2026 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[venkyhere]

How misleading is this stat ? It's data, neverthless, but doesn't say that the top two got to use an extra set of tyres.

[Badger]

https://imgbb.com/

How misleading is this stat ? It's data, neverthless, but doesn't say that the top two got to use an extra set of tyres.

Considering Hamilton was on the same strategy and looked like the fastest car it's actually quite useful. Basically they (Verstappen) lacked half a second of race pace to the front. So a decent chunk of time but not horrifying given that it's a track that really shouldn't suit the RB22 in its current state.

[Just_a_fan]

https://ibb.co/wFQCMw37
The two GOATs and in many ways very similar characters and even career paths. It wasn't easy for either of them to get a breakthrough. Is Nole a fan as we are?

GOATs? A number of former champions in both sports might be wondering how those two are better than others in the histories of both sports...

All you have to do is stop wondering and pay attention to what happens on track, across several completely different regulation sets, etc. Also listen to what the people involved in the sport say, like team principals.

And, in many cases, ignore history. F1 didn't start in 2015.

[avantman]

https://imgbb.com/

How misleading is this stat ? It's data, neverthless, but doesn't say that the top two got to use an extra set of tyres.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics".

[Brahmal]

And, in many cases, ignore history. F1 didn't start in 2015.

No it didn't, but comparing athletes between eras is extremely difficult if not impossible. This applies to basically all sports.

[CMSMJ1]

Let's stop the nonsense of the GOAT waffle eh?

Senna was the best. Maybe others would say Jimmy Clark.
Perhaps the kids in ten years will say Antonelli...

It adds no value in this team thread.

[Just_a_fan]

Let's stop the nonsense of the GOAT waffle eh?

Senna was the best. Maybe others would say Jimmy Clark.
Perhaps the kids in ten years will say Antonelli...

It adds no value in this team thread.

[avantman]

Instead of wasting bytes on the internet quoting non-informative posts I decided to add some value .



Direct comparison between Lewis and Max. Although the strategy seemed the same at first glace. it still has very significant differences, due to tire allocation and laps they were stopped on.
On the first stint on equal used soft tires, Lewis was on average 0.58s faster, not counting the opening lap where Max was battling Mclarens and losing more time in traffic, whereas Lewis had clean combat free lap. Ferrari also had lower deg, unsurprisingly.
It easy to see that the 2nd stint was basically a waste of time for Hamilton(although necessarily as he had to utilize that hard set), as he gained virtually no time on Max over 15 laps in the faster car. Because Max was on medium and Lewis was on hard, which undeniably was much weaker compound in the race. A lot of deg kicked in quite early for Lewis and he was lapping not only slower even than Max (on medium) but also than Russell who was on hard as well which forced Ferrari to act and call him in for medium, as Russell pulled a gap of almost 3 sec, from just 1.5s just after the first stop. This is where Lewis race could finally be started. On a lighter car medium worked instantly and properly and he was lapping 2.5s - 3 seconds faster than Max and Russell who were on older tires still. By stopping one lap earlier than Max for 1st stop and 3 laps earlier for his 2nd stop Lewis gained by my estimations roughly 11 seconds of race time on Max simply by being on new tires for 4 extra laps. A critical factor, which made final gap of 40 seconds bigger than it should have been had they stopped on the same lap.
Lewis then had another set of hard for the final stint, where the track was coming to its best and grippiest state, lighter cars could go even faster through the corners which allowed him to switch hard on properly. Unlike the 2nd stint the deg looked significantly lower on the 4th and final stint. Of course the fact that Ferrari has much more downforce than the rest helped him switch the tires on properly and in turn had more grip, slide less and keep deg in check. Comparing pace on the final stint I came to exactly the same average deficit of 0.58s, taking only 19 laps from 43 to 61 into account, as the rest of the data sheet was skewed by the late VSC. The deficit of 0.58s seems lower than it probably should've been all things being equal on that stint. But Max had better medium tire, and final 5 laps not counted in.
For sure Lewis would've been faster if he had 2 sets of medium rather than 2 hards for the race, which would allow him to pull another 9-10 seconds on Max, if we make an assumption his advantage would be the same as on soft and around 6 tenths a lap.

[FW17]

Instead of wasting bytes on the internet quoting non-informative posts I decided to add some value .
https://ibb.co/Q3mX7HDj
https://ibb.co/DDLRvhSk

Direct comparison between Lewis and Max. Although the strategy seemed the same at first glace. it still has very significant differences, due to tire allocation and laps they were stopped on.
On the first stint on equal used soft tires, Lewis was on average 0.58s faster, not counting the opening lap where Max was battling Mclarens and losing more time in traffic, whereas Lewis had clean combat free lap. Ferrari also had lower deg, unsurprisingly.
It easy to see that the 2nd stint was basically a waste of time for Hamilton(although necessarily as he had to utilize that hard set), as he gained virtually no time on Max over 15 laps in the faster car. Because Max was on medium and Lewis was on hard, which undeniably was much weaker compound in the race. A lot of deg kicked in quite early for Lewis and he was lapping not only slower even than Max (on medium) but also than Russell who was on hard as well which forced Ferrari to act and call him in for medium, as Russell pulled a gap of almost 3 sec, from just 1.5s just after the first stop. This is where Lewis race could finally be started. On a lighter car medium worked instantly and properly and he was lapping 2.5s - 3 seconds faster than Max and Russell who were on older tires still. By stopping one lap earlier than Max for 1st stop and 3 laps earlier for his 2nd stop Lewis gained by my estimations roughly 11 seconds of race time on Max simply by being on new tires for 4 extra laps. A critical factor, which made final gap of 40 seconds bigger than it should have been had they stopped on the same lap.
Lewis then had another set of hard for the final stint, where the track was coming to its best and grippiest state, lighter cars could go even faster through the corners which allowed him to switch hard on properly. Unlike the 2nd stint the deg looked significantly lower on the 4th and final stint. Of course the fact that Ferrari has much more downforce than the rest helped him switch the tires on properly and in turn had more grip, slide less and keep deg in check. Comparing pace on the final stint I came to exactly the same average deficit of 0.58s, taking only 19 laps from 43 to 61 into account, as the rest of the data sheet was skewed by the late VSC. The deficit of 0.58s seems lower than it probably should've been all things being equal on that stint. But Max had better medium tire, and final 5 laps not counted in.
For sure Lewis would've been faster if he had 2 sets of medium rather than 2 hards for the race, which would allow him to pull another 9-10 seconds on Max, if we make an assumption his advantage would be the same as on soft and around 6 tenths a lap.

While that analysis is good, Max vs Lando, Max ended 16 seconds behind. Max was on better tyres than Lando on 3 of the 4 stints, yet was nowhere near.

[euv2]

Instead of wasting bytes on the internet quoting non-informative posts I decided to add some value .
https://ibb.co/Q3mX7HDj
https://ibb.co/DDLRvhSk

Direct comparison between Lewis and Max. Although the strategy seemed the same at first glace. it still has very significant differences, due to tire allocation and laps they were stopped on.
On the first stint on equal used soft tires, Lewis was on average 0.58s faster, not counting the opening lap where Max was battling Mclarens and losing more time in traffic, whereas Lewis had clean combat free lap. Ferrari also had lower deg, unsurprisingly.
It easy to see that the 2nd stint was basically a waste of time for Hamilton(although necessarily as he had to utilize that hard set), as he gained virtually no time on Max over 15 laps in the faster car. Because Max was on medium and Lewis was on hard, which undeniably was much weaker compound in the race. A lot of deg kicked in quite early for Lewis and he was lapping not only slower even than Max (on medium) but also than Russell who was on hard as well which forced Ferrari to act and call him in for medium, as Russell pulled a gap of almost 3 sec, from just 1.5s just after the first stop. This is where Lewis race could finally be started. On a lighter car medium worked instantly and properly and he was lapping 2.5s - 3 seconds faster than Max and Russell who were on older tires still. By stopping one lap earlier than Max for 1st stop and 3 laps earlier for his 2nd stop Lewis gained by my estimations roughly 11 seconds of race time on Max simply by being on new tires for 4 extra laps. A critical factor, which made final gap of 40 seconds bigger than it should have been had they stopped on the same lap.
Lewis then had another set of hard for the final stint, where the track was coming to its best and grippiest state, lighter cars could go even faster through the corners which allowed him to switch hard on properly. Unlike the 2nd stint the deg looked significantly lower on the 4th and final stint. Of course the fact that Ferrari has much more downforce than the rest helped him switch the tires on properly and in turn had more grip, slide less and keep deg in check. Comparing pace on the final stint I came to exactly the same average deficit of 0.58s, taking only 19 laps from 43 to 61 into account, as the rest of the data sheet was skewed by the late VSC. The deficit of 0.58s seems lower than it probably should've been all things being equal on that stint. But Max had better medium tire, and final 5 laps not counted in.
For sure Lewis would've been faster if he had 2 sets of medium rather than 2 hards for the race, which would allow him to pull another 9-10 seconds on Max, if we make an assumption his advantage would be the same as on soft and around 6 tenths a lap.

I think Red bull couldn't get the hard tire to work as well as the other top teams, simply due to lack of downforce, which led to more sliding, that made the medium the favorable compound for them.

That's why the race pace comparisons here won't give us an exact picture, but the fact still remains the gap in race pace was substantial as you mentioned. Mekies seems to be hinting that the Austria upgrades won't solve all their problems, suggesting that they won't even lose all the excess weight, it will only bring them closer.

[Badger]

Was there any confirmation about this new chassis or was that just TK babbling? Seems quite inconvenient to bring a new chassis between a double header and Austria is the race that is constantly being talked about in terms of updates and weight savings.

[SiLo]

Instead of wasting bytes on the internet quoting non-informative posts I decided to add some value .
Direct comparison between Lewis and Max. Although the strategy seemed the same at first glace. it still has very significant differences, due to tire allocation and laps they were stopped on.
On the first stint on equal used soft tires, Lewis was on average 0.58s faster, not counting the opening lap where Max was battling Mclarens and losing more time in traffic, whereas Lewis had clean combat free lap. Ferrari also had lower deg, unsurprisingly.
It easy to see that the 2nd stint was basically a waste of time for Hamilton(although necessarily as he had to utilize that hard set), as he gained virtually no time on Max over 15 laps in the faster car. Because Max was on medium and Lewis was on hard, which undeniably was much weaker compound in the race. A lot of deg kicked in quite early for Lewis and he was lapping not only slower even than Max (on medium) but also than Russell who was on hard as well which forced Ferrari to act and call him in for medium, as Russell pulled a gap of almost 3 sec, from just 1.5s just after the first stop. This is where Lewis race could finally be started. On a lighter car medium worked instantly and properly and he was lapping 2.5s - 3 seconds faster than Max and Russell who were on older tires still. By stopping one lap earlier than Max for 1st stop and 3 laps earlier for his 2nd stop Lewis gained by my estimations roughly 11 seconds of race time on Max simply by being on new tires for 4 extra laps. A critical factor, which made final gap of 40 seconds bigger than it should have been had they stopped on the same lap.
Lewis then had another set of hard for the final stint, where the track was coming to its best and grippiest state, lighter cars could go even faster through the corners which allowed him to switch hard on properly. Unlike the 2nd stint the deg looked significantly lower on the 4th and final stint. Of course the fact that Ferrari has much more downforce than the rest helped him switch the tires on properly and in turn had more grip, slide less and keep deg in check. Comparing pace on the final stint I came to exactly the same average deficit of 0.58s, taking only 19 laps from 43 to 61 into account, as the rest of the data sheet was skewed by the late VSC. The deficit of 0.58s seems lower than it probably should've been all things being equal on that stint. But Max had better medium tire, and final 5 laps not counted in.
For sure Lewis would've been faster if he had 2 sets of medium rather than 2 hards for the race, which would allow him to pull another 9-10 seconds on Max, if we make an assumption his advantage would be the same as on soft and around 6 tenths a lap.

0.6s a lap for 66 laps is... 39.6 seconds. Which is almost exactly the gap they finished with. So I don't think you can claim the 40s gap was bigger than it should have been.