Ferrari Project 678 Speculation Thread

[catent]

Fuel is a factor. Theoretical energy density and the actual energy extracted are different things. The latter depends a lot on the chemistry of the fuel. How well it vaporizes, how fast it burns, and the temperature of the flame.

Is it a concrete fact the biofuels can't match synth fuel in terms of performance? Like, cant there be additives added in the blend to improve this metric?

The above comment answered your question. The right additives can give bio-fuels properties that may make them combust better than synthetic fuels do, which can lead to much higher performance. Lower density fuel might also have some performance benefits, since more, less energy dense fuel could potentially help control temperatures and in turn allow the teams to run leaner.

Remember that the current rules don't have a fuel flow limit. They have an energy flow limit. If your fuel is of lower density, you can increase fuel flow to compensate, but you also have to carry more fuel at race start.

What will differentiate the different fuels from each other is not how dense they are, but what percentage of the potential energy the teams manage to extract from it. Bio fuels and synthetic fuels are likely to have different advantages and drawbacks. Which ends up being better remains to be seen.

Thank you very much for this post. I found it quite informative.

[ryaan2904]

Fuel is a factor. Theoretical energy density and the actual energy extracted are different things. The latter depends a lot on the chemistry of the fuel. How well it vaporizes, how fast it burns, and the temperature of the flame.

Is it a concrete fact the biofuels can't match synth fuel in terms of performance? Like, cant there be additives added in the blend to improve this metric?

The above comment answered your question. The right additives can give bio-fuels properties that may make them combust better than synthetic fuels do, which can lead to much higher performance. Lower density fuel might also have some performance benefits, since more, less energy dense fuel could potentially help control temperatures and in turn allow the teams to run leaner.

Remember that the current rules don't have a fuel flow limit. They have an energy flow limit. If your fuel is of lower density, you can increase fuel flow to compensate, but you also have to carry more fuel at race start.

What will differentiate the different fuels from each other is not how dense they are, but what percentage of the potential energy the teams manage to extract from it. Bio fuels and synthetic fuels are likely to have different advantages and drawbacks. Which ends up being better remains to be seen.

Well said! Thanks for the answer

[PlatinumZealot]

So Ferrari is the only one with bio fuel and all other PU manufacturers are going with synthetic fuel ?

Doesn’t really matter. Only thing that matters is power density and how it detonates.

Bio-fuels typically have a lower energy density than e-fuels. This is important because of the new energy flow limit (3000MJ/hr iirc). The synthetic fuel teams will carry slightly less fuel onboard (weight). Of course, the secondary factor is how well you can extract the energy, but the synthetic fuels have a start line advantage.

You can have a bio-synthetic fuel. This is likely what Ferrari are using. They will design it to as dense as possible if they are smart.

[johnnycesup]

When people say that bio-fuels have this or that property, what are they talking about? I don't think the common biofuels like Ethanol or Biodiesel are relevant here.

As for energy density, the total amount of variation permitted in the regulations is 7,9% (LHV min 38MJ/kg, max 41MJ/kg). There is also a 9% max variation in density (720kg/m^3 min, 785kg/m^3 max). Which means there is a potential 17,6% difference in volumetric energy density (min 27360MJ/m^3, max 32185MJ/m^3) which could be a real difference in combustion behaviour and overall vehicle packaging.

[matteosc]

When people say that bio-fuels have this or that property, what are they talking about? I don't think the common biofuels like Ethanol or Biodiesel are relevant here.

As for energy density, the total amount of variation permitted in the regulations is 7,9% (LHV min 38MJ/kg, max 41MJ/kg). There is also a 9% max variation in density (720kg/m^3 min, 785kg/m^3 max). Which means there is a potential 17,6% difference in volumetric energy density (min 27360MJ/m^3, max 32185MJ/m^3) which could be a real difference in combustion behaviour and overall vehicle packaging.

That is significant, but the consequences on combustion could be relevant as well. A fuel with 17.6% more volumetric energy sounds great, but you are limited in energy flow, so you can inject significant less fuel volume per cycle, with the same volume of air. How does this affect the combustion? Can the energy be extracted?
I think there is a lot of research about what is the right compromise.

[f1316]

Pushrod at front and rear for the Haas render, which takes Ferrari suspension. If accurate, it would show Ferrari has also gone this route.

[Vinlarr89]

Thought Ferrari might have gone Push-Pull

[zioture]

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share an exclusive article we've published regarding the early development of the Ferrari SF-26 for the 2026 F1 season.
Our report highlights that Ferrari is already conducting initial tests, apparently featuring the return of "bazooka" aerodynamic elements on a basic test version of the car. This is quite interesting considering the new regulations, and it suggests an early strategic direction for their aero philosophy.
You can read the full details and our analysis here:


https://www.newsf1.it/f1-2026-ferrari-s ... t-version/
What are your initial thoughts on this? Do you think the "bazooka" concept could be effective under the 2026 regs, especially with the rumored power unit changes?
Looking forward to hearing your insights!

[f1316]

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share an exclusive article we've published regarding the early development of the Ferrari SF-26 for the 2026 F1 season.
Our report highlights that Ferrari is already conducting initial tests, apparently featuring the return of "bazooka" aerodynamic elements on a basic test version of the car. This is quite interesting considering the new regulations, and it suggests an early strategic direction for their aero philosophy.
You can read the full details and our analysis here:
https://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/upload ... ooka-1.jpg

https://www.newsf1.it/f1-2026-ferrari-s ... t-version/
What are your initial thoughts on this? Do you think the "bazooka" concept could be effective under the 2026 regs, especially with the rumored power unit changes?
Looking forward to hearing your insights!

It would be interesting if Ferrari continued with the triangular airbox (as shown here), especially given the centre line cooling on the Racing Bulls. The Haas and Cadillac seem to have a more conventional/round shape airbox - mixed with fairly normal sidepod inlet size - so would indicate that the new Ferrari PU isn't especially cooling hungry (and maybe the RB one is, given the Racing Bulls airbox?).

If this so-called "bazooka" is a feature, you wonder why it would work now when it really hasn't been especially successful for Mercedes or Red Bull in the past. With nothing but my eyeball CFD, I wonder if the triangular airbox is beneficial for this kind of arrangement? Just looking at it, you'd think it would produce less blockage (but I have nothing but gut to base that on).

[matteosc]

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share an exclusive article we've published regarding the early development of the Ferrari SF-26 for the 2026 F1 season.
Our report highlights that Ferrari is already conducting initial tests, apparently featuring the return of "bazooka" aerodynamic elements on a basic test version of the car. This is quite interesting considering the new regulations, and it suggests an early strategic direction for their aero philosophy.
You can read the full details and our analysis here:
https://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/upload ... ooka-1.jpg

https://www.newsf1.it/f1-2026-ferrari-s ... t-version/
What are your initial thoughts on this? Do you think the "bazooka" concept could be effective under the 2026 regs, especially with the rumored power unit changes?
Looking forward to hearing your insights!

It would be interesting if Ferrari continued with the triangular airbox (as shown here), especially given the centre line cooling on the Racing Bulls. The Haas and Cadillac seem to have a more conventional/round shape airbox - mixed with fairly normal sidepod inlet size - so would indicate that the new Ferrari PU isn't especially cooling hungry (and maybe the RB one is, given the Racing Bulls airbox?).

If this so-called "bazooka" is a feature, you wonder why it would work now when it really hasn't been especially successful for Mercedes or Red Bull in the past. With nothing but my eyeball CFD, I wonder if the triangular airbox is beneficial for this kind of arrangement? Just looking at it, you'd think it would produce less blockage (but I have nothing but gut to base that on).

I think the bazooka was successful for the Red Bull, but not in the latest regulations. It all depends on how your car is going to work in the end, so it may be beneficial now.
About the triangolar airbox (i.e. less central cooling), one of the benefits would be cleaner flow to the rear wing. Will this be important in these new regulations? How will the absence of a beam wing affect things?

[Xyz22]

This guy found a lot of performance with the "bazookas" in his CFD simulation:

https://x.com/jancikapral/status/201336 ... 73972?s=20

[Xyz22]

Triangular air box seems confirmed:

https://x.com/scuderiaferrari/status/20 ... sKmlITLIhQ

[Longley]

Triangular air box seems confirmed:

https://x.com/scuderiaferrari/status/20 ... sKmlITLIhQ

I think you see there only the triangular structural struts of the roll hoop. The Racing Bull 2026er car has them also in its wide air intake. I would say we would have to wait a little longer.

[bananapeel23]

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share an exclusive article we've published regarding the early development of the Ferrari SF-26 for the 2026 F1 season.
Our report highlights that Ferrari is already conducting initial tests, apparently featuring the return of "bazooka" aerodynamic elements on a basic test version of the car. This is quite interesting considering the new regulations, and it suggests an early strategic direction for their aero philosophy.
You can read the full details and our analysis here:
https://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/upload ... ooka-1.jpg

https://www.newsf1.it/f1-2026-ferrari-s ... t-version/
What are your initial thoughts on this? Do you think the "bazooka" concept could be effective under the 2026 regs, especially with the rumored power unit changes?
Looking forward to hearing your insights!

Without the beam wing, i really don't think so. The concept of the bazooka/cannons was mostly to get the low energy cooling air out of the way of the beam wing. Without the beam wing, the only real benefit it would provide is marginally better control of the diffuser. The extra diffuser control would come at the cost of additional drag and complexity from bulky cannons. I just don't think such a tradeoff would be worthwhile.

[murphy]

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share an exclusive article we've published regarding the early development of the Ferrari SF-26 for the 2026 F1 season.
Our report highlights that Ferrari is already conducting initial tests, apparently featuring the return of "bazooka" aerodynamic elements on a basic test version of the car. This is quite interesting considering the new regulations, and it suggests an early strategic direction for their aero philosophy.
You can read the full details and our analysis here:
https://www.newsf1.it/wp-content/upload ... ooka-1.jpg

https://www.newsf1.it/f1-2026-ferrari-s ... t-version/
What are your initial thoughts on this? Do you think the "bazooka" concept could be effective under the 2026 regs, especially with the rumored power unit changes?
Looking forward to hearing your insights!

Total wrong direction for me, needs to be more like Redbull and Mercedes.