But that was the case last year too after McLaren's upgrade.Xyz22 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 09:38It's possible that in some tracks we'll be close or even faster than McL but we need to start looking at the "bigger picture". McL has been the most consistent car in the last few races. Look how slow Ferrari was in Canada.SoulPancake13 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 04:38I somewhat disagree. Yes, Ferrari had a bad weekend, I won't deny that, but Imola showed that the Ferrari is not miles off the McLaren(and according to Charles they didn't maximize the setup, another tenth puts Leclerc at the same pace there). What the car needs now is the ability to generate temps for the qualifying lap, which is supposed to be addressed at Silverstone. After that, I think we should see who will be 2nd best, but until then, the car is still competitive in the hotter conditions which we should hopefully see in Barcelona. This is too much of a knee jerk reaction to the past races IMO. There is no doubt McLaren is second best or even best right now though, just that a widening of the operating window and getting better at putting some energy into the tyres could go a long way.Xyz22 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 03:22
That was just a colossal gamble considering the race was completely lost. They were not sure they would have fixed the engine issue.
In any event the goal is to keep improving. Highly likely that McL will be 2nd best this year which sound’t be a surprise considering last year they were almost 1s quicker than Ferrari in real tracks. They probably started the year with a conservative car and Ferrari historically has been able to start the season with relatively better package. Their upgrade has been massive and put them into a position to often challenge for the win. We had 2 chances to win and we did it, which was important.
There is a lot of work to do.
You have to take into account that the radio channels are open to all.MattLightBlue wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 12:30Vasseur mentioned something about tyre pressure between quali and race, can someone tell me if it could be related to suspension stiffness and dry-wet conditions?
Also, I am not very happy about how they managed the communication with Charles during the engine issues moments: I think he should be allowed to know more than telling him “don’t worry and keep pushing”.
Yes, much embarrassing, much wow.Xyz22 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 14:59You guys saw how quick the McL was on inters? The difference with the others was embarrassing. In the second part of the first stint even Piastri who usually struggles with tyre management was lapping way faster than both MB and RB. Crazy stuff considering how dominant the RB19 and RB18 were in these conditions.
By "embarrassing" i meant that the difference in performance was really huge and i didn't expect it to be considering past seasons where RB was easily the class of the field. Lando gained like 4s in just a few laps on Max ?LM10 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 15:03Yes, much embarrassing, much wow.Xyz22 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 14:59You guys saw how quick the McL was on inters? The difference with the others was embarrassing. In the second part of the first stint even Piastri who usually struggles with tyre management was lapping way faster than both MB and RB. Crazy stuff considering how dominant the RB19 and RB18 were in these conditions.
McLaren currently have a car that appears to generate very good tyre heat, it is very evident in cool conditions.Xyz22 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 14:59You guys saw how quick the McL was on inters? The difference with the others was embarrassing. In the second part of the first stint even Piastri who usually struggles with tyre management was lapping way faster than both MB and RB. Crazy stuff considering how dominant the RB19 and RB18 were in these conditions.
The current point standings dont relate to the current competitive picture at all, and that's what is most important to look at, because that points situation will change if the car doesn't get quite a bit better. I'm not just talking about raw pace either, I'm talking about eradicating weaknesses, because we're now up against both a clearly faster Red Bull, but also a Mclaren that is faster and has no weaknesses. That's very tough to deal with, and Ferrari will likely find itself regularly racing for 3rd-6th instead of 1st-3rd, especially at any places that will highlight Ferrari's issues.catent wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 02:45Ferrari does not need a “miraculously transformative upgrade” to compete with McLaren for WCC; Ferrari need to widen the operating window and improve performance in cooler temps.
Ferrari still leads McLaren in WCC and had their first dud weekend of the season, where everything that could go wrong, did. One bad (and unlucky) weekend does not make a race season. People are understandably disappointed but I think there are some significant overreactions and kneejerk hot takes following Montreal.
Car has been slower then Mclaren ever since China, here in particular (in fact, against Merc as well, by big amount). Its worrying no doubt and Ferraris upgrade clearly didnt deliver results to match Mclaren.LM10 wrote: ↑10 Jun 2024, 12:43This thread is by far the most ridiculous on this forum. I missed the weekend and usually I read all posts I missed, but this time I just stopped. I find it increasingly hard to follow this thread. People going crazy and crying around because of an off-weekend, changing their mind about Ferrari’s performance level week in week out based on singularity which a race weekend is. What a joke.
The car is still the same and it’s not gonna lose performance 2 weeks later. Such big performance losses are always because of setup/tyre issues - like RedBull in Singapore last year for example. This does not mean that the SF-24 suddenly turned into a weak car or Ferrari into a weak team.
Stop overreacting and appreciate the work this young and evolving team has done under Vasseur instead of being disrespectful and questioning their seriousness or competence. They’ve overcome many difficulties and paved the way for future success.