Red Bull rubber front wing

The seemingly never-ending saga about bendy formula one cars is back in the media spotlight, and as ever championship leader Red Bull is right in the middle.

Multiple videos depicting the front nose of the world champions' 2012 RB8 car have emerged in the wake of last weekend's Abu Dhabi grand prix, showing the extreme tip of the front nose section to be apparently made of some sort of 'rubbery' material.

The best videos of the 'rubber' Red Bull can be seen at:

https://2img.net/r/ihimizer/img171/645/boomer.gif

and

http://www.auto.it/images/Articolo/93auto/C_5_Articolo_11971_paragrafi_paragrafo_0_testoParagrafo_1.gif

and

http://www.auto.it/images/Articolo/72auto/C_5_Articolo_11971_paragrafi_paragrafo_0_testoParagrafo_2.gif

"Is this legal?" wondered a report by Italian magazine Autosprint, with Tuttosport adding: "Should it (the nose) not be a rigid part?"

Germany's Auto Motor und Sport journalist Tobias Gruner, however, thinks the controversy is a "false alarm", because the front 150mm of the nose extremities are "always made a little softer" for the purposes of the FIA's mandatory crash tests.

But Gruner also acknowledged that engineers from rival teams are similarly analysing the images, with "at least one team" thought to have already contacted the governing body.

As ever, right at the heart of the latest technical controversy is Red Bull's designer Adrian Newey, who was recently labelled a "genius" by McLaren driver Lewis Hamilton.

"His cars are veritable works of art," agreed British broadcaster Damon Hill, who in 1996 won the championship at the wheel of a Newey-penned Williams.

"I don't want to go too far, but he is the Michelangelo of formula one," he added.

Source: motorsport.com

Their only 4 day behind my friend

I don't believe any of it's illegal, we've been here, done that and got the t-shirt on basically every part of Newey's cars. At Monaco the car was deemed to have an unfair advantage, nothing was done, at Hockenheim the car was investigated and nothing was done and the same will happen here. There too smart a team, who take advantage of loopholes in the flimsy, weak techincal directives and that pretty much sums it up. What they going to do, ban the Red Bull and strip away their recent results and let this title end in a farsical fashion......never. Waste of time.

John wrote:I don't believe any of it's illegal, we've been here, done that and got the t-shirt on basically every part of Newey's cars. At Monaco the car was deemed to have an unfair advantage, nothing was done, at Hockenheim the car was investigated and nothing was done and the same will happen here. There too smart a team, who take advantage of loopholes in the flimsy, weak techincal directives and that pretty much sums it up. What they going to do, ban the Red Bull and strip away their recent results and let this title end in a farsical fashion......never. Waste of time.

Exactly!

The FIA will be damned if they do and damned if they dont anyway. From their point of view, they're best leaving alone until the season ends. After all, how daft will it look if they ban the car and remove RBs points, handing the WDC to Alonso by default. It'll make the sport look a laughing stock.

Though something needs to be done with RB, im all for pushing the boundries but its this same team year after year.

The fact that RB are always in the thick of any controversy points to a contrast in team philosophies. In order to win RB are forever looking to gain any kind advantage by exploiting ambiguities in the regulations as part of their weaponry. This is at odds with other teams who may also spot a weakness but still operate within the spirit of the regulations. Is it cheating or is it clever? Either way it seems very much the same subjective line drawn in the sand between tax evasion and tax avoidance.

They had opportunities to punish the cheats but chose not to take them. They even tried to cheat with the fuel loads and it took them almost a whole day to sort out a punishment.

They should also have never allowed them to start from the pit lane as that gave Newey and co the opportunity to tweak all the illegal devices the car has.

One thing this season has shown is that when the fingers car isn't the fastest on the grid, he's average to mediocre

Belgarion of Riva wrote:

They should also have never allowed them to start from the pit lane as that gave Newey and co the opportunity to tweak all the illegal devices the car has.

This is what i disagree with, they should have been allowed to change the engine alone (or gearbox, whichever is faulty), but must be the same setup as the broken item. Teams should not be allowed to tweek gear ratios, etc if they are starting from the pit lane under such circumstances.

The gear ratios were key for me. Throughout practice & qualifying the Red Bulls and McLaren were actually the slowest cars on the speed traps due to their specific setup needs and therefore allowing Vettel to change this setup was obviously a huge advantage in attempting to come through the field. Add in the ridiculous luck and the change in gear ratios resulted in the eventual podium outcome.

SteveG wrote:The fact that RB are always in the thick of any controversy points to a contrast in team philosophies. In order to win RB are forever looking to gain any kind advantage by exploiting ambiguities in the regulations as part of their weaponry. This is at odds with other teams who may also spot a weakness but still operate within the spirit of the regulations. Is it cheating or is it clever? Either way it seems very much the same subjective line drawn in the sand between tax evasion and tax avoidance.

Yeah, Ferrarri operating in the spirt of the laws again today, eh?

Oh, and there's no subjectivity on tax evasion/avoidance; one operates inside the law, the other not. It's an objective difference.

Belgarion of Riva wrote:They had opportunities to punish the cheats but chose not to take them. They even tried to cheat with the fuel loads and it took them almost a whole day to sort out a punishment.

They should also have never allowed them to start from the pit lane as that gave Newey and co the opportunity to tweak all the illegal devices the car has.

One thing this season has shown is that when the fingers car isn't the fastest on the grid, he's average to mediocre

Dream on.

Belgarion of Riva wrote:One thing this season has shown is that when the fingers car isn't the fastest on the grid, he's average to mediocre

For me that's a daft statement but he's not in the same league as Alonso or Hamilton - because they consistently can make a great car better and turn team errors into more points than the others

banbrotam wrote:

Belgarion of Riva wrote:One thing this season has shown is that when the fingers car isn't the fastest on the grid, he's average to mediocre

For me that's a daft statement but he's not in the same league as Alonso or Hamilton - because they consistently can make a great car better and turn team errors into more points than the others

Is the level of the Red Bull defined by Vettel or Webber? When Hamilton said how fast 'you guys' are, Webber told him it was the other guy who was fast.

Has anyone considered that maybe, just maybe, it's Vettel that makes the package so dominant?

bogbrush wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

Belgarion of Riva wrote:One thing this season has shown is that when the fingers car isn't the fastest on the grid, he's average to mediocre

For me that's a daft statement but he's not in the same league as Alonso or Hamilton - because they consistently can make a great car better and turn team errors into more points than the others

Is the level of the Red Bull defined by Vettel or Webber? When Hamilton said how fast 'you guys' are, Webber told him it was the other guy who was fast.

Has anyone considered that maybe, just maybe, it's Vettel that makes the package so dominant?

Vettel's good...but he's not that good.

Having a good chuckle at all the kneejerk reactions on here.

First off, its widely acknowledged Red Bull have the best chief designer in the business in Adrian Newey. Even if their car doesn't turn out to be all that great at the start of a season, they have the ability to refine and redevelop it and make it the best in the field, before the end of the season...just look at this season and 2009 where they caught and overtook the trailblazing Brawn team, in terms of performance.

I think there are parallels between Red Bull and McLaren here. In Mark Webber and Jenson Button you have drivers who probably give benchmark results for the equipment they have (i.e. good drivers in good cars). In Vettel and Hamilton you have drivers who can push their machinery to the absolute maximum and find performance others cannot.

Where Seb and Lewis differ I suspect is racecraft. Seb produces the goods more often than not when he qualifies on pole and can control a race from the front. He has shown in a few races that he can mix it up and gain places, but more often than not he tends to struggle and looks pretty ordinary. Lewis, on the other hand, will drive the wheels off his car and get past people any way he can...I just think he has more of a natural racer's instinct.

In terms of car setup and strategy, I think Red Bull and Ferrari have played very similar games, such as choosing to start from the pit lane so they can completely change the car set up, while Ferrari broke 2 curfews to work on their cars. Both have also used team orders to ensure their top drivers get the best results possible.

In a nutshell, I believe Ross Brawn said it best when he said results in F1 were 90% dependent on the car and 10% dependent on the driver (though I'd modify that to 80% car, 10% strategy, 10% driver).

bogbrush wrote:

SteveG wrote:The fact that RB are always in the thick of any controversy points to a contrast in team philosophies. In order to win RB are forever looking to gain any kind advantage by exploiting ambiguities in the regulations as part of their weaponry. This is at odds with other teams who may also spot a weakness but still operate within the spirit of the regulations. Is it cheating or is it clever? Either way it seems very much the same subjective line drawn in the sand between tax evasion and tax avoidance.

Yeah, Ferrarri operating in the spirt of the laws again today, eh?

Oh, and there's no subjectivity on tax evasion/avoidance; one operates inside the law, the other not. It's an objective difference.

I said 'other' not 'all'.

And if evasion/avoidence was as clear cut as you suggest then there would be far fewer rich lawyers knocking about.

SteveG wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

SteveG wrote:The fact that RB are always in the thick of any controversy points to a contrast in team philosophies. In order to win RB are forever looking to gain any kind advantage by exploiting ambiguities in the regulations as part of their weaponry. This is at odds with other teams who may also spot a weakness but still operate within the spirit of the regulations. Is it cheating or is it clever? Either way it seems very much the same subjective line drawn in the sand between tax evasion and tax avoidance.

Yeah, Ferrarri operating in the spirt of the laws again today, eh?

Oh, and there's no subjectivity on tax evasion/avoidance; one operates inside the law, the other not. It's an objective difference.

I said 'other' not 'all'.

And if evasion/avoidence was as clear cut as you suggest then there would be far fewer rich lawyers knocking about.

No, the lawyers concentrate on effective avoidance and ineffective avoidance. That is, that which sticks and that which does not.

Accountants concentrate on effective/ineffective avoidence. The most agressive cases then get jumped on by the Revenue. Cue the lawyers on both sides who then proceed to argue the toss in court about what's legal and what aint.

No, they argue about whether its effective or not.

Take the Rangers case; there's no legation of evasion, just whether the scheme works or not.

No - they argue the legalities via case law.

BB - at the end of the day my original post draws a comparison between Red Bull and their exploitation of FIA loopholes as a bit like tax. Most people would see where I was coming from without feeling the need to disect every word and start a completely unrelated and unnecessary argument. If you're determined to have the last word on this then go ahead because I'm not on this forum to engage in titfortat bol**ks and I'm certainly not on this forum to argue about tax.

Hey, you brought it in.

Ironically, on a post suggesting the RB don't operate within the spirit, like others do. Obviously written before Ferrari did Massas gearbox....