Scuderia Ferrari SF90

[Xwang]

I fear that they design with too much limited security factor some critical components to limit weight maybe because they are not able or cannot limit weight in other areas of the car.
The fact that they use the matt paint to reduce weight let me think that they are at the limit of the weight.
If it is not a design problem then it is a quality one (they are not able to check that the components they make i what they have designed and is used in the way it was supposed to be used).
Do you agree?

[LM10]

Someone on Autosport had a theory which might make sense. Except for Austria, Mercedes is perhaps driving well within their limits and therefor nothimg breaks. The other teams however need to go to the edge everytime leading to this breaking of stuff. If Ferrari had the same level of dominance the Merc had they maybe could also run at 95% instead of 100% every time.

I say that for years. It's obvious. All these talks about Ferrari have the dominant PU are surely BS. The Mercedes car is the dominant one but in another way. It has so much more in reserve that they don't need full power of all components all the time. They said that themselves a few times back in 2016. If you can cruise nearly every race, you can spare parts. And I don't think other teams had less problems in Austria, they just chose to go full power anyway. Mercedes did not. They are clever as hell and they can use they potential to the maximum. It's really scary.

This is my opinion. It's not based on enough facts to say, it must be true. But I see some logic in it.

Last year Ferrari had less reliability issues than Mercedes.

[Xwang]

I fear that they design with too much limited security factor some critical components to limit weight maybe because they are not able or cannot limit weight in other areas of the car.
The fact that they use the matt paint to reduce weight let me think that they are at the limit of the weight.
If it is not a design problem then it is a quality one (they are not able to check that the components they make i what they have designed and is used in the way it was supposed to be used).
Do you agree?

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14503 ... y-approach

[saviour stivala]

Which 3? I was just thinking, Ferrari will probably want to avoid a situation in which they automatically trigger a penalty when they introduce their Spec 3 ICE/PU components at Spa/Monza (circuits they're expected to do well at).

MGU-K, CE and ES only 2 per season allowed and he is on the limit already.

Gotcha. Agreed on replacing those. Won't affect the Spec 3 introduction whatsoever.

Correct. Vettel having to start from last position will only benefit by taking a new gearbox, K and CE.

[Pyrone89]

They could do that again, FIA doesn't like that I imagine but it's allowed.

Then they lose the units added to the pool yesterday. After 1 team took like 3 engines in one weekend to stockpile they changed the rule if you exceed the limit of PU elements twice in a weekend for the same component. You are then only allowed to use the last introduced one from then on.

But so far they didn't exceed the limit. Is it different then?

Yes different, but then it makes no advantage to change now. Only gets you closer to the penalty limit

[MtthsMlw]

Then they lose the units added to the pool yesterday. After 1 team took like 3 engines in one weekend to stockpile they changed the rule if you exceed the limit of PU elements twice in a weekend for the same component. You are then only allowed to use the last introduced one from then on.

But so far they didn't exceed the limit. Is it different then?

Yes different, but then it makes no advantage to change now. Only gets you closer to the penalty limit

It would push mgu-k, ES and CE over the limit so he would have 3 of each in the pool without a meaningful grid penalty since he's P20 anyways.

[pb6797]

Probably a good idea to take all the components you can and have a pit-lane start with the car setup altered to handle a wet race too. May well see Vettel carve through the field with a wet setup while everyone else slips and slides around.

Could yet be a Ferrari win!

[Pyrone89]

But so far they didn't exceed the limit. Is it different then?

Yes different, but then it makes no advantage to change now. Only gets you closer to the penalty limit

It would push mgu-k, ES and CE over the limit so he would have 3 of each in the pool without a meaningful grid penalty since he's P20 anyways.

Yes, but I think the ones installed yesterday then get disallowed as per my first post. Not 100% sure as the change yesterday was without penalty, so it might be possible

[Big Mangalhit]

They could do that again, FIA doesn't like that I imagine but it's allowed.

Then they lose the units added to the pool yesterday. After 1 team took like 3 engines in one weekend to stockpile they changed the rule if you exceed the limit of PU elements twice in a weekend for the same component. You are then only allowed to use the last introduced one from then on.

But so far they didn't exceed the limit. Is it different then?

I was also wondering how the wording might be about this. If they could put two and not have the directive --- them cause it's not like they are putting two above the limit. But it's maybe not so good cause you then you had 2 new PU but if they wanted an upgrade they'd take a penalty. Right now they can have an upgrade with no penalty so it's a trade-off they should know better. Still don't understand why they didn't put the new K CE and ES just to have them with nor risks (or did they and I missed it?) Surely they had spares there no? Also prolly easier for them to ship from factory in a few hours

[henry]

Then they lose the units added to the pool yesterday. After 1 team took like 3 engines in one weekend to stockpile they changed the rule if you exceed the limit of PU elements twice in a weekend for the same component. You are then only allowed to use the last introduced one from then on.

But so far they didn't exceed the limit. Is it different then?

I was also wondering how the wording might be about this. If they could put two and not have the directive --- them cause it's not like they are putting two above the limit. But it's maybe not so good cause you then you had 2 new PU but if they wanted an upgrade they'd take a penalty. Right now they can have an upgrade with no penalty so it's a trade-off they should know better. Still don't understand why they didn't put the new K CE and ES just to have them with nor risks (or did they and I missed it?) Surely they had spares there no? Also prolly easier for them to ship from factory in a few hours

The relevant section is in bold below:

Unless he drives for more than one team (see 23.3(c) below), and subject to the additions described below, each driver may use no more than 3 engines (ICE), 3 motor generator units‐heat (MGU‐H), 3 turbochargers (TC), 2 energy stores (ES), 2 control electronics (CE) and 2 motor generator units‐kinetic (MGU‐K) during a Championship season.
With the consent of (and at the sole discretion of) the FIA, the numbers above will be increased by one for any driver using a power unit provided by a new power unit manufacturer (as defined in Appendix 9) taking part in their first Championship season.
b) Should a driver use more than the numbers set in a) above of any one of the elements during a Championship season, a grid place penalty will be imposed upon him at the first Event during which each additional element is used. Penalties will be applied according to the following table and will be cumulative :
The first time an additional element is used Ten grid place penalty. The next times an additional element is used Five grid place penalty.
If a driver incurs a penalty exceeding 15 grid places he will be required to start the race from the back of the starting grid.
Any of the six elements will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.
During any single Event, if a driver introduces more than one of the same power unit element which is subject to penalties, only the last element fitted may be used at subsequent Events without further penalty.

[Big Mangalhit]

TY very much Henry, put I still think the word is a bit ambigous. Like in this case only the second introduced PU would be subjected to penalies so does the other one would not be viable to use again? IMO that wouldn't make sense. How you you interpret it? Could they use PU number 3 if they introduced 3 and 4 yesterday?

[henry]

TY very much Henry, put I still think the word is a bit ambigous. Like in this case only the second introduced PU would be subjected to penalies so does the other one would not be viable to use again? IMO that wouldn't make sense. How you you interpret it? Could they use PU number 3 if they introduced 3 and 4 yesterday?

PU 3 is not subject to a penalty so the bolded clause does not apply. Only one element, number 4 is subject to penalties. So they could use 3 and 4 in future events.

If they had introduced 4 and 5 in the event, number 4 would not be allowed to be used in future events.

Another way of looking at it is that once you reach the penalty free count of elements you may only increase the stock of elements you carry forward by one at every event.

[alessio]

Do you have news about this?

"Ferrari modified the front suspension by moving the fulcrum point of the strut with a bracket slightly more protruding from the hub holder"

Source:
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferra ... m/4502640/

[MtthsMlw]

Do you have news about this?

"Ferrari modified the front suspension by moving the fulcrum point of the strut with a bracket slightly more protruding from the hub holder"

Source:
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferra ... m/4502640/

Comparing pictures I couldn't tell a difference and as this is only reported by one source I would take it with a grain of salt.

[saviour stivala]

Vettel took a new ES. Leclerc took a new K and ES.