2024 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[Xyz22]

The way I look at this is that the gap to Red Bull in qualifying is now a genuine one. That is, the two cars warm up and use their tyres in a roughly similar way. This is as opposed to other cars - and Ferrari last year - where qualifying flatters the gap given better tyre warm up.

Red Bull chose this compromise and it’s inherent to the concept. It’s not something you can dial out with setup which is evidenced by the same trait being true in Monaco - if Red Bull could have sacrificed some race pace there for more margin in quali, they definitely would have. As it was, they squeaked into pole but pulled out as normal during the race.

Ferrari have now chosen the same conceptual compromise - so don’t expect them to suddenly dial in a way to extract more quali pace and have the best of both worlds. The solve is more pure performance. At the moment Red Bull can get away with the compromise because their overall margin over the other teams is sufficiently large - eg let’s say they have 5 tenths advantage per lap over McLaren in the race, they can afford for this to shrink to 2 tenths or less in quali and still be at the front. Ferrari, depending on track, don’t necessarily have this raw pace advantage and so, on days like this, may find themselves lower in quali but coming through. Tbh the margins were so small that it probably should have been 4th and 5th on the grid and that would have been fine to covert to 3/4 in the race, possibly even better. Leclerc only having one run in quali - which is ultimately on him - is the main fly in the ointment.

The issue is that McL with the same overall macro concept qualified ahead of Ferrari.

[f1316]

The way I look at this is that the gap to Red Bull in qualifying is now a genuine one. That is, the two cars warm up and use their tyres in a roughly similar way. This is as opposed to other cars - and Ferrari last year - where qualifying flatters the gap given better tyre warm up.

Red Bull chose this compromise and it’s inherent to the concept. It’s not something you can dial out with setup which is evidenced by the same trait being true in Monaco - if Red Bull could have sacrificed some race pace there for more margin in quali, they definitely would have. As it was, they squeaked into pole but pulled out as normal during the race.

Ferrari have now chosen the same conceptual compromise - so don’t expect them to suddenly dial in a way to extract more quali pace and have the best of both worlds. The solve is more pure performance. At the moment Red Bull can get away with the compromise because their overall margin over the other teams is sufficiently large - eg let’s say they have 5 tenths advantage per lap over McLaren in the race, they can afford for this to shrink to 2 tenths or less in quali and still be at the front. Ferrari, depending on track, don’t necessarily have this raw pace advantage and so, on days like this, may find themselves lower in quali but coming through. Tbh the margins were so small that it probably should have been 4th and 5th on the grid and that would have been fine to covert to 3/4 in the race, possibly even better. Leclerc only having one run in quali - which is ultimately on him - is the main fly in the ointment.

The issue is that McL with the same overall macro concept qualified ahead of Ferrari.

It’s tough to say whether the concept is fully the same without looking at the floor. I didn’t see the McLaren long runs but Ferrari’s looked comparable with Red Bull, so I think at least they will be more in the hunt relatively to McLaren in the race.

Ultimately this, and maybe Silverstone, will be the McLaren shines more than anywhere else. Norris in particular is very fast through the high speed stuff; the rest of their performance is ok but not at Ferrari’s level. So if there’s any track where it’s ok to be behind McLaren in quali, it’s here. Let’s wait and watch the race - if we’re quicker in race pace than the McLaren on a high speed track, that’ll be a fairly big step and proof of what I’m saying.

I think about 2017 as well and how we had a Mercedes challenging car most places but fighting with Williams here. It’s one of those tracks.

[Fakepivot]

Next season, 6 names will transfer from Mercedes to Ferrari. The agreement between the teams has been completed."

must be Lewis crew? like his race engineers and mechanics ?

[LM10]

The issue is that McL with the same overall macro concept qualified ahead of Ferrari.

You’re thinking black and white. This is an extremely oversimplified point of view. Neither is the concept of both cars the same nor is McLaren’s higher qualifying position a proof for anything - especially this early in-season with a new concept on the part of Ferrari.

[AR3-GP]

Next season, 6 names will transfer from Mercedes to Ferrari. The agreement between the teams has been completed."

must be Lewis crew? like his race engineers and mechanics ?

More likely technical people. Loic Serra's followers.

[DoctorRadio]

The way I look at this is that the gap to Red Bull in qualifying is now a genuine one. That is, the two cars warm up and use their tyres in a roughly similar way. This is as opposed to other cars - and Ferrari last year - where qualifying flatters the gap given better tyre warm up.

Red Bull chose this compromise and it’s inherent to the concept. It’s not something you can dial out with setup which is evidenced by the same trait being true in Monaco - if Red Bull could have sacrificed some race pace there for more margin in quali, they definitely would have. As it was, they squeaked into pole but pulled out as normal during the race.

Ferrari have now chosen the same conceptual compromise - so don’t expect them to suddenly dial in a way to extract more quali pace and have the best of both worlds. The solve is more pure performance. At the moment Red Bull can get away with the compromise because their overall margin over the other teams is sufficiently large - eg let’s say they have 5 tenths advantage per lap over McLaren in the race, they can afford for this to shrink to 2 tenths or less in quali and still be at the front. Ferrari, depending on track, don’t necessarily have this raw pace advantage and so, on days like this, may find themselves lower in quali but coming through. Tbh the margins were so small that it probably should have been 4th and 5th on the grid and that would have been fine to covert to 3/4 in the race, possibly even better. Leclerc only having one run in quali - which is ultimately on him - is the main fly in the ointment.

The issue is that McL with the same overall macro concept qualified ahead of Ferrari.

The issue is that if Leclerc has the usual 2-3 tenths on Sainz at Suzuka, Ferrari qualifies in third ahead of Mclaren and it would a completely different scenario.
It’s the second time in a row their faster driver takes himself the blame for not extracting the best from the tyres on one lap.
It can be due to his engineers or to himself, this is the fact.
Leclerc’s reputation is going to suffer heavily if this continues, as in F1 you are only good as your last race.

[chrisc90]

What are people looking at when they say it was a disastrous qualifying?

I mean in 2023 they were further away to Verstappen than this year. Even charles has closed the gap to Max this year if you look at the times.

2023 Max to Charles: 0.665
2024 Max to Carlos: 0.485

Net gain over year on year on the same track.

Even races this season...

Bahrain: 0.228
Jeddah: 0.319
Aus: 0.270

Yes the gap might be a little over a tenth this time round, but certainly wouldnt class it as disastrous or the worlds going to stop like some are making out.

If the race pace is that good like it was evident in FP3, with a second-ish to Verstappen, then there certainly shouldnt be any worries at all. Much harder for Charles to clear some car, but Carlos should aim to clear Norris very early on and see how it plays out against Perez.

[Sphere3758]

People don’t want to say it, but Redbull looks to have pretty poor race pace, like in Australia. This is the first time in a long time where Checo looked faster than Max on the race sims, both being much slower than Carlos and Charles.

It is not clear cut that Redbull will run away with this

[organic]

People don’t want to say it, but Redbull looks to have pretty poor race pace, like in Australia. This is the first time in a long time where Checo looked faster than Max on the race sims, both being much slower than Carlos and Charles.

It is not clear cut that Redbull will run away with this

Sargeant was also quicker than the RBs in the race sim, with Alonso being quicker still than Ferraris.. Also at back end of 2023 most weekends RB would not be the fastest race sims

[scuderiabrandon]

People don’t want to say it, but Redbull looks to have pretty poor race pace, like in Australia. This is the first time in a long time where Checo looked faster than Max on the race sims, both being much slower than Carlos and Charles.

It is not clear cut that Redbull will run away with this

20 kilos of added fuel tends to do that.

Australia is different because they struggled with graining, that should not be the case here.

[Sphere3758]

People don’t want to say it, but Redbull looks to have pretty poor race pace, like in Australia. This is the first time in a long time where Checo looked faster than Max on the race sims, both being much slower than Carlos and Charles.

It is not clear cut that Redbull will run away with this

20 kilos of added fuel tends to do that.

Australia is different because they struggled with graining, that should not be the case here.

20 kilos would mean 0.6 of a second. If you look at just the laps when Charles and Max were both out, Charles was faster by more than that.

viewtopic.php?p=1203361#p1203361

I am not claiming that Ferrari are faster, just that it is a lot closer than people seem to think. Carlos could be challenging for the win tomorrow if he has a good start. I am just sad that it is not Charles in p4, that would have made it a lot more interesting


Also, Helmut Marko repeatedly stating that Charles was faster on race sims is interesting . The man rarely gives false credit to opposition drivers, so there must be some truth to it

[Xyz22]

The way I look at this is that the gap to Red Bull in qualifying is now a genuine one. That is, the two cars warm up and use their tyres in a roughly similar way. This is as opposed to other cars - and Ferrari last year - where qualifying flatters the gap given better tyre warm up.

Red Bull chose this compromise and it’s inherent to the concept. It’s not something you can dial out with setup which is evidenced by the same trait being true in Monaco - if Red Bull could have sacrificed some race pace there for more margin in quali, they definitely would have. As it was, they squeaked into pole but pulled out as normal during the race.

Ferrari have now chosen the same conceptual compromise - so don’t expect them to suddenly dial in a way to extract more quali pace and have the best of both worlds. The solve is more pure performance. At the moment Red Bull can get away with the compromise because their overall margin over the other teams is sufficiently large - eg let’s say they have 5 tenths advantage per lap over McLaren in the race, they can afford for this to shrink to 2 tenths or less in quali and still be at the front. Ferrari, depending on track, don’t necessarily have this raw pace advantage and so, on days like this, may find themselves lower in quali but coming through. Tbh the margins were so small that it probably should have been 4th and 5th on the grid and that would have been fine to covert to 3/4 in the race, possibly even better. Leclerc only having one run in quali - which is ultimately on him - is the main fly in the ointment.

The issue is that McL with the same overall macro concept qualified ahead of Ferrari.

The issue is that if Leclerc has the usual 2-3 tenths on Sainz at Suzuka, Ferrari qualifies in third ahead of Mclaren and it would a completely different scenario.
It’s the second time in a row their faster driver takes himself the blame for not extracting the best from the tyres on one lap.
It can be due to his engineers or to himself, this is the fact.
Leclerc’s reputation is going to suffer heavily if this continues, as in F1 you are only good as your last race.

Mate, i couldn't care less about Leclerc's reputation. I look at the result. Leclerc was 0.1s slower than Sainz (with 0.08s lost in the first straight for whatever reason) which again isn't good but not a disaster, yet is P8. The base performance of the car today wasn't good, that's it. In fact Vasseur was on the same page.

[Vanja #66]

The strategy of going longer on first stint with hards pays off when you are not strong on pace. If you are fast, it is better to start with a tyre which gives you an advantage in the first laps, and then you pit early trying to finish into clean air. This way you also will force others to pit earlier than wanted.

In Australia it was impossible to overtake Norris' McLaren even with 4 DRS zones. In Suzuka it's much more difficult to do it with only 1 zone, so it's better to use slower tyres first, go long and wait to get some clear air for stints on faster Medium tyres. If you get lucky with VSC/SC and save 10s while boxing - all the better

***

On another note, I'm not sure why people are so down with today's Q results. It's like Australia post-Q all over again... Sainz is 1.2s quicker and Max was 0.7s quicker than last year, Sainz gained 0.5s more than Max! If we compare to Leclerc's 23 lap, it's still 0.2s more than Max - on a track Ferrari was joint worst (with Qatar) in the final 9 races of 2023. Vasseur said Ferrari needs 4 tenths on RB a while ago and it looks like that is still the gap, when Red Bull doesn't mess up the race setup like Australia. So that's a known gap and it's still there and it will show tomorrow. It's gonna be great if it ends up being no more than 0.5s a lap tomorrow on average, unlike last year's 0.85s...

McLaren was always going to be quick and RB even quicker here, those two cars are simply able to exploit more from their floors in high-speed sections at the moment. Points are awarded tomorrow and Vasseur's Ferrari now needs to show what they are made of in adverse conditions. If Sainz finishes close to Norris even without getting the podium it will be a great achievement. Leclerc also needs to show some skills tomorrow, by all accounts P5 is simply a must for him, Piastri still needs to hone his race pace.

[Xyz22]

The strategy of going longer on first stint with hards pays off when you are not strong on pace. If you are fast, it is better to start with a tyre which gives you an advantage in the first laps, and then you pit early trying to finish into clean air. This way you also will force others to pit earlier than wanted.

In Australia it was impossible to overtake Norris' McLaren even with 4 DRS zones. In Suzuka it's much more difficult to do it with only 1 zone , so it's better to use slower tyres first, go long and wait to get some clear air for stints on faster Medium tyres. If you get lucky with VSC/SC and save 10s while boxing - all the better

***

On another note, I'm not sure why people are so down with today's Q results. It's like Australia post-Q all over again... Sainz is 1.2s quicker and Max was 0.7s quicker than last year, Sainz gained 0.5s more than Max! If we compare to Leclerc's 23 lap, it's still 0.2s more than Max - on a track Ferrari was joint worst (with Qatar) in the final 9 races of 2023.

McLaren was always going to be quick and RB even quicker here, those two cars are simply able to exploit more from their floors in high-speed sections at the moment. Points are awarded tomorrow and Vasseur's Ferrari now needs to show what they are made of in adverse conditions. If Sainz finishes close to Norris even without getting the podium it will be a great achievement. Leclerc also needs to show some skills tomorrow, by all accounts P5 is simply a must for him, Piastri still needs to hone his race pace.

Which is why they can't afford to lose track position due to an undercut from someone else. Starting with the hards would clearly allow other drivers to undercut from behind, and Pirelli said the undercut will be extremely powerful.

[Cs98]

The strategy of going longer on first stint with hards pays off when you are not strong on pace. If you are fast, it is better to start with a tyre which gives you an advantage in the first laps, and then you pit early trying to finish into clean air. This way you also will force others to pit earlier than wanted.

In Australia it was impossible to overtake Norris' McLaren even with 4 DRS zones. In Suzuka it's much more difficult to do it with only 1 zone , so it's better to use slower tyres first, go long and wait to get some clear air for stints on faster Medium tyres. If you get lucky with VSC/SC and save 10s while boxing - all the better

***

On another note, I'm not sure why people are so down with today's Q results. It's like Australia post-Q all over again... Sainz is 1.2s quicker and Max was 0.7s quicker than last year, Sainz gained 0.5s more than Max! If we compare to Leclerc's 23 lap, it's still 0.2s more than Max - on a track Ferrari was joint worst (with Qatar) in the final 9 races of 2023.

McLaren was always going to be quick and RB even quicker here, those two cars are simply able to exploit more from their floors in high-speed sections at the moment. Points are awarded tomorrow and Vasseur's Ferrari now needs to show what they are made of in adverse conditions. If Sainz finishes close to Norris even without getting the podium it will be a great achievement. Leclerc also needs to show some skills tomorrow, by all accounts P5 is simply a must for him, Piastri still needs to hone his race pace.

Which is why they can't afford to lose track position due to an undercut from someone else. Starting with the hards would clearly allow other drivers to undercut from behind, and Pirelli said the undercut will be extremely powerful.

Yup, the undercut could be 3-4 seconds with this deg. Best for Leclerc would be to start on medium, hope to make a position or two early, then go for the undercut onto his second set of mediums (I can see an Alonso train forming from P5-P9), leave the hards for last since they are more flexible in terms of stint length. Starting on the hard would just lock your options since you have to go long then, even if a perfect undercut opportunity came on lap 10-20 it would be too soon