Ferrari SF23

[Fede90]

It’s crucial to see how the car can face the turns kerbs. Last year, after DT39, Ferrari lost his versatility and it was pretty stiff.

[deadhead]

My only worry is that this philosophy was developed for a set of rules that are no longer there.. it worked brilliantly until the TD kicked in last year and I’m guessing things are even more extreme with this year’s changes, so sticking to original design but for a different rule set might be the wrong choice, but we shall see.

Think about how far ahead they would’ve been last year with the engine working at full capacity and without the mid season rule changes…

I hope I’m wrong.

Photo from the back

https://ibb.co/3pGQMvW

I remember 2004 well, when the press and Scarbs said the F2004 was disappointing and that a car with so little development would have little chance against the extremely advanced McLaren, Renaults or the "ingenious" Williams with its Walrus nose. When the F2004 then drove everything into the ground it was quite embarrassing.... once again it had been shown that knowledgeable and continous development is the key to success.


Ferrari's problem in 2022 was two things - the suspension, which was the same as in previous years and not adapted to the requirements of the ground effect cars. They thought making it extremely stiff was enough. It wasn't! The other thing was that the TD39 practically required higher ride heights. The F1-75, with its low venturi tunnels, was designed to maximize ground effect. The Red Bull, on the other hand, had higher venturi channels and functioned more like a car with a flat floor and therefore worked much better with higher ground clearance. Ferrari couldn't improve much on this during the season because everything on the car was mounted in such a way that the venturi tunnels couldn't be made higher. This would have required a completely new monocoque and practically everything would have had to be rebuilt. That's not possible during a season. It is the suspension, the underbody and the diffuser that determine with which ground clearance a F1 car works best. Here Ferrari had every opportunity to rework exactly this area, which we haven't seen anything about yet. So it is, sorry for the expression, complete nonsense to draw such conclusions without having seen the parts that determine it (and even then it is hard to do so just by looking at them). Ferrari's philosophy is and was based, relatively speaking, on the following things:

to "drive" the underbody and diffuser in the best possible way by supplying the rear wing and beamwing with clean air in the best possible way, which is achieved by an extremely small and narrow airbox and engine cover

to have the lowest possible center of gravity in order to keep the negative influence of lateral load changes on the aero platform and the tires as low as possible

Since the Ground Effect has been reduced in 2023, Ferrari's philosophy to maximize the performance of the rear wing and beamwing assembly is not "from yesterday". Even more so because the rear wing and beamwing assembly have a major influence on the performance of the diffuser and underbody. The new front wing concept, which in turn also strengthens its performance, is certainly not negative when the ground effect is reduced. The suspension was completely renewed. So Ferrari obviously deliberately tried to maximize strengths and eliminate weaknesses. The fact that the F1-75 was the fastest car in terms of pure, raw speed even after the introduction of the TD39 also shows how nonsensical the statement is that the philosophy is outdated.

However, Ferrari's problem in 2022 was that the whole car was built and designed to maximize the ground effect. This was done with a very low "roof" of the floor that was designed so that you could drive permanently with a lower floor level thanks to a "flexible" T-tray and underbody. Everything on the underbody was designed with this in mind. When the TD39 was introduced, this philosophy was thrown out of its working window and nothing could be changed because the tunnels could not be made higher. Red Bull had a philosophy from the beginning based on "higher" tunnels and higher ground clearance. They were able to fix that with the new car without any problems. So it's stupid to say that Ferrari's philosophy was developed for a regulation that no longer exists. For one thing, neither Venturi tunnels nor diffusers have really been seen, and Ferrari has certainly adapted them accordingly, just as they have finally adapted the suspension to the requirements of a ground effect car. The rest of Ferrari's philosophy is very good with the current as with the old regulations, the Rear and Beamwing drives the underfloor the most. And the improvements that have been introduced strongly suggest that these are precisely those knowledgeable continual developments that usually win world championships(even if I do not want to imply here that Ferrari will win the title-but the development and philosophy of the car certainly does not exclude it).

What makes Scarbs' statements even more stupid (sorry Scarbs, but its a fact!) is that neither the Red Bull nor the new Mercedes has been seen yet! Even if you see the new cars it's hardly possible to determine their performance only by their looks ubd development, but to say something like that without having seen them at all - that's nonsense. At best!

Thank you for sharing more insight on their philosophy!

I wasn't really making a statement, but rather experessing an uneducated concern..

[Giando]

Pictures are coming in...

[SmallSoldier]

Pictures by Federico Basile

[organic]

Pictures are coming in...

https://postimg.cc/ctG9g5Gc

https://postimg.cc/8jHKcHKh

They have made the chassis deeper there for the purpose of suspension geometry?

[Giando]

Pictures are coming in...

https://postimg.cc/ctG9g5Gc

https://postimg.cc/8jHKcHKh

They have made the chassis deeper there for the purpose of suspension geometry?

Yes, and that's what i am trying to discover+demonstrate since yesterday (there are many posts about that in previous pages)

[Vanja #66]

Pictures are coming in...

Good spots today, looks to me like front arms are raised and rear arms lowered. Bit like RB18 anti dive geometry. I'm sure this suspension geometry was worth extending the tub and blocking the floor splitter.

[Henk_v]

Well, looking at the side-by-side comparison, it looks more like they raised the monocoque locally than that they made bulges, or both. The splitter looks much taller on the 23 car.

[FDD]

Pictures are coming in...

https://postimg.cc/ctG9g5Gc

https://postimg.cc/8jHKcHKh

They have made the chassis deeper there for the purpose of suspension geometry?

Yes, and that's what i am trying to discover+demonstrate since yesterday (there are many posts about that in previous pages)

Do You have picture of inlets on diffuser fences?

[Andi76]

I am sure that there is a reason for this positioning, but it is not clear to me how it would reduce losses and improving airflow.

In pretty much the same way a vortex generator does.

After seeing the analysis of KYLE.ENGINEERS here, I believe that the exposed lower impact structure is not an advantage. Maybe it would have hurt more in the floor, or maybe it was too expensive to change its position.

It was just an idea and a possibility
If Kyle says that, then it's true. His F1 experience leaves no doubt about it.

[Xwang]

Is it possible that lower front arm attached points are indeed keel attach points as they used to be at the beginning of 2000s?

[matteosc]

In pretty much the same way a vortex generator does.

After seeing the analysis of KYLE.ENGINEERS here, I believe that the exposed lower impact structure is not an advantage. Maybe it would have hurt more in the floor, or maybe it was too expensive to change its position.

It was just an idea and a possibility
If Kyle says that, then it's true. His F1 experience leaves no doubt about it.

Absolutely agree with you. The video is very interesting, btw.

[Andi76]

After seeing the analysis of KYLE.ENGINEERS here, I believe that the exposed lower impact structure is not an advantage. Maybe it would have hurt more in the floor, or maybe it was too expensive to change its position.

It was just an idea and a possibility
If Kyle says that, then it's true. His F1 experience leaves no doubt about it.

Absolutely agree with you. The video is very interesting, btw.

I'm going to check it out right now! As always in the shower after work

[Henk_v]

Still looking at the side-by-side pictures. I cant decide if they slimmed the monocoque front of the bib (which would make great sense for weight saving) an that left the bulges for the suspension or if they have the same monocoque height with added bulges..

[gordonthegun]

Change in rear brakes cooling intake: