2026 Scuderia Ferrari HP F1 Team

[f1isgood]

We have no idea how the 2022 concept would’ve evolved because it got destroyed by technical directives and rule changes.

That's a bad line of reasoning. If you base a concept off something that can be outdone by a TD it's a bad concept. Car was bouncing, red flag with suspension design. Flexi floor saga was also a red flag. It was a bad concept that died rightly early. That said it should have been allowed to have lasted at least one full year. In that regard Toto got Ferrari nailed.

That’s what I say about the blown diffuser as well, or using brake cooling ducts to heat up tires or flexible wings. If your concept can’t win races without an engine then it’s no good concept.

Cars should just be lego bricks to make sure that no rule change can possibly mess up their performance.

With you, there's no nuance or point in discussing Ferrari as a non Ferrari fan. At this point you might as well try to make a point that remove everything and let's do a drivers championship by making drivers run around the track

[dialtone]

That's a bad line of reasoning. If you base a concept off something that can be outdone by a TD it's a bad concept. Car was bouncing, red flag with suspension design. Flexi floor saga was also a red flag. It was a bad concept that died rightly early. That said it should have been allowed to have lasted at least one full year. In that regard Toto got Ferrari nailed.

That’s what I say about the blown diffuser as well, or using brake cooling ducts to heat up tires or flexible wings. If your concept can’t win races without an engine then it’s no good concept.

Cars should just be lego bricks to make sure that no rule change can possibly mess up their performance.

With you, there's no nuance or point in discussing Ferrari as a non Ferrari fan. At this point you might as well try to make a point that remove everything and let's do a drivers championship by making drivers run around the track

What was nuanced in your take? Come with a nuanced take an get a nuanced conversation.

If you come here saying the Ferrari rightfully lost because a TD broke its concept and thus wasn’t good enough then you’re going to be taken unseriously.

Ferrari floor was meant to work with peak downforce and handle the fast speed by flexing. They tried making it work and almost did in ‘24 as they would have won the WCC if FIA didn’t allow blatant rule cheating on flexible wings.

[f1isgood]

That’s what I say about the blown diffuser as well, or using brake cooling ducts to heat up tires or flexible wings. If your concept can’t win races without an engine then it’s no good concept.

Cars should just be lego bricks to make sure that no rule change can possibly mess up their performance.

With you, there's no nuance or point in discussing Ferrari as a non Ferrari fan. At this point you might as well try to make a point that remove everything and let's do a drivers championship by making drivers run around the track

What was nuanced in your take? Come with a nuanced take an get a nuanced conversation.

If you come here saying the Ferrari rightfully lost because a TD broke its concept and thus wasn’t good enough then you’re going to be taken unseriously.

Ferrari floor was meant to work with peak downforce and handle the fast speed by flexing. They tried making it work and almost did in ‘24 as they would have won the WCC if FIA didn’t allow blatant rule cheating on flexible wings.

There is nuance is what I am saying, but you don't want to hear it.

I didn't say Ferrari "rightfully lost". I said that if a concept collapses because of a Technical Directive, then the car operating in a gray area because Technical Directives typically "clarify" existing rules and the way in which they should be interpreted/are enforced. If enforcing the same rule in a different way kills performance, then that means the concept was simply fragile as it depended on small tolerances. That is simply not good enough from an engineering point of view--- that's all there is. I already said that they should have been allowed to run it for the entire season (which you ignored in a nuanced manner of course) but once the flexi floor topic came through, the concept was done for. It's the beginning of a four year cycle and Ferrari let themselves get hamstrung 12.5 percent of the way in.

You can call what others do as cheating. In the end, there were stricter wing tests last season at Barcelone and McLaren only went onto the sweep the entire European round after that pretty much. That means their concept by itself was not overly reliant on the flexi wings alone. They of course benefited from exploting it but that didn't break their car concept as is. You can make an argument that they had time to fix it or whatever but I can only go off what I see.

Regarding 2024, I think they should have been DSQ'ed for Baku but then that was not part of my original post so not sure why you are going there.

The evidence we have -- it tells us that the 2022 car had limited development potential under tighter enforcement of rules. It was a dead-end.

[dialtone]

I didn't say Ferrari "rightfully lost". I said that if a concept collapses because of a Technical Directive, then the car operating in a gray area because Technical Directives typically "clarify" existing rules and the way in which they should be interpreted/are enforced. If enforcing the same rule in a different way kills performance, then that means the concept was simply fragile as it depended on small tolerances. That is simply not good enough from an engineering point of view--- that's all there is. I already said that they should have been allowed to run it for the entire season (which you ignored in a nuanced manner of course) but once the flexi floor topic came through, the concept was done for. It's the beginning of a four year cycle and Ferrari let themselves get hamstrung 12.5 percent of the way in.

You can call what others do as cheating. In the end, there were stricter wing tests last season at Barcelone and McLaren only went onto the sweep the entire European round after that pretty much. That means their concept by itself was not overly reliant on the flexi wings alone. They of course benefited from exploting it but that didn't break their car concept as is. You can make an argument that they had time to fix it or whatever but I can only go off what I see.

Regarding 2024, I think they should have been DSQ'ed for Baku but then that was not part of my original post so not sure why you are going there.

The evidence we have -- it tells us that the 2022 car had limited development potential under tighter enforcement of rules. It was a dead-end.

I went there to show that their concept could in fact work, they didn’t change it from 2022 and 2025, they remained with a relatively flat ceiling on their floors. Probably a mistake in retrospect but in 2024 they were the best legal car by the end of the season, was the concept bad? Clearly they couldn’t figure it out well enough.

The tolerances on those floor cars were for everyone small, like 2-5mm small on ride height. Every single team had their time placing bad updates and having to revert to fix it.

The difference between merc and ferrari in ‘24 was tiny, so hard to claim they were so superior if the WCC went down to the last race and would have changed with just a single properly ruled result.

[.poz]

The difference between merc and ferrari in ‘24 was tiny, so hard to claim they were so superior if the WCC went down to the last race and would have changed with just a single properly ruled result.

WCC went down over a drain cover in Las Vegas

[genarro]

The difference between merc and ferrari in ‘24 was tiny, so hard to claim they were so superior if the WCC went down to the last race and would have changed with just a single properly ruled result.

WCC went down over a drain cover in Las Vegas

Or a small touch fromone world champion in the final race..

[ryaan2904]

He does miss one big factor (for me). For the same amount of regen, superclipping is a lot faster than lift and coast

With superclipping these cars come down from 1000 to 300-400 hp

Still better than 0 hp of LiCo.

All things considered i can understand why superclipping is necessary with current regs, its just not a good look. But yeah ig lico in quali would be worse.

I mean atleast to new fans it'll still feel like the drivers are attacking the corner

[catent]

Now that I think about Ferrari this year, it's basically 2022 again. They threw away 2021 barring a battery pack upgrade and then came out with a good car. It would be interesting to see if they have a base concept that can last four years unlike last time.

We have no idea how the 2022 concept would’ve evolved because it got destroyed by technical directives and rule changes.

That's a bad line of reasoning. If you base a concept off something that can be outdone by a TD it's a bad concept. Car was bouncing, red flag with suspension design. Flexi floor saga was also a red flag. It was a bad concept that died rightly early. That said it should have been allowed to have lasted at least one full year. In that regard Toto got Ferrari nailed.

The static load tests for the underbody were clearly articulated; Ferrari designed a flexible floor around those static load tests (much like McLaren/Mercedes with their front/rear-wings), which effectively allowed them to run lower with greater compliance and less stiffness. It was pretty brilliant, and arguably the best way to extract performance from those ground-effect cars.

Moreover, even though Ferrari experienced porpoising/bouncing, it clearly had minimal impact on their drivers' comfort. Whether that had anything to do with the flexible floor, or if the bouncing was never an issue and Mercedes made a meal of it, the point remains that the Ferrari floor solution (prior to TD-39) seemed to work very well in multiple regards.

For whatever reason(s), the FIA (being pressured by other teams, primarily Mercedes) intervened to change the static load tests for the underbody, effectively eliminating floor flex, neutering Ferrari's concept, and arguably funneling all teams down the same narrow development path.

It wasn't a trick, like fuel flow rates, or this alleged compression ratio thing. It was a way to effectively run the car lower, increasing downforce while minimizing plank wear. The FIA intervened - and I understand the reasons they did, because ultimately Ferrari's solution was beyond the spirit of the ruleset - but the notion that Ferrari built their 2022 car around some hack/trick, is nonsense.

Also, the way TD-39 immediately clamped down on flexible underbodies, while the FIA sat on their hands and waffled for over a literal calendar year regarding flexible wings, was a complete farce.

[ryaan2904]

We have no idea how the 2022 concept would’ve evolved because it got destroyed by technical directives and rule changes.

That's a bad line of reasoning. If you base a concept off something that can be outdone by a TD it's a bad concept. Car was bouncing, red flag with suspension design. Flexi floor saga was also a red flag. It was a bad concept that died rightly early. That said it should have been allowed to have lasted at least one full year. In that regard Toto got Ferrari nailed.

The static load tests for the underbody were clearly articulated; Ferrari designed a flexible floor around those static load tests (much like McLaren/Mercedes and their front/rear-wings), which effectively allowed them to run lower with greater compliance and less stiffness. It was pretty brilliant, and arguably the best way to extract performance from those ground-effect cars.

Moreover, even though Ferrari experienced porpoising/bouncing, it clearly had minimal impact on their drivers' comfort. Whether that had anything to do with the flexible floor, or if the bouncing was never an issue and Mercedes made a meal of it, the points remains that the Ferrari floor solution prior to TD-39 seemed excellent.

For whatever reason(s), the FIA (being pressured by other teams, primarily Mercedes) intervened and changed the location of the static load tests, effectively eliminating floor flex, neutering Ferrari's concept, and arguably funneling all teams down the same, narrow, restricted development path.

It wasn't a trick, or a hack, like fuel flow rates, or compression ratio tricks. It was a way to effectively run the car lower while minimizing plank wear. The FIA intervened, and I understand the reasons they did because ultimately Ferrari's solution was beyond the spirit of the ruleset, but the notion that Ferrari built around some hack/trick (like fuel flow rates) is nonsense.

Also, the way TD-39 immediately clamped down on flexible underbodies, while the FIA sat on their hands and waffled for over a literal calendar year regarding flexible wings, was a complete farce.

"Spirit of the ruleset" is the term fia uses when it wants to neuter one team due to lobbying from another.

Das wasn't legal as per "spirit of the ruleset", nor was flexi-wings, nor is this compression ratio trick now.

Technically eating through engines like Mercs did in '21 is against the "spirit of the ruleset" as well because the "spirit" was to have the engines last many races for environmental reasons. Frankly spirit of the ruleset is the most bs term coined by the fia cuz they aren't competent enough to write good rules, nor tough enough to enforce them properly. I suppose a finance guy like toto and a PR manager like Russel is what F1 needs nowadays

[SiLo]

I was certain that the flexing floor thing was mostly rubbish, and the TD that limited vertical movement is what killed them. They didn't have aggressive porpoising like Mercedes, but they did have it.

[f1Follower]

What upgrades are the teams going to bring in Bahrain? Do we know that Ferrari is going to bring the upgrades as earlier suspected?

[organic]

What upgrades are the teams going to bring in Bahrain? Do we know that Ferrari is going to bring the upgrades as earlier suspected?

They already used the Melbourne-spec lighter chassis in first test and brought a new floor, diffuser and front wing to Bahrain 1st test. More new components will come for the second test I'm sure but there's not gonna be an a Vs b spec suddenly different. It's been gradually adding new components and verifying that they work

[sucof]

What upgrades are the teams going to bring in Bahrain? Do we know that Ferrari is going to bring the upgrades as earlier suspected?

They already used the Melbourne-spec lighter chassis in first test and brought a new floor, diffuser and front wing to Bahrain 1st test. More new components will come for the second test I'm sure but there's not gonna be an a Vs b spec suddenly different. It's been gradually adding new components and verifying that they work

How do you know about the chassis, do you have any source?

[organic]

What upgrades are the teams going to bring in Bahrain? Do we know that Ferrari is going to bring the upgrades as earlier suspected?

They already used the Melbourne-spec lighter chassis in first test and brought a new floor, diffuser and front wing to Bahrain 1st test. More new components will come for the second test I'm sure but there's not gonna be an a Vs b spec suddenly different. It's been gradually adding new components and verifying that they work

How do you know about the chassis, do you have any source?

Autoracer

[f1Follower]

They already used the Melbourne-spec lighter chassis in first test and brought a new floor, diffuser and front wing to Bahrain 1st test. More new components will come for the second test I'm sure but there's not gonna be an a Vs b spec suddenly different. It's been gradually adding new components and verifying that they work

How do you know about the chassis, do you have any source?

Autoracer

Share the link