Scuderia Ferrari SF16-H

[bhall II]

I totally agree, like you said in the above summary, extremely limited budget, very short time frame, and somewhat archaic tools when it comes to permutation simulation.

This leaves me with the distinct impression that you didn't read it all (and, frankly, that suits me just fine).

Let us now return to the unfolding tragedy that is SF16-H.

[ME4ME]

Some news from Italy

- Ferrari in Canada with new TC
- Brings ~25hp (4 tenths) worth of lap time, especially on tracks with sparse regen
- Reliability update so it doesn't use tokens
- New aero parts

http://www.f1analisitecnica.com/2016/06 ... butto.html

And new specs of fuel and rear suspension.

Should make them fastest on the grid. If true. If tyre issues are fixed. Probably not.

[f1316]

I think it's fair to summarise that, regardless of anything, overtaking was not sufficiently improved in 2009 as a result of the OWG's work. So whatever the factors that contributed to it, their initial work was not successful.

Changes post 2011 have increased overtaking numbers. Whether or not the result is better is another debate.

Aral wrote:_ have a look at the title of this thread and the introduction. The thread is about the Ferrari SF16-H, and anything that is tangible to it. Commenting about the OWG and prospects of passing has nothing to do with the physical car.If you are not happy with the OWG, please post your comments on the general chat forum.

[f1316]

Some news from Italy

- Ferrari in Canada with new TC
- Brings ~25hp (4 tenths) worth of lap time, especially on tracks with sparse regen
- Reliability update so it doesn't use tokens
- New aero parts

http://www.f1analisitecnica.com/2016/06 ... butto.html

And new specs of fuel and rear suspension.

Should make them fastest on the grid. If true. If tyre issues are fixed. Probably not.

Well it also depends on what other teams do.

Still, power unit development trends do seem to be echoed in this formula, with Ferrari and Renault just one and two years behind Mercedes respectively: Ferrari are now at the point of making a token free reliability upgrade in Canada to fix a problem that has not allowed them to extract the maximum from their PU (just like Mercedes last year ); Renault have increased resource having not initially invested sufficiently and are now making big strides via fixes to initial fundamental flaws (just like Ferrari last year).

Whether or not one manufacturer can bridge the year's worth of 'gap', I am not sure (until next year when everyone can essentially start again if they want), but learnings from others seem to mean the relative differences on package performance is decreasing each year.

Subjectively, I still think the Ferrari package shows plenty of potential but has a tyre usage issue which has contrived with other things to limit positive results (with wins in Australia and Spain we might think differently); but a slightly deeper dive into practice and race pace shows the pace is reasonably strong even without the turbo fix. With it, and having actually closed to the leader in recent races, I'd suggest there is still reason to believe the season could be worthwhile.

[wesley123]

Aral wrote:- This post has been removed as it was off-topic. Please note that this thread is for anything that is attached to or used in the SF16-H. Off topic comments can be removed.

[ferkan]

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 69884.html

So according to AMUS, Ferrari has passed crash test of shorter nose =D>

[Thunder]

Well about Time. Their Nose was still a bit Longer than the likes of Red Bull, Williams or McLaren.

[ferkan]

Well about Time. Their Nose was still a bit Longer than the likes of Red Bull, Williams or McLaren.

But it had plenty of volume for air to pass between tip and pillars that connect nose to FW. Williams is still behind there...

[Thunder]

True and that likely won't even change. Just the Stump will get shorter i guess.

[F1NAC]

According to autosprint FIA rejected proposal for turbine fix as a reliability upgrade.

[miguelalvesreis]

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 69884.html

So according to AMUS, Ferrari has passed crash test of shorter nose =D>

Maybe I misunderstood it but, isn't AMUS saying that one team passed crash test recently with a short nose and that many in the paddock believe is Ferrari?

It's different from saying that Ferrari passed the crash test with a short nose

[giantfan10]

According to autosprint FIA rejected proposal for turbine fix as a reliability upgrade.

Good.

Where do you see a good news in that?

Is there a link? I can't find a news that talks about it

There is no link.. in an article auto sprint says Ferrari will use 3 tokens to fix their turbo for canada.... this was not an article claiming the FIA rejected their claim . Was basically a throwaway sentence in an article about what to expect for the canadian GP...
There are specific reports from other sites saying that it has been approved... matters not the upgrade will be used with or without tokens so i have no idea what GoranF1 is celebrating

[bl4zar_]

Most of the articles I've read said that it was approved as a reliability fix, I wouldn't worry much about this.

[Fede90]

Most of the articles I've read said that it was approved as a reliability fix, I wouldn't worry much about this.

Mclaren fans, man.......

What's their role here? Do McLaren's boys really think that they can challenge Ferrari?

Maybe in 2020

[f1316]

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferra ... el-745002/

So three tokens according to motorsport, autosport said two, I think.

I think it's a bit odd given the seeming similarity to Mercedes last year, but then I don't know the ins and outs.

I actually think the suspension change could be most significant - if it works. Getting tyres to work properly in qualifying is their biggest Achilles heel and you would imagine a change like this would have come as a result of post Barcelona test, which implies they had time to understand the issue, just not time to rush production of new part before Monaco.

So long as everything goes to plan, these sound like significant developments.