Ferrari Power Unit Hardware & Software

[Juzh]

It's not, and data supports this assumption, as opposed to just speculation.

http://www.fia.com/file/33794/download?token=F0p1ftUl

It is impossible to ascertain the engine power from top speed. The motogp bikes hit ~350 km/h at Mugello, does this mean the Honda motogp engine is as powerful as the Mercedes PU? The only way to estimate engine power is via GPS data, or by using on-board footage to provide a GPS estimation. Further compounding the problem is that vehicle top speed is more than likely a classic game theory game among the teams.

Yes, it is impossible to ascertain the absolute engine power from top speed, but it is possible to ascertain relative power to each other (within reason).
Also, you're telling me it's an utter coincidence top 5 are all merc powered in all traps, bar 1? Especially over the start/finish line which is just a flick and back on full throttle and force india of all cars is faster than vettel, who probably carried 5-10 clicks more into apex, yet was still slower than mercs. Get real.

Mercedes may not have been running as much df as Ferrari, going by their lap times.

They ran as much as possible, same as all other teams do in singapore where drag is not an issue. Please be reasonable.

Williams is not as slippery anymore as it was last year. They've regularly been beaten by lotus of FI in various speed traps this year, whereas last year they were almost always on top.

[Cold Fussion]

The within reason bit is the important bit, maybe you can get it within 10-15%, but that's still +- 80 hp which isn't really all that helpful.

[PlatinumZealot]

The Ferrari engine is now just a powerful as Mercedes with the rumored Singapore update. Not sure if there was any token spend though.

What singapore update? Never heard of such thing. It's also not as powerful. Even compared to pre-monza spec all mercedes customer teams still use.

If Ferrari's PU is as powerful as Mercedes', that would be impressive as they still have 4 tokens to spend. Merc have spent all theirs.

It's not, and data supports this assumption, as opposed to just speculation.

http://www.fia.com/file/33794/download?token=F0p1ftUl

Not sure if they were the Monza engines or the Canada engines.

Why would they use an old inferior PU?

Paddy Lowe has confirmed suspiscions in Japan saying he thinks the Ferrari engine is just as powerful now.

[LionKing]

I don't believe that Ferrari engine is as powerful as Mercedes yet. The speed trap numbers at Suzuka and deficit to Mercedes engined teams suggest otherwise. Ferrari may be close but has still some work to do.

[ME4ME]

I agree, I don't think they're quite there yet either.

Should be very interesting to see if, how well, and what for they use the remaining tokens they have for 2015. Also it's been said they are going for a near total redesign for next year. Makes me excited

[ripper]

Some italian media say that tokens will be used also on the basement and to reduce the size of the PU, in order to gain aerodynamic advantages. Arrivabene hinted it in an interview during Monza weekend: "We also have to think at aerodynamicist's work, today they are having problems in developing their work because of PU's dimension. If you look at the car from above it is easy to see that our car has the posterior part bigger than the competition".

Apologies for my english

[Blackout]

In 2014 they have put the engine's oil tank and the Kers behind the engine, under the turbo, but they reversed to a more classic layout in 2015. So what will they do in 2016? Will they retain their V-integrated intercooler? it reduces the overall footprint a lot (but maybe it prevents the installation of variable trumpets? and a big MGUH?)

The biggest 'weak point' regarding 'footprint' is their turbo layout which is placed behind the engine IMO. I only see drawbacks. That requires a larger/longer gearbox, longer exhausts, exhaust and turbine that are very close to the compressor etc... compared to Merc.
A Merc layout would solve those 'problems' and might reduce the size of the intercooler and its water rad and help them put a 'bigger' MGUH?

[ripper]

Translated from Omnicorse:

"Power unit's engineers are called to realize the lower part of the 6-cylinder smaller, for aerodynamic reasons. The objective is to increase the passage of air flows that pass near the basement to bring more energy in the rear diffuser and generate more downforce. At Maranello have thought to remove the cylinder liners and pass to a monobloc version, maybe even moving some accessories like pumps to clear the area further."

I don't know if it's speculation or what, that's everything I found on this matter.

[Jolle]

Translated from Omnicorse:

"Power unit's engineers are called to realize the lower part of the 6-cylinder smaller, for aerodynamic reasons. The objective is to increase the passage of air flows that pass near the basement to bring more energy in the rear diffuser and generate more downforce. At Maranello have thought to remove the cylinder liners and pass to a monobloc version, maybe even moving some accessories like pumps to clear the area further."

I don't know if it's speculation or what, that's everything I found on this matter.

Strange, I thought the with of the step in the floor was regulated and that the PU wasn't much wider than the plank anyway.

It sounds like the quote from Bernard when the rules changed in the early 80ies banishing ground effect. He ordered the TAG as a V6 to maximize the space for a good wing, else it might have been a boxer of a 6L on it's side.

[wuzak]

In 2014 they have put the engine's oil tank and the Kers behind the engine, under the turbo, but they reversed to a more classic layout in 2015. So what will they do in 2016? Will they retain their V-integrated intercooler? it reduces the overall footprint a lot (but maybe it prevents the installation of variable trumpets? and a big MGUH?)

The biggest 'weak point' regarding 'footprint' is their turbo layout which is placed behind the engine IMO. I only see drawbacks. That requires a larger/longer gearbox, longer exhausts, exhaust and turbine that are very close to the compressor etc... compared to Merc.
A Merc layout would solve those 'problems' and might reduce the size of the intercooler and its water rad and help them put a 'bigger' MGUH?

The gearboxes are already quite long, as the engines are quite short, and the gearbox mounting point is behind the engine proper. So space there isn't a problem.

[bill shoe]

The gearboxes are already quite long, as the engines are quite short, and the gearbox mounting point is behind the engine proper. So space there isn't a problem.

Two issues:

1. Space (for aero slimness above and below the floor). Gearboxes are indeed quite long, but look at something like the 2015 McLaren and how it tapers to nothing above the critical diffuser floor. This kind of openness will become standard, kind of the ass-end analogy to the front of the car that is so scooped out under the raised nose.

2. Weight distribution. These cars are still quite plump, so they have less ballast than the top teams are used to in recent years (pre-2014). The perpetual problem with race car design is taking weight off the engine-end of the car and putting on the non-engine-end of the car. So moving weight forward is desirable but difficult. Relocating components from the bellhousing to the front of the engine and squishing them in around the engine/fuel-tank interface is the solution.

[NL_Fer]

Aero on these cars are influenced by engine size allot. Every inch or kg less, will be more downforce, less drag. Also cooling efficiency is really important, the smaller the air vents, the better the aero will be.

I think Ferrari are doing it right, not like Honda, making a small engine, not knowing how to increase the power now.

[Blackout]

In 2014 they have put the engine's oil tank and the Kers behind the engine, under the turbo, but they reversed to a more classic layout in 2015. So what will they do in 2016? Will they retain their V-integrated intercooler? it reduces the overall footprint a lot (but maybe it prevents the installation of variable trumpets? and a big MGUH?)

The biggest 'weak point' regarding 'footprint' is their turbo layout which is placed behind the engine IMO. I only see drawbacks. That requires a larger/longer gearbox, longer exhausts, exhaust and turbine that are very close to the compressor etc... compared to Merc.
A Merc layout would solve those 'problems' and might reduce the size of the intercooler and its water rad and help them put a 'bigger' MGUH?

The gearboxes are already quite long, as the engines are quite short, and the gearbox mounting point is behind the engine proper. So space there isn't a problem.

But some Gboxes seem to be shorter than others, look at last tear's Merc Gbox (didnt see the 2015 one) it's quite short compared to others. And according to Sauber, many cars suffer chronic understeer because they're too long for the circuits they use. Understeer is one of the C.34 problems according to Dall'Ara and they can't move the rear wheels where they want to shorten the wheelbase wihout messing up the whishbones, because of the gearbox length and position.

[OO7]

I think Arrivabene was possibly referring to sidepod size reduction in relation to cooling/exhaust pipe shaping. There isn't really much that can be done around the engine to reduce size, as the rear undercut doesn't appear to be anywhere near to interfering with/fowling the engine.

[ripper]

Again Arrivabene on Ferrari's PU:

"In 2015 we have recovered about 90 hp compared to 2014. For the next year, the target will be much lower. But it's the same for everyone. I have great confidence in this team and that Vettel is truly a phenomenon. I am sure it will be a fun season ."