I think there was a lap with LEC -0.4s on RUS and HAM was -0.8s. Then red flag or traffic ruined it. Not sure how the practice went after that (around half time of fp2).SoulPancake13 wrote:Seems to me like today was used as another testing day from the team - both drivers said they felt pretty good about how the day went. Charles still thinks there is more potential although they are not able to reach the level of McL.
Expectations were very high so yeah.
Spout this as if it's gospel that an evolved SF-24 would have been uncompetitive. We will never know that.Seanspeed wrote: ↑04 Apr 2025, 11:51The problem isn't that they were bold, it's that the changes they did make aren't working as well as hoped.
Ferrari were not happy to be 2nd this year. They were aiming to have the best car, and simply sticking with what we were doing with the 2024 car wasn't gonna be enough as that car had inherent weaknesses that would have prevented us from being good enough all round.
They absolutely made the right decision to try something different, especially in light of this being the end year of regulations, as it means there was little to lose.
Ferrari themselves, you know, the team of professionals with actual real world expertise in this subject and obviously of their own car, seemed to also believe that simply evolving the 2024 car wasn't gonna be enough. Which is honestly pretty much just common sense. In F1, to rid yourself of more fundamental car issues, you usually need an off-season to make larger core changes to the car.Waz wrote: ↑04 Apr 2025, 22:41Spout this as if it's gospel that an evolved SF-24 would have been uncompetitive. We will never know that.
What has happened though is that Ferrari built a car that seems to have lost its strengths without improvement in any area.
Ultra sensitive to ride height.
Doesn't ride kerbs well.
Very stiff suspension.
No tire wear advantage.
It's all good pointing to previous seasons that they recovered well, but they didn't win any of those.
Maybe I will be wrong, but it's such a waste of time to bring a car you don't understand.
Serra spent absolutely 0 minutes working on the SF25. This is total conjecture.continuum16 wrote: ↑04 Apr 2025, 23:46Ultra sensitive to ride height.
Doesn't ride kerbs well.
Very stiff suspension.
No tire wear advantage.
Sounds a lot like 2022 and 2023 Mercedes that Loic Serra worked on, doesn't it? Given he joined in autumn 2024 I am 99% sure this is a coincidence. But not 100%.
My point is that it does not give me a lot of confidence that these problems will be solved in a timely manner.
It could be that in the pursuit of performance, these "issues" are actually characteristics of being at a higher level. Notice how McLaren also have the symptoms but are just managing it better. Riding kerbs well, pliable suspension, wider window, nice tyre life may well be characterists of a ground effect car that isn't at the limit of performance. Going closer to the ground and controlling the aero platform in a tighter window of movement has it's sacrifices.Waz wrote: ↑04 Apr 2025, 22:41Spout this as if it's gospel that an evolved SF-24 would have been uncompetitive. We will never know that.Seanspeed wrote: ↑04 Apr 2025, 11:51The problem isn't that they were bold, it's that the changes they did make aren't working as well as hoped.
Ferrari were not happy to be 2nd this year. They were aiming to have the best car, and simply sticking with what we were doing with the 2024 car wasn't gonna be enough as that car had inherent weaknesses that would have prevented us from being good enough all round.
They absolutely made the right decision to try something different, especially in light of this being the end year of regulations, as it means there was little to lose.
What has happened though is that Ferrari built a car that seems to have lost its strengths without improvement in any area.
Ultra sensitive to ride height.
Doesn't ride kerbs well.
Very stiff suspension.
No tire wear advantage.
It's all good pointing to previous seasons that they recovered well, but they didn't win any of those.
Maybe I will be wrong, but it's such a waste of time to bring a car you don't understand.
Maybe put that message on the Redbull Team thread instead of making slight insinuations about Hamiltons performance today. This thread does not need toxic comments like this...
oh my bad din't mean it like that, i am team supporter first, don't care to much about drivers, I was just surprised redbull took pole with max when McLaren looked like on rails in onboard poised to take an easy pole.
crazy the amount of time theyre both losing in S2 but i guess Sukuza was about damage limitation more than anythingScuderiaLeo wrote: ↑05 Apr 2025, 05:39S1
Leclerc: +.156 from Norris
Hamilton: +.201 from Norris
S2
Leclerc: +.356 from Russell
Hamilton: +.397 from Russell
S3
Hamilton: +.107 from Piastri
Leclerc: +.11 from Piastri
* Hamilton had difficulties on his lap and Leclerc didn't do a softs run at the end.
Still, disappointing sector 2 right now.
