Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[MtthsMlw]

> after the measurement point

Well, if they do it before the measuring point and between measuring increments that beats the rule.

Even if somebody would do that, how much can they actually gain?
Can anyone answer?

i read that the gain should be of about 2g ( two grams ) per second of fuel. How many horse power would that bring?

100kg/h -> 27,78g/s
27,78g/s + 2g = 29,78g/s
~ 7.2% increase in fuel flow.

If we would just put that % directly on ICE output you get around +60hp if your ICE is normally at 830hp or 57hp if your base is at 800hp. It isn't that simple though but not that far away from what has been reported.

[trinidefender]

> after the measurement point

Well, if they do it before the measuring point and between measuring increments that beats the rule.

Even if somebody would do that, how much can they actually gain?
Can anyone answer?

i read that the gain should be of about 2g ( two grams ) per second of fuel. How many horse power would that bring?

Total guesstimate here but if it is 2g/s then that is 7.2kg/hr. Assuming a 100kg/hr fuel flow (the supposed maximum not taking into account fuel flow sensor error margins) gives you 970 bhp running steady state then an extra 7.2kg/hr of fuel flow will give an extra 70 bhp for a total of 1040.

This calculation makes a lot of assumptions though including your 2g/s figure. Mind sharing where you got that number from?

[saviour stivala]

This extra “2 grams per second fuel flow” estimation. Apart from where this estimated number came from, an extra ‘2 grams per second’ means an extra 120 grams per minute over and above the 100000 grams per minute maximum at 10500 rpm allowed by the rules, which will read ‘100120 grams per minute’. The difference (fuel flow) per combustion at 10500 rpm will be an extra 0.023 grams per combustion fuel flow.

[henry]

> after the measurement point

Well, if they do it before the measuring point and between measuring increments that beats the rule.

Even if somebody would do that, how much can they actually gain?
Can anyone answer?

i read that the gain should be of about 2g ( two grams ) per second of fuel. How many horse power would that bring?

Total guesstimate here but if it is 2g/s then that is 7.2kg/hr. Assuming a 100kg/hr fuel flow (the supposed maximum not taking into account fuel flow sensor error margins) gives you 970 bhp running steady state then an extra 7.2kg/hr of fuel flow will give an extra 70 bhp for a total of 1040.

This calculation makes a lot of assumptions though including your 2g/s figure. Mind sharing where you got that number from?

There’s a possibility that somebody, somewhere is working backwards from a 40kW gain. At 28 g/sec the ICE power is about 560kW. 2 more grams would add 40kW exactly.

[LM10]

Would this system not produce suspiciously low readings though too?

Also... Maybe Ferrari have done what I said and are just pretending to now have lower power so they can use it properly when next season they are in the fight again

If I was Ferrari, after yesterday's FIA directives, I would definitely use less power purposely in the remaining GP's just to trick the opponents into thinking that this was what made them fast.

[falonso81]

All this speculation with Ferrari makes me think. Did they have this edge in acceleration early in the season? Can someone clarify this?

[MtthsMlw]

All this speculation with Ferrari makes me think. Did they have this edge in acceleration early in the season? Can someone clarify this?

Since early 2018 actually, back then their hybrid system was questioned and checked.

[falonso81]

All this speculation with Ferrari makes me think. Did they have this edge in acceleration early in the season? Can someone clarify this?

Since early 2018 actually, back then their hybrid system was questioned and checked.

Yes i do remember it was the twin-battery thing then.

[saviour stivala]

This extra “2 grams per second fuel flow” estimation. Apart from where this estimated number came from, an extra ‘2 grams per second’ means an extra 120 grams per minute over and above the 100000 grams per minute maximum at 10500 rpm allowed by the rules, which will read ‘100120 grams per minute’. The difference (fuel flow) per combustion at 10500 rpm will be an extra 0.023 grams per combustion fuel flow.

A numbers and warding correction:- "an extra '2-grams per second fuel flow" means an extra 7200 grams per hour over and above the 100000 grams per hour maximum at 10500 rpm allowed by the rules, which will read '107200grams per hour'. The difference (fuel flow) per combustion at 10500 rpm over what the rules allows will be an extra 0.023 grams per combustion fuel flow.

[izzy]

on racefans they're showing how the Ferrari top speed is suddenly closer to the others, compared to the other races this year

[MtthsMlw]

on racefans they're showing how the Ferrari top speed is suddenly closer to the others, compared to the other races this year

Taking just the best results [top speed] for each engine brand, it’s clear to see Ferrari have consistently been the top performing engine this year
Ah yes, top speed is only determined by engine power.

But the early indication is the FIA’s directive does appear to have led to a slight reduction in Ferrari’s top speed
What if they ran a bit more wing to tackle the tyre deg/cornering problems they had in the previous races?
Occam's razor anyone?
Also why just a slight reduction?

That is significant on a weekend when Ferrari’s run of six consecutive pole positions ended by just 12 thousandths of a second.
They're were off the pace in Mexico already.

Not trying to blindly defend Ferrari here but coming to a conclusion already is a bit far fetched.

[izzy]

on racefans they're showing how the Ferrari top speed is suddenly closer to the others, compared to the other races this year

Taking just the best results [top speed] for each engine brand, it’s clear to see Ferrari have consistently been the top performing engine this year
Ah yes, top speed is only determined by engine power.

But the early indication is the FIA’s directive does appear to have led to a slight reduction in Ferrari’s top speed
What if they ran a bit more wing to tackle the tyre deg/cornering problems they had in the previous races?
Occam's razor anyone?
Also why just a slight reduction?

That is significant on a weekend when Ferrari’s run of six consecutive pole positions ended by just 12 thousandths of a second.
They're were off the pace in Mexico already.

Not trying to blindly defend Ferrari here but coming to a conclusion already is a bit far fetched.

well tbf racefans don't come to conclusion really, they say: "Whether that is actually the case will become more clear over the coming races. But the early indication is ..."

and in Mexico the gap in top speeds was the biggest, apart from Hock. So as usual we're just assembling evidence tentatively, at least i am, but there's that data. We can always change our minds, after all

[LM10]

on racefans they're showing how the Ferrari top speed is suddenly closer to the others, compared to the other races this year

Taking just the best results [top speed] for each engine brand, it’s clear to see Ferrari have consistently been the top performing engine this year
Ah yes, top speed is only determined by engine power.

But the early indication is the FIA’s directive does appear to have led to a slight reduction in Ferrari’s top speed
What if they ran a bit more wing to tackle the tyre deg/cornering problems they had in the previous races?
Occam's razor anyone?
Also why just a slight reduction?

That is significant on a weekend when Ferrari’s run of six consecutive pole positions ended by just 12 thousandths of a second.
They're were off the pace in Mexico already.

Not trying to blindly defend Ferrari here but coming to a conclusion already is a bit far fetched.

Totally agree. What an amateurish written article right there. No mention of acceleration whatsoever, just jumping on top speed which at high speed is surely affected more by drag than power.

What's more, if this fuel flow thing has been Ferrari's secret and if it's true that this contributes to 40 kW power advantage, then shouldn't have Ferrari lost significant amount of power rather than just having a bigger speed deficit of only 0.2 km/h in comparison to 2019 average? Also, how can Ferrari still be the clearly best accelerating car out there without 40 kW of extra power?

Next time the writers of those articles should at least try to act more professional. They seem to have missed that Ferrari already didn't get pole in Mexico as well.

[MtthsMlw]

on racefans they're showing how the Ferrari top speed is suddenly closer to the others, compared to the other races this year

Taking just the best results [top speed] for each engine brand, it’s clear to see Ferrari have consistently been the top performing engine this year
Ah yes, top speed is only determined by engine power.

But the early indication is the FIA’s directive does appear to have led to a slight reduction in Ferrari’s top speed
What if they ran a bit more wing to tackle the tyre deg/cornering problems they had in the previous races?
Occam's razor anyone?
Also why just a slight reduction?

That is significant on a weekend when Ferrari’s run of six consecutive pole positions ended by just 12 thousandths of a second.
They're were off the pace in Mexico already.

Not trying to blindly defend Ferrari here but coming to a conclusion already is a bit far fetched.

well tbf racefans don't come to conclusion really, they say: "Whether that is actually the case will become more clear over the coming races. But the early indication is ..."

and in Mexico the gap in top speeds was the biggest, apart from Hock. So as usual we're just assembling evidence tentatively, at least i am, but there's that data. We can always change our minds, after all

How does one explain Sochi then? Ferrari even more down on the highest speed (5.2kmh) than here in Austin (2.1kmh) haven't read any analysis back then.

Another argument in the article is that only Ferrari has a bigger gap (2.1kmh) to the top speed than its season average (1.9kmh).
That all hinges on 0.2km/h.

[LM10]

Taking just the best results [top speed] for each engine brand, it’s clear to see Ferrari have consistently been the top performing engine this year
Ah yes, top speed is only determined by engine power.

But the early indication is the FIA’s directive does appear to have led to a slight reduction in Ferrari’s top speed
What if they ran a bit more wing to tackle the tyre deg/cornering problems they had in the previous races?
Occam's razor anyone?
Also why just a slight reduction?

That is significant on a weekend when Ferrari’s run of six consecutive pole positions ended by just 12 thousandths of a second.
They're were off the pace in Mexico already.

Not trying to blindly defend Ferrari here but coming to a conclusion already is a bit far fetched.

well tbf racefans don't come to conclusion really, they say: "Whether that is actually the case will become more clear over the coming races. But the early indication is ..."

and in Mexico the gap in top speeds was the biggest, apart from Hock. So as usual we're just assembling evidence tentatively, at least i am, but there's that data. We can always change our minds, after all

How does one explain Sochi then? Ferrari even more down on the highest speed (5.2kmh) than here in Austin (2.1kmh) haven't read any analysis back then.
https://f1i.com/wp-content/uploads/2019 ... chi.v1.jpg
Another argument in the article is that only Ferrari has a bigger gap (2.1kmh) to the top speed than its season average (1.9kmh).
That all hinges on 0.2km/h.

Good point. Leclerc totally destroyed the rest with his pole lap and look at how far down the order he is.