New RB11 nose is an “engineering masterpiece,” says Horner

Christian Horner says that Red Bull’s new short nose is an ‘engineering masterpiece’ – and is adamant that his team deserves praise for getting it through the FIA crash test.

Teams have been moving towards shorter noses this year in search of aerodynamic benefits. It’s believed that the new nose required four attempts before it pass the test, which created some negative PR. However, Horner says that was just normal practice as the team explored the limits.

“I think that’s fairly usual for something as different as that,” he told this writer. “I think you can see by the aggressively short nature of it that it’s been quite a technical challenge. It’s a great credit to the guys that actually did it to get it through. It’s not a negative at all, it’s an engineering masterpiece that they’ve managed to achieve.”

The nose was run by Daniil Kvyat today, but problems for Daniel Ricciardo – who was running in standard spec – meant that it was hard for the team to make a fair comparison between the two iterations and judge the aerodynamic benefits.

“We haven’t really done a laps so we’ve got a bit more comparison work to do, but the initial signs are encouraging. But let’s see what the results look like, because it has quite a big effect on the rest of the car.”


Filed under Uncategorized

7 responses to “New RB11 nose is an “engineering masterpiece,” says Horner

  1. May be a musical mastepiece, but these noses are pretty ugly. Mean, I prefer IndyCar’s aero kids to F1’s aero hermaphrodites. No offence to the fans of the new formula & extreme energy recovery.

    NASCAR’s doing the green farce better: plant some trees, cut down factory farting, race 15% ethanol fuel or wotever.

    Hope in 2016 we won’t see “thumbs down” noses in F1. Engineer as much as you like, just gimme normal looking race cars.

    • GeorgeK

      So much said in so few words! Too bad the suits running things can’t seem to grasp the same vision.

      • Mean, it’s not bad, the “sport” (& I sorta enjoyed me track walks in Jerez) but it’s not great either. If you’re a journo & you’re paid to travel to races & tweet lap times/blurry pics, then it’s OK. Spending 2,000€ on a dusty seat in a temporary dilapidated grandstand somewhere at the back of the track is another story. That’s me main point. Cars’ ugliness just adds insult to injury.

    • anon

      However, the IndyCar aero kits were also responsible for causing injuries that left a spectator in a critical condition in the first race of the season, so perhaps it’s not all bad for F1 by comparison.

      • Spectator was alive & sueing the city of St Pete last time I checked. Aero kids were significantly strengthened by now & will be strengthened even further (shame about Chevy having to chop its rabbit ears though, such an orgasmic piece!). It’s all bad with F1, unfortunately, in the looks department, extremely ugly vehicles, ridiculous low noses & it makes no difference for driver safety. These things are only fast in straight line, cornering speeds are similar to F3 or WSR. Mean, they wanted to be road relevant – they got it! Now my Twingo is on the same level of performance with RBR. “Exciting” times in F1!

  2. TR4

    If they’re using it this weekend, it appears that
    Engineering Masterpiece = Slower than Toro Rosso…

Leave a Reply to Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s