2016 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team - Ferrari

[Juzh]

TBH they did have some aero updates which seem to have worked. Whether it's enough or not to keep them in contention on DF tracks will be interesting to see. Next up is monza, which should at least od paper undoubtably suit ferrari better than RB. The big test will be singapore and if they can replicate last's year success.

[Schuttelberg]

Wasn't the '16 car to be Allison's baby? This was the car that had his biggest mark from what I understood. What happened as he is considered by many one of the best in the field. Am I to understand his car has a fundamental flaw so bad the team dropped the project early in the season...did the doors at Maranello knock Allison's heels as he left?

Secondly, things have seemed to only worsen since they fired Luca and I cannot believe I'm saying this because I was not at all a fan of Luca, but maybe that was a bad call from the Ferrari brain trust? Things certainly have not improved despite having arguably one of the best engineers on the market (until recently).

Third, in my opinion they should swallow their pride, call Brawn, take it like men, and turn the racing empire over to him. Vettel may not be patient enough for that kind of overhaul to materialize...what, 3-4 years till top/near top of podium every race, but certainly Brawn could do it. I'd be a perfect transition for Verstappen in 3-4 years. Win a couple WDC's at Red Bull then transition to Ferrari right when brawn has them pulling into the sharp end.

Vet would probably try to replace Nico at Merc to try his hand with Hamilton. Which would be fun to see play out. Certainly better than our current situation...

Firstly, anyone who has followed this season closely will tell you that more than Ferrari (the car and aero) under performing, it's the reliability and circumstances that have conspired against them. I'm also of the belief that JA is a top engineer, but life is unpredictable and his departure has been a big blow this year for the team. When the car started out in Australia, it wasn't the cream of the crop but it was not hopeless. This year's design is his philosophy and his input in it has been almost zero since his personal tragedy. Let's not pretend that Ferrari have done a horse piss job this year. They've been below expectations, but not completely appalling.

Secondly, Ferrari's decision to fire LDM was absolutely correct. He single handedly broke the triumvirate of Todt/Brawn/Schumacher to stroke his own ego and ever sice JT left, Ferrari have been miserable. It is JT that Ferrari misses, not LDM. Why fix something that ain't broke? LDM tried, failed and Ferrari are now forever in 'restructure' mode. Ferrari have not become worse since LDM left. They were second or third before LDM left and that's where they are now.

Thirdly, Ferrari might make the call to Ross Brawn but he might not pick up. The issue is that F1 fans know the names of two engineers i.e Newey/Brawn and they feel only these two can fix a team. It's a time for progression in F1. They need to invest in a younger engineering team that will serve the future. Make no mistake, RB would be a massive asset to any F1 team, but I think he is done with F1 and Ferrari need to find the next Brawn/Newey.

Lastly, you have quite a crystal ball my friend. Vettel is 29, still young and has plenty of time on his hands to achieve something at Ferrari. He doesn't come across the kind to me to leave something unfinished. Sure, he may jump ship one day, but how can you say it will be at Mercedes and how do you know Hamilton will be there then? Verstappen has won 1 RACE. There is plenty for him to prove and achieve before thinking about a Ferrari drive! He sure as hell could be WDC at Red Bull and I think he has the talent to do it, but Ricciardo isn't a teddy bear waiting to get beat. If anything, Ferrari at the moment would hire DR ahead of MV. There's a lot of speculation in your post.

Ferrari are doing the right thing by quietly restructuring the engineering side and I have full faith that Vettel and Ferrari will do all they can to fulfill their ambition. They might fail, BUT I guarantee you they'll try their darn hardest.

It is years like these that make success feel sweet. Without the agony of 1996-1999 there wouldn't be any ecstasy from 2000-2004, if you know what I mean.

[Chuckjr]

Yes fully agree my post had a lot of speculation and it was a lot of just ideas trying to understand. I appreciate your reply. Very helpful and clarifying. Thank you.

[Schuttelberg]

Yes fully agree my post had a lot of speculation and it was a lot of just ideas trying to understand. I appreciate your reply. Very helpful and clarifying. Thank you.

You're welcome my friend.

[TAG]

Ferrari president Sergio Marchionne has further ramped up the pressure on his Formula 1 team to deliver results, claiming that anyone not delivering their best no longer has a future there.

"But anyone who doesn't bring results should leave. That is a rule that applies to everyone – even me."

He added: "We have an obligation to achieve the goals we have set ourselves."

I wonder what he'll say when Ferrari inevitably drops back again at the next high-downforce circuit. He can't seriously think that anything done over the summer has somehow breathed new life into this season's campaign.

Or is he really that naive?

This man does not appear to have the appropriate temperament for F1.

I'm not sure what's going on, I mean yeah, I know we see it, but can it really be that thick that no one in the organization sees the issues and has enough authority, conviction, balls, whatever you want to call it, to say that the problems are due to unrealistic and impatient goal setting?

[f1316]

I for one am extremely surprised by Ferrari's positive showing at Spa - I thought it would be their worst circuit of the year, just as it was last. In Silverstone they didn't seem good on fast corners and in Baku it seemed like a longer lap worked in favour of Mercedes power, I presumed because of better deployment.

So it's positive that characteristics that ought to have worked against them did not. The rumour is that the new engine is Mercedes equaling and, if so, and if the Spa performance was actually indicative of having solved fundamental aerodynamic issues, then you'd presume Monza could be very strong.

The one caveat is the temperature. I wonder if the heat damaged the other cars' tyre usage - particularly the Mercedes which seemed set up specifically for the soft to the detriment of super soft performance - so it was more a question of the others coming back towards them than Ferrari improving.

In any case, intrigued to see how they go at Monza. It's always fun and a bit of a one off; Singapore to some extent too, if for different reasons.

[bhall II]

I'm not sure what's going on, I mean yeah, I know we see it, but can it really be that thick that no one in the organization sees the issues and has enough authority, conviction, balls, whatever you want to call it, to say that the problems are due to unrealistic and impatient goal setting?

Even under ideal circumstances, it requires six to eight weeks to take something from concept to completion - and much longer if it involves the power unit. That means it's not really possible for anything related to Marchionne's management reshuffle to have had a substantive effect yet. So, if he, or anyone else, truly thinks those moves are already bearing fruit, then I'd say the team is lost in the woods.

[ME4ME]

I for one am extremely surprised by Ferrari's positive showing at Spa - I thought it would be their worst circuit of the year, just as it was last. In Silverstone they didn't seem good on fast corners and in Baku it seemed like a longer lap worked in favour of Mercedes power, I presumed because of better deployment.

So it's positive that characteristics that ought to have worked against them did not. The rumour is that the new engine is Mercedes equaling and, if so, and if the Spa performance was actually indicative of having solved fundamental aerodynamic issues, then you'd presume Monza could be very strong.

The one caveat is the temperature. I wonder if the heat damaged the other cars' tyre usage - particularly the Mercedes which seemed set up specifically for the soft to the detriment of super soft performance - so it was more a question of the others coming back towards them than Ferrari improving.

In any case, intrigued to see how they go at Monza. It's always fun and a bit of a one off; Singapore to some extent too, if for different reasons.

I agree regarding the tyres, the hot circumstances certainly helped Ferrari and hurt Mercedes.

I don't think Ferrari was ever weak in high speed aero. They have been strong in that regard all year, Spain is a good example. Where they are losing out is in slow corners and traction events. This was again the case in the bus stop chicane. Their engine at least is top notch.

[Schuttelberg]

I for one am extremely surprised by Ferrari's positive showing at Spa - I thought it would be their worst circuit of the year, just as it was last. In Silverstone they didn't seem good on fast corners and in Baku it seemed like a longer lap worked in favour of Mercedes power, I presumed because of better deployment.

So it's positive that characteristics that ought to have worked against them did not. The rumour is that the new engine is Mercedes equaling and, if so, and if the Spa performance was actually indicative of having solved fundamental aerodynamic issues, then you'd presume Monza could be very strong.

The one caveat is the temperature. I wonder if the heat damaged the other cars' tyre usage - particularly the Mercedes which seemed set up specifically for the soft to the detriment of super soft performance - so it was more a question of the others coming back towards them than Ferrari improving.

In any case, intrigued to see how they go at Monza. It's always fun and a bit of a one off; Singapore to some extent too, if for different reasons.

I think Ferrari are there or there about with the engine. I also think they've sorted out the gearbox issues which were quite a pain in the rear earlier this season. I genuinely feel Ferrari started with a good car. They've just had an awful amount of bad luck this year. For example, Spa was the first real (HOT) race, a condition this car is tailor made for, but they went there with 1 set of mediums for the race. Also, the races they've looked strong at, they've screwed up on Lap 1 or found a strategy to stuff it up. The aero hasn't changed much since Spain and it's the right move to have switched to 2017 early. We can reset 2016 all over again and keep Mercedes out for 1/4th of the season and they would still win the titles, comfortably.

What I think has been piss poor from Ferrari's POV are two things-
1) The bubble gum tyres just don't suit the car. The operating window is just too small.
2) Vettel has not been on form at Qualifying. He will still beat Raikkonen on Saturday, but he has not unlocked his own potential on Saturday yet this season. I feel, he's a rhythm driver and it's just not strung together yet for him.

What Ferrari need?

A baking hot weekend in Monza. I think the RBR threat will not loom at Monza and they just need a super clean weekend and bring the cars home in P3 and P4.

[wickedz50]

I for one am extremely surprised by Ferrari's positive showing at Spa - I thought it would be their worst circuit of the year, just as it was last. In Silverstone they didn't seem good on fast corners and in Baku it seemed like a longer lap worked in favour of Mercedes power, I presumed because of better deployment.

So it's positive that characteristics that ought to have worked against them did not. The rumour is that the new engine is Mercedes equaling and, if so, and if the Spa performance was actually indicative of having solved fundamental aerodynamic issues, then you'd presume Monza could be very strong.

The one caveat is the temperature. I wonder if the heat damaged the other cars' tyre usage - particularly the Mercedes which seemed set up specifically for the soft to the detriment of super soft performance - so it was more a question of the others coming back towards them than Ferrari improving.

In any case, intrigued to see how they go at Monza. It's always fun and a bit of a one off; Singapore to some extent too, if for different reasons.

I think Ferrari are there or there about with the engine. I also think they've sorted out the gearbox issues which were quite a pain in the rear earlier this season. I genuinely feel Ferrari started with a good car. They've just had an awful amount of bad luck this year. For example, Spa was the first real (HOT) race, a condition this car is tailor made for, but they went there with 1 set of mediums for the race. Also, the races they've looked strong at, they've screwed up on Lap 1 or found a strategy to stuff it up. The aero hasn't changed much since Spain and it's the right move to have switched to 2017 early. We can reset 2016 all over again and keep Mercedes out for 1/4th of the season and they would still win the titles, comfortably.

What I think has been piss poor from Ferrari's POV are two things-
1) The bubble gum tyres just don't suit the car. The operating window is just too small.
2) Vettel has not been on form at Qualifying. He will still beat Raikkonen on Saturday, but he has not unlocked his own potential on Saturday yet this season. I feel, he's a rhythm driver and it's just not strung together yet for him.

What Ferrari need?

A baking hot weekend in Monza. I think the RBR threat will not loom at Monza and they just need a super clean weekend and bring the cars home in P3 and P4.

Attribution to poor luck or poor management will be tested in Monza. If past performances were attributed to poor luck then I am expecting a genuine WIN else you will see another incident blow it away.
This team needs a morale boosting win mate, body language is shoddy and there is no belief left.

[f1316]

I think without strange anomalies - stalling on the grid, reliability issues etc - 3 and 4 should be nailed on as worst case scenario.

If the engine upgrade is as good as I've heard tell (and did anyone notice much of a step from Mercedes' at Spa?) then there's a chance for a win. Qualifying was close last year and, whilst I don't expect pole, I can imagine a front row/first corner lead, and from there the win is on.

Hopeful, certainly. Optimistic, probably. But also realistic. I don't say they'll suddenly be fastest in Monza but I'm certain they'll be second fastest and likely a close second, which gives the chance for a perfectly timed victory.

[evered7]

I think without strange anomalies - stalling on the grid, reliability issues etc - 3 and 4 should be nailed on as worst case scenario.

Hopeful, certainly. Optimistic, probably. But also realistic. I don't say they'll suddenly be fastest in Monza but I'm certain they'll be second fastest and likely a close second, which gives the chance for a perfectly timed victory.

You forgot Vettel not trying Kamikaze moves in the first corner. There is a high chance of that still happening since he seems to be blaming Max for being there and not him for turning in way too quickly while there was a car park available to his left to drive into.

Spa was refreshing but for the incidents. They seem to have the pace. But they need to really work with their tire allocations.

Having just 1 set of meds was insane. Good that there is split strategy in Italy at least with respect to tires.

[f1316]

I personally think Max was more at fault, even though I don't know why Vettel took the risk to squeeze his teammate so much - risk vs reward was not smart.

But Max's was a dive bomb - I believe this is the correct word. Kimi had his entire car in front and Max went into the corner with no chance of making it. He also had to go completely onto the curb, so really wasn't even a gap to speak of.

Anyway, another conversation for another thread but yes, incidents are another thing that could ruin (yet another) potentially promising race.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

When I look through the posts of @Schuttleberg and @f1316, I can't seriously understand your optimism here. More so because, it is now a common knowledge that, Ferrari has already thrown the towel, whereas Red Bull is continuing to develop their car.

To me, this year's car is clearly a step backward compared to last year's car and for many reasons. They have been making steady progress on their PU, which is masking the inefficiencies of the chassis. I have not an iota of doubt that, you put that PU in that Red Bull, it will kick the Mercedes a**. How is it that there are so many rumors about performance gains on Ferrari PU that makes round and none about Mercedes? And in the end, Mercedes manages to stay ahead on that front. Empty vessels makes more noise?

One of the many reasons for such a lackluster performance is also the fact that, they have no clue how to handle those extra PSI put in those tires. While Red Bull struggled briefly with tire woes, they have understood it and have come back strong. It is common sense that, on tracks like Barcelona and Hungary, if you can't qualify better, then you are not going to make any major inroads and having a strong chassis has given a lot of teeth to that Red Bull. On both circuits, it appeared that Ferrari was faster, for whatever reasons, but not qualifying better is also a problem of the car as much it is with the driver. So not understanding how to make those tires work in qualifying, is one of the major headaches.

It is also not helping their cause that, their star driver is off the game, both in qualifying and in races. He doesn't seem to be handling the let down in expectations better, that rose after unexpected surge in performance in last year.

"Bad luck/Strategies/Self inflicted mistakes" hampers every team through a season. Mercedes and Red Bull both have had their fair share of them. So, Ferrari isn't any different to those teams when we look at contention for championship. Even if the temperatures make Monza look more like a Sahara desert, I doubt if there is any advantage that Ferrari would have ahead of a Merc or a Red Bull. As far the tires are concerned, it is a fact that both Merc and RB understands them better than Ferrari. If an RB stayed ahead of Ferrari on tracks like Hockenheim and Spa, I wonder how a Ferrari would manage to beat them.

[f1316]

Same old conversation with GPR-A, isn't it?

Listen, I agree that Ferrari, as an organisation, have been poor this year. They've thrown away multiple good positions over weekends for one reason or another and, whilst there is still clearly a fairly sizeable gap to the Mercedes package, I don't agree that the car is a step back. Last year's car was a known quantity and the race team made the most of every opportunity; this year they've taken a long time to understand the car and have scored some major own goals, but without them they would have won a few races and - I think/hope - they may have turned the corner in understanding the car now.

I tend to agree that a RB with the same PU would have been on a par with if not ahead of Mercedes, but interesting that Riccardo thinks otherwise:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... -ricciardo

If the Renault engine is as good as the Ferrari then it suggests the chassis are very very close. I don't believe that, so think the Ferrari PU has an advantage, but you must also remember Ferrari is a PU developer, so if this is good enough to mask what you seem to think is a bad chassis, then well done to them - it's a *package* after all.

Couple more things:

- both RB and Ferrari (and probably also Mercedes now) have switched almost all development focus to 2017 so there's no longer any difference there. I hope Ferrari switched earlier as the pace of development would imply either that or ineptitude

- you can't say it's a "fact" that RB and Mercedes understand the tyres better than Ferrari; they seem to be able to get more out of them, but it's certainly not a fact


Still find it curious how much GPR-A hates Ferrari and likes to goad its supporters but fair play - it's a free internet!