Ferrari SF-24 speculation

[Xyz22]

Concerned by what sounds like a RB lite. Going to be difficult to be on par with them if trying to develop a car that’s trying to emulate them.
Of course we might pull it out the bag, but seems unlikely at best.

It's quite clear their concept (chassis) is the best one in terms of possible aero development.

According to Cardile there was no major issue in how the suspensions work, but the car was lacking aero performance and stability due to the existing limitations (chassis, transmission, etc.)

Looking at McL i think Cardile is right. McL massive improvement came pretty much only from huge aero upgrades that were possible due to the decisions made on the chassis and other key internal components.

[DoctorRadio]

Concerned by what sounds like a RB lite. Going to be difficult to be on par with them if trying to develop a car that’s trying to emulate them.
Of course we might pull it out the bag, but seems unlikely at best.

According to Cardile there was no major issue in how the suspensions work, but the car was lacking aero performance and stability due to the existing limitations (chassis, transmission, etc.)

Do you have any direct quote to this?

[Xyz22]

Concerned by what sounds like a RB lite. Going to be difficult to be on par with them if trying to develop a car that’s trying to emulate them.
Of course we might pull it out the bag, but seems unlikely at best.

According to Cardile there was no major issue in how the suspensions work, but the car was lacking aero performance and stability due to the existing limitations (chassis, transmission, etc.)

Do you have any direct quote to this?

It's from his interview in Zandvoort. He specifically said that the decisions made (i.e. sticking with the same chassis concept of the F1 75) limited the aero development which is the main reason why they were not performing on RB level.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/vide ... 34202.html

Also during the actual press conference he really put the emphasis on the aero performance of the car. Can't find the source right now though.

My post on the subject from August viewtopic.php?p=1154420#p1154422

So the 676 project will likely involve:

- Completely new chassis with a different SIS placement (RB concept?)
- Revised front end (i guess this is a given considering air flows will be completely different?)
- Completely new rear end (this was officially confirmed by Cardile) which will likely involve the redesign of the rear suspension
- New gearbox case
- New floor and diffuser to adapt to the new concept
- New sidepods?

Hopefully they will be able to recycle all the beam wings and rear wings from this year, or at least some of them, considering how much of the car will be changed next year (budget cap).

Think i was quite on the money here (Nothing special about it, just following Cardile statements)

[AR3-GP]

I wouldn't expect anything less than a brand-new car in order to defeat the others so at least they understand the gravity of the situation and they are trying.

[Sevach]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-f ... /10557828/

One of the most open and technically minded talks i've ever seen from a tech chief.

[Xyz22]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-f ... /10557828/

One of the most open and technically minded talks i've ever seen from a tech chief.

He reiterated once again that he thinks the main issue of the SF 23 was related to aero.

[Vanja #66]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-f ... /10557828/

One of the most open and technically minded talks i've ever seen from a tech chief.

Nice article, he's open about some fairly obvious details that were discussed here both last year and early this year

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-f ... /10557828/

One of the most open and technically minded talks i've ever seen from a tech chief.

He reiterated once again that he thinks the main issue of the SF 23 was related to aero.

This concerns me, they kept having major drop in race pace on hardest tyres every weekend, compared to other Top 5 teams. Similar situation to last year, though more pronounced in 2023. It's not like RB has a magic formula while working the hardest tyres, Merc, Aston and most of all McLaren were regularly faster on those tyres since around Silverstone.

There was also some work on suspension internals prior to Austria which helped, so it's not like the suspension was always 100% spot on.

[FDD]

There was also some work on suspension internals prior to Austria which helped, so it's not like the suspension was always 100% spot on.

Also we can't know how open he was when he downplay the role of the suspension (regarding your opinion), maybe they are hiding.
We'll see

[Xyz22]

There was also some work on suspension internals prior to Austria which helped, so it's not like the suspension was always 100% spot on.

Also we can't know how open he was when he downplay the role of the suspension (regarding your opinion), maybe they are hiding.
We'll see

Yeah of course we don't know if they are hiding info about this, but even in the official italian transcription of the interview Cardile pretty much implied that they didn't see any major issues in terms of suspension kinematics. He said the suspension design is indeed really important in order to achieve the desired aero behaviour/performance.

[Venturiation]

Ferrari is underestimated, they were the best team that had a fast car with porpoising wich means the suspensions were OK
Mercedes was very bad with porpoising

[Venturiation]

[Vanja #66]

There was also some work on suspension internals prior to Austria which helped, so it's not like the suspension was always 100% spot on.

Also we can't know how open he was when he downplay the role of the suspension (regarding your opinion), maybe they are hiding.
We'll see

Yes, indeed, we only get what we are told officially. So we try to sort it out, compare with rumours and common sense

[FDD]

"Ferrari, through the 676 project, intends to make a clear change of direction. To do this, the new car will not be revolutionized but will undoubtedly be "different".
Ferrari has undergone a clear restyling, which was already announced during last season on several occasions. We are talking about a choice necessary to modify the imperfect aero-mechanical interaction of the SF-23. The intention aims to avoid "sagging" of the suspension and maximize the work of the diffuser, whose height relative to the ground must remain as stable as possible.
The bottom-diffuser combination is sensitive to various perturbations. It is clear, therefore, that the more stable the initial project data are kept, especially the height from the ground, the greater the "ease" will be in making the floor work well in all conditions.
Ferrari from this point of view it suffered several problems in the past world championship. In large-radius curves, where travel parameters and load transfer are maximum, the SF-23 "suffered" greater excursions in height. We are talking about a few millimeters but, considering the sensitivity of the vortex structure, they made the difference. The intent of the GES relating to the 676 project aims to minimize excursions of the fund, a task on which all the teams are working hard.
An aspect that will be resolved by making some changes to the geometry of the rear suspension which, as far as we know, will not be distorted in any case. In fact, from a kinematic point of view, the rear layout worked really well in traction.
The rear suspension dynamics changes Ferrari would have thought of miniaturizing the gearbox. By maintaining the length, its width measurement could be reduced. In this way there will be no variations regarding the wheel base (car wheelbase). A measure that can favor a broader development of the diffuser."

[LeveragedTiger]

"Ferrari, through the 676 project, intends to make a clear change of direction. To do this, the new car will not be revolutionized but will undoubtedly be "different".
Ferrari has undergone a clear restyling, which was already announced during last season on several occasions. We are talking about a choice necessary to modify the imperfect aero-mechanical interaction of the SF-23. The intention aims to avoid "sagging" of the suspension and maximize the work of the diffuser, whose height relative to the ground must remain as stable as possible.
The bottom-diffuser combination is sensitive to various perturbations. It is clear, therefore, that the more stable the initial project data are kept, especially the height from the ground, the greater the "ease" will be in making the floor work well in all conditions.
Ferrari from this point of view it suffered several problems in the past world championship. In large-radius curves, where travel parameters and load transfer are maximum, the SF-23 "suffered" greater excursions in height. We are talking about a few millimeters but, considering the sensitivity of the vortex structure, they made the difference. The intent of the GES relating to the 676 project aims to minimize excursions of the fund, a task on which all the teams are working hard.
An aspect that will be resolved by making some changes to the geometry of the rear suspension which, as far as we know, will not be distorted in any case. In fact, from a kinematic point of view, the rear layout worked really well in traction.
The rear suspension dynamics changes Ferrari would have thought of miniaturizing the gearbox. By maintaining the length, its width measurement could be reduced. In this way there will be no variations regarding the wheel base (car wheelbase). A measure that can favor a broader development of the diffuser."

This seems to be the reverse of Red Bull, who have prioritized an aero concept that functions at many different ride heights.

Not sure this will end well for Ferrari given how variable each track is and the relative impossibility of controlling ride height in all circumstances.

[scuderiabrandon]

"Ferrari, through the 676 project, intends to make a clear change of direction. To do this, the new car will not be revolutionized but will undoubtedly be "different".
Ferrari has undergone a clear restyling, which was already announced during last season on several occasions. We are talking about a choice necessary to modify the imperfect aero-mechanical interaction of the SF-23. The intention aims to avoid "sagging" of the suspension and maximize the work of the diffuser, whose height relative to the ground must remain as stable as possible.
The bottom-diffuser combination is sensitive to various perturbations. It is clear, therefore, that the more stable the initial project data are kept, especially the height from the ground, the greater the "ease" will be in making the floor work well in all conditions.
Ferrari from this point of view it suffered several problems in the past world championship. In large-radius curves, where travel parameters and load transfer are maximum, the SF-23 "suffered" greater excursions in height. We are talking about a few millimeters but, considering the sensitivity of the vortex structure, they made the difference. The intent of the GES relating to the 676 project aims to minimize excursions of the fund, a task on which all the teams are working hard.
An aspect that will be resolved by making some changes to the geometry of the rear suspension which, as far as we know, will not be distorted in any case. In fact, from a kinematic point of view, the rear layout worked really well in traction.
The rear suspension dynamics changes Ferrari would have thought of miniaturizing the gearbox. By maintaining the length, its width measurement could be reduced. In this way there will be no variations regarding the wheel base (car wheelbase). A measure that can favor a broader development of the diffuser."

This seems to be the reverse of Red Bull, who have prioritized an aero concept that functions at many different ride heights.

Not sure this will end well for Ferrari given how variable each track is and the relative impossibility of controlling ride height in all circumstances.

You are misinterpreting the artcle.

RB19 had a wide operating window meaning they could set the car up at different ride heights and not have as big drop-offs in performance or driveability. This is what you are referring to, not what the article is discussing.

What they are discussin is during the dynamic phase. The Red Bull had good platform control so during roll,pitch,yaw moments the platform stayed as stable as they desired it to be. So that meant at any given time the driver knew exactly how the car would react.

"...whose height relative to the ground must remain as stable as possible."