating within the rules? (Apart from not changing that floor radius fast enough, for which they rightly were slapped on the wrist).

No? Good, all still within the rules then, whatever the armchair specialists or even Otmar and Andrew might say. If they really had a case, Haas would have suffered the consequences, correct? So even with all the people from F1 itself included, the governing authorities don't seem to agree with them.


Edited by Reddington, 23 January 2019 - 08:14.


#2091 Ragnar668

Ragnar668
  • Member

  • 1,782 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:14

Ah, you seriously want to state that these men don't have a bone in this fight? Come on!

Of course they have a bone in this fight, bit I seriously doubt they would say these thinks in public if they didn't think they we're true
Would be damaging for their own credibility



#2092 Reddington

Reddington
  • Member

  • 423 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:16

Of course they have a bone in this fight, bit I seriously doubt they would say these thinks in public if they didn't think they we're true
Would be damaging for their own credibility

 

If so, they should think about going to court over it.



#2093 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:18

If so, they should think about going to court over it.


A official complaint at FIA would be enough, I don't think they ever did.

#2094 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,590 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:21

The design and building of the chassis is done by all teams themselves.

In what manor might be debated, but the assumption that Haas has a Ferrari chassis is far from the truth. Compare the two: they are pretty different.
And if we look at wings, barge boards etc, you’ll see that they’re not even close in some cases.
 

 

Erm, the Haas has been a Ferrari carbon copy for a while now.

 

I'll just trust my own eyes thank you.



#2095 Reddington

Reddington
  • Member

  • 423 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:29

Erm, the Haas has been a Ferrari carbon copy for a while now.

 

I'll just trust my own eyes thank you.

 

Are they similar? Yes. Are they a "carbon copy"? No. And as said, in the aero sides regarding bargeboards etc they were even totally different. There have been articles about it, but I don't care enough to find the links. If anyone else does, great. If not, totally fine too. I stand by what I said. 

 

Do I think there is an intense collaboration? Sure. But as long as the other teams don't formally protest and as long as the FIA and FOM are saying that it's all within the rules, then I don't get the debate.

 

Sure, I do get that some of you don't like the rules, but that's a different discussion.



#2096 A3

A3
  • Member

  • 28,590 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:40

I'not saying I have a problem with it, I'm just saying I see similar cars. 

 

The 2018 designer must have "designed" the 2018 challenger by tracing over the 2017 Ferrari. :drunk:

 

https://cdn.racingne...vshaasboven.png

https://pbs.twimg.co...a5DW8AEYjBn.jpg



#2097 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:47

Are they similar? Yes. Are they a "carbon copy"? No. And as said, in the aero sides regarding bargeboards etc they were even totally different. There have been articles about it, but I don't care enough to find the links. If anyone else does, great. If not, totally fine too. I stand by what I said. 

 

Do I think there is an intense collaboration? Sure. But as long as the other teams don't formally protest and as long as the FIA and FOM are saying that it's all within the rules, then I don't get the debate.

 

Sure, I do get that some of you don't like the rules, but that's a different discussion.

 

I agree, i do trust my eyes and have seen comparisons that instantly pointed out dozens + differences between the Haas and Ferrari cars.

 

https://www.motorspo...-675078/675078/

 

The F1 cars all have similarities, they copy as much as possible what can help them in their car philosophy.



#2098 Maxioos

Maxioos
  • Member

  • 3,187 posts
  • Joined: October 17

Posted 23 January 2019 - 08:58

I'not saying I have a problem with it, I'm just saying I see similar cars. 

 

The 2018 designer must have "designed" the 2018 challenger by tracing over the 2017 Ferrari. :drunk:

 

https://cdn.racingne...vshaasboven.png

https://pbs.twimg.co...a5DW8AEYjBn.jpg

 

(It's getting far off topic, but well, still off season)

 

I'm opinion, you can place all other 9 cars there and will have similarities also. Or, between some of the other cars, just because the basis is already that restricted by FIA and they copy each other as fast as possible. 

 

imo. it's like, look they have 4 wheels, the Ferrari also has 4 wheels, they are similar.

 

 

ib9w4yc66lg01.png

C5gJ8d4WMAAohpA.jpg

f49894d6ea568d953d0de5ac6c47beca.jpg



#2099 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,784 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 23 January 2019 - 09:58

Yes but when a bunch of F1 technical people say it is a virtual copy Im going to at least give that SOME credence.