Scuderia Ferrari SF72H Speculation Thread

[FerrariF60]

Hopefully they’ll make it work better in the wet as well
As the SF71H had a weakness in that dept.

[f1316]

I don’t think anyone will design their car to be good in the wet - relative wet weather performance is more just a consequence of other design decisions made as part of optimal (I.e. dry weather) performance goals.

The Ferrari - and even more so the Red Bull last year - didn’t have as good wet weather performance as the Mercedes but that’s probably more to do with Mercedes’ general design philosophy being largely different (less rake, longer wheelbase - arguably more ‘stable’ aero platform) and the mechanical grip Aldo Costa’s cars have always been known for (even if he himself has stepped away, that ‘DNA’ remains within the car/team). That’s just how Mercedes have found it best to reach the fastest possible lap time at the majority of circuits - I don’t for one second believe that wet weather performance was a factor in their decision making; if they thought a different philosophy would gain them, say, three tenths in the dry, they’d happily give up any wet weather benefit (imo).

So I doubt Ferrari will be specifically looking to address this - that said, the problems with their Singapore/Russia upgrade seemed to be a lack of stability, so addressing those areas may have a serendipitous knock-on effect in the wet.

[Just_a_fan]

The Mercedes was definitely better at keeping the wet tyres warm - a side effect of their overheating issue, ironically. But they also had the best wet weather driver of his generation in the car. That combination is always going to be difficult to beat.

[NathanOlder]

Thats why he won every wet race since 2014

[FrukostScones]

back on topic:

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... 4318048%2F

[Just_a_fan]

Thats why he won every wet race since 2014

Best does not mean infallible...

[Giando]

'Slim size', says Autosprint showing a drawing by Paolo Filisetti apparently with very narrow sidepods front section.

[Blackout]

Compared to 2018

[Giando]

It's the sidepods width that amazes me in the drawing: you can entirely see the rear tyres.

The picture you posted from last year's presentation had been altered, or its perspective is funny, cause it doesn't show the rear Pirellis.

I highly doubt anyway we will really see such slim sidepods... but let's see!

Maybe they've found something clever for radiators...

Also - in AS drawing - the front bakes cooling devices are way too similar to 2018 version, while that area had been restricted, right?

[Blackout]

Maybe the drawing is a kind of isometric view of the car (whatever the distance, the objects retain their real size.), whereas the photo is a natural perspective view obviously...


Like this one iso view.

[F1NAC]

It's the sidepods width that amazes me in the drawing: you can entirely see the rear tyres.

The picture you posted from last year's presentation had been altered, or its perspective is funny, cause it doesn't show the rear Pirellis.

I highly doubt anyway we will really see such slim sidepods... but let's see!

Maybe they've found something clever for radiators...

Also - in AS drawing - the front bakes cooling devices are way too similar to 2018 version, while that area had been restricted, right?

Cooling inlets are normal. Just aero winglets are not allowed on brake duct assembly

[timbo]

Maybe the drawing is a kind of isometric view of the car (whatever the distance, the objects retain their real size.), whereas the photo is a natural perspective view obviously...
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4 ... 65ee46009f

The perspectives in the drawing and the picture are clearly different, compare the apparent RW widths.
I doubt it is possible to make sidepods so narrow. After all the fuel tank dimensions are regulated and it gets bigger (marginally, but still) next year.

[Blackout]

Maybe the drawing is a kind of isometric view of the car (whatever the distance, the objects retain their real size.), whereas the photo is a natural perspective view obviously...
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4 ... 65ee46009f

The perspectives in the drawing and the picture are clearly different, compare the apparent RW widths.
I doubt it is possible to make sidepods so narrow. After all the fuel tank dimensions are regulated and it gets bigger (marginally, but still) next year.

You dont say
I agree for the blue part.
But regarding the fuel tank, I wonder if a longer or a higher fuel tank would really f*** CoG up and handicap the car... it could be a good alternative (instead of a wider one).

[f1316]

Maybe the drawing is a kind of isometric view of the car (whatever the distance, the objects retain their real size.), whereas the photo is a natural perspective view obviously...
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4 ... 65ee46009f

The perspectives in the drawing and the picture are clearly different, compare the apparent RW widths.
I doubt it is possible to make sidepods so narrow. After all the fuel tank dimensions are regulated and it gets bigger (marginally, but still) next year.

You dont say
I agree for the blue part.
But regarding the fuel tank, I wonder if a longer or a higher fuel tank would really f*** CoG up and handicap the car... it could be a good alternative (instead of a wider one).

Don’t forget that the other rumour about the Ferrari is that it will continue to grow its wheelbase - that’s to accommodate the fuel tank whilst continuing to shrink sidepods.

[carisi2k]

The halo treatment looks interesting on that supposed sf72 image. It looks like the teams are trying to find a way to flatten the halo and give better vision for the driver.