https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/lecl ... /10613051/
It seems like it’s more a question of deployment strategy - kinda surprising they can still get this wrong at this point. Still, in a way it’s comforting as this is solvable.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/lecl ... /10613051/
I don't think it was an expected aero setup what RB and McL chose, but it did work for them in Q and R, track simply came to them with more and more rubber. Ferrari most likely didn't even consider changing to smaller BW and setting up the car that way, it's not a small change at all
Canadian GP will defo need different wing and will be the big test of aero efficiency, mechanical compliance and grip, and energy deployment with the long straight and all the chicanes that need to be attacked with good entry speed and good traction/grunt out of these.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:30I don't think it was an expected aero setup what RB and McL chose, but it did work for them in Q and R, track simply came to them with more and more rubber. Ferrari most likely didn't even consider changing to smaller BW and setting up the car that way, it's not a small change at all
Why do you think this is related to wing level (and hence drag) rather then deployment? Given Leclerc and Fred have both referred to “power strategy” or “hybrid management”, this seems to imply it’s more a question of mapping. Do you think this is just a more convenient public stance? Genuine question, but what they are saying implied that they don’t think it’s the wing level that’s to blame.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:30I don't think it was an expected aero setup what RB and McL chose, but it did work for them in Q and R, track simply came to them with more and more rubber. Ferrari most likely didn't even consider changing to smaller BW and setting up the car that way, it's not a small change at all
They get blind sided by how much the other teams sandbag on Friday n Saturday practice sessions. Leclerc's radio comms after qualifying somewhat confirm this. So when they look at their performance, they think they are doing enough, in hindsight it obviously isn't. This is something they will have to note going forward.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:30I don't think it was an expected aero setup what RB and McL chose, but it did work for them in Q and R, track simply came to them with more and more rubber. Ferrari most likely didn't even consider changing to smaller BW and setting up the car that way, it's not a small change at all
It will be the same setup as Miami for all teams basically, so same rear wing for Ferrari and single-piece beam wing in Canada. Monaco will be typical highest load for everyone of course, but I think we may see a few surprises in Barcelona...ing. wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:42Canadian GP will defo need different wing and will be the big test of aero efficiency, mechanical compliance and grip, and energy deployment with the long straight and all the chicanes that need to be attacked with good entry speed and good traction/grunt out of these.
Because higher drag is quite obvious when you look at how Miami went and how Imola went in terms of top speeds between Top 3 teams, even if Ferrari Imola upgrade undoubtedly improved their Top Speed by around 1-2kmh in total in my view.f1316 wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:52Why do you think this is related to wing level (and hence drag) rather then deployment? Given Leclerc and Fred have both referred to “power strategy” or “hybrid management”, this seems to imply it’s more a question of mapping. Do you think this is just a more convenient public stance? Genuine question, but what they are saying implied that they don’t think it’s the wing level that’s to blame.
Isn't there a small caveat here that Ferrari was running a slightly more loaded rear wing? Wouldn't that mean if they had run with less df, they would have to sacrifice some performance elsewhere on the track.Fer.Fan wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 20:33Lecler:
"We lost everything in the straights, and they are doing something weird with the energy, engine-wise, McLaren and Red Bull," he said. “We’ve got to look into it, but nothing that isn't possible to change.
“So we’ll look into that, and once we fix that I think we’ve got a real shot of going back on the top step for the podium," he concluded.
Ok, thanks. I guess my point then is that it’s odd that the team choose to blame something else publicly. There must be a reason.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 22:03It will be the same setup as Miami for all teams basically, so same rear wing for Ferrari and single-piece beam wing in Canada. Monaco will be typical highest load for everyone of course, but I think we may see a few surprises in Barcelona...ing. wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:42Canadian GP will defo need different wing and will be the big test of aero efficiency, mechanical compliance and grip, and energy deployment with the long straight and all the chicanes that need to be attacked with good entry speed and good traction/grunt out of these.
Because higher drag is quite obvious when you look at how Miami went and how Imola went in terms of top speeds between Top 3 teams, even if Ferrari Imola upgrade undoubtedly improved their Top Speed by around 1-2kmh in total in my view.f1316 wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 21:52Why do you think this is related to wing level (and hence drag) rather then deployment? Given Leclerc and Fred have both referred to “power strategy” or “hybrid management”, this seems to imply it’s more a question of mapping. Do you think this is just a more convenient public stance? Genuine question, but what they are saying implied that they don’t think it’s the wing level that’s to blame.
But then why is Charles talking about a different PU strategy (energy management)?
Could just be his presumptions before he's gotten more info.
1 tenth (race pace & qualifying) between Mclaren Red Bull & Ferrari = clear 3rd best.Seanspeed wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 22:56Could just be his presumptions before he's gotten more info.
Or just excuse making, though Ferrari tends to be little pleased with their drivers criticizing their drivetrains.
Either way, very annoying weekend for me. We're not bad, but it's very frustrating that we've gone from clear 2nd best with some hopes for occasional wins throughout the season to being thankful for even being on the podium cuz we're clear 3rd best.
EDIT: In terms of downforce/drag levels, I feel it's more that Mclaren have made a huge leap here than Ferrari suffering from bad choices. Annoying as hell to acknowledge, but that's my read. In comparison to Red Bull, we seem to be about the same as we were before. It's unbearable.
But he did say that it was noticed after qualifying, so that implies an analysis of the engineers, no?
I've never seen him do that, he honest af.
No we definitely improved vs RB, but Mclaren jump is almost scary. They went from 6-7 tenths a lap behind to being therebouts. They went from being a pig on straight to one of the fastest.Seanspeed wrote: ↑19 May 2024, 22:56Could just be his presumptions before he's gotten more info.
Or just excuse making, though Ferrari tends to be little pleased with their drivers criticizing their drivetrains.
Either way, very annoying weekend for me. We're not bad, but it's very frustrating that we've gone from clear 2nd best with some hopes for occasional wins throughout the season to being thankful for even being on the podium cuz we're clear 3rd best.
EDIT: In terms of downforce/drag levels, I feel it's more that Mclaren have made a huge leap here than Ferrari suffering from bad choices. Annoying as hell to acknowledge, but that's my read. In comparison to Red Bull, we seem to be about the same as we were before.