FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Big Azza]

What are RC engines?

Not very complicated, and only work well for Lewis.

Ouch!

A bit harsh!

[darwin dali]

What are RC engines?

Not very complicated, and only work well for Lewis.

Ouch!

A bit harsh!

[CookinFlat6]

Lots of aero concepts carry on, however without an engine that lasts the race and powers the car, the extra 0.5 sec from best aero concepts will just be a work of art

That's the whole idea, the power units will cause changes across the grid and therefore if there was gonna be a 'reset' this is when it would happen. Aero doesn't bring more speed than an extra 100 bhp. And the incremental advantages produced by Neweys cleverness will be pretty irrelevant with the new regs

Everyone now knows how to shape a car for downforce, the clever stuff like blown diffusers that many were slow to exploit has been abolished.

This is a forced return to power and mechanical grip. The only 2 sec advantage will be there

Ross Brawn is being provocative, IMHO , there is no way aero and design within the regs can bring the time a good engine and car bring. Let's remember that engines have been frozen for years allowing gains to come from aero

So unless he means Renault are carrying over some tricks Merc haven't thought of RBRs 2 sec advantage won't be carried over by the same aero tricks

No one is saying RBR will have a two second advantage next year. In fact, Nico was the one making an absolute claim by saying everyone starts from zero next year. We can argue all day about how important aero learned in the last few years will be in 2014, but I think we all can agree that it isn't ZERO. Of course there are a ton of factors involved in predicting 2014, but the point is given the info we have now, I think it's pretty safe to say Red Bull will still have the upper hand to some degree.

only if Renault build a power unit on par with Merc

You are assuming that the merc is not a dog of an engine. Yes I know they say it is 100bhp up. But if it only lasts 50 miles then it is of no use

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

From the horses mouth
http://www.planetf1.com/driver/18227/9012603/Red-Bull-s-hopes-pinned-on-Renault

Red Bull's chief technical officer Adrian Newey said that the "engine-dominated" changes that will be implemented next season would result in their success becoming depend on Renault's ability to produce the goods.

"Certainly the regulation changes are engine-dominated," said Newey.

"It's not at all clear at the moment whether one of the three manufacturers (Renault, Ferrari and Mercedes) we have next year come up with a better product than the other two from both a performance point of view and also reliability, which could be quite a concern at the start of the season, certainly.

Newey added that this significant change in output is not their only concern.

"So it's very hard to judge where we'll be at the start of the year. We've also got some quite significant aerodynamic regulation changes which are not nearly as big as the ones we had in 2009 but still by normal year-to-year standards very big changes."

[acosmichippo]

Right, no one is saying engines won't have an effect. I'm just saying there's no way to know who has a better engine now, which is Newey's point entirely. Granted, Aero (arguably RBR's primary strength) will be different next year, but there are still concepts that should carry over. Additionally, other things RBR performs near the top at like team strategy and pit stops will all carry over to next year.

So again, the whole point is that while there are major changes, I wouldn't *expect* Merc to suddenly be on even ground with RBR in 2014. Of course it can happen if Merc develops a truly badass engine, or the Renault is a dog. But as of now, there's no reason to think either will happen.

Meanwhile you discount Brawn's opinion on the matter as being "provocative" when he really has no reason to be. I could just as easily say Newey is being provocative in that quote.

[LewEngBridewell]

What are RC engines?

Not very complicated, and only work well for Lewis.

[CookinFlat6]

Right, no one is saying engines won't have an effect. I'm just saying there's no way to know who has a better engine now, which is Newey's point entirely. Granted, Aero (arguably RBR's primary strength) will be different next year, but there are still concepts that should carry over. Additionally, other things RBR performs near the top at like team strategy and pit stops will all carry over to next year.

So again, the whole point is that while there are major changes, I wouldn't *expect* Merc to suddenly be on even ground with RBR in 2014. Of course it can happen if Merc develops a truly badass engine, or the Renault is a dog. But as of now, there's no reason to think either will happen.

Meanwhile you discount Brawn's opinion on the matter as being "provocative" when he really has no reason to be. I could just as easily say Newey is being provocative in that quote.

Let's say all engines are equal, then the advantage will come from the team that packages best, develops best through the early days and has the best team resources and staff
Merc are already faster than RBR in pit stop absolute terms so that doesn't wash and strategy alone won't guarantee RBR 2 sec advantage
Today's RBR advantage is down to Neweys prowess with aero and complete mastery of new regs in 2009

2014s aero change is restrictive and not expansive, I.e there is less scope for another Newey exploitation that everyone else misses, the aero is restricted to what was know in the last few years and not new ambiguous open ended rules. So there should be a big convergence on aero advantage amongst the teams, which was the whole point of the new regs

Let's say though that engines are equal and Newey again exploits aero better than Merc, that leaves packaging and developing in the beginning. Where is there any proof that a small aero advantage will give more benefits than a well integrated manufacturer/team car?

Nowhere, it's just status quo thinking, look at history, look at Ferrari after the Ms era or Williams after the Renault etc etc
History tells us that there is a much much higher chance of a team losing its advantages than keeping them just because they mastered the previous reg era. Look how Mac have gone from fastest car to mid grid without any reg change, just by getting a new concept a bit wrong. Now they have resources, where is the guarantee that RBR will enough advantage over assuming they get the new era averagely right?

That's what Newey is pointing out to those already expecting a 2 sec advantage from aero when the new regs might give 0.5 at most compared to mechanicals that can give 10 secs relatively. Yup the regs are stacked for mechs and Nico is right in everyone bar the teams with big resources and making engines start on level field

And Ross for me is being naughty considering his earlier statements regarding the Merc team integration, engine, staff etc. remember he targeted 2014 all the time. And he has just realised that Neweys aero might suddenly bring a winning advantage?

Mind games

[acosmichippo]

That's what Newey is pointing out to those already expecting a 2 sec advantage from aero that might give 0.5 at most compared to mechanicals that can give 10 secs relatively

You keep bringing up this two second thing, but no one is arguing that they will remain ahead by two seconds next year. Anyone expecting that after so many changes would indeed be crazy. Then again, it might happen. I'm simply saying they're more likely than not to be ahead by some margin.

[CookinFlat6]

That's what Newey is pointing out to those already expecting a 2 sec advantage from aero that might give 0.5 at most compared to mechanicals that can give 10 secs relatively

You keep bringing up this two second thing, but no one is arguing that they will remain ahead by two seconds next year. I'm simply saying they're more likely to be ahead by some margin.

You have no proof that they have any advantage beyond their present success

I suggest you find me an example in history where an F1 team carried over a regulation exploitation based advantage, or even an engine change advantage

It would be like in 2008 insisting McLaren and Ferrari were guaranteed an advantage in 2009.

Just cos they have best pitstops or strategy ain't gonna keep them at the front from start of year

I'm sorry I just cannot see the logic in this assumption, it's just a status quo bias

[acosmichippo]

No, of course I do not have any proof, which is why I'm not making any absolute claims. I'm not basing my argument an any particular "exploitation", and yes there is way more that goes into an F1 team than pit stops and strategy - those were just two smaller examples I listed aside from the engineers, designers, drivers, and everyone else that works on these cars. It's not a bias to think a team that has been kicking bottom the past four years will *probably* still be leading the pack, even after major regulation changes; It's the null hypothesis I will default to unless someone can provide enough evidence to suggest otherwise. As I think you will agree, we have zero evidence one way or the other right now.

[CookinFlat6]

Exactly we have zero evidence right now so everyone has equal chances

All I'm saying is that it cannot be said RBR will start off better and faster than Merc like you have confidently stated

Even Ferrari have a chance of being ahead

It can be argued that the engine teams have a slight advantage, but it cannot be argued that a team that had an advantage from regulations that have been purposefully purged has an advantage in the new era

And we can't say Newey is the advantage as he can similarly exploit the new regs like in 2009 because the evidence says that his expertise is in aero and not in mechanicals which are placed to carry the largest performance differentiator

[acosmichippo]

All I'm saying is that it cannot be said RBR will start off better and faster than Merc like you have confidently stated

Problem is I never said that in any form, especially not confidently. I'm now getting the impression you're intentionally misunderstanding my posts, so I will excuse myself from this conversation.

[CookinFlat6]

All I'm saying is that it cannot be said RBR will start off better and faster than Merc like you have confidently stated

Problem is I never said that in any form, especially not confidently. I'm now getting the impression you're intentionally misunderstanding my posts, so I will excuse myself from this conversation.

So again, the whole point is that while there are major changes, I wouldn't *expect* Merc to suddenly be on even ground with RBR in 2014. Of course it can happen if Merc develops a truly badass engine, or the Renault is a dog. But as of now, there's no reason to think either will happen.

Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Merc

[1Lemon]

All I'm saying is that it cannot be said RBR will start off better and faster than Merc like you have confidently stated

True, and it cannot be confidently stated that Merc will produce a good car either, but with the evidence of the last 4 years/last reg change it's safe to assume RBR aren't gonna' just fall back.

[CookinFlat6]

No ones assuming anyone is falling back, just that RBR start with an inherent performance advantage unrelated to the power unit.

Just because they are best now doesn't bean they will start best when there is a big reg change, especially one that downgrades the previous clear advantage - aero

I asked for some evidence from F1 history to suggest RBR would automatically remain ahead but instead I apparently misunderstand posts

[What's Burning?]

Aero is aero, so it stands to reason that a skilled aerodynamic team will still produce a more efficient package. No different than the expectation that the strong engine teams will produce a strong engine.

I don't doubt Red Bull will produce a good aero package, but the emphasis on aero has been greatly reduced. So there is only one way Red Bull's advantage will go. They may retain that advantage, but they won't be able to extract the gap they've been able to exploit these last years from it.