Ferrari F60

[mx_tifoso]

Onon,
Where have you been for the past year? The front wing has undegone many changes, obviously it has been widened, and the central section is standard for all teams, among others. I suggest going through the many threads which discuss the ´09 regs, or going through the official regs themselves.

Ferrari have already said that this is not what the car will look like come the Australian GP in March, this is a very early version. And it hasn´t even been track tested yet so a few things will come off and others will come on.

And thanks for sharing that with us Scarbs. Do you have any pictures to share as well?

[timbo]

In fact the rear section almost loks like the twin floor F92 such is the rounded shape of the upper bodywork.

That's what I thought to, looks like they've come to that idea on a new level, hope it works better this time!

[i70q7m7ghw]

Anyone spotted the outlets under the shell logo on the side pods, possibly linked with the small inlet under the the larger sidepod inlets.

see here - http://www.gurneyflap.com/Resources/fr.jpg

[i70q7m7ghw]

Left side of front wing cracked!!??

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... car_24.jpg

[cba_]

Left side of front wing cracked!!??

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... car_24.jpg

Looks like a wire

[timbo]

Left side of front wing cracked!!??

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... car_24.jpg

Looks like a wire

Yes, looks like it is taped, however on footage I've seen on youtube I was negatively surprised by how much front wing flexes, when car rides over bumps, well with such a big wing it is not too strange, but anyway...

[imightbewrong]

small comparison of the top views:

[i70q7m7ghw]

Well after seeing BMW having to reinforce theirs with wire tethers my immediate thought was the Ferrari wing had cracked under abnormal flexing or something... guess it would be quite hard to do that to a wing though. After looking closely does look like a wire, can't see a camera anywhere down there though, there was one on Massa's head in another shot LOL

[modbaraban]

small comparison of the top views:

Very interesting. The way how the cockpit was moved towards the front wheels made me think about that long nose again. Maybe it's for safety reasons rather than aero?

[djos]

just for comparison
that rear wing is the culprit
see this comparison.....it looks just great with those low rear wing

I disagree, the 2009 wing height is awesome (just like mid '90's) it's only the width that looks stupid!

[timbo]

small comparison of the top views:

Very interesting. The way how the cockpit was moved towards the front wheels made me think about that long nose again. Maybe it's for safety reasons rather than aero?

Actually the photos are not in the same scale (great job anyway), so it is hard to judge at the moment. OTOH I don't think longer nosevone holds much advantage in terms of safety.

[Scotracer]

I've done my own comparisons:




They are just more accurate (I hope!)

To see them in higher res:

http://i40.tinypic.com/2wn93yv.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/21onej7.jpg

[i70q7m7ghw]

small comparison of the top views:

Very interesting. The way how the cockpit was moved towards the front wheels made me think about that long nose again. Maybe it's for safety reasons rather than aero?

Actually the photos are not in the same scale (great job anyway), so it is hard to judge at the moment. OTOH I don't think longer nosevone holds much advantage in terms of safety.

They seem to be in scale, just slightly different angles. The cockpits are same size in each image, which stays the same surely?

[timbo]

They seem to be in scale, just slightly different angles. The cockpits are same size in each image, which stays the same surely?

Well, this is interesting - I think that on F60 there's kinda lense effect, so the center of the car seems to be magnified, while outer sections, including tyres, are kinda "deeper". Because of that tyres seem smaller, and that's why I though images are not scaled right.

[Skunk0001]

With the bigger increase in contact area on the front than the rear I'd have expected them to try to move the cockpit back, not forward. I guess it must be to offset the weight of the KERS (or KERS sized ballast) in the rear. Interesting...