2024 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team - Page 496 (2024)

Formula Uno seem to be hedging nothing until Monza - https://formu1a.uno/it/ferrari-e-questi ... voluzione/

At Ferrari, the latest updated technical documentation is stuck on July 31st and, according to our information, the red car will not have any new parts on Dutch soil. The development of the car will in fact resume at the same time as the championship restarts.

The fund brought to Hungary was a run for cover, using entirely virtual CFD models . The real step to climb to find efficient load should come with the updates scheduled for Monza and, above all, with the package that will be introduced later, between Baku and Singapore .

Be interesting to see who is correct.

Space-heat wrote: ↑

20 Aug 2024, 11:00

Formula Uno seem to be hedging nothing until Monza - https://formu1a.uno/it/ferrari-e-questi ... voluzione/

At Ferrari, the latest updated technical documentation is stuck on July 31st and, according to our information, the red car will not have any new parts on Dutch soil. The development of the car will in fact resume at the same time as the championship restarts.

The fund brought to Hungary was a run for cover, using entirely virtual CFD models . The real step to climb to find efficient load should come with the updates scheduled for Monza and, above all, with the package that will be introduced later, between Baku and Singapore .

Be interesting to see who is correct.

Seriously? I think we know who is more likely to be wrong

formu1a.uno team was also completely wrong about configurations for Hungary and Spa, while Nugnes announced updates before Vasseur confirmed there will be changes in Hungary. If the team made the Hungary change to the floor based on CFD alone, they could have easily found more useful downforce with further geometry improvement and CFD testing.

To bring a small update like this to a track of any kind, you need at least 2-3 days to make the tools, lay down the laminate, cure the parts and finally bond the new bits to existing floor in exactly the right place. Shipping is one more day, so they had about 1 week available between Silverstone and Hungary for design and simulations before the new bits got approved. Since that first week there were 2 more weeks by the end of Spa weekend and 1 more week after Ferragosto to extract the maximum from an interim update. Quite feasible to bring another small change to Netherlands and 2-stage update package later in Monza and Singapore

Vanja #66 wrote:formu1a.uno team was also completely wrong about configurations for Hungary and Spa, while Nugnes announced updates before Vasseur confirmed there will be changes in Hungary. If the team made the Hungary change to the floor based on CFD alone, they could have easily found more useful downforce with further geometry improvement and CFD testing.

To bring a small update like this to a track of any kind, you need at least 2-3 days to make the tools, lay down the laminate, cure the parts and finally bond the new bits to existing floor in exactly the right place. Shipping is one more day, so they had about 1 week available between Silverstone and Hungary for design and simulations before the new bits got approved. Since that first week there were 2 more weeks by the end of Spa weekend and 1 more week after Ferragosto to extract the maximum from an interim update. Quite feasible to bring another small change to Netherlands and 2-stage update package later in Monza and Singapore

1 week to design and simulate a part seems fairly tight. Doesn’t leave much room for iteration on the result unless they know EXACTLY what flow they need to control and what they need it to do.

This goes against those that say they aren’t headless right now.

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 04:23

1 week to design and simulate a part seems fairly tight. Doesn’t leave much room for iteration on the result unless they know EXACTLY what flow they need to control and what they need it to do.

This goes against those that say they aren’t headless right now.

I don't really think it took them one single week to improve the situation, I just gave this as a timeline reference They must have tried some things after Austria, maybe even after Spain, but it still had to go through final validation over many simulation cases.

I also don't think setting aside a part of resources to do this would hinder the next upgrade, the more you know the better you will be next time.

Asked whether he felt it was necessary for Ferrari to go through the problems with its Spain upgrade to fully understand the bouncing situation, Sainz replied: “I have my own theory about it. Obviously, I have been complaining about bouncing before the upgrades.” Sainz didn’t elaborate, but it seems reasonable to infer from his response that he felt Ferrari should have recognised the problem earlier and tackled it rather than going down a development path that actually increased it.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/lewi ... e-regrets/

AR3-GP wrote:

Asked whether he felt it was necessary for Ferrari to go through the problems with its Spain upgrade to fully understand the bouncing situation, Sainz replied: “I have my own theory about it. Obviously, I have been complaining about bouncing before the upgrades.” Sainz didn’t elaborate, but it seems reasonable to infer from his response that he felt Ferrari should have recognised the problem earlier and tackled it rather than going down a development path that actually increased it.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/lewi ... e-regrets/

Lmao… good riddance

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

scuderiabrandon wrote: ↑

20 Aug 2024, 11:52

Seriously? I think we know who is more likely to be wrong

Has anyone tried to log all the times Nugnes, formu1a.uno and the main outlets/journalists have gotten it right or wrong about Ferrari in recent times? Especially with objective things such as upgrade schedules. I think that would help with identifying the more reliable sources in a statistical way rather than "In my opinion I've found them to be more reliable". You could start doing it right now, I'm doing my own on AM.

Maybe that would finally seal the deal on Nugnes forever... or not! Who knows... maybe Nugnes is the MOST reliable of them all!

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 21:27

AR3-GP wrote:

Asked whether he felt it was necessary for Ferrari to go through the problems with its Spain upgrade to fully understand the bouncing situation, Sainz replied: “I have my own theory about it. Obviously, I have been complaining about bouncing before the upgrades.” Sainz didn’t elaborate, but it seems reasonable to infer from his response that he felt Ferrari should have recognised the problem earlier and tackled it rather than going down a development path that actually increased it.

See Also

R/C Tech Forums - 1/10 R/C F1's...Pics, Discussions, Whatever...

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/lewi ... e-regrets/

Lmao… good riddance

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think he is saying anything bad, even if it may be a little biased towards his own perspective.

If Carlos really felt something with the car that Leclerc might have possibly dismissed as something he could handle, then that would really be an oversight by the engineers if they just proceeded without caution just because Carlos is leaving and they didn't have to tend to his requests.

And to be honest, this hypothetic scenario does not seem farfetched at all in my opinion. After all, Leclerc is the one who said he wasn't really bothered by porpoising that much back in 2022 when the car was arguably a championship contender (first part of the season). And that thing was visibly bashing into the ground, especially at the S2 straight.

Emag wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 22:27

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 21:27

AR3-GP wrote:https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/lewi ... e-regrets/

Lmao… good riddance

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think he is saying anything bad, even if it may be a little biased towards his own perspective.

If Carlos really felt something with the car that Leclerc might have possibly dismissed as something he could handle, then that would really be an oversight by the engineers if they just proceeded without caution just because Carlos is leaving and they didn't have to tend to his requests.

And to be honest, this hypothetic scenario does not seem farfetched at all in my opinion. After all, Leclerc is the one who said he wasn't really bothered by porpoising that much back in 2022 when the car was arguably a championship contender (first part of the season). And that thing was visibly bashing into the ground, especially at the S2 straight.

If Ferrari hear Sainz or any other driver of his caliper that wants to drive a train to be happy, then Ferrari will lap 1-1.5 slower.
Imo Sainz comments are completely irrelevant. He cannot drive an oversteering car that is the fastest in everything, especially in brake and entering in corners. This is fast racing one on one and only a few on the current grid can tame this where Sainz is not in this list.
Ferrari must hear Leclerc 100% and built a car for him. Hamilton is almost the same and has this oversteering ability so it's much better that he is coming to the team. RB does this with Max and we all see the results.

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 21:27

Lmao… good riddance

He's one really clever general after the battle, isn't he...

bluechris wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 22:42

Emag wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 22:27

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 21:27

Lmao… good riddance

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think he is saying anything bad, even if it may be a little biased towards his own perspective.

If Carlos really felt something with the car that Leclerc might have possibly dismissed as something he could handle, then that would really be an oversight by the engineers if they just proceeded without caution just because Carlos is leaving and they didn't have to tend to his requests.

And to be honest, this hypothetic scenario does not seem farfetched at all in my opinion. After all, Leclerc is the one who said he wasn't really bothered by porpoising that much back in 2022 when the car was arguably a championship contender (first part of the season). And that thing was visibly bashing into the ground, especially at the S2 straight.

If Ferrari hear Sainz or any other driver of his caliper that wants to drive a train to be happy, then Ferrari will lap 1-1.5 slower.
Imo Sainz comments are completely irrelevant. He cannot drive an oversteering car that is the fastest in everything, especially in brake and entering in corners. This is fast racing one on one and only a few on the current grid can tame this where Sainz is not in this list.
Ferrari must hear Leclerc 100% and built a car for him. Hamilton is almost the same and has this oversteering ability so it's much better that he is coming to the team. RB does this with Max and we all see the results.

Which is something I 100% agree with. Fast cars are almost never the easiest to drive to the limit by every driver on the grid.

My point was more on the handling behaviour. I believe if any of your drivers feels something is off, then that’s at least worth a look at.

And again, nobody really knows what’s been going on in the background and perhaps this is just Carlos being butthurt and flashing a “I told you so”.

Vanja #66 wrote:

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 21:27

Lmao… good riddance

He's one really clever general after the battle, isn't he...

I’m sure he believes the engineers instead sat down and decided that more bouncing was what the car needed just to spite him.

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 23:18

Vanja #66 wrote:

dialtone wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 21:27

Lmao… good riddance

He's one really clever general after the battle, isn't he...

I’m sure he believes the engineers instead sat down and decided that more bouncing was what the car needed just to spite him.

It doesn't have to be so black and white. Mercedes ignored Hamilton for 2 years. They thought they were making the right decisions. Who would have thought the driver could be right and not the windtunnel and data?

Ferrari have those sharkmouths like the Red Bull. Neither team looks so good right now...suspect or coincidence?

Emag wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 23:18

bluechris wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 22:42

Emag wrote: ↑

21 Aug 2024, 22:27

I don't think he is saying anything bad, even if it may be a little biased towards his own perspective.

If Carlos really felt something with the car that Leclerc might have possibly dismissed as something he could handle, then that would really be an oversight by the engineers if they just proceeded without caution just because Carlos is leaving and they didn't have to tend to his requests.

And to be honest, this hypothetic scenario does not seem farfetched at all in my opinion. After all, Leclerc is the one who said he wasn't really bothered by porpoising that much back in 2022 when the car was arguably a championship contender (first part of the season). And that thing was visibly bashing into the ground, especially at the S2 straight.

If Ferrari hear Sainz or any other driver of his caliper that wants to drive a train to be happy, then Ferrari will lap 1-1.5 slower.
Imo Sainz comments are completely irrelevant. He cannot drive an oversteering car that is the fastest in everything, especially in brake and entering in corners. This is fast racing one on one and only a few on the current grid can tame this where Sainz is not in this list.
Ferrari must hear Leclerc 100% and built a car for him. Hamilton is almost the same and has this oversteering ability so it's much better that he is coming to the team. RB does this with Max and we all see the results.

Which is something I 100% agree with. Fast cars are almost never the easiest to drive to the limit by every driver on the grid.

My point was more on the handling behaviour. I believe if any of your drivers feels something is off, then that’s at least worth a look at.

And again, nobody really knows what’s been going on in the background and perhaps this is just Carlos being butthurt and flashing a “I told you so”.

The problem in Ferrari was the sudden snaps from the back (they have fixed that). This is completely irrelevant from a understeering car because it looses grip suddenly and it's dangerous as we all saw some times and the driver loose confidence.
If Carlos speaks for this, ok, maybe the problem is still there? Doesn't seem so.