We all know Red Bull car is awful. Only their influence on FIA keeps them close.
I bet that Norris would accept swap back for a chance to attack Verstappen. Maybe we get some clarity on that.
Was never going to happen, as the temperatures cooled Max had plenty of performance and tyre life.FittingMechanics wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 19:09We all know Red Bull car is awful. Only their influence on FIA keeps them close.
I bet that Norris would accept swap back for a chance to attack Verstappen. Maybe we get some clarity on that.
You don't get points for finishing down the road at races you do win.
What do the phrases 'dominant car' / 'best of the current grid' / 'excellent car' / 'championship winning car' etc mean ?Darth-Piekus wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 18:44The RB car has been always competitive and equal to Mclaren. In one lap pace the difference was always less than a tenth which is nothing. The difference in those races happened due to the circumstances coming to Mclaren's strength which is preserving the temperature on tyres while the rest overheated or couldn't heat up the tyres. Mclaren was never dominant and it is time to accept that perhaps Oscar made the difference and is first on merit.
7-0. Even as a fan, stop pretending either of Mclaren drivers is Max equal. Anyways, to count Suzuka for Red bull just shows how biased you are.
The mcl39 has no weakness. The drivers are giving max the winsmwillems wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 18:46Cs98 wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 18:38RB have been competitive in 3/7 races and absolutely nowhere compared to McLaren in the rest. Your claim that they've been "close all year" is absolute tosh. Don't know why you even bother, you think we've forgotten about Australia, China, Bahrain and Miami after the 7th race?![]()
They've a great car. Ours is more rounded, but not perfect. Max is close in the championship and getting wins. At the end of the day, that tells the true story. Being do.inant at a couple of tracks isnt the reality of our pace, just nonsense hype.
This was the first race Red Bull arguably had the best car, though mclaren bodged it with that stupid early first stop of Oscar. 6 out of 7, depending on the track how much of an advantage McLaren had, this is way too close. Monaco probably is mcLarens to lose but i wouldnt bet on it after today.mwillems wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 20:12You don't get points for finishing down the road at races you do win.
4-3 to Mclaren on genuine pace.
Nearly 50 50. That's the dictionary definition of close.
I never said it wasn't a title winning car but enough with all this narrative every time Max wins. The reason Mclaren has a consistent podium finish is because it has two fantastic drivers and are actually running with two cars instead of one. The car has an obvious weakness as both drivers mentioned it so many times. It is twitchy the moment you try to drive it on the limit and it needs special conditions for it to perform at maximum. In Bahrain, China and Miami these very hot conditions happened and nowhere else. Everywhere else we saw a difference on half a tenth in qualifying and barely a tenth on race pace. After all since we want to talk about domination compare Oscar to Lando. 4 wins with the same car compared to Lando and that shows to me it's not just the car. When Oscar forced Max into a mistake in Australia in the rain where all cars are equal it definitely wasn't the car. What about Miami when Oscar forced Max make another mistake. The car can't teach you that. What about Saudi Arabia where Oscar passed Max from the dirty line at the start. Was it the car again? Half of these races happened in rainy conditions where all cars are equal and I didn't see our drivers lacking talent against Max. It is about time to accept that Oscar perhaps is a better driver than what people think he is and to be honest I am getting tired of arguing. The same thing happened after Japan and look how that turned out with Oscar making back to back victories gaining 29 more points from Max.venkyhere wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 20:17What do the phrases 'dominant car' / 'best of the current grid' / 'excellent car' / 'championship winning car' etc mean ?
- the car standing on stilts in the garage, without tyres ?
Every bit of engineering invested into a car has a single objective - making the tyres attached to it, go quickly on the track. Tyre life / management isn't something 'removed' from the performance of a race car. MCL39 is an absolute beauty of a car. Stop underselling the car. The Redbull 'matched' the McLarens in 3 (Japan, Saudi, Imola) out of 7 races, and severely lagged behind in the other 4. The Mercedes has never matched the McLaren. Ferrari are way behind. The only car that is consistently 'front row' , consistently podium finishing, is the MCL39. The Redbull is not a bad car, it's definitely good, but it isn't consistent. It has weaknesses. The MCL39 doesn't have any 'noticeable' weakness so far in this season. It is indeed a title winning car. Let that sink in.
Nope, ignoring the circuit and condition specific swing between the cars, the wins, the points, and focusing on a margins of a few races you didn't do well at, is.
McLaren races they could have won on merit: 7/7.mwillems wrote: ↑18 May 2025, 21:02Nope, ignoring the circuit and condition specific swing between the cars, the wins, the points, and focusing on a margins of a few races you didn't do well at, is.
Another race today where the myth of the tyre life got a big hit. Even in clean air we couldn't catch Max.
Simple fact is RB can beat us and they can do it often enough, they are faster than us on merit at nearly half the races and there is no reason this wont continue.