Renault R25

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
Guest
Guest
0

Post

sharkie17 wrote:i think that has got to be the UGLIEST nose ive ever seen.
looks like an Anteater, the mascot of our school

- West

icef1mkd
icef1mkd
0
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 9:07 am
Location: Republic of Macedonia

Post

correction:
even though before Hungary was known that this year it will be 90 deg, the new RS 25 V10 maintains the 72 degree angle! :roll:
won't discuss it... :?
"You will never know the feeling of a driver
when winning a race. The helmet hides feelings
that cannot be understood."
Ayrton Senna, November 1988

Reca
Reca
137
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 5:22 pm
Location: Monza, Italy

Post

I like the way they solved the single/twin keel problem, two slim keels starting on the sides of the tub and connecting in the center where the lower wishbone (in single piece) is attached. Simple and clever.

Edit, pics surely help to understand… :

http://www.f1total.com/bilder/zoom.php? ... 2&d=&b=115
http://f1.racing-live.com/en/photos/200 ... _148.shtml

KJM3
KJM3
0
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:19 pm

Post

I noticed that the chimney's on the R25 now seem to have slats in them. You can barely see it the pic below, but it is visible.

I guess Renault have found a way to use the slats to help direct the airflow better, or maybe smoothen the airflow out before it gets to the back of the car?

Image

- KJ

RacingManiac
RacingManiac
9
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:29 am

Post

"v keel"; still doesn't look very stiff does it....

Image

KJM3
KJM3
0
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:19 pm

Post

RacingManiac wrote:"v keel"

still doesn't look very stiff does it....

http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/875013d.jpg
I was just about to ask if anyone had a post with regards to Renault's "V-Keel" and you just so happened to post it. :)

Does anyone have a high-res image of Renault's solution?

How about McLaren's solution?

- KJ

User avatar
Steven
Owner
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 5:32 pm
Location: Belgium

Post

well about that engine:

The technical specifications of the Renault F1 RS25 V10 engine for the 2005 World Championship.

The RS25 has been designed specifically to meet the new two race weekend reliability regulations imposed by the FIA.

• 72° 'V' angle with optimum integration in the new R25 chassis.
• Atmospheric 3-litre V10 engine.
• Mass optimised for the required reliability, with a gain relative to the RS24.
• Reliability of more than 1400km with a performance gain relative to the RS24.
• 98 % of parts are new.

It's basically what I would have done, the engine was working fine last year. It was also stated earlier in the year that 72 degrees is basically the best angle engine-wise (so not considering CoG, integration, stiffness, ...)

v10motorhead
v10motorhead
0
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 4:26 pm
Location: Australia

Post

Renault have just confirmed at the launch the are using the 72 degree V10

ReubenG
ReubenG
0
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:31 pm

Stiffness of the V-Keel

Post

Regarding the comment on the stiffness of the "V-Keel" , I disagree somewhat - the forces coming throught the wishbones will be primarily lateral forces. The laterally aligned V Keel is then one of the stiffest structures you can use - it behaves like a 2 member truss . THere will be some longitudinal forces acting on that mounting point, which then causes the v-keel to act like a cantilever in bending - not a very stiff structure. But if one looks at the way the V-keel members are orientated, their highest bending stiffness is aligned with moments caused by longitudinal forces.

Reca
Reca
137
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 5:22 pm
Location: Monza, Italy

Post

KJM3 wrote: I noticed that the chimney's on the R25 now seem to have slats in them
the slats on the chimney were already in the R24 in the last part of the ’04 season, I don’t know exactly since when (I’ve few pics of the R24 on the HD and only one showing them).
Tomba wrote: It was also stated earlier in the year that 72 degrees is basically the best angle engine-wise (so not considering CoG, integration, stiffness, ...)
72 is the angle allowing to have evenly spaced ignitions (720/10) but that’s not really a big advantage on high revving engines, and 90°, also if the ignitions aren’t evenly spaced, has in term of dynamic balance a few advantages compared with the 72*. Hence I wouldn’t say that 90° is a choice related with just packaging considerations, there’s lot more than that.

At the end, I read an interview with Denis Chévrier, Renault engine designer, and he declared that last year, from first to last Gp, they gained 5% of power (compared with a typical gain that is 3%) and 1250 rpm. At the start of the year they hope to have on the new engine (it has basically no parts in common with the old one) the same power they had at the end of last year.
Considering that from engine noise analysis I did at the time, I obtained a peak of 17100 rpm from the Alonso’s qualifying lap in Australia and a peak of 18400 rpm from the Alonso’s qualifying lap in Brazil, I can conclude that my analysis of engine rpm isn’t so bad after all...

Ducati
Ducati
0
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 9:16 pm

R25 front suspension & ballast

Post

I have heard of a new particular front suspension totally different from what they where using last year and a particular rear distribution of the ballast.
does anyone knows something about this ?

Thanks

ReubenG
ReubenG
0
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:31 pm

Post

Check out this thread.

viewtopic.php?t=1119&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

The "V-Keel" is the "new" suspension idea - it makes use of the single lower attachment point of a single keel, without the need for the fat cross section. Basically it replaces a single structural member that experiences bending with a two member truss (which will be stiffer).

The rearward mass bias was used last year by Renault - it gives them significantly better traction while accelerating, either off the start out a corner ( remember Button trying to catch Alonso at Hockenheim last year?) but does make the car tend to understeer. I don't know whether Renault are running a similar mass balance on the R25.

dumrick
dumrick
0
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 12:36 pm
Location: Portugal

Post

ReubenG wrote:Check The rearward mass bias was used last year by Renault - it gives them significantly better traction while accelerating, either off the start out a corner ( remember Button trying to catch Alonso at Hockenheim last year?) but does make the car tend to understeer. I don't know whether Renault are running a similar mass balance on the R25.
Yes, that's what I've read. Apparently, Renault used a gearbox that was 20 Kg (!) heavier than the average of the other teams, biasing the weight distribution for the purposes you mentioned and allowing a more robust construction to allow more radical Launch Control programs, with influence in how fast they started out of the grid.

scarbs
scarbs
382
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:47 am
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Post

Ignore this bull S*** that Renault purposely added weight to the rear of the car last year. They decided to ditch the wide angle engine so late, they had to use some elements of the older 72-degree engine to get a competitive engine ready for the first race of 2004. This resulted in a heavier engine.
The team worked around to get the car to work with the compromised set up. This year the team have more ballast to play with and hence able to move weight forwards.
Their starts were more a result of the control systems matching several parameters better than other teams. Last year Renault made the launch via setting the clutch paddle at the biting point, the engine would be trying to drive the car forward so the team locked the brakes. this gave them an immediate advantage off the line. the cars general traction advantage (partly through power delivery) then aided the run to the first corner.

kilcoo316
kilcoo316
28
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:45 pm
Location: Kilcoo, Ireland

Post

scarbs wrote:Ignore this bull S*** that Renault purposely added weight to the rear of the car last year. They decided to ditch the wide angle engine so late, they had to use some elements of the older 72-degree engine to get a competitive engine ready for the first race of 2004. This resulted in a heavier engine.
The team worked around to get the car to work with the compromised set up. This year the team have more ballast to play with and hence able to move weight forwards.
Their starts were more a result of the control systems matching several parameters better than other teams. Last year Renault made the launch via setting the clutch paddle at the biting point, the engine would be trying to drive the car forward so the team locked the brakes. this gave them an immediate advantage off the line. the cars general traction advantage (partly through power delivery) then aided the run to the first corner.
I don't know the whole story but:

I was at a thing in paris last year (Nov) and Bernard Dudot was there (head of renault engines) and I was asking him about the switch from 111 to 72 deg Vee and about the cg height increase - he did reply to me that their simulations had shown the longitudinal position of the centre of mass was more important... so in what context he meant that I don't know... maybe starting performance, maybe tyre wear... I have no idea