If redbull had the Merc powerplant ????
Discussion
Gaz. said:
He'd have still had a DQ in Australia, a mare in Malaysia & Austria. Otherwise he's been best of the rest at most of the races when the Mercs have finished. It isn't the engine that gives Mercedes such an edge otherwise Mclaren would be doing a lot better than they are. RBR's problems aren't the power output of their lump, it's a lack of preparation and unwillingness to cooperate with Renault prior the the season starting and the regulations being set in stone.
how so?DQ in Aus was due to the fuel flow sensor bulls
t that was instigated by Renault (RB were not the only car that were modifying them).yes, Renault have caught up to some extent, but at the start of the season, they were massively down on performance in every respect, whereas the RB car clearly showed good aero pace from the little test mileage they had.
had the RB had the Merc engine, they almost certainly would be somewhat ahead of where Merc are now.
Scuffers said:
how so?
had the RB had the Merc engine, they almost certainly would be somewhat ahead of where Merc are now.
How can you say that with almost certainty? What real evidence is there that the RB chassis is any better, if even as good, as the Mercedes?had the RB had the Merc engine, they almost certainly would be somewhat ahead of where Merc are now.
Vettel's regular complaints and swapping of chassis don't suggest it's the masterpiece some say.
REALIST123 said:
How can you say that with almost certainty? What real evidence is there that the RB chassis is any better, if even as good, as the Mercedes?
Vettel's regular complaints and swapping of chassis don't suggest it's the masterpiece some say.
I'm going on the comments of Lewis and others during testing saying he could not follow the RB though medium sweeping bends etc, he was suggesting they were 20+Kmh up though them.Vettel's regular complaints and swapping of chassis don't suggest it's the masterpiece some say.
Also, looking at the sector times though the year so far, any sector that is downforce related, RB's are well up there even when they are having to run less aero than others not to cripple them in straight lines.
I would suggest Ricardo's 3rd in the standings is 100% down to the chassis being the best out there saddled with the worse power-train.
to then blame RB for the power-train is a bit much, show me the Renault powered team that have done better?
Gaz. said:
I stand by my opinion that an awful lot of RBR's problems are of their own making. They did not do any R&D with their own technical partner and the first time a complete RB10 & PU was assembled together was for the launch of the car in February and Jerez was the first time a Renault lump was fired up in a chassis- a Caterham. A lot of people gasped when they saw the size of the Caterham, its inlets/outlets and sidepods, especially compared to the slimline STR and the shrink wrapped Red Bull which promptly suffered from a few fires and melting hardware & bodywork. All/most of their winter testing set backs would have happened regardless of the PU in the back. 
Renault didn't do much development on their PU compared Merc who started early.RBR wanted did a lot of development work on RBR9 that would have hampered work on this year's car eg. the new package after the summer break which made the car dominant.
Scuffers said:
how so?
had the RB had the Merc engine, they almost certainly would be somewhat ahead of where Merc are now.
Rubbish. It's not about the engine. It's not about the chassis. It's not about the aero.had the RB had the Merc engine, they almost certainly would be somewhat ahead of where Merc are now.
It's about the entire package as a whole, and only by doing everything in house, and starting earlier than everyone else do Mercedes have such an advantage.
rb51 said:
Don't agree it's all about the package but do agree
On them starting early preparing for the season helped, I honstly
Think redbull would be the faster package if they had the Merc power plant.
Isn't the Merc running away with it because their whole package hangs together better than the rest?On them starting early preparing for the season helped, I honstly
Think redbull would be the faster package if they had the Merc power plant.
'They' say because they started development earlier than everyone else, with defined engine specs in there from day one, is the reason they're nailing it. Something to do with the engine + bits sitting in all the optimal positions for weight distribution.
THX said:
Isn't the Merc running away with it because their whole package hangs together better than the rest?
'They' say because they started development earlier than everyone else, with defined engine specs in there from day one, is the reason they're nailing it. Something to do with the engine + bits sitting in all the optimal positions for weight distribution.
more to do with actually putting all the bits together and testing them before they went to the first test day!'They' say because they started development earlier than everyone else, with defined engine specs in there from day one, is the reason they're nailing it. Something to do with the engine + bits sitting in all the optimal positions for weight distribution.
ie, they tested all the powertrain parts together at HPE before they went near the car.
Scuffers said:
REALIST123 said:
How can you say that with almost certainty? What real evidence is there that the RB chassis is any better, if even as good, as the Mercedes?
Vettel's regular complaints and swapping of chassis don't suggest it's the masterpiece some say.
I'm going on the comments of Lewis and others during testing saying he could not follow the RB though medium sweeping bends etc, he was suggesting they were 20+Kmh up though them.Vettel's regular complaints and swapping of chassis don't suggest it's the masterpiece some say.
Also, looking at the sector times though the year so far, any sector that is downforce related, RB's are well up there even when they are having to run less aero than others not to cripple them in straight lines.
I would suggest Ricardo's 3rd in the standings is 100% down to the chassis being the best out there saddled with the worse power-train.
to then blame RB for the power-train is a bit much, show me the Renault powered team that have done better?
REALIST123 said:
RBR chassis didn't look that special today, even with high downforce in anticipation of the rain. 0.7s off the Mercedes in the first sector which, as Brundle said, is all about the chassis, nothing to do with power.
not so, else Williams would be further back.they (RB) are the slowest in a straight line again
Scuffers said:
REALIST123 said:
RBR chassis didn't look that special today, even with high downforce in anticipation of the rain. 0.7s off the Mercedes in the first sector which, as Brundle said, is all about the chassis, nothing to do with power.
not so, else Williams would be further back.they (RB) are the slowest in a straight line again
Frankly, I think it's ludicrous to suggest the Mercedes chassis isn't every bit as good as the RBR, especially when it's based on some specious comment by Hamilton in testing (wasn't that Button by the way?).
REALIST123 said:
Top speed isn't relevant to this argument IMO. The fastest Renault engined cars are up there with the Mercedes engined cars, no reason why RBR couldn't be.
Frankly, I think it's ludicrous to suggest the Mercedes chassis isn't every bit as good as the RBR, especially when it's based on some specious comment by Hamilton in testing (wasn't that Button by the way?).
care to revise this comment now we have seen the race?Frankly, I think it's ludicrous to suggest the Mercedes chassis isn't every bit as good as the RBR, especially when it's based on some specious comment by Hamilton in testing (wasn't that Button by the way?).
red bull were on the pace of the mercs.
if their aero was that crap, they would not be there.
rb51 said:
Would you reckon Dani Ric would be running away
With wdc if he had mercedes power in his red bull
Chassis ?
Your question from a few days ago I think was answered this morning. Clearly the RB aero is good, and also clearly the engine is not a match.With wdc if he had mercedes power in his red bull
Chassis ?
It is quite possible an RB/Merc combo would be #1.
You can wonder if Renault are e.g. very focussed on 2015 now there may be an RB resurgence next year?
In my opinion, Red Bull would be ahead with the Merc engine.
But I also have a feeling that SV would be trying a lot harder if he had a car capable of winning regularly, so I think it would have been closer between DR and SV, maybe even the other way around. DR is the one who has something to prove (and is has done this very well, not knocking him), but for me Vettel this season has not been pushing like he has done in the past.
But I also have a feeling that SV would be trying a lot harder if he had a car capable of winning regularly, so I think it would have been closer between DR and SV, maybe even the other way around. DR is the one who has something to prove (and is has done this very well, not knocking him), but for me Vettel this season has not been pushing like he has done in the past.
Chris944_S2 said:
In my opinion, Red Bull would be ahead with the Merc engine.
But I also have a feeling that SV would be trying a lot harder if he had a car capable of winning regularly, so I think it would have been closer between DR and SV, maybe even the other way around. DR is the one who has something to prove (and is has done this very well, not knocking him), but for me Vettel this season has not been pushing like he has done in the past.
Think he has been pushing---had a number of off track excursions this season.But I also have a feeling that SV would be trying a lot harder if he had a car capable of winning regularly, so I think it would have been closer between DR and SV, maybe even the other way around. DR is the one who has something to prove (and is has done this very well, not knocking him), but for me Vettel this season has not been pushing like he has done in the past.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff