I fixed the lights. They totally lost connection and it was a mission to get them reconnected. Normal service resumed on Friday but hope you found this one interesting. There’s also some new swag on the F1 store if you want to grab something. Link in description
If it helps, look at this as like having a braking system which automatically trail brakes the inside wheel only on corner entry, to help turn-in. Instead of the driver manually not releasing the brakes fully to counter understeer on turn-in (trail braking), the valve/restrictor automatically does the same but to only one wheel not both to replicate the fiddle brake effect (for turn in only) by slowing the release of pressure in the brake fluid line to that wheel. And for front/rear brake bias generally, think of braking as something which takes away grip. Tyres have a finite amount of grip at any time, use more of that to slow the car and there's less lateral grip available to turn or go around a corner. Take away the rear grip by pulling the handbrake and you oversteer, too much rear brake bias works the same way. Too much front braking force and you remove more front grip than rear, so the car understeers.
With regards to brake balance. The idea is to use as little steering lock as possible but still keep enough rear grip that the car doesn't slide. It helps acceleration out of the corner by keeping front wheels pointed straight. David Coulthard always uses the term "rotation" alot. It's basically using the rear of the car to do most of the turning. Initiate the turn with a small steering input just to guide the front and the rotation of the car does the rest.
I can imagine the chaos of what would basically be shitposting: "Hydraulic powered seats are banned." "VaporRub as a substitute for lubricant is banned." "Engine coolant must be completely free of any and all human urine." And I'm all for it.
Sounds similar to when FIA had a whisper with Ferrari about a fuel leak into their turbo that gave them extra horsepower and they suddenly dropped like a stone. FIA have a whisper with Red Bull about asymmetric fiddle brakes and everyone suddenly makes up huge ground on them.
@@Igbon5 I'm too lazy to look up individual stats on the average pace of each team over each race etc but perez going from podiums to the midfield even sometimes at the back of the midfield since after miami suggests the whole field made up ground on redbull, given Max has also declined it seems like it's the car not just perez. I highly suspect the pace loss versus each team would show a pace loss to everyone, somebody who cares more than me should get on that lol.
@@braveheart4603 you guys arent the only lazy ones; Perez is trash. As soon as RB gives him a guarantee, he immediately stops showing up. Hes back to bottom of the midfield again in zandvoort lmao
Aha, a penny has dropped - the old version specifically refers to brake Pads and discs. But, regen takes the power off the rear axle and works with the rear brakes. So, if someone had worked how to apply the regen braking differentialy to the axles, that would be within the old rule but illegal under the new directive
Yes! I've been saying this too. The brake valve hypothesis is borderline moronic because it was always illegal. This covers other ways to slow the car outside the braking system. And still could be deemed illegal if it was found to be acting as some kind of driver aid
@@dand1585 but I think it's closer looking down alternative means of slowing the car than speculating about a valve somebody dreamed up which probably wouldn't be deemed legal anyway
I don't think that would fly either. You would either need 2 electric motors (one on each axle) or the differential or brakes (like the McLaren with 2 brake pedals) would be the star of the show. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the differential a heavily restricted LSD? An LSD will provide up to all torque to the wheel with the least grip or down to a complete 50/50 split on the axles. Thus, it needs to be the brakes, since the LSD will not do the trick and the MGU-K is a single electric motor on the prop shaft.
@@krismoe31 i agree largely with this sentiment, but still feel there is something outside of the braking system itself which has been clarified by this new wording. Was it Lando or Charles after imola who said something about other teams doing something creative with their deployment? It's a hazy memory but someone definitley said something along those lines after that race.
The FIA doesn't update the rules mid-season without some reason. Typically it's when a team "hypothetically" asks if something they're considering would be legal. Then someone calls someone else, the word gets around, and the real target of the investigation stops doing the bad thing without anyone having to make a formal issue of it.
dosnt really matter when the rules updated to be honest. When the FIA wants to ban something, whether it has solid evidence of someone using it or not, they will issue a technical directive. They can update the published rules whenever they feel like it, if a technical directive has been issued, that becomes the legal status of the technical rules
This is more likely what happened, a rumor tipped off about a team working on a system. But at the same time they can just do it whenever for any reason and even more so with new regulation set coming for 2026 and they can start working on cars in a few months
@@jackjackson1591unless the braking system wasn't the means for slowing the inside wheel? Don't get me wrong, it could fall foul of other parts of the regs, but using regenerative in this way doesn't break any rule surrounding the hydraulic braking system
instances like this is why when it comes to anything technological in F1, I only trust reports from experts within the field who know what they are talking about and not social media pages that report on stories without proper insight. Misinformation spreads too quickly in the space because they hear rumours and report it as facts.
Very basic version of this sort of braking system. It could only be sent to one rear wheel and had to be individually set to the left or right rear based on the circuit being driven.
@@B__L i once saw a comment from Instagram recently. This bloke was suggesting RB can use a hydraulic/mechanical weight transfer system to get back some of that rotation the assymetric braking offered.
im not sure if this is how it actually, mechanically works, but the way ive worked it out in my head that helps me understand the brake bias and getting the rear out: when you fully lock up a brake, that wheel loses any ability to do anything other than slide forward. its not an on-off effect though, as you go from 0-100% brake applied, the wheel gets more locked and this effect becomes more of an issue until you fully stop it spinning when you actually do "lock up". With this in mind, think of what the front and rear wheels are doing when you brake while turning. If you have more front brake bias, the front wheels will want to keep going straight more than the rear wheels, you will have less of a steering effect as your car is tending to keep sliding forward - you are understeering. if you have more rear bias, when you brake your rear wheels will want to keep sliding forward (as that is the direction you are moving when you brake, they just keep doing what theyre doing) but your front wheels are fully capable of turning. As they turn in, your rear wheels keep sliding "forward" as the front of your car follows the corner, you are rotating the car with the front turning way faster than the rear is willing to turn - you are oversteering. the latter is also exemplified by shifting the weight distribution, when you slam on the brakes your weight is shifted forward giving you more weight on the front and stopping your wheels locking up in the process, meanwhile your rear wheels have less weight pushing them in to the road making them easier to lock up at the same time, so slamming on your brakes with a 50-50 (F:R) brake distribution gives the effect of having a 40-60 distribution - the fronts can brake more than they are while the rears are braking too much and have locked up. Likewise, a similar effect can be seen between left and right wheels, as things like corner radius and centrifugal force can change how much a left brake should work vs a right brake - wheels on the outside of the corner need to travel further around than the wheels on the inside so they deed to travel faster so they require less braking, meanwhile centrifugal force means the outside wheel has more weight on it meaning it may need more brake force if you actually want to slow the car down. hope that makes sense to anyone other than just me, I think that covers most of the things to do with braking? ig it can be worth to mention that drum brakes can have higher braking potential than disks, but they fade way way quicker because they cant be cooled as well so thats why brake disks are better for racing and, say, safer for driving down a hill, but once you stop, a drum brake is better for a handbrake, or are better for really heavy lorries that usually spend all day on the highway but might need a lot of force to slow down once every few hours?
If Red Bull had a dramatic drop in performance, how come the other teams didn't catch them at the same time? McLaren had a huge update in Miami and from that moment until Canada, they were the only team anywhere close to RB. Mercedes started to fight for the podiums after Montreal. At the same time, how come there are no similar rumours about Ferrari? Leclerc had brake issues in Bahrein and their performance drop is maybe even bigger (though going backwards during the season is more like a tradition to them).
As per usual, all these "well informed" British gossip channels regurgitate the fantasy of some pathetic amoeba. And yes, it's ALWAYS the British channels instigating without ANY specific evidence. It's like catnip for those haters... they'll power up their caps lock, and convert into inbred pundits. Next week they'll have another hype train of hate...if they fail to find another issue this weekend.
Its straight up friction circle stuff. The front tires can only absorb so much force. Spend it on front brakes you'll lose any ability to put in lateral forces....and vice versa.
brake migration is a variable brake bias to do with the brake pressure as your coming off the pedal +ve moves it forward and -ve moves it to the rear. this will help with the car balance on entry
@@TheDjsmurph I think it’s a replacement for the variable diff settings on the wheel or something. It’s in Le Mans Ultimate and fully simulated but I just set it and leave it.
@@AidanMillward it’s literally just “migrating” your brake balance forward or rearward. So let’s say I want my BB forward when I start a braking zone to get the car stable and slowed down quicker, then as I let off the pedal and trailbrake, the braking is “migrated” to the rear allowing me to steer into the apex and get more rotation. It’s much simpler if you think of it as just adjusting your brake balance knob real time as you’re braking. But that’s wildly impractical so the migration just does that bit for you….lol
Well, in Hungary, when Max tryed to overtake LH and went suuuper wide he said on the radio "I'm -5 brake bias and this thing does not turn" ... it just adds to the speculation :)
Every time I watch one of your videos, I'm reminded why I love them so much. 😊 You do exactly what I like to do when I explain things. I play devil's advocate and suggest what could be happening and why it would be an advantage. Then, instead of pointing how Because of this this and this, it looks like this is actually happening here, I leave it people to decide for themselves now that i've educated them. I do the same thing when people ask for advice. I talk about all the good and the bad of How they may react in the situation. What their next move might be. I don't tell them what I would do Or what they should do. I let them decide for themselves. I can't wait to see what happens next and for your next video. Keep doing what you're doing.😊
Wonder whether this is "someone" who has approached FIA for approval of a system for 2025, in the same way that Mercedes did with DAS. However whereas FIA said yes to Merc but then banned it for the following season. Here FIA are just clarifying an existing rule (the Fiddle Brake rule) as you detailed the other day.
"Here FIA are just clarifying an existing rule (the Fiddle Brake rule) as you detailed the other day" And if the FIA hadn't, this rule would have gone into effect in 2026, anyway. They just brought it forward a year and a half
This could also easily be the case of the FIA looking through the rulebook - realising that it could interpreted in a certain way - and then closing the loophole before anyone could use it.
The brake balance thing, I BELIEVE works as you expect it to when braking well within the adhesion limit of the tyre. Once you approach the limit and enter the grey area of "under rotation" where there is some sliding motion, then the rearward bias (or rather reduced front bias, which is effec....you know this :D ) begins to induce a handbrake effect. Conversely, too much front bias will increase the sliding component of the front tyre motion leading to *nd*rst**r (sorry for language) ) I may be talking massive balls of course. I'm still a bit too weak and sore to set my wheel up, but you could test with a sim car with stupid soft tyres and minimum brake pressure. Or it's some mad thing to do with the circle the car is following and differential Vs Ackerman Angles or Newey knows what.
I remember a few years ago when Ferrari definitely wasn't cheating fuel flow, and it was pure coincidence that their top speed dropped compared to every other team from the moment the FIA changed how they measured it.
Complete coincidence, I am sure. It's not like there is 1 driver whose performance has fallen off dramatically this year and loudly complains about not being able to turn anymore. /sarcasm
Except for the fact that, unlike when Ferrari was caught for the oil burn trick, every single team hasn't said a word accusing Red Bull of doing asymmetrical braking. So there goes your conspiracy theory.
Ferrari was penalized for their regulation breach, it was however "fixed behind closed doors". Apparently if it's Ferrari, the FIA is too scared to scare them out of F1.
@@byronservies4043what about Ferraris drop off? What about Aston martins drop off? They were both front runners last year and they’ve fallen back. I guess you have some made up reason why it’s ok for them to be struggling?
I still think it's probable that Red Bull ran such a system. As you say it's not full 'evidence' so we can't speak in absolute terms, but what do we have fits the theory well enough to at least consider it a reasonable explanation as to Red Bull's decline in performance. It's not just that they've been caught, their car has got worse in performance, often visibly too. - The Melbourne DNF for Max has to be considered as a sign of this. The manner of the retirement, even it being the right rear which is the brake you'd deploy it on for that circuit, gives a strong impression of this system being used and it failing. The team's explanation of an over-tightened part doesn't wash, given the car was in parc-fermé from qualifying and Max didn't have issues with it for an hour of qualifying running. I'd call this a good fit post-hoc. - Issues with tyre wear since Imola and beyond. One of the major issues Red Bull seem to face this season is that they seem to chew their tyres up, often dramatically more than some other of the fast cars. If as some surmise such a system aided with tyre wear, that this pattern of poor tyre management seems to be now an inherent trait of the car since the supposed removal does also fit well with the theory. Even at Zandvoort when Max led initially, all Norris had to do was bide his time and let Max run through his tyres before choosing his moment and blasting off into the distance. - The aim of such a system is to give a car more rotation in a more efficient manner. It would give the driver more front end without needing to implement the compromises (or to a lesser degree) than without it. We all know Max likes to drive on the front axle, but the aero balance of this gen of cars is more rearwards than before. This potentially could have been used to give Max more of what he likes without creating strange setups. Again it fits the profile of what we know. Since the presumed removal, Max has been vocal often on the radio about how the car won't turn, how even adding wing doesn't help him. - The FIA are not a reliable source for rules transgressions or which team were an inspiration for a particular rule clarification. Sometimes this is simply because they don't know, the teams have smarter engineers than the FIA team has in scrutineering. Sometimes this is because they get caught out by a better interpretation of the rules, which is what I believe would be the case here. I don't think the original wording would have sufficiently covered which is surmised that Red Bull were doing, so when the FIA say no-one fell foul of the rules, that's right, but you had to change them too. Red Bull use the projection technique you mentioned often, with flexi wings etc etc etc. My personal guess is that Red Bull removed the system having become suspicious that the FIA were being led onto it and preparing a rule clarification. I think that's really as much as we can know. Teams will never admit to running bespoke rule-skirting systems, the FIA won't admit to mistakes. The Red Bull has lost pace as well as being caught by the other teams, and has handling and performance flaws that are neatly explained by this whole theory being true to at least some extent. The question I have still is; was it only ever used on Max's car? I have had suspicions since Perez took the lead of the WDC at Baku that his car hasn't been of the same spec as Max's. The almost immediate decline in Perez's performance over one lap and race distances was akin to this drop for the team in '24. I can't see how the brake system would necessarily fit into that, but my suspicions are more general about the 2nd Red Bull car and how it is prepared compared to the 1st one. Good summary of the situation and the rumours here and there in this video though.
A lot of things get easier to understand once you read what is maximum slip angle and how tires work. Simplified, there is only certain amount of grip in the tire and this has to be spread between acceleration/deceleration and turning. If you want to be turning, you can't be slowing down with that tire at the same time. But... that is "trust me bro" type of explanation... There is no short way to say what slip angle is, the closes thing i could figure out is that everything that the car does with its tires, all the forces that it has is done by using the tire deformation and its elastic properties of trying to return to its original shape.. It is like thousands of rubber bands pulling against the traction, and you can't have more than finite amount of those bands and they can only stretch so far until they either break or we lose traction. And of course, they are in real life also pushing against traction but pulling is easier at least for me to see in my minds eye. We can either pull as hard as we can to slow the car down, or we can pull almost as hard as we can but also applying sideways forces to turn the whole thing. That is what happens when you turn the steering wheel. SO the more rearwards you can have your brake balance, the more margins you have at the front for turning. And brake migration tries to offset the change in the body mass transfer, as your G forces start to come down, you are not getting as much "boost" at the front from the shift in weight and angular momentum, brake balance migrates towards the back. I hate brake migration, i consider it a form of ABS. It changes brake parameters without driver input. Lock the brake balance settings to be done by the driver and this can be done only when they are not braking. Get rid of all driver aids.
Fiddle brakes, or any other variation, didn't make the Red Bull a rocket ship in a straight line. At the start of the new regs that car was passing everyone along straights like they were in reverse, without DRS. They just got the new regulations right and everyone else has closed the gap. McLaren had a huge leap forward after copying the floor on the Red Bull when it was hoisted in to the air at Monaco, so it does happen
With the fiddle brake you don't require as much downforce to get the car to rotate, so you run less wing, so you're faster than everyone else on the straights
I think RB is playing with aero (thru those new ducts behind the drivers head, perhaps the regular intakes to yaw the car under the guise of cooling system, but that would be useful in med/high speed corners not low speed. This is the kind of stuff jets use and it doesn't require moving much air.
It would be surprising if asymmetric braking wasn't already thoroughly banned after McLaren's third pedal. I don't see how a delay would fly either, all changes or modulation of braking must be physically done by the driver
@@fuzzy1dk the driver takes his foot off the pedal and the brakes release, if the rules don't say how quickly it has to happen then nothing's violating them.
@@AidanMillwardslow release valve would create a situation where there was a differing force on the pads within a given circuit though. Temporarily or not, it would still be illegal. Check the wording of the new regs. It talks about torque on the axle. I believe it's nothing to do with the braking system and more about regen or something
The reason why shifting back gives more rotation is the same reason you spin when you totally lock the rears. You want the front wheels fully gripped but still turning, meanwhile it can be beneficial for the rears to underrrotate to promote oversteer
@@AidanMillward Pretty simple. Red Bull has had the least amount of wind tunnel testing since mid 2022. The rules don't allow for one team to dominate for long.
@@Andre_The_Millennial Idk about that, I'm pretty sure wind tunnel time AFTER the cars are disgned in their base configuration isn't going to have a major swing effect mid-season. Remember, rolling-road wind tunnels only simulate airflow in a direct strait line. Dynamic wind while driving around a track is an entirely different situation.
Not to give any possible current or future F1 engineers who will probably never see this any ideas, but you COULD theoretically do it with one pedal. It could be a thing like how a road car has a brake light switch that turn the brake lights on, without actually activating the brakes, but instead of a light, it activates your asymmetrical system instead, and when you press it normally, it activates the brakes like normal. meaning that if you only push the pedal a bit, you could do like McLaren did in 97/98, but with one pedal.
Shitfting brake balance forward doesn’t give better turn in because you are using more of the total amount of grip in the front tires to brake rather than turn, when you shift rearward it makes the cars platform more balanced under breaking so the nose doesn’t dive as much, giving you more rotation at the front. Sounds counter intuitive because you would think more weight on the front means more front grip, but this is the reason that trail breaking is so important, transferring the weight to the rear before and during corner entry
Delayed release makes sense I suppose. I was staring at the extra rule and thinking they've extended symmetry coverage from the pad to the axle, so perhaps some type of clutch between brake pad and axle had been used? But that seems wildly complex to pull off, and certainly wouldn't be in the 50 quid fiddle brake region.
A reason shifting brake balance forward would make turn in worse: The tires don't like to brake and turn. I'm sure there is more to it but, lateral and torsional forces add together to overwhelm the available traction. So braking while you just start to turn in, would be a worse experience than lifting off the brake as you turn in. I'm not an expert, but I Iove racing games and physics
2:57 I would say here shifting it to the front would cause you to lock and go horribly wide inducing understeer think brake magic Baku 2021 but not as bad More to the rear will cause the rear to lock but will also induce rotation better hence it being a tool to reduce understeer as you have a sharper rotation at the front - best way to reduce understeer is either softer suspension setups, more front downforce or more rearward braking
@@RANDOMZBOSSMAN1 but at the same time, further to the front means more weight over the front wheels and less on the rear, resulting in better turn in.
@RANDOMZBOSSMAN1 that bit reminded me of Richard Hammond explaining under and oversteer. Understeer, the front doesn't turn, you hit a tree, and you 💀. Oversteer, the back overtakes the front of the car, you hit a tree, and you 💀.
@@AidanMillward Vehicle dynamics is a weird thing! Because like you say moving the weight forward can cause changes to the mechanical platform which can induce oversteer but at the same time you have to consider the aero platform in where the downforce is biased if it’s front or weird based Long story short it’s probably black magic what the engineers do in balancing everything in terms of what causes a car to oversteer/understeer and if there’s any snap oversteer/understeer as well I think Newey went to a coven rather than a university that’s why he can see air allegedly lol
@@AidanMillward No, it doesn't. That's where you are going wrong. This is all about traction circles: the total amount of grip in any direction available to any tyre contact parts, and how you chose to allocate the available grip between longitudinal and lateral forces
I call bollocks on this. There's no way RBs performance drop off is unrelated. The other teams haven't magically caught up, RB have slowed down and this brake valve thingy being forcibly removed is the only thing that makes sense. Also explains Max's moaning about understeer recently
RBs performance wasn't centered around braking though, it was pretty much all high speed, high load corners that they had the most performance in. This happens in every set of regulations, one team comes out ahead and as the regs progress the other teams tend to catch up.
@@Skull5617Correct - it wasn’t centered on braking, at least, not in braking zones. Where it *is* related to braking is the use of the brakes in novel ways in novel places.
@F-Man what the fuck does that even mean? You only use the brakes in the braking zones. Even if rb had some magic brakes that's not gonna make their car faster in a straight line or give it more downforce through high speed corners.
It's hard to say. It made sense to me that with the FIA hiring a team of engineers who are tasked with finding loopholes in the 2026 rules that they would patch the same loopholes in the 2024 and 2025 rules. But then how to explain a brake failure on only one wheel. Every other brake issue I can vaguely remember seemed to be symmetrical like Mercedes in Canada it was always both rear brakes fading or both front brakes overheating because a team tried to run the small brake ducts in testing and it wasn't enough cooling. Maybe someone with a better memory can think of some times that one brake failed that wasn't just down to a tear off being stuck in a front right brake duct.
I dont think you're a million miles out with this idea. The new regs cover using means outside of the braking system to achieve asymmetrical braking. That is, I believe, why the amendment was made. But Scarbs and his doodles have got everyone frothing over this brake valve idea, which I'm not even sure would work as he described
Nobody was running a fuel system that could bypass the FIA sensor in 2019 either ... 🤷♂ Ferrari drop in pace that year was pure coincidence, just like Red Bull now (cough!) 🙄
It's a situation where several theories are more or less equally plausible. One of the predictions I made for this season was that McLaren would close the performance gap on Red Bull, which they have done.
You explained it very well (IMO) with the one brake taking a second or so longer to release. We’re RB cheating, of course they were & as usual the FIA would rather just cover it all up and just remind those who get them that the Pit Pass is a privilege.
This all has more than a wiff of Ferrari fuel sensor avoision (to use a Kent Brockman) about it. Could be nothing, could be everything, and with the FIA we will probably never know. BTW nice work on the video sequencing having this out so close the video about the third brake pedal 👍
Time to look out for large payment/settlement from redbull in the FIA’s financial reports next year. Ferrari’s settlement in 2018 showed up as $18Million in that report.
It's either that RB has had to abandon some hidden, grey area tech or they've gotten a bit overconfident with the capability of the car (assumed it was good enough to stay ahead of the field) and simply not allocated enough upgrades to this season and are instead focusing development on next years car
If the regen was the source of alleged differential braking, could it have been applied in the actual differential? Torque sensing is used to manage the limited slip in the diff, so it could be possible to use that to draw more regen from one side and effectively achieve lateral differential braking, just by managing the amount of slip from side to side.
The wording in the rulebook was enough to stop asymmetrical braking being achieved via use of the braking system. The amendment actually covers the use of braking via other means - engine/regenerative braking etc. I'll bet this fiddle brake valve hypothesis thing is just barking up the wrong tree.
I also think this could be why Max was apparently trying to over compensate the lack of turn in by maxing out on his rearward brake bias adjustment. The other means of braking was all via the rear axle, but not via the brake system itself
What if a team had axle bias in the gearbox. It could be delivered with a steering angle sensor, left or right and also the amount to be applied by how much angle is input to the steering wheel. the axle could be driven by a hydrostatic system in the gearbox itself, completely hidden from prying eyes like the FIA or other teams.
nice video. I think it's a coincdnece that's become a storm in a teacup, there is a history of dominat teams loosing perfomance, and although the have been anomalies in this case, one would think that in this day of even more media there would be more concrete eveidence by now
You have to change your mindset about brake bias. Compare it too heat. Cold isn't real, it's a concept. The feeling of cold, is the absence of heat. You don't add cold, you take away heat. The physics of braking on a race car is similar. You don't add front bias. The physics is (are?) you are taking away rear brakes. The less rear brake, the less the rear wheels are helping to slow the car down. Then you over tax the front tires, and they lose turning efficiency.
Re- "I don't understand brake balance" Brake balance changes do nothing at all - under gentle braking. You can brake only the front, all the way to only the rear, nothing changes. It only does anything when limits of adhesion are being approached. To find out what happens with greater rear brake balance when entering corners at speed - Get a car with a REAR handbrake, go to a big empty car park with plenty of run-off space and drive in a tight circle so the tyres are squealing. Press the clutch (if there is one) and pull on the handbrake hard. You will see that this helps turn in. Now interpolate this result to racing. I wouldn't do this with an electric handbrake or a double clutch or other "manual" automatic. In some jurisdictions this is "dangerous driving", don't get caught. Do it in the rain for a lower speed (and quieter) appreciation of the effect.
I can't be arsed checking but are Merc's and McLaren's improvement also at the expense of other teams. I do think Red Bull directed investment away from the current car when initially dominant to the get a head start for the next two years. After all if Sergio was pulling his weight RB would have both titles sewn up by now. Maybe they will just have to find a little upgrade to see out the year.
Your description of how the asymmetric breaks work by letting go later, which no one else has been able to articulate, underlines even more the redbull break issues = a break staying on.
The new technical clarification might be a setback for Mercedes and McLaren 😎 It is noteworthy that both Toto and Zak have been completely silent in this discussion.
Did anyone notice how Oscar managed to "lock"both front wheels at monza and they kept rotating with them smoking all the way around the tyre never actually locking in one spot on the tyre?
2:52 - No? Because if you shift the brake balance forward, you’re giving the front tires more work to do. You want them prioritizing turning, not on slowing down the car, as they’re the wheels that turn the car most efficiently.. Let the “dumb” rear wheels do the stoppy thing. Also easier for them as there’s an engine to mechanically weigh the whole thing down.
Too much front brake bias whilst trying to steer the car with more effective friction on the outside front tyre, because of weight transfer, will lead to understeer.
I imagine CH saying “Nothing to see here it’s just a technical wording change to cover something that FIA have just thought about and think it would be sensible to add to current wording to tell Teams not to go down that route.” Clearly there’s no issue here then! Gary Anderson was experimenting with this sort of thing 30 years ago. Everybody must have forgotten the idea existed.
If could be coincidence but if Red Bull are absolutely nowhere in Zandvort, then we can fully assume they got told to remove it. It also doesn’t help with from what I’ve read somewhere some Red Bull employees weren’t happy with the new technical directive been added. Could be fake but that’s what I’ve read. We just have to see the next few races. If Red bull are suddenly doing a Brawn GP 2009 due to this TD then it’s safe to say they got told to remove it IMO.
I tend to believe that RedBull were up to something. Although statistics have their limitations they do have their uses and it's clear RedBull have been affected by something. In 2023 Max failed to reach the podium just once, just over halfway through 2024 that's gone up to 5. Once due a retirement in Australia but the other 4 were in the last 7 races. In 2023 Max won all but 3 races and it looked like 2024 was going the same way, but in the last 7 races Max has won just 2. By the end of last season Redbull had scored more points than 2nd and 3rd combined, this year McLaren are almost breathing down their necks and Ferrari aren't too far off either. That has to be more than just the other teams closing the gap. Also, we know the 2023 car was utterly brilliant because Perez finished second in the WDC. He started 2024 with 6 top 5 finishes in 6 races, 4 of those being podiums. Suddenly, at the start of the European races Perez qualifying & race results drop off dramatically (it's especially noticeable with his qualifying results). That suggests to me that the RB20 suddenly became much more difficult to drive, which would have a bigger impact on Perez compared to Max. Looking at the stats it's very clear something must have changed with the RB20 around the start of the European season. The only question is what?
That's plausible, but don't forget Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren were all completely out of sorts at the start of 2023. Ferrari and Mercedes had brought lightly updated 2022 cars to start with, which were nowhere near good enough (hence revised concepts halfway through the season) . McLaren were nowhere as they were behind schedule on development. As Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren have improved (A LOT) through 2023 and 2024, it's only logical that Red Bull's advantage would be deminished, no? Especially if Red Bull have now gone astray with their own development (whether or not that is due to balance problems from a brake bias enforcement change), Red Bull throwing old style aero parts on the car at Spa tends to suggest there is a significant aero component to Red Bull's misstep as opposed to purely mechanical problems. (Aston Martin were the closest challenger at the start of 2023, but they were pretty far away in laptime terms and they were hit by the flexible nose technical directive too. They aren't necessarily that much further away in strict laptime terms now, the other top 4 teams just improved a lot.)
Honestly, Red Bull not being as dominant is easier explained by the parity rules rather than some “magic” breaks. Red Bull have less wind tunnel testing time and their car has a different development path than competitors. McLaren and Mercedes pretty much started to develop cars closer to the RB19 and have caught up in aero.
@@TassieLorenzo You could be correct, and I agree that we would expect RedBull's advantage to be reduced. But it's the way it's happened so suddenly that makes me suspect that there's more to it. In the first 6 races Perez qualified 5th,3rd,3rd,2nd,2nd,4th, consistent and solid. Yet from Race 7 onwards his performance drops dramatically 11th,18th,16th,8th,8th,19th,16th,3rd. To me that doesn't look like the Redbull going astray, that looks like something has fundamentally changed and Perez has been unable to adapt.
Too much has been made of changes to the published rules. It doesn't need the published rules to be updated to ban, or clarify anything. The FIA issues a technical directive, which are not available to the public. The fact that they did update the rules now is interesting in itself, but not for the reasons people think - it is because they probably wanted to draw public attention to it ... something they didn't need to do just to clarify the rules to the teams. They would have got that from the directive
Red Bull have been in turmoil off the circuit - I'm sure the many distractions have added to their drop in form, it's not one issue that they may or may not have been doing.
@@mutleyengbut of the rulebook is thick as a skyscraper and there is no innovation....it essentially is becoming a spec series because everything is against the rules or banned once made
@@mutleyeng I did not say i WANT it to be so, but everytime anyone does anything cool it is instantly added to the book of grudges, so just drop the charade at once. Id rather see those guys make top fuel dragsters or whatever landspeed racers can conjure from their wettest dreams go around corners.
Whilst this brake story is very entertaining I suspect Red Bull have designed themselves into a tricky spot, similar to Merc at the start of these regs. RB seem to have fallen into the same trap as McLaren a long time ago and Merc recently, RB seem to be chasing absolute performance rather than having a bit of a compromise and a wider setup window.
Maybe the current F1 car runs a pre-programme set up from Sims assist 🤔 ???????? Just a thought Doesn't the FIA monitor the teams technical directive compliance prior to the beginning of the season?????
@AidanMilward Hey Aidan, will you be making videos again in the future that focus on the careers of drivers who were only briefly in F1 but were quite successful outside of it? I'm asking because youtube caught me with old DTM videos and Bernd Schneider had several sideroles in your videos.
What does the new wording outlaw that wasn't already clearly illegal. The old 11.1.1 defined front and rear brake circuits and 11.1.2 required the pressure to be equal within a circuit. Not seeing the needs for the 'new rules' unless it's another "...any lapped car"/"...all lapped cars" dodge. Something's fishy. Anyone else remember Max's "That's what happens when you stop cheating." to Ferrari after their illegal PUs got banned? Of course, this feels too much like karma to be let go by a lot of us...If Red Bull wasn't cheating, why the change in fortunes after China? And if Red Bull *was* running an illegal part, why should any fan believe it started with the RB20 and wasn't also in the RB19, RB18 or even the RB16B?
Pre-amendment: 11.1.2 The brake system must be designed so that within each circuit, the forces applied to the brake pads are the same magnitude and act as opposing pairs *on a given brake disc*. This could be interpreted as "equal pressure on either side of a brake disc, per brake disc" if you play stupid. That's why there isn't a clear ban/punishment and an amendment to the rules. If you play stupid enough to misinterpret rules because they're just not watertight enough. What's the FIA going to do? Yeah its against the spirit, but still.
@@hurkadurk Only if you are being obtuse on purpose. 11.1.2's "...within each circuit" unpacks to "...within the front or rear brake circuit". It was perfectly clear the first time. If you're smart enough to design car parts, you are probably smart enough to parse English sentences.
@@jackjackson1591 Arguably yes. BUT. if you're smart enough, you play with the rules so that you get away with misinterpreting, no? People hate it, but again, its not outright banned. because there seems to be no repercussion other than RB drop off. But again, this is IF RB did such a thing. I'm not blind to the fact suddenly RB is struggling with something that is very much related to torque vectoring or per-wheel braking. But maFIA said noone did such a thing.
Apologies if this was already mentioned - Brembo reported nothing wrong with the red bull calipers, post investigation. Adding brake dust to the already smoking callipers.
personally I don't think it was the braking, Red Bull used to have the best ride quality and could use the curbs everywhere when others could not, Merc had the worst ride quality with high vertical stiffness, roll on a while and as Red Bull have gone backwards they seem to have had to run a stiffer car vertically giving them the worst ride quality in the field, I think the FIA found something in the suspension and have covered it over with the fiddle brake 2.0 regulation wording, be interesting to see if Red Bull are now back on it or not for the rest of the season
i get what you're saying but RB have lost pace compared to their last year's car which makes zero sense. mclaren and merc didn't magically gain close to a second from imola onwards.
Edit of that article doesn't really add anything. It just restates in a different fashion what was already said. So technically there is no change to the prohibition of asymmetrical braking power.
There never is smoke without fire in F1 - if there are whispers, later they become full-blown noises. It cannot be coincidence Red Bull have gone backwards. Watch now as they romp to a 1-2.....
When a team is as dominant as RBR were during 2023 I guess there's a natural tendency to believe they're up to some sort of black magic, but the reality is they have the advantage of the only notable engineer still in F1 who already had some working knowledge of ground effect cars, coupled with opponents who didn't really get things right. My personal view... the rules are working as intended and Red Bull have just been caught.
The brake announcement blurb, reached me just before Vandoort, so I was thinking "who drops back most"-- Mercedes back below 5th, seems to say something. Maybe you will update with "Mercedes had recently moved up significantly, the brake ban, now Mercedes back to where they were 5 weeks ago. How did you miss this/
@@AidanMillward I don't put ultimate stock value of practice. Again I don't know timelines, but the only outlier, both gain and loss of performance recently has been Mercedes- and both like old times. True a multitude of offsetting conditions could be at work.
People forget that Ferrari and Aston Martin were front runners last year and completely ignore the drop off in performance they’ve had. F1 pundits literally talked about this today and said that RB hasn’t lost performance and they’ve actually gotten faster. FIA said no one did it, what more do we need to debunk this
Mercedes hasn't overtaken RBR. Lewis got a gift in UK when Mercedes murdered Oscar's strategy. Russell got obvious gift in Austria Russell's win in Spa was an anomaly
RBR’s 2022-2023 performance was also an anomaly, as was Mercedes’ 2014-2020, as was RBR 2010-2013. In actuality, nobody has actually won the championship since Ferrari.
Lewis win in Uk is more what others did and not what he did George win in Austria is cus the top 2 ping pong each others George win in Spa is partly cus he was underweight but also because of his good strategy Basically Mercedes, though making steps to return is still a lot behind Red Bull
Lewis wasn’t gifted anything. He earned it. Oscar would’ve been behind lewis if they doubled stacked the McLarens. Russell was lucky but if he had qualified any lower Oscar would have probably won that race. Russell didn’t win in spa lewis did.
Something is "afoot" here, because, suddenly Red Bull-Max, has fallen off. The top speeds are all about the same, bur suddenly McLaren and Merc are faster. And poor Tsunoda is carrying even more of the car than at thestart of the season. What? Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.
The FIA does not want to deal with the issue of disqualifying a team caught cheating after all, break steering (asymetric clamping force across the axil). It is easier to say no team was using it, but how do you explain RB forced to remove a part from their car and the loss of performance since Miami,
Look at it like this.... The 2nd most dominant car in history, winning 24 out of 28 races, now cannot get on the podium. DURING MID SEASON! Something is definitely a miss.
and possibly a lower development ceiling with their current package, allowing teams using cars inspired by their old aero package to make more progress at a faster rate
Is it just me, or does anyone else wish the FIA would just leave some of these smaller loopholes closed and just let all the teams work it out over a season or two? There's so much potential for real trickle down driving tech that would actually benefit road cars and consumers.
Edit: wrote this before watching the whole vid. This all feels like Ferrari saying “no we are not burning engine oil to get a power advantage.” And the FIA says nothing but amends the rules and Ferrari somehow got slower…..
look, dear boy - you've been told, Mclaren only ran Brake Steer at Australia in 1998 - One race only. Stewards banned it for Brasil, then the FIA banned it
The Red Bull is not as dominant but a bad day in the office for Verstappen he is still regularly on the podium. There is no transparency in F1, never has been, the rule clarification that has been made must have been triggered by something, even if it was someone waking up one morning thinking that it wouldn't go amiss to add an extra sentence to Article 11.1.2. In the absence of transparency is sounds like someone used the "well it isn't clear" card to defend themselves from breaking an existing rule. If that is the case, say it, and then the other teams can decide if the "it isn't clear defence" is in anyway justified.
FIA is, in my opinion, a reacting organisation. It build rules, then make adjustment according to what loophole guy like newey or other designer find. Exemple : flexi wing. Sooooooo, what do you think? Is it Redbull, good chances.
It’s all in the weight transfer of the car. Think of riding a bicycle. If you lean even slightly to one side you’ll feel it. The brake sensor/cylinder would be working the same to control the rear brake pressure.
I fixed the lights. They totally lost connection and it was a mission to get them reconnected.
Normal service resumed on Friday but hope you found this one interesting. There’s also some new swag on the F1 store if you want to grab something. Link in description
Mission Cheat Bull to keep Hamilton away 😂
If it helps, look at this as like having a braking system which automatically trail brakes the inside wheel only on corner entry, to help turn-in.
Instead of the driver manually not releasing the brakes fully to counter understeer on turn-in (trail braking), the valve/restrictor automatically does the same but to only one wheel not both to replicate the fiddle brake effect (for turn in only) by slowing the release of pressure in the brake fluid line to that wheel.
And for front/rear brake bias generally, think of braking as something which takes away grip. Tyres have a finite amount of grip at any time, use more of that to slow the car and there's less lateral grip available to turn or go around a corner.
Take away the rear grip by pulling the handbrake and you oversteer, too much rear brake bias works the same way. Too much front braking force and you remove more front grip than rear, so the car understeers.
@@ibex485 Good explanation
With regards to brake balance.
The idea is to use as little steering lock as possible but still keep enough rear grip that the car doesn't slide. It helps acceleration out of the corner by keeping front wheels pointed straight.
David Coulthard always uses the term "rotation" alot. It's basically using the rear of the car to do most of the turning. Initiate the turn with a small steering input just to guide the front and the rotation of the car does the rest.
DIY
nice storytelling, but I also think they just put an air tight seal to the rulebook.
I propose the FIA should randomly ban something that nobody is actually doing each summer to keep conversation going during summer break.
I second this argument.
@@Spike-sk7ql Third. Rule passed. FIA, get your rules updated please.
I can imagine the chaos of what would basically be shitposting:
"Hydraulic powered seats are banned."
"VaporRub as a substitute for lubricant is banned."
"Engine coolant must be completely free of any and all human urine."
And I'm all for it.
Ban rear wings
No gingers.
Sounds similar to when FIA had a whisper with Ferrari about a fuel leak into their turbo that gave them extra horsepower and they suddenly dropped like a stone. FIA have a whisper with Red Bull about asymmetric fiddle brakes and everyone suddenly makes up huge ground on them.
Everyone?
@@Igbon5 EVERYONE!!! (NFSMW2005 reference...)
@@Igbon5 I'm too lazy to look up individual stats on the average pace of each team over each race etc but perez going from podiums to the midfield even sometimes at the back of the midfield since after miami suggests the whole field made up ground on redbull, given Max has also declined it seems like it's the car not just perez.
I highly suspect the pace loss versus each team would show a pace loss to everyone, somebody who cares more than me should get on that lol.
@@braveheart4603
I'm too lazy as well. I thought Perez dropped off before. Maybe I'll try and check.
@@braveheart4603 you guys arent the only lazy ones; Perez is trash. As soon as RB gives him a guarantee, he immediately stops showing up. Hes back to bottom of the midfield again in zandvoort lmao
Aha, a penny has dropped - the old version specifically refers to brake Pads and discs. But, regen takes the power off the rear axle and works with the rear brakes. So, if someone had worked how to apply the regen braking differentialy to the axles, that would be within the old rule but illegal under the new directive
Yes! I've been saying this too. The brake valve hypothesis is borderline moronic because it was always illegal. This covers other ways to slow the car outside the braking system.
And still could be deemed illegal if it was found to be acting as some kind of driver aid
The mgu k is on the prop shaft, not axles.
@@dand1585 but I think it's closer looking down alternative means of slowing the car than speculating about a valve somebody dreamed up which probably wouldn't be deemed legal anyway
I don't think that would fly either. You would either need 2 electric motors (one on each axle) or the differential or brakes (like the McLaren with 2 brake pedals) would be the star of the show. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the differential a heavily restricted LSD? An LSD will provide up to all torque to the wheel with the least grip or down to a complete 50/50 split on the axles. Thus, it needs to be the brakes, since the LSD will not do the trick and the MGU-K is a single electric motor on the prop shaft.
@@krismoe31 i agree largely with this sentiment, but still feel there is something outside of the braking system itself which has been clarified by this new wording.
Was it Lando or Charles after imola who said something about other teams doing something creative with their deployment? It's a hazy memory but someone definitley said something along those lines after that race.
The FIA doesn't update the rules mid-season without some reason. Typically it's when a team "hypothetically" asks if something they're considering would be legal. Then someone calls someone else, the word gets around, and the real target of the investigation stops doing the bad thing without anyone having to make a formal issue of it.
dosnt really matter when the rules updated to be honest. When the FIA wants to ban something, whether it has solid evidence of someone using it or not, they will issue a technical directive. They can update the published rules whenever they feel like it, if a technical directive has been issued, that becomes the legal status of the technical rules
This is more likely what happened, a rumor tipped off about a team working on a system. But at the same time they can just do it whenever for any reason and even more so with new regulation set coming for 2026 and they can start working on cars in a few months
Like NASCAR legend Smokey Yunick said : "If it ain't written down, it ain't illegal".
Fair enough, I mean the FIA DOES know the teams they are dealing with and if something like that said was left open to interpretation.... yeah.
exactly
I prefer Air Bud’s take: ‘There ain’t no rule says a dog can’t play basketball.’
11.1.1 and 11.1.2 taken together require equal pressure within each brake circuit. Any car that found a way round the reg probably deserves a DSQ.
@@jackjackson1591unless the braking system wasn't the means for slowing the inside wheel?
Don't get me wrong, it could fall foul of other parts of the regs, but using regenerative in this way doesn't break any rule surrounding the hydraulic braking system
instances like this is why when it comes to anything technological in F1, I only trust reports from
experts within the field who know what they are talking about and not social media pages that report on stories without proper insight. Misinformation spreads too quickly in the space because they hear rumours and report it as facts.
'97 McLaren: 💀
Very basic version of this sort of braking system. It could only be sent to one rear wheel and had to be individually set to the left or right rear based on the circuit being driven.
@@B__L i once saw a comment from Instagram recently. This bloke was suggesting RB can use a hydraulic/mechanical weight transfer system to get back some of that rotation the assymetric braking offered.
im not sure if this is how it actually, mechanically works, but the way ive worked it out in my head that helps me understand the brake bias and getting the rear out:
when you fully lock up a brake, that wheel loses any ability to do anything other than slide forward. its not an on-off effect though, as you go from 0-100% brake applied, the wheel gets more locked and this effect becomes more of an issue until you fully stop it spinning when you actually do "lock up". With this in mind, think of what the front and rear wheels are doing when you brake while turning.
If you have more front brake bias, the front wheels will want to keep going straight more than the rear wheels, you will have less of a steering effect as your car is tending to keep sliding forward - you are understeering.
if you have more rear bias, when you brake your rear wheels will want to keep sliding forward (as that is the direction you are moving when you brake, they just keep doing what theyre doing) but your front wheels are fully capable of turning. As they turn in, your rear wheels keep sliding "forward" as the front of your car follows the corner, you are rotating the car with the front turning way faster than the rear is willing to turn - you are oversteering.
the latter is also exemplified by shifting the weight distribution, when you slam on the brakes your weight is shifted forward giving you more weight on the front and stopping your wheels locking up in the process, meanwhile your rear wheels have less weight pushing them in to the road making them easier to lock up at the same time, so slamming on your brakes with a 50-50 (F:R) brake distribution gives the effect of having a 40-60 distribution - the fronts can brake more than they are while the rears are braking too much and have locked up.
Likewise, a similar effect can be seen between left and right wheels, as things like corner radius and centrifugal force can change how much a left brake should work vs a right brake - wheels on the outside of the corner need to travel further around than the wheels on the inside so they deed to travel faster so they require less braking, meanwhile centrifugal force means the outside wheel has more weight on it meaning it may need more brake force if you actually want to slow the car down.
hope that makes sense to anyone other than just me, I think that covers most of the things to do with braking? ig it can be worth to mention that drum brakes can have higher braking potential than disks, but they fade way way quicker because they cant be cooled as well so thats why brake disks are better for racing and, say, safer for driving down a hill, but once you stop, a drum brake is better for a handbrake, or are better for really heavy lorries that usually spend all day on the highway but might need a lot of force to slow down once every few hours?
8:18 Nice NCIS reference.
If Red Bull had a dramatic drop in performance, how come the other teams didn't catch them at the same time? McLaren had a huge update in Miami and from that moment until Canada, they were the only team anywhere close to RB. Mercedes started to fight for the podiums after Montreal.
At the same time, how come there are no similar rumours about Ferrari? Leclerc had brake issues in Bahrein and their performance drop is maybe even bigger (though going backwards during the season is more like a tradition to them).
That's what I think too.
As per usual, all these "well informed" British gossip channels regurgitate the fantasy of some pathetic amoeba.
And yes, it's ALWAYS the British channels instigating without ANY specific evidence.
It's like catnip for those haters... they'll power up their caps lock, and convert into inbred pundits.
Next week they'll have another hype train of hate...if they fail to find another issue this weekend.
What are you smoking ,not to see
Its straight up friction circle stuff. The front tires can only absorb so much force. Spend it on front brakes you'll lose any ability to put in lateral forces....and vice versa.
brake migration is a variable brake bias to do with the brake pressure as your coming off the pedal +ve moves it forward and -ve moves it to the rear. this will help with the car balance on entry
@@TheDjsmurph I think it’s a replacement for the variable diff settings on the wheel or something. It’s in Le Mans Ultimate and fully simulated but I just set it and leave it.
@@AidanMillward it’s literally just “migrating” your brake balance forward or rearward.
So let’s say I want my BB forward when I start a braking zone to get the car stable and slowed down quicker, then as I let off the pedal and trailbrake, the braking is “migrated” to the rear allowing me to steer into the apex and get more rotation.
It’s much simpler if you think of it as just adjusting your brake balance knob real time as you’re braking. But that’s wildly impractical so the migration just does that bit for you….lol
It’s a Schrödinger’s brake scenario.
Braken't
Well, in Hungary, when Max tryed to overtake LH and went suuuper wide he said on the radio "I'm -5 brake bias and this thing does not turn" ... it just adds to the speculation :)
-5 bbal means it's set towards the rear, which helps rotate the car
bbal set towards the front promotes understeer
Every time I watch one of your videos, I'm reminded why I love them so much. 😊 You do exactly what I like to do when I explain things. I play devil's advocate and suggest what could be happening and why it would be an advantage. Then, instead of pointing how Because of this this and this, it looks like this is actually happening here, I leave it people to decide for themselves now that i've educated them.
I do the same thing when people ask for advice. I talk about all the good and the bad of How they may react in the situation. What their next move might be. I don't tell them what I would do Or what they should do. I let them decide for themselves.
I can't wait to see what happens next and for your next video. Keep doing what you're doing.😊
Second this comment. Proper way to go about critical thinking
Regardless of what gets said or published, the reality is that we’ll never know. Look at Ferrari’s NDA with the FIA around their fuel flow hack.
Wonder whether this is "someone" who has approached FIA for approval of a system for 2025, in the same way that Mercedes did with DAS. However whereas FIA said yes to Merc but then banned it for the following season. Here FIA are just clarifying an existing rule (the Fiddle Brake rule) as you detailed the other day.
"Here FIA are just clarifying an existing rule (the Fiddle Brake rule) as you detailed the other day"
And if the FIA hadn't, this rule would have gone into effect in 2026, anyway. They just brought it forward a year and a half
This could also easily be the case of the FIA looking through the rulebook - realising that it could interpreted in a certain way - and then closing the loophole before anyone could use it.
@@Nikelaos_Khristianos Does FIA have someone (or a team doing that) ? Is that what Nicolas Tombassis does ?
Brilliant article, as always, Sir. Thank you.
The brake balance thing, I BELIEVE works as you expect it to when braking well within the adhesion limit of the tyre. Once you approach the limit and enter the grey area of "under rotation" where there is some sliding motion, then the rearward bias (or rather reduced front bias, which is effec....you know this :D ) begins to induce a handbrake effect. Conversely, too much front bias will increase the sliding component of the front tyre motion leading to *nd*rst**r (sorry for language) )
I may be talking massive balls of course. I'm still a bit too weak and sore to set my wheel up, but you could test with a sim car with stupid soft tyres and minimum brake pressure.
Or it's some mad thing to do with the circle the car is following and differential Vs Ackerman Angles or Newey knows what.
All the cars look like a clone RedBull this year
I remember a few years ago when Ferrari definitely wasn't cheating fuel flow, and it was pure coincidence that their top speed dropped compared to every other team from the moment the FIA changed how they measured it.
Complete coincidence, I am sure. It's not like there is 1 driver whose performance has fallen off dramatically this year and loudly complains about not being able to turn anymore. /sarcasm
Except for the fact that, unlike when Ferrari was caught for the oil burn trick, every single team hasn't said a word accusing Red Bull of doing asymmetrical braking. So there goes your conspiracy theory.
Ferrari was penalized for their regulation breach, it was however "fixed behind closed doors".
Apparently if it's Ferrari, the FIA is too scared to scare them out of F1.
@@byronservies4043what about Ferraris drop off? What about Aston martins drop off? They were both front runners last year and they’ve fallen back. I guess you have some made up reason why it’s ok for them to be struggling?
I still think it's probable that Red Bull ran such a system. As you say it's not full 'evidence' so we can't speak in absolute terms, but what do we have fits the theory well enough to at least consider it a reasonable explanation as to Red Bull's decline in performance. It's not just that they've been caught, their car has got worse in performance, often visibly too.
- The Melbourne DNF for Max has to be considered as a sign of this. The manner of the retirement, even it being the right rear which is the brake you'd deploy it on for that circuit, gives a strong impression of this system being used and it failing. The team's explanation of an over-tightened part doesn't wash, given the car was in parc-fermé from qualifying and Max didn't have issues with it for an hour of qualifying running. I'd call this a good fit post-hoc.
- Issues with tyre wear since Imola and beyond. One of the major issues Red Bull seem to face this season is that they seem to chew their tyres up, often dramatically more than some other of the fast cars. If as some surmise such a system aided with tyre wear, that this pattern of poor tyre management seems to be now an inherent trait of the car since the supposed removal does also fit well with the theory. Even at Zandvoort when Max led initially, all Norris had to do was bide his time and let Max run through his tyres before choosing his moment and blasting off into the distance.
- The aim of such a system is to give a car more rotation in a more efficient manner. It would give the driver more front end without needing to implement the compromises (or to a lesser degree) than without it. We all know Max likes to drive on the front axle, but the aero balance of this gen of cars is more rearwards than before. This potentially could have been used to give Max more of what he likes without creating strange setups. Again it fits the profile of what we know. Since the presumed removal, Max has been vocal often on the radio about how the car won't turn, how even adding wing doesn't help him.
- The FIA are not a reliable source for rules transgressions or which team were an inspiration for a particular rule clarification. Sometimes this is simply because they don't know, the teams have smarter engineers than the FIA team has in scrutineering. Sometimes this is because they get caught out by a better interpretation of the rules, which is what I believe would be the case here. I don't think the original wording would have sufficiently covered which is surmised that Red Bull were doing, so when the FIA say no-one fell foul of the rules, that's right, but you had to change them too. Red Bull use the projection technique you mentioned often, with flexi wings etc etc etc. My personal guess is that Red Bull removed the system having become suspicious that the FIA were being led onto it and preparing a rule clarification.
I think that's really as much as we can know. Teams will never admit to running bespoke rule-skirting systems, the FIA won't admit to mistakes. The Red Bull has lost pace as well as being caught by the other teams, and has handling and performance flaws that are neatly explained by this whole theory being true to at least some extent.
The question I have still is; was it only ever used on Max's car? I have had suspicions since Perez took the lead of the WDC at Baku that his car hasn't been of the same spec as Max's. The almost immediate decline in Perez's performance over one lap and race distances was akin to this drop for the team in '24. I can't see how the brake system would necessarily fit into that, but my suspicions are more general about the 2nd Red Bull car and how it is prepared compared to the 1st one.
Good summary of the situation and the rumours here and there in this video though.
A lot of things get easier to understand once you read what is maximum slip angle and how tires work. Simplified, there is only certain amount of grip in the tire and this has to be spread between acceleration/deceleration and turning. If you want to be turning, you can't be slowing down with that tire at the same time. But... that is "trust me bro" type of explanation... There is no short way to say what slip angle is, the closes thing i could figure out is that everything that the car does with its tires, all the forces that it has is done by using the tire deformation and its elastic properties of trying to return to its original shape.. It is like thousands of rubber bands pulling against the traction, and you can't have more than finite amount of those bands and they can only stretch so far until they either break or we lose traction. And of course, they are in real life also pushing against traction but pulling is easier at least for me to see in my minds eye. We can either pull as hard as we can to slow the car down, or we can pull almost as hard as we can but also applying sideways forces to turn the whole thing. That is what happens when you turn the steering wheel. SO the more rearwards you can have your brake balance, the more margins you have at the front for turning.
And brake migration tries to offset the change in the body mass transfer, as your G forces start to come down, you are not getting as much "boost" at the front from the shift in weight and angular momentum, brake balance migrates towards the back. I hate brake migration, i consider it a form of ABS. It changes brake parameters without driver input. Lock the brake balance settings to be done by the driver and this can be done only when they are not braking. Get rid of all driver aids.
Last I looked, I do not remember you @ 100k. Congrats!
We got the whole Roberto Moreno party and had Break Dancing, Pinatas & Red Bull Drinking contest , Sorry you missed it Kiwi.
Fiddle brakes, or any other variation, didn't make the Red Bull a rocket ship in a straight line. At the start of the new regs that car was passing everyone along straights like they were in reverse, without DRS. They just got the new regulations right and everyone else has closed the gap. McLaren had a huge leap forward after copying the floor on the Red Bull when it was hoisted in to the air at Monaco, so it does happen
With the fiddle brake you don't require as much downforce to get the car to rotate, so you run less wing, so you're faster than everyone else on the straights
As already mentioned here and with the video- less wing needed with the fiddle brake because something else is doing the work.
I think RB is playing with aero (thru those new ducts behind the drivers head, perhaps the regular intakes to yaw the car under the guise of cooling system, but that would be useful in med/high speed corners not low speed. This is the kind of stuff jets use and it doesn't require moving much air.
8:30 you said this while i was mid dab. a lot of coughing soon followed after.
It would be surprising if asymmetric braking wasn't already thoroughly banned after McLaren's third pedal. I don't see how a delay would fly either, all changes or modulation of braking must be physically done by the driver
@@fuzzy1dk I think the way round it was “I’m not using a pedal. I’m using a slow release valve”
@@AidanMillward modulation of braking without physical input from the driver?
@@fuzzy1dk the driver takes his foot off the pedal and the brakes release, if the rules don't say how quickly it has to happen then nothing's violating them.
@@fuzzy1dk “it says here that I can’t use a third pedal. Says nothing about using a slow release valve”
@@AidanMillwardslow release valve would create a situation where there was a differing force on the pads within a given circuit though. Temporarily or not, it would still be illegal.
Check the wording of the new regs. It talks about torque on the axle. I believe it's nothing to do with the braking system and more about regen or something
The reason why shifting back gives more rotation is the same reason you spin when you totally lock the rears. You want the front wheels fully gripped but still turning, meanwhile it can be beneficial for the rears to underrrotate to promote oversteer
I think the word you are looking for is slip angle
All the anti-Red Bull/Max Verstappen channels won't like this.
@@Andre_The_Millennial neither will the pro ones. Because that just means there’s another reason to find as to why max can’t win atm.
@@AidanMillward Pretty simple. Red Bull has had the least amount of wind tunnel testing since mid 2022. The rules don't allow for one team to dominate for long.
@@Andre_The_Millennial
Tell us about your inside knowledge.
@@Andre_The_Millennial Idk about that, I'm pretty sure wind tunnel time AFTER the cars are disgned in their base configuration isn't going to have a major swing effect mid-season. Remember, rolling-road wind tunnels only simulate airflow in a direct strait line. Dynamic wind while driving around a track is an entirely different situation.
@@Margarinetaylorgreasenot really inside knowledge that the teams at the top gets less wind tunnel time
Not to give any possible current or future F1 engineers who will probably never see this any ideas, but you COULD theoretically do it with one pedal. It could be a thing like how a road car has a brake light switch that turn the brake lights on, without actually activating the brakes, but instead of a light, it activates your asymmetrical system instead, and when you press it normally, it activates the brakes like normal. meaning that if you only push the pedal a bit, you could do like McLaren did in 97/98, but with one pedal.
Shitfting brake balance forward doesn’t give better turn in because you are using more of the total amount of grip in the front tires to brake rather than turn, when you shift rearward it makes the cars platform more balanced under breaking so the nose doesn’t dive as much, giving you more rotation at the front. Sounds counter intuitive because you would think more weight on the front means more front grip, but this is the reason that trail breaking is so important, transferring the weight to the rear before and during corner entry
Delayed release makes sense I suppose. I was staring at the extra rule and thinking they've extended symmetry coverage from the pad to the axle, so perhaps some type of clutch between brake pad and axle had been used? But that seems wildly complex to pull off, and certainly wouldn't be in the 50 quid fiddle brake region.
A reason shifting brake balance forward would make turn in worse:
The tires don't like to brake and turn.
I'm sure there is more to it but, lateral and torsional forces add together to overwhelm the available traction. So braking while you just start to turn in, would be a worse experience than lifting off the brake as you turn in.
I'm not an expert, but I Iove racing games and physics
2:57 I would say here shifting it to the front would cause you to lock and go horribly wide inducing understeer think brake magic Baku 2021 but not as bad
More to the rear will cause the rear to lock but will also induce rotation better hence it being a tool to reduce understeer as you have a sharper rotation at the front - best way to reduce understeer is either softer suspension setups, more front downforce or more rearward braking
@@RANDOMZBOSSMAN1 but at the same time, further to the front means more weight over the front wheels and less on the rear, resulting in better turn in.
@RANDOMZBOSSMAN1 that bit reminded me of Richard Hammond explaining under and oversteer.
Understeer, the front doesn't turn, you hit a tree, and you 💀.
Oversteer, the back overtakes the front of the car, you hit a tree, and you 💀.
@@AidanMillward Vehicle dynamics is a weird thing!
Because like you say moving the weight forward can cause changes to the mechanical platform which can induce oversteer but at the same time you have to consider the aero platform in where the downforce is biased if it’s front or weird based
Long story short it’s probably black magic what the engineers do in balancing everything in terms of what causes a car to oversteer/understeer and if there’s any snap oversteer/understeer as well I think Newey went to a coven rather than a university that’s why he can see air allegedly lol
@@AidanMillward No, it doesn't. That's where you are going wrong. This is all about traction circles: the total amount of grip in any direction available to any tyre contact parts, and how you chose to allocate the available grip between longitudinal and lateral forces
I call bollocks on this. There's no way RBs performance drop off is unrelated. The other teams haven't magically caught up, RB have slowed down and this brake valve thingy being forcibly removed is the only thing that makes sense. Also explains Max's moaning about understeer recently
RBs performance wasn't centered around braking though, it was pretty much all high speed, high load corners that they had the most performance in. This happens in every set of regulations, one team comes out ahead and as the regs progress the other teams tend to catch up.
Someone pull stats comparing times from last year to this where red bull was fastest, should make it clear how much it slowed down
@@Skull5617Correct - it wasn’t centered on braking, at least, not in braking zones.
Where it *is* related to braking is the use of the brakes in novel ways in novel places.
@F-Man what the fuck does that even mean? You only use the brakes in the braking zones. Even if rb had some magic brakes that's not gonna make their car faster in a straight line or give it more downforce through high speed corners.
It's hard to say. It made sense to me that with the FIA hiring a team of engineers who are tasked with finding loopholes in the 2026 rules that they would patch the same loopholes in the 2024 and 2025 rules. But then how to explain a brake failure on only one wheel. Every other brake issue I can vaguely remember seemed to be symmetrical like Mercedes in Canada it was always both rear brakes fading or both front brakes overheating because a team tried to run the small brake ducts in testing and it wasn't enough cooling. Maybe someone with a better memory can think of some times that one brake failed that wasn't just down to a tear off being stuck in a front right brake duct.
Imagine if the differntial was reading from the steering, Then the brakes were reading from that. Not entirely illegal
That's covered in the regs, such as limited slip diffs etc.
I dont think you're a million miles out with this idea. The new regs cover using means outside of the braking system to achieve asymmetrical braking.
That is, I believe, why the amendment was made.
But Scarbs and his doodles have got everyone frothing over this brake valve idea, which I'm not even sure would work as he described
I've heard some people propose it's to do with the energy recovery. I'm not technically inclined is it makes sense to me.
Nobody was running a fuel system that could bypass the FIA sensor in 2019 either ... 🤷♂
Ferrari drop in pace that year was pure coincidence, just like Red Bull now (cough!) 🙄
If Ferrari did it it must mean someone did the brake thingy now? I don't see such a direct connection
It's a situation where several theories are more or less equally plausible.
One of the predictions I made for this season was that McLaren would close the performance gap on Red Bull, which they have done.
You explained it very well (IMO) with the one brake taking a second or so longer to release.
We’re RB cheating, of course they were & as usual the FIA would rather just cover it all up and just remind those who get them that the Pit Pass is a privilege.
NCIS references. Lovely.
Where ?!?
I didn’t realise it was still on tbh.
@analex4044 the Gibbs's rules. Around 08:15
This all has more than a wiff of Ferrari fuel sensor avoision (to use a Kent Brockman) about it.
Could be nothing, could be everything, and with the FIA we will probably never know.
BTW nice work on the video sequencing having this out so close the video about the third brake pedal 👍
Time to look out for large payment/settlement from redbull in the FIA’s financial reports next year. Ferrari’s settlement in 2018 showed up as $18Million in that report.
I didn’t intend for them to be this close. All this came out over the weekend while I was away
It's either that RB has had to abandon some hidden, grey area tech or they've gotten a bit overconfident with the capability of the car (assumed it was good enough to stay ahead of the field) and simply not allocated enough upgrades to this season and are instead focusing development on next years car
If the regen was the source of alleged differential braking, could it have been applied in the actual differential? Torque sensing is used to manage the limited slip in the diff, so it could be possible to use that to draw more regen from one side and effectively achieve lateral differential braking, just by managing the amount of slip from side to side.
The wording in the rulebook was enough to stop asymmetrical braking being achieved via use of the braking system.
The amendment actually covers the use of braking via other means - engine/regenerative braking etc.
I'll bet this fiddle brake valve hypothesis thing is just barking up the wrong tree.
I also think this could be why Max was apparently trying to over compensate the lack of turn in by maxing out on his rearward brake bias adjustment. The other means of braking was all via the rear axle, but not via the brake system itself
What if a team had axle bias in the gearbox. It could be delivered with a steering angle sensor, left or right and also the amount to be applied by how much angle is input to the steering wheel. the axle could be driven by a hydrostatic system in the gearbox itself, completely hidden from prying eyes like the FIA or other teams.
Don't give the FIA ideas to ban more innovation.
However i read that F1 cars already have some kind of torque vectoring.
nice video. I think it's a coincdnece that's become a storm in a teacup, there is a history of dominat teams loosing perfomance, and although the have been anomalies in this case, one would think that in this day of even more media there would be more concrete eveidence by now
You have to change your mindset about brake bias. Compare it too heat. Cold isn't real, it's a concept. The feeling of cold, is the absence of heat. You don't add cold, you take away heat.
The physics of braking on a race car is similar. You don't add front bias. The physics is (are?) you are taking away rear brakes. The less rear brake, the less the rear wheels are helping to slow the car down. Then you over tax the front tires, and they lose turning efficiency.
Your videos always bring a piece of joy and positivity into my life. Thank you for your warmth and light!🚙🟪🥕
Re- "I don't understand brake balance" Brake balance changes do nothing at all - under gentle braking. You can brake only the front, all the way to only the rear, nothing changes. It only does anything when limits of adhesion are being approached.
To find out what happens with greater rear brake balance when entering corners at speed - Get a car with a REAR handbrake, go to a big empty car park with plenty of run-off space and drive in a tight circle so the tyres are squealing. Press the clutch (if there is one) and pull on the handbrake hard. You will see that this helps turn in. Now interpolate this result to racing. I wouldn't do this with an electric handbrake or a double clutch or other "manual" automatic. In some jurisdictions this is "dangerous driving", don't get caught. Do it in the rain for a lower speed (and quieter) appreciation of the effect.
I can't be arsed checking but are Merc's and McLaren's improvement also at the expense of other teams.
I do think Red Bull directed investment away from the current car when initially dominant to the get a head start for the next two years. After all if Sergio was pulling his weight RB would have both titles sewn up by now. Maybe they will just have to find a little upgrade to see out the year.
HUGE WIN tossing in Gibbs Rule❤
Your description of how the asymmetric breaks work by letting go later, which no one else has been able to articulate, underlines even more the redbull break issues = a break staying on.
We're assuming its Red Bull, thats the point, we're assuming.
I'm sure there may be WhatsApp messages to clarify. Allegedly.
The new technical clarification might be a setback for Mercedes and McLaren 😎 It is noteworthy that both Toto and Zak have been completely silent in this discussion.
@@ua697 I guess we'll know in a couple of days. If Max wins his home race by thirty seconds and McLaren and Mercedes are fighting with the Hass's.....
@@ua697I highly doubt it
Did anyone notice how Oscar managed to "lock"both front wheels at monza and they kept rotating with them smoking all the way around the tyre never actually locking in one spot on the tyre?
2:52 - No? Because if you shift the brake balance forward, you’re giving the front tires more work to do. You want them prioritizing turning, not on slowing down the car, as they’re the wheels that turn the car most efficiently.. Let the “dumb” rear wheels do the stoppy thing. Also easier for them as there’s an engine to mechanically weigh the whole thing down.
Your videos are always so insightful and inspiring! Thank you for your talent and dedication.🍖☘️🎤
Too much front brake bias whilst trying to steer the car with more effective friction on the outside front tyre, because of weight transfer, will lead to understeer.
I imagine CH saying “Nothing to see here it’s just a technical wording change to cover something that FIA have just thought about and think it would be sensible to add to current wording to tell Teams not to go down that route.”
Clearly there’s no issue here then! Gary Anderson was experimenting with this sort of thing 30 years ago. Everybody must have forgotten the idea existed.
If could be coincidence but if Red Bull are absolutely nowhere in Zandvort, then we can fully assume they got told to remove it. It also doesn’t help with from what I’ve read somewhere some Red Bull employees weren’t happy with the new technical directive been added. Could be fake but that’s what I’ve read. We just have to see the next few races. If Red bull are suddenly doing a Brawn GP 2009 due to this TD then it’s safe to say they got told to remove it IMO.
I tend to believe that RedBull were up to something. Although statistics have their limitations they do have their uses and it's clear RedBull have been affected by something. In 2023 Max failed to reach the podium just once, just over halfway through 2024 that's gone up to 5. Once due a retirement in Australia but the other 4 were in the last 7 races. In 2023 Max won all but 3 races and it looked like 2024 was going the same way, but in the last 7 races Max has won just 2. By the end of last season Redbull had scored more points than 2nd and 3rd combined, this year McLaren are almost breathing down their necks and Ferrari aren't too far off either. That has to be more than just the other teams closing the gap.
Also, we know the 2023 car was utterly brilliant because Perez finished second in the WDC. He started 2024 with 6 top 5 finishes in 6 races, 4 of those being podiums. Suddenly, at the start of the European races Perez qualifying & race results drop off dramatically (it's especially noticeable with his qualifying results). That suggests to me that the RB20 suddenly became much more difficult to drive, which would have a bigger impact on Perez compared to Max. Looking at the stats it's very clear something must have changed with the RB20 around the start of the European season. The only question is what?
That's plausible, but don't forget Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren were all completely out of sorts at the start of 2023. Ferrari and Mercedes had brought lightly updated 2022 cars to start with, which were nowhere near good enough (hence revised concepts halfway through the season) . McLaren were nowhere as they were behind schedule on development. As Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren have improved (A LOT) through 2023 and 2024, it's only logical that Red Bull's advantage would be deminished, no?
Especially if Red Bull have now gone astray with their own development (whether or not that is due to balance problems from a brake bias enforcement change), Red Bull throwing old style aero parts on the car at Spa tends to suggest there is a significant aero component to Red Bull's misstep as opposed to purely mechanical problems.
(Aston Martin were the closest challenger at the start of 2023, but they were pretty far away in laptime terms and they were hit by the flexible nose technical directive too. They aren't necessarily that much further away in strict laptime terms now, the other top 4 teams just improved a lot.)
Honestly, Red Bull not being as dominant is easier explained by the parity rules rather than some “magic” breaks. Red Bull have less wind tunnel testing time and their car has a different development path than competitors. McLaren and Mercedes pretty much started to develop cars closer to the RB19 and have caught up in aero.
@@TassieLorenzo You could be correct, and I agree that we would expect RedBull's advantage to be reduced. But it's the way it's happened so suddenly that makes me suspect that there's more to it.
In the first 6 races Perez qualified 5th,3rd,3rd,2nd,2nd,4th, consistent and solid. Yet from Race 7 onwards his performance drops dramatically 11th,18th,16th,8th,8th,19th,16th,3rd. To me that doesn't look like the Redbull going astray, that looks like something has fundamentally changed and Perez has been unable to adapt.
Too much has been made of changes to the published rules. It doesn't need the published rules to be updated to ban, or clarify anything. The FIA issues a technical directive, which are not available to the public. The fact that they did update the rules now is interesting in itself, but not for the reasons people think - it is because they probably wanted to draw public attention to it ... something they didn't need to do just to clarify the rules to the teams. They would have got that from the directive
Red Bull have been in turmoil off the circuit - I'm sure the many distractions have added to their drop in form, it's not one issue that they may or may not have been doing.
Haas was using it, look at Hulk in practice at Zandvoort
Call it luck or making the best of your opportunities, my guess is this is a glitch for RB, the tables will be as they are at the end of the season.
Just make it a spec race at this point.
I would kill to see Max doing IndyCar. Verstappen vs Piastri at the Indy 500 would be a movie.
you already have plenty of spec racing series to follow - the very essence of F1 is that it is not spec racing
@@mutleyengbut of the rulebook is thick as a skyscraper and there is no innovation....it essentially is becoming a spec series because everything is against the rules or banned once made
@@mutleyengexactly so why do they punish every single technical innovation?
@@mutleyeng I did not say i WANT it to be so, but everytime anyone does anything cool it is instantly added to the book of grudges, so just drop the charade at once. Id rather see those guys make top fuel dragsters or whatever landspeed racers can conjure from their wettest dreams go around corners.
This "delayed braking" could have been as simple as a collapsing brake hose on Max's car in Australia.
Whilst this brake story is very entertaining I suspect Red Bull have designed themselves into a tricky spot, similar to Merc at the start of these regs. RB seem to have fallen into the same trap as McLaren a long time ago and Merc recently, RB seem to be chasing absolute performance rather than having a bit of a compromise and a wider setup window.
Maybe the current F1 car runs a pre-programme set up from Sims assist 🤔 ???????? Just a thought
Doesn't the FIA monitor the teams technical directive compliance prior to the beginning of the season?????
@AidanMilward Hey Aidan, will you be making videos again in the future that focus on the careers of drivers who were only briefly in F1 but were quite successful outside of it? I'm asking because youtube caught me with old DTM videos and Bernd Schneider had several sideroles in your videos.
Just because one team is doing something the others are not doesn't mean its cheating!
Crazy comment
What does the new wording outlaw that wasn't already clearly illegal. The old 11.1.1 defined front and rear brake circuits and 11.1.2 required the pressure to be equal within a circuit. Not seeing the needs for the 'new rules' unless it's another "...any lapped car"/"...all lapped cars" dodge.
Something's fishy.
Anyone else remember Max's "That's what happens when you stop cheating." to Ferrari after their illegal PUs got banned? Of course, this feels too much like karma to be let go by a lot of us...If Red Bull wasn't cheating, why the change in fortunes after China? And if Red Bull *was* running an illegal part, why should any fan believe it started with the RB20 and wasn't also in the RB19, RB18 or even the RB16B?
Pre-amendment: 11.1.2 The brake system must be designed so that within each circuit, the forces applied to the brake pads are the same magnitude and act as opposing pairs *on a given brake disc*.
This could be interpreted as "equal pressure on either side of a brake disc, per brake disc" if you play stupid.
That's why there isn't a clear ban/punishment and an amendment to the rules.
If you play stupid enough to misinterpret rules because they're just not watertight enough. What's the FIA going to do?
Yeah its against the spirit, but still.
@@hurkadurk Only if you are being obtuse on purpose. 11.1.2's "...within each circuit" unpacks to "...within the front or rear brake circuit". It was perfectly clear the first time.
If you're smart enough to design car parts, you are probably smart enough to parse English sentences.
@@jackjackson1591 Arguably yes. BUT. if you're smart enough, you play with the rules so that you get away with misinterpreting, no? People hate it, but again, its not outright banned. because there seems to be no repercussion other than RB drop off. But again, this is IF RB did such a thing.
I'm not blind to the fact suddenly RB is struggling with something that is very much related to torque vectoring or per-wheel braking. But maFIA said noone did such a thing.
Apologies if this was already mentioned - Brembo reported nothing wrong with the red bull calipers, post investigation. Adding brake dust to the already smoking callipers.
personally I don't think it was the braking, Red Bull used to have the best ride quality and could use the curbs everywhere when others could not, Merc had the worst ride quality with high vertical stiffness, roll on a while and as Red Bull have gone backwards they seem to have had to run a stiffer car vertically giving them the worst ride quality in the field, I think the FIA found something in the suspension and have covered it over with the fiddle brake 2.0 regulation wording, be interesting to see if Red Bull are now back on it or not for the rest of the season
i get what you're saying but RB have lost pace compared to their last year's car which makes zero sense. mclaren and merc didn't magically gain close to a second from imola onwards.
Maybe the Fiddlebrakes 2.0 is the friend we made along the way?
Edit of that article doesn't really add anything. It just restates in a different fashion what was already said. So technically there is no change to the prohibition of asymmetrical braking power.
There never is smoke without fire in F1 - if there are whispers, later they become full-blown noises. It cannot be coincidence Red Bull have gone backwards. Watch now as they romp to a 1-2.....
God am I excited for free practise on Friday. We will find out then.
When a team is as dominant as RBR were during 2023 I guess there's a natural tendency to believe they're up to some sort of black magic, but the reality is they have the advantage of the only notable engineer still in F1 who already had some working knowledge of ground effect cars, coupled with opponents who didn't really get things right.
My personal view... the rules are working as intended and Red Bull have just been caught.
The brake announcement blurb, reached me just before Vandoort, so I was thinking "who drops back most"-- Mercedes back below 5th, seems to say something. Maybe you will update with "Mercedes had recently moved up significantly, the brake ban, now Mercedes back to where they were 5 weeks ago. How did you miss this/
They were fastest in practice two. If they were fiddling with the brakes they’d have dropped off at spa when it was announced. Instead they won.
@@AidanMillward I don't put ultimate stock value of practice. Again I don't know timelines, but the only outlier, both gain and loss of performance recently has been Mercedes- and both like old times. True a multitude of offsetting conditions could be at work.
People forget that Ferrari and Aston Martin were front runners last year and completely ignore the drop off in performance they’ve had. F1 pundits literally talked about this today and said that RB hasn’t lost performance and they’ve actually gotten faster. FIA said no one did it, what more do we need to debunk this
Fiddle brake? Didn't Arthur Mallock have that in the Fifties?
Mercedes hasn't overtaken RBR.
Lewis got a gift in UK when Mercedes murdered Oscar's strategy.
Russell got obvious gift in Austria
Russell's win in Spa was an anomaly
RBR’s 2022-2023 performance was also an anomaly, as was Mercedes’ 2014-2020, as was RBR 2010-2013.
In actuality, nobody has actually won the championship since Ferrari.
Lewis win in Uk is more what others did and not what he did
George win in Austria is cus the top 2 ping pong each others
George win in Spa is partly cus he was underweight but also because of his good strategy
Basically Mercedes, though making steps to return is still a lot behind Red Bull
@@analex4044 Lewis had the same soft tyres as Lando and pitted earlier, really he should have been caught. I'd say he earned that win
Lewis wasn’t gifted anything. He earned it. Oscar would’ve been behind lewis if they doubled stacked the McLarens. Russell was lucky but if he had qualified any lower Oscar would have probably won that race. Russell didn’t win in spa lewis did.
@@F-Manbro what are u talking about😂
Something is "afoot" here, because, suddenly Red Bull-Max, has fallen off. The top speeds are all about the same, bur suddenly McLaren and Merc are faster. And poor Tsunoda is carrying even more of the car than at thestart of the season. What? Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.
The FIA does not want to deal with the issue of disqualifying a team caught cheating after all, break steering (asymetric clamping force across the axil).
It is easier to say no team was using it, but how do you explain RB forced to remove a part from their car and the loss of performance since Miami,
By saying "upgrades didn't work as expected"
Easy peasy😊
No creature compares to humans’ wildness
❤️❤️❤️
Look at it like this....
The 2nd most dominant car in history, winning 24 out of 28 races, now cannot get on the podium. DURING MID SEASON!
Something is definitely a miss.
According to Red Bull their struggles since Miami were caused by a new floor that didnt work fully,
and possibly a lower development ceiling with their current package, allowing teams using cars inspired by their old aero package to make more progress at a faster rate
According to RBR they never exceeded the spending cap either. Except when they did. You can normally tell when Horner is lying - his lips are moving.
So then just remove the new floor and hey presto! Back on the mega pace
Is it just me, or does anyone else wish the FIA would just leave some of these smaller loopholes closed and just let all the teams work it out over a season or two?
There's so much potential for real trickle down driving tech that would actually benefit road cars and consumers.
"You don't race cars, you race the rule book" ~ Smokey Yunick
Edit: wrote this before watching the whole vid.
This all feels like Ferrari saying “no we are not burning engine oil to get a power advantage.” And the FIA says nothing but amends the rules and Ferrari somehow got slower…..
"You would think shifting the brake balance forward would be better for turn in"
No I wouldn't...why would anybody think that?
@@DontForgetOldKolobok because not everyone is as smart as you, clearly.
Does it work that way for motorcycles?
@AidanMillward or alot dumber
look, dear boy - you've been told, Mclaren only ran Brake Steer at Australia in 1998 - One race only. Stewards banned it for Brasil, then the FIA banned it
Thanks
The Red Bull is not as dominant but a bad day in the office for Verstappen he is still regularly on the podium. There is no transparency in F1, never has been, the rule clarification that has been made must have been triggered by something, even if it was someone waking up one morning thinking that it wouldn't go amiss to add an extra sentence to Article 11.1.2.
In the absence of transparency is sounds like someone used the "well it isn't clear" card to defend themselves from breaking an existing rule. If that is the case, say it, and then the other teams can decide if the "it isn't clear defence" is in anyway justified.
FIA is, in my opinion, a reacting organisation. It build rules, then make adjustment according to what loophole guy like newey or other designer find. Exemple : flexi wing. Sooooooo, what do you think? Is it Redbull, good chances.
There is no such thing as a coincidence. (Gibbs)
7:30 but how does the system know what direction the wheel is going to turn?
It’s all in the weight transfer of the car. Think of riding a bicycle. If you lean even slightly to one side you’ll feel it. The brake sensor/cylinder would be working the same to control the rear brake pressure.