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.
The overbite does not make much sense without completely new sidepods.
The overbite comes with more aggressive drop or gullies starting more upstream. Also the narrow inlet for more outwash surface. If Ferrari have the same size inlet, and no sidepod change, then I doubt the overbite will be 2.5 tenths improvement.
ringo wrote:The overbite does not make much sense without completely new sidepods.
The overbite comes with more aggressive drop or gullies starting more upstream. Also the narrow inlet for more outwash surface. If Ferrari have the same size inlet, and no sidepod change, then I doubt the overbite will be 2.5 tenths improvement.
Overbite isn’t 2.5 tenths alone, they are making changes to the floor as well, and there’s probably more than just the sidepod inlet in the sidepod work. 1.5 tenths are from efficiency and 1 tenth is from downforce. The sidepods are more efficiency than other stuff, might even generate some lift.
Again according to the article and what they talked about before, the first iteration of the inverted inlet wasn’t good, they iterated on it and made changes that allowed it to work, so likely the inlet comes with a lot of other stuff.
The overbite does not make much sense without completely new sidepods.
The overbite comes with more aggressive drop or gullies starting more upstream. Also the narrow inlet for more outwash surface. If Ferrari have the same size inlet, and no sidepod change, then I doubt the overbite will be 2.5 tenths improvement.
The entire upgrade package is said to be worth around 2.5 tenths, which includes a new floor and bodywork. The article made it clear enough.
If the problem of the overbite design is the "leakage" from sidepod inlet at high speed going in a critical area (and to minimize it RB used two small inlet) maybe Ferrari can try to direct it in the bypass duct
The Quest for Perfect Aerodynamics: Ferrari and Red Bull Compared
In the world of Formula 1, innovation and aerodynamic optimization are daily endeavors. Recently, engineer Cardile commented on the new air intake solutions adopted by Red Bull, comparing them to those currently used by Ferrari. This comparison has sparked a series of speculations and forecasts, some based on professional analysis, while others are purely hypothetical.
The debate mainly focuses on the effectiveness of Red Bull’s so-called “shark mouth belly” and whether Ferrari should consider adopting a similar approach. The question is whether such aerodynamic adjustments truly represent Red Bull’s competitive advantage and whether it is worthwhile for Ferrari to follow suit.
This year, Red Bull introduced an even more extreme configuration of the air intakes than in the past, with a cross-section that appears slimmer and more optimized. This solution, featuring an L-shaped slit, seems to divide the upper surface of the belly, which is descending, from the lower part that extends above the car’s floor, thus influencing the airflow towards the rear.
Detailed analysis reveals that, despite visual differences, the cross-sections of the bellies of Red Bull and Ferrari have similar concepts. Both solutions seem to work with significant three-dimensionality, managing the airflow in three fundamental components: the upper, the lower, and the lateral.
In conclusion, while Red Bull has certainly optimized the air intake section, it cannot be considered a revolution, but rather an evolution of existing solutions. Ferrari, in evaluating whether or not to follow this direction, must carefully consider whether such changes will lead to a significant improvement in performance or if it is merely a chase after a supposed aerodynamic “Holy Grail.”
If you want, here is the full video is in Italian, but just turn on the subtitles and the English translation to watch it
