A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Anti-Dive Geometry: To prevent excessive front-end dive, teams like Red Bull use a clever suspension geometry. They set up the front suspension so that when you hit the brakes, the front of the car doesn’t drop too much.
A.I. much or article pasted from somewhere? Basically not saying much except, yeah, that’s what anti-dive does and, no, not why Red Bull incline their wishbones—cleverly or otherwise.
Why It Matters: Keeping the front of the car higher during braking helps maintain stability. If the front end dives too much, the driver might lose confidence because the car becomes unpredictable. Imagine turning the steering wheel while the car is bouncing around—it’s not ideal!
This is all wrong: not only does anti-dive not stop bouncing but a couple of drawbacks of anti-dive geometry is that it reduces compliance over bumps while braking (more harshness and bouncing) and it reduces steering feel… hence why too much anti-dive is not desirable.
If you cared to read the first line, I said layman explanation!
Anti-Dive Geometry: To prevent excessive front-end dive, teams like Red Bull use a clever suspension geometry. They set up the front suspension so that when you hit the brakes, the front of the car doesn’t drop too much.
A.I. much or article pasted from somewhere? Basically not saying much except, yeah, that’s what anti-dive does and, no, not why Red Bull incline their wishbones—cleverly or otherwise.
Why It Matters: Keeping the front of the car higher during braking helps maintain stability. If the front end dives too much, the driver might lose confidence because the car becomes unpredictable. Imagine turning the steering wheel while the car is bouncing around—it’s not ideal!
This is all wrong: not only does anti-dive not stop bouncing but a couple of drawbacks of anti-dive geometry is that it reduces compliance over bumps while braking (more harshness and bouncing) and it reduces steering feel… hence why too much anti-dive is not desirable.
If you cared to read the first line, I said layman explanation!
If you read my post you’d know that what you posted was not pertinent to what RB and others are doing and just generally wrong, layman or otherwise.
Most decisions made for the SF-24 make perfect sense, except keeping the rear as pullrod.
Ferrari raised where the rod connects with the chassis compared to 23, you know what also would've raised the rod way higher, a pushrod...
I don't expect it to be a night and day difference, it's just one rod, Ferrari did it's best to minimize the "penalty" and the suspension arms still act as obstruction of that area to every team, but the other solution just makes way more sense.
Last edited by Sevach on 17 Feb 2024, 00:40, edited 1 time in total.
Most decisions made for the SF-24 make perfect sense, except keeping the rear as pullrod.
Ferrari raised where the rod connects with the chassis compared to 23, you know what also would've raised the rod way higher, a pushrod...
I don't expect it to be a night and day difference, it's just one rod Ferrari did it's best to minimize the "penalty" and the suspension arms still act as obstruction to every team, but the other solution just makes way more sense.
And the chassis won't be changed for next year so they are stuck with pull rod in 2025 too
Most decisions made for the SF-24 make perfect sense, except keeping the rear as pullrod.
Ferrari raised where the rod connects with the chassis compared to 23, you know what also would've raised the rod way higher, a pushrod...
I don't expect it to be a night and day difference, it's just one rod Ferrari did it's best to minimize the "penalty" and the suspension arms still act as obstruction to every team, but the other solution just makes way more sense.
It does not makes sense to switch to push rod rear with 2 years left in this regs cycle in my opinion. You'd be better off making compromises and focusing on bigger deficiencies. Then decide whether it is worth a change in 2026. Cardile himself said there were indeed aero benefits to using push rod rear but the added weight and lack of compliance was not worth it for them. If they can optimize the weight and work on compliance over the next 2 seasons, a switch in 2026 makes more sense, given it is still way to go.
Both Allson and Harman admitted the redesgin of the chassis and gearbox took up way too many recources and slowed the development rate down a lot.
Most decisions made for the SF-24 make perfect sense, except keeping the rear as pullrod.
Ferrari raised where the rod connects with the chassis compared to 23, you know what also would've raised the rod way higher, a pushrod...
I don't expect it to be a night and day difference, it's just one rod Ferrari did it's best to minimize the "penalty" and the suspension arms still act as obstruction to every team, but the other solution just makes way more sense.
It does not makes sense to switch to push rod rear with 2 years left in this regs cycle in my opinion. You'd be better off making compromises and focusing on bigger deficiencies. Then decide whether it is worth a change in 2026. Cardile himself said there were indeed aero benefits to using push rod rear but the added weight and lack of compliance was not worth it for them. If they can optimize the weight and work on compliance over the next 2 seasons, a switch in 2026 makes more sense, given it is still way to go.
Both Allson and Harman admitted the redesgin of the chassis and gearbox took up way too many recources and slowed the development rate down a lot.
To me it doesn't make sense because Ferrari went and changed the gearbox casing anyway. Why would you fiddle with the gearbox casing, and then not make the switch at that point.
To me Ferrari just gave PR excuses. I get it though. They had so many things they wanted to work on and there was a risk they could get lost with the change. They stuck to what they know rather than the unknown. That in of itself is a positive spin, but I suspect in a different more unlimited timeline they would have a push rod.
The SF 23 was not a slow car last year, beating the RB on pure pace more than any other entrant.
Don't think they maximised it in competition, took some considerable time to understand how to get out of TD039 predicament, ultimately until last iteration of the floor etc toward the end of 2023.
Looked like they were still "stroking" PU software in combating 2022 mechanical reliability issues during initial phase of 23 too.
Pure and absolute pace was generally close to RB.....their own assessment seemed to intelligently, and with diligence, list and target primary areas of concern that they appeared to have verified quite thoroughly during 2023.
Sidepod and associated aero map, plus optimisation of rear suspension that they acknowledged was good (concern seems to be solely underfloor aero impact/volume) looks to be a very very solid development in evolving their car.
Casual observance of "why haven't they gone pushrod " seems a very crude and naive analysis by way of determination and projection of performance that we've all yet to see.
They seem set to offer the most evolved challenge they can to RB, I feel there is good room for more optimistic expectation.
Charles, SF24, not so good as previous video with Carlos, but I think SF24 is more suited to Charles.
That makes me confident.
If they manage good in season development, I am optimistic that SF24 can gives us a good 2024 campagna.
Sorry but my phone is not good
Please watch another video
Thank You
I’ll also add, as has been said already, that Ferrari had among the best, if not the best traction and suspension compliance last year. They also seemed to solve the tyre wear issues towards the mid/end of last season. If those things outweigh the aero benefit then it’s a no brainer.
It's not clear, to me, why Ferrari still design the top air intake, on the top of driver's head, as small they can. All other teams started years ago to improve that part to get more air to cool the engine. I think that it is their purpose.
And if you improve that part you could free some space from the side of the car and have less drag/more aerodynamic efficiency with an more complex/extreme design.
I don't know, tell me if i'm wrong.
It's not clear, to me, why Ferrari still design the top air intake, on the top of driver's head, as small they can. All other teams started years ago to improve that part to get more air to cool the engine. I think that it is their purpose.
And if you improve that part you could free some space from the side of the car and have less drag/more aerodynamic efficiency with an more complex/extreme design.
I don't know, tell me if i'm wrong.
There is an inherit nature for fans to go against everything Ferrari do, which is bcoming very annoying to be quite frank. If you don't know the purpose don't comment on it unless it is a geniune question.
You first imply that other teams intake designs are an improvement and then you don't really know why. You can see why this is becoming annoying. Rather enquire first before saying others are better.
The smaller rollhoop intake improves the quality of air making it to the rear wing therefore increasing it's efficiency. Vanja has also suggested that it is a great way to recover some pressure aka reduce the amount of lift created by the engine cover bodywork
The purpose of my question was to understand the two philosophy behind the two different design of that intake. I am not a Ferrari fan, though my country is Italy, I think your bias is a little bit offensive to me.
My question hasn’t any second aim, I haven’t nothing against Ferrari, Mercedes or other teams. I’m just curious like everyone else.
I don’t want go off topic, my was a question on a thecnical aspect.
The purpose of my question was to understand the two philosophy behind the two different design of that intake. I am not a Ferrari fan, though my country is Italy, I think your bias is a little bit offensive to me.
My question hasn’t any second aim, I haven’t nothing against Ferrari, Mercedes or other teams. I’m just curious like everyone else.
I don’t want go off topic, my was a question on a thecnical aspect.
But you immediately implied they were doing somethign worse than other teams, then proceeded to ask. If you don't understand, first ask.
So, let me reformulate my question/s. Which are the technical advantages of a thin top intake chosen by Ferrari engineers?
Are there any relations with a bigger top intake and thinner car sides?
Thank you for your patience with a novice.
