Few details already noted in this thread, and some that haven't been discussed.
Starting from the front is the right way to start. The nose is of the same concept, but quite more blunt and wider. Hard to say if wide or thin is the right way, since teams seem to be going vack and forth with this, so it can't really be anything crucial - it is what it is and is designed to work with the rest of the car. We should remember Ferrari maxxed out nose width continuously since 2012, featuring thumb nose from 16-21, maybe they have a preference in flow conditioning...
The slot between center section of the 1st and 2nd flap makes me curious, in some angles it seems bigfer but it could ve just lighting. Pronounced brackets suggest a substantial change in load bearing distribution between two elements. FW trailing edge is noticably lower than last year and features less outwash-forced flow. It's almost back to 2022 design, but still a lower trailing edge. One of the biggest issues with SF-23 throughout the year was front aero load and poor balance, even after Japan floor update it wasn't perfect. It's not like RB19 after all and the team will hope this issue was solved. As we can see, VGs are gone. I wasn't a fan of 23 wing at any point, it was clearly draggy and lacked substantial planform surface area and those VGs just gave a horrible "last-minute-fix" impression which could have been true in the end...
Following up, front suspension obviously, this is pretty much the same as AMR24 philosophy, aligned with the trend set by RB18, with the exception here being pushrod element. It looks neatly packed, there is also a shround around chassis opening to minimise the interference loses. Arms are more inclined among themselves, can't say if there is more anti dive now, it was already there the last two years, otherwise the car would have managed to scrape the high-places front wing on braking. Steering rod is now used as a slat ahead of lower front arm, just like RB is doing.
Mirror shrouds are gone, just like top Halo winglet and Viking horns on airbox. Flow conditiong out in favour of drag reduction. Keeping the triangular airbox is keeping their packaging advantage to keep the radiators inside the sides which need to be wide for external aero in any case.
New sides feature a similar outside contour as Barcelona spec update, noted in blue line. Finally on this angle, the rear wing is a completely new design, seems to follow Spa 23 philosophy but has a bigger main plane camber and angle.
Here the most impoetant feature is continuation of floor design, a clear evolution of successful Japan-23 spec floor compared to the new design. Inlet seems to be maxxed out fully inboard and outboard, for better or worse. Side view also shows great similarity between two specs.
Couple of things from side view, the lower rear arms are attached again to a chassis appendage, but it does seem less extreme than last year.
Now the sidepod inlets are clearly new, much anticipated sidepod redesign by the team and there is clear increase in height already. Both top and bottom lips are now higher, with lower having a lot of room to go further up over the year. SIS tube is moved to the floor, as it was announced months ago, ooening up room for a significant undercur increase. Clearly, as first pointed out by yours trully and repeated the whole year, SIS tube bulge had an outwashing role on the SF23 Evo, same as what RB was doing when they increased the undercut from RB18 to 19. Having this out the way now is a significant drag reduction in that area.
The cannon outlet, or engine cover shelf, is now fully integrated. In hindisght, SF23 Evo likely featured a soultion which was the only applicable given the initial SF23 cooling concept which was completely different obviously. In spite of some missuse of the term, this is not Ferrari switching to centerline cooling, that would require a bigger airbox and a radiator on top of the PU. This outlet design is simply used to align with the need to remove the louvres from sidepods to maximise their effectivness now that the air going over the top ends up feeding the beam wing. Having the air from the radiators in that zone would mean introducing low energy, dirty air where you need it as clean as possible. In my view, it could also play a role in increasing DRS effectivness, by reducing the suction under the rear wing and thus inside the engine cover to reduce internal drag slightly.
Finally on side view, a small but important improvement of DRS pylon design, now there is no 90 degree angle joint which is most likely generating a big local stagnation area. Also, potentially more important change, the length of attachment point to the wing is a lot shorter now, potentially allowing bigger rear wing flexing on straights to reduce drag.
A couple of interesting comparisson points in the rear, first of all its very strange there seems to be no change on brake ducts (front ducts are also the same as 23), but they did their job well last year. Pull rod chasis attachment point is moved a lot to the back, clearly for aerodynamic reasons. It's a lot less obstructive path now, while keep their rear-end driveability requirements in check.
Rear view is clearly much different and also shows how the 3 cooling outlets now form one big cannon outlet. The beam wing is obviously very novel in this itteration, an evolution of design introduced in Silverstone 23. Also looks to be like a medium downforce solution.
Rear 3/4 view offers a look at the rear of the nose, quite wide and flat. The undercut is massive, at least as big as AMR24 right now. Could be even bigger, who knows what's in the update pipeline. It was also already noted how big the diffuser volume is, but it's very hard to compare this between two seasons.
Finally, just an illustration of what might be going on with Halo winglets and S duct now, they are definitely aligned with cooling louvres and they are likely increasing the airflow over those to improve cooling in adverse conditions, while also helping with flow attachement and containing Halo losses. Same as last year, but different
Overall, SF-24 is a completely different car from launch spec SF-23, now fully aligned with the prevailing bodywork philosophy of the grid. Ferrari did keep their advantage with small airbox design and I believe it was the right choice for them. They can clearly improve sidepod inlets and undercut, but main rivals can't reduce their airbox size and generate a decent pressure recovery on the back surface of the airbox. As always, floor remains an unknown, but late-season results and positive driver feedback in 23 must have given the team a much needed boost.
