Ferrari's lack of pace

m3_lover · Post 04 Apr 2006, 02:55

(GMM) Luca di Montezemolo has blamed constant rule changes in formula one for Ferrari's fall from dominance.

The Italian team's president told the Brazilian press that Ferrari has not adapted well enough to the 2006 F1 regulations, including the return of tyre-change pit stops and 2.4 litre V8 engines.

He said: ''The changes were introduced to limit Ferrari's supremacy, which many believed was boring.''

Previously, however, Montezemolo had praised the FIA's 2006 rulebook, having condemned last year's rules for making formula one a 'tyre championship'.

''With so much change, even if you are at the top, everything has to start again from scratch,'' he said this week.

''You have to change the motor, the aerodynamics, the tyres.''

I do have to believe that ferrari dominance was boring, but he is complaining that there was too many changes. The only other person who I have heard complaining about the changes was Dr Mario in regards to BMW's reliability problem with there engines. Ferrari started there testing earlier then other teams (testing during the winter which is banned by other teams) and they have there own personal track, and they have racked a lot of mileage too. I don't hate ferrari but the problem is clearly that the team is not competitive to other teams that had to make the same changes.

vyselegend · Post 04 Apr 2006, 03:54

Renault was dominant under 2005 rules, and are still now... Isn't it a proof they're wrong? It's a shame when top teams with HUGE budget and facility start to complain, making excuses of everything... Just to avoid to admit they went wrong. I'm sure they were over confident last year, they thought their problems were specific to that new reglement etc, and they were sure they'll be able to bounce back in 2006. Now they start to realise that Renault, Mac Laren and Honda (and even others) are really strong, it was not just circumstances, and they start to fear to stay in the mid-field for too much time, wich is very bad for busyness especially when you're Ferrari because all your marketing is based on that image of dominance.

Jason · Post 04 Apr 2006, 10:01

vyselegend wrote:Renault was dominant under 2005 rules, and are still now... Isn't it a proof they're wrong? It's a shame when top teams with HUGE budget and facility start to complain, making excuses of everything... Just to avoid to admit they went wrong. I'm sure they were over confident last year, they thought their problems were specific to that new reglement etc, and they were sure they'll be able to bounce back in 2006. Now they start to realise that Renault, Mac Laren and Honda (and even others) are really strong, it was not just circumstances, and they start to fear to stay in the mid-field for too much time, wich is very bad for busyness especially when you're Ferrari because all your marketing is based on that image of dominance.

I agree

manchild · Post 04 Apr 2006, 10:44

Luca di Montezemolo had no objections when rules were changing all the time during their dominance

dumrick · Post 04 Apr 2006, 11:09

Before the championship started, the return of tyre changes was praised, because they believed that Bridgestone would be in a better situation than Michelin under the new regs. Now that it's clear that Michelin has always made better tyres (with the exception of Bridgestones in the days they were developed for one single car and didn't work in any other chassis), they complain...
Engine regulations are the same, if the Ferrari weren't underperforming and blowing in races, Luca wouldn't even open his mouth...

m3_lover · Post 04 Apr 2006, 11:13

He is a great CEO for Ferrari and returned it to glory, I wonder if he is going to be at the San Marino GP this year

Hudsonhawk. · Post 04 Apr 2006, 12:14

Luca di Montezemolo had no objections when rules were changing all the time during their dominance

i agree.

plus i think their money well is drying up....

Jason · Post 04 Apr 2006, 12:26

Luca has no power to complain about the rules, because they are racing under the FIA. Tyre changes came back to F1 because many team complain, aslo dangerous to stay out on worn tyres because when you brake your tyre does not have enough grip so the car will under braking, which aslo cause accident because tyres are so low in grip and you go under brakingand then slip off track track for an off-track caper. About engines Luca has no power to complain.

Ciro Pabón · Post 04 Apr 2006, 12:39

I agree with Mr. Montezzemolo. Rule changes have become a confirmation of the theory: "the guy that runs ahead has all the arrows pierced in his back".

You have to consider that there are few respectable people left, people that everybody trust when arbitration is needed. What are we going to do when Bernie dies? Enron-ize F1?

Every rule change is an adjustment of the powers-to-be. I say we should try to minimize the changes and stop treating everybody that support regulation-freezing as a whiner. It is a sad day for F1 when Ferrari implicitly accepts that it has not the financial muscle... Fiat is not precisely buoyant.

Besides, Mr. Montezzemolo is one of the guys that is adamant in rejecting only pay-per-view TV for F-1. How do you like this rule change? I like him.

DaveKillens · Post 04 Apr 2006, 14:43

When Ferrari began their five year dominance of the sport, they formed a tight partnership with Bridgestone that basically made Bridgestone exclusive to Ferrari needs. Then came 2005, and suddenly Bridgestones and Ferrari were not able to develop a tire that was competitive. They made their bed, they have to suffer the consequences. No pity or support from me. The rule to allow tire changes in '06 definitely levelled the tire playing field in what Michelin had established a clear superiority. So when Monty spouts off about tire inequities, I have absolutely no sympathy or support for his viewpoint.
For the first two races of the season, Ferrari had worked hard on preparing for hot conditions. But down under, this last weekend, we saw cracks in the mighty Ferrari organization. They were not as prepared as in the past, they had failed to study the soft compounds, and Shu started the race on what can only be considered the incorrect tire choice. After he had his first pit stop and gone with more suitable tires, he cracked off very competitive times when his fuel was down, near the end of his run. The car is quick, and so is Shu. But both Shu and his team made uncharateristic mistakes, to me signs that Ferrari are not as good a team as years gone by.

m3_lover · Post 04 Apr 2006, 19:50

Was there any major rule changes from 2000-2004 when ferrari won every year?

RacingManiac · Post 04 Apr 2006, 20:47

the front wing got higher and higher....

jaslfc · Post 05 Apr 2006, 01:43

it was just during those years of ferrari dominance they had a winning formula. great tyres, car and driver. and they were able to build on it year after year. in 2005.. with all this dramatic rule change this levelled the playing field and i applaud renault for being on top of the new rules.

DaveKillens · Post 05 Apr 2006, 01:59

m3_lover wrote:Was there any major rule changes from 2000-2004 when ferrari won every year?

Yes, and it can be argued some rules worked against Ferrari. But they were a great team with a great driver. The history of racing shows that no one dominates year after year, forever. There was a time when Ferrari just plain sucked, and what I consider a great driver, Jean Alesi carried the torch for Ferrari, only winning once.

jd · Post 05 Apr 2006, 10:39

m3_lover wrote:Was there any major rule changes from 2000-2004 when ferrari won every year?

Yes, one major change was the qualifying. MS was hampered for winning / leading the championship through out 2003. Besides, the one lap qualifying never suited ferrari.