Probably because they don't deem the drag penalty worth the benefit.FLuidd wrote:can someone explain why ferrari have opted for no monkey seat?
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: James Allison (TD), Simone Resta (CD), Corrado Lanzone (Head of production), Loic Bigois (HA), Dirk De Beer (HA), Jock Clear (ED), Mattia Binotto (HE), Rory Byrne (Tech Advisor), Massimo Rivola (SD), Maurizio Arrivabene (TP), Sergio Marchionne (Chairman)
Drivers: Sebastian Vettel (5), Kimi Raikkonen (7)
Probably because they don't deem the drag penalty worth the benefit.FLuidd wrote:can someone explain why ferrari have opted for no monkey seat?
Teams can inform drivers of potential car failures and how to prevent them. Doubtful kimi's actions were responsible for failure.evered7 wrote:"I think I broke something"
These were Kimi' words when informing the team about the issue. It looks like he didn't manage something correctly with the PU and hence the subsequent failure.
I don't think Ferrari have given a reason as to why Kimi had to retire. Also I didn't hear Ferrari instructing Vettel to take it easy on the PU front if they had suspected a similar issue to occur in his car.
So it looks more like a driver error than the PU going bonkers by itself.
Comes to show how much bullshit people say.
Total power output is nothing without fast power delivery.Kiril Varbanov wrote:Tech analysis: Ferrari steering wheel may hold key to rocket F1 starts - single clutch paddle.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... ts-682182/
I think it's a lot more than that.iulian_florea wrote:They’ve lengthen the lever to improve the clutch modulation.
Just like in a motorbike clutch. Simple an effective.
it may be because it isnt need in their opinion. if you look at the Ferrari rear above the diffuser compared to Mercedes it is much more open allowing air to flow faster over the diffuser which in turn sucks more air from under the car. They may be creating enough downforce with the diffuser to just not even bother with the draggy monkey seat.FLuidd wrote:can someone explain why ferrari have opted for no monkey seat?
Also possible that they can't use it because their front wing might be at maximum downforce. If this is the case they would not be able to balance additional rear downforce.giantfan10 wrote:it may be because it isnt need in their opinion. if you look at the Ferrari rear above the diffuser compared to Mercedes it is much more open allowing air to flow faster over the diffuser which in turn sucks more air from under the car. They may be creating enough downforce with the diffuser to just not even bother with the draggy monkey seat.FLuidd wrote:can someone explain why ferrari have opted for no monkey seat?
As far as the front wing being at maximum downforce..... i dont think that would be a valid reason. running more front wing angle would cure that with a drag penalty of course. Red Bull i believe also didnt run a monkey seat.Just_a_fan wrote:Also possible that they can't use it because their front wing might be at maximum downforce. If this is the case they would not be able to balance additional rear downforce.giantfan10 wrote:it may be because it isnt need in their opinion. if you look at the Ferrari rear above the diffuser compared to Mercedes it is much more open allowing air to flow faster over the diffuser which in turn sucks more air from under the car. They may be creating enough downforce with the diffuser to just not even bother with the draggy monkey seat.FLuidd wrote:can someone explain why ferrari have opted for no monkey seat?
Only Ferrari know and they will have a good reason for not running it.
The problem with just adding front wing angle is that it alters flow to the rear of the car. Adding front wing angle can actually make the rear end lose downforce.giantfan10 wrote: As far as the front wing being at maximum downforce..... i dont think that would be a valid reason. running more front wing angle would cure that with a drag penalty of course. Red Bull i believe also didnt run a monkey seat.