Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[hollus]

A bit less "RB said" and "Mercedes thinks" would be nice.
Speculation is fine, IMO. Commenting on the possible reasons for third parties to let fourth parties do this or that is a bit too much.

Also, let's not forget the possibility that Ferrari might just have stretched many things to the limit and in the process found some nice synergies. Let's try to keep speculation somewhat grounded on solid anchors.

The subject is still Ferrari's PU hardware and software.

[subcritical71]

Instead of judging who’s right or wrong (could we save those arguments for the race and team threads)! Why don’t we have a good technical discussion on their merits and when little factoids trickle in from time to time either confirming or removing a topic from contention.

[Pyrone89]

Maybe time for someone to summarize the facts, for those of us not willing to go through pages of rumors?

[PlatinumZealot]

Maybe time for someone to summarize the facts, for those of us not willing to go through pages of rumors?

There are no facts. Sorry.

[zibby43]

well it's contrary to what has been writen....... but thats what ppl don't wanna read

It would still be nice, if you could tell more details on what you’ve heard. Or from whom.
Mudflap’s friend is inside of Mercedes team. It’s as much of a first hand information as we could get here.

i know that it would be nice but then this topic will turn into a small battlefield on who is right and who is wrong... and i don't feel into excusing myself for the info i have that stands opposite of others, so i keep them for myself and will see at the end who was right....

who is gonna judge if Mudflap is right or wrong?
would you believe my story if i say it came from inside Mercedes but is the opposite of what mudflap tells us?

let me put it this way, Mercedes is now playing the nice boy of the class and putting it all into the laps of RB becaue its the convenient way for now for Mercedes.

and the users can take it or just leave it as it is ..... again i am not going into a Word-Battle on who is wrong or who is right ..... this is what i know and lets leave it at that

Mudflap has, on multiple occasions, shared insider info. that later turned out to be accurate, despite people doubting him at the time of posting.

He seems to have a reliable source at the team. Share whatever you want, but I can vouch for Mudflap on the basis that he has posted at least 2 pieces of insider information in the past year that were later publicly confirmed by the team.

[saviour stivala]

“FERRARI power unit hardware and software”. The FERRARI power unit is the only one out of the four on the grid that have not as yet been disqualified from either qualifying or race results since 2014 new maximum fuel flow formula rules for maximum fuel flow infringements. Neither because of its fuel hardware nor because of its fuel flow software.

[izzy]

Mudflap has, on multiple occasions, shared insider info. that later turned out to be accurate, despite people doubting him at the time of posting.

He seems to have a reliable source at the team. Share whatever you want, but I can vouch for Mudflap on the basis that he has posted at least 2 pieces of insider information in the past year that were later publicly confirmed by the team.

yes count me in for Mudflap too. The question on the second battery for me is more whether his source is correct. And just trying to make sense of it. There isn't any spare space in an F1 car, it's packaged to the absolute limit isn't it, so how do they hide cables that are big enough to make a difference? Big fat cables with 1000v insulation. And can they do it without using the FIA-standard ECU? It sounds a bit elementary, to 'bypass the FIA sensor with the second battery'.

[turbof1]

I can also vouch for mudflap (#vouchformudflap; make it trending!). Do note, what he is saying:

Unlike Red Bull, Merc does not seem convinced Ferrari are doing anything 'dirty' PU wise. They do not know exactly where that PU performance is coming from and are of course considering every possibility. In the post COTA factory debrief it was communicated that the reduction in top speed was in line with an increase in cornering performance - similat to what Ferrari have claimed. Another key point was that it was much more difficult to understand where Ferrari sat drag and power wise due to the relatively different aero design. As far as they could tell the straight line speed has been there since Australia but it was initially considered to be mostly down to aero.

His source is pretty much saying "we don't immediately have an indication of any ill intent or Ferrari being hampered by the directives, but we really cannot know for sure". It appears that GPS data is not everything. It is also why aero data on F1 cars are being kept more secured than the crown jewels of England. So it is telling that even top teams don't have a confident guess on that front about the competition.

[Capharol]

let me get 1 thing straight here i don't doubt Mudflap, i've read Mudflaps posts and know his info is normally spot on, but i doubt the info, because mine says the opposite.
and these are rumours which can't be verified.
and before kicking a debatte down here on who is right or who is wrong, i'd rather keep this rumour for myself instead of floating this topic with a debatte that could go on for the entire winterstop (because we won't get an answer anyway)

so again this has nothing to do with me saying Mudflap is lying or anything else.... it's all about an opposite information which will only lead to an endless debatte and at the end maybe even getting out of hand

so now lets forgett the whole thing and get back to topic

[SiLo]

let me get 1 thing straight here i don't doubt Mudflap, i've read Mudflaps posts and know his info is normally spot on, but i doubt the info, because mine says the opposite.
and these are rumours which can't be verified.
and before kicking a debatte down here on who is right or who is wrong, i'd rather keep this rumour for myself instead of floating this topic with a debatte that could go on for the entire winterstop (because we won't get an answer anyway)

so again this has nothing to do with me saying Mudflap is lying or anything else.... it's all about an opposite information which will only lead to an endless debatte and at the end maybe even getting out of hand

so now lets forgett the whole thing and get back to topic

Imagine dangling that carrot and then running away with it! It's almost off-season, I want to hear more about this Ferrari PU if there are any tricks involved.

I still don't really understand the reasoning for using a split battery when it seems nobody else does.

[subcritical71]

I can also vouch for mudflap (#vouchformudflap; make it trending!). Do note, what he is saying:

Unlike Red Bull, Merc does not seem convinced Ferrari are doing anything 'dirty' PU wise. They do not know exactly where that PU performance is coming from and are of course considering every possibility. In the post COTA factory debrief it was communicated that the reduction in top speed was in line with an increase in cornering performance - similat to what Ferrari have claimed. Another key point was that it was much more difficult to understand where Ferrari sat drag and power wise due to the relatively different aero design. As far as they could tell the straight line speed has been there since Australia but it was initially considered to be mostly down to aero.

His source is pretty much saying "we don't immediately have an indication of any ill intent or Ferrari being hampered by the directives, but we really cannot know for sure". It appears that GPS data is not everything. It is also why aero data on F1 cars are being kept more secured than the crown jewels of England. So it is telling that even top teams don't have a confident guess on that front about the competition.

A lot of this story is starting to line up pretty good (in my mind anyway). This is not meant as an aero subject, but rather its affect on the overall car/PU. At testing the Ferrari was really fast and an article from the anonymous aerodynamisist mentioned that they would struggle with front end grip. And they did. The side effect of that low aero configuration was a very good top end speed. Fast forward to the end of the season and Ferrari seem to be on top of the aero, or can at least dial more into the car, and now have a bit more in the front (and back) increasing the overall downforce. This comes at a cost somewhere on the car.

[Big Tea]

Maybe time for someone to summarize the facts, for those of us not willing to go through pages of rumors?

There are no facts. Sorry.

Except that one

[LM10]

I can also vouch for mudflap (#vouchformudflap; make it trending!). Do note, what he is saying:

Unlike Red Bull, Merc does not seem convinced Ferrari are doing anything 'dirty' PU wise. They do not know exactly where that PU performance is coming from and are of course considering every possibility. In the post COTA factory debrief it was communicated that the reduction in top speed was in line with an increase in cornering performance - similat to what Ferrari have claimed. Another key point was that it was much more difficult to understand where Ferrari sat drag and power wise due to the relatively different aero design. As far as they could tell the straight line speed has been there since Australia but it was initially considered to be mostly down to aero.

His source is pretty much saying "we don't immediately have an indication of any ill intent or Ferrari being hampered by the directives, but we really cannot know for sure". It appears that GPS data is not everything. It is also why aero data on F1 cars are being kept more secured than the crown jewels of England. So it is telling that even top teams don't have a confident guess on that front about the competition.

A lot of this story is starting to line up pretty good (in my mind anyway). This is not meant as an aero subject, but rather its affect on the overall car/PU. At testing the Ferrari was really fast and an article from the anonymous aerodynamisist mentioned that they would struggle with front end grip. And they did. The side effect of that low aero configuration was a very good top end speed. Fast forward to the end of the season and Ferrari seem to be on top of the aero, or can at least dial more into the car, and now have a bit more in the front (and back) increasing the overall downforce. This comes at a cost somewhere on the car.

Well, even Tanabe told that it's not possible to find out entirely, if a reduced speed is due to different power settings or different aero settings. It seems to be that most of the people jumped to a conclusion too soon because they obviously were sure of Ferrari doing something out of order.
Austin and Brazil had a Ferrari car with maximum downforce like in Monaco or Singapore. Some people's argument then was that in Singapore Ferrari had top speed advantage despite having maximum downforce. But one crucial thing was left out: Not only Ferrari had maximum downforce, but all others as well. In Austin and Brazil, however, it was only the Ferrari whereas others went for relatively less, or let's say "normal" rear wing surface.

[nzjrs]

It appears that GPS data is not everything. It is also why aero data on F1 cars are being kept more secured than the crown jewels of England. So it is telling that even top teams don't have a confident guess on that front about the competition.

To me this is itself a conundrum and a fascinating insight. Team's are not lacking photographic evidence of their competitors cars, and photogrammetry is pretty good these days, so it seems to me reasonable that teams could get to a static model of their competitors cars visible aerodynamics without extreme effort.

Taken that as given, it seems there is something prohibitively complex between applying their in-house simulation tools to models of competitors cars, and obtaining an estimation of their aerodynamic performance.

Could it be; limitations on CFD time? the parts of the cars not able to be photographed? the presumed deflection of these parts under load that is not statically able to be photographed? or the size of the error bars on the the output of these reverse engineering efforts?

It's long been a question of mine how much money/time/effort teams spend on studying their competitors, I wonder if this episode speaks to that.

[bluechris]

I can also vouch for mudflap (#vouchformudflap; make it trending!). Do note, what he is saying:
His source is pretty much saying "we don't immediately have an indication of any ill intent or Ferrari being hampered by the directives, but we really cannot know for sure". It appears that GPS data is not everything. It is also why aero data on F1 cars are being kept more secured than the crown jewels of England. So it is telling that even top teams don't have a confident guess on that front about the competition.

A lot of this story is starting to line up pretty good (in my mind anyway). This is not meant as an aero subject, but rather its affect on the overall car/PU. At testing the Ferrari was really fast and an article from the anonymous aerodynamisist mentioned that they would struggle with front end grip. And they did. The side effect of that low aero configuration was a very good top end speed. Fast forward to the end of the season and Ferrari seem to be on top of the aero, or can at least dial more into the car, and now have a bit more in the front (and back) increasing the overall downforce. This comes at a cost somewhere on the car.

Well, even Tanabe told that it's not possible to find out entirely, if a reduced speed is due to different power settings or different aero settings. It seems to be that most of the people jumped to a conclusion too soon because they obviously were sure of Ferrari doing something out of order.
Austin and Brazil had a Ferrari car with maximum downforce like in Monaco or Singapore. Some people's argument then was that in Singapore Ferrari had top speed advantage despite having maximum downforce. But one crucial thing was left out: Not only Ferrari had maximum downforce, but all others as well. In Austin and Brazil, however, it was only the Ferrari whereas others went for relatively less, or let's say "normal" rear wing surface.

Did you saw really the Ferrari wing setup in comparison to the other teams? Ferrari wing was like air brake. For sure the others increased their wings also but no way near to what Ferrari did.

As the time passes and no new info or FIA directives and no news, i stay in my position, Ferrari has somehow a great PU, i don't know if it is the ice or the turbo or the mgu and in my mind they try high downforce setup in the last races for 2 reasons.
1. To gain knowledge and good telemetry because they lost this championship again from a team that has bigger downforce and generates perfect heat conditions for the tyres.
2. To blind their opponents and the media to not see the obvious but to make them happy that something of all the rumors they spread has a solid base and Ferrari stopped doing it.

This is PU thread and we started again the chit chat ... Sorry @turbof1