2025 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[RonMexico]

On the topic of the engine braking and using the tools in the car. I find that superbikes give a better illustration of what is applied in F-1, as we do not get much detail from the teams; for casual fans at least. Fans involved in competitive racing and open wheel racing probably know a lot more on brake balance and differential settings and use.


I can imagine how intimate the driver needs to be with his engine and tools to really get the most out of it.

An informative video on brake balance, maps and brake by wire:

Let's consult someone who went through the same transition.

And so, in an Automoto.it interview, Bottas was asked how difficult it is to adapt to the Ferrari engine.

“It’s not that difficult,” he said.

“I don’t find the differences that big, apart from something minor regarding driveability.

“The most complex thing is to manage the adjustments, as the nomenclatures are different. Once you learn the basics, you manage without too much effort.”

But, is a change of driving style needed to get the best out of the Ferrari engine?

“Minimal,” Bottas replied, “especially in terms of shifting and engine braking.

“But everything is adjustable, and you can find a solution that makes you feel comfortable.”

So there we have it, changes are minimal. Straight from no nonsense Bottas who isn't trying to fool anyone.

That's why Bottas has a race seat.. oh wait!
Drivers are different. Driving style and operation level.
You are basically saying Hamilton is trying to fool people and in any car Charles is going to be 6 tenths to a second faster. OK we get it.
As I say, let's hear the theories at the end of the season to explain why all of a sudden Lewis is on the pace, or why Ferrari shifted the car away from Charles and made him slower to favor Lewis, because this is the most predictable explanation from F1 fans who are so willing to punch down.
Bottas is entitled to his own opinion. So is Ralf Shumacher, Martin Brundle, and everyone else who "understands" what's going. These same people will flip like a switch when things turnaround and it doesn't fit their theories.

It's a race weekend. I do not expect much difference this weekend. Maybe just more consistency from Hamilton.
He's going to need more time to adjust. Half a season as Carlon Sainz says; who happens to be an active driver.

Whatever way you dress it up, a lack of adaptability is not a great trait.
Sainz is a politician and will only say something to favour his own situation.

[ScuderiaLeo]

According to Duchessa, we'll see small updates between Imola and Spain. Then a larger package with a revised rear is planned to come sometime after, perhaps spread across multiple races.

https://autoracer.it/it/mclaren-red-bul ... rrari-sf25

[f1316]

According to Duchessa, we'll see small updates between Imola and Spain. Then a larger package with a revised rear is planned to come sometime after, perhaps spread across multiple races.

https://autoracer.it/it/mclaren-red-bul ... rrari-sf25

Yeah, same here: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferr ... /10717907/

Not a lot of details though

[Space-heat]

McLaren obviously have a system that can keep the tires in their window for longer and more consistent than any other car, so expecting an easy 1-2 from them considering that lovely Miami sunshine this time of year.

I also think this has nothing to do with their flexing front wing, so that TD everyone is betting on slowing them down will do nothing.

While I agree that their excellent tyre temperature regulation is not going to change significantly with the Spain TD.

I think saying that they will be unaffected is unlikely.

Pre-Miami last year the McLaren had to compromise their set up. I remember Oscar and Lando bemoaning the last corner in Bahrain 2024 (can't find the interview). The Miami update, accompanied by the FW, allowed them to have a set-up that helped them excel across all corner types

Mcl Miami 2024 update list


Taking that away will limit their ability to perform in all corner types. Even if it only costs them a tenth to the competition, that will matter. I think qualitatively and rumour-mill based it seems like it will hit Red Bull the least, then maybe Ferrari.

If (and big if) Ferrari can sort out the ride height that will be a bigger gain than anything else. Unfortunately I think, it will come too late for this season but if it results in closing the RB, Ferrari, Mcl and Merc pack even closer it might generate some great races.

[deadhead]

Thanks for posting that I forgot how big that upgrade was...

We will see soon enough, I'm not saying it wont affect them, but it won't be more than any other team so the gaps are likely to remain as we might see them this coming weekend

[LM10]

Thanks for posting that I forgot how big that upgrade was...

We will see soon enough, I'm not saying it wont affect them, but it won't be more than any other team so the gaps are likely to remain as we might see them this coming weekend

How do you know?

[ringo]

Interesting parts from Rosario Giuliana at the Race (AR):

Upgrades:
"Sources suggest Ferrari won’t bring any significant update packages to the next two races at Miami and Imola."


Confirmation the Bahrain floor was planned before season and not to fix Ride Height:
"In Bahrain a fortnight ago, Ferrari introduced its first upgrade package of the year, headlined by a new floor.

The goal was greater aerodynamic efficiency and improved high-speed downforce. While the changes helped, they weren’t designed to fix the SF-25’s rear-end instability - a trait described as a 'lazy' rear end that first emerged in round one.

Notably, the Bahrain package had already been in the works before the season began, forming part of a pre-established development trajectory rather than a direct response to early-season struggles."


Some greater speculation later in the article:
"The Bahrain updates have done little to fully cure the car's fundamental weaknesses. Part of the issue appears mechanical - likely involving suspension geometry and weight distribution...The aim is to develop a new floor that maintains downforce at greater ride heights."

I hope the later is not true as if we can't run low, we won't challenge, so you might as well pivot away to 26'.


https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/ferr ... must-stop/

That's actually good news.
It means that there is more room for progress if the last update was pre planned.
If it were to fix the issues and it barely did anything, then I would be more worried.
There is now more time and resources to effectively work on a fix for the rear end issue.

Over the winter was when they were supposed to have fixed the car's issues with a better base. That they've not been able to do that is not good news, because the changes needed to properly 'fix' anything are likely out the window without more fundamental rethinking that's simply not possible in-season, and definitely not possible in a season like this when 2026 has to be a priority if you're not capable of fighting for the championship.

Perhaps Ferrari still put some effort into doing what they can, even if just for the exercise of doing so and proving they can move forward meaningfully, but it's more likely to be bandaid fixes than anything that will genuinely transform the car into what Ferrari were aiming for to begin with. And they'll have limited resources to do all this anyways, because again, Ferrari are out of the championship battle already and will be better off prioritizing 2026.

You cannot fix issues for a car that has never run on the track in anger. So this is why I was saying I would have been more concerned if the car was ran in real life on a real track with data collected, and a part made to fix the issue and it underwhelmed.
A part developed over the winter, solely based on old, correlated data, and lab data from Pirelli and simulation, can be more forgiven if it does not produce the calculated lap times.
Again, you cannot fix a problem for a machine that has never ran. The problem starts existing in real life only.
If you design in a problem at a primordial stage, then that's insanity and the whole team needs to go to the asylum.

[ringo]

Let's consult someone who went through the same transition.

And so, in an Automoto.it interview, Bottas was asked how difficult it is to adapt to the Ferrari engine.


So there we have it, changes are minimal. Straight from no nonsense Bottas who isn't trying to fool anyone.

That's why Bottas has a race seat.. oh wait!
Drivers are different. Driving style and operation level.
You are basically saying Hamilton is trying to fool people and in any car Charles is going to be 6 tenths to a second faster. OK we get it.
As I say, let's hear the theories at the end of the season to explain why all of a sudden Lewis is on the pace, or why Ferrari shifted the car away from Charles and made him slower to favor Lewis, because this is the most predictable explanation from F1 fans who are so willing to punch down.
Bottas is entitled to his own opinion. So is Ralf Shumacher, Martin Brundle, and everyone else who "understands" what's going. These same people will flip like a switch when things turnaround and it doesn't fit their theories.

It's a race weekend. I do not expect much difference this weekend. Maybe just more consistency from Hamilton.
He's going to need more time to adjust. Half a season as Carlon Sainz says; who happens to be an active driver.

Whatever way you dress it up, a lack of adaptability is not a great trait.
Sainz is a politician and will only say something to favour his own situation.

Traits don't matter if over your career you deliver over 100 wins. And Hamilton has adapted over countless technical changes. It's okay to not adapt 100% of the time. Hamilton still has the most insane conversion rates in many metrics. Probably top 3 in all of these metrics. A driver like that is not one who is not adaptable.

[Silent Storm]

Traits don't matter if over your career you deliver over 100 wins. And Hamilton has adapted over countless technical changes. It's okay to not adapt 100% of the time. Hamilton still has the most insane conversion rates in many metrics. Probably top 3 in all of these metrics. A driver like that is not one who is not adaptable.

That’s a lazy deflection, Ringo...

Dominance during a golden era with the best car isn’t proof of adaptability, it’s proof of capitalizing on superiority, which Hamilton did brilliantly. But past stats don’t rewrite current reality. Right now, he’s being outdriven in the same car, under the same rules.

When Hamilton struggles, suddenly it’s “traits don’t matter” That’s convenient.

Adaptability isn’t a historical metric you dust off when the present doesn’t flatter your favorite, it’s something you prove now, race by race. The stopwatch doesn’t care how many wins you had in 2015.

You keep trying to reframe facts with sentiment. At some point, even nostalgia has to yield to evidence. Past adaptability doesn't excuse present stagnation. Legacy can't drive the car for him.

[ringo]

Traits don't matter if over your career you deliver over 100 wins. And Hamilton has adapted over countless technical changes. It's okay to not adapt 100% of the time. Hamilton still has the most insane conversion rates in many metrics. Probably top 3 in all of these metrics. A driver like that is not one who is not adaptable.

That’s a lazy deflection, Ringo...

Dominance during a golden era with the best car isn’t proof of adaptability, it’s proof of capitalizing on superiority, which Hamilton did brilliantly. But past stats don’t rewrite current reality. Right now, he’s being outdriven in the same car, under the same rules.

When Hamilton struggles, suddenly it’s “traits don’t matter” That’s convenient.

Adaptability isn’t a historical metric you dust off when the present doesn’t flatter your favorite, it’s something you prove now, race by race. The stopwatch doesn’t care how many wins you had in 2015.

You keep trying to reframe facts with sentiment. At some point, even nostalgia has to yield to evidence. Past adaptability doesn't excuse present stagnation. Legacy can't drive the car for him.

This is just a false narrative. I have been watching F-1 since 1999. Hamilton was a top driver even before moving to Mercedes.

21 wins, 26 pole positions, and 12 fastest laps in McLaren before 2013. Compare those stats to the drivers at the time and look on the rank of the cars also.
Even by the 24 race seasons of the modern era, many drivers do not have those statistics. Only Max, who has enjoyed a dominant car for 4 complete seasons. Hamilton did not need a dominant era to be one of the most adaptable or one of the greats. Red bull and Ferrari were mostly dominant in that whole period, yet the results are there even if he retired at the end of 2012.
Again, it's not about being lazy about the numbers. But the numbers speak for themselves, that is if you have been watching the sport and not just looking on the spreadsheets. It's just not likely by any confidence interval for an average/ non adaptable driver to have 100 wins over 16 different F-1 cars and 4 or 5 major regulation changes.
On the contrary, it's actually lazy of new fans of the sport to simply accept what they think they see now, and what the pundits say without actually living through the seasons. None of Hamilton's teammates ever said he was not adaptable. It's quite the opposite.

[Silent Storm]

Traits don't matter if over your career you deliver over 100 wins. And Hamilton has adapted over countless technical changes. It's okay to not adapt 100% of the time. Hamilton still has the most insane conversion rates in many metrics. Probably top 3 in all of these metrics. A driver like that is not one who is not adaptable.

That’s a lazy deflection, Ringo...

Dominance during a golden era with the best car isn’t proof of adaptability, it’s proof of capitalizing on superiority, which Hamilton did brilliantly. But past stats don’t rewrite current reality. Right now, he’s being outdriven in the same car, under the same rules.

When Hamilton struggles, suddenly it’s “traits don’t matter” That’s convenient.

Adaptability isn’t a historical metric you dust off when the present doesn’t flatter your favorite, it’s something you prove now, race by race. The stopwatch doesn’t care how many wins you had in 2015.

You keep trying to reframe facts with sentiment. At some point, even nostalgia has to yield to evidence. Past adaptability doesn't excuse present stagnation. Legacy can't drive the car for him.

This is just a false narrative. I have been watching F-1 since 1999. Hamilton was a top driver even before moving to Mercedes.

21 wins, 26 pole positions, and 12 fastest laps in McLaren before 2013. Compare those stats to the drivers at the time and look on the rank of the cars also.
Even by the 24 race seasons of the modern era, many drivers do not have those statistics. Only Max, who has enjoyed a dominant car for 4 complete seasons. Hamilton did not need a dominant era to be one of the most adaptable or one of the greats. Red bull and Ferrari were mostly dominant in that whole period, yet the results are there even if he retired at the end of 2012.
Again, it's not about being lazy about the numbers. But the numbers speak for themselves, that is if you have been watching the sport and not just looking on the spreadsheets. It's just not likely by any confidence interval for an average/ non adaptable driver to have 100 wins over 16 different F-1 cars and 4 or 5 major regulation changes.
On the contrary, it's actually lazy of new fans of the sport to simply accept what they think they see now, and what the pundits say without actually living through the seasons. None of Hamilton's teammates ever said he was not adaptable. It's quite the opposite.

You’re mistaking a wikipedia summary for present day relevance....

No one’s denying Hamilton’s past brilliance, what’s being pointed out is his present form under pressure and change.

Dragging up decade old stats to defend current struggles is like waving a high school trophy at a pro tryout. Yes, he’s had an incredible career. Yes, he’s adapted before. But that doesn’t make him immune to criticism today, especially when he’s been consistently outperformed.

The irony? For all your talk about lazy narratives, clinging to past glory instead of addressing the now is the lazy narrative.

Legends don’t get free passes. They earn them again...

And if your whole argument boils down to “but look at what he did back then,” then congratulations... You’ve just made the case that the Hamilton of today is a shadow of who he once was.

Legacy is earned. But it’s also retired...

[Cs98]

That’s a lazy deflection, Ringo...

Dominance during a golden era with the best car isn’t proof of adaptability, it’s proof of capitalizing on superiority, which Hamilton did brilliantly. But past stats don’t rewrite current reality. Right now, he’s being outdriven in the same car, under the same rules.

When Hamilton struggles, suddenly it’s “traits don’t matter” That’s convenient.

Adaptability isn’t a historical metric you dust off when the present doesn’t flatter your favorite, it’s something you prove now, race by race. The stopwatch doesn’t care how many wins you had in 2015.

You keep trying to reframe facts with sentiment. At some point, even nostalgia has to yield to evidence. Past adaptability doesn't excuse present stagnation. Legacy can't drive the car for him.

This is just a false narrative. I have been watching F-1 since 1999. Hamilton was a top driver even before moving to Mercedes.

21 wins, 26 pole positions, and 12 fastest laps in McLaren before 2013. Compare those stats to the drivers at the time and look on the rank of the cars also.
Even by the 24 race seasons of the modern era, many drivers do not have those statistics. Only Max, who has enjoyed a dominant car for 4 complete seasons. Hamilton did not need a dominant era to be one of the most adaptable or one of the greats. Red bull and Ferrari were mostly dominant in that whole period, yet the results are there even if he retired at the end of 2012.
Again, it's not about being lazy about the numbers. But the numbers speak for themselves, that is if you have been watching the sport and not just looking on the spreadsheets. It's just not likely by any confidence interval for an average/ non adaptable driver to have 100 wins over 16 different F-1 cars and 4 or 5 major regulation changes.
On the contrary, it's actually lazy of new fans of the sport to simply accept what they think they see now, and what the pundits say without actually living through the seasons. None of Hamilton's teammates ever said he was not adaptable. It's quite the opposite.

Imagine being in the Ferrari thread and trying to sneak by Ferrari fans that they were "dominant" in the late V8 era over the likes of McLaren The truth is that Lewis' record in this era isn't special compared to the other "elite" guys. Fernando, Seb, Jenson, they all have comparable or superior stats when you look at wins, podiums, points, and championships at that time.

And I have to agree with Silent Storm, all this comes across as deflecting from his current (lack of) ability to adapt. Being "adaptable" isn't some trophy you won 15 years ago that you can put on your mantle and forever claim as an inherent quality, it's an actual skill that needs to be proven here and now for it to matter. And we are not seeing that right now at this stage of his career.

[ringo]

The lesson here is you can't please everyone.
No matter what you do!!

Anyhow this weekend there seem to be updates and fancy race suits.

[Seanspeed]

You cannot fix issues for a car that has never run on the track in anger.

I'm talking about the issues with the 2024 car quite obviously. Did that really need explaining?

The 2024 car was good, but had some limitations/flaws. The aim for 2025 wasn't to produce some ground-up rethink of everything, it was to take the good qualities of the 2024 car, enhance them, and most importantly - address the fundamental problems. 2025 is the last year of the regulations, there was never gonna be time to start completely fresh and work out any issues it had, especially when we knew Mclaren would almost assuredly be starting out strong from the get-go.

[MattLightBlue]

This weekend they could try to set up the car lower for the sprint race only, to gain some performance and take advantage of less wear expected for the 20-ish laps.
It would mean, however, no time to try a proper race setup. What do you guys think?