Ferrari pulled the covers off from its 2019 contender. The prancing horse did so in its annual event at its homebase in Maranello in an event where symbolism was key.
I expect that they estimate required levels of downforce ( like min+max for the season) and they then optimize drag. Now, if they‘ve estimated the required baseline df too low, they can‘t increase their df without losing aero efficiency.Ringleheim wrote:
What does he mean "The whole car is positioned in that area" ???
good!
So, according to Rosberg, they developed the car "incorrectly" with the car lacking downforce and a new rear-wing (designed to provide that extra needed downforce efficiently) still in the works.
Well he actually said a new rear wing may not solve the problem because it could make the downforce they are generating and overall car inefficient
Rosberg is a superhero just like Newey and has CFD vision? I had no clue.
nahhhturbof1 wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 03:50Aren't you guys a bit ahead with the "no downforce"? The same was being discussed last race... In the W10 topic!
Let's wait the conjecture a bit longer across several races. Conjecture includes what Rosberg is saying. He is no engineer. Yes he might (or might not) have good sources, but we can't necessarily take his word for it.
The downforce argument will only get deservedly stronger after this weekend.turbof1 wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 03:50Aren't you guys a bit ahead with the "no downforce"? The same was being discussed last race... In the W10 topic!
Let's wait the conjecture a bit longer across several races. Conjecture includes what Rosberg is saying. He is no engineer. Yes he might (or might not) have good sources, but we can't necessarily take his word for it.
5 seconds in a hour race seems a pretty recoverable gap, aero choices suited for this track or not ( and i think it is strange they will wait spain for the new aero package to recover it )GrandAxe wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 10:26The downforce argument will only get deservedly stronger after this weekend.turbof1 wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 03:50Aren't you guys a bit ahead with the "no downforce"? The same was being discussed last race... In the W10 topic!
Let's wait the conjecture a bit longer across several races. Conjecture includes what Rosberg is saying. He is no engineer. Yes he might (or might not) have good sources, but we can't necessarily take his word for it.
5 seconds is easily recoverable, true. But Ferrari's aero issue really came to the fore on this track, the understeery front end refuses to bite. Did you notice how much front tyre locking both cars had through the race?mmred wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 10:305 seconds in a hour race seems a pretty recoverable gap, aero choices suited for this track or not ( and i think it is strange they will wait spain for the new aero package to recover it )GrandAxe wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 10:26The downforce argument will only get deservedly stronger after this weekend.turbof1 wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 03:50Aren't you guys a bit ahead with the "no downforce"? The same was being discussed last race... In the W10 topic!
Let's wait the conjecture a bit longer across several races. Conjecture includes what Rosberg is saying. He is no engineer. Yes he might (or might not) have good sources, but we can't necessarily take his word for it.
do they lack front downforce? their front wing philosophy could be the culprit?GrandAxe wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 11:195 seconds is easily recoverable, true. But Ferrari's aero issue really came to the fore on this track, the understeery front end refuses to bite. Did you notice how much front tyre locking both cars had through the race?
Ferrari seems to have gone for a low downforce, high engine power, high speed configuration. Unfortunately though, the engine seems to have reliability problems that means that any gains from high speed are lost, in turn, making their low downforce very costly.
If an aero package is not due until Spain, then it must be a pretty comprehensive one, perhaps they might even (hopefully) change their front wing style. If the engine gremlins are easier to fix, then might keep their present configuration and become a real bullet on the track - a monster, particularly at tracks like Spa and Monza.
the front locks have more to do with brake balance and slowering very much at slow cornersGrandAxe wrote: ↑14 Apr 2019, 11:195 seconds is easily recoverable, true. But Ferrari's aero issue really came to the fore on this track, the understeery front end refuses to bite. Did you notice how much front tyre locking both cars had through the race?
Ferrari seems to have gone for a low downforce, high engine power, high speed configuration. Unfortunately though, the engine seems to have reliability problems that means that any gains from high speed are lost, in turn, making their low downforce very costly.
If an aero package is not due until Spain, then it must be a pretty comprehensive one, perhaps they might even (hopefully) change their front wing style. If the engine gremlins are easier to fix, then might keep their present configuration and become a real bullet on the track - a monster, particularly at tracks like Spa and Monza.
