Ferrari F1-75

[Big Tea]

Forgive me, I should have been clearer. I meant on the floor analysis video.

If only a day had 48 hours instead of 24... With my full-time job, all the side-projects I'm involved in and just a few spare hours for private life, no time for much more...

Private life? Luxury…..

Don't know what you lot are crying about, us retired guys get NO holidays, No bank holidays and No sick leave.

[Stu]

If only a day had 48 hours instead of 24... With my full-time job, all the side-projects I'm involved in and just a few spare hours for private life, no time for much more...

Private life? Luxury…..

Don't know what you lot are crying about, us retired guys get NO holidays, No bank holidays and No sick leave.

[saviour stivala]

Re FERRARI speculation gains by ICE and ERS to be introduced in Miami. I do not mean to say that gains from both are not possible because gains from both might very much be possible. But what is being claimed (horsepower numbers as well as lap times) was not indorsed/confirmed by FERRARI. The only thing from FERRARI officially was that ‘’both drivers will have full power unit power output available at Miami’’. Which might well mean that at the first four races the ICE was was not ran at its full power output potential. On the ICE power unit part the claimed extra power push-out is being contributed to the power unit having reached the targets of maximum reliability, the planed seventh long run on the test bench without encountering serious reliability problems. If this claim is correct it means that FERRARI went into the season done four races with a power unit not yet validated on the test bed. Something very hard to believe. But it can be that FERRARI went into the first four races with at least the ICE not at full output potential. On FERRARI FANS site it is being claimed that Sainz’s number one ICE will resume to its FP1 –FP2 race weekends services.

[zioture]

[AR3-GP]

Re FERRARI speculation gains by ICE and ERS to be introduced in Miami. I do not mean to say that gains from both are not possible because gains from both might very much be possible. But what is being claimed (horsepower numbers as well as lap times) was not indorsed/confirmed by FERRARI. The only thing from FERRARI officially was that ‘’both drivers will have full power unit power output available at Miami’’. Which might well mean that at the first four races the ICE was was not ran at its full power output potential. On the ICE power unit part the claimed extra power push-out is being contributed to the power unit having reached the targets of maximum reliability, the planed seventh long run on the test bench without encountering serious reliability problems. If this claim is correct it means that FERRARI went into the season done four races with a power unit not yet validated on the test bed. Something very hard to believe. But it can be that FERRARI went into the first four races with at least the ICE not at full output potential. On FERRARI FANS site it is being claimed that Sainz’s number one ICE will resume to its FP1 –FP2 race weekends services.

Binotto has now said there will not be a new ERS in Miami

So just rear wing and ICE 2 for Charles at the current highest setting they have tested.

[saviour stivala]

Thanks for the latest information.

[aleks_ader]

Why you would introduce new ERS couple months early? It makes no sense. Remember there is only one chance to homologate new spec. Sometimes i dont understand you guys.

[saviour stivala]

The ‘new ERS’ the part/s of the power unit still with one more chance yet at development. The parts, MGU-K, ES, CE. Development/progress or not ‘K’ power, the only allowed source of additional power to the ICE crankshaft cannot be more than that stipulated by the rules. Only improvements in it’s capability to push power ‘max as stipulated’ for the full stipulated duration over a lap. For instance, I was reading that at Imola the 066/7 was clipping before the RBR did, meaning the red bull was deploying for longer. OK. The experts race reports I read said that was by chose from FERRARI side (mapping). And so it was also by chose from the Red Bull side. IF one believes the duration (start and stop of deploy) of both was the same. It means they both believed in advantage in the way they operated. Which means they both had to sacrifices one end of their deploy. And in turn that means they both can improve on their deployment.

[GrrG]

Ferrari: the skate under the bottom is anti porpoising

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-te ... /10255544/

[ing.]

Ferrari: the skate under the bottom is anti porpoising

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-te ... /10255544/

https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/amp ... 75-flo.jpg

[AR3-GP]

Ferrari: the skate under the bottom is anti porpoising

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-te ... /10255544/

https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/amp ... 75-flo.jpg

If this is the trick, it's crazy that it's taken Ferrari, and Mercedes still seem lost in the weeds, so long to run it. That RB floor has been doing the rounds since Bahrain.

[Stu]

It is not “the trick”, in fact if this skate edge is designed to run on the floor intentionally during straight line running it falls foul of the rules regarding sprung parts of the car being in contact with the track*. The real secret lies in a combination of factors to do with both the floor concept and suspension concepts.
The skate is shaped as it is such that it complies with the floor-edge-wing part of the regulations.

* which is why there were hurried rules written to allow (and then define) the tension struts connecting the chassis and floor that some teams are using - essentially they have to, otherwise the cars would be deemed to be operating outside the rules.

[johnny comelately]

Turn it UPP
DNA altering

[Sansovino]

It is not “the trick”, in fact if this skate edge is designed to run on the floor intentionally during straight line running it falls foul of the rules regarding sprung parts of the car being in contact with the track*. The real secret lies in a combination of factors to do with both the floor concept and suspension concepts.
The skate is shaped as it is such that it complies with the floor-edge-wing part of the regulations.

* which is why there were hurried rules written to allow (and then define) the tension struts connecting the chassis and floor that some teams are using - essentially they have to, otherwise the cars would be deemed to be operating outside the rules.

Not too sure of the rules but could they not claim the primary purpose being structural strength?
What about the skidblock rules could they claim such as well? (Probably reaching with this one as I assume the skidblocks have prescribed dimensions, size and location to prevent such a solution)

[mzso]

Any horse power gain from the ICE can only result if the ICE was run below its maximum output potential.

That seems to be the implication. Though I'm a tad doubtful of these claim. How would they even assess reliability accurately if they don't run it at full power?