2025 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[AR3-GP]

We've also seen this before. This is an area where the drivers themselves can be a hindrance to progress because they have no engineering experience. Many of them have no idea how precarious the whole system really is. They don't understand how if the team wanted to include a bit of "Feedback" from the driver, that it could immediately take off 50+ points of downforce and 2-3 months of development (basically ending your season) to try and go in a new development direction. So, they would actually go backwards before they can go forwards. Mercedes explained this already through 2022-2024. Going backwards is very costly.

Drivers don't understand how much teams are trying to hang on to any bit of performance they happen to find even if it becomes more difficult to driver. Mclaren have also alluded to this in admitting they were not tuning the car to any driver because you can't afford to. You simply go in the direction of steepest descent in terms of your development, and you have to believe the drivers can handle it. This is a race. You have to take calculated risk. You can't always afford to turn down a development direction that offers performance, out of fear that the driver won't be able to drive it. If you do, you will always be behind the ones that don't but a driver still manages to drive it.

[Paa]

We've also seen this before. This is an area where the drivers themselves can be a hindrance to progress because they have no engineering experience. Many of them have no idea how precarious the whole system really is. They don't understand how if the team wanted to include a bit of "Feedback" from the driver, that it could immediately take off 50+ points of downforce and 2-3 months of development (basically ending your season) to try and go in a new development direction. So, they would actually go backwards before they can go forwards. Mercedes explained this already through 2022-2024. Going backwards is very costly.

Drivers don't understand how much teams are trying to hang on to any bit of performance they happen to find even if it becomes more difficult to driver. Mclaren have also alluded to this in admitting they were not tuning the car to any driver because you can't afford to. You simply go in the direction of steepest descent in terms of your development, and you have to believe the drivers can handle it. This is a race. You have to take calculated risk. You can't always afford to turn down a development direction that offers performance, out of fear that the driver won't be able to drive it. If you do, you will always be behind the ones that don't.

Yeah, this is true in general and would be fully ok if Red Bull was difficult to drive, but fastest overall.
The problem is that it is difficult to drive and slow.
So it might not be a monster on the edge, there is a chance that it is simply a bad car.

[AR3-GP]

Yes the problem is not always the characteristics of the car. They are very similar to 2022-2023 (understeer on front limited, bad on bumps, some instability) . The problem is in that they have no longer been able to make the car fast in spite of its weaknesses. Even the drivers miss this point because the only way they can interpret the car is through their feelings at the wheel. They won in 2022 and 2023 with this concept so there's no grounds to now complain about the car being difficult to drive as the reason that they are slow. Mclaren drivers say the car is difficult to drive and they are the fastest! It's just that this is what the driver tends to focus on as the only tangible explanation for why they are not the fastest. It's more complicated that that. It is possible to be the fastest and have a car that is difficult to driver Red Bull achieved that before, and Mclaren has it to some extent now. The real problem is Red Bull are no longer strong enough in their strengths relative to competition to compensate for the weaknesses that they always had.

For Max, it's not a matter of Red Bull not listening. It's that probably if they gave Max and Checo what they wanted, they would have butchered the original concept of the RB18 and had to build back up from a midfield car and no guarantee they could get all the way back to the same performance level as they would need to know how to build a completely different car. No sane technical director would commit this seppuku to their presently fast car, no matter how much drivers are complaining as long as they are still winning.

Mclaren isn't going to butcher their car's concept to make it easier for their drivers either. You can't afford to give away the lap time that you already spent resources and time on just to appease the driver, especially if you are currently winning.

[f1isgood]

I simply think Red Bull's concept hit the development ceiling far earlier especially given they didn't want to adapt to the many flexi-tricks running all over the grids. They are also throwing away free lap-time with the rear wing being flat for what it's worth. It is about reaching a local optima with these optimization problems, Red Bull hit theirs quick and found it great for a while when it took others much more time and resources to reach marginally better minima.

Red Bull will walk out of these regulations (which frankly were the closest F1 has had since 2014) with the most success of all teams and in the end it's just a matter of a couple of tenths and I think regardless of this year and the drama around the team, the technical team won these regulations, end of.

2026 will be another test, a very different type of one as well with all the active aero shenanigans. Fully look forward to that.

[AR3-GP]

Red Bull will walk out of these regulations (which frankly were the closest F1 has had since 2014) with the most success of all teams and in the end it's just a matter of a couple of tenths and I think regardless of this year and the drama around the team, the technical team won these regulations, end of.

Agreed, which is why I think it's silly to question Red Bull's overall approach to this regulations cycle. It's failing to see the forest from the trees.

[ringo]

I do not believe there is a permanent inverse relationship between ease of driving and speed. The team is just poor at development when regulations mature. There is no law that says making a car faster makes it harder to drive. No such thing. It is just an expression of the design philosophy of redbull and it is not a good philosophy.
McLaren is not hard to drive in 2024, and is not either in 2025. Lando had some difficulty with the window, but the car was not hard once it got there. Piastri is not complaining.
It is difficult to design and build something while considering how someone will feel manipulating that thing at 200mph. It's not an easy job to engineer that; but I suspect how redbull find time with their car.. the objectives the engineering team believe will bring them pace, is now flawed when the bar is set incrementally higher each year. Those pillars of performance they strive for just aren't correct when it comes to the holistic performance of the car. Difficult to drive to me just means the car is disconnected front to back. Redbull need to do better. Nothing is stopping the engineers from making a more symbiotic car that is the fastest. This would be a more straightforward car for the pilots to harness.

Maybe they are focusing on certain regions of the floor producing the bulk of the downforce, and not prioritizing other areas? Maybe reshaping the floor brings a more uniform load distribution, but loading the beam wing more compensates?
Possible a greater focus on tyre temps. or brake duct winglets etc.? You get the picture. There are a million ways to skin a cat, but while Mclaren are using a razor blade, Redbull are using a nail clip to do it.

[Paa]

Yes the problem is not always the characteristics of the car. They are very similar to 2022-2023 (understeer on front limited, bad on bumps, some instability) . The problem is in that they have no longer been able to make the car fast in spite of its weaknesses. Even the drivers miss this point because the only way they can interpret the car is through their feelings at the wheel. They won in 2022 and 2023 with this concept so there's no grounds to now complain about the car being difficult to drive as the reason that they are slow. Mclaren drivers say the car is difficult to drive and they are the fastest! It's just that this is what the driver tends to focus on as the only tangible explanation for why they are not the fastest. It's more complicated that that. It is possible to be the fastest and have a car that is difficult to driver Red Bull achieved that before, and Mclaren has it to some extent now. The real problem is Red Bull are no longer strong enough in their strengths relative to competition to compensate for the weaknesses that they always had.

For Max, it's not a matter of Red Bull not listening. It's that probably if they gave Max and Checo what they wanted, they would have butchered the original concept of the RB18 and had to build back up from a midfield car and no guarantee they could get all the way back to the same performance level as they would need to know how to build a completely different car. No sane technical director would commit this seppuku to their presently fast car, no matter how much drivers are complaining as long as they are still winning.

Mclaren isn't going to butcher their car's concept to make it easier for their drivers either. You can't afford to give away the lap time that you already spent resources and time on just to appease the driver, especially if you are currently winning.

I just realized this, but how did we end up discussing the car being difficult to drive?
Few weeks ago Max said that handling was comfortable, just slow. Did he change his mind? Or it is just about Lawson not being able to cope?

[AR3-GP]

Yes the problem is not always the characteristics of the car. They are very similar to 2022-2023 (understeer on front limited, bad on bumps, some instability) . The problem is in that they have no longer been able to make the car fast in spite of its weaknesses. Even the drivers miss this point because the only way they can interpret the car is through their feelings at the wheel. They won in 2022 and 2023 with this concept so there's no grounds to now complain about the car being difficult to drive as the reason that they are slow. Mclaren drivers say the car is difficult to drive and they are the fastest! It's just that this is what the driver tends to focus on as the only tangible explanation for why they are not the fastest. It's more complicated that that. It is possible to be the fastest and have a car that is difficult to driver Red Bull achieved that before, and Mclaren has it to some extent now. The real problem is Red Bull are no longer strong enough in their strengths relative to competition to compensate for the weaknesses that they always had.

For Max, it's not a matter of Red Bull not listening. It's that probably if they gave Max and Checo what they wanted, they would have butchered the original concept of the RB18 and had to build back up from a midfield car and no guarantee they could get all the way back to the same performance level as they would need to know how to build a completely different car. No sane technical director would commit this seppuku to their presently fast car, no matter how much drivers are complaining as long as they are still winning.

Mclaren isn't going to butcher their car's concept to make it easier for their drivers either. You can't afford to give away the lap time that you already spent resources and time on just to appease the driver, especially if you are currently winning.

I just realized this, but how did we end up discussing the car being difficult to drive?
Few weeks ago Max said that handling was comfortable, just slow. Did he change his mind? Or it is just about Lawson not being able to cope?

He said the handling was “comfortable” for him but if Lawson is nowhere, then something must be difficult which Max just tends to manage behind the wheel better than his teammates. I should rephrase, I don’t think Max said difficult = slow. That’s just hypothetical what another driver might say.

We have to get away from difficult to drive being a bad thing anyway. The only thing that matters is the stopwatch. They have won 4 WDC. Nothing should have been done differently if it would result in less than that and I said before, to “reset” the concept would have likely cost them one of the championships if not more.

[HPD]

I didn't really want to comment, but I read a lot of comments about Yuki saying he's arrogant. There's nothing wrong with having a dream and saying it.

“That would be great, in the first race, home Grand Prix – that’s obviously inside of my head,” he said of the possibility of standing on the rostrum at Suzuka.

“That’s what I’m dreaming for rather than a target, to be honest – it will be tough. I’m expecting it to be challenging, it won’t be easy. It’s such a limited time to adapt, but I’ll do my best. If I get through Q3 and score points, I’m happy.”

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... RG8HtrKg2Q

[AR3-GP]

It's early but it looks like Tsunoda is doing well. Time to go beat some Fezzas, Mercs and Maccas

[AR3-GP]

[organic]

Max was telling his engineer the car is "flexing weirdly"?

[kediown]

Max was telling his engineer the car is "flexing weirdly"?

Yeah. What does this even mean from a driver's perspective?

[Jdn1327]

I know it's only p1...but Yuki looks way more comfortable in the car that Liam did. Very impressed with how he's handled this first session...well done Yuki.

[ringo]

So much for difficult car. Myth busted. The car only needed a quick #2 with a few years experience.
Good for him, but all is not safe. He still has the whole weekend. I think things will be a little more tentative in qualifying.
Yuki may have a little more engine mode, but we really don't know. Otherwise he is still within a tenth on the twisty sectors. Not bad.
The constructors is possible if Yuki is really this close.