Ferrari SF-24

[Xyz22]

https://x.com/RosarioGiuliana/status/18 ... 9283432584

[Vanja #66]

That Shell logo threw me of completely, I was convinced new sides are bigger than Barcelona spec from the first garage photo

[Andi76]

That Shell logo threw me of completely, I was convinced new sides are bigger than Barcelona spec from the first garage photo

Maybe it was the rear area. It appears and looks to be bigger.

[FDD]

That Shell logo threw me of completely, I was convinced new sides are bigger than Barcelona spec from the first garage photo

Maybe it was the rear area. It appears and looks to be bigger.

https://postimages.org/

The part around the Shell logo also looked to me that is bigger, more like Imola spec as Vanja said.
But on these photos is clear that it is not.
Yes the rear area around the Ray Ban logo is different for sure, with much less curvature, vertical part more flat.

[4ld0]

Hallo, its my first post but since no one noted this it should be noted that the attachment of the bottom retaining straps is different. Now they seem to be always attached to the gearbox housing but higher up, closer to the exhaust pipe. Perhaps this is to radiate heat towards the bottom?

Zandvort:


Monza:

[zioture]

[Vanja #66]

All the vertical kicks on the rear keel are canceled now and they are back to near original 2022 keel design. They gave up on some local load and probably made it up within the tunnels. This may have a positive effect on running the rear axle with less stiffness, as keeping it extra stable at high speed may no longer be so important.

Changes to the floor edge could be very important for newly designed tunnels and their stability in adverse conditions. Or cutting off a piece means they want to avoid mechanical floor sealing at high roll due to less stiff rear axle

Big changes in any case, looks like their direction will evolve further with 2025 car

[ing.]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GWOPZ4zWgAE ... me=900x900

All the vertical kicks on the rear keel are canceled now and they are back to near original 2022 keel design. They gave up on some local load and probably made it up within the tunnels. This may have a positive effect on running the rear axle with less stiffness, as keeping it extra stable at high speed may no longer be so important.

Changes to the floor edge could be very important for newly designed tunnels and their stability in adverse conditions. Or cutting off a piece means they want to avoid mechanical floor sealing at high roll due to less stiff rear axle

Big changes in any case, looks like their direction will evolve further with 2025 car

^^ Great summary of the underfloor changes.

Regarding the additional scalloping of areas of the floor edge, this must surely be to reduce the sealing at very low ground clearance and so increase the margin for porpoising, as hinted at by Jock Clear quote in a previous post.

[PlatinumZealot]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GWJLpK4XEAA ... name=large

Somehow the corner mount of this wing is legal. Did anyone do a feature on how these special wing treatments meet the leaglity curvatures?

[FDD]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GWOPZ4zWgAE ... me=900x900

All the vertical kicks on the rear keel are canceled now and they are back to near original 2022 keel design. They gave up on some local load and probably made it up within the tunnels. This may have a positive effect on running the rear axle with less stiffness, as keeping it extra stable at high speed may no longer be so important.

Changes to the floor edge could be very important for newly designed tunnels and their stability in adverse conditions. Or cutting off a piece means they want to avoid mechanical floor sealing at high roll due to less stiff rear axle

Big changes in any case, looks like their direction will evolve further with 2025 car

^^ Great summary of the underfloor changes.

Regarding the additional scalloping of areas of the floor edge, this must surely be to reduce the sealing at very low ground clearance and so increase the margin for porpoising, as hinted at by Jock Clear quote in a previous post.

It sounds logical.
Vanja, your aero opinion on this?

[Vanja #66]

It sounds logical.
Vanja, your aero opinion on this?

Absolutely, I wouldn't suggest it otherwise I don't think there was a moment in F1 floor design where every micro detail has to be taken into account to design a floor that will work optimally in all conditions. We simply can't compare original Venturi/Ground Effect era cars with cars today, the tools today are a quantum leap ahead.

To have a cutout to prevent mechanical sealing in a critical area where the floor and flow structure change their nature seems like a step to allow wider chassis movement window, but without triggering the bouncing. That seems like a worthy sacrifice at this point. McLaren hit the gold vein with Miami floor and only had a minor diffuser roof tweak (well outside ground effect locally) and minor floor edge bracket tweak since. When you see others struggling with new parts so often, it makes perfect sense.

[FDD]

I was thinking in the same direction about the Monza floor spec.
Zander Arcari:
"Let's now make a clarification: it is not true that the new floor has not provided even one point of extra downforce. On the contrary, it has contributed to increasing the overall downforce of the car, and the fact that Ferrari, despite a level of downforce lower than optimal for the Monza track , managed to make the car work and manage the tires in an excellent way, is proof of this. This is what the Italian team is aiming for for the rest of the championship, with the aim of confirming its recent performances."

Opinions?

[Vanja #66]

I was thinking in the same direction about the Monza floor spec.
Zander Arcari:
"Let's now make a clarification: it is not true that the new floor has not provided even one point of extra downforce. On the contrary, it has contributed to increasing the overall downforce of the car, and the fact that Ferrari, despite a level of downforce lower than optimal for the Monza track , managed to make the car work and manage the tires in an excellent way, is proof of this. This is what the Italian team is aiming for for the rest of the championship, with the aim of confirming its recent performances."

Opinions?

That explanation on its own is flawed in a few ways. Ferrari had less wing, so less drag and downforce, this limited their cornering capacity anyway. Leclerc was actively saving in Lesmo 2, Ascari and Parabolica, while McLaren had to push in all of them to create a gap to prevent a DRS attack from Leclerc - ensuring race unfolded the way it did. This does not guarantee the new floor has more or less downforce than Spain floor, but without bouncing. We will have to see how both Baku and Singapore unfold to be able to make any kind of meaningful conclusion

What is positive for Ferrari is the fact they bolted on new floor on both cars and never looked back at Hungary floor, which means the new floor is undoubtedly a step forward from Hungary spec. To make it a meaningful use of budget funds, we can assume they aimed at reaching at least the downforce level of idealised Spanish floor or maybe even more to make up for lost development time. But this is just an assumption and we have no way of knowing for sure, unless Ferrari are equal to McLaren in the next two races as well

[AR3-GP]

That explanation on its own is flawed in a few ways. Ferrari had less wing, so less drag and downforce, this limited their cornering capacity anyway. Leclerc was actively saving in Lesmo 2, Ascari and Parabolica, while McLaren had to push in all of them to create a gap to prevent a DRS attack from Leclerc - ensuring race unfolded the way it did. This does not guarantee the new floor has more or less downforce than Spain floor, but without bouncing. We will have to see how both Baku and Singapore unfold to be able to make any kind of meaningful conclusion

Baku and Singapore are outlier tracks anyway. Ferrari would have always suited these circuits. It's medium and high speed corners which Ferrari needs to study again. COTA would be the confirmation.

[Vanja #66]

Baku and Singapore are outlier tracks anyway. Ferrari would have always suited these circuits. It's medium and high speed corners which Ferrari needs to study again. COTA would be the confirmation.

It's long-arched corners where Ferrari faced problems these 2 seasons and, of the remaining 8 races, only Qatar has those in abundance. I'd argue Baku and Singapore are quite relevant for the rest of the season. If they can match and fight McLaren in both those tracks, they will be fighting for podiums everywhere else too