Renault’s radical front exit exhausts pictured

2011 F1 testing

Posted on

| Written by

The Renault R31 has been pictured sporting a radical exhaust arrangement.

The R31’s exhausts point out of the front of the sidepods, directing hot air underneath the car to improve the performance of the diffuser.

See Craig Scarborough’s article on his site for an explanation of how the exhaust works.

2011 F1 testing

    Browse all 2011 F1 testing articles

    Images © F1 Fanatic and Julien Leroy / If you wish to use these images please contact F1 Fanatic to request permission

    Author information

    Keith Collantine
    Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

    Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

    134 comments on “Renault’s radical front exit exhausts pictured”

    1. Wow, I was wrong. Alright, for their sake I hope that this system doesn’t significantly reduce engine power or cause other issues. Very interesting idea…

      1. That can’t be the only exhaust pipe, otherwise the engine would fail, especially in high temperatures, probably it’s a secondary pipe blowing to the front for some kind of effect on the diffuser, but they still have the normal exhaust pipes at the rear.

        1. They can’t have more than 2 exhaust pipes (1 left, 1 right) as the rules are specific about the number of exits.

      2. “we’re on the brave end of brave” no kidding!

        1. also keith, I think you may have the jump on all the other F1 press on this story! congrats!

    2. I don’t know why I don’t believe in this system, I’m guessing it won’t work as they expected

      1. Wow, awesome. Your “guess” against months of sophisticated analysis using advanced technical methods by the best engineers in the world.
        I wonder who’s right…

        1. Haha snap. It’s like when my girlfriend goes ‘naaaaah’, when I tell her something will or won’t work. Then she finds out I’m right… Every time :)

          1. Hahaha – sorry Luigis but you were asking for that one, most amusing!

        2. I didn’t realise they’ed borrowed so mclaren guys, where did you read that?

    3. I really doubt it will work as well as they think it will.

      1. Because you have much more experience than them?

        lol, I don’t think I’ve ever seen you write a positive comment.

        1. I think its a fare comment, it will be hard to get it to work… and they didn’t get much running, read into that what you will.

        2. @SirCoolbeans.. according to your logic none of us should post anything on F1, considering that we have no F1 experience.

          Well I post what I feel like posting.. not positive, happy or inspirational comments. If you want that .. go watch some motivational speaker talk.

    4. Now this all seems technichally interesting and innovative, but is it actually going to make the car go significantly quicker, or is it just innovation for the sake of it?

      1. I suppose it does have its troubles, if not this, than why did Petrov spend the largest part of the morning in the garage?

        Curious to find out weather it works for them, other teams will have their work cut out to replicate that with the packaging, heat, engine tuning etc. to make it work.

        1. Maybe the guys from McLaren are now busily shaving the radiator and fitting and cutting to get a similar system able to fit on their car before launch so they can work on introducing it 2nd :-p

      2. Do you think anything an F1 team does is just for the sake of doing it?

      3. DeadManWoking
        1st February 2011, 16:32

        It’s going to have a far greater effect on performance than the livery or the driver’s helmet colors! 8)

      4. Well, I suppose it’s better to try something revolutionary than to rest on your laurels. Something average isn’t going to get you to the front…

    5. ***?If it works FIA it´s going to receive lot of crying letters.LoL. Wanna know the exactly purpose.

    6. Peek-a-boo!

      Well that secret didn’t last long did it, I think teams will wait to see the (if) any benefits before furiously scurrying around and copying it.

    7. Anatoly Nechaev
      1st February 2011, 14:12

      Julien, how does it sound?
      Some say it’s awful…

      1. This was on youtube, and it may just be me but it sounds a bit rough.

        1. Thats the R30, the car has a shark fin in the video, plus thers two of them, and only one R31 on track in valencia.

          1. Good point, so it was just me, LOL. It would help if I could read.

            1. I also found it earlier, and failed to notice that it’s not R31 xD

        2. That’s last year’s R30 in the video.

    8. Anatoly Nechaev
      1st February 2011, 14:14

      BTW, nice diversion with the orange stripes 8)

    9. I fail to see how having your exhaust there holds any advantage performace wise. Anybody think they know??

      1. The idea is, it blows the whole floor to get air speeding up and make the underbody more efficient.

        See explanation by Craig Scarborough, he is great at these things.

        Great in detail pics, you and Julien get the scoop on this together with ScrabsF1!

      2. Maybe it doesn’t work at all and Renault just want to waste everybody’s time trying to copy it

        1. Lol, that would require some very Bahar think.

    10. wonder if directing the exhaust opposite to where the car goes affects the performance of the engine. Specially going fast…

      1. Anatoly Nechaev
        1st February 2011, 14:37

        Actually it’s facing back.
        Look closely, front is on the left, back (where exhausts are facing) is on the right.

        1. oh, i got it now. You’re right.

    11. I think because of letting it leak that easily the benefits aren’t that high or seriously questionable. On the other hand you can test it only on track and nowhere else so maybe Renault had no choice.
      Very clever solution, but my less knowledgeable mind doesn’t leads me to see serious benefit here. Isn’t it too long for exhaust pipe or too long for gases to travel to place where they actually generate downforce? I think there’s more to that in the floor design, but that’s the bit that’s very well hidden.

      From the day one of testing this season shapes up bloody nice!

      1. They could try out that exhaust in wind tunnel.
        As for the gases, they might be sucked out by the pressure created under the floor (i think)

        1. They could test it only by putting real car with a real engine in a tunnel and i’m not sure Renault has 1:1 wind tunnel.

          CFD much more likely, but CFD needs to be proven on track even more than numbers from a wind tunnel do.

          1. Isn’t 1:1 model testing banned anyway?

            1. is it? i can’t quite recall. if it is, then it must come from RRA, not the FIA rules

            2. DeadManWoking
              2nd February 2011, 2:19

              a)iii) four one day aerodynamic tests carried out on FIA approved straight line or constant radius sites between 1 January 2010 and the end of the last Event of the Championship. Any of these days may be substituted for four hours of wind-on full scale wind tunnel testing to be carried out in a single twenty four hour period.

              h) With the exception of the full scale testing permitted in 22.1(a) above, no wind tunnel testing may be
              carried out using a scale model which is greater than 60% of full size.
              i) No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.

              No 1:1 wind tunnel testing except

      2. Homogolation? I’m not sure that you could change something significant as this quickly. One thing I’d expect is reliability problems, ala Red Bull when they first brought in the EBD.

    12. See only if F1 could get back to things like this, but to do with engine configurations etc. Even im staring to get tired of the contant chase for aero, and this is all about aero. Thank god for the pull/push rod suspension I suppose, and good luck to Renault if they can get it to work properly.

      I wonder if this what McLaren have been extending the lead time to perfect?

    13. I think it’s a risky idea, but I don’t know enough about it yet. I hope it works out for them, but there are some heat related issues, which can cause a variety of troubles.

    14. Ha love the comments from some above openly doubting the system when they havent:

      a) Seen any plans
      b) Don’t know the purpose
      c) Haven’t the experience of designing an F1 car (well certainly not this years as you would be busy now!).

      1. Anatoly Nechaev
        1st February 2011, 14:45

        Isn’t a goal of public forum like this to discus, criticize and brainstorm such ideas?

        Even if we don’t poses “experience of designing an F1 car” doesn’t mean we don’t have any knowledge in physics and aerodynamics.

        1. @ Anatoly

          I don’t think he means we don’t have an idea about aerodynamics, because most of us do have a rough idea. He means to say that the people designing these cars aren’t in it for no reason.

          If the car’s a flop and the system proves to be a failure, then yes, we can shoot the concept down.

      2. Yeah there will alway’s be experts, and their ‘ideas’ and ‘thoughts’ are perfect, and we shall her them… Ofcourse we shouldn’t doubt their opinion, they know better than the mechanics from Enstone for sure!

      3. My thoughts exactly… it’s like when the very first pictures of the car launches come out and immediately people give their VERY STRONG opinion that the car either sucks or will blow away the competition… silly, really.

        1. I didn’t see “very strong” opinions about this. People have doubts, and I think some of these doubts are reasonable. We will see. I hope it works for Renault, as I want their drivers to have a car they can push to the limits and fight for the ultimate prize.

          1. I don’t think that reasonable is the apt word – reasonable as based on what? which way the wind blows? tea leaves? hunches based on nothing but hunches? I haven’t seen any technical reasons given – because no one here knows more than what their eyes tell them, and when it comes to internal workings, that amounts to nothing at all.

            Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but it’s fun when they’re at least mildly informed and based on at least a hint of tangible knowledge.

            1. Longer exhaust piping with more bends equates to more resistance (back pressure) that can cause reduced power and decreased fuel economy to compensate. The increased downforce will have to be worth the trade-off to make it worthwhile, and I hope that it is.

            2. Maciek, contrary to what you believe some people here are quite familiar with technical aspects of motorsport. There are engineers watching F1, imagine that. The fact, that you don’t know understand potential shortcomings of such solution, doesn’t mean that everyone is just as ignorant.

              Keith pointed you to an excellent Craig Scarborough’s analysis of this innovation. This should give you at the very least a basic idea.

              Yes, we don’t know the internal workings, but we can imagine what problems Renault engineers were facing when they had to figure them out to create an efficient design. It is not easy.

              And sometimes even F1 engineers don’t get it right. I could list numerous ideas that didn’t work out in Formula One, although they were thought out by very smart people. There are doubts over this, and I agree with Ben – these doubts are not baseless. And the fact that Renault spent most of today’s session in the garage certainly doesn’t help to clear these doubts.

              I wish them all the best. I hope this solution works and I know that it can work. Right now I reserve my judgment until I see more.

            3. According to Adam Cooper, Renault suffered from brake line leak. The team confirmed it


              Please don’t jump into conclusions.

            4. @MaroonJack
              All you say is well taken – but of course the many, many comments I was referring to had nothing at all like arguments or knowledge to present, but just poo-pooed the idea in the space of a few syllables without suggesting any reason for it, which got simply under my skin. I meant no offence to anyone with interesting things to say…

      4. George,

        People that say that you can’t comment on anything unless you have experience with it are making an asinine point. If you don’t have kids, and see a parent beating their child senseless would you accept their response if they said ‘you don’t know what’s it like being a parent’? I doubt it.

        1. Speaking of asinine points, how did you work child-beating into this? Aside from the example, sure you make valid point, in theory – but in fact, no one here knows what’s going on inside that Renault – so how does saying “I don’t think it’ll work” amount to anything other than “bah-humbug”?

          What is it about Renault and Kubica that seems to get the automatic skeptics out in droves?

          1. I was illustrating the absurd by being absured—just because we aren’t engineers doesn’t mean that we can’t comment on technical developments. Perhaps I just shouldn’t have jumped to a nuclear example.

            I’m not against Kubica; he has really impressed me—especially last year’s near error free season!

            1. All’s cool, Argent, I wasn’t implying that you were being overly critical – just the overall impression I’ve had since last season. Thanks for the info on exhaust above – it’s certainly more than I knew : ) although if you look at where the engine is placed in these cars, routing the exhaust beneath the sidepods might not require either more length or more ‘bends’ than the standard solution, depending on how it’s done…?

          2. Mac,
            I get a bit over zealous with examples sometimes, so it was fair of you to pounce on that.

            Regarding the bends, I’m assuming the Renault did everything in their power to get the exhaust pips as straight a shot to the front as possible; however, my concern with the bends is the primarily rooted in the size of the fuel cell and the placement of the KERS batteries (if applicable). The team will want to have the fuel cell as low as possible to keep the center of gravity equally as low, but if we are to believe that they are fairly straight the exhaust pipes would undoubtedly run past the fuel cell en route to barge board / front sidepod exit. Therefore, my feeling is that they are run in an elongated curve that follows the curvature of the sidepod floor in effort to keep it away from the fuel cell. With this method, the only abrubt change in direction would be the exit. Perhaps Renault have solved any back pressure problems by using the front splitter to direct and accelerate the airflow down the inside of the barge boards in front of the outlets to assist with drawing the exhaust gasses out of the system.

            If this actually works effectively, I really hope that the FIA doesn’t jump all over this to ban such a unique, innovative solution. The only argument that I think could be made to ban it is because the exhaust outlet looks like it is split in half, and it could be argued that this, in effect, creates four outlets–Article 5.6 explicitly states that there can only be two exits. Though what I’m seeing may just be some kind of directional vane that doesn’t go much further than an inch or two.

            1. Took my non-technical mind some concentration to work through that, but I think I can visualise what you mean fairly well. Hmm, would love to get my little hands on their blueprints, that’s for sure…

      5. Well that’s what a forums are all about, isn’t it? We’re by no means F1 engineers here, but that shouldn’t stop us from speculating about and discussing techs – it’s one of the purposes of online communities. Such logic might lead to a conclusion that we have no right to talk about race strategies, since none of us own a supercomputer cluster to run simulations and doesn’t have a degree at mathematical modelling to program it properly. We’re enthusiasts (fanatics!) – not pros, so we are talking about things at our level. It’s sort of like two unemployed blokes in a pub discussing issues of international politics, yes but why not? :)

    15. Anyway it appears to be the only new idea.
      The rest of the cars really look so similar each other!!!

      1. Trained eye can see a heck of a lot of differences. I’m not a trained eye, or an owner of one, but having been looking very closely at them, I can see a plethora of variations. For me, I’ve seen more this year than any other so far. I guess it’s subjective.

    16. It’s hilarious!

      You guys should be working for the Renault technical department and remind them that they’re wasting their time!

      Sorry to sound sarcastic but i’m with GeorgeTuk here – i’m sure there’s a good reason for Renault trying this. Until they drive a car ‘in anger’, it’s sometimes hard to judge how effective a new part is.

      For any of us to say “oh that’s silly – there’s no benefit there” is actually beyond ridiculous.

      This site is meant for intelligent discussion, and that’s all i’ve seen since i’ve regularly visited this site, but this is a wee bit silly…

      C’mon people – it’s fine to have an opinion, but we’re not the ones getting paid thousands to design Formula One cars.

      1. Was just about to say the same. Most of the comments left here are saying it’s stupid and it won’t work. Heck, what do we know?

        Yep, clearly they’re wasting their time and don’t know what they’re doing at all…

        1. I’am still undecided on weather these comments are sad or hilarious!

    17. If they point forward, doesn’t the air rushing into the exhausts blow the fumes back or something? I’m missing something important here.

      Anyway, if the McLaren is as radical as is rumoured, all this just vindicates their decision to delay introducing their car.

      1. Oh, I get it. They come out of the front but actually point backwards.

        1. No, they actually point forward, as i understand it. The exhaust just sits very low under the airbox, there’s no airflow (it is behind the wheel) and it’s a low pressure zone.

          BTW i love the comments “that is just silly, it won’t work.” – like no one in Renault at any point during the whole year of extensive design, calculations, wind-tunnel tests, stress-tests, temperature analysis and fitting ask himself is it really worth it.

          1. DeadManWoking
            1st February 2011, 17:26

            No, they actually point sideways though angled slightly towards the back and as it’s behind the bargeboard there would be air flowing across the opening creating a possible chimney effect to speed the exhaust flow as per Bernoulli’s principle.

    18. Often, a couple of teams sumble across the same innovation. Maybe Mclaren have something similar and thought it worth hiding.

      Well the cat is out of the bag now.

      I think it will provide a performance benefit but routing the exhaust so near the radiators could cause a cooling headache. If their KERS batteries are down there too it could be dangerous.

    19. For me as for now Renault is the most technically new car on the grid and I would really love to see them fighting for wins. There is no fun without the risk. They said that they took the brave course and we all can see that it’s true.

    20. i assume they have consider carbon monoxide poisoning of the driver. ;)

    21. The perfomance benefit here is major, no doubts there. Like anything on the cutting edge it’s going to have teething issues, but if Lotus Renault nail this they might be this years Brawn.

      1. explain please?

        1. The Exhaust gases go under the car to add pressure under the floor which helps suck the car to the ground and also feeds the rear diffusers to add down force. Last years options of having the exhausts exiting through the floor have been outlawed by the new regs to this is renaults solution. However I think I remember the double diffusers increased this effect considerably so I am not sure they will get as much performance increase as last years blown underfloors (although obviously any performance increase helps).

          1. Are you sure a higher pressure under the car doesn’t make a hovercraft?

            I see it working in one of two modes.
            1) The hot exhaust runs or flows along the edges of the under tray, creating low pressure forcing air to migrate towards the edges thereby creating low pressures along the central parts of the under tray Renault could get away with any ordinary diffuser.

            2) The hot gases flow directly underneath the under tray and accelerates towards the diffuser creating very low pressures and increased downforce as the diffuser can work efficiently.

    22. All we can say at this point is that it’s new and fairly radical, so let’s see how well it works.
      People last year stated that the little air inlet of the McLaren’s F-duct system would ruin the aero of the car. We all know how quick the other teams were to copy the system.
      On topic: I have zero technical background, so her are my guesses:
      – Exhausts on those cars come out at high speeds. Relaying them to the front of the car could maybe mimic an aero effect on the diffusor that it would otherwise only benefit when the car is up to speed. I’m thinking faster acceleration or so? Anyone with more technical background an idea on this?

      1. I stated guessES but only gave one…

        The seceond idea, but I already don’t think it’ll be it: could it be beneficial to control the airflow under the car when one is tailing a car in front? Just thinking about this, because the movable wings can only be used in designated area’s of the circuits. So if you’d have another advantage that you can use at all times to tackle the “dirty air” problem…

      2. i am not an expert myself but I thought that this device, if working properly, might increase cornering speed of R31…

    23. Wonder how long till its banned

      1. maybe a whole year? hahaha, hope they keep it though :)

    24. When the car catches fire their livery will be appropriate ;)

      1. Then there’ll be way they can convince those pesky Canadians they’re livery has nothing to do with “smoking” :D

        1. Damn, I meant “there’ll be NO way”

        2. right, it does not have filters, that’t the difference :p

          1. Dazed and Confused
            1st February 2011, 17:09

            right, it does not have filters

            Hey look closely at this photo & you’ll find it does have a filter.


            A symantec filter lol 8)

    25. I only wonder how the system will cope with different amount of fumes generated on different speeds and revs. This could be very significant problem. Changes of downforce in every second could be a cause of serious problems.

      1. Dazed and Confused
        1st February 2011, 16:05

        Changes of downforce in every second could be a cause of serious problems.

        Don’t worry. Renault will use a retarded engine ;) If fact the were the first ones to retard theirs on red bull last year.

        1. DeadManWoking
          1st February 2011, 17:06

          Well if you go by some of the comments here, they already use retarded engineers! ;)

    26. Really cool to see that there’s always some innovation in F1. I hope it works, it shuffles the cards a bit.

      Will they do the same as Red Bull last year, use it only in Q3? RB put their exhaust blow system only to full use in Q3, because of the fact that it needed more RPM’s in slower corners. Or is that also banned now?

      1. Well, they can’t really change the exhausts between Q2 and Q3, then again between Q3 and the race, can they? The exhaust do have to be present all the time, so it would seem a rather permanent feature.

    27. Is that an exhaust or a cooling vent for the engine?

    28. people complain when a car is conservative and looks the same like last years car.

      then when a team comes up with a new idea people complain that it will fail and that there is no point.

      what can you say..

    29. It could be a trick they’ve played to disguise the real location of their exhausts.

      I seem to remember Red Bull having stickers on their car last year to trick people into believing that they didn’t do anything tricky with their exhausts.

      Testing sessions are a prime opportunity for other teams to spy, so there’s lots of games played to hide true innovations. Remember the cardboard covers for diffusers last year?

    30. Interesting. but doubtful it would so effective.

    31. The duct above the exhaust exit is for cold air to enter the car and provide cooling.

      The gas exiting the exhaust will be hundreds of degrees in temp, and hot air rises….

      See what I’m saying?

      I think the hot air could rise and be pshed back into the sidepod vent…

      Imagine if they ‘forgot’ about common sense. :/

      1. Scratch that – I looked at the pics – it’ll be fine ;)

        1. Haha, nice take back :)

    32. Everyone’s crossing their fingers that this will work. Well, I hope it doesn’t. I hope Renault’s season is a miserable failure. They’re a bunch of cheats and they even have the audacity to take another team’s name! So Renault, or Lotus, or whatever the hell you’re called, I hope it doesn’t work out.

      1. Yeah, right, they should have rejected Lotus’ sponsorship.

      2. Time to take your pills, honey.

      3. Are you not happy that the ‘cheats’ have a new identity – they are still Renault, but fresh management along with the long term Lotus investment mean that another high performance team remains in Formula One, which is important after the loss of two big investors in the last few years – BMW and Toyota. Yes, I am glad that new life has been given to Renault, even if I don’t 100% agree with the cirumstances of names and colours.

    33. Nice idea from Lotus-Renault but i’ll reserve judgement until we see some competitive lap times.

    34. I have to say that I dont quite understand. I have no doubt that this concept is technically sound, but im not quite understanding.

      Isnt the idea to create a vacuum under the floor and in the diffuser to generate downforce? How does piping more air under the car (or even into the diffuser) create more downforce? I would think that it would just increase the pressure under the car and thus decrease downforce.

      Any explanation here would be greatly appreciated!

      1. Its to do with increasing the lift (or in this context downforce) coefficient I believe. Making the air hotter causes the density of the air to decrease, therefore reducing the dynamic pressure and increasing the coefficient.

        Basically increasing the lift you get from a set dimension of a wing (or floor of an F1 car)

        1. I should explain, dynamic pressure is just the term for a value that happens to have the same units as pressure. Well its sort of pressure, but not. Thats as far as my lecturer got.

          1. Well Dipak T., I understand your “lift” in combination of what “Calum” wrote above about hot air.

            Combining the two will result to the “understanding” about Hallard was talking about.

            Just my 2cents :)

            1. Im not quite sure what youre getting at

      2. Piping more air, hot air, will make the air move even much faster creating a low pressure, low pressure is what creates lift in an aircraft wing, so its the reverse here.

      3. The car is pushed down towards the ground as a reaction to air shooting up out of the back (think of a rooster tail spray pattern in the wet and imagine the water is air). Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, see, like when you push someone on a swing you have to brace yourself.

        The heavier the air you shoot out the back is, the more you react ie the more downforce.

        Hotter air is denser, so you can fit more of it in the same space as colder air would take up. So point your 800deg exhausts into the front of your diffuser, which is the thing making the air shoot up at the back, and you get more downforce.

        Hope that helps ;)

        1. Hotter air is less dense, using the ideal gas law shows that density of air is inversely proportional to temperature.

        2. Apologies Gridlock, but please don’t make statements when you have no idea what you’re talking about.

          Please don’t just quote Newton’s third law for the sake of it.

    35. StephenAcworth
      1st February 2011, 19:20

      Question: does the fact that the volume of air emitting from the exhaust will change as hot air meets colder air have some effect also? I would have thought this would affect pressure etc… but I am no physicist.

    36. Bloody cool if you ask me!

      I Look forward to seeing how it develops!

    37. It took me a while to understand the picture as it’s very zoomed in and it’s hard to picture it overall with the car. But, if it’s pointing to where I think it is, then it should help like with the defusers from the previous years. How much it’ll help, we may never know.

      Now the next thing is heat. How hot will it get? Will it cause other stresses on the engine due to the new flow for the exhaust air? Remember that teams spend ages designing those curly exhausts for optimal performance and this ones had to bend in a rather un-orthadox fashion.

      Will you lose HP from pushing your exhaust in a bendy way, to gaining aero grip through the exhaust design?

      1. I have read the article where Alan Permane said that the temperatures were OK, they didn’t crossed beyond the accepted limits, plus he said that the system is fine. In addition, when asked about this development, Vitaly said “We can’t talk about this right now, but everything works fine”, plus he said that today he didn’t “push” – these poor lap times were due to problems with the brakes.

    38. Ross Brawn admitted to working on a similar solution according to auto motor und sport. McLaren is also rumored to be working on something even more extreme regarding exhaust.

    39. The question remains that will it work? Renault trying something different when they really needs to be in the front of the grid in 2011 well only time will tell.

    40. i think it would be hilarious if that turned out not to be an exhaust at all but some other innovative doo dah that i have no clue about =P

      smoke and mirrors time

    41. Hey guys, i was just thinking…usually when engine catches fire, flames come out from exhaust, right?
      So, basically, now it will fire around the cockpit area in such case making it really unsafe for the driver?

      1. That’s a concern I share.

    42. Greta to see all the discussion regarding how this exhaust performs when the car is moving, but my question is regarding when the car is stationary for periods of time. When they are held for the longer times on the grid are exhaust fumes going in the driver’s face. Also the new location of this heat source. Is it going to make the Renault struggle more than the other cars. Will more heat be reaching the radiators?

    43. Pitstop is bit of a concern as well. Exhaust now routed almost directly to rear wheels crew. I’m beginning to think that this tech is far off from being straightforward benefit. And giving some conspiracy theories voiced here a thought too.

    44. Word is, McLaren has done the same thing with their exhausts!

      1. Mister Nillionaire
        2nd February 2011, 11:16

        That would mean that it HAS TO give a serious performance boost.

        1. Mister Nillionaire
          2nd February 2011, 11:32

          Oh, and I have read somewhere that Red Bull is said to be also built in a way that could suggest they will have FEE, but they’re not revealing it yet.
          Looking forward to see them all in Bahrain, hopefully LRGP will be up in front with BRB and Mclaren this year.

    45. the car it’s gonna bee the best now

    46. seems that radical word is common from 2009 brawn GP,
      but i can see their exhaust length and layout will backfire because of heat problem

    47. Mister Nillionaire
      2nd February 2011, 12:08

      Soooo, has anyone actually got any video footage with it on track? I wonder how much different it sounds.

    48. there was some video in the comments elsewhere on this site. can’t remember where exactly, sorry.
      it doesn’t sounds really different, a bit rougher though

    Comments are closed.