Max Verstappen, Red Bull, Silverstone, 2018

Mexico is Red Bull’s last chance to win in 2018 – Horner

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Christian Horner says the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez is the only circuit left this year which is likely to strongly favour Red Bull.

What they say

Horner was asked if the team will add to its haul of three wins so far this year:

I think realistically Mexico is probably the only shot we’ve got left under normal circumstances.

Quotes: Dieter Rencken

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Should FIA choose F1’s tyre supplier instead of FOM?

I still don’t think it’s correct that the tyre supply is decided on commercial grounds.

FOM/Liberty shouldn’t have a say in my opinion. If the FIA wish to stick with a sole supplier it should be a decision made solely by the FIA based on who can come up with the best product but ideally there should be some competition with it left up to each team who supply them with tyres.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Cwojdek, Mattb, Radoye, Sato113 and Onmar22!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

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.

19 comments on “Mexico is Red Bull’s last chance to win in 2018 – Horner”

  1. Red bull was also strong in japan last year, I wouldn’t rule it out, verstappen was able to keep hamilton under pressure for the whole race, even with bottas slowing him down before pitting.

    Unfortunately malaysia is gone, that was also a strong venue for red bull and particularly, weak for mercedes.

    1. @esploratore They’ll have good race pace, but that won’t matter when you qualify 5th and 6th.

      1. “malaysia is gone, that was also a strong venue for red bull and particularly, weak for mercedes.” lol at that…

        2014 Ham went by 17sec to next
        2015 bad team strategy on early SC call…
        2016 Ham retired on a brand new engine’s failure while some 17? secs ahead of next guy?
        2017? Ham didnt even fight RB/Max as he wasnt racing RB and didnt risk like some Ferrari driver kept risking?
        Msia was by no means a weak merc track when merc wanted to win there! Statistic dont always show the bigger pic… Otherwise, singapore should have been a really bad track for mercedes…

        1. @mysticus Clearly in an era of mercedes domination (2014-2016) mercedes was the strongest car in any given track, how’s that a surprise?

          But as soon as the car was no longer dominant, ferrari were battling red bull on pace to be the strongest car of the weekend, they were just starting too far back to really compete or not starting at all, meanwhile hamilton drove a great race to get 2nd with the clear 3rd best car, even though he couldn’t keep up with verstappen, and bottas was even beaten by vettel who started towards the back, and ocon or some other car, think a force india, was very close to bottas.

          That doesn’t look at all like a strong mercedes track, 2014-2016 don’t matter in the slightest, find a weak track for mclaren in 1988!

          1. “2014-2016 don’t matter in the slightest” so one year performance is all that matter? Long term consistency means not much?

            i guess we have difference in opinion… 80s were whole different can of warms… i m talking about current gen cars not history…

            Mercedes has two weak tracks, and they were Monaco and Singapore, but Singapore seemed fixed and hopefully not a jinxed track…

  2. Just gotta hope for rain.

  3. Yes, because of the high-altitude of that circuit, which reduces the impact of the engine/PU deficits despite that venue featuring one of the longest if not the longest straight of the entire Championship although Suzuka shouldn’t be too bad either as it’s generally an aero-circuit. Apart from the respective sectors 2, COTA and YMC have a lot of corners as well.
    – Regarding the Reuters-article: Unsurprising.
    – I agree with the COTD in principle, but isn’t it kind of a joint-decision already? BTW, has it always been like this or was this type of decision previously solely the governing body’s? At the moment, I can’t recall whether the previous tyre-tenders were decided this way or not.
    – Also on this day in F1: Sebastian Vettel took a win in Singapore in 2013 with one of his most dominant performances ever.

    1. “high-altitude of that circuit, which reduces the impact of the engine/PU deficits” it reduces available/potential power for everyone, not just Ferrari and/or Mercedes only… so it still has impacts!

      Dont read too much into 2013 singapore, it is a unique very high downforce street circuit best suited for RB which was the best/highest downforce car! Their cheats though didnt last long after that year… in 2014 it was found that they had a hydraulic pressure adjustable/sensitive actuator that was controlling front wing flaps! I wonder why it was never found before…. as their flexi wings were most talked about… guess fia only checked weight aspect… and actuator worked on air pressure so weight test was passed so easily…

      1. and actuator worked on air pressure so weight test was passed so easily…

        Seems like bending the rules rather than breaking them (cheating). That is F1 in a nutshell.

        1. Well it seems cheating since rule states it needs to withstand those weight applied, but because it would be impossible to be checked during racing/cornering, device is cleverly hidden away to brake the rule not just bend it…

          It was a moveable device and mechanical device at it, it brakes the rules, everyone suspected it, but couldnt figure it out up until 2014….

  4. I think all the future F1 concepts having a passing resemblance to Formula E shows is that in a concept the designer can afford to pursue as equally adolescent form over function philosophy as the actual Formula E cars do.

    I’ll guarantee now once real engineers get their hands on the ruleset we won’t get cars like that unless those rules are so tight and prescriptive that all the cars look identical.

    1. It’s like in the past, when car manufacturers were chasing only airflow efficiency, all futuristic prototypes looked the same.

      And the F1 concepts looks totally different to FE (and Indy); only F1 is a true open wheel racing series.

    2. I’m not going to assume that the concept shots we’ve seen of three different possibilities have been done by ‘adolescents.’ I bet there is some accuracy in them as to what Brawn is looking for. Of course they are concepts, but they are hardly outlandish like all the concepts we saw showing cars when we were debating halos, with enclosed cockpits that couldn’t possibly work in reality.

  5. If the FIA wish to stick with a sole supplier it should be a decision made solely by the FIA

    I’ve got three reasons I disagree with the COTD:
    1) FIA should only define the technical specifications based on ‘safety’ and ‘level playing field’; never/ever WHO supplies which part.
    2) We’ve seen how things go wrong (corruptive payments) when the FIA gets involved in making commercial decisions.
    3) The FOM (IMO) is responsible to make sure that all teams can make money. The only way to do this is by controlling the revenue streams to the teams and the costs to compete. You don’t want FIA to have free reign in deciding from whom teams have to buy without any commercial responsibility to the teams.

  6. We could do with another tyre war not ones that wearout.

  7. Interesting how RBR are prepping for the budget cap.

    Appear to be grooming Max for Horner’s job – Max already has made definitive statements on the power units and drivers. Expect by the end of the season, he’ll be up to speed on Adrian’s department as well. ;-)

  8. Has anyone been following Sophia Flörsch? Has she got pace? Would be great to see a female making the ranks (on merit with real pace – i.e. not Carmen Jorda). That FIA article is really poorly written and formatted.

    1. @justrhysism She hasn’t show blistering pace to say the least, but it’s not like she’s hopeless (as Jorda was in GP3). She outqualified teammates on a few occasions, some good battles in the races.

      The category makes for an hard impact for newcomers. I hope she can have a full season next year (maybe not in the new F1-supporting series but in whatever revival of EuroF3 current organizers will put on)

      It’s safe to say she’s not on Calderon’s level for now.

  9. Fudge Kobayashi (@)
    27th September 2018, 10:51

    What cars are these people looking at to find anything in common with the FE car? To my eyes there is sweet FA in common, no gimmicky split rear spoiler, no wide prescriptive nose section, even the Halo is far better sculpted and integrated in the conceps than the FE one which, although works on a whole with the car, isn’t actually any different in shape to the spec part in multiple series at the moment.

    FE needs to take a chill pill and stop pushing their agenda within the F1 news sphere, they are starting to look really desperate for buy-in.

Comments are closed.