2016 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team - Ferrari

[zamlatuljko]

Hello Guys, Ferrari fan here

I am watchin' this forum many years ago but never actually posted anything...

So about semi automatic gearbox.

Several years ago some posted about that,
@reca made detail post about that

An abstract, I hope it answers, at least partially, your questions.
In 1978 Mauro Forghieri designed a system that was mounted on an old Ferrari 312 F1. It was composed by hydraulic actuators (taken from a machine tool) moving the selecting forks in the gearbox. The shift was actuated by two buttons on the steering wheel, one for the upshift, the other one for the downshift. Gilles Villeneuve tested it on the Fiorano track making about 100 laps successfully. But at the end of the test he said that he wasn’t confident without a mechanical link, Enzo Ferrari accepted the judgement of the driver and the system wasn’t further developed.
About 10 years later John Barnard introduced on the Ferrari F1/89 (640) the semi-auto gearbox with paddle shifter behind the wheel

whole disscusion you can read it here

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=884

[giantfan10]

Thats a slippery slope youre trying to negotiate when you start removing key pieces from a team to justify your opinion.
Red bull without Newey and their mastery of the blown diffuser would not be competitive.
Mercedes without Andy Cowell ,

This is understandable.

token rules and the ability to veto any chance to allow the other engine manufacturers to compete would not be dominating anything.

This? The rules were not laid out in 2014. Everybody knew what it was. When did Mercedes vetoed anything? They didn't made much fuss at the beginning of 2015, when Ferrari found a loophole with respect usage of token for in season development. This year, they even offered a 5% extra fuel usage for other manufacturers. Has Ferrari ever done that, or will they ever let go off their advantage?

You love to argue dont ya?lol
At the beginning of 2015 in reference to in season token usage Mercedes didnt make a fuss because they didnt have a leg to stand on. This was a rule already on the books and it was up to the FIA alone to clarify it.
In order to change the token rule all 10 teams had to agree to a change which in essence handed Mercedes a "veto" which according to reports they used several times to block any change.
I suspect mercedes offering that 5% was in response to the FIA announcing scrapping tokens.
ANYWAY my original point was that you cant go nitpicking at every championship team subtracting whatever u see fit from the team then slapping a label on them

[giantfan10]

I agree with the fact that Ferrari is a classic underperformer team. Even during the Shumi years there were seasons which were saved because they could run and run in Fiorano until they found the right pieces for the car. What I mean it that even with Bryne Ferrari´s designs could be also flawed in some aspects. I dont count 2002 and 2004 when the car was nearly perfect from the very beginning.

So which team is the team that you are holding up as the gold standard?
Thats a slippery slope youre trying to negotiate when you start removing key pieces from a team to justify your opinion.
Red bull without Newey and their mastery of the blown diffuser would not be competitive.
Mercedes without Andy Cowell ,token rules and the ability to veto any chance to allow the other engine manufacturers to compete would not be dominating anything.
See how slippery that slope is?

Sorry but I dont understand what do you mean. (seriously, not being sarcastic here)

I was telling you that its not fair to make the comments you did about any championship team on the grid.
This comment:
"Ferrari is a classic underperformer team. Even during the Shumi years there were seasons which were saved because they could run and run in Fiorano until they found the right pieces for the car."
I also asked which team you thought was the team in F1 that got it right every year and won every championship. "Gold standard"

[Vasconia]

So which team is the team that you are holding up as the gold standard?
Thats a slippery slope youre trying to negotiate when you start removing key pieces from a team to justify your opinion.
Red bull without Newey and their mastery of the blown diffuser would not be competitive.
Mercedes without Andy Cowell ,token rules and the ability to veto any chance to allow the other engine manufacturers to compete would not be dominating anything.
See how slippery that slope is?

Sorry but I dont understand what do you mean. (seriously, not being sarcastic here)

I was telling you that its not fair to make the comments you did about any championship team on the grid.
This comment:
"Ferrari is a classic underperformer team. Even during the Shumi years there were seasons which were saved because they could run and run in Fiorano until they found the right pieces for the car."
I also asked which team you thought was the team in F1 that got it right every year and won every championship. "Gold standard"

Thanks for the explanation. I was only refering to Ferrari, you have mentioned the other teams, not me.

I was not implying that a team must be the best every year. I mean that Ferrari was too dependant from the free tests during the Michael years, because sometimes they werent able to develope the car in a so efficient way as other teams, which perhaps were better doing this(I mean using the wind tunnel, computers,etc).. This explains why Ferrari has not been able to build a winnner car during winter since the test ban, while other tems can(not every year of course, but sometimes).

[giantfan10]

An interesting look at that issue is curiously enough both Mclaren and Ferrari stopped winning championships once the "gimmicks" in Formula 1 showed up.
Mass damper
Double diffuser
Exhaust blown diffuser
V6 turbo and token rules.
One team always seemed to get the "gimmick" just right till the FIA slams that door and hits the reset button.
Just an interesting observation

[GPR-A duplicate2]

An interesting look at that issue is curiously enough both Mclaren and Ferrari stopped winning championships once the "gimmicks" in Formula 1 showed up.
Mass damper
Double diffuser
Exhaust blown diffuser
V6 turbo and token rules.
One team always seemed to get the "gimmick" just right till the FIA slams that door and hits the reset button.
Just an interesting observation

Gimmicks? Formula 1 is about being innovative and top of the line technology series. If Ferrari doesn't know how to achieve this, that doesn't make those items gimmicks. Those are intelligent ways to identify avenues to explore an advantage. Gimmicks? I would say, "Sour Grapes".

[Vasconia]

An interesting look at that issue is curiously enough both Mclaren and Ferrari stopped winning championships once the "gimmicks" in Formula 1 showed up.
Mass damper
Double diffuser
Exhaust blown diffuser
V6 turbo and token rules.
One team always seemed to get the "gimmick" just right till the FIA slams that door and hits the reset button.
Just an interesting observation

This is a classic, though with Ferrari there was not a clear "gimmick"(or at least not only one). In this case the FIA approved a ridiculous new normative about tyres(2005) to end with the Scuderia´s supremacy.

[giantfan10]

An interesting look at that issue is curiously enough both Mclaren and Ferrari stopped winning championships once the "gimmicks" in Formula 1 showed up.
Mass damper
Double diffuser
Exhaust blown diffuser
V6 turbo and token rules.
One team always seemed to get the "gimmick" just right till the FIA slams that door and hits the reset button.
Just an interesting observation

Gimmicks? Formula 1 is about being innovative and top of the line technology series. If Ferrari doesn't know how to achieve this, that doesn't make those items gimmicks. Those are intelligent ways to identify avenues to explore an advantage. Gimmicks? I would say, "Sour Grapes".

see the word gimmick in parenthesis?
i made it quite clear that it was an observation on my part, and didnt make an arguement for or against any of it
what exactly would i have sour grapes for? i'm not an employee of Ferrari. they win or come in last,life goes on.
seems as if you just argue for the sake of argueing..... switch innovation for gimmick and my point remains EXACTLY the same.
I dont even get this entire OMG ferrari didnt win so the world is over movement. Ferrari had their "gimmick" with their own test track and a tire supplier completely focused on them.
its like clockwork in recent history in Formula 1, A team wins a couple championships the FIA figures out what makes them dominant and changes it ... rinse then repeat.Ferrari, Renault then Ferrari snuck in one then Brawn then Red bull.. now its Mercedes.
i'm not responding to anything else on this specific point because there is nothing here to argue about.

[F1NAC]

Error 404: Strategist not found.... I don't get how they didn't manage to cover Bulls...

[wickedz50]

Error 404: Strategist not found.... I don't get how they didn't manage to cover Bulls...

Lol, the strategic nonsensene,

[jurinius]

Error 404: Strategist not found.... I don't get how they didn't manage to cover Bulls...

Lol, the strategic nonsensene,

This is what happens when you don't know where to stand, it s okay to look in front of you. Red Bull is playing with it as well, they are focus to beat Ferrari not to dream about Mercs.

[Xwang]

I still don't understand why testing on track (as Ferrari used to do) is bad while investing huge sums on simulators and wind tunnels is good.

[Sonador]

Error 404: Strategist not found.... I don't get how they didn't manage to cover Bulls...

They were going for a one stop with Vettel, his pace was decent even on old supersofts.
With Raikönnen they were 2 stopping, but they did not account for Verstappens pace i guess?

The blow out remind me a little of Spa, did Pirelli reccomended/impose a maximium of ussage on the supersofts/ultrasofts??

[Pany]

BIG Ferrari tactic problem explain: If intention was to differentiate strategy (because of possible rain), the one stop one would have been better for raikkonen, cause drivers characteristics.
I strongly think the tectical Ferrari problems are due to Vettel first drive position; I mean they were sure the best strategy for the day was one stop and thereafter offered it to Vettel (even that with used supersoft) because he wants to be the favourite one. Big big problem which explains also why Kimi is still there: to suit Vettel demands.
Things have changed: other top teams tend to put in car the best pilots for both cars ang give thme same opportunities; this way you can still be competitive with one car if the other one goes to failure or other tyre/traffic problems.
When you are behind Mercedes you need to push always with both cars and put pressure, as redbul (less quick then Ferrari) is doing on Ferrari. Big big Mistake and the worst thing is that still beleave is the best choice.....

[Vasconia]

Error 404: Strategist not found.... I don't get how they didn't manage to cover Bulls...

They were going for a one stop with Vettel, his pace was decent even on old supersofts.
With Raikönnen they were 2 stopping, but they did not account for Verstappens pace i guess?

The blow out remind me a little of Spa, did Pirelli reccomended/impose a maximium of ussage on the supersofts/ultrasofts??

Yes, though I dont remember the exact amount of laps. Anwyay a normal tyre cant explode when you are making good laps times.