Red Bull hope to 'punch above their weight'

Wednesday 7th January 2009

The cost cutting changes, the new aerodynamic rules, the return of slicks and the introduction of KERS should all benefit independent teams, according to Red Bull team principal Christian Horner.

The global economic crisis and the withdrawal of Honda forced the FIA to announce dramatic cost-cutting measures at the end of last season.

Horner believes the changes will make up for the lack the depth of manufacturer research and development at teams like Red Bull.

"For an independent team like Red Bull Racing, the rules do create a more level playing field, he Autosport:.

"With the restrictions that are coming into play, pretty much everyone has the same tools at their disposal.

"It's very easy to overlook that we are an independent team. We have got great strength of depth in people and the infrastructure is very strong. But as a non-works team, we lack the depth of manufacturer research and development and analysis. With the regulation changes, that becomes irrelevant.

"The regulation changes create opportunities and we will be looking to punch above our weight in 2009."

Red Bull's new car, the RB5, will be unveiled on February 9 and Horner is happy with the work they've done on it so far.

"We're happy with what we have learned. It has been mainly focused on tyre evaluations and we're happy with what we have done," he added.

"Sebastian (Vettel) has settled into the team very quickly. Obviously he had done some running for us at the beginning of 2008 and in September. We're very content with our winter testing programme and are looking forward to the new car."

Your Comments

race

"These guys are a true independant team, making the big boys look twice a few times with their approach. I hope they get some good results this season, they promise so much."

Bannor

"Editors - I have previously pointed out your lack of spelling ability, but it seems you also can't even cut-and-paste properly either. What does "make up for the lack the depth" mean (3rd paragraph of this article)? And in the text you were quoting (6th paragraph), it is correct! What is going on? Does NO-ONE check these things before publication? You are printing articles for the *entire world* to read - they should be of a higher standard - at *least* grammatically correct and without spelling errors."