2024 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[SoulPancake13]

Is it possible to wait at least after the first timed lap of pre-season testing before we decide to fire the entire team?

Well, the aerodynamic "experts" who have read an article or two about why the RB19 is so good have decided that Ferrari did not do enough and the car is too basic. The season is already over, the RB20 will lap 5 seconds faster than everyone else and Ferrari will dissolve the racing team.

It isn't so much that Ferrari built a bad car to me. The car looks very similar to previous RB incarnations and from 2022 and 2023, that is clearly a productive way to go. The question is whether a car that looks like an older RB, will be able to compete with the newest RB. That's where I come up a bit disappointed. Logic says this is not possible.

I understand where you are coming from, but as someone earlier in the thread mentioned, these cars are so complex that there is no way we can really predict their competitiveness based off of images. We have an idea of what they want to do. Just because they don't go for an extreme solution doesn't mean it isn't good! The floor and suspension are completely redone, what that will do for the car, we have 0 idea. It's best to wait and see, like all things F1 in my opinion

[jambuka]

We don't know how the underfloor looks like. Maybe the car looks basic on the outside, but they have put in resources to develop an incredible efficient floor. Excited for pre season testing.

[Xyz22]

Is it possible to wait at least after the first timed lap of pre-season testing before we decide to fire the entire team?

Indeed.

Just want to flex my prediction from last year though:

https://i.ibb.co/DMMpBS6/Screenshot-202 ... al-net.png

Quite on the money

Credit where credit is due. .. looking forward to your new prediction.

Hopefully it will be positive and i'll be right once more

[CouncilorIrissa]

We'll know where we are once Charles gets out of a car and takes his helmet off.

[Xyz22]

[LM10]

The car has not even hit the track properly and people on here are already claiming really wild stuff!

To say that the SF-24 is what should have been the car competing against the RB19 is totally random. Even the SF-23 with major compromises became as fast as, if not faster than the RB19 in certain conditions (e.g. on soft tyres) on race pace in the later stages of last season.

It always amazes me how by only looking at renders and pictures people can make bold predictions and criticize the work of highly skilled engineers working their backsides off for months. At least wait for the actual races before going all in with your negativity towards the team just because they didn't put some fancy looking wings and shapes on the car like Aston Martin did.

Even the decision to retain the overall suspension layout (push-pull) is being criticized by some... obviously Ferrari having been the best car in terms of mechanical grip, traction and braking for years now has not been enough to convince those people that Ferrari might know what they're doing.

Lastly, it's been said many times, but it can not be stressed enough that the most important parts of a car are the ones not visible to the naked eye, even more so in the current formula.

[scuderiabrandon]

The car has not even hit the track properly and people on here are already claiming really wild stuff!

To say that the SF-24 is what should have been the car competing against the RB19 is totally random. Even the SF-23 with major compromises became as fast as, if not faster than the RB19 in certain conditions (e.g. on soft tyres) on race pace in the later stages of last season.

It always amazes me how by only looking at renders and pictures people can make bold predictions and criticize the work of highly skilled engineers working their backsides off for months. At least wait for the actual races before going all in with your negativity towards the team just because they didn't put some fancy looking wings and shapes on the car like Aston Martin did.

Even the decision to retain the overall suspension layout (push-pull) is being criticized by some... obviously Ferrari having been the best car in terms of mechanical grip, traction and braking for years now has not been enough to convince those people that Ferrari might know what they're doing.

Lastly, it's been said many times, but it can not be stressed enough that the most important parts of a car are the ones not visible to the naked eye, even more so in the current formula.

Finally someone with a bit of common sense. Took the words right out of my mouth.

This thread has become worse than twitter. I think the mods should start issuing warnings for sulking and acting entitled.

[LM10]

It's a bit strange. The car looks somehow as if it's design has only caught up to last year's RB:

1) Added RB19 sidepod inlet underbite
2) Added RB19 undercut sidepod
3) Added plain mirror covers from RB19.
4) Added engine cover exits from RB19.
5) Narrower gearbox as RB19


Yet RB have advanced forward a year from that design. This is a car that Ferrari claimed would not be a RB copy but it somehow feels that way? Considering the design direction, it has great potential to be a very fast car, but I wonder if it can be as fast as RB if the starting point is a bit like an older RB.

A concept (and this one eventually turned out to be the ideal one for this formula) requires certain things, otherwise it wouldn't be called a concept. In this case it's things like sidepod inlet underbite (the high sidepod inlets were their idea from the SF70H anyway), an undercut, a cannon outlet combined with the channels seen on the W14 first.
The gearbox already was as slim as it could get last year (see Blackout's post from yesterday or a couple of days ago). But then again, in this concept it makes sense that the slimmer the gearbox to make way for flow towards diffuser, the better.

As for the plain mirror covers, that's hardly a standout or important RB19 feature, to be honest. It's more likely Ferrari didn't bother spending money on such a detail providing little performance gains.

All fair points (although we don't know how good the RB20 will be, so we don't know if the cannon outlets of the W14 are working or a terrible error).

Regarding the mirrors, it's just interesting. For 2 years they had complicated looking mirrors, and then the year when they mimic much of the RB, they also drop the complicated mirror covers. If not to deliberately copy them, then at least it shows their thinking is in a direction similar to RB (spend on the performance drivers, not the superficial stuff).

I don't think Ferrari did anything wrong per-say. They followed a good direction but my immediate reaction was only that it felt like it's a year behind by virtue of being so similar to a year old car so I question how quick it could be relative to a newer iteration of that rival which looks to have made several key changes to make their old car obselete.

I'm sure the floor is heavily inspired by someone's Monaco crash as well.

Actually it's interesting you say that the Ferrari is so similar to a year old car because in my opinion the SF-24 is the least RB19-esque car out there. For a start it has a totally different cooling layout, still with the least centreline cooling. That's why it does not have letterbox sidepod inlets and probably won't have simply because of a different cooling approach. It also is the only car (together with the Haas) with 100% different suspension layouts.

[Xyz22]

A concept (and this one eventually turned out to be the ideal one for this formula) requires certain things, otherwise it wouldn't be called a concept. In this case it's things like sidepod inlet underbite (the high sidepod inlets were their idea from the SF70H anyway), an undercut, a cannon outlet combined with the channels seen on the W14 first.
The gearbox already was as slim as it could get last year (see Blackout's post from yesterday or a couple of days ago). But then again, in this concept it makes sense that the slimmer the gearbox to make way for flow towards diffuser, the better.

As for the plain mirror covers, that's hardly a standout or important RB19 feature, to be honest. It's more likely Ferrari didn't bother spending money on such a detail providing little performance gains.

All fair points (although we don't know how good the RB20 will be, so we don't know if the cannon outlets of the W14 are working or a terrible error).

Regarding the mirrors, it's just interesting. For 2 years they had complicated looking mirrors, and then the year when they mimic much of the RB, they also drop the complicated mirror covers. If not to deliberately copy them, then at least it shows their thinking is in a direction similar to RB (spend on the performance drivers, not the superficial stuff).

I don't think Ferrari did anything wrong per-say. They followed a good direction but my immediate reaction was only that it felt like it's a year behind by virtue of being so similar to a year old car so I question how quick it could be relative to a newer iteration of that rival which looks to have made several key changes to make their old car obselete.

I'm sure the floor is heavily inspired by someone's Monaco crash as well.

Actually it's interesting you say that the Ferrari is so similar to a year old car because in my opinion the SF-24 is the least RB19-esque car out there. For a start it has a totally different cooling layout, still with the least centreline cooling. That's why it does not have letterbox sidepod inlets and probably won't have simply because of a different cooling approach. It also is the only car (together with the Haas) with 100% different suspension layouts.

The nose is also completely different compared to RB.

[AR3-GP]

A concept (and this one eventually turned out to be the ideal one for this formula) requires certain things, otherwise it wouldn't be called a concept. In this case it's things like sidepod inlet underbite (the high sidepod inlets were their idea from the SF70H anyway), an undercut, a cannon outlet combined with the channels seen on the W14 first.
The gearbox already was as slim as it could get last year (see Blackout's post from yesterday or a couple of days ago). But then again, in this concept it makes sense that the slimmer the gearbox to make way for flow towards diffuser, the better.

As for the plain mirror covers, that's hardly a standout or important RB19 feature, to be honest. It's more likely Ferrari didn't bother spending money on such a detail providing little performance gains.

All fair points (although we don't know how good the RB20 will be, so we don't know if the cannon outlets of the W14 are working or a terrible error).

Regarding the mirrors, it's just interesting. For 2 years they had complicated looking mirrors, and then the year when they mimic much of the RB, they also drop the complicated mirror covers. If not to deliberately copy them, then at least it shows their thinking is in a direction similar to RB (spend on the performance drivers, not the superficial stuff).

I don't think Ferrari did anything wrong per-say. They followed a good direction but my immediate reaction was only that it felt like it's a year behind by virtue of being so similar to a year old car so I question how quick it could be relative to a newer iteration of that rival which looks to have made several key changes to make their old car obselete.

I'm sure the floor is heavily inspired by someone's Monaco crash as well.

Actually it's interesting you say that the Ferrari is so similar to a year old car because in my opinion the SF-24 is the least RB19-esque car out there. For a start it has a totally different cooling layout, still with the least centreline cooling. That's why it does not have letterbox sidepod inlets and probably won't have simply because of a different cooling approach. It also is the only car (together with the Haas) with 100% different suspension layouts.

The differences in the sidepod cooling and suspension are minor geometrical differences imo.

It's clear where they are moving towards, and what they are moving away from. Cardile said they will see where they are in the first race and go from there.

[dialtone]

The differences in the sidepod cooling and suspension are minor geometrical differences imo.

It's clear where they are moving towards, and what they are moving away from. Cardile said they will see where they are in the first race and go from there.

Minor differences in cooling and suspension between the RB19 and SF-24? How can you say that in seriousness? And all this by just looking at the car from the outside, the suspension internals you haven't even seen.

[AR3-GP]

The differences in the sidepod cooling and suspension are minor geometrical differences imo.

It's clear where they are moving towards, and what they are moving away from. Cardile said they will see where they are in the first race and go from there.

Minor differences in cooling and suspension between the RB19 and SF-24? How can you say that in seriousness? And all this by just looking at the car from the outside, the suspension internals you haven't even seen.

I don't think I've expressed what I'm trying to say well. The aerodynamic profile of the car is what I am commenting on. Anyone can clearly see what car inspired this design. There may be differences in the outright cooling layour and angles of suspension members, but there isn't any mistaking what this car generally looks like.

[dialtone]

The differences in the sidepod cooling and suspension are minor geometrical differences imo.

It's clear where they are moving towards, and what they are moving away from. Cardile said they will see where they are in the first race and go from there.

Minor differences in cooling and suspension between the RB19 and SF-24? How can you say that in seriousness? And all this by just looking at the car from the outside, the suspension internals you haven't even seen.

I don't think I've expressed what I'm trying to say well. The aerodynamic profile of the car is what I am commenting on. Anyone can clearly see what car inspired this design. There may be differences in the outright cooling layour and angles of suspension members, but there isn't any mistaking what this car generally looks like.

I'm not sure where this discussion is going to go... Are you looking for Ferrari to put an "inspired by XYZ" next to the components that were inspired by other teams? Should other teams not race with semi-auto gears because Ferrari invented them? It's F1, everyone copies from everyone and then apply to their own platform. Ferrari took plenty of inspiration from RB and also went their own way in a lot of pretty critical areas.

What were they supposed to do?

[AR3-GP]

Minor differences in cooling and suspension between the RB19 and SF-24? How can you say that in seriousness? And all this by just looking at the car from the outside, the suspension internals you haven't even seen.

I don't think I've expressed what I'm trying to say well. The aerodynamic profile of the car is what I am commenting on. Anyone can clearly see what car inspired this design. There may be differences in the outright cooling layour and angles of suspension members, but there isn't any mistaking what this car generally looks like.

I'm not sure where this discussion is going to go... Are you looking for Ferrari to put an "inspired by XYZ" next to the components that were inspired by other teams? Should other teams not race with semi-auto gears because Ferrari invented them? It's F1, everyone copies from everyone and then apply to their own platform. Ferrari took plenty of inspiration from RB and also went their own way in a lot of pretty critical areas.

What were they supposed to do?

What it seems more like is similar to the SF23 and any changes made were to imitate a RB concept. There is nothing wrong with that. The point is we were told it wouldn't be a copy, so I am surprised that the car looks the way it does.

The differences to RB currently are not "new". They are actually just unchanged parts of the SF23 like the front suspension, pullrod rear, and roll hoop inlet. That doesn't say "different design direction", it says "that's from last year and we didn't change it."

[dialtone]

The front suspension is the same as last year. The roll hoop inlet is the same as last year. The centreline cooling is the same as last year. Ferrari is currently the only one with pull rod rear from last year (albeit with geometry changes).

What it seems more like is the SF23 with changes made in certain areas to imitate a RB concept. There is nothing wrong with that. I only questioned whether this can be enough to beat a newer RB concept. We were told it wouldn't be a copy so I expected to see something I hadn't seen before.

Front suspension is not the same as last year.



If you look at this image and think they are the same, you should look again. Look at the intersection of the suspension arm against the steering rod, in SF-23 it happens half-way through the rod, in SF-24 it happens extremely close to the chassis.



I don't know how realistic this image is, but even if I just look at the overlap of the rear wing against the wheel, that rear wheel is a good 15% overlapping with the wing and the front suspension was moved back back by a good 10-15cm. Again image may lie with the exact proportion, but obviously the difference in layout is massive.

I don't know if this car is going to beat the RB20, probably not, but let's stop with the bashing of the car before it has done even a single timed lap. Nobody here knows.