Red Bull Red Bull Advanced Technologies RB17

[Bridster]

Regarding running and servicing the car:


via Motor1

Claims which are worth nothing, as they don't even have a running engine yet, much less a car.

And, mind you, these are the folks behind the Valkyrie, for which every claim possible turned out to be untrue, and which has the highest maintenance costs in the business.

 

[Bucketslash11]

Stop joking around.
Price is absolutely retarded. The looks of the car too btw.
A Manthey or Schirmer, big villa with pool and an apartment in a big city for me, personally. That would be money well spent.

This hypercar stuff for the 1% is getting completely out of control. Normal people can't even buy a small city car anymore.

THIS IS NOT A CAR. Just look at it you suckers.

welcome to the second gilded age of capitalism, the contradictions are at their most powerful which creates political instability as the imperialist capitalist structure faces anti-imperialist resistance which leads to higher cost inside the imperial core

 

[Bucketslash11]

i'm disappointed it's not a road car, especially with the length Newey went to for practicality and aerodynamics to work together, i guess he must've had an internal conflict about what he wanted and chose to do both because the aerodynamics gave him some empty pockets

 

[Revvd]

Mate, $6 million for RB17 seems like a deal of the century compared to this €7 million piece of ####. lmao

 

[Revvd]

I updated my engine chart. @Bridster was right that it was gonna be at least four liters.
Crazy that it's only 150 kg. Nice perk of not having a subframe...

 

[Revvd]

Here's a little comparison. IMO RB17 could use more anthropomorphic headlights. Right now it looks like a Cylon Raider from BSG with these thin light strips . Maybe they could improve it for the final version.

 

[Bridster]

I updated my engine chart. @Bridster was right that it was gonna be at least four liters.
Crazy that it's only 150 kg. Nice perk of not having a subframe...

The weight is fairly typical for pure race engines that only last a couple of thousand km. It's bit on the higher side, actually - although, as always, it depends on what exactly is included in that engine weight claim. Look at the engines in the Solus, the Rodin, or the 777. What makes these engines look light, is that a lot of the "hyper" track cars have engines that are based on the road variants - so they last a lot longer, are simpler to operate, but are heavier.

No clue what the third car in your visual comparison is, btw . I feel like I might have seen it somewhere briefly, but already forgot!

 

[bmwz4coupe]

This is very much the best and the worst of Newey - both being the result of his long ingrained F1 way of doing things. On one hand, this single-minded focus results in a brilliantly optimized car, especially aerodynamically, where every millimeter gets make use of. On the other, it also interferes, or makes him unable to recognize, what the car should actually be and how it's gonna be used.

Some comments Newey makes are quite bizarre. He says it's gonna have a "luggage space" for overalls and helmets - but it's a car that's gonna be transported to a track on a trailer anyway! He should have allowed for luggage on the Valkyrie, now it doesn't matter! He also talks about how the car should be "accessible to non-F1 drivers" - forgetting that even a GT3 car would be too much for the average person buying this sort of machine. Just a week ago we got a track review of the Mclaren Solus GT (which is, at least on paper, not anywhere close to this on performance) by Jethro (who is a really fast driver with a lot of racing experience), and he wasn't able to even get close to the limits of the car! Now imagine this much faster car and even a worse driver! I really do get a distinct impression that Newey is quite out of touch, in his F1 Ivory Tower somewhere, but what do I know.

That the car has a 15k RPM V10 is amazing, but we also know that these high strung racing engines have very short lives - a few thousand km - and if this revs to 15k, then it might be even less. Then he also talks about the car having three tire options... Who is gonna do the deciding and switching? And the gearbox is the same philosophy as F1 too. This all means a huge support team having to follow you everywhere!

As for the performance targets - we'll see. We got the exact same targets from the same man with the Valkyrie and those weren't even remotely realistic. Although now, with a car that doesn't need to follow any regulations, those targets are more achievable, he really should have learned his lesson in not talking big before the car had been anywhere close to finished.

Yes, not easy to understand the logic with the fact that this non-roadlegal racecar has luggage space, while the roadlegal Valkyrie, designed by the same man, has no luggage space….

 

[Revvd]

The weight is fairly typical for pure race engines that only last a couple of thousand km. It's bit on the higher side, actually - although, as always, it depends on what exactly is included in that engine weight claim. Look at the engines in the Solus, the Rodin, or the 777. What makes these engines look light, is that a lot of the "hyper" track cars have engines that are based on the road variants - so they last a lot longer, are simpler to operate, but are heavier.

At least this one doesn't need water pre-heater before engine start, like the Solus GT (unless I'm wrong and they just conveniently forgot to mention it). That already makes it so much more usable.

Speaking of Rodin... They've been teasing parts from something called "Project 006" on their instagram. I hope it's something less nuts than FZero - but still a crazy track car using that same engine (or the NA version).

No clue what the third car in your visual comparison is, btw . I feel like I might have seen it somewhere briefly, but already forgot!

It's Adamastor Furia. You're more than welcome to read my thread about it.

Yes, not easy to understand the logic with the fact that this non-roadlegal racecar has luggage space, while the roadlegal Valkyrie, designed by the same man, has no luggage space….

Come on, that's not true. It has a frunk.

 

[Bucketslash11]

It's Adamastor Furia. You're more than welcomed to read my thread about it.

i found out through a reverse image search, surprisingly Top Gear has written about it, the car certainly falls into the "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" category

 

[Revvd]

i found out through a reverse image search, surprisingly Top Gear has written about it, the car certainly falls into the "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" category

Yeah, the similarity is certainly no accident. The Furia was penned by a Portuguese aerodynamicist whose CV includes Valkyrie and the original Valkyrie AMR Pro (the previous version that got cancelled).

But what shows that there's levels to aero, is that on the Adamastor the empty space around the front wishbones just leads nowhere, whereas on RB17 it's clean air intake for the radiators.

 

[Bucketslash11]

Yeah, the similarity is certainly no accident. The Furia was penned by a Portuguese aerodynamicist whose CV includes Valkyrie and the original Valkyrie AMR Pro (the previous version that got cancelled).

But what shows that there's levels to aero, is that on the Adamastor the empty space around the front wishbones just leads nowhere, whereas on RB17 it's clean air intake for the radiators.

where are the radiators located then? seems like the only place to get high pressure air in

personally i like the concept and execution but the price should've been €750kinstead of close to 2/3rds of a Valkyrie (add Valhalla which also comes underneath it in price), it sort of misses the point of budget imitation

 

[Gianclaudio]

I've the same odd mix of engineering amazement and moral dilemma with these ultra hyper cars, as I do with jet fighters.
15k redline on cars that will rarely -if ever- see action and will be more about bragging.

 

[Chimaera]

Newey said in the Top Gear video (from 8:36) it was 875 KG depending on what specifications it has. I'm kinda curious what other specifications there are and how much weight difference that will be. What kind of weight wasn't specified but I assume it's kerb weight. Dry would be kinda disappointing.

Presentator (Top Gear) asked (at 18:10) if this will be as fast around Silverstone as a contemporary F1 car and Newey said yes. So not a F1 car by 2026 regulations but current. Lap record by Verstappen is 1:27.097. Lets see if they at least get a time under 1:30. I really hope Red Bull will be the first manufacturer to actually show it's possible by letting Max drive it on Silverstone at 100% to try and actually set a time like that.

And @Revvd is right with the confidential tyre. In the Shmee vid at 12:47 Rob Gray (Technical Director at RBAT) says "There will be confidential tire, so a tire that Michelin will only let you access if they're there to support".

When I saw the reveal I thought it looked simliar at first glance to the Valkyrie AMR Pro. Even though they said styling was also considered I don't think it looks good at all. I think the problem for me that it's just sooo long.

Also, Shmee says it's 5.75M pounds + taxes. Original price was 5M pounds + taxes and Top Gear still has it at 5M pounds + taxes. If the price got bumped to 5.75M pounds it will be even more insane lol.

 

[Revvd]

where are the radiators located then? seems like the only place to get high pressure air in

You mean on the Furia? They must be somewhere at the beginning of the sidepods. But I don't have a single clear picture. To be honest, it does look like it would struggle with heat management, much like Dallara Stradale.

 

[Revvd]

Newey said in the Top Gear video (from 8:36) it was 875 KG depending on what specifications it has. I'm kinda curious what other specifications there are and how much weight difference that will be. What kind of weight wasn't specified but I assume it's kerb weight. Dry would be kinda disappointing.

So far, I've come across two lightweight options in the articles that I've read. One's AC (predictably) and the other one being the acrylic windscreen option (vs. glass). I'm guessing the 875 kg quote is a car with all the lightest options checked. Not sure about the weight standard, tho. I would hope he means wet without fuel, but you never know.

Also, one interesting option I found about is that the base treaded tire comes with 20" wheels. And there is a dedicated wet tire on top of those three dry options.
It really looks like Newey couldn't make up his mind as to what the purpose of the car is. Or he has a mate at Lanzante and wanted to make it easy on him to do the SVA road conversion.

Presentator (Top Gear) asked (at 18:10) if this will be as fast around Silverstone as a contemporary F1 car and Newey said yes.

I really doubt it's gonna be as fast. But it's nice to have such a strong specific claim from AN, so we can hold him to it. Usually when these claims are left vague, you are left guessing about which kind of track they mean. There's a huge difference between, say Le Mans, where I could belive it, and a track like Silverstone.

Even if the comparison is F1 on hard compound slicks and with full tank around Silverstone GP, I still think it's unreasonable expectation for RB17 to be as fast as a modern F1. In my eyes it will be a huge success if it's as fast as 919 Evo.

 

[Bridster]

Even if the comparison is F1 on hard compound slicks and with full tank around Silverstone GP, I still think it's unreasonable expectation for RB17 to be as fast as a modern F1. In my eyes it will be a huge success if it's as fast as 919 Evo.

Well, the 919 Evo is faster than the current F1 cars. At Spa it did 1:41.77 and the fastest Q time out of the new F1 cars came in 2022 at 1.44.29. The 2023 Q was wet and we'll see what the cars can do this year but the improvement from 2022 to 2024 seems to be about 1-1.5s on average, so I doubt we'll see anyone beat that.

Either way, the 919 Evo is a good comparison. It weighs about the same and has about the same power - but it has the advantage of being developed and perfected over many years. It also doesn't have to be as durable as the standard 919, or as the RB17, and it doesn't have to have any compromises such as having to be drivable by noobs. So RB getting close to that, or even beating that, would indeed by very impressive.

 

[Revvd]

My bad. I didn't think to check the lap times and thought the pace of the ground effect F1s has improved.

So not a F1 car by 2026 regulations but current.

Why do you think it's not 2026 regulations? Went back to listen to that segment. A contemporary F1 car for an RB17 owner, who has just taken delivery, likely is 2026. The track development won't start until summer 2025. So why compare it with 2024 cars?

 

[Revvd]

They just had AN talk about RB17 on the FoS livestream. Here's the development evolution history and some stats. It's mostly just confirmation of what was published already.

2021 first concept
2022 first evolution
2023 second evolution (blue mockup)
2024 third evolution

250 ps motor
around 880 kg
5 g braking and cornering
380 kph limited (he wasn't sure tho)
£5.75M

Would be nice if Goodwood had an actual car nut on the mic to go for follow up questions, not afraid to pry for more info.

 

[Chimaera]

My bad. I didn't think to check the lap times and thought the pace of the ground effect F1s has improved.


Why do you think it's not 2026 regulations? Went back to listen to that segment. A contemporary F1 car for an RB17 owner, who has just taken delivery, likely is 2026. The track development won't start until summer 2025. So why compare it with 2024 cars?

I'm not sure, you make a good point. I maybe took it too literary because of the word contemporary (currently/now). And I don't know exactly what the presenter (and Newey with the confirmation) ment with that word.