by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
GP Week : Issue 208
What Ferrari lacks that Red Bull has TECHNICAL TeCHNICAL PAOLO FILISETTI Technical Editor It may seem strange that in our title we mention Red Bull instead of Mercedes. The reason behind this choice is related to the fact that the RB10 and the F14T may be compared starting with a common weak spot – their power unit. There no doubt that the Renault PU showed a lack of power and huge reliability problems at the pre-season tests. On the other hand the Ferrari 059/3 was designed with the strong priority of reliability as main target. This reliability target was reached by Ferrari, but on the other hand the performance gap in favor of the Mercedes engine has also been clearly visible. So having said that, it seems not so inappropriate to put the Renault and Ferrari PUs almost at the same level of competitiveness. Having said that, it becomes much more straightforward making a comparison between the RB10 and F14T, to discover what the first has, that the second one lacks. It is no coincidence that we chose to undertake this kind of analysis at Spa. Here, for the first time in the season, Red Bull adopted a set-up configuration that is exactly the opposite of what the Milton Keynes based team has done in the previous races. Usually the downforce loads adopted by Vettel and Ricciardo, are among the highest on the field. This time, instead, the team decided to optimise the top speed performance of the car, to ease the overtaking potential of the cars in the race. The solution worked perfectly, at least for Ricciardo, and clearly shows how good the aero package of the RB10 is. The car was still able to produce a relevant downforce load, notwithstanding the low wing angles adopted. On the other hand, with the exception of Alonso in the first sector, Ferrari weren’t capable of maximizing their top speed performance, as they adopted a more cautious high downforce set-up that paid a dividend in qualifying. This choice, was in fact a sort of ‘obliged’ route for the team to follow, because, giving the fact that the car itself is incapable of producing an adequate downforce level with low angles of the flap; Ferrari chose the other way round, by maximising the handling performance in the twisty BELGIUM RACE SECTOR ANALYSIS T1 TIME ANALYSIS RANGE 31,118(ROS) – 31,933(RAI) 31 31.2 31.4 31.6 31.8 32 ALO RAI VET RIC MAG BUT MAS BOT HAM ROS T1 T1 RACE SECTOR ANALYSIS T1 SPEED ANALYSIS RANGE 343,8Kmh(ALO) – 326,7 KMH(RAI) 326 329 332 335 338 341 344 ALO RAI VET RIC MAG BUT MAS BOT HAM ROS SPEED 1 SPEED 1 39 GPWEEK.com // 39 GPWEEK.com // F1 >>> BELGIUM PARTNERS: