182 replies to this topic

[ARTGP]

pup, on 01 Aug 2024 - 21:11, said:

Because the FIA told them to? That was the talk at least.

Seems to me that both McLaren and Merc cut their gap to Red Bull by about the same amount at the same time. That seems like a big coincidence for two teams to simultaneously make a big jump like that. People want to think that one or the other started cheating but it seems more likely that Red Bull got pegged back.

Why Ferrari isn’t in that group I don’t know, but probably would be because they stumbled when they rushed their big update and that, too, would be about the same time.

.

In Miami and Imola, Mercedes finished 30+ seconds behind Red Bull on pace. Only Mclaren was fighting Red Bull in those two races, which is due to a 6 tenth update package.

You have an interesting definition of “same time”.

In Monaco, Mercedes Introduced front wing and suspension changes and that transformed their car. Monaco was a bad track for Red Bull regardless.

Ferrari has never really been there, finishing far back in Imola, Spain, Austria, Silverstone, etc and would have been far back from Red Bull at Spa if not for Leclerc pole lap where he beat the Mclarens while driving inferior machinery.

Edited by ARTGP, 01 August 2024 - 22:39.

[FirstnameLastname]

If it’s Redbull, they are cheaters - should have a £100mil fine and a race ban. Glad it’s been banned and gotten rid of their absurd advantage

If it’s anyone else, and it’s helped them catch up, I’m all for it. Should be applauded.

[Paa]

FirstnameLastname, on 01 Aug 2024 - 23:01, said:

If it’s Redbull, they are cheaters - should have a £100mil fine and a race ban. Glad it’s been banned and gotten rid of their absurd advantage

If it’s anyone else, and it’s helped them catch up, I’m all for it. Should be applauded.

 

To be fair this is always the case for most fans of any team.

 

If other team, "Cheaters, that's the only reason they won, punish them irrationally".

 

If their team, "Clever engineering. Changing the rules mid-season is not fair."

Edited by Paa, 01 August 2024 - 23:14.

[catent]

As a matter of curiosity: was differential braking across a given axle banned prior to this rule update? Or is this entirely new technical language? Red Bull acting nefariously is contingent on them knowingly subverting a rule/regulation; otherwise it’s a legal solution. Is this a new rule, or a clarification?

Depending on for how long Red Bull has been utilizing such technology, this could cast a shadow across their success during the 2023 season.

That’s not to say Red Bull haven’t had a balanced, versatile, predictable, solid race car, but if this season is any indication, we would expect the margins to have been smaller and the perception of greatness to be less pronounced, if they were (potentially) utilizing such technology during the 2023 season, too.

Obviously this is highly speculative at this point; we don’t know if Red Bull is the team this rule
update is directed towards, and if so, for how long it’s been occurring.

Edited by catent, 02 August 2024 - 04:53.

[jacdaniel]

I think it’s most likely to be McLaren if anyone.

It’s usually the team that have found huge performance gains in recent races that have found something.

And it seems a bit bizarre that Red Bull were caught doing something 3 months ago and they’re only getting around to updating the regs now

[Broekschaap]

catent, on 02 Aug 2024 - 04:45, said:

As a matter of curiosity: was differential braking across a given axle banned prior to this rule update? Or is this entirely new technical language? Red Bull acting nefariously is contingent on them knowingly subverting a rule/regulation; otherwise it’s a legal solution. Is this a new rule, or a clarification?

Depending on for how long Red Bull has been utilizing such technology, this could cast a shadow across their success during the 2023 season.

That’s not to say Red Bull haven’t had a balanced, versatile, predictable, solid race car, but if this season is any indication, we would expect the margins to have been smaller and the perception of greatness to be less pronounced, if they were (potentially) utilizing such technology during the 2023 season, too.

Obviously this is highly speculative at this point; we don’t know if Red Bull is the team this rule
update is directed towards, and if so, for how long it’s been occurring.

The old 11.1.2 was speaking of the same force on opposing brake discs. So i think it was always intented like this but needed clarification because a team found away to apply the same force with a different outcome.

 

The rest of your post is speculative nonsense.

[Ivanhoe]

Could it be as simple as using different brake pads on each disc? The regulations only provide that you can fit no more than 2 brake pads on each wheel.

[DJH63]

pup, on 01 Aug 2024 - 21:11, said:

Because the FIA told them to? That was the talk at least.

Seems to me that both McLaren and Merc cut their gap to Red Bull by about the same amount at the same time. That seems like a big coincidence for two teams to simultaneously make a big jump like that. People want to think that one or the other started cheating but it seems more likely that Red Bull got pegged back.

Why Ferrari isn’t in that group I don’t know, but probably would be because they stumbled when they rushed their big update and that, too, would be about the same time.

There is no real secret as to why RB have fallen back - they lack CFD time *and* Newey said before the season that he thought Wache had gone down the wrong development path and they’d not have a chance to try and fix it until later in the season. Verstappen said as much before Budapest that it was their only planned big upgrade and if it didn’t work then they were going to be also-rans in the second half of the season.

[Broekschaap]

Ivanhoe, on 02 Aug 2024 - 07:54, said:

Could it be as simple as using different brake pads on each disc? The regulations only provide that you can fit no more than 2 brake pads on each wheel.

That is simple and elegant. But would would that make it a "system" or "mechanism"?

[DW46]

McLaren, Red Bull or Merc surely, they have all had odd performance swings.

Edited by DW46, 02 August 2024 - 11:16.

[catent]

Broekschaap, on 02 Aug 2024 - 07:29, said:

The old 11.1.2 was speaking of the same force on opposing brake discs. So i think it was always intented like this but needed clarification because a team found away to apply the same force with a different outcome.

The rest of your post is speculative nonsense.

Speculative? Absolutely. Nonsense? If my post was actually nonsense, one couldn’t have called said post speculative and have it make sense in context (if my words were truly nonsensical).

The fact we’re speculating on the matter means that there is some sense (note I didn’t say “truth”) to what we’re discussing. Whether or not it’s true is an entirely different conversation; “premature” may be a fairer word to use.

Thanks for clarifying, anyway.

Edited by catent, 02 August 2024 - 14:17.

[mclara]

DJH63, on 02 Aug 2024 - 07:55, said:

There is no real secret as to why RB have fallen back - they lack CFD time *and* Newey said before the season that he thought Wache had gone down the wrong development path and they’d not have a chance to try and fix it until later in the season. Verstappen said as much before Budapest that it was their only planned big upgrade and if it didn’t work then they were going to be also-rans in the second half of the season.

The latter is most likely the cause then if true. Because RB only have 10% ish less development time than Mercedes. So that doesn't explain how they have gained almost a second on RB

[Broekschaap]

catent, on 02 Aug 2024 - 14:07, said:

Speculative? Absolutely. Nonsense? If my post was actually nonsense, one couldn’t have called said post speculative and have it make sense in context (if my words were truly nonsensical).

The fact we’re speculating on the matter means that there is some sense (note I didn’t say “truth”) to what we’re discussing. Whether or not it’s true is an entirely different conversation; “premature” may be a fairer word to use.

Thanks for clarifying, anyway.

Ok premature nonsense it is.

 

Your welcome!

[AlexPrime]

FirstnameLastname, on 01 Aug 2024 - 23:01, said:

If it’s Redbull, they are cheaters - should have a £100mil fine and a race ban. Glad it’s been banned and gotten rid of their absurd advantage

If it’s anyone else, and it’s helped them catch up, I’m all for it. Should be applauded.

not surprised by the attitude at all     

[catent]

Broekschaap, on 02 Aug 2024 - 14:53, said:

Ok premature nonsense it is.

You’re welcome!

Not quite …

“premature speculation”

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Spec racing is the answer ...

[917k]

RainyAfterlifeDaylight, on 02 Aug 2024 - 17:37, said:

Spec racing is the answer ...

It’s not…

[F1 Mike]

RainyAfterlifeDaylight, on 02 Aug 2024 - 17:37, said:

Spec racing is the answer ...

Stop right there and wash your mouth out

[Risil]

Spillage, on 01 Aug 2024 - 11:14, said:

Wasn't it banned after the Brazilian GP of 1998? They absolutely domianted both there and in Melbourne, and didn't domiante afterwards.

Goodyear also brought better tyres to the third race of the year, which helped Ferrari close some of the gap in Argentina too.

[DW46]

RainyAfterlifeDaylight, on 02 Aug 2024 - 17:37, said:

Spec racing is the answer ...

https://trailers.get...3486929c653/gif

[RekF1]

ARTGP, on 01 Aug 2024 - 22:38, said:

.
In Miami and Imola, Mercedes finished 30+ seconds behind Red Bull on pace. Only Mclaren was fighting Red Bull in those two races, which is due to a 6 tenth update package.
You have an interesting definition of “same time”.
In Monaco, Mercedes Introduced front wing and suspension changes and that transformed their car. Monaco was a bad track for Red Bull regardless.
Ferrari has never really been there, finishing far back in Imola, Spain, Austria, Silverstone, etc and would have been far back from Red Bull at Spa if not for Leclerc pole lap where he beat the Mclarens while driving inferior machinery.

Tbf, Mercedes weren't going to learn much about the updates in Monaco or Canada. Barcelona would have been the first representative track, but it seems all teams are focusing on a different range of circuits. RedBull and Ferrari both looked better in the global south and Asia.

Ffs, auto corrupt. *Barcelona, not bathroom.

Edited by RekF1, 02 August 2024 - 18:48.

[pdac]

RainyAfterlifeDaylight, on 02 Aug 2024 - 17:37, said:

Spec racing is the answer ...

 

Or just the freedom to include whatever ideas you can come up with as long as it's safe and within budget.

[teejay]

If it's a team I don't like dock all their 2024 points.

If it's a team I like wow great thinking and how dare the fia stifle innovation.

Edited by teejay, 02 August 2024 - 23:18.

[jonklug]

teejay, on 02 Aug 2024 - 23:18, said:

If it's a team I don't like dock all their 2024 points.

If it's a team I like wow great thinking and how dare the fia stifle innovation.

Tbh most of us are this way. But realistically, if they had to change the rules to specifically forbid it, it wasn't illegal up until this point regardless of who was using it.

[Counterbalance]

jacdaniel, on 02 Aug 2024 - 05:42, said:

I think it’s most likely to be McLaren if anyone.

It’s usually the team that have found huge performance gains in recent races that have found something.

And it seems a bit bizarre that Red Bull were caught doing something 3 months ago and they’re only getting around to updating the regs now

 

With the hectic schedule, it makes perfect sense to adjust the rules now. As someone mentioned, Adrian Newey said earlier in the season that Pierre Wache had gone down the wrong development path, perhaps the now outlawed breaking system was what Newey was referring to. Either way, I hope it doesn't result in interfering with the way F1 is at the moment, it's a genuine 3 way fight (plus Ferrari occasionally when they get things right) battle at each race. F1 is in great health for once, let's hope it stays as such.

Edited by Counterbalance, 04 August 2024 - 12:21.

[FirstnameLastname]

catent, on 02 Aug 2024 - 15:59, said:

Not quite …

“premature speculation”

You can get a prescription for that



Apparently

[DS27]

I suspect it's Mc, or Merc (or both), but i'm not sure I understand why they are banning it..

[UncleSam]

Maybe it's in a premature phase with no clear performance gain just yet but they don't want any developments down that path.

[ATM]

Why not, if it respects the budget?
Correct me if I'm wrong but that functionality sounds a little bit like ESP to me. And that's been around for ages, ever since the A-klasse failed the moose test.

[Beamer]

FirstnameLastname, on 01 Aug 2024 - 23:01, said:

If it’s Redbull, they are cheaters - should have a £100mil fine and a race ban. Glad it’s been banned and gotten rid of their absurd advantage

If it’s anyone else, and it’s helped them catch up, I’m all for it. Should be applauded.

 

Just hoping you're being sarcastic and this is not really your opinion? 

[Mc_Silver]

Quote

Peter Windsor: Looks as though RBR might have been running a clever rear cross-brake inertia valve before they were obliged to remove it before Miami. This could explain Max's RR brake drama in MEL and his turn-in grief since China.

https://x.com/PeterD...198674336948377

[sterlingfan2000]

Conspiracy theorist right again lol.

[Nobody]

jacdaniel, on 02 Aug 2024 - 05:42, said:

I think it’s most likely to be McLaren if anyone.

It’s usually the team that have found huge performance gains in recent races that have found something.

And it seems a bit bizarre that Red Bull were caught doing something 3 months ago and they’re only getting around to updating the regs now

Thanks for playing, better luck next time

[sterlingfan2000]

Another Conspiracy, could Newey told FIA what Redbull was doing ?

[jonklug]

Thanks for playing, better luck next time.

 

 

Edited by jonklug, 16 August 2024 - 10:50.

[milestone 11]

jonklug, on 16 Aug 2024 - 10:49, said:

Thanks for playing, better luck next time.

He would say that, wouldn't he.
Perhaps you could try an original riposte next time.

Edited by milestone 11, 16 August 2024 - 11:16.

[Goron3]

This read from Mark Hughes is worth a read:

 

https://www.motorspo...l-brake-system/

 

"Asymmetric braking on the rear axle would be a neat way of resolving this conflict. By applying greater force to the outside rear than the inside, the car could be made to pivot into the slow corners. If this was related to how much steering lock was applied, then it could be set up to heavily rotate the car only into low-speed corners without coming into effect at the lesser steering angles needed for high-speed corners."

 

Which team has jumped forward massively with low speed performance over the last few months? Which team gained around half a second of performance despite adding fewer upgrades than rivals?

 

Note. It's Mclaren. Fascinated to see what the pecking order is for Zandvoort and Monza - both tracks have a mix of high and low speed corners.

[Garagista]

If it is Red Bull and it is since Miami thay they had to remove, why werent we informed at the time? Or next race?

It feels like the Ferrari engine thing. the FIA knew something was wrong, but couldnt prove, until recently.

[jonklug]

milestone 11, on 16 Aug 2024 - 11:09, said:

He would say that, wouldn't he.
Perhaps you could try an original riposte next time.

What would he, a mechanic have to gain by replying to random tweets? Unless he really felt it was ridiculous and was bothered by the conspiracies.

If RedBull had this on they would have been monsters in low speed, but in reality that was their weak spot even in 2023. I get why McLaren fans are worried though.

[Stephane]

On the other hand, low speed corners are where you have the least pressure applied on the brakes, and the less g-forces, making the system less usefull.

[Clatter]

So if it is Red Bull is Newey to blame?
https://www.the-race...-led-inversion/

"Adrian Newey revealed last year in an exclusive interview with The Race that he focused on the suspension design and left the aerodynamics to very capable others in the Red Bull design group."

[JL14]

Interesting...

Red Bull suddenly taking a big drop in relative performance.

McLaren getting rid of their slow corner troubles way earlier than they said the could.

Mercedes finding form and finally being able to balance their car between low and high speed after a "how didn't we realise earlier that it's what we have to do?"-moment.

 

Will be interesting to see how these teams do from Zandvoort onwards.

[noikeee]

Stephane, on 16 Aug 2024 - 11:39, said:

On the other hand, low speed corners are where you have the least pressure applied on the brakes, and the less g-forces, making the system less usefull.

Erm not really, it's more like the opposite? Turn 1 in Monza is pretty slow but a hard braking zone whereas something like Pouhon would be the lightest of touches on the brake.

Depends more on how fast is the approaching speeds before the corner, even then you generally brake harder the slower the corner

Relevant video that I watched earlier today, although I don't really love this channel: https://youtu.be/Hf-...ogeJBk2e9ILYzWt

Edited by noikeee, 16 August 2024 - 17:25.

[loki]

Clatter, on 16 Aug 2024 - 14:17, said:

So if it is Red Bull is Newey to blame?
https://www.the-race...-led-inversion/

"Adrian Newey revealed last year in an exclusive interview with The Race that he focused on the suspension design and left the aerodynamics to very capable others in the Red Bull design group."

Or as The Judge may say…. “Newey sabotages Red Bull by not working on the aero design”…

[Boxerevo]

sterlingfan2000, on 16 Aug 2024 - 10:14, said:

Another Conspiracy, could Newey told FIA what Redbull was doing ?

Easier to be the woman affected.

 

Will not deny that if it is Mclaren and if Red Bull gets worse, it will be a good end of year for Mercedes it seems.

Edited by Boxerevo, 16 August 2024 - 18:01.

[Clatter]

loki, on 16 Aug 2024 - 17:31, said:

Or as The Judge may say…. “Newey sabotages Red Bull by not working on the aero design”…

I suppose if he were already looking to leave, abstaining from the aero makes taking ideas to the next team much easier.

[MikeTekRacing]

JL14, on 16 Aug 2024 - 14:50, said:

Interesting...

Red Bull suddenly taking a big drop in relative performance.

McLaren getting rid of their slow corner troubles way earlier than they said the could.

Mercedes finding form and finally being able to balance their car between low and high speed after a "how didn't we realise earlier that it's what we have to do?"-moment.

 

Will be interesting to see how these teams do from Zandvoort onwards.

Red Bull does not make sense. The rule is now, they would be milking it until illegal. It's either legal or illegal. If grey, the'd challenge the DSQ and fight it. 

They would at least run it on Perez's car. 

It has to be something that's still on a car. 

[pdac]

MikeTekRacing, on 16 Aug 2024 - 22:28, said:

Red Bull does not make sense. The rule is now, they would be milking it until illegal. It's either legal or illegal. If grey, the'd challenge the DSQ and fight it. 

They would at least run it on Perez's car. 

It has to be something that's still on a car. 

 

That's not how it works. Teams do something that is technically not banned by the rules. Then the FIA gets wind of it and does not like it. They tell the team(s) they will bring in a technical directive to ban it and give them a certain amount of time to adjust. After that, they modify the rules to make it illegal. It's a bit of give-and-take. The teams are happy that they don't have to change overnight and the FIA are happy because the loophole is closed within a timeframe that is acceptable to all.

 

And everyone can agree that they do not need an 11th team, if course,

Edited by pdac, 16 August 2024 - 22:53.

[Bliman]

MikeTekRacing, on 16 Aug 2024 - 22:28, said:

Red Bull does not make sense. The rule is now, they would be milking it until illegal. It's either legal or illegal. If grey, the'd challenge the DSQ and fight it. 

They would at least run it on Perez's car. 

It has to be something that's still on a car. 

Red Bull makes perfect sense. It is not normal how much pace they have lost. We see that Mercedes and Mclaren are quite close to each other but that Red Bull has lost a ton of pace.

It also could be that Mclaren and maybe Mercedes have found something similar but not so effective as Red Bull and that is giving them an upper hand at the moment. But that would be quite strange because the FIA would be very strict if they found a competitor doing this and they found it illegal.

But the way Red Bull has gone back is very suspicious and I haven't seen that for a long time.

But why should they have removed it if it wasn't illegal?

[Bliman]

pdac, on 16 Aug 2024 - 22:51, said:

That's not how it works. Teams do something that is technically not banned by the rules. Then the FIA gets wind of it and does not like it. They tell the team(s) they will bring in a technical directive to ban it and give them a certain amount of time to adjust. After that, they modify the rules to make it illegal. It's a bit of give-and-take. The teams are happy that they don't have to change overnight and the FIA are happy because the loophole is closed within a timeframe that is acceptable to all.

 

And everyone can agree that they do not need an 11th team, if course,

But wouldn't a technical directive be known to the public? Or have I missed it?