Ferrari SF-26

[AR3-GP]

I've been thinking about the purpose of the "sticky-uppy bit" in the center of Ferrari's macarena wing. I think its purpose is to pretension the flap. It makes some drag which when applied in this position relative to the rotation point is creating a "restoring torque" that keeps the wing under a rotational tension when it's upside down. Either that or it's some kind of counterweight or mass damper to do the same thing.

That may be the case, but Ferrari clearly consider it to be an aerodynamic element as well. It even has it's own tiny little gurney flap!

Yes but I think it's not for specifically for generating downforce on its own. Its connected to the operation of the wing. Potentially part of making it move faster or move more reliably.

Speculation, but consistent with what I proposed some time ago:

https://www.formulatecnica.it/2026/05/f ... -macarena/

We are referring to the physical load that the pilot must apply to the yoke to overcome aerodynamic drag and move steering surfaces such as balancers, ailerons and directional rudder. This same principle has been translated by Ferrari to the "Macarena" 2.0 to reduce the workload of the actuators. The latter which, in all likelihood, could be of an electrical nature.

The flap of the Ferrari SF-26 of the Macarena 2.0 wing to speed up rotation
A hydraulic system would in fact have much larger dimensions, making their integration inside the side bulkheads more complicated. To be fair, it should be noted that no official confirmation or denial has yet arrived from Maranello on the matter. By placing the flap at a safe distance from the pivot of the main profile, aerodynamic drag is used to amplify the lever arm.

This scenario generates a higher torque as a result, capable of significantly speeding up the implementation of the component to which it is anchored. The obvious technical compromise pays off in terms of efficiency. If, on the one hand, during the 270-degree excursion, the device facilitates rotation in both directions, on the other hand, it turns into a penalizing element in a static position at 90 degrees.

[sucof]

https://www.formulatecnica.it/wp-conten ... errari.jpg

When I saw this the first time, I thought about this. But we will never know unless someone from Ferrari will tell us.

[Farnborough]

It looks and seems plausible as the return arc exposes this, in leverage, first as the wing rotation approaches it's "crest" in travel back toward full load location.

Given the observable limitations during public testing (the indecisive, if that's the correct word use,, for re-establishment of load) through the instability at corner entry we saw, song with driver comments. This does correlate the various concerns during that journey toward ultimately the race "live" use in Miami.

It appears to by in the downstream "shadow" of conventional DRS activation facility as we recognise that location, suggesting it makes use of that legality box to exist in rules framework.

[Brahmal]

From Miami:







https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... yoVKbxhszt

[AR3-GP]

The rear wing light is a standard part.

[sucof]

Will Ferrari remove the wing actuators to save weight now for Monaco?

[PlatinumZealot]

No straight mode for monaco so yes it would make sense to do so.

[matteosc]

No straight mode for monaco so yes it would make sense to do so.

Would they be able to remove the bulb too, to maximize wingspan? Or would it be too expensive (new wing to produce)?

[bananapeel23]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig

Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

[SB15]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig

Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

Mclaren, Audi, and Redbull followed the same direction as Mercedes. Very surprised Ferrari didn't at least try it.

[cplchanb]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig
Well they already are one of the best around low speed corners. Maybe it was a diminishing returns exercise that wasn't worth it
Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

Mclaren, Audi, and Redbull followed the same direction as Mercedes. Very surprised Ferrari didn't at least try it.

[PlatinumZealot]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig

Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

Depends on the regulations... Seems that you can put somwthing in the central box.. But at other tracks will it interact badly with the rotating wing?

[sucof]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig

Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

No funny business?? Ferrari indeed brought the most expensive nose holder in the paddock, according to that picture!

Jokes aside, they already had their similar winglet there, and I doubt putting in that more development time and money would have given them any measurable time benefit.

[bananapeel23]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig

Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

No funny business?? Ferrari indeed brought the most expensive nose holder in the paddock, according to that picture!

Jokes aside, they already had their similar winglet there, and I doubt putting in that more development time and money would have given them any measurable time benefit.

I can’t find the part of the regulations that even allows for the Mercedes and Red Bull solutions. I would assume it’s the rear wing rotation fairing. But all rear wing auxiliary components, including the fairing, have to be obscured from below and from the side with rear wing assembly mounted. These elements are very much visible from the side as far as I can tell, unless they are obscured by the endplate. It doesn’t appear like it, however.

[SB15]

Seemingly no funny business with the rear wing actuator pod in Monaco. I’m surprised they didn’t bring something similar to Mercedes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJ9wEgwXcAA ... ?name=orig

Frankly I’m surprised that Ferrari hasn’t opted to make something like the Mercedes actuator part of their stamdard package. Are they not allowed to have a central rear wing actuator pod due to having an actuator in the endplate?

No funny business?? Ferrari indeed brought the most expensive nose holder in the paddock, according to that picture!

Jokes aside, they already had their similar winglet there, and I doubt putting in that more development time and money would have given them any measurable time benefit.

I can’t find the part of the regulations that even allows for the Mercedes and Red Bull solutions. I would assume it’s the rear wing rotation fairing. But all rear wing auxiliary components, including the fairing, have to be obscured from below and from the side with rear wing assembly mounted. These elements are very much visible from the side as far as I can tell, unless they are obscured by the endplate. It doesn’t appear like it, however.

Since they're other teams like McLaren and Audi with the solution, I think we can all conclude that this is very much allowed and a massive gray area that can be exploited.