Red Bull RB10: First pictures

2014 F1 cars

Red Bull RB10, Jerez, 2014

The Red Bull RB10 has a lot to live up to – its four predecessors were all world champions. Here are the first pictures of the new car.

See pictures of all the 2014 F1 cars

2014 F1 cars


Browse all 2014 F1 cars articles

Advert | Go Ad-free

78 comments on Red Bull RB10: First pictures

  1. Bullfrog (@bullfrog) said on 28th January 2014, 9:07

    Not another one. At least they tried to conceal it. Lovely sleek design apart from that.
    Very little hope left now, but it’s resting on Marussia. I think we can count the Caterham out, after what its boss said about it!

  2. WarfieldF1 (@warfieldf1) said on 28th January 2014, 9:34

    So the solutions so far:-
    Lotus = Tusk nose. As it seems to be unique, it will either be a “Brawn” or a “Lotus under sidepod exhaust”
    Ferrari and Mercedes= Non “Bulbous Bow/ Finger” with “fancy” camera mounting. The merc interpretation looks more coherent and visually pleasing but thats no reason to think it will be faster than the FIAT. The Merc rear looks super compact.
    Others so far including Red Bull = variations on the “Bulbous Bow/ Finger”, with standard camers mountings from those i have seen so far.
    Nice to see such wide differences of approach, BUT……..who’s right??

    • In my opinion it does look like Ferrari and Mercedes have gone down the wrong route. They have spent years trying to raise their noses to get better airflow under the car and then Ferrari and Mercedes block off a significant amount of airflow. Unless they have some other secret at the rear end then it looks like they have made a mistake. This is more apparent when you consider that the Ferrari looks almost identical to a Mclaren Concept picture which was released a while ago. Mclaren obviously thought of this approach and then decided against it, couple that with Adrian Newey doing much the same as Mclaren and Lotus clearly showing that underside airflow is massively important to them too, it looks like the ugly solution could be the correct one. (Although personally I think the Ferrari looks like the ugliest of the lot which is odd when Merc can do such a nice design using the same concept).

      • spoutnik (@spoutnik) said on 28th January 2014, 17:40

        I for one would not be so sure about that as there are many ways to gain an advantage (fuel consumption, different rear airflow, less downforce, reliability,..).
        I would not be surprised if an advantage were to unfold with the way Ferrari and Mercedes did interpret the rules and more generally for exotic designs.
        As for the ugliest car, my vote definitely goes to Caterham (keeping its crown) which seems to develop some skills in making a terrible design :)

      • spoutnik (@spoutnik) said on 28th January 2014, 17:41

        I for one would not be so sure about that as there are many ways to gain an advantage (fuel consumption, different rear airflow, less downforce, reliability,..).
        I would not be surprised if an advantage were to unfold with the way Ferrari and Mercedes did interpret the rules and more generally for bizarre designs.
        As for the ugliest car, my vote definitely goes to Caterham (keeping its crown) which seems to develop some skills in making a terrible design :)

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 29th January 2014, 11:50

        That picture you might have seen was not from McLAren @lee1. It was a photoshop from someone who tried to predict different nose shapes that could be legal, made on a McLaren but it could have been any car. And as that looked almost exactly like what Ferrari did I wouldn’t be surprised if they did have a bit of inside info to go by.

        On a different note, the Mercedes does look like Ferrari, and does have some similarities (Camera mount idea), but the nose itself is likely different, in a sense its going on the same idea as the Lotus nose.

  3. Sharon H (@sharoncom) said on 28th January 2014, 9:48

    Looks fast, as usual. At least they attempted to hide the front protrusion.

  4. Garns (@) said on 28th January 2014, 10:31

    It looks great, and so does the Mercedes, certainly the best 2 looking cars IMO. Ferrari also looks pretty good as well but nose not a asthetic as these two…………… lets just get them on the track!!

  5. WimBR said on 28th January 2014, 10:46

    I’m OK with the nose. Its more bulbous nosetip may well have some fuel-saving intent and its vertical front may just be able to split the incoming airflow more efficiently (but I’m no aerodynamicist). Moreover, I think it is one of the more elegant solutions to date.
    But what does intrigue me is the back of the car as seen in the three-quarter front shot: is it me or is there some tube-like bodywork at the bottom that suggests a channel through which something (other than exhaust gasses of course) is blowing over the floor? Has Newey found some other airflow to use down there?

  6. there seems to be a lot of missing details on the RB10… Cameras/monkey seat wing etc… The back end is tiny, (so is the W05 very tight packaging on both) I wouldn’t be surprised if the track going RB10 is quite different to this…

    • Also there seems to be another iteration of the letterbox slot ( visible just above the Total decal on the front corner shot)

  7. In a tribute to Vettel Red Bull have incorporated is famous finger into the car design!

  8. Maciek (@maciek) said on 28th January 2014, 13:58

    At first glance it looks quite conservative by Newey’s standards – though there’s something going on under that nose – in the head-on shot the area’s greyed out.

  9. Christopher (@twiinzspeed) said on 28th January 2014, 14:35

    Based on all the pictures so far, my order (opinion) of beauty is as follows.
    Mercedes is the best looking with Ferrari just behind, after that, I think Mclaren have done a good job with the bulbous nose concept. The Force India and the Red Bull have done well trying to hide/ minimize the protrusion. I am withholding judgement on the Lotus until I see more of it. But I do think Lotus have done a great job of interpreting/ pushing the rules vs most of the others. All the other cars not mentioned are basically ugly. I really hope the Ferrari and Mercedes design ends up being fast. That way, most everyone will improve the looks of their cars as the season progresses. I don’t get why the FIA can not write the regs to prevent this kind of crappy looking noses. I mean they had YEARS to know this was coming right?? Oh well, I am still totally siked that the season is under way!

  10. DaveD (@daved) said on 28th January 2014, 14:41

    OK, I’m dubbing this one “The Redbull Pelican”. From the front, it looks like a pelican’s bill full of fish LOL

  11. Byron said on 28th January 2014, 15:45

    What if the tip were tip to break off during the race and somehow improve performance? would it be dq’d for failing to comply to rules? Whats if ‘its been designed to break off easily and classified as crash structure, crumple zone area?

  12. Has anyone else noticed that the red bull is the only car without camera mounts on it?

  13. spoutnik (@spoutnik) said on 28th January 2014, 17:59

    I just read that Newey said he was not fan of the low nose profiles. He said it could be fare more dangerous if a driver had to dive under the rear of another… Quite the worst scenario I agree with him!

  14. @mads
    defiantly different, i knew rb10 would be different to the str9

    i do like the look

  15. johnny stick said on 28th January 2014, 19:28

    I think by keeping the bulbous part forward of the wing mounts, there is less aero detriment. also, the 3/4 front view shows good flow thru the nose in the turns, so should perform good. Whereas the Ferrari must loss a lot in the turns. I think the bulbous nose could help by dumping the down force on the straights by stalling the floor, but allowing clean air around the sides in the turns.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.