Ferrari SF1000

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
User avatar
aleks_ader
90
Joined: 28 Jul 2011, 08:40

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Thermal cam right? If is that so. Its obviously tire surface monitoring. Yeah i m even suprised if they didnt bring aero rakes in this sesions. I guess they still need to build whole development program from scratch.
"And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you're no longer a racing driver..." Ayrton Senna

f1316
f1316
80
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 18:36

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

I’m guessing, since I haven’t seen it anywhere, Ferrari are still yet to introduce the change to their cooling/radiator arrangement that is was rumoured would fix an ‘aerodynamic blockage’ - if indeed that’s even genuinely a thing.

In a way, and if it’s still a fundamental issue still to be addressed, it would be positive to know their current performance - which doesn’t appear to be as woeful as I was expecting at Silverstone - was achieved without this.

hape
hape
2
Joined: 03 Jan 2019, 13:17

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

f1316 wrote:
01 Aug 2020, 14:59
I’m guessing, since I haven’t seen it anywhere, Ferrari are still yet to introduce the change to their cooling/radiator arrangement that is was rumoured would fix an ‘aerodynamic blockage’ - if indeed that’s even genuinely a thing.

In a way, and if it’s still a fundamental issue still to be addressed, it would be positive to know their current performance - which doesn’t appear to be as woeful as I was expecting at Silverstone - was achieved without this.
Indeed if P4 at 0,1 sec of Verstappen is without the radiator arrangement changed then I would think they have recovered quite some cavalli since Austria. At least Leclerc starts on the medium, which might be somewhat tricky at the start with the guys behind on softs. But should help in the race.
Still the gap of Mercedes to the rest of the field is unreal

f1316
f1316
80
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 18:36

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

I get the impression that this year’s chassis is not really that bad - seems capable of beating the pink W10 - but it’s just so compromised by the lack of power that they can’t run proper wing levels etc. and that only compounds the lack of pace from being down on power (affecting tyre management etc.).

It seems they’d be a clear second best and likely not too far off Mercedes if power was equal.

User avatar
Alakshendra
-2
Joined: 05 Jul 2020, 17:48

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

I am really puzzled why is Ferrari not bringing any upgrades.I mean they are still 1 sec down to Merc and that is a huge margin.

Is Ferrari going to bring new upgrades by filming day?

LM10
LM10
121
Joined: 07 Mar 2018, 00:07

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Alakshendra wrote:
01 Aug 2020, 16:48
I am really puzzled why is Ferrari not bringing any upgrades.I mean they are still 1 sec down to Merc and that is a huge margin.

Is Ferrari going to bring new upgrades by filming day?
First it's important to solve all the long time issues like correlation, team dynamics etc. Why bring upgrades when you have other more serious problems going on? They need to re-do whatever they need to finally have a healthy and balanced working environment. That's crucial for the future.

User avatar
Alakshendra
-2
Joined: 05 Jul 2020, 17:48

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

LM10 wrote:
01 Aug 2020, 17:00
Alakshendra wrote:
01 Aug 2020, 16:48
I am really puzzled why is Ferrari not bringing any upgrades.I mean they are still 1 sec down to Merc and that is a huge margin.

Is Ferrari going to bring new upgrades by filming day?
First it's important to solve all the long time issues like correlation, team dynamics etc. Why bring upgrades when you have other more serious problems going on? They need to re-do whatever they need to finally have a healthy and balanced working environment. That's crucial for the future.
I agree, but its Ferrari, if they won't try anything it will be really heartbreaking. As a Ferrari fan every weekend i wait just to see where red car is.

dtro
dtro
3
Joined: 06 Feb 2019, 19:39

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Years of playing with gray areas of the technical regulations has finally led Rahrah to what may be considered rock bottom.
Binotto said the car would be a beater in the beginning of the season and it is. Now they need to go back to the drawing board and we won't see if they can do that until 2022, plus only one of their drivers can drag the beater to places it doesn't belong.
Why no upgrades? Because there's only so much you can do to a donkey to make it compete with race horses.

holeindalip
holeindalip
17
Joined: 11 Jun 2013, 01:58
Location: Decatur,IL USA

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

f1316 wrote:
01 Aug 2020, 16:37
I get the impression that this year’s chassis is not really that bad - seems capable of beating the pink W10 - but it’s just so compromised by the lack of power that they can’t run proper wing levels etc. and that only compounds the lack of pace from being down on power (affecting tyre management etc.).

It seems they’d be a clear second best and likely not too far off Mercedes if power was equal.
In fairness it’s not really the w10, the internal suspension arrangements and parts are totally different and probably work the tires differently and they have different drivers so I don’t think it’s fair to compare the times they are putting in. If it was the actual w10 ran by the mercs and the actual drivers I would almost bet the f1000 would be behind no doubt.....

cfletch737
cfletch737
0
Joined: 01 Dec 2019, 19:59

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

In an interview today, Seb confirmed the filming day on Wednesday.

https://twitter.com/Vetteleclerc/status ... 0316675073

JPBD1990
JPBD1990
49
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 12:19

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Honestly, Ferrari is surprisingly close to redbull here. Considering the absolute neutering of their engine, I think it shows the chassis isn’t allllll bad. Of course, looking at Vettel and Albon, both need to work on stability and drivability but... could be worse?

Mercedes is years ahead of everyone else, but take them out of the equation and it’s actually a very competitive season. I ignore Mercedes existence, and I’m quite enjoying this season so far.

User avatar
aleks_ader
90
Joined: 28 Jul 2011, 08:40

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Still race pace is bad. Could bad Power unit efficiency compound that even more. Plus lower wing levels are probably not ideal for those hard compounds also. Otherwise with Mclaren and FI this is gona be nice fight.
First it's important to solve all the long time issues like correlation, team dynamics etc. Why bring upgrades when you have other more serious problems going on? They need to re-do whatever they need to finally have a healthy and balanced working environment. That's crucial for the future.
=D>

Otherwise i expect even more test devices and measuring tool in free practices.
"And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you're no longer a racing driver..." Ayrton Senna

f1316
f1316
80
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 18:36

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

I mean, race pace wasn’t good but Charles was faster than everyone bar the Mercedes and Max - and that’s with a very low downforce setup which won’t have been great for tyre life.

So they’re slow and it’s bad but still faster than a lot of other cars with more hp.

Xwang
Xwang
29
Joined: 02 Dec 2012, 11:12

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Can radiators be changed or are they already frozen for this year?

evered7
evered7
5
Joined: 22 Apr 2012, 20:46

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

f1316 wrote:
02 Aug 2020, 18:30
I mean, race pace wasn’t good but Charles was faster than everyone bar the Mercedes and Max - and that’s with a very low downforce setup which won’t have been great for tyre life.

So they’re slow and it’s bad but still faster than a lot of other cars with more hp.
They had a little bit of buffer to the next car on the grid. I guess they can add a bit more wing to help the tires in the race in the next weekend.

Two absolute disaster of a weekend and two pretty good salvages in the first 4 for Ferrari.