2025 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[SB15]

I asked this question immediately back in November when there were rumors about the SF-25’s suspension:

Who at Ferrari thought going double pull-rod was good idea especially in an era where the floor produces most of the downforce that sucks the car closer to the ground and where the other top 3 teams went Push-Rod in the rear for great reasons?

I too am curious about this, but what exactly are the reasons for a push-rod rear suspension? That’s a genuine question because I have no idea (other than speculating about suspension geometry in a very elementary manner).

I’d suspect any inherent limitations of a pull-rod rear suspension, or any clear benefits of a push-rod rear, would be well within the scope of awareness of the technical team, especially by year four of a reg set. But perhaps they did make a major conceptual misstep.

Curious to hear the rationale supporting a push-rod rear, or explaining why pull-rod was a bad idea.

I guess in theory and don’t take this seriously this is my opinion: It was to keep the rear from bottoming out or to limit any porpoising effect that may happen. I think Mclaren and Redbull seen the issues a traditional pull-rod in rear would bring if not properly adjusted because how much downforce these new cars produces.

Mercedes and Ferrari didn’t expect it, especially Mercedes they were particularly blindsided by the issues and spent most the year trying to solve the issue with the W13 and then the next year they still had porpoising issues here and there with the W14. Mercedes realized that the Pull-rod was not the way to go, maybe after Austin of 2023 that’s when they decided to switch.

Last year the W15 was inconsistent with the new Push-rod but that’s expected because they didn’t finish it until last minute. Throughout the year, the car was very quick at times when tracks temps were optimal (cooler). Which I think it means Mercedes didn’t need to change their design philosophy on the new Push-rod for the now, W16.

[ringo]

The Ferrari engines have more mass at the back (compressor and turbine) because they dont have the split turbo like Honda or Mercedes.
I suspect this is why pullrod works besr for them. It makes sense to put as much mass lower down in the gear box casing, than to use pushrod and have those masses higher up with the turbo that hangs off the back more than a mercedes or honda.
The pull rod for sure would make for a wider base for the gearbox, but I suspect ferrari have a very compact suspension to mitigate this.
Nonethless, the pull rod is not their issue.
In theor the pushrods can open up more spaxe in the diffuser area, however we have seen where porpoising and other aero stability phenomena somewhat limits the volume of the underfloor.
Ferrari's problem may simply be lack of data to setup the car correctly. I do not think its major or fundamental. That was the first sprint race and it just look like the engineers feel asleep at the switch is all.

[ScuderiaLeo]

This thread by one of this forum's very own might help with the debate that happened yesterday...



Also, a report from Formula Passion that builds off the AR one about the rear suspension:

Maranello hopes to resolve the problem by correcting setup strategies and potentially updating certain internal components, working between dynamic benches and the simulator. All indications converge towards a platform control problem, specifically stabilizing floor heights and movements. The difficulties are located at the rear.

The design of the rear section is always a compromise between mechanical and aerodynamic behavior. The more one tries to reduce bulk to free up space in the diffuser and around the gearbox, the more difficult the task becomes. The suspension rigidity also depends on the deformation of the arms and the external transmission structure to which all other elements are connected.

Floor management thus links mechanics and aerodynamics. In Maranello, they are working extensively on dynamic test benches, sophisticated mobile platforms where the car is placed, capable of reproducing circuit profiles and loads recorded on the track. However, these tests do not allow work on aerodynamics, which can be analyzed in the wind tunnel, but where the static model has no suspension. The information gathered in these two environments will then be cross-referenced with track data to refine the virtual models in the simulator, on which solutions will be evaluated.

Platform control is a global problem that requires a different compromise in terms of settings. In Maranello, they will evaluate modifications to torsion spring and damper settings, correcting setup strategies to stabilize ground clearance without too much compromising other performance aspects. If unsuccessful, the alternative would be to update internal mechanics as much as possible.

If the solutions prove conclusive, Ferrari could finally lower its ground clearance, which would allow appreciation of its aerodynamic potential and assess the feasibility of returning to the rankings. Conversely, it would be a sign of a structural problem this year, forcing resources to be diverted to the 2026 project.

[f1316]

I must be crazy to be looking for the silver lining after the debacle of sunday, but in some weird way at least they didn’t build a car that’s working perfectly and still has no performance. It seems like there is performance in the car but they still need to unlock it. The pace in the sprint portion was strong and it’s not as if that setup was perfect by any means. So there’s room for fairly rapid improvement (and, hey, it can’t get worse than 0 points! )

It’s not really good enough that for the third year in a row they’re needing a o recover from issues with development but they at least shown they are capable of doing so.

[ringo]

Chasing down Mclaren is not going to be easy. Ferrari chased them last year and arguably were closer to Mclaren than they are now at this phase of the season.
The team is going to bleed to many points before they figure out the issues.

[dialtone]

This thread by one of this forum's very own might help with the debate that happened yesterday...

This just about lines up with what I said so makes complete sense to me.

They didn't design a car that doesn't perform, it's a smallish compliance issue that will be fixed.

[bananapeel23]

Let's be honest here, Haas only did what they did because they're trying to save resources this year with 2026 regs looming.

Haas is operating at the budget cap just like every other team (except maybe RB). Haas is doing so well financially now that Gene Haas doesn't even have to put his own money into the team at this point.

They are keeping the same chassis and suspension becuase they aren't fighting for the championship, and prefer to spend more to bring a more mature car for 2026 over finishing (for example) p6 instead of p8 in 2025.

If Haas expected to be super competitive in 2025, they would have brought a new chassis and the 2025 Ferrari suspension.

Meeting the budget cap doesn’t automatically make Haas have equal opportunities with Ferrari.

They don’t have the same facilities.
They don’t have the same quality of people.
They don’t have the same quality of data and experience.

And I can keep adding to that list …

If limiting the budget was enough to equalize teams, we would have been looking at a spec-series racing by last year already.

Well, duh

But that doesn't mean that HAAS would be sacrificing their chances any more than Ferrari would be. They simply have a lower relative competitiveness due to their lack of certain things.

They are saving resources for 2026, but not because they couldn't afford to build a new car for 2025. They simply didn't think it was worth it given the relatively small potential reward for a very large investment of resources. If you fight for the championship, the equation is very different.

[venkyhere]

The broken wing on 16 was still supporting load into the chassis somewhat competently, the proximity to the ground CAN give it advantage in pure ground effect as aero "ideal" and why they have very strong test for drooping of the wing across the car in scrutineering.

Those effects just cannot be qualified by us to make a driver judgement I feel.

atleast agree with me that a drooping down front wing on one side without an endplate is going to 'affect' the aero wash to one side of the floor tunnels (the main reason why the noses of the cars are so 'high' in this ground effect era) and we know how sensitive the floor tunnel flow is to 'yaw' ; which indirectly implies that if such a car is faster than the same car that's undamaged, the difference most probably is the driver

Hehe I can see we are looking at it differently but I'm not skilled enough in that to judge. We'll have to request Vanja to adjudicate i suspect.

This thread by one of this forum's very own might help with the debate that happened yesterday...

@Farnborough, I guess we have our answer. Above twitter thread by Vanja lines up with my guessing. It also goes to show, that LeClerc was simply superior to Hamilton (in this particular race) to run with lower laptime and lower tyre deg, despite a damaged car. I know it will be blasphemous to say this, but from the on track cameras (very less onboards), it very well did look like that the lines LeClerc was driving through T1-2-3 and T11-12-13, was faster and torturing the tyres less, compared to the lines Hamilton was driving.

[jambuka]

This thread by one of this forum's very own might help with the debate that happened yesterday...

This just about lines up with what I said so makes complete sense to me.

They didn't design a car that doesn't perform, it's a smallish compliance issue that will be fixed.

If this fix holds true and the pace shown by Hamilton in the sprint or LEC with car damage was real, this is going to be a heck of a comeback for WCC. Can’t wait

[SB15]

This thread by one of this forum's very own might help with the debate that happened yesterday...

This just about lines up with what I said so makes complete sense to me.

They didn't design a car that doesn't perform, it's a smallish compliance issue that will be fixed.

If this fix holds true and the pace shown by Hamilton in the sprint or LEC with car damage was real, this is going to be a heck of a comeback for WCC. Can’t wait

I seriously doubt there will be any comeback because you forget that other teams can bring upgrades/updates as well.

Ferrari is more than likely going to spend a ton of time working out their rear suspension which is very time consuming and expensive thing to do. There is not any “Magic fix” for any car, it’s a slow and rather very painful process.

[SiLo]

Its a long season, and if they can get a fix in early, because they understand the problem, then they should still have a good season.

[Luscion]

motorionline saying Ferrari were aware of the problem since pre season tests, were working on a solution since then and could introduce a new floor as soon as Suzuka to fix the problem

https://f1grandprix.motorionline.com/f1 ... ovo-fondo/

[ScuderiaLeo]

motorionline saying Ferrari were aware of the problem since pre season tests, were working on a solution since then and could introduce a new floor as soon as Suzuka to fix the problem

https://f1grandprix.motorionline.com/f1 ... ovo-fondo/

Suzuka would be quite impressive. Bahrain is a lot more realistic. How reliable is this source?

Apprehension aside, I remember last season we were all shocked at how quick they introduced a new floor after Spain, and how effective it was considering how little time they'd had to develop it.

[Julesdropgems]

Per Corriere Dello Sport, it is believed that the floor is the culprit and they have known about it since testing. Loic Serra is leading the project now with Suzuka being the upgraded floor delivery date. If all of this is true, the interesting caveat will be nailing the correlation from the simulation to the bumpy Suzuka circuit which may be another outlier track.

https://www.corrieredellosport.it/news/ ... l_progetto

https://www.corrieredellosport.it/news/ ... progetto/2

https://www.corrieredellosport.it/news/ ... progetto/3

[jambuka]

This just about lines up with what I said so makes complete sense to me.

They didn't design a car that doesn't perform, it's a smallish compliance issue that will be fixed.

If this fix holds true and the pace shown by Hamilton in the sprint or LEC with car damage was real, this is going to be a heck of a comeback for WCC. Can’t wait

I seriously doubt there will be any comeback because you forget that other teams can bring upgrades/updates as well.

Ferrari is more than likely going to spend a ton of time working out their rear suspension which is very time consuming and expensive thing to do. There is not any “Magic fix” for any car, it’s a slow and rather very painful process.

They should be able to find a fix in the next couple races.Even if they spend time now working out the suspension, it is not time lost, as they will be carrying this suspension concept next year.