Max Verstappen, Red Bull, Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez, 2018

Repeat of Verstappen’s clutch failure on Ricciardo’s car cost Red Bull a one-two

2018 Mexican Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by and

Red Bull lost a potential one-two in the Mexican Grand Prix because Daniel Ricciardo suffered a similar failure to the clutch problem which hit Max Verstappen’s car during Friday practice.

Team principal Christian Horner said Ricciardo’s car began to develop the problem early in the race. It forced him into retirement while he was running second behind Verstappen with 10 laps to go.

“It looks like a clutch issue that probably, looking at the data, started on lap six,” said Horner. “It looks similar to the issue that Max had on Friday so we need to obviously get it all back to the UK to understand it but that’s what’s looking like the culprit.”

In response to a question from RaceFans, Horner said the problem did not appear to be linked to Ricciardo’s start. Horner said Ricciardo slipped the clutch too much at the start, suffering wheelspin which cost him places to Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton.

Ricciardo left the track quickly following his fourth retirement from the last seven races.

“He’s had an immensely frustrating afternoon,” said Horner. “You can understand his emotions are running incredibly high.

“It’s gutting not just for him but for the whole team because we were looking at potentially a one-two finish which has enormous value to us. So it feels a bittersweet victory in that it’s fantastic for Max to have driven an outstanding race but I’m pretty confident that Daniel would have been able to hold Sebastian [Vettel] over those remaining laps.

“So you can understand his frustration and hope that this cloud that’s following him around lifts for the final two races.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2018 F1 season

Browse all 2018 F1 season articles

50 comments on “Repeat of Verstappen’s clutch failure on Ricciardo’s car cost Red Bull a one-two”

  1. Wow, they clearly tested how to sabotage the car on Friday to implement it on Sunday. The dasterdly lot!

    1. With two drivers as good as VER and RIC you need every sabotage scenario available to man to successfully breake the spirit.
      With the RB13 they tested them on VER and now they have found a new frontier with Danny.

      1. Stop comparing VERs, your idol, mishaps in 2017 with RICs 2018 mishaps. You look like a complete tool while at it. You’re trying to implant false memories inside our brains with your orange biased propaganda.

        1) “When Max has all these failures last year..” – Max did not have all of Dans 2018 failures.. at all. Here are the true figures: VER had 3 issues with quali which forced him to the (almost) back of the grid: 2 bc of grid penalties and 1 bc of a similar problem RIC experienced this year in HUN-quali, albeit the reason was different (crash of Stroll and weather versus crash of Giovinazzi and mechanical). RIC has had 5 (4 mechanical and aforementioned Hungary) in 2018.
        In his 2017 races VER had at most 4 DNFs bc of the car. I say at most bc prior to two of those DNF he did make contact with cars/kerbs or other weird looking stuff. But let’s just say 4. RIC has had 8 DNFs by no fault of his own in 2018. 6 car failures, 1 bc of a starting accident in which he had no blame and 1 bc of VER, who took him out in an unallowed manner.
        So how are those the same kind of (amount of) failures: 3 versus 5 in quali and 4 (tops) versus 8 in the race? They’re not.
        2) The reason why those remarks about overdriving the car were made, is bc of their respective driving (history). Whenever RICs had his DNFs, it was immediately clear it was something with the car. Max is a much more aggressive driver which frequenly resulted in contact with others (like I briefly mentioned by example at 1)).
        3) Besides the fact that VERs 2017 is incomparable with RICs 2018, RICs 2017 is already smeared with more bad luck than VERs. Those figures are: 5 grid penalties, (one of which coincided with VERs, but RICs was harsher), all due to tech-stuff. And 6 DNFs, all beyond his control. 5 car failures, 1 time bc of Max took him out, for which VER pleaded guilty, but took no penalty bc they’re from the same team. Now I should say that 2 of those DNFs came in the same weekend as in which RIC took grid penalties.
        So then the comparison in 2017 would be: 3 versus 3 in quali and 4 (VER) to 6 (RIC).
        4) On top of all this, RIC also had to deal (but still finished) with damage sustained, not through his fault, at the start in Italy’17, France’18 and no DRS in quali in Britain.

        In other words, both RICs 2017 and 2018 were a lot worse, they’re not even remotely close, than VERs 2017 in terms of ‘bad luck’, who’s had an almost clean ride through 2018 with only 1 or 2 (Silverstone) DNFs and 1 quali issue in Russia.

        Stop this orange biased rewriting of racing history. Just say ziggoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, hahhahaahahahaha.

        1. The unbiased history shows VER was the better racer over the last 2.5 years, both in stats and on track. Ziggo won’t change that the slightest bit. ;)

          This season if Max was forced to DNF, he was in front of Danny. If Danny had his DNF, he was typical behind Max. Even in qualifying Danny 1-lap-superman wasn’t able to withstand Max. Quite a few of Danny’s points this year where actual Max’ leftovers.

          1. Just the very fact you don’t even get ’cause and effect’ right, makes you look.. let’s say, simple.
            Ziggo doesn’t try to change your alleged fact, it in fact has made reality turned into it. Their, and yours apparently, reality that is.

            Your comment is your typical VER-FBoy reply to a fact-based comment. Just say VER was the better one, that’s it. So do you deny the events mentioned in my elaborate comment above? Hahahhahahahahahahah. You guys can’t go into the actual events bc that would make you face reality.

            This season if Max was forced to DNF, he was in front of Danny. If Danny had his DNF, he was typical behind Max. Quite a few of Danny’s points this year where actual Max’ leftovers. – This is a much used and beloved argument oranges like you love to throw into this discussion, every year. But tell me then, how did RIC outscore VER while having more DNFs at the same time? How are you gonna solve this mathematical conundrum? In 2016 he outscored VER once more in races both finished. So just stop this delusional, lying orange narrative, you won’t undo history with it, hahahhahahaha.
            Even in this year he was up in the first 60%. Only after the summerbreak, when RIC announced his departure, VER caught up. And the only thing that enabled him to do so, were the grid penalties of RIC (and ofcourse RIC now being left out of briefings and being treated as a sunk cost).

            Even in qualifying Danny 1-lap-superman wasn’t able to withstand Max – Wow, you really do know your numbers and sport, ahahahahahahahahahahha

            Ziggooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

  2. Will they let Gasly drive it?

    1. @johnmilk: Only if he can put in a clutch performance

      1. Surely he is capable of it, with his Honda experience @jimmi-cynic

  3. Verstappen demonstrated what an advantage it is to be at the front with no dirty air. I don’t see any cars ever retiring from p1 any more. P1 mostly dictates the pace these days, the car is less stressed and car drive fast easier.

    1. Remarkable how dirty that air was, as it even held back the cars behind when the gap was over 10 seconds large.

      1. Hhahahahahahahahahah +1
        kpcart, an orange, was ridiculing RICs pace a couple of articles ago (‘Verstappen repeats ..’); now that he has read the explanation of RICs compromised pace, he changed his narrative to continue his hate speech towards RIC and making VER look better than he is.

        Orange hate, orange propaganda. Can you say ziggooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo?????? Hahhaahahahhahhhahahahah.

    2. Interestingly fewer cars in front finish the race than cars not being in p1!

      Darrell Huff wrote a nice book about it ;)

      1. Maybe because theres only one car in front but 21 behind? ;)

    3. Apart from passing the whole field but the first 5 (and some of them several times) I guess that could be true. Still not sure what it has to do with Ricciardo having a clutch failure, since you use the clutch with every gear change Kpcart

      1. On the contrary, the clutch is only used at the start of the race and after a tyre change.

  4. Gasly wont drive it, Daniel was frustrated and should not have made those comments. But he will drive. I will be really disappointed if he doesn’t..

    1. I agree. I had to google his remarks as I didn’t know what he had said until now. But yeah, he’s understandably mad and frustrated, but if anything for me this weekend we saw that indeed in spite of DR leaving the team, they consider him family. They were so happy for him with his pole…so wanted him to have that vindication for some of his unreliability this season, so I don’t see DR trying to hand over the reins to Gasly and calling it a day with RBR. That would be a negative thing to do and not the way to end his tenure there, and I think he’d regret it…not to mention the contract thing and all…but I’m sure he’ll finish the season as normal.

      1. “They” may consider him family but Marko no longer does and we are seeing the results of his ire.
        I called this before the race BTW – they would screw with his clutch and I believe Dan hinted at the start the clutch was an issue.

  5. It amazing to note how close Verstappen is to Bottas in the World Drivers Championship. On the one hand, we have been witnessing the meteoric rise of one of F1’s prodigies and a potential World Champion. On the other, the struggles of a driver who has been trying so hard to match the heights of the colossus called Lewis Hamilton whilst also playing his wing-man.
    I think we should all take more than a moment to appreciate the achievements (improvements) of Max in since Monaco.

    1. True and Max is only 20 points back of Kimi too.

    2. There are no improvements since Monaco.

      1. He has been flawless like Hamilton post @rethla

        1. paeschli, you said the same thing a couple of articles ago this weekend. Others had already corrected you, but you seem not to be bothered by facts that show VERs-mistakes: (possibly) Silverstone, being slow in the rain in Hungary and crashing his car onto the kerbs in Texas. Thing is, he got away with them bc he retired with tech-issues and got a 2nd-place finish through a combi of being very, very lucky and a good drive.

          Ziggo.

    3. @webtel
      So just imagine where RIC would have been had it not been for his ‘bad luck’.

      1. There’s no need to imagine. When his bad luck occurred Danny was be somewhere behind Max, that’s a simple fact.

        Why don’t you subscribe to a nice VPN, log in on a dutch server, subscribe to Ziggo, and see for yourself?

        1. (..) that’s a simple fact. – That’s a simple and old lie.
          (..) that’s a simple fact. – Give us the data then.
          Ziggoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

          1. some people

  6. As far as I know, the gearbox and the hydraulics associated to it are 100% Red-Bull, correct?
    So although it seems “weird”, considering all the reliability issues they had in the past, that this weekend Renault was not to blame for…

    1. As far as I know, the gearbox and the hydraulics associated to it are 100% Red-Bull, correct?

      @bakano – I had a similar thought – is the clutch part of the engine, or, given the dual-clutch nature of F1 transmissions, is it part of the Red Bull-manufactured gearbox?

      Horner’s statement that the parts need to go back to the UK makes me think it’s the latter, if it were a Renault PU issue, it would have had to go to Viry (I think?).

      1. @phylyp,

        Per my understanding they only have 1 clutch, that has dual usage. It is mounted in the back of the engine but I’m still not 100% sure who is responsible for it (the engine manufacturer or the team). I do believe it is certain that the hydraulics to operate it are from Red-Bull…

        It also seems to me that Horner didn’t blame Renault and I’ve seen him quoted as even (mildly) praising them for this weekend.

        Nevertheless, just wanted to add that I find it normal that Renault’s PU on the Red Bulls is less reliable for these reasons:
        a) they have their own fuel (and I guess oil) and cooling configuration;
        b) they continue to use and older MGU-K;
        c) The Red-Bull is a much faster car so it also “pushes” the components harder, at least they are subjected to higher forces due to the faster pace (I guess that due to the competition in the midfield, the Renault team kind of pushes the engine hard too, but it is not “shaken” as harder since the car is 1~2 seconds slower per lap)

        1. But this offset by:
          ‘The Red-Bull is a much faster car so it’ will finish faster and has less time to break down ;)

          and indeed, transmission (gearbox & clutch) is Red Bull’s own; not part of the PU.

        2. @bakano – thanks for correcting me on the single clutch point. I had – wrongly – assumed that F1 used a dual-clutch transmission :-)

      2. How do you find out if Red Bull think Renault is to blame?
        Don’t worry, they’ll tell you.

        1. well if they do not tell it we know the answer i guess ;)

  7. @phylyp,

    Per my understanding they only have 1 clutch, that has dual usage. It is mounted in the back of the engine but I’m still not 100% sure who is responsible for it (the engine manufacturer or the team). I do believe it is certain that the hydraulics to operate it are from Red-Bull…

    It also seems to me that Horner didn’t blame Renault and I’ve seen him quoted as even (mildly) praising them for this weekend.

    Nevertheless, just wanted to add that I find it normal that Renault’s PU on the Red Bulls is less reliable for these reasons:
    a) they have their own fuel (and I guess oil) and cooling configuration;
    b) they continue to use and older MGU-K;
    c) The Red-Bull is a much faster car so it also “pushes” the components harder, at least they are subjected to higher forces due to the faster pace (I guess that due to the competition in the midfield, the Renault team kind of pushes the engine hard too, but it is not “shaken” as harder since the car is 1~2 seconds slower per lap)

  8. What the f are we doing here??!?
    Why hasnt anyone blamed Renault yet?

    1. I guess we can understand if Ricciardo doesn’t blame them.

      1. RIC knows he’s getting shafted and I expect when he gets away from RBR he will make it known.

        1. Mike, that’s my expectation too.

      2. @robbie
        Whenever VER is involved, ‘logical thinking’ is alien to this guy.

    2. I guess it proves that it is Red Bull themselves who source the clutches @todfod.

      1. @bascb

        Red Bull do make their own clutches… but every failure in the Red Bull camp is Renault’s fault.

        1. Maybe the current contract hands out pretty fines to comfort Renault when they do that without even a hint of reality so they refrained?

  9. “Blame Renault” is this season’s “Blame Honda”.
    Who will blame who next season?

    1. It will be a nice circle with Red Bull blaming Honda and McLaren blaming Renault

      1. McLaren blaming Renault would be like Williams blaming Mercedes.

  10. #IncompetenceAtItsBest

  11. Today it is normal to criticize people about being a fan of a driver. No matter the performance the jealousy is obvious. Either you are with us or against us. But looking at the facts, data and forget emotions it is clear who are the top drivers of this season. What also is obvious is that Max did not do any harm to the sport, he actually helped saving it in its worst times. So without Max (and others in the past) it would be a very, very boring sport to watch.

Comments are closed.