2024 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[Xyz22]

No. Costa designed the F1 248, F 2007 and F 2008. He also made the F 10. All of these cars are better than whatever Cardile has done in his entire career.

He was also one of the key people behind Mercedes' winning cars of 2014-2018 (some would say even 2019 car), it was no surprise Brawn snatched Costa as soon as he could back in 2011

Yep. Again, i'm not saying Cardile is terrible (he is a good engineer), but Costa is a legend of F1.

We were all furious against Montezemolo for firing him out of rage after the race.

[yooogurt]

https://imgur.com/hexoEKi.png
We're looking at yet another wet-weather masterclass, boys. Strap yourselves in.

Another cold gp, damn, quali will be a pain again.

[Xyz22]

Realistically, our next opportunity will be Baku.

With this quali performance we won't be able to fight for the win in classic tracks. It's just not gonna happen.
In the race in Spain we were quite close to Max. Excluding the first stint where we were compromised by our starting position, Leclerc was only 0.66s slower than Max. Of course Leclerc had a fresher medium tyres in the second stint, but even considering the last stint where Max had a new soft, Lec was only 0.1s per lap slower. This is really good.

In a linear race Max would have finished 8-9s ahead of Leclerc factoring in RB performance advantage with full fuel.

The problem is the starting position. Our race was finished the moment we started P5 and P6. That's it.

[SoulPancake13]

Were there any articles from reliable sources detailing why the car was off pace here? 3 tenths to Norris and Max is a bigger gap than what was in Imola... and since then we have brought a big upgrade. Is there a chance the new floor doesn't work correctly?

[Xyz22]

Were there any articles from reliable sources detailing why the car was off pace here? 3 tenths to Norris and Max is a bigger gap than what was in Imola... and since then we have brought a big upgrade. Is there a chance the new floor doesn't work correctly?

You mean in quali? Max was ahead by that much thanks to the tow.

McL is just faster.

In race trim, the gap (in free air) to RB was around 0.1s.

[SoulPancake13]

Were there any articles from reliable sources detailing why the car was off pace here? 3 tenths to Norris and Max is a bigger gap than what was in Imola... and since then we have brought a big upgrade. Is there a chance the new floor doesn't work correctly?

You mean in quali? Max was ahead by that much thanks to the tow.

McL is just faster.

In race trim, the gap (in free air) to RB was around 0.1s.


https://storage.googleapis.com/fp-media ... A_24_1.jpg

It seems on the mediums we were matching Norris tbf, and with Max we were right there. Maybe not so doom and gloom...

[Vanja #66]

Realistically, our next opportunity will be Baku.

With this quali performance we won't be able to fight for the win in classic tracks. It's just not gonna happen.
In the race in Spain we were quite close to Max. Excluding the first stint where we were compromised by our starting position, Leclerc was only 0.66s slower than Max. Of course Leclerc had a fresher medium tyres in the second stint, but even considering the last stint where Max had a new soft, Lec was only 0.1s per lap slower. This is really good.

In a linear race Max would have finished 8-9s ahead of Leclerc factoring in RB performance advantage with full fuel.

The problem is the starting position. Our race was finished the moment we started P5 and P6. That's it.

Of the remaining track configurations only Silverstone, Spa and Qatar will definitely be better for RB and McL in my view. Qatar could swing into Ferrari's favour if there are no mandatory stops like last year, in which case high deg will work for Ferrari. The weather will play a role in certain events though.

Hungary, Zandvoort and Brasil will probably be neutral.

Monza, Baku, Singapore, Mexico and Vegas should favour Ferrari and I think Texas and Abu Dhabi might also favour Ferrari as things stand now.

Were there any articles from reliable sources detailing why the car was off pace here? 3 tenths to Norris and Max is a bigger gap than what was in Imola... and since then we have brought a big upgrade. Is there a chance the new floor doesn't work correctly?

We tend to forget Ferrari had a Filming Day with both drivers having 100km for their Imola update and this was massive for their proper basic Imola setup (having too big beam wing and losing on straight was another matter) and this year not a single RB20 update was a big step as soon as it was introduced. In Spain, Leclerc's FP1 was useless and FP2 wasn't much better, so he hardly had the best setup available. They have a lot of room to show what they can do in Austria and weather forecast for Sunday is getting better. Friday and Saturday should be dry and very sunny and quite warm for Austrian subalpine hills, so hopefully Sprint and Q can go well.

[Sevach]

According to this Cardile is heading to Aston Martin.
Loic Serra will be chassis and aero chief.

[Xyz22]

Were there any articles from reliable sources detailing why the car was off pace here? 3 tenths to Norris and Max is a bigger gap than what was in Imola... and since then we have brought a big upgrade. Is there a chance the new floor doesn't work correctly?

You mean in quali? Max was ahead by that much thanks to the tow.

McL is just faster.

In race trim, the gap (in free air) to RB was around 0.1s.


https://storage.googleapis.com/fp-media ... A_24_1.jpg

It seems on the mediums we were matching Norris tbf, and with Max we were right there. Maybe not so doom and gloom...

McL was quicker. They have found something special with their development.
Our issue is starting so far behind unfortunately.

[Space-heat]

You mean in quali? Max was ahead by that much thanks to the tow.

McL is just faster.

In race trim, the gap (in free air) to RB was around 0.1s.


https://storage.googleapis.com/fp-media ... A_24_1.jpg

It seems on the mediums we were matching Norris tbf, and with Max we were right there. Maybe not so doom and gloom...

McL was quicker. They have found something special with their development.
Our issue is starting so far behind unfortunately.

Yeah, Norris was super quick on the Soft at the end of stint one. There was a 2.8s gap (Norris to Charles) on Lap 17 when Hamilton pitted; it was 6.1 seconds by the time Norris pitted on Lap 23 (to Charles). That is almost half a second a lap (.47s/lap). A lap and a bit later, after Charles pit, on lap 25 he was 10.7 s behind Norris.

As you said, the race was lost when the decision to extend the first stint was made. This was caused by the poor qualifying and the decision to go into the race considering "plan B" (Charles referenced that they were told to look after the tyre in the first stint).

Ferrari gambled on a one-stop or safety car because it didn't think it could make it work on track. Given Charles's set-up for low drag, a gamble at pushing the Merc early to overtake, pitting to undercut, and then extending in the second stint would have been interesting, but that is in hindsight when what they tried didn't work.

Hopefully the set-up was compromised by the bouncing at highspeed that Sainz mentioned and finding a solution without compromising performance can lead to a bump.

[Xyz22]

It seems on the mediums we were matching Norris tbf, and with Max we were right there. Maybe not so doom and gloom...

McL was quicker. They have found something special with their development.
Our issue is starting so far behind unfortunately.

Yeah, Norris was super quick on the Soft at the end of stint one. There was a 2.8s gap (Norris to Charles) on Lap 17 when Hamilton pitted; it was 6.1 seconds by the time Norris pitted on Lap 23 (to Charles). That is almost half a second a lap (.47s/lap). A lap and a bit later, after Charles pit, on lap 25 he was 10.7 s behind Norris.

As you said, the race was lost when the decision to extend the first stint was made. This was caused by the poor qualifying and the decision to go into the race considering "plan B" (Charles referenced that they were told to look after the tyre in the first stint).

Ferrari gambled on a one-stop or safety car because it didn't think it could make it work on track. Given Charles's set-up for low drag, a gamble at pushing the Merc early to overtake, pitting to undercut, and then extending in the second stint would have been interesting, but that is in hindsight when what they tried didn't work.

Hopefully the set-up was compromised by the bouncing at highspeed that Sainz mentioned and finding a solution without compromising performance can lead to a bump.

Yeah McL was in another league in free air.

[AR3-GP]

Leclerc wasn't on the podium because he had a bad qualifying. For his reputation, he only finished 0.005s ahead of Sainz (Leclerc mistake in T5). Considering that Leclerc is very highly regarded as a qualifier, the gap and mistake suggest a clear underperformance. The margin to P3 was only 0.03s so a simple 1 tenth more than Sainz would have put Leclerc in P3, and the podium.

Going on about Sainz is just avoiding this fact. Leclerc was never beating Hamilton after starting behind him. Hamilton/Russell made the difference on Saturday for the final place on the podium. Leclerc can look to his qualy performance, not Sainz, for his answers. This is exactly what Fred Vasseur also stated.

Without that mistake he would have been P3 yes, but still by a very small margin. This means that both him and Sainz got very close to the max potential of the car. We have been seeing this trend since the first race in Bahrain, that is drivers making minor mistakes when trying to extract the 100% of the car in quali trim. This car is terrible in qualifying and currently the slowest of the top 3. Also looking at the difference in the race it could be that Sainz is using setups more tuned for quali performance and this is why he has been able to finish that close to Leclerc.

Leclerc is worth 1 tenth minimum in qualifying on any day and on any track when he does a good job. There isn’t more to say. Stop the excuses.

[ScuderiaLeo]

Without that mistake he would have been P3 yes, but still by a very small margin. This means that both him and Sainz got very close to the max potential of the car. We have been seeing this trend since the first race in Bahrain, that is drivers making minor mistakes when trying to extract the 100% of the car in quali trim. This car is terrible in qualifying and currently the slowest of the top 3. Also looking at the difference in the race it could be that Sainz is using setups more tuned for quali performance and this is why he has been able to finish that close to Leclerc.

Leclerc is worth 1 tenth minimum in qualifying on any day and on any track when he does a good job. There isn’t more to say. Stop the excuses.

How are you quantifying Leclerc? Is there a measurement process for how much a "good Leclerc" is worth?

[Vanja #66]

Leclerc is worth 1 tenth minimum in qualifying on any day and on any track when he does a good job. There isn’t more to say. Stop the excuses.

These nonsense provocations and baiting have been too much for a while already. Reported

[Xyz22]

Leclerc wasn't on the podium because he had a bad qualifying. For his reputation, he only finished 0.005s ahead of Sainz (Leclerc mistake in T5). Considering that Leclerc is very highly regarded as a qualifier, the gap and mistake suggest a clear underperformance. The margin to P3 was only 0.03s so a simple 1 tenth more than Sainz would have put Leclerc in P3, and the podium.

Going on about Sainz is just avoiding this fact. Leclerc was never beating Hamilton after starting behind him. Hamilton/Russell made the difference on Saturday for the final place on the podium. Leclerc can look to his qualy performance, not Sainz, for his answers. This is exactly what Fred Vasseur also stated.

Without that mistake he would have been P3 yes, but still by a very small margin. This means that both him and Sainz got very close to the max potential of the car. We have been seeing this trend since the first race in Bahrain, that is drivers making minor mistakes when trying to extract the 100% of the car in quali trim. This car is terrible in qualifying and currently the slowest of the top 3. Also looking at the difference in the race it could be that Sainz is using setups more tuned for quali performance and this is why he has been able to finish that close to Leclerc.

Leclerc is worth 1 tenth minimum in qualifying on any day and on any track when he does a good job. There isn’t more to say. Stop the excuses.

There is no need to be aggressive.
I'd like to add that Leclerc is usually quite honest when he doesn't do a good lap in quali. Back in 2021 when he was in pole in Baku, he literally said his lap was not good.

This time he said that there wasn't "more" to extract from the car. Of course with a perfect lap he would have been P3, but we are talking very very small margins. To me, it is clear that both him and Carlos were able to get close to the limit. As a matter of fact, Carlos has quite the record in Spain in terms of qualifying, considering that before matching with Charles he always finished ahead of his teammate outside 2019 with Lando.