Ferrari F2012

[myurr]

Watch the apex speed in turn 5 and 6! Alonso used shorter gears and more downforce...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkMmlvBQEPw[/youtube]

Actually seemed like the slower the corner the faster Alonso was in comparison to Schumacher, although it's very hard to tell from that video and I have no idea at what point in the weekend it was shot, nor how much fuel each car had at the time.

[myurr]

It seems logical to me that since the acer ducts are extending out further than other teams' as part of Ferrari's exhaust solution, if this is not working they are doubly hit - i.e. not only do they not have an effective exhaust solution, but the car's aero is also negatively impacted.

Therefore, if this is in some way rectified - whether by cutting the ducts shorter and adopting, for example, a Sauber type solution, or by making the initial solution work to the extent it was supposed to (and they must have seen a big benefit from it, as they would surely have been aware of the aero/drag downside) - they can solve their two big problems in one fell swoop.

Changing the ducts will require downstream changes to the rest of the car, even if subtle. So that is why we haven't seen them just chop them off. No doubt they're working on a refinement that we'll see in the next couple of races, but it's not going to be a quick and easy fix for them. Come the European races no doubt we'll see a Sauber style exhaust on this car but if they try and rush it then they'll be taking a huge huge risk of it not working and them falling further behind before they can get it all hooked up.

[f1316]

It seems logical to me that since the acer ducts are extending out further than other teams' as part of Ferrari's exhaust solution, if this is not working they are doubly hit - i.e. not only do they not have an effective exhaust solution, but the car's aero is also negatively impacted.

Therefore, if this is in some way rectified - whether by cutting the ducts shorter and adopting, for example, a Sauber type solution, or by making the initial solution work to the extent it was supposed to (and they must have seen a big benefit from it, as they would surely have been aware of the aero/drag downside) - they can solve their two big problems in one fell swoop.

Changing the ducts will require downstream changes to the rest of the car, even if subtle. So that is why we haven't seen them just chop them off. No doubt they're working on a refinement that we'll see in the next couple of races, but it's not going to be a quick and easy fix for them. Come the European races no doubt we'll see a Sauber style exhaust on this car but if they try and rush it then they'll be taking a huge huge risk of it not working and them falling further behind before they can get it all hooked up.

No, sure, I totally get that. I was thinking more of the Mugello test being the time at which they introduce the fully modified arrangement; but my point was it may be that one issue is causing myriad problems and therefore IF (big if) they can sort it, they could overcome numerous issues.

In many ways they are lucky they have a test so soon into the season this year - although some would argue that another test at the beginning would have helped them get a better handle on the car. I'm not sure I agree with that though, since they're bound to have better info from the two races so far (and the four before the test) than from any amount of testing.

Interestingly, Autosport are saying this:

"But its [Ferrari's] major focus will be on big upgrades for the Spanish Grand Prix, with the car set to feature a new sidepod, exhaust and rear bodywork solution."

[munudeges]

Again, on a drying track, Alonso lost a second per lap to a Sauber, this discloses the situation crystal clear me thinks?

Allowed myself to get sidetracked on this thread, but that's the material point here.

Interestingly, the longer they were on the tyres, wet or dry, the worse it got and the more time Alonso lost. It was worse in the dry. They've got tyre wear problems and you need all the mechanical help you can get there. The fact is that what Ferrari have provides them with less room for adjustment of handling than a push-rod.

Pet peeve, but I do wish people would stop calling aerodynamics 'aero'. That's a chocolate bar where I come from.

[Jersey Tom]

I have this theory why "aero" is such a popular subject for the pub-analyst, with catchy xpressions like vortex, delaminanation, stalling and what not, it becomes uncertain enough for anyone in to easily get a gloss of quasi-knowledge on the subject.

This was of course not directed at any poster on this fine forum.

And yet you cling to a funny feeling about a front suspension that just doesn't look right to you...

Au contraire, I have tried to xplain my aversions in an engineerish fashion several times, but very few seems to bother?

Refresh our memories.

[munudeges]

There is a forum search for these things............

[Postmoe]

Pet peeve, but I do wish people would stop calling aerodynamics 'aero'. That's a chocolate bar where I come from.

But not where I do. Now that you know, the communication problem is admirably solved.

[munudeges]

It still doesn't mean aerodynamics, or indeed anything, in English. It's just laziness in all honesty.

[Postmoe]

It still doesn't mean aerodynamics, or indeed anything, in English. It's just laziness in all honesty.

Talking about laziness: It's not even english. I do not often see greeks stalking people like you in forums for awkwardly borrowing their language.

If you understand aero it should be ok. I'm not going to be called lazy by someone who doesn't even know how many languages I'm using or if it's easy for me. I don't find that... fair.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Au contraire, I have tried to xplain my aversions in an engineerish fashion several times, but very few seems to bother?

And others who are quite qualified as well as having insider information(Scarbs) have stated the suspension is fine. The math was done and it works as well as push rod in operating the spring. The motion ratio is the same as pushrod. People are just missing that it's the angle of the rod & the wishbone it's attached to that defines the ratio. As for adjusting load, Pullrod can still be offset to alter load with steering lock.
People are just picking up on something they don't think looks right. If the suspension was the problem surely a slippery wet track would present serious problems for the car if the suspension was the problem. Yet it was consistently setting fastest lap times than cars with push rod and on newer tyres.

And if I'm not mistaken, on Fernando's lap stop, the car was fitted with used tyres IIRC.

[amouzouris]

Au contraire, I have tried to xplain my aversions in an engineerish fashion several times, but very few seems to bother?

And others who are quite qualified as well as having insider information(Scarbs) have stated the suspension is fine. The math was done and it works as well as push rod in operating the spring. The motion ratio is the same as pushrod. People are just missing that it's the angle of the rod & the wishbone it's attached to that defines the ratio. As for adjusting load, Pullrod can still be offset to alter load with steering lock.
People are just picking up on something they don't think looks right. If the suspension was the problem surely a slippery wet track would present serious problems for the car if the suspension was the problem. Yet it was consistently setting fastest lap times than cars with push rod and on newer tyres.

And if I'm not mistaken, on Fernando's lap stop, the car was fitted with used tyres IIRC.

big +1

[f1316]

Au contraire, I have tried to xplain my aversions in an engineerish fashion several times, but very few seems to bother?

And others who are quite qualified as well as having insider information(Scarbs) have stated the suspension is fine. The math was done and it works as well as push rod in operating the spring. The motion ratio is the same as pushrod. People are just missing that it's the angle of the rod & the wishbone it's attached to that defines the ratio. As for adjusting load, Pullrod can still be offset to alter load with steering lock.
People are just picking up on something they don't think looks right. If the suspension was the problem surely a slippery wet track would present serious problems for the car if the suspension was the problem. Yet it was consistently setting fastest lap times than cars with push rod and on newer tyres.

And if I'm not mistaken, on Fernando's lap stop, the car was fitted with used tyres IIRC.

Yes, I read that. But why did they do that? Seems really odd, as surely they had some new sets? He only did one run in Q3, after all.

[myurr]

It still doesn't mean aerodynamics, or indeed anything, in English. It's just laziness in all honesty.

Talking about laziness: It's not even english. I do not often see greeks stalking people like you in forums for awkwardly borrowing their language.

If you understand aero it should be ok. I'm not going to be called lazy by someone who doesn't even know how many languages I'm using or if it's easy for me. I don't find that... fair.

Don't worry, segedunum / munudeges has history...

Welcome to the forum!

[myurr]

Yes, I read that. But why did they do that? Seems really odd, as surely they had some new sets? He only did one run in Q3, after all.

He used a new set of mediums in Q1 I believe even though he didn't really need to, and then used them again for the first Q2 run. I think he then did another Q2 run on another set, before using his final set in Q3.

[Jersey Tom]

Au contraire, I have tried to xplain my aversions in an engineerish fashion several times, but very few seems to bother?

And if I'm not mistaken, on Fernando's lap stop, the car was fitted with used tyres IIRC.

Yes, I read that. But why did they do that? Seems really odd, as surely they had some new sets? He only did one run in Q3, after all.

If it was an intentional move, it's entirely possible that scuffs would fire off quicker on the slightly damp conditions than stickers.