Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[mzso]

I don't think that the idea behind asking all teams before bringing reliability upgrades is to ask for their permission. If so, of course all of them will at all times say no, in order to prevent the opponents to get more competitive.

I'd imagine it's rather to inform them and make sure that the said upgrade actually is meant for reliability reasons. If in the opinion of the teams the upgrade is more of a performance one rather than reliability, they must argue that and then say that they're not agreeing with the upgrade. At least that's how I think the process would more or less look like.

I think it's in FIA's power to deny it. Sending them to teams is a means of getting opinions. The probably don't have the knowledge to judge on their own.
Anyway whatever the process is, relying on it seems really chancy.

[codetower]

and it is likely that the second power unit of the year will be able to debut in four or five races, once reliability has been secured with a specific evolution of the engine”

That's a tad outlandish because of the engine freeze. It would require them planning on submitting data to the FIA and the other teams on a reliability update, which might ultimately be denied as far as I know.

I don't think that the idea behind asking all teams before bringing reliability upgrades is to ask for their permission. If so, of course all of them will at all times say no, in order to prevent the opponents to get more competitive.

I'd imagine it's rather to inform them and make sure that the said upgrade actually is meant for reliability reasons. If in the opinion of the teams the upgrade is more of a performance one rather than reliability, they must argue that and then say that they're not agreeing with the upgrade. At least that's how I think the process would more or less look like.

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

[LM10]

That's a tad outlandish because of the engine freeze. It would require them planning on submitting data to the FIA and the other teams on a reliability update, which might ultimately be denied as far as I know.

I don't think that the idea behind asking all teams before bringing reliability upgrades is to ask for their permission. If so, of course all of them will at all times say no, in order to prevent the opponents to get more competitive.

I'd imagine it's rather to inform them and make sure that the said upgrade actually is meant for reliability reasons. If in the opinion of the teams the upgrade is more of a performance one rather than reliability, they must argue that and then say that they're not agreeing with the upgrade. At least that's how I think the process would more or less look like.

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

Hmm, now I’m confused even more.

So does the article say that Ferrari wants to bring the second PU of the season already in the 4th or 5th race (after having made sure that reliability is OK), but the same PU version? Why do they need to bring a new one then? Different installation in order to make better use of specific parts of the PU which first needed to be tested for reliability? That’s the only wild guess I have right now to explain the reason behind bringing a new PU of the same iteration.

Or do they mean that the PU will be operated in highest engine modes only after 4-5 races and because of that they call it the second PU of the year? That’s an even wilder guess.

[AR3-GP]

I don't think that the idea behind asking all teams before bringing reliability upgrades is to ask for their permission. If so, of course all of them will at all times say no, in order to prevent the opponents to get more competitive.

I'd imagine it's rather to inform them and make sure that the said upgrade actually is meant for reliability reasons. If in the opinion of the teams the upgrade is more of a performance one rather than reliability, they must argue that and then say that they're not agreeing with the upgrade. At least that's how I think the process would more or less look like.

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

Hmm, now I’m confused even more.

So does the article say that Ferrari wants to bring the second PU of the season already in the 4th or 5th race (after having made sure that reliability is OK), but the same PU version? Why do they need to bring a new one then? Different installation in order to make better use of specific parts of the PU which first needed to be tested for reliability? That’s the only wild guess I have right now to explain the reason behind bringing a new PU of the same iteration.

Or do they mean that the PU will be operated in highest engine modes only after 4-5 races and because of that they call it the second PU of the year? That’s an even wilder guess.

They cannot make hardware changes to my knowlege (sans reliablity). PU2 is likely just mapped different.

[codetower]

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

Hmm, now I’m confused even more.

So does the article say that Ferrari wants to bring the second PU of the season already in the 4th or 5th race (after having made sure that reliability is OK), but the same PU version? Why do they need to bring a new one then? Different installation in order to make better use of specific parts of the PU which first needed to be tested for reliability? That’s the only wild guess I have right now to explain the reason behind bringing a new PU of the same iteration.

Or do they mean that the PU will be operated in highest engine modes only after 4-5 races and because of that they call it the second PU of the year? That’s an even wilder guess.

Yeah, it is a little confusing. The article wasn't posted and I couldn't find the original. 4-5 races to introduce a new engine does seem a bit early, especially in a 22 race season. I suppose they could introduce them a little early and begin cycling them through the practices, etc. I would imagine most teams will end up taking a penalty at some point. It's a looong season this year.

As far as the "evolution" part, could they mean the hybrid? That part is not frozen until September if I'm not mistaken. Maybe they will be testing some new bits there.

[AR3-GP]

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

Hmm, now I’m confused even more.

So does the article say that Ferrari wants to bring the second PU of the season already in the 4th or 5th race (after having made sure that reliability is OK), but the same PU version? Why do they need to bring a new one then? Different installation in order to make better use of specific parts of the PU which first needed to be tested for reliability? That’s the only wild guess I have right now to explain the reason behind bringing a new PU of the same iteration.

Or do they mean that the PU will be operated in highest engine modes only after 4-5 races and because of that they call it the second PU of the year? That’s an even wilder guess.

Yeah, it is a little confusing. The article wasn't posted and I couldn't find the original. 4-5 races to introduce a new engine does seem a bit early, especially in a 22 race season. I suppose they could introduce them a little early and begin cycling them through the practices, etc. I would imagine most teams will end up taking a penalty at some point. It's a looong season this year.

As far as the "evolution" part, could they mean the hybrid? That part is not frozen until September if I'm not mistaken. Maybe they will be testing some new bits there.

Cycling the engines in is about using the high performing engine on the circuits which reward it, and using the older engine on the circuits that are not power sensitive. That way you optimize the engine usage.

[mzso]

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

Well, matteosc says the exact opposite . (I assume you both speak Italian)

Only one of you can be right.

[codetower]

I don't believe (I may be mistaken) that the article meant that Ferrari were bringing in a "reliability update" rather once they've established the reliability of the current engine after a few races (how much wear and tear, what they expect, etc), then they will introduce the 2nd engine of the year for "this evolution" of the engine (2021 -> 2022 engine).

Well, matteosc says the exact opposite . (I assume you both speak Italian)

Only one of you can be right.

Haha! I may be completely wrong. Unfortunately I don't work at Ferrari so I'm just making assumptions. Take what I say with a pinch of salt

The translation IS correct, but personally I just cant imagine they are already bringing in "reliability" updates so soon. And masking performance upgrades as "reliability" will surely bring some resistance from Mercedes/Honda/Renault. The article might just be speculating that if there ARE any reliability updates needed, they would come after the 4th or so race.

[Polite]

Ferrari is working this way till the beginning of the PU era: the hardware is not running in the max settings possible in the few first races to address any failure. Then with the second PU of the year, they set it in the normal/full operational mode (as tested indoor) and the PU 1 of the year become the PU for future fridays.

[AR3-GP]

Ferrari split turbo rumours are officially dead. Mark Hughes reports that it is a normal turbo. Mark is a paddock insider so his remarks will have come directly from Ferrari in my estimation.

Nice article about the Ferrari PU here: https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... LatoL.html

[mzso]

Ferrari split turbo rumours are officially dead. Mark Hughes reports that it is a normal turbo. Mark is a paddock insider so his remarks will have come directly from Ferrari in my estimation.

Nice article about the Ferrari PU here: https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... LatoL.html

Nonsense... A dude saying something, definitely doesn't mean anything is official.
A photo will be decisive.

[LM10]

Ferrari split turbo rumours are officially dead. Mark Hughes reports that it is a normal turbo. Mark is a paddock insider so his remarks will have come directly from Ferrari in my estimation.

Nice article about the Ferrari PU here: https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... LatoL.html

Nonsense... A dude saying something, definitely doesn't mean anything is official.
A photo will be decisive.

It will surely have more value than usual articles as it is on the official F1 website.

[timoth]

Ferrari split turbo rumours are officially dead. Mark Hughes reports that it is a normal turbo. Mark is a paddock insider so his remarks will have come directly from Ferrari in my estimation.

Nice article about the Ferrari PU here: https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... LatoL.html

Most of the things he wrote in this article are from an article on formu1a.uno which was written 8 or 9 months ago. So many things may have changed in the last 9 months and for sure it's not official just because it's in f1 website.
Of course I'm not saying it's not split turbo, all I'm saying is that we don't know. It's just speculation based on an article written 9 months ago.

[DarthPlagueisTheVise]

[MtthsMlw]

Looks split to me