Ferrari F1-75

[One and Only]

I wonder if the much more backed off front wing indicates that they’re generating tonnes of downforce elsewhere so it isn’t necessary, or that they’re unable to generate that much downforce at the rear so need a backed off front wing to balance it.

Kyle.engineers asked this in his video and I’ve been pondering it ever since as Ferrari’s seems to be almost flat compared to the others.

Edit: link for comparison

Thanks for sharing this. The caveat is that the photo angles are marginally different, but clearly the Ferrari has the flattest angle of attack. I don't think the full regulation box for the front wing area has been maximised either, but I've not seen a top down view to confirm it.

I wasn’t able to find top down pic of new Ferrari. It’s interesting that they haven’t published it.

[mwillems]

I get the general concern regarding the extreme nature of the bodywork, and you can get a whiff of Ferrari doing a Ferrari and trying to be just a bit too novel with a new car.

That said if it proves to be competitive, I’ll be happy.

I totally agree here. I think they took "thinking out of the box" and "being brave" too literally here and just came up with the most unorthodox concept they could. The SF1000 is probably the most impressive Ferrari ever packaging wise, the engine cover and sidepods on that were incredibly tight, I really wish they went down that route (of course while fixing the problems the SF1000 had)

Nugnes reported that apparently this sidepod concept proved to be 7% more efficient than the sloped sidepods, I hope he is right but he isn't really trustworthy

It's important to be clear that they considered it more effective than Ferraris interpretation of how to make sloped sidepods work and we can't assume that in itself was an effective solution in itself, nor interpretation this as suggesting it was a bad one.

It's a chunky but sexy car, but the louvred spoon may well still be brilliant and could still be coupled with slimmer sidepods if they dont prove effective. For all we know this solution has some brilliance that needs to be further refined. Certainly in my original post I wasn't suggesting Ferrari throw the bathtub out with the water.

All the cars have scope to merge to a more unified solution at this point.

But if this concept does produce high downforce and they do have a strong engine then maybe its a winner as is.

Before the merc I thought this was a nice design, but merc pushed the idea of the floor forged into a crude bargeboard so the question it leaves me is, is the Ferrari solution relevant given what Merc have done and can it develop as much as those tunnel entrances on the merc.

[Stu]

I'm also a noob and I'm worried about the excessive thickness of the Ferrari sidepods looking at it through the CFD in my eyes. Is it possible that in Maranello the upper part where I painted in blue was made like a empty tube to direct the inner air flow exactly where they want?

That "tube" area is from my understanding mandated by the rules - there is a minimum radius any bodywork can take there so Ferrari was forced to make it in a tube instead of being sharp edged.

Perhaps I said badly. I meant that this "tube" with a diameter of 4-6 cm is intended not for cooling radiators, but for purposefully directing air to the beam wings or diffusor through this tube. Is it worth it? It seems to me that it is more controllable than on the surface of the body.

https://i.imgur.com/TztxyIY.jpg

And if that tube is not used for cooling purposes it nearly sidesteps the new ruling about openings in the bodywork (except for exit louvres).

[jumpingfish]

That "tube" area is from my understanding mandated by the rules - there is a minimum radius any bodywork can take there so Ferrari was forced to make it in a tube instead of being sharp edged.

Perhaps I said badly. I meant that this "tube" with a diameter of 4-6 cm is intended not for cooling radiators, but for purposefully directing air to the beam wings or diffusor through this tube. Is it worth it? It seems to me that it is more controllable than on the surface of the body.

https://i.imgur.com/TztxyIY.jpg

And if that tube is not used for cooling purposes it nearly sidesteps the new ruling about openings in the bodywork (except for exit louvres).

Ah.. but then they can use part of the radiators somewhere inside there to bend that rule and to say: it is for cooling

[One and Only]

That "tube" area is from my understanding mandated by the rules - there is a minimum radius any bodywork can take there so Ferrari was forced to make it in a tube instead of being sharp edged.

Perhaps I said badly. I meant that this "tube" with a diameter of 4-6 cm is intended not for cooling radiators, but for purposefully directing air to the beam wings or diffusor through this tube. Is it worth it? It seems to me that it is more controllable than on the surface of the body.

https://i.imgur.com/TztxyIY.jpg

And if that tube is not used for cooling purposes it nearly sidesteps the new ruling about openings in the bodywork (except for exit louvres).

Radiator with one grill is still technically a radiator. I can see how they can circumvent that rule. Other thing is will FIA be happy with such interpretation.

[Henri]

Very different front wings

[cokata]

We don't know downforce levels. But what we can say is that having DF generating part of the wing be a bigger % of the total width therefore with a lower AOA if all else is equal for a given DF it will produce less drag.

The other advantage is that if the AOA is lower there is more chance to redirect the upwash back down to the floor, maybe that's why the tie rod is exposed. They are trying as much as possible of bringing the upwash back, rather than backing off the wing angle at the nose like merc does.

[Stu]

Perhaps I said badly. I meant that this "tube" with a diameter of 4-6 cm is intended not for cooling radiators, but for purposefully directing air to the beam wings or diffusor through this tube. Is it worth it? It seems to me that it is more controllable than on the surface of the body.

https://i.imgur.com/TztxyIY.jpg

And if that tube is not used for cooling purposes it nearly sidesteps the new ruling about openings in the bodywork (except for exit louvres).

Radiator with one grill is still technically a radiator. I can see how they can circumvent that rule. Other thing is will FIA be happy with such interpretation.

If the rule says cooling exit, but the duct has no cooling purpose, it is merely empty bodywork (not even a duct).
If shaped internally with the correct volume changes there are potential flow uses that the exit can be used for; you are also totally in control of how the air moves through the bodywork. Maybe I’m stretching here, but through-flow was a massive part of some of the later LMP1 cars (Toyota, Porsche, Audi & Nissan) all used it to reduce drag and maximise L:D.

[Timtim99]

Has anyone considered if Ferrari did not revealed all their car design during the car Launch? for me I think the floor and front wing look too basic.

[Nicktendo86]

Has anyone considered if Ferrari did not revealed all their car design during the car Launch? for me I think the floor and front wing look too basic.

With the budget cap I cannot see them developing and manufacturing fake parts to hide the real ones. What they have shown/run so far is what they have I am sure.

[Partymood]

Has anyone considered if Ferrari did not revealed all their car design during the car Launch? for me I think the floor and front wing look too basic.

With the budget cap I cannot see them developing and manufacturing fake parts to hide the real ones. What they have shown/run so far is what they have I am sure.

Genuine question, can the floor be modular?

[F1ern]

I wonder if the much more backed off front wing indicates that they’re generating tonnes of downforce elsewhere so it isn’t necessary, or that they’re unable to generate that much downforce at the rear so need a backed off front wing to balance it.

Kyle.engineers asked this in his video and I’ve been pondering it ever since as Ferrari’s seems to be almost flat compared to the others.

Edit: link for comparison

It seems like Ferraris rear wing has also smaller surface then Merc.

[aleks_ader]

Perhaps I said badly. I meant that this "tube" with a diameter of 4-6 cm is intended not for cooling radiators, but for purposefully directing air to the beam wings or diffusor through this tube. Is it worth it? It seems to me that it is more controllable than on the surface of the body.

https://i.imgur.com/TztxyIY.jpg

And if that tube is not used for cooling purposes it nearly sidesteps the new ruling about openings in the bodywork (except for exit louvres).

Ah.. but then they can use part of the radiators somewhere inside there to bend that rule and to say: it is for cooling

"Herby is 51% of cooling i swear. Look attachment in email CFD confirms it"

[pantherxxx]

According to Motorsport Italy (from Maranello sources) Ferrari believes that their unique sidepod design makes 7% more downforce at the back of the car, than a more conventional tighter sidepod design. It will be up to the track to confirm these data.

Like the Aston Martin, Ferrari tries to dissipate the warm but already processed air generated during the cooling of the power unit. Judging by the design of the gills, they don't necessarily try to direct it to the top of the diffuser, but to the rear wing and above the diffuser. The latter theory is also indicated by the fact that the opening of the swingarms of the rear suspension was cleverly shaped by Ferrari as a miniature spoiler.

This is certainly the distinguishing mark of a project that was deliberated after a long and careful study: the project coordinator, Enrico Cardile, and the aerodynamic leader, David Sanchez, had the opportunity to work with plenty of time on the ground-effect single-seater project, discriminating the different solutions to converge on the double bottom concept with the variants created in Maranello.

[Jakxy]

According to Motorsport Italy (from Maranello sources) Ferrari believes that their unique sidepod design makes 7% more downforce at the back of the car, than a more conventional tighter sidepod design. It will be up to the track to confirm these data.

Like the Aston Martin, Ferrari tries to dissipate the warm but already processed air generated during the cooling of the power unit. Judging by the design of the gills, they don't necessarily try to direct it to the top of the diffuser, but to the rear wing and above the diffuser. The latter theory is also indicated by the fact that the opening of the swingarms of the rear suspension was cleverly shaped by Ferrari as a miniature spoiler.

This is certainly the distinguishing mark of a project that was deliberated after a long and careful study: the project coordinator, Enrico Cardile, and the aerodynamic leader, David Sanchez, had the opportunity to work with plenty of time on the ground-effect single-seater project, discriminating the different solutions to converge on the double bottom concept with the variants created in Maranello.

+%7 DF is great number. But what is going to cost at the straights? I mean we know that engine is not weak as back in 2020 but… being sitting duck at straights was painful enough after 2019.