To the level it was capable of? Agree.
Yeah we’re on the same page. I was just trying to tease out what Max achieved with the car opposed to his teammate.
No it wouldn't have been - it was overweight & had lesser downforce in the previous spec.zibby43 wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:05Yeah we’re on the same page. I was just trying to tease out what Max achieved with the car opposed to his teammate.
But also, I think part of the equation is that the circuit probably flattered both the car and the driver. Max is excellent there and the RB would’ve been strong there in its previous spec as well.
Ah yes because when I think of downforce, I think of Austria.venkyhere wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:24No it wouldn't have been - it was overweight & had lesser downforce in the previous spec.zibby43 wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:05Yeah we’re on the same page. I was just trying to tease out what Max achieved with the car opposed to his teammate.
But also, I think part of the equation is that the circuit probably flattered both the car and the driver. Max is excellent there and the RB would’ve been strong there in its previous spec as well.
RB was slower than Ferrari in Canada and like half a second slower than Merc in the race. In Austria they were quicker than Ferrari and nearly matching Merc. What do you think changed?zibby43 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2026, 03:45Ah yes because when I think of downforce, I think of Austria.venkyhere wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:24No it wouldn't have been - it was overweight & had lesser downforce in the previous spec.zibby43 wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:05
Yeah we’re on the same page. I was just trying to tease out what Max achieved with the car opposed to his teammate.
But also, I think part of the equation is that the circuit probably flattered both the car and the driver. Max is excellent there and the RB would’ve been strong there in its previous spec as well.
Oh wait, it’s actually one of the least downforce-sensitive, most power-dependent circuits on the calendar.
Was Red Bull good in Canada? Oh yeah, Max was 3rd, 1s behind LH. But carry on I guess.
There is no need to be so sarcastic.zibby43 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2026, 03:45Ah yes because when I think of downforce, I think of Austria.venkyhere wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:24No it wouldn't have been - it was overweight & had lesser downforce in the previous spec.zibby43 wrote: ↑30 Jun 2026, 21:05
Yeah we’re on the same page. I was just trying to tease out what Max achieved with the car opposed to his teammate.
But also, I think part of the equation is that the circuit probably flattered both the car and the driver. Max is excellent there and the RB would’ve been strong there in its previous spec as well.
Oh wait, it’s actually one of the least downforce-sensitive, most power-dependent circuits on the calendar.
Was Red Bull good in Canada? Oh yeah, Max was 3rd, 1s behind LH. But carry on I guess.
Nowhere did I say the update was not meaningful. Only that they still would’ve been strong in Austria without based on circuit characteristics and Max’s record there.Badger wrote: ↑01 Jul 2026, 07:00RB was slower than Ferrari in Canada and like half a second slower than Merc in the race. In Austria they were quicker than Ferrari and nearly matching Merc. What do you think changed?
If the gap to Merc was the same as in Canada they would've finished 35 seconds behind.zibby43 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2026, 15:38Nowhere did I say the update was not meaningful. Only that they still would’ve been strong in Austria without based on circuit characteristics and Max’s record there.
And RB was within around 1s of Ferrari in Canada. Ferrari completely losing the plot in Austria munching their rear tires flattered RB a bit as well.
Active-aero pretty much eliminates the reason for flexi-wings. I suppose it might be useful for rebalancing the car during high-speed corners, but not sure about that. If it is, Audi and VCARB would have an advantage with their FW actuators on the wing instead of in the nose.