Ferrari F60

[enkidu]

With the bigger increase in contact area on the front than the rear I'd have expected them to try to move the cockpit back, not forward. I guess it must be to offset the weight of the KERS (or KERS sized ballast) in the rear. Interesting...

Or the added disadvantage of these slicks, weight has been said to be needed to be even further forward than with the grooved.

[Skunk0001]

Good point, although if Bridgestone can shift the contact patch ratio forward, and the balance rearwards at the same time then they are either idiots, or are 'under orders'. I doubt they can be that bad at what they do and the second option wouldn’t make sense since this is all supposed to be about passing, and front grip is most of the problem.

So if its not the tyres themselves then it could be a consequence of the new regulations forcing the aero balance rearwards to make the front wing less critical when following.

Either way, there seems to be some conflicting reports on these things, one article will say that the tyres will make the cars oversteer more, and (as you pointed out) another will say they need more weight on the front.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the others do.

[bazanaius]

would it not also be due to the fact that the rear and front tyres are the same size? I guess there was a reason that rear tyres used to be bigger than front, due to the added grip required. With these same four tyres on each corner maybe forward weight distribution improves rear tyre wear?

B

[bazanaius]

And I've decided what's wrong with the F60. That nose is just too long! and the rear wing is not wide enough to match the front (although I like it in its higher position)

B

[pipex]

Ferrari has done it, the new car is pretty nice considering the rules
Maybe the cockpit has been moved to make space for the KERS batteries, the car is very similar to the 2008 one. From the photos it seems that the nose is wider than the 2008 one, similar to the ones tested by McLaren/BMW. With all the computing power for aerodynamics i think its possible that the solutions between different teams will converge faster than we might think (i have no crystal ball and i could be wrong ).
Mahle continues to be a Ferrari sponsor? I didn't see their logo in the new car.

[mike]

With the bigger increase in contact area on the front than the rear I'd have expected them to try to move the cockpit back, not forward. I guess it must be to offset the weight of the KERS (or KERS sized ballast) in the rear. Interesting...

Or the added disadvantage of these slicks, weight has been said to be needed to be even further forward than with the grooved.

i think they move the weight to the front to cover the weight loss in the front of the ballast, since F2008 and others carried a significant weight in the front wing and i also think that since the loss in downforce and grip in the rear end they would lighten to rear to make it more drivable
note: the car is also alot shorter and it would imply the balance is moved dramatically

[andartop]

Well, this is interesting - I think that on F60 there's kinda lense effect, so the center of the car seems to be magnified, while outer sections, including tyres, are kinda "deeper". Because of that tyres seem smaller, and that's why I though images are not scaled right.

Or is it the other way around: Is it normal to have such extreme toe angles or was the center of the image "shrunk"?
It's a good looking car considering the regulations, but those wings..(Is it a snow plough? Is it a hole puncher? Is it..oh, shut up!)

[xpensive]

There you go andartop, it's the revival of Ferrari's "Spazzaneve" concept!

[GTO]

With the adoption of 2009 regs & some of the previewd cars during Dec. testing incorporating 09 design elements graphted onto 08 cars, I was expecting a bit of an ugly duckling to be unveiled today by Ferrari. However much to my surprise, and staying true to their history of creating beautiful cars, the Ferrari design team have delivered another stunning & attractive race car. I love it. In my view, it looks too good to be just a race car that will soon be re-designed & out of date. It's creatively simple & classic lines looks like it should be a one of a kind, single seat, production car to commemorate Ferrari's 60 anniversary. Beautifully designed. =D>

This brings me to a question as to who designed it. This presentation photo indicates two chief designers...Nicholas Tombazis & Aldo Costa. That can't be correct.
http://www.motorsport.com/photos/f1/200 ... m-0053.jpg
One must be a tech. director & the other one the chief designer who took over for Rory Byrne. Does anyone know this? Scarbs, perhaps you could answer since you were there at the launch?

[ESPImperium]

I actually like it, its a design that works in my eyes.

However, one thing i do not like is the lack of Italian flag like on the F2008s T-Wings.

Im intregued in what Toyota will have in a couple of days time.

[machin]

Those wing mirror supports are perfectly legal... there's a "free" area which allows the teams to do anything they want (as long as it fully contains the side impact structures), its only 175mm wide with a little triangular section on the inboard side defined by these rules:-

3.8.4 this is the rule concerning 75mm radius bodywork, and stops at a distance of 450mm fwd of the rear face of the cockpit entry envelope.

3.11.1 this is the rule which bans bodywork within a certain area.... no bodywork is allowed fwd of a transverse line position 625mm fwd of the rear face of the cockpit entry envelope and a diagonal line from 875mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template and 240mm from the car centre line to 625mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template and 415mm from the car centre line.

Its the volume between these two rules that can have the radiator inlets, wing mirror supports and any turning vanes... as you can see its a very small area, but one which Ferrari have utilised.

I think the car looks great, and we'll get used to that rear wing I'm sure....

[Metar]

My only real qualm with the F60 is simple: It's boring. I remember the hours I spent gobbling up images of the BMW F1.08 and the other aeroinsane cars - but here, the F60 already "bores" me. There's quite literally nothing to discuss.

Other than that, impressively prettier than what I suspected. The proportions of the wings still look terrible, but that's what we've got...

[myurr]

Definitely prettier than I thought it would be, but one thing that strikes me is that at some point one of the drivers is going to lose a mirror. Are there any safety related rules that state that drivers must always have two mirrors or are black flagged?

People have been making a big deal about the vulnerability of the front wing, something that has probably been overstated, but we have a lot of relatively gentle side impacts (wheels and the like) that could do some damage to those mirrors.

[i70q7m7ghw]

I think the supports probably have enough flex in them to absorb a small touch. Talking about the wings, if you look at the width of the front wing it could be possible to lose it just banging front wheels with someone. It'd be very easy for another driver to touch the side of your front wing with his spinning wheel. This will surely stop true wheel to wheel racing which I thought the rules were trying to encourage?

[ESPImperium]

Personally, i feel that the front wings are too wide, maybes 200mm less in size from each side and the pannels being a slightly bigger size as the middle ground would have been better. Also aesthetics wise, id say that the rear wing should be the intermediate between this years F60 and last years F2008.

The thing is simple, yeah, but it is simply beautiful to me.

And remember, it was us that wanted a more controling and stringent form of regs, so we better like it or lump it.