Ferrari 2017 Contender Speculation Thread

[bhall II]

Ferrari's new homepage...

[cplchanb]

i see what you did there......

[RedNEO]

The timing choosed to give this news it's a bit suspicious, for me it seems Ferrari wants to downplay their chances because every year it's the same pressure to deliver a winning car.

And then, how can they know if the wind tunnel results are bad if they don't have a reliable benchmark yet?

It's very odd to me.

When is the ideal time?

[daniellammers]

The timing choosed to give this news it's a bit suspicious, for me it seems Ferrari wants to downplay their chances because every year it's the same pressure to deliver a winning car.

And then, how can they know if the wind tunnel results are bad if they don't have a reliable benchmark yet?

It's very odd to me.

I remember somebody told the media that Red Bull was generating 15 percent more downforce with their 2015 mule car than the others (Merc, Ferrari). So in that way, they have a benchmark. But if they don't even come close to that, the Tifosi are going to have a hard time as pointed out before.

[FrukostScones]

The timing choosed to give this news it's a bit suspicious, for me it seems Ferrari wants to downplay their chances because every year it's the same pressure to deliver a winning car.

And then, how can they know if the wind tunnel results are bad if they don't have a reliable benchmark yet?

It's very odd to me.

I remember somebody told the media that Red Bull was generating 15 percent more downforce with their 2015 mule car than the others (Merc, Ferrari). So in that way, they have a benchmark. But if they don't even come close to that, the Tifosi are going to have a hard time as pointed out before.

a good Tifosi has his passion, he does not need victory. every victory is a gift from heaven, like Canada 1995. One still well remembered.

Also, even version A fails, then with Byrne's heavy input version B might be a winner.
Byrne is so involved that he was at strage y Group meeting in Nov for Ferrari.

http://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferrar ... 71869/?s=1

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... t=&act=url

[Afterburner]

The timing choosed to give this news it's a bit suspicious, for me it seems Ferrari wants to downplay their chances because every year it's the same pressure to deliver a winning car.

And then, how can they know if the wind tunnel results are bad if they don't have a reliable benchmark yet?

It's very odd to me.

When is the ideal time?

For me, after the first week of testing they know how much and where they need to develop.

Saying they are focusing more on the engine because the aero is weak is talking rubbish, the engine development it's too complicated to be rushed when we have 45 days until Melbourne.

[Afterburner]

The timing choosed to give this news it's a bit suspicious, for me it seems Ferrari wants to downplay their chances because every year it's the same pressure to deliver a winning car.

And then, how can they know if the wind tunnel results are bad if they don't have a reliable benchmark yet?

It's very odd to me.

I remember somebody told the media that Red Bull was generating 15 percent more downforce with their 2015 mule car than the others (Merc, Ferrari). So in that way, they have a benchmark. But if they don't even come close to that, the Tifosi are going to have a hard time as pointed out before.

Now, that's really a good source to use as benchmark...

Ferrari wanting to have 30% more downforce than 2016 car and they only have 25% is one thing, another thing it's having 5% less than the best 2017 car, but, they don't have benchmark to say they need to develop a B car, for me they just want to downplay their chances.

[Vortex Motio]

(Pardon but I've edited for brevity, snipped out some of bhall II's evidences...)

https://twitter.com/Gianludale27/status ... 7375128576

The implication is that the team was unable to come up with a structural design that's light enough to be competitive while also retaining the properties needed to pass the test. By extension, it's very difficult for me to believe that problems like this are isolated; on the contrary, it points to structural design and/or manufacturing woes that have the potential to screw up everything.

Incidentally, one of the hallmarks of poor chassis rigidity is setup difficulty, because undue flexing introduces variables that are difficult, if not impossible, to control.

“You have two types of downforce [grip], I don't have to teach you,” [Arrivabene] said. “One is the aerodynamic downforce and the other is mechanical downforce [grip].

"We have to work in both areas because they have to talk together because sometimes they talk different languages at the moment.”

(I've snipped out 2 more supporting evidences right here for brevity before bhall II's conclusion : )

Examples of problems that can be caused by insufficient or erratic stiffness:

• Chronic setup difficulties
• Inconsistent development, both mechanical and aero
• Poor low-speed traction if the suspension is stiffened to correct high-speed balance issues
• Bizarre race strategy born from an inability to understand the tires

Any of those seem familiar?

I believe Ferrari's technical problems are structural.

Naturally, I can't confirm if any of this is right or wrong. However, it's 100% plausible, even though it would seem to be a failure of something so fundamental that most folks probably wouldn't expect it to happen at "the pinnacle of motorsport." (It still wouldn't be as bad as screwing up a fuel cell, though.)...

Ferrari's new homepage...

http://i.imgur.com/WuXZDPu.jpg

http://formula1.ferrari.com/en/fiorano- ... iovinazzi/
...There was a second day of testing at the Fiorano circuit today, with a programme based on correlating simulator data with that gathered on track...
...the Finn having to deal with rain as well as strong winds. Nevertheless, he still completed several runs.

Because Ferrari have placed rumble strips of a different design inside of the chicane apexes, (and it was cold, windy and wet making good aero data difficult to gather), it appears correlation of mechanical forces was one of the primary goals of this test, which is to your point.

The evidence you've brought together does point to a quality control issue, or if I may re-purpose your phrases, erratic stiffness due to manufacturing woes.

If quality control is causing stiffness issues, then "correlating simulator data" with a “standard” SF15-T will only be effective if Ferrari are now better able to measure and understand the stiffness of this particular chassis (and any chassis moving forward). Time will tell...

[bhall II]

Because Ferrari have placed rumble strips of a different design inside of the chicane apexes, (and it was cold, windy and wet making good aero data difficult to gather), it appears correlation of mechanical forces was one of the primary goals of this test, which is to your point.

That's a great observation. I had noticed the temporary curbs--or "kerbs," for the rest of you heathens--but I didn't recognize the possible connection.

[ripper]

Wasn't excessive torsion a cause of gearbox failing in 2016 season? If I remember correctly recently one chief of composite materials (or assembly-manufacturing chief, something like that... I can't remember now) was fired, could it be related?

[bhall II]

There was also this...

here we go again btw

revs dropping at 300 meters sign, before turn 14

Friction is proportional to the square of speed, and the power required to overcome friction is proportional to the cube of speed. That means it doesn't take a whole lot of added friction at high rotational speeds to result in a not insignificant loss of power.

Since the gearbox case is structural, and aero loading is also proportional to the square of speed, it's enough to make you wonder.

[prof]

Just for the record, the singular of "tifosi" is "tifoso". And it's not the name of a particular Ferrari Fan Club, but it's only the litteral italian translate of "fans"

[ME4ME]

There was also this...

here we go again btw
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CH-5M_1cdgs/ ... s640/2.png
revs dropping at 300 meters sign, before turn 14

Friction is proportional to the square of speed, and the power required to overcome friction is proportional to the cube of speed. That means it doesn't take a whole lot of added friction at high rotational speeds to result in a not insignificant loss of power.

Since the gearbox case is structural, and aero loading is also proportional to the square of speed, it's enough to make you wonder.

I doubt that they designed the gearbox insufficiently rigid to experience tortional issues while driving on a straight. The drop speed, I'd put that down to engine mapping and ERS recovery strategy.

[giantfan10]

There was also this...

here we go again btw
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CH-5M_1cdgs/ ... s640/2.png
revs dropping at 300 meters sign, before turn 14

Friction is proportional to the square of speed, and the power required to overcome friction is proportional to the cube of speed. That means it doesn't take a whole lot of added friction at high rotational speeds to result in a not insignificant loss of power.

Since the gearbox case is structural, and aero loading is also proportional to the square of speed, it's enough to make you wonder.

I doubt that they designed the gearbox insufficiently rigid to experience tortional issues while driving on a straight. The drop speed, I'd put that down to engine mapping and ERS recovery strategy.

I do recall "clipping" happening because of the turbo not being ran at max rpm due to the early design flaw which had a trickle down effect on the batteries not being fully charged with an end result of running out of ooomph at the end of long straights

[bhall II]

I doubt that they designed the gearbox insufficiently rigid to experience tortional issues while driving on a straight. The drop speed, I'd put that down to engine mapping and ERS recovery strategy.

Why?

I do recall "clipping" happening because of the turbo not being ran at max rpm due to the early design flaw which had a trickle down effect on the batteries not being fully charged with an end result of running out of ooomph at the end of long straights

Take a wild guess where the turbine was mounted...



Also... https://twitter.com/tgruener/status/756474001799647232