2025 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[deadhead]

Makes little sense in regards to saving this season so if true this is about 2026.

the current part would work very well in 26, probably better than new design if my expectations turn out to be true

the new part needs to handle peak GE end-of-year 2025 loads in high speed (which is where the current solution doesn't handle the load and leads to higher plank wear), with the least roll and least possible bouncing, while also providing softer compression rate at low speed traction zones when ride height is greater

nothing like that is gonna happen in 2026 - smaller floors, much less ground effect, smaller diffuser, regulated kick size...

hate then sound of that tbh

Thank you for reminding me what common sense is

[ScuderiaLeo]

This is from Nugnes so take lightly!! But I thought it might be interesting to share for discussion.

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-fe ... /10720542/

The rear end is unstable and the car becomes unpredictable and difficult to drive especially when braking. There is a lack of aerodynamic load in the rear and when braking the red car moves too much, putting the two drivers who like to carry a lot of speed through the corners in difficulty.

With the Sakhir updates, a tenth was found, but it was not enough to climb back to the positions that count. At Imola, the first race of the European season, we will see some small changes, but nothing that suggests a significant leap in quality. Something more substantial will be seen in Spain, in conjunction with the race that will impose much more stringent checks on the front wings. We expect a different rear diffuser and detailed changes to the bottom, but also a different mechanical setup to count on suspensions that work with stiffer setups, allowing us to dare with lower ground clearances.

In Maranello they are convinced that McLaren and Mercedes will pay the price with the new FIA checks and the Scuderia could get closer, if not to the uncatchable papaya cars, at least to Red Bull and Mercedes.

[dialtone]

The proof of wearing the plank front part was due to their DSQ in China, where only the 2 sides titan bolts in front of the plank were affected.

Do you have a source for this?

The DSQ in china was for the rear of the plank not the front, according to official Ferrari note.

[Vanja #66]

I have a feeling that the root cause of everything is 'driver needs to sit more rearwards' hard requirement on SF-25 w.r.t SF-24, and that led to the shorter gearbox and produced a domino effect of changes like different weight distribution, suspension redesign etc etc and resulted in this quagmire.
And I have a gut feel that this hard requirement came from their new driver signing, who must have pulled his weight with upper management (Elkkaan) over the entire year-in-waiting last season.

Front axle is moved forward from driver, but CoG is more on the nose, this was rumoured during testing and confirmed post testing, no weight transfer to the rear

[ringo]

Crazy to think that driver who was contracted to mercedes til the very end of 2024, who has zero access to the 25 car, and zero knowledge of their 24 car, can insist on a fundamental design feature like the position of the cockpit.
We have to be able to identify BS when we see it in the media.

[Vanja #66]

This plank issue is due to running with a little rake at the rear in order to increase diffuser DF and thus decrease the rear instability that both drivers, and particularly HAM, are moaning about.
.....

A, don't take anything ChronoGP says as true. In fact, lately its completely opposite

Basically every assumption and conclusion they made is wrong

[dans79]

The DSQ in china was for the rear of the plank not the front, according to official Ferrari note.

You can see that it is the rear in the official documents as well.

https://www.fia.com/system/files/decisi ... ber_44.pdf

https://www.fia.com/system/files/decisi ... ations.pdf

https://www.fia.com/system/files/decisi ... sembly.pdf

The skid wear of car number 44 was checked.

The rearmost skid was measured according to the team’s legality documents submission in
accordance with TD039 L, item 1.2 b) i). Measurements were taken along the stiffness compliant
area at three different points of the periphery (inner arc). The recorded measurement were 8.6 mm
(LHS), 8.6 mm (car centerline) and 8.5 mm (RHS).

As this is less than the 9 mm minimum thickness required by TR Article 3.5.9 e), I am referring this
matter to the stewards for their consideration.

[Rodak]

I have a feeling that the root cause of everything is 'driver needs to sit more rearwards' hard requirement on SF-25 w.r.t SF-24, and that led to the shorter gearbox and produced a domino effect of changes like different weight distribution, suspension redesign etc etc and resulted in this quagmire.
And I have a gut feel that this hard requirement came from their new driver signing, who must have pulled his weight with upper management (Elkkaan) over the entire year-in-waiting last season.

Front/rear weight distribution is fixed by regulation. It could be possible to change the distribution of weight in the car, the polar moment, but not the actual weight distribution at the wheels.

[balex]

Front/rear weight distribution is fixed by regulation. It could be possible to change the distribution of weight in the car, the polar moment, but not the actual weight distribution at the wheels.

Correct, but it’s orthogonal to the point they were trying to make that Hamilton orchestrated specific design directions via higher-level executives who don’t have any day-to-day involvement with the team, prior to him even being a member of the team.

You need to step up to this level of thinking if you’re going to make a meaningful contribution to this discussion, as difficult as that might be to hear I know.

[Vanja #66]

Front/rear weight distribution is fixed by regulation. It could be possible to change the distribution of weight in the car, the polar moment, but not the actual weight distribution at the wheels.

it's not 100% fixed, you have 54mm of room to place the CoG - and this is checked at minimal weight with 80kg for driver and "his" ballast

so the fuel can and does change the weight distribution during the race

[Sphere3758]

Given Monaco's low speed nature , will Ferrari be able to run the car as low as the others without fearing plank wear?

[deadhead]

Given Monaco's low speed nature , will Ferrari be able to run the car as low as the others without fearing plank wear?

I think they all have to raise their cars around Monaco so Ferrari will probably be on par as far as ride height