Red Bull RB12 TAG-Heuer

[hemichromis]

Such a weird comment. They obviously won't run this car next year. And the successor (RB13) will be designed to other regulations. Next year there is really nothing new to say about this years car, other then estimating the quality of the team that designs and manufactures it.

Weird comment!? Red bull have form for building very good cars, this years car seems to be an example of that.

To me it seems reasonable to expect them to do the same next year.

it seems you lack to understand the regulation change of 2017 will cause that this car is simply unusable so it will not be the same car, it wont even be comparable. a 2016 sauber is an evolution of a 2015 sauber, even that isn't the same, but you could imagine it being more or less the same.
the 2016 RB12 is quite different to the 2015 one, and the 2017 will not be any evolution but a 'revolution'. because of the rule changes. that's why.

this car only works for this year.

EDIT: just looked at my initial post and found i said 'this' car.


What I meant is that this car is further proof of Red bull's ability to make a very good car.
They have been making very good cars for the last 6+ years, often the best or equal best car.

This is why i think they are likely to produce a very good car next year also.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[carisi2k]

Such a weird comment. They obviously won't run this car next year. And the successor (RB13) will be designed to other regulations. Next year there is really nothing new to say about this years car, other then estimating the quality of the team that designs and manufactures it.

Weird comment!? Red bull have form for building very good cars, this years car seems to be an example of that.

To me it seems reasonable to expect them to do the same next year.

it seems you lack to understand the regulation change of 2017 will cause that this car is simply unusable so it will not be the same car, it wont even be comparable. a 2016 sauber is an evolution of a 2015 sauber, even that isn't the same, but you could imagine it being more or less the same.
the 2016 RB12 is quite different to the 2015 one, and the 2017 will not be any evolution but a 'revolution'. because of the rule changes. that's why.

this car only works for this year.

From what I understand those regulation changes have not been locked in and with the current cars providing extremely fast laps in qualifying and pretty decent races there is apparently growing support (especially from the smaller teams) to not do too much to the regulations on cost grounds.

[carisi2k]

The RB12 is an evolution of the late RB11. Both cars are very close. RB12 is a refinement, a tidied up version of its predecessor. But it seems it gained almost 3s per lap in Q (2.9s in Melbourne and Bahrain) while Merc gained just over 3s compared to 2015. According to Pirelli, the tires bring 1s, so the RB chassis and PU gained around 2s.
Qualy speed traps were better than last year too. 4-5kmh behind the best cars/8kmh behind the highest top speed (Williams), while they were 11kmh and 16kmh behind in 2015. But as you saw, the Williams was no match for the RB in Q and race.
The gap at the speed trap has been halved In Bahrain. Race top speeds are better too (slipstream bla bla, I know but even...)

The RB12 may be an evolution but it is a brilliant evolution. Can't say the same about the FW38 or vjm08.

[aral]

This thread is about the RB12 and technical aspects relating to that particular car. Speculative comments about 2017 etc have no place here. Please stay on topic.

[lio007]

China, Thursday:

[Godius]

fri, fp. China.

[Fulcrum]

Literally a hands-width outward from the tips there is a remarkably clear zone, looks like you could delineate it with straight lines. Every other component has some coverage of paint.

Is there something repellent on parts of the front wing elements? If so, is it a function of the advertising, a function of the wing surface (materials and or downforce), or did they just miss a spot?

[bhall II]

Is there something repellent on parts of the front wing elements? If so, is it a function of the advertising, a function of the wing surface (materials and or downforce), or did they just miss a spot?

The FlowVis looks fresh, like it hasn't been subjected to high speeds yet.

[Fulcrum]

Is there something repellent on parts of the front wing elements? If so, is it a function of the advertising, a function of the wing surface (materials and or downforce), or did they just miss a spot?

The FlowVis looks fresh, like it hasn't been subjected to high speeds yet.

Ah, thanks!

[ME4ME]

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/bite- ... ps-687369/

[Morteza]

RB12 steering wheel via @SomersF1

[turbof1]

Really guys? Speculation in the sense of "what if" and "could have"? In a car thread? I had to grow an extra pair of arms to give a proper expression how I feel about that:



Let me end this little yin yang discussion by the normal procedure: remove and conquer. With that done we interrupt you for an informative message: this is a car thread. Discussion is restricted as according to the guidelines in the first post, to the hardware of the car i.e. the physical parts. Performance in the sense where the car could have ended up in any particular race is not a physical part of a car.

[RegerandeBull]

[Sevach]

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/bite- ... ?tp=19&s=1

An article on the serrated FW.

[e36jon]

China, Thursday:
http://images.adrivo.com/images/950/q_8 ... 743736.jpg

http://images.adrivo.com/images/700/q_8 ... 743735.jpg

Apologies for re-posting the images, I was slow noticing them and had a question.

Are they using 'disc springs' on the jounce shock? I believe they also have torsion springs for the left and right as well, and then this shock + spring(s) for compression / heave / jounce. Can anyone verify?

Thanks!

Jon