2026 Scuderia Ferrari HP F1 Team

[Luscion]

Are they banned from starting to apply throttle before the blue lights (or previously before red lights started the countdown)? I am not sure what is the procedure.

If there was no ban on applying throttle then it would just be a matter of teams timing it according to the last car reaching the grid. If there was a ban, then yes, Ferrari lost an advantage.

I believe they were only allowed to apply throttle once the first of the five red light turned on at the start but now there's the pre start. Fred brought up this being an issue with the 2026 regs, FIA and other teams ignored him so Ferrari designed an engine where they wouldnt suffer with turbo and battery issues at the start, then during testing some teams realized how screwed they were an lobbied for a pre start for "safety reasons". So yea Ferrari got screwed there, Max pretty much echo'd what fred said here (Fred also said it before the change), that if they were so worried about it being a safety issue they could start from the pitlane, Max also talked about it being a choice with the turbo design.



Max -

“As for the start, that’s simply the choice you make with the turbo. We consciously made a certain decision there. And those who have problems with it, well, they can also start from the pitlane.

https://www.grandprix247.com/formula-1- ... la-1-rules

[Waz]

Ferrari could have changed the behaviour of the PU when the blue light rules were announced, but they chose not to. Let's see if they uncork anything after mid-season.

How so? My understanding is that this is a question of hardware (turbo size) so not something that is easily (aka impossible) changed. What are you suggesting they ‘chose’ not to change? Software?

There is no confirmation on this turbo size rumour.

A smart engineer who has learned from the previous regulations will always go the maximum turbo size considering the engines are hybrid, and always thinks about race pace not just the start of the race.

I have been vocal on this. It would be silly to run a smaller turbo when you need as much power as possible in the higher rev range of the engine.

I feel Fred is playing reverse psychology here. The Ferrari starts are good because they have a solution for it and wanted to keep an advantage not because they have a small turbo. Why would you purposely make an engine weak for 98% percent of race? When you have overtaking aids?

I am with you. There is no suggestion from anyone at Ferrari that a smaller turbo was chosen. The only thing Fred said was that they designed the power unit as a whole to start well.

For all we know, they worked on how to spool the turbo quickly. Or, a completely different method of getting off the line quickly. Ferrari have plenty of experience with starting systems.

[f1316]

How so? My understanding is that this is a question of hardware (turbo size) so not something that is easily (aka impossible) changed. What are you suggesting they ‘chose’ not to change? Software?

There is no confirmation on this turbo size rumour.

A smart engineer who has learned from the previous regulations will always go the maximum turbo size considering the engines are hybrid, and always thinks about race pace not just the start of the race.

I have been vocal on this. It would be silly to run a smaller turbo when you need as much power as possible in the higher rev range of the engine.

I feel Fred is playing reverse psychology here. The Ferrari starts are good because they have a solution for it and wanted to keep an advantage not because they have a small turbo. Why would you purposely make an engine weak for 98% percent of race? When you have overtaking aids?

I am with you. There is no suggestion from anyone at Ferrari that a smaller turbo was chosen. The only thing Fred said was that they designed the power unit as a whole to start well.

For all we know, they worked on how to spool the turbo quickly. Or, a completely different method of getting off the line quickly. Ferrari have plenty of experience with starting systems.

Well every reputable journalist - who have inside sources in the teams - is reporting that Ferrari has a smaller turbo. Bear in mind: 1) Ferrari is widely believed to have used a smaller turbo in the last rules cycles so likely see other benefits as well 2) Fred called this a tradeoff worth 1 tenth per lap - so we’re likely talking smallER but very small differences.

In any case, this isn’t really the point - everyone is reporting Ferrari have a smaller turbo, you don’t believe it…fine. But what PlatinumZealot said was that Ferrari could have changed something and *chose* not to - I’m trying to understand what it is you think they could have changed and, if so, why they would have actively made a choice not to do something that was beneficial given new start procedure?

[FW17]

There is no confirmation on this turbo size rumour.

A smart engineer who has learned from the previous regulations will always go the maximum turbo size considering the engines are hybrid, and always thinks about race pace not just the start of the race.

I have been vocal on this. It would be silly to run a smaller turbo when you need as much power as possible in the higher rev range of the engine.

I feel Fred is playing reverse psychology here. The Ferrari starts are good because they have a solution for it and wanted to keep an advantage not because they have a small turbo. Why would you purposely make an engine weak for 98% percent of race? When you have overtaking aids?

I am with you. There is no suggestion from anyone at Ferrari that a smaller turbo was chosen. The only thing Fred said was that they designed the power unit as a whole to start well.

For all we know, they worked on how to spool the turbo quickly. Or, a completely different method of getting off the line quickly. Ferrari have plenty of experience with starting systems.

Well every reputable journalist - who have inside sources in the teams - is reporting that Ferrari has a smaller turbo. Bear in mind: 1) Ferrari is widely believed to have used a smaller turbo in the last rules cycles so likely see other benefits as well 2) Fred called this a tradeoff worth 1 tenth per lap - so we’re likely talking smallER but very small differences.

In any case, this isn’t really the point - everyone is reporting Ferrari have a smaller turbo, you don’t believe it…fine. But what PlatinumZealot said was that Ferrari could have changed something and *chose* not to - I’m trying to understand what it is you think they could have changed and, if so, why they would have actively made a choice not to do something that was beneficial given new start procedure?

Sounds like Ferrari of 2014 who sacrificed power of the ICE for aerodynamics.

Fred is looking to cover his backside and save face in front of Charles Leclerc for another lost season.

European season starting soon, soon he will be singing about the seconds they have gained with their 2027 car and engine.

But as soon as the ADUO list includes Ferrari, Fred should go the Stefano way.

[deadhead]

If they abandon yet another project mid season in order to presumably build a winning car for the next one leaving both drivers holding the bag I can’t see either of them driving for Ferrari in 2027

[AR3-GP]

Fighting with the Italian team consistently would mean closing the gap to six tenths, seen in the first three rounds, despite the Ferrari package whose impact is four tenths according to Maranello – a figure to be confirmed in the coming weekends.

https://autoracer.it/red-bull-in-canada ... n-ferrari/

[catent]

Fighting with the Italian team consistently would mean closing the gap to six tenths, seen in the first three rounds, despite the Ferrari package whose impact is four tenths according to Maranello – a figure to be confirmed in the coming weekends.

https://autoracer.it/red-bull-in-canada ... n-ferrari/

I find these predictions mostly meaningless at this stage of a (still very new) regulation set that's only seen five total races.

Not nearly enough data on the cars themselves, the respective upgrade packages, track-by-track variation, tire sets, track temps, etc, and how all those many variables interact with session-to-session pace.

Heck, even late during the season of a mature regulation set, we sometimes see surprises in terms of relative pace.

As I understand it, Ferrari likely didn't fully optimize the updates brought to Miami; further optimizing those recent updates will likely bring some additional pace.

And for whatever reason(s), certain tracks (be it layout, type of tarmarc, or some other factor) just work really well - or don't work really well - for certain teams.

[AR3-GP]

Fighting with the Italian team consistently would mean closing the gap to six tenths, seen in the first three rounds, despite the Ferrari package whose impact is four tenths according to Maranello – a figure to be confirmed in the coming weekends.

https://autoracer.it/red-bull-in-canada ... n-ferrari/

I find these predictions mostly meaningless at this stage of a (still very new) regulation set that's only seen five total races.

Not nearly enough data on the cars themselves, the respective upgrade packages, track-by-track variation, tire sets, track temps, etc, and how all those many variables interact with session-to-session pace.

Heck, even late during the season of a mature regulation set, we sometimes see surprises in terms of relative pace.

As I understand it, Ferrari likely didn't fully optimize the updates brought to Miami; further optimizing those recent updates will likely bring some additional pace.

And for whatever reason(s), certain tracks (be it layout, type of tarmarc, or some other factor) just work really well - or don't work really well - for certain teams.

I posted this to share that autoracer said the upgrade was 4 tenths according to Ferrari. Anything else that is written in the article is speculation.

[venkyhere]

sprint weekends are not ideal to optimize upgrade packages. Only after track time of three FP sessions of an hour each, can the team say "yes the upgrade works/doesn't" because having to find an optimal setup that is balanced in terms of stiffness/ride-height/camber/toe etc across a low fuel quali run and a full tank race run, is not easy to finish within an hour, if there are a lot of updates. Unless, the team is Mclaren who have absolutely nailed their correlation b/w simulation modelling and track data , since 2024 itself.

[sucof]

sprint weekends are not ideal to optimize upgrade packages. Only after track time of three FP sessions of an hour each, can the team say "yes the upgrade works/doesn't" because having to find an optimal setup that is balanced in terms of stiffness/ride-height/camber/toe etc across a low fuel quali run and a full tank race run, is not easy to finish within an hour, if there are a lot of updates. Unless, the team is Mclaren who have absolutely nailed their correlation b/w simulation modelling and track data , since 2024 itself.

I would slightly argue this.
After the sprint race, teams can again change the car, so if you think about the sprint events as FP2 then it is not worse. Add to that that they have a proper quali and little race as FP2, which is a lot better to actually see your car at max and compared to the others, than regular practice.

[CRazyLemon]

Any predictions on Ferrari pace this weekend?

I feel without the safety car in Miami we might have been able to stay ahead longer. Mercedes pulled a good strategy call so maybe 3rd could have been an easier position to hold onto against the outcome we had in the real world.

Macarena wing didn't seem to show that much straight line efficiency as I was hoping / dreaming of.

Logically this puts us 3rd best in my mind. So 4th 5th for the top car?

I'm hoping fp1 shows more promise than that though.

[Macklaren]

Any predictions on Ferrari pace this weekend?

I feel without the safety car in Miami we might have been able to stay ahead longer. Mercedes pulled a good strategy call so maybe 3rd could have been an easier position to hold onto against the outcome we had in the real world.

Macarena wing didn't seem to show that much straight line efficiency as I was hoping / dreaming of.

Logically this puts us 3rd best in my mind. So 4th 5th for the top car?

I'm hoping fp1 shows more promise than that though.

Depends on what "promise" and expectations mean...

If Mercedes wins this weekend, esp. with Kimi, then the championship is effectively over for everyone (as a McLaren stan I know its never over until its over given the last two years but practically speaking, most teams will treat the rest of the season as a development year for 2027). If expectations are for the odd race win, then Mercedes will slip up on execution at some point this year for the others to pick it up.

[deadhead]

The only thing that can “save” Ferrari on this track is the rain lottery on Sunday

[matt_b]

The only thing that can “save” Ferrari on this track is the rain lottery on Sunday

either that or remove sector 3, but we all know its a full weekend of sunshine and then come Monaco it'll be a downpour, yellow flags, red flags, SC's the lot

[j_ste]

Not quite sure how to feel about that. Lewis kinda messed up his Q3…but Mercedes are out of reach