RB3 vs. STR-02 - Best Picture yet

[Giuseppe F1]

Twins? You decide:

http://images.gpupdate.net/large/68619.jpg

[ArrowsFA1]

Gerhard Berger:

"It's definitely not the same car. It's very easy to see that."
:D

[WelshLegend]

The RB3 has a more flat upper nose in comparison to the STR-2. Is it me or are the rear wings slightly different??????????

[Giuseppe F1]

The RB3 is running a midwing on the roll-hoop where the TR in this picture isnt.........so on that basis, I think Gerhard and Colin should now kiss and make up!!!! :)


Yeah right - Roll on the courts!

[Sleeper]

You would think they would try a little harder to make the cars look a bit different.

[tinchote]

As mentioned, the wing on the airbox is a difference. They also seem to have different tyres ;) :D

[VkmSpouge]

I think Berger must have been joking about the two cars not being the same. Other than the mid-wing, the livery and the drivers there is no visible difference. In fact a picture of David Coulthard, testing yesterday has his RB3 without the mid-wing.

http://www.motorsport.com/photos/f1/2007/tes/f1-2007-tes-xp-1450.jpg

[ArrowsFA1]

They're more alike than the Shadow & Arrows were in 1978 :p

[millencolin]

its ridiculous... grrr

[Gannex]

I thought Gerhard Berger fully admitted that the two teams are using essentially the same car. I thought Berger's position was that since a third party owns the design, STR is not using a car made by another competitor. So I'm confused by your quote, Arrows, of Berger saying "it's . . . not the same car." Was he referring to this year's version? I suspect not, but would appreciate clarification. If ever there was a need for "link please", this is it!!!

[GRAVETT]

today i am seeing both cars upclose and there is no way these cars are diffrent. there are a few aero diffrences between the two and the rear bodywork of the torro rosso does differ slightly, this must be to incorperate the diffrent power plant but subtlties aside these are most certainly the same chassis.
oh the joys of wireless t'internet !!

[tinchote]

At least they are not running 3 litre engines :rolleyes:

[Simmi]

The question is how different is 'different'?

They could have at least changed the wing mirrors.

[ArrowsFA1]

If ever there was a need for "link please", this is it!!!
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56721

[ioan]

Judging on that picture is less than objective, but still there are a ew different things:
1. the nose
2. the airbox intake
3. that wing everyone is talking about.

There are also plenty of things that might be different and that we can't see in these picture and maybe any other pictures.
I suppose that the engine mounting isn't the same either. and who knows how many other things.

[seppefan]

This is a joke. The FIA, Red Bull and Bernie in colusion. More power to Williams, Spyker and i hope Mclaren although Ron may wimp out. Hope not as this is cheating and bad for F1.

[ChrisS]

These pics make for a better comparison

http://www.motorsport-total.com//bilder/2007/070214/z1171441222.jpg

http://www.motorsport-total.com//bilder/2007/070214/z1171441217.jpg

[Donney]

Yep veeery different! :rolleyes:

[Gannex]

I thought Gerhard Berger fully admitted that the two teams are using essentially the same car. I thought Berger's position was that since a third party owns the design, STR is not using a car made by another competitor. So I'm confused by your quote, Arrows, of Berger saying "it's . . . not the same car." Was he referring to this year's version? I suspect not, but would appreciate clarification. If ever there was a need for "link please", this is it!!!


http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56721

Thanks for the link, Arrows, and I see that you are right: Toro Rosso is indeed saying that there are substantial differences between the two cars.

But I still think it is a bit of a red herring, because the legal claims of both RBR/STR and Honda/Aguri are that they are entitled, in 2007, to use the identical car, as long as the intellectual property (IP) rights to the car are owned by a third party, and not owned by either of the sharing teams. Thus, it is basically irrelevant if the cars are or are not different.

This puts the situation in a completely different legal context to the row that erupted a few years ago when Sauber appeared to be using the previous year's Ferrari. There, no one denied that Ferrari owned the Ferrari design, so it was essential that the Sauber NOT be the same design. Here, by contrast, the claim that the STR and RBR are different is merely icing on the cake -- an additional arrrow in STR's quiver, just in case the arbitrator finds that the IP rights to the Red Bull actually belong to Red Bull.

No one has remarked, so I will do so here, that in recent days Frank Williams has clarified his position on this dispute. He has said that he will seek arbitration, but at that arbitration he may not seek to have the STR and Super Aguri cars prohibited from taking part in races. He might seek only that they not be allowed to score constructor points, and therefore not receive TV money which, otherwise, they would receive in proportion to those points. On the question of seeking, through an injunction, to ban the cars from competing at all, Williams has said, Bush-like, only that the option has not been ruled out. But one suspects that Williams feels that an injunction is so unlikely to be granted, and would be so disruptive to the sport, that it must remain the "nuclear option", a threat that will never actually be used.

[sonic_roadhog]

To quote (nearly) Murray Walker. "The car David Coulthard is driving is unique, except for the one folowing it which is identical!!!!"

This isn't going to go away this season is it???

Sonic :)

[ArrowsFA1]

Toro Rosso is indeed saying that there are substantial differences between the two cars.
Franz Tost has explained their position:

"Before we decided what to do for 2007 we very carefully studied the regulation with lawyers and with the FIA together. And then the interpretation from our side is quite clear, that we do not run the customer car.
We have our own car, which is, in many aspects, totally different to the Red Bull car, and the design of the car is being made by Red Bull Technology, together with Adrian Newey, in co-operation with the designers of Toro Rosso. Therefore I think we are within the regulations."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56726

They may look similar, but my bet is that beneath the bodywork the design around the engine bay & gearbox is different, which therefore makes them different from each other.

Atleast it does from a lawyers point of view, and that is the most important point of view regarding RBR & STR. It was that argument that did it for the 1995 Ligier & the 1994 Benetton, and a precedent is a handy thing to have in a legal argument.

Sorry Sir Frank, but your'e screwed.

[blakebeatty]

seriously though, i looked at the two pictures for like an hour trying to find differences, and could only come up with oneL the red bull had an extra horizontal fin on the winglet in front of the rear tyre.

this is of course going on the (lofty?) assumption that tonio didn't have an incident on track that might have knocked it off...

[WelshLegend]

So in theory both cars should be on simillar times pace wise. Granted both have different engines, but both are brilliant engines. I wouldnt be surprised if Scuderia Torro Rosso upstage their "bigger brother" team on more than 1 occasion. I reckon that this is last chance saloon for Scott Speed if he doesn't score a point this year. I just hope he is the second driver.

[Hawkmoon]

I wonder who will develop each car during the season, assuming that the courts don't give one or the other the boot?

I think Newey is technically no longer an employee of Red Bull Racing, but is now employed by a different Red Bull company. In this case, shouldn't the developments he and his team come up with be passed on to both RBR and STR?

How much do you want to bet that STR have to come up with their own developments?

[tinchote]

When Berger first says that the cars are different, and then emphasizes that they have looked carefully into the Concorde agreement, you have to deduce that the cars are not that different :D

[DimitraF1]

who cares? let the green lights talk !!! :P

[AndySpeed]

Adrian Newey designed the cars and I think (within the rules) that he can design for two teams in one season if he so wishes.

He's hardly going to change his own designs is he to make the cars *look* different, I'm willing to bet the stuff under the body is a bit more different than it merely appears. Let's face it to the untrained eye most F1 cars look alike these days.

However that said if it continues like this my support for Red Bull this season will take a big knock.

[Civic]

How different were last year's RB and STR cars? They looked very similar to me, with the biggest difference being the restrictor in the STR's airbox intake.

Someone needs to find comparison pics of the B195 and JS41. I remember there were similar legal threats against the "Blue Benetton".

[ArrowsFA1]

who cares?
Williams and Spyker ;)

[gjalie]

Adrian Newey designed the cars and I think (within the rules) that he can design for two teams in one season if he so wishes.

He's hardly going to change his own designs is he to make the cars *look* different, I'm willing to bet the stuff under the body is a bit more different than it merely appears. Let's face it to the untrained eye most F1 cars look alike these days.

However that said if it continues like this my support for Red Bull this season will take a big knock.



well it doesn't look like he designed 2 cars, cause any idiot can see that the bodywork is the same.
looks like sportscar series were you can buy a car and drive, f1 was unique no team had the same car.
now red bull also has a advantage on aerodynamic side cause they have 4 identical cars to test and compare.

[ArrowsFA1]

now red bull also has a advantage on aerodynamic side cause they have 4 identical cars to test and compare.
The reality is that "Red Bull" is a 4-car team, not two independent teams.

[RJL25]

who cares? customer chassis will be legal next year anyway!

in 2008 redbull and toro rosso will be using the same car, honda and super aguri will be using the same car, mclaren and prodrive will use the same car, williams and toyota will use the same car (or atleast very similar) and although ferrari probably wont give spyker its 2008 car, it will probably give them its 2007 car to play with. BMW better find someone to play with and fast!

so if its gonna happen next year, who cares if it happens this year!

[AndySpeed]

well it doesn't look like he designed 2 cars, cause any idiot can see that the bodywork is the same.

You contradict yourself here. "it doesn't look like he designed 2 cars". Adrian Newey was hired by Red Bull to work on the car design for both teams. I agree that he probably gave the same design to both teams, yes. But then you get into complications as to who owns that design - Red Bull parent company (who Newey is employed by Red Bull Technologies, an independent company) who have sold it to the teams, perhaps? There are potentially many loopholes.


now red bull also has a advantage on aerodynamic side cause they have 4 identical cars to test and compare.

Red Bull have a very agressive attitude to being competitive. $$$ is not the only element they have it seems, although it is the main driving force. Buy two teams, bend the rules, etc. etc.

[tinchote]

who cares? customer chassis will be legal next year anyway!

in 2008 redbull and toro rosso will be using the same car, honda and super aguri will be using the same car, mclaren and prodrive will use the same car, williams and toyota will use the same car (or atleast very similar) and although ferrari probably wont give spyker its 2008 car, it will probably give them its 2007 car to play with. BMW better find someone to play with and fast!

so if its gonna happen next year, who cares if it happens this year!

You are right. I refer to my signature, then :s

[RJL25]

I refer to my signature, then :s

haha i love it! king mosley and his kingdom of rediculous rules....

[vivaldi]

i hope that Honda have better ideas !!

:ninja:

[ShiftingGears]

Well at least they had the decency to produce a great looking car in the Toro Rosso, I'd have to say its my favourite livery so far! I love the Gold rims as well, NICE!

[gjalie]

You contradict yourself here. "it doesn't look like he designed 2 cars". Adrian Newey was hired by Red Bull to work on the car design for both teams. I agree that he probably gave the same design to both teams, yes. But then you get into complications as to who owns that design - Red Bull parent company (who Newey is employed by Red Bull Technologies, an independent company) who have sold it to the teams, perhaps? There are potentially many loopholes.



Red Bull have a very agressive attitude to being competitive. $$$ is not the only element they have it seems, although it is the main driving force. Buy two teams, bend the rules, etc. etc.


it's a lack of sportivity not more not less and marketing strategic not very smart with all the negative reactions, will a championship compensate this?

[Gannex]

who cares? customer chassis will be legal next year anyway!
. . .
so if its gonna happen next year, who cares if it happens this year!

Not so fast, RJL25. Two authoritative people have given directly opposing views on this question. Frank Williams has stated unequivocally that in his view the legality of customer cars in 2008 is still very much an open question. He points out that the 2008 Concorde Agreement is far from settled. All that has been agreed are some major points in principle, what lawyers call "Heads of Terms". These are, essentially, a wish list, an agreed set of principles that narrows the scope of the negotiations over the final agreement. The extent to which constructors may use other constructors' ideas, the precise rules defining "Constructors", have not even been circulated in draft form, according to Sir Frank.

Dave Richards, on the other hand, has a very different take on this subject. He says that he has spoken repeatedly to Max Mosley, others within the FIA, to Bernie Ecclestone and other F1 powers, and has received assurances from everyone that customer chassis for 2008 are a done deal. He established this before submitting his bid to be an entrant into the 2008 championship, he says.

These two positions are entirely consistent, I think. Mosley, with his customary confidence, is putting it about that there is nothing more to be discussed about chassis-sharing in 2008. This is classic Mosley, trying to make his preferred position a fait accompli.

Meanwhile, Frank Williams, who has been round the block a few times, knows that it is almost never too late to give up on something important, and especially not at the stage where an agreement has not even been drawn up in draft form, as is the case with the 2008 Concorde.

So, RJL25, all these teams may be drawing up their chassis-sharing plans, but it's not over till the fat lady sings!!!

[nigelred5]

We all know they are the exact identical chassis with minor differences in only the small aerodynamic appendages and those differences necessitated by the different engines.i suspect they won't perform quite nearly the same due to the engine differences and the driver quality. I'll be curious to see if the Red Bull cars have the same amazing starts as Renault has had over the last couple seasons.

[ioan]

[quote="nigelred5"]We all know they are the exact identical chassis with minor differences.../QUOTE]

We? Who are, or is, those "we"?

Maybe you have some inside info about the RBR and STR chassis and would like to share it with us?

[tinchote]

We all know they are the exact identical chassis with minor differences in only the small aerodynamic appendages and those differences necessitated by the different engines.i suspect they won't perform quite nearly the same due to the engine differences and the driver quality. I'll be curious to see if the Red Bull cars have the same amazing starts as Renault has had over the last couple seasons.

I would be surprised if they have such good starts. There seemed to be consensus last year that Renault's starts were due to the weight distribution and not due to the engine.

[Gannex]

Correct, tinchote. And also Renault's gear ratios have been optimised for starts.

[tinchote]

Correct, tinchote. And also Renault's gear ratios have been optimised for starts.

Which was an amazing design decision. They won many many points by passing cars at the start and defending their position later :up:

[Gannex]

They did indeed. Which is one of the reasons I have to give grudging respect to Flavio Briatore; this was his decision (heavily influenced, of course, by Pat Symonds).

[jjanicke]

I'm not sure how anyone not intimately knowledgeable on the concord agreement can even attempt to claim whether or not these cars violate the rules.

This has got to be one of the most complicated rules in the agreement. Clearly these cars are not identical (and it goes beyond the engine and air box wing).

Not to mention that in every previous similar incident the precedent has been establish clearly in favor of "similar" cars.

And so what; 1 Chassis, 2 engines, seems like a lot of fun to me. There's a certain sports car series in the US (Daytona Prototypes) that employ similar tactics and have very exciting racing.

[wmcot]

Come on! They're obviously different! They don't even use the same paint!!!! :)

[Giuseppe F1]

Spot the Difference (if at all) - Profile views:

http://www.pitpass.com/images/galleries/2007spotthedifference/2007spotthedifference_s001.jpg

[Giuseppe F1]

Well - RBR do seem to have an extra wingelet behind the chimney exiting the top of the sidepod, whereas the STR doesnt

[W8&C]

Maybe its only an optical illusion due to slightly different angles of exposure, but isn´t the distance between the driver´s headrest and the air intake different at both cars? If that´s true, that could be a hint for different wheelbases (due to different engines/gearboxes), different fuel tank assembly, ...

[RJL25]

the RBR car's sidepods are more aggresively tapered then the STR car, you have to look hard to notice but the STR is definetly more pudgy in the area between the sidepod air intake and the hot air exit shimey, which was to be expected as the whole reason for going for renault power plants was because of the smaller cooling requirements and therefore the smaller the sidepods. Im certain that the RBR engine and sidepod covers would not fit on the STR car and visa versa

and obviously the STR misses out on the RBR cars winglet, however i suspect that considering RBR's aero package is yet to be finalised, then nor has STR's, so we wait...

but yeah theres no doubt that the two cars share the same basic chassis, just 1 has been modified to accept the renault engine, and one has been modified to accept the ferrari engine. Which means the entire cooling, electronic and hydrolic systems in the car will be completely different. The two cars will probably be sharing the bare monocoque, suspension designs and general aero package

[Mikeall]

Visually they may well look the same as they used the same aerodynamic data and the chassis were probably ordered from the the same company with similar specifications. However the cars use different engines so everything connected to the engines must obviously be different so the chassis are most likely of different specifications. The gearboxes are separate designs as far as I am aware (when questioned about what STR got from Ferrari Berger or Tost just mentioned engines and electronics but said they made their won gearbox).

There is no doubt that they are different cars but visually they are very similar.