- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
"Historic English team".
Yes but we cant say for sure that these are concept problems. These are more like teething issues, which a top team shouldnt have, but if the pace is there after solving them then there's nothing lost yet for a championship fight. Also a lot of wing issues are likely due to aggressive weight saving rather than total incompetence. Can't really fault them there, plus they'll prbly get on top of those quite easily.ing. wrote: ↑08 Mar 2023, 18:07Agree… and disagree about the car concept. With almost 3/4 of a year to prepare (with clear targets and objectives) and with basically just a warmed over ‘22 car—same roll-hoop/inlet, same cooling scheme inside similar “cleaned-up” sidepods, same suspension layout with front push-rod, rear pull-rod—with only the steering rack lowered to provide lower CG, better aero management and maybe better bump-steer characteristics this car should have hit the ground running and chased the RBs hard. Not run around chasing “set-up” issues, floppy front and rear wings, toasted electrics and tires, etc.ryaan2904 wrote: ↑08 Mar 2023, 11:52To be honest, this team absolutely does deserve bashing. They have failed to deliver for years and even still they make silly mistakes. Imagine Lec losing both his CEs in one race. Potentially starting with a penalty on the 2nd race. Such gross incompetence should not happen inside a championship contender team.
What does not deserve bashing is the car concept & direction. It has potential and is limited by weak front end problems. That and porpoising.
So, yeah, maybe a legacy of the Binotto era—where no faults were seen or admitted—and maybe because of the TD vacuum left by the same Binotto, but not an impressive start by the team. Hope they get their act together soon for their sake.
They didn't let him go, he decided to go himself. He was offered a lower position and he refused. Seeing how the problem with Leclerc's car was inadequate wiring by design and all the problems with wings, seems like the car was pushed way too much towards weight saving than towards reliability. It was justified to do that for PU and other systems last year as Ferrari had a very big performance gap to fill, but for this car it isn't and can't be justified. He was leading the design himself, so "The Pharaoh" pushed in that direction.
Just don't understand why couldn't they iteratively make the car lighter after proving the change in the concept works. Seems like the team was too optimistic to do everything at once, aero change, lightweight parts and issues came up.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑09 Mar 2023, 09:24They didn't let him go, he decided to go himself. He was offered a lower position and he refused. Seeing how the problem with Leclerc's car was inadequate wiring by design and all the problems with wings, seems like the car was pushed way too much towards weight saving than towards reliability. It was justified to do that for PU and other systems last year as Ferrari had a very big performance gap to fill, but for this car it isn't and can't be justified. He was leading the design himself, so "The Pharaoh" pushed in that direction.
it's a bit semantics here... nobody would accept a demotion, especially if they can get the same job somewhere else.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑09 Mar 2023, 09:24They didn't let him go, he decided to go himself. He was offered a lower position and he refused. Seeing how the problem with Leclerc's car was inadequate wiring by design and all the problems with wings, seems like the car was pushed way too much towards weight saving than towards reliability. It was justified to do that for PU and other systems last year as Ferrari had a very big performance gap to fill, but for this car it isn't and can't be justified. He was leading the design himself, so "The Pharaoh" pushed in that direction.
After listening to team radio, it turns out the team was happy with how Leclerc managed the tyres, there were only a few moments when he was required to correct his driving in some corners. The period after Perez overtook him for P2 was driving to cover Sainz, hence the slower laps since he was more than 12s ahead. After the second pit stop, they were also managing the pace and team was happy with how Leclerc was treating the tyres. The only mention of degradation was "degradation on Hards is better than expected." So yeah, the car was simply lacking only behind RB in the race trim. I will listen to Sainz' radio and update.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑07 Mar 2023, 10:13So all in all, my feeling is that Ferrari overestimated Hards quite a bit, or they knowingly went "what the hell, lets race and see what happens" with Leclerc. Degradation on Softs for Leclerc was almost the same as Max' but the car was simply half a second slower and we know they were both pushing hard on those first laps. Sainz's race suggest we shouldn't take his laps and degradation of his tyres into account, he wasn't the reference driver in this race, at all...
Demotion was from the TP position where he wasn't doing a good job on the political side between teams. TD039 shouldn't have been allowed such as it happened, let alone the 2019 engine penalty that FIA never had enough to prove to go public. In the end, it turned out it was Binotto who refused to favour Leclerc even when it was obvious Sainz is not able to extract the best from the car in 2022. That's all good reasons to declare someone isn't doing a good job as TP so demotion was deserved.
sainz had a lot more bouncing on his car, so they couldnt had the same setup for both cars.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑09 Mar 2023, 10:04After listening to team radio, it turns out the team was happy with how Leclerc managed the tyres, there were only a few moments when he was required to correct his driving in some corners. The period after Perez overtook him for P2 was driving to cover Sainz, hence the slower laps since he was more than 12s ahead. After the second pit stop, they were also managing the pace and team was happy with how Leclerc was treating the tyres. The only mention of degradation was "degradation on Hards is better than expected." So yeah, the car was simply lacking only behind RB in the race trim. I will listen to Sainz' radio and update.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑07 Mar 2023, 10:13So all in all, my feeling is that Ferrari overestimated Hards quite a bit, or they knowingly went "what the hell, lets race and see what happens" with Leclerc. Degradation on Softs for Leclerc was almost the same as Max' but the car was simply half a second slower and we know they were both pushing hard on those first laps. Sainz's race suggest we shouldn't take his laps and degradation of his tyres into account, he wasn't the reference driver in this race, at all...
For Sainz the deg was worse than their model already at lap 6, but better than Hamilton. Sainz was complaining about deg himself at lap 10. Engineer is suggesting corrections all the time, especially on Hards. Sainz wasn't comfortable at all, complaining about degradation all the time, in second half of the race he seems to feel like his race is falling appart. His driving and setup hurt the tyres a lot more than Leclerc's car did. Seems like they were driving for two different teams, with Leclerc focused on fighting for podium and Sainz' feedback feels like he's scrapping for points with 5 other drivers.
Demotion was from the TP position where he wasn't doing a good job on the political side between teams. TD039 shouldn't have been allowed such as it happened, let alone the 2019 engine penalty that FIA never had enough to prove to go public. In the end, it turned out it was Binotto who refused to favour Leclerc even when it was obvious Sainz is not able to extract the best from the car in 2022. That's all good reasons to declare someone isn't doing a good job as TP so demotion was deserved.
