Part of it is down to design ethos of the cars.

The Mclarens can't overtake the Red Bulls because the Red Bull is so fast round the high speed corner section and the lap in general, that the Mclaren can't get close enough to use DRS effectively (see Button/Vettel).

The Red Bull can't overtake the Mclaren as it doesn't have enough straight line speed to do so. (See Webber/Hamilton in Korea).

*this only applies after the first few laps.

 

This is also due to the Merc engine having almost 30 bhp more than the Renault. FIA will not allow Renault to unlock the extra power as SV will walk every race with more ease.

 

Really!? The FIA are stopping an engine manufacturer from attaining max power, I never knew they could do that. Why aren't Toro Rosso and Force India ahead of Mercedes GP then?

 

They've frozen engine development for a while now, and also limited the revs. Which is a big part of the reason why F1 cars are so damn reliable now and also part of the problem of Vettel winning. You used to be able to count on the Red Bulls at least being unreliable.

I think it's more to do with the aerodynamics than engine though. I get the impression Adrian Newey sees being fast due to power being a bit distasteful, something you see in his obvious dislike of KERS too. The Red Bulls are never that fast on the speed traps; are the team that still seem to have KERS issues more than anyone else, and don't seem to have a very effective DRS either and generally aren't good at overtaking. But give them a long fast corner...

 

Ferrari-powered cars seem to be doing rather well in the speed traps - another F1 conspiracy?

I note that Petrov was faster than Button and Hamilton, so the Renault engine can't be that bad.


http://fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1_...-race-trap.pdf

Goes to show that braking/cornering > power though...

 

yeh, i am just surprised by CGs comment that the Renault engine has 30bhp more to give but can't because it was deemed by the FIA as too much of an advantage. That just doesn't sound right at all, that is not the pinacle of motor-racing, that is playing God with the results.

I know they have frozen engine development and the like, but I don't think that means that each team can't get more or less power out of the engine. I have always thought due to the freeze and rev limit, everyone was at about the same power, but 30bhp is alot in F1 and for the FIA to hold that back because of a potential massive advantage is wrong.

It just seems an odd thing to say...

 

Or that those cars are running a taller final drive/top gear because they are in the mid-field and need the top speed to overtake?

 

are those speed trads in the drs zone.if so they dont really give a true measure of top speed.

 

Exactly, tons of variables. The FIA used to publish all sorts of useful information in that regard, can't seem to find it anymore.

 

And of course peak power isn't the most important thing. It was always said the Ferrari engine was more peaky, and the Renault was best for driveability, which is why Red Bull have stuck with Renault when really they could have had their choice. Renault were pointing at their peak power and moaning that they ought to be allowed to do a bit more development work to close the gap, but when a Renault engine car is winning all the time the argument looks a bit weak.

But it's interesting that for Torro Rosso, going for top speed seems to have delivered good results. And remember a couple of years ago when Force India nearly won both Spa and Monza thanks to straight line speed.