Scuderia Ferrari SF71H

[PhillipM]

That'd be a nightmare in terms of ergonomics when glancing at vibrating mirrors at 180mph.

The great big chipped vertical line up the middle is what he's refering to, where it's broken.

[DiogoBrand]

That dark edge chip is a reflection of the carbon housing.

1. Notice the white line.
2. Notice the edge of the carbon housing.

https://i.imgur.com/c0jtSrq.jpg

My guess is the innermost mirror is set up normally, showing whats to the left and right of the rear wing.
The outer part shows what´s between the rear wing, right behind you.

edit: now it might be a broken mirror but it´s a clean crack.

But that must mean that edge is also another separate piece, because it wouldn't make sense for just that triangle to reflect the mirror housing, and if that's the case, I think it would be way more likely for the mirror to be broken than Ferrari dividing it in three intentionally.

[Big Tea]

My car has mirrors like that. One gives a view wider out, one closet to me. I find it useful when pulling out to overtake on a 3 lane as I see the outside sooner if there is traffic in the middle lane, but not too close. Also useful on roundabouts.

But these will do the exact opposite since this is concave, not convex which allows you to see your deadzone.
Im guessing these are for a clearer view on whats right behind him.

My mirrors are not curved at all, just flat but at different angles.
Inner 2/3ds is a standard rear view outer 1/3rd is exactly as if the same mirror was adjusted outwards

[SectorOne]

But that must mean that edge is also another separate piece, because it wouldn't make sense for just that triangle to reflect the mirror housing, and if that's the case, I think it would be way more likely for the mirror to be broken than Ferrari dividing it in three intentionally.

I think we are over complicating things here now.
There´s two mirrors in the housing, one of which has a sharper angle then the other one.
If its intentional or not we can´t say but the number of them we can safely say is two.

[DiogoBrand]

But that must mean that edge is also another separate piece, because it wouldn't make sense for just that triangle to reflect the mirror housing, and if that's the case, I think it would be way more likely for the mirror to be broken than Ferrari dividing it in three intentionally.

I think we are over complicating things here now.
There´s two mirrors in the housing, one of which has a sharper angle then the other one.
If its intentional or not we can´t say but the number of them we can safely say is two.

I see it now. I was thinking the outer part was reflecting the rear wing, with that tiny triangle reflecting the mirror housing, which would make no sense if the mirror wasn't broken, but now I do realize the outer part is actually reflecting the head support while the small edge reflects the housing. Makes a lot more sense, makes it more plausible that the concave shape for the mirror is intentional, but still I see no good reason for Ferrari using a concave mirror. Let's wait and see if that mirror is still there for Spain.

[Vanja #66]

"It seems that this hollow fairing of the mirror does not serve to direct the airflow towards the upper sidepod inlet, contrary to what was thought at first.
Put simple, its role would rather be to improve the airflow towards the rear wing and diffuser. Its shape would certainly create a little more drag, but it would also generate a wake of higher pressure, more energized than with a conventional design, which helps the elements further down (the rear wing and the diffuser) in generating downforce".

Could you please post links of those articles you are quoting? I've found it on F1i.com. They've probably read Steven's article, posted more than a month ago:

https://www.f1technical.net/development ... eally-work

[JoeSmith]

"It seems that this hollow fairing of the mirror does not serve to direct the airflow towards the upper sidepod inlet, contrary to what was thought at first.
Put simple, its role would rather be to improve the airflow towards the rear wing and diffuser. Its shape would certainly create a little more drag, but it would also generate a wake of higher pressure, more energized than with a conventional design, which helps the elements further down (the rear wing and the diffuser) in generating downforce".

Could you please post links of those articles you are quoting? I've found it on F1i.com. They've probably read Steven's article, posted more than a month ago:

https://www.f1technical.net/development ... eally-work

I wonder why they put it in the mirror ?. IMHO, halo device have larger surface to do that

[Vanja #66]

Most teams do it with Halo fairings, yes.

[paddyf1]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferr ... r-1034702/

[Boston-George]

It added three tabs to the upper surface/corner of the mirror, shielding the strakes if the car were to be viewed from above.

Why is it not allowed to see the strakes from above?

[JRodrigues]

Two mirrors:

[djos]

Two mirrors:

https://cdn-2.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... -sf71h.jpg
https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... -sf71h.jpg

Fascinating, I'd have thought a single panoramic mirror would have been a better choice from a driver's vision pov.

[JRodrigues]

Don't know if that is just a 'Kimi thing'... Vettel seems to have just one mirror:

[Zynerji]

Don't know if that is just a 'Kimi thing'... Vettel seems to have just one mirror:

https://cdn-9.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... -sf71h.jpg
https://cdn-9.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... detail.jpg

Maybe it's an age and eyesight thing!!

[ema00]

it seems broken