ing. wrote: ↑07 Mar 2023, 20:18
Sounds like the typical “peaky” floor design again requiring a suspension with compromised compliance to keep it working and still they have porpoising. In Italian, but basically the the car suffers from a weak front end and to gain some DF the car needed to be lowered. This triggered porpoising at an earlier than expected speed, the the suspension was stiffened and with that all the issues of drivability (oversteer) and poor tire life:
Hard to understand why they were not able to hit the ground running with a proper single-pillar RW when all they did was a warm over of last year’s car with the steering rack lowered (to where it should have been last year) and the lower SIS left as is—resulting in the silly little bumps and no development leeway for more undercut—while other teams basically revolutionized their cars.
Article is pretty interesting. Confirms what many have speculated here: the lack of front compromised the setup heavily. Therefore, the talks of "lack of correlation" talk about the fact that the virtual setup would have been 4 tenths quicker and also softer on the tyres. Wonder exactly just what the problem is with the front wing - too much flex, or just flat out bad correlation? Either way, by lowering the car too far, Ferrari had to stiffen suspension and that killed the tyres. My guess is the goal will be to run the car a little higher, allowing for a softer suspension that creates a similar level of downforce. If you believe that the fix will come before Australia, then there is no need to panic, hence the calmness of Vasseur in the media.
Also, name which team revolutionized their car??? Maybe Aston Martin, but even still it seems like an evolution of their second spec car last season, although more extreme. Every other team has evolved, same as Ferrari, but the characteristics of Ferrari's car has completely changed. Brand new suspension is hard to figure out.