RB6(2010) vs F2004 Melbourne Pole Lap Comparison
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 03. 2017
- Very intense. A comparison between Red Bull's RB6 and Ferrari's F2004. Both of these cars are championship winning, driven by the drivers who won the championship in the same year too.
The Ferrari F2004 is considered to be the fastest F1 car ever built, and the Red Bull RB6 is considered to be "the car with the most down force in the history of F1." Watch and find out which car is faster around this iconic Albert Park track.
The commentary heard is from the RB6 video on the left. You can hear them talking in amazement about the amount of down force the car has throughout the video. - Auta a dopravní prostředky
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
2004 lap had race fuel onboard. It would be better if you find a 2004 time from Friday practise since they set their fastest lap times then.
KMan34 That would be almost impossible to do that:( If i could I would but i don't have the time to look for them. And you're right man, you sure are right.
No worries, great comparison video anyway!
KMan34 Thank you!
Plus they had grooved tyres... if they wud hav had slicks times wud hav been much faster
@@rifatislam5836 just stop with that arguement. The grooved tyres are faster for 2004 cars
These two laps are ultra awesome and beautiful.
Sonny Lindfield Yep, two fantastic laps, I wonder how much faster the 2017 cars will be on qualifying pace
@@elb7032 a decent amount
For a 17 year old car, that F2004 is insanely fast.
no
@@xj_220 *yes.*
*Ferrari fast.*
Race fuel and worse tires. That thing was amazing.
put a modern slick tires it can go even more faster
2004/05 cars were the fastest ever until 2017.
2004 - grooved tyres, race fuel load, race car setup, one-lap Q1 + one-lap Q2
2010 - slicks, qualifying fuel load and car setup, 10 minutes Q3 on a track that was PERFECTLY prepared by the TONS of Q1 and Q2 action!
grooved tires aren't slower
@@PPedroFernandes Yes, they are. (With the same compound.)
@@jakubkrcma they literally aren't. Go back to physics class please.
1- Grip doesn't depend on surface area
2- The grooves real disadvantage is heat management over a race distance
3- The grooved tires were a lot softer than even what we knew as "super softs".
You're just wrong at all levels
@@PPedroFernandes Slicks with the same compound and overall dimensions are MUCH faster around a lap!!! We're talking up to full seconds at some tracks. One of the main reasons for the introduction of grooved tyres in 1998 was to slow the cars down in corners. Rolling resistance (hypothetically - with ideal materials) doesn't depend on tyre width, grip does.
@@PPedroFernandes Your Physics I has turned you into a real Dunning Kruger, mate.
It's pure madness how much time Vettel made in the last few corners!
Because of the slicks
@@manotopalian4286 and more downforce
@@zafrylaiman8695 the downforce was just amazing
@@a2shame797 The Red Bull RB6 was a downforce monster
@@manotopalian4286 I love it how you experts always put in about the slicks. If you only knew, how much downforce the Aerodynamics generated. Adrian Newey took it to a complete new level. The F2004 was pretty stock compared to the 2010 RB
F2004 is the best F1 car ever build, a beauty, great sound, such a thing will never come again
Nah w11
@@whatbruz4202 never i go to F1 since the early 80th and see many races live the V6 is crab V12 or V10 near the track, unbelievable not the tech sound today, real cars and drivers
@@coralreefexplorer what are you even saying
@@coralreefexplorer the sound doesn’t matter lol shut up and go watch nascar if you want sounds
@@dbabu51 yes you right nascar is better than F1 100%
imagine 2004 with same fuel onboard as RB6
Muddassir Habib and with slicks
Muddassir Habib, It's still lighter than the RB6, though, even with 10-15 laps more fuel onboard.
moiskellerwerter bra plus KERS
@@TheJokerit19 imagine a side by side of the rb6, f2004 and the w10
Even the fastest lap of the 2004 Australian GP, which was faster than the pole time, was still slower than Vettel's Q2 time.
The Ferrari F2004 in combination with the incredible skills of Micheal Schumacher is the most Epic thing ever in F1 history
God Michael was the greatest driver ever!!
You know they did something extraordinary because they beat the f2004 before 2017
今里？そなるか
Vettel and the RB06 were the perfect combination Man-Machine, holy shit.
The agressivity that he must handle each corner is insane, the 2012 RB was more "tamed", but this one is just a legitimely bull.
No. Kimi with the 2005 Mclaren was amazing. He would’ve easily won the championship had it not been for reliability issues with that Mercedes engine
@@dbabu51 who tf was talking about Kimi here? Love the guy, but really, what he said was true and you just put Kimi in there as well in a Seb and Michael video?
@@spicykking2854 prime Kimi was one of the best drivers of his time. Not an unreasonable comparison
@@janimizer1725 But no one asked
@@HilbertXVINo one had to ask. They can say what they want
Crazy, the Ferrari gains 200 metres on the straight then in just 2 corners the Red Bull catches up again.
They used to have a different philosophy where straights mattered more
2004 cars had much more horsepower then 2010 cars just with grooved tires therefor corner speeds were lower.
2010 cars had full slick tires, that's simply the reason why they are quicker in corners.
@@6GaliX the rb6 is a downforce maniac it is so fast in corners. Newey created a beast
You do realize that 200m is equivalent to 3 seconds in lap time, right? You think that F2004 gains 3 sec in one straight and RB gains that back in 2 corners?
@@Hmkls I do realise that, I did karting for a few years so I do have an idea about this kind of things. I meant '' 100 '', it was a typo. It's obvious from the onboard camera the Ferrari wasn't 200 metres ahead on the straight.
The 2004 Ferrari had all the fuel onboard and had grooved tyres compared to slicks...a maxed out F2004 is even faster than modern day
The fastest time set in the 2004 weekend is still slower than the fastest times set in the 2010 weekend.
@@TheOtherNeutrino Because the Aero was simply better 6 years later. But the times of the f2004 were slower, can also be due to the fact that at that time they actually drove very rarely, especially ferrari, with low of fuel. With fresh tires and completely no fuel, the ferrari would certainly have been in the 1.23 areas. And if the rules had not been changed after 2004, they would have been even faster until they were slowed down for a really good reason.
the f2004 pales in comparison to that of the w11 or 2020 mercedes. that was THE fastest f1 car ever
@@no1washerezz Of course, there is no question that the w11 was the fastest car and is superior to the f2004. If the cars had not been cut in 2004.. how much faster they would have been in 2006-2007. Apart from that, it was still real formula 1 at that time. Even if the races were sometimes boring.
Formula 1 was spectacular back then. Today, trucks overtaking at the push of a button. And the drivers are puppets.
@@TheOtherNeutrino coz slick tyres as was stated
The F2004 seemed to perform in most of the corners as well as the RB6 and only lost a little time in the last couple corners. Then again the F2004 was being driven by Schumacher in his absolute prime and with grooved tires. Imagine if that car had slicks like the RB6, it could've scrubbed another 1-2.5 sec off the lap time with the added grip.
Also, dont forget the fuel
Back when vettel was unstoppable
"I used to rule the grid.."
@@cresbalundo8845 "fans would rise when I took the win"
@@arindamsaha7062 "now in the garage i feel alone"
He was unstoppable in Monza last year.
@@GTChucker86 😂
you see just how much the positioning and lens angle of the camera influences our senses of speed. if i didn't pay attention to the landmarks on the track i would have said the ferrari was 2 times quicker.
The Ferrari had a more powerful engine, traction control and the Michael.
The Red Bull had proper slick tyres, modern aero and Inspector Seb.
It should also be noted that both Red Bulls and Alonso were faster than the F2004 in qualifying and even the fastest lap set in the race.
doo ba doo ba doo Inspector Seb doo ba doo ba doo doo doo
"the Michael" - Eddie Irvine or someone
@@haxthehax Wasn’t it Hakkinen?
@@canborcbakan4206 it was believe he said it after the 2000 Belgium GP
F2004 sounds faster.
V10 vs V8
Looks faster too
@@cop9743 it's because the camera is pointed more towards the road ahead compared to the camera today you see the car more than the road which makes the car look slow
No shit
Two of the 🐐s
I love to watch F1 nowadays, especially onboards but man I really miss these screaming and smaller racing cars
ferrari had a faster engine, red bull had a better chasis and aereodynamics
and 6 more years to make that car
ferrari had 10x more fuel ;d
red bull had better tires
Ferrari had 4 line-grooved tyres and about 40 kg more fuel in it... Sadly we never saw these cars in their full qualy mode.
if the ferrari f2004 had slicks, schumacher would finish the lap with 1:21:00
No it won't due to the rb6 having crazy downforce which the f2004 just can't match
@@bluengold3443 No, I think it would. George has a point. Those grooved dry tires are at least 2 to 3 seconds slower per lap than proper racing slicks. So I think 1:21 is a reasonable time, probably even faster with a lighter fuel load. The RB6 does have a lot more downforce and better downforce, so I think it would be closer. I think it would be interesting if the RB6 ran a lighter fuel load, too.
I doubt the F2004 would be as fast with the 2010 slicks on it. Not only are they thinner than the F2004's tyres even with grooves, but Ferrari had Bridgestone in their pocket for tyre designs and compounds as they were the only notable team of 3 to use Bridgestone tyres. The tyres that Ferrari used at each track were made for the F2004 and made for the track itself, whereas the RB6's tyres weren't so specialised and they had to make do with what they had.
With equal tyres and equal fuel loads, I doubt there'd be much a difference between paces of the two cars - the F2004 has the engine but the RB6 has the downforce.
You could see how the RB front wing going closer to the ground on the straights
F 2004
Mclaren 2005 unreliable monster.
RB 2013
Merc 2020
Monsters in f1 since 2000
The v10s always have a excuse to be slowest than moderns cars.
What we really need is to go back to the larger FOV cameras, the sense of speed is so much greater
This reminded me how onboard camera position in 2010 has been dreadful.
Must be a joy to drive…
Seb: damn right it is
2010 has a better aerodynamics.. For fast cornering
How a V8 here could beat a V10 lap?! The only time it happens
I believe it happened several times in 2010/2011
A v6 beat both never doubt F1 engineers
@@xj_220 to be fair, the V6s are engineering marvels. The V8 and V10 were down to *add as much fuel and revs as possible*
quicker in the corners. The F2004 made all of its time up on the straights but the downforce on that red bull was enough to compensate
good comparison i like these vids
The RB6 destroyed the F2004 in the last sector. High speed corners were where RedBull dominated.
You can argue about tires and whatnot but the truth is, 6 years of aerodynamic evolution is worth way more than tire and even losing 2 cylinders didnd hinder that.
The real truth is that the f2004 was qualifying on race fuel, around 12/13 worth laps or so. Which, using Brundle's 0.1s per lap of fuel, would mean that on a ultra light fuel load, you would expect the f2004 to set somewhere around a mid 1:23.
@@transformersguy234 no, they didn't do a single lap faster than rb6 through practice and race. Keep in mind that most of the track records were set during races in v10 era.
@@transformersguy234 no, in q2 u would see that, but u didn't, in the race the fastest was a 1:24.1 with low fuel and in qualifying it was 3 tenths slower, it wouldn't be close to modern cars
@@bxtterz16 The F2004 was faster than any F1 car until 2017. At least on most of the tracks. F1 in 2004 brought us maybe the greatest cars. Fast as shit, fantastic sound, primitive aerodynamics and absolutely gorgeous.
I forgot. All of that without slicks.
@@markusplotz2259 actually 2016 was faster than 2004 in some cases, and at this point it seems u are living in denial, these f1 cars are the fastest ever, and they make 2004 cars look slow, and there was no overtaking in 2004 so what's ur point
The fastest 2004 lap was from the race: 1:24,125
And it was never beat. 2004 and 2005 fastest f1 cars ever
crazy to think that the 2017 to 2021 generation would completely obliterate these cars
All the track records (in a race) are still from 2004 and 2005. Qualifying during these years was done on race fuel so incomparable and they actually did quicker times in the race :)
The V10 sound is a perfect third above the V8 sound, a proper chord. 25% more cylinders, 25% higher frequency.
loved the sonographic approach.
It,s crazy how Sebastian drove with that distorted view
Less than a second in it. And the redbull had full slicks. Not sure if they had Dr's at that time but full slicks for sure can give you just over half a second a lap compared to grove tyres. Just shows how great the 2004 car really was
Wider tyres in 2004 which means it had more contact patch with grooves and was 250 down on horsepower.
@@seemarai6583 engine of f2004 is superior despite being slower.Downforce is superior in rb6 not engine one. Interesting that with dominant downforce tyre setup degrade earlier rather in f2004. DRS not an issues it's same in f2004 without DRS it's parameter used efficitively nowadays rather than then
2010 was the last DRS free season (not counting the F-duct system pioneered by McLaren) since it was the events of the 2010 Abu Dhabi GP that kind of forced the issue.
Shows how slow it is
The ferrari looks so much faster because the fov of the camera is higher
It’s epic to hear the V10 and the V8 but the V10 tho 😍😍😍
Its crazy how much more harder and tougher to drive the 2004 era looks. The 2010 looks so easy and smooth.
But the V10s had traction control. I think V8s didn't. So technically it would be harder to control the V8s
RB6 the downforce monster
The way RB6 catched F2004 at corners & went forward is insane.
Schumacher's lap Time in the race was a 1:24.1
Who is there after 1:17 868 by Charles leclerc pole lap 2022
Just Imagine the Ferrari with actual slicks
Easily -1 second faster, the minimum.
@@archvile1313 More... Read somewhere that in circuits with a variety of all types of corners (like Suzuka, Silverstone, Albert Park) a slick tyre could give upwards of even 2 second advantage in it's softest compound. And it makes sense... A slick is literally all of the tyre on the road getting grip, while the grooved tyres have about ~95% of the tyre on the surface. 5%... That may look like little, but it's a lot...
@OriginalFake Simulated??? That's not real life physics I'm afraid. Where by the way?
@OriginalFake A game... Even if it's a great game with amazing physics like AC, it's not even close to what the real thing is.
Alonso on his 2005 V10 Renault was lapping almost as fast as backmarkers in 2020 and his engine aerodynamics and also the slicks (which weren't the softest compound) weren't at full qualy mode. That engine was reving up to only 16-17k... When it normally revs up to almost 19k. And Alonso himself wasn't pushing it to the limit either since he had nothing at stake and the car is a priceless championship memento of his and Renault that obviously he had to be careful and not crash it.
Take away the fuel and give the softest compound of slicks of the 2020 cars (with the right size of tyre obviously) to the 2004 cars and they will not be far off the current generation.
shumi w/ the f2004 is just truly magnificent.
if those softs are available back then for 2004, it would have been so fast fast..
You can admire the aero beast that RB6 was by the way Vettel attacks those corners in comparison to Schumacher
*f2004's lap record remains unbeaten up until albert park was re-profiled*
it would of been beaten if we raced their last year
The difference it is 6 years of technologie.........
.
I love it
Ben Monaghan Thank you Ben
We all want to see an f2004 with proper slicks
Wow. Every corner is similar, except for the last corner!
ngl, because of the camera view of the f2004, it shows a better perspective of how fast an f1 car is
It's interesting how the 2010 is faster but looks quite a bit slower at the same time.
Its because of 60 fps camera setup compared to the 30 fps one from the early 2000's
Lap start: "let's just listen at the throttle"
--- *Proceeds to talk over the entire lap*
I like how 2010 F1 had more stable camera and higher video quality !
Slicks vs groved tyres. And know how beast the F2004 was in those days.
I don't know what it is, but somehow old footage makes the car look way faster than the modern recordings.
The F2004 would run this pace whole day long. Race fastest lap was 0.3s faster then his pole. RB6 race lap is over 4s slower
Tyressss. Full slick vs semi slick?
Now if we could get an engine to sound like both mixed together.
not same fuel levels and also different tyres..i think they more even then they look maybe 2004 is faster with slicks
1:13 they should bring the shark fin back, I think that was the main reason he could get away with that there
rb6 gains in corners
f2004 gains in straights
These times aren't accurate. The V10s in 2004 were some of the quickest F1 cars ever.
tyres are different 2004 is hard too drive
Schumi one looks cleaner
Traction control and a proper rear wing tends to help
I think it’s more about skills, there’s a lot more struggle with those old cars watch any lap from that era drivers were arm wrestling with the steering wheel. These 2010 to nowadays cars are easiest to drive, they are bigger and have those wide and slick tyres
A battle between master and a student
look how much less curbs Michael has on the outside of every corner, not fair
Imagine if the 04 cars had slick tyres. My god.
i miss the sound 😢
The f1 we will never experience again!
Who else is here now that we've finally come back to Australia after 2020 and 2021 were cancelled?
Imagine F1 2004 with slicks...
The F2004 had race fuel onboard and it's not on slick tires
it's not about the 'age' of the car. it's about the formula at the time. if the formula remained the same from 2004 to 2010, then for sure the 2010 would be faster. not comparing apples with apples. you can easily make a 2022 car slower than 2004.
No hay comparación me gusta la escudería Red bull, pero estamos hablando del mejor coche de la mejor escudería de todos los tiempos que es Ferrari
V8, the 15 year old little brother
V10, the 23 year old beast
So how is that on Monza the record is still from Montoya's 2004 Williams FW26
Correction: actually a few drivers apparently beat the record in 2018, Raikkonen, Vettel and Hamilton
i love Ferrari F2004 v10 engine sound
Pneu rainuré pour Michael car à cette époque si il avait laisser les pneus slicks ! Elle aurait été encore beaucoup plus puissante la f 2004 !
The camara in 2004 had better colors than the 2010 one
Better everything except resolution which is the only thing people care about now.
RB6 had 250hp less and still beat the F2004. Wow.
@FichDich InDemArsch no
I was a bit shocked because Melbourne is an engine dependent track
Not quite 250 hp less. It would be around 150 hp less (900 hp for the V10 Ferrari; and 750 hp for the V8 Red Bull). When the Red Bull deploys KERS, that gives the 2.4 L V8 engine an additional 80 hp (but only for 6 seconds per lap). That extra power boost of +80 hp gives the Red Bull a total power output of 830 hp; while the Ferrari still only has around 900 hp, from its N/A 3.0 V10 engine; with no KERS, or any type of additional electrical or power boost.
@@michaeldavis2531 This Red Bull doesn't even have KERS.
@@michaeldavis2531 Uff... Trying to pull all the knowledge and then not even correctly. RB6 is without KERS
Old F1 Engine produce Music, after they produce just Noice !
And most of the 2019 F1 cars which last raced there completely obliterated the RB6 pole lap. Lewis Hamilton set the pole with a whopping 1:20.486
Nobody ever beat the 2004 race lap record though !
Now let them switch cars. Imagine the corner speed if Michael was driving the RB10 🤤
@lol shit 😂😂😂
A bit slower but would be ok
Jesus the 2004 car is scary fast in a straight line…
So the F2004 is not as aggressive as the RB6 on the kerbs. That should mean the Ferrari doesn't take lines as good as the Red Bull, from a modern perspective. I guess going on kerbs would mean too much risk to go airborne, because of the lack of some downforce, compared to the Red Bull. Still the Ferrari doesn't lose too much time because of higher average speed. Does the whole thing I've said make sense?
every gain the rb6 made in the corners was nullified by the insane straight speed of the F2004
Give the F2004 the same tires like on the Redbull and the F2004 flies to the moon.
Track limits on turn 4 for the RB
That v8 just silenced that v10
But the Lap Rekord is 1:24,125 (Michael Schumacher 2004)
Vettels was in quali
Se la f 2004 avesse avuto le gomme slik non ci sarebbe stata storia !! Era velocissima
f1 2004 with slick tyres would be unbeatable
2004 looked 5x faster
The difference are the tyres.. The F2004 must breaking earlier and the corner speed is also slower because of the tyres
But also different downforce and weight levels
2004 mais veloz
2010 tem mais chão (chassi) e freia melhor
Se fosse em circuito mais travado,a diferença seria maior
That RB made the F2004 look like Bambi on ice
That's the reason the 2004 F1 cars were actually quicker on nearly every F1 track (until 2017, not even 2010) and that without slicks? You must have missed a lot.
@@markusplotz2259 Straight line speed
@@markusplotz2259 and as for the tyres, they had 2 suppliers competing at the time, whereas the Pirelli we use today are engineered to be subpar to spice up the strategical aspect of racing.
F2004..both legends