Ferrari SF1000

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
Partymood
Partymood
-3
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 4:21 pm

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

zibby43 wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:28 pm
kimmmykim wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 10:48 pm
Hey guys, the settlement between Ferrari and the FIA stated that Ferrari would help the FIA in policing the engines. Was the recently announced quali mode ban something that Ferrari had a hand with? I find it really hard to believe that their SF1000 has an engine without even the most basic quali mode (before the ban) in the same same year when it is banned.

Sent from my SM-A307FN using Tapatalk
Perhaps this discussion may be better suited for the PU or team threads, but to answer as succinctly as possible, yes, Ferrari absolutely lobbied the FIA about the qualifying mode ban.

And as Mark Hughes pointed out, it backfired on them.

"Any hope Ferrari may have about the imposition of a single engine mode helping it looks forlorn. From Monza, the FIA imposed a new Technical Directive that insisted only a single engine mode could be used from the beginning of qualifying to the end of the race. You can choose different modes for different tracks, but can no longer change during qualifying or race, effectively outlawing qually or overtaking modes that involved any changes to ignition timing, fuel flow, oil burn etc.

Because Ferrari was already extremely restricted in this regard (since the pre-season Technical Directives), it hoped that the ruling might bring the others down towards its level. All that appears to have happened is that any engine mileage previously used up by running the more aggressive modes has now been deployed instead – by Mercedes, Renault and Honda – to a stronger baseline mode. Charles Leclerc’s relatively strong qualifying and very poor race performance at Mugello suggests the ruling has simply switched around Ferrari’s strongest and weakest parts of the weekend."


https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/arti ... -formula-1
Hughes thinks that? Didn't Marko said that Redbull pushed hard for the ban? Why didn't he mention that in his article?

the EDGE
the EDGE
77
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:31 pm
Location: Luton ENGLAND

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Partymood wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:47 am
Hughes thinks that? Didn't Marko said that Redbull pushed hard for the ban? Why didn't he mention that in his article?
I don’t even think the article is accurate, otherwise why would it just have affected Leclerc and not Vettel, and as they have to run the same engine mode all weekend why would he have performed better in quali than the race, surely the performance would have carried over?

I thought the reason Leclerc did much better in quali than the race was that the car was setup to over-use the tyres for better 1 lap performance

zibby43
zibby43
429
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:16 am

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Partymood wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:47 am
zibby43 wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:28 pm
kimmmykim wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 10:48 pm
Hey guys, the settlement between Ferrari and the FIA stated that Ferrari would help the FIA in policing the engines. Was the recently announced quali mode ban something that Ferrari had a hand with? I find it really hard to believe that their SF1000 has an engine without even the most basic quali mode (before the ban) in the same same year when it is banned.

Sent from my SM-A307FN using Tapatalk
Perhaps this discussion may be better suited for the PU or team threads, but to answer as succinctly as possible, yes, Ferrari absolutely lobbied the FIA about the qualifying mode ban.

And as Mark Hughes pointed out, it backfired on them.

"Any hope Ferrari may have about the imposition of a single engine mode helping it looks forlorn. From Monza, the FIA imposed a new Technical Directive that insisted only a single engine mode could be used from the beginning of qualifying to the end of the race. You can choose different modes for different tracks, but can no longer change during qualifying or race, effectively outlawing qually or overtaking modes that involved any changes to ignition timing, fuel flow, oil burn etc.

Because Ferrari was already extremely restricted in this regard (since the pre-season Technical Directives), it hoped that the ruling might bring the others down towards its level. All that appears to have happened is that any engine mileage previously used up by running the more aggressive modes has now been deployed instead – by Mercedes, Renault and Honda – to a stronger baseline mode. Charles Leclerc’s relatively strong qualifying and very poor race performance at Mugello suggests the ruling has simply switched around Ferrari’s strongest and weakest parts of the weekend."


https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/arti ... -formula-1
Hughes thinks that? Didn't Marko said that Redbull pushed hard for the ban? Why didn't he mention that in his article?
OT, but I wouldn't put much stock into what Marko says.

Red Bull ended up being one of the manufacturers that asked for more dyno time to adapt to the TD. Plus, Red Bull was hurt a bit by the TD, as they had a decent quali mode. Ferrari, on the other hand, didn't have a quali mode at all this year (per Mattia).

Sevach
Sevach
878
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

the EDGE wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 5:44 am
Partymood wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:47 am
Hughes thinks that? Didn't Marko said that Redbull pushed hard for the ban? Why didn't he mention that in his article?
I don’t even think the article is accurate, otherwise why would it just have affected Leclerc and not Vettel, and as they have to run the same engine mode all weekend why would he have performed better in quali than the race, surely the performance would have carried over?

I thought the reason Leclerc did much better in quali than the race was that the car was setup to over-use the tyres for better 1 lap performance
That and Ocon f... everybody, Charles lap was slower than many cars that qualified behind him in Q2.

zioture
zioture
409
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 11:46 am
Location: Italy

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Image

Image

zioture
zioture
409
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 11:46 am
Location: Italy

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Image

User avatar
MtthsMlw
858
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 5:38 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

S/o to Seb
Image

and these crazy turning vanes
Image
via @NicolasF1i

Sevach
Sevach
878
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Image

Ringleheim
Ringleheim
14
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:02 am

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

I enjoy these detail shots of the car. It's fun to look at everything.

But man, this Ferrari is not going to go much faster with some re-tweaked turning vanes.

I hope they aren't even trying to improve the car. Put the effort into the future.

wowgr8
wowgr8
5
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:35 pm

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Ringleheim wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:32 pm
I enjoy these detail shots of the car. It's fun to look at everything.

But man, this Ferrari is not going to go much faster with some re-tweaked turning vanes.

I hope they aren't even trying to improve the car. Put the effort into the future.
Word is they're experimenting on this car to see whether it's the right direction to take for the 21 car. Which worries me because shouldn't next year's car be 70-80% baked at this point in the year? What if the track tests show this is the wrong direction to take?? Random thought

User avatar
MtthsMlw
858
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 5:38 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

Ringleheim wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:32 pm
I enjoy these detail shots of the car. It's fun to look at everything.

But man, this Ferrari is not going to go much faster with some re-tweaked turning vanes.

I hope they aren't even trying to improve the car. Put the effort into the future.
New floor and barge boards/sidepod (I guess) coming next race, actual performance upgrade this time. I think it's still ok to set the foundation for 2021 now as in season development next year will be minimal for everyone.

wowgr8 wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:35 pm

Word is they're experimenting on this car to see whether it's the right direction to take for the 21 car. Which worries me because shouldn't next year's car be 70-80% baked at this point in the year? What if the track tests show this is the wrong direction to take?? Random thought
Another season like this one and big worries over 2022.

User avatar
Blackout
785
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:12 am

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

MtthsMlw wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:31 pm
and these crazy turning vanes
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjAbMzUXkAA ... name=large
via @NicolasF1i
A Haas invention from 2019

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
474
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:45 am

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

They should try the slim nose and cape concept becauae they have nothing to lose at this point.
Not driving a Mercedes? Work harder!

nico5
nico5
8
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:55 pm

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

The Styrian GP version is missing from this comparison. In was like an intermediate step. Looks like Ferrari are only comfortable making very subtle changes to their FW.

sucof
sucof
8
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:15 am

Re: Ferrari SF1000

Post

I do not agree that these front wing modifications are small, and I do not think that most people look at this the right way.
If you look closer, nearly every element of the wing is slightly different - true. But if you look from the point of view of the air, if each element modifies the airflow slightly, in the end the changes in the air pressures and directions add up, and will be huge.
And I think the new wing just does that. I would not be surprised, if we could see the actual CFD data and image, that the air moves totally different compared to the older wing.