Red Bull RB18

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.
User avatar
jjn9128
753
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Stu wrote:
Sun Dec 04, 2022 11:34 am
There will be (as there will for all cars); feel free to start a ‘RB19 speculation thread’, there is one for the W14.

To be honest, unless there are any leaks, it will be pure ‘this is what I want to see’ speculation at this stage.
It's gonna have 6 wheels and a V12 as Red Bull accidentally fail to confrom to the tech regs :twisted:
#aerogandalf
"There is one big friend. It is downforce. And once you have this it’s a big mate and it’s helping a lot." Robert Kubica

Sasha
Sasha
55
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:43 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

As-web stated that RB will use a upgrade RB18 next year.

My guess that is why they didn't use the new lightweight chassis, saving it for the 23 season.

That is one way to get around the cap penalty and gives you cap space to do late season upgrades in 23.

Your design team can take longer to design the 24 season car.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
97
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

When asked how much Red Bull are over the weight limit, he revealed: "It was close to 20 kilos at the beginning of the season."

Wache confirms the car is still overweight and when asked if they are over by a ballpark figure of three kilos he responded: "No, more!"

RacingNews365.com queries: "Twelve?"

"Could be," responded Wache.

"In any case, the car is still substantially too heavy. We can still improve on that next year. The other teams are much closer to the limit, so that's a lot of 'free lap time' as we would call it."

Pierre Wache - RB TD

:shock:

https://racingnews365.com/the-developme ... e-lap-time


He says the end of season RB18 was "substantially" too heavy. :wtf:

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Substantial could be 1% in F1 terms.
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
97
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Stu wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 8:49 pm
Substantial could be 1% in F1 terms.
I agree but teams will bite your arm and leg off to get that 1%.

They were somewhere between 5-10kg overweight at the end of the season, reading between all the lines due to having to use old parts again.

marcel171281
marcel171281
12
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:08 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 9:03 pm
Stu wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 8:49 pm
Substantial could be 1% in F1 terms.
I agree but teams will bite your arm and leg off to get that 1%.

They were somewhere between 5-10kg overweight at the end of the season, reading between all the lines due to having to use old parts again.
1% is 8 kg. Pretty substantial.

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

marcel171281 wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:19 am
AR3-GP wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 9:03 pm
Stu wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 8:49 pm
Substantial could be 1% in F1 terms.
I agree but teams will bite your arm and leg off to get that 1%.

They were somewhere between 5-10kg overweight at the end of the season, reading between all the lines due to having to use old parts again.
1% is 8 kg. Pretty substantial.
That was my point, use the word substantial in reference to F1 and 1% is considered substantial.
Use the same word in reference to regular automobiles and 1% is insignificant, but 10% is considered substantial.
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

LM10
LM10
102
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:07 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Isn't it a give and take? Why would they build their car with overweight, if it was not for performance reasons?

User avatar
organic
205
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2022 1:24 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

LM10 wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:47 pm
Isn't it a give and take? Why would they build their car with overweight, if it was not for performance reasons?
I'd imagine that newer spec components reached end of their lifespan and they bad to revert to older, less ideal specifications?

Doubt RB were wanting to produce anything to do with 2022 towards the end of the season given how much of a margin they already had in both championships.

Could be some of their lighter components expired/wore out quicker than expected, or more likely the introduction of some of the newer spec components earlier in the season, when the competition had not yet faded, was expedited

User avatar
dans79
252
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

LM10 wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:47 pm
Isn't it a give and take? Why would they build their car with overweight, if it was not for performance reasons?
Cost!

for example Cf can be purchased in a wide range of Modulus,weaves, and tows. Depending on what you are using and how you are laying it up you can basically get an inverse relationship between weight/strength and cost.

This is a marketing page, but it shows you the range that's available on the market!
https://www.toraycma.com/products/carbon-fiber/
191 103 103 7

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
97
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

LM10 wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:47 pm
Isn't it a give and take? Why would they build their car with overweight, if it was not for performance reasons?
You're thinking far too deterministically.

Teams never intended to build overweight cars. It's always a bit of a guessing game as to where you will end up. The car is going to need X amount of parts on board and even when you are designing to the best of your ability at the time, it doesn't mean in a deterministic way that every car can be built to that min weight. As it would turn out, 9 out of 10 teams showed up with overweight cars. It was not intentional. They were caught off guard with how difficult it was to hit the weight target.

It wasn't a matter of "oh we'll make this engine cover a little bit wider and take the weight penalty because the aero gain is worth it". It was more a case of, the only way we are hitting this weight limit right now is if we remove the gearbox....

The RB18 has several failed attempts at a lighter DRS actuator. They were on the limit of design and had failures. Removing the DRS actuator in it's entirety would have brought them closer, but that's not practical...

User avatar
Wouter
94
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Farewell RB18

Everyone has played their part in our most successful season in Formula 1 and we speak to a few
that got to know the RB18 very well over the course of 2022.
Geoff Ayton, Controls engineer
Rob Dowe, Systems Design engineer
Ana Groom, Aerodynamics engineer
Matt Semple, Electrical Systems engineer

The Power of Honda!

User avatar
carisi2k
19
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:26 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

The problem with that farewell to RB18 is that they don't actually have an RB18 in that video. That is the FIA showcar.

User avatar
lio007
292
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

carisi2k wrote:
Tue Dec 27, 2022 10:25 pm
The problem with that farewell to RB18 is that they don't actually have an RB18 in that video. That is the FIA showcar.
I didn't get it either why they used the showcar.

Henk_v
Henk_v
23
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2022 12:41 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:30 pm
LM10 wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:47 pm
Isn't it a give and take? Why would they build their car with overweight, if it was not for performance reasons?
You're thinking far too deterministically.

Teams never intended to build overweight cars. It's always a bit of a guessing game as to where you will end up. The car is going to need X amount of parts on board and even when you are designing to the best of your ability at the time, it doesn't mean in a deterministic way that every car can be built to that min weight. As it would turn out, 9 out of 10 teams showed up with overweight cars. It was not intentional. They were caught off guard with how difficult it was to hit the weight target.

It wasn't a matter of "oh we'll make this engine cover a little bit wider and take the weight penalty because the aero gain is worth it". It was more a case of, the only way we are hitting this weight limit right now is if we remove the gearbox....

The RB18 has several failed attempts at a lighter DRS actuator. They were on the limit of design and had failures. Removing the DRS actuator in it's entirety would have brought them closer, but that's not practical...
Good post!

One has to remember nobody knew the exact loads on the car. The 22 cars are bound to have some safety margins built in. And not all can just be upgraded out. Either because they are homologated or because the implications are too big on adjacent parts.
For instance; if you understand the load on the rear suspension better, making it lighter might mean a redesign of the gearbox shell, bodywork, floor, and brakes and linkages.
That would mean New crash tests for the rear crash structure and possibly reworking all rear wings and exhaust.

That might not only be too big for an upgrade -especially the cost-, also the timeline may be such that you can just have it for the last few races. Also, mitigating collateral on other parts means a suboptimal solution. Better to design completely new for the next year.