2024 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[Farnborough]

Related to this aspect, pull rod front suspension, AN interview in which he talks specifically about this design.

Quoted from memory .... the RB platform he is credited with that suspension, moved driver back as far as possible, resulting in engine located as far rearmost as could be arranged. Then front suspension subjected to the tub's cross section at that point to fit in competent front suspension.

He specifically said that he always wants the keel shape (like a boat) at that point for flow volume approaching floor and so that shape in this iteration would bring too much geometric compromise to push rod arrangement. Hence the pull rod design being primary as result of desirable flow at front end of chassis. Also adding that it benefits front brake duct design but not being specific about the gain from that component. Not said by him, but it looks and sounds like (as he elaborated on downstream aspect in talking about clearing wheel wake after this) this is trying to tidy the problematic wheel wake and move it out the side of chassis with as much power as possible.
Furthermore, he spoke of using high pressure effect underneath the leading part of sidepod entry to also eject "dirty" flow away from the chassis and out to side.
Sounds like he disagreed with putting sdepod entry under the pod top surface as it reduces the potency of that flow to enact cleaning of further downstream vehicle architecture. Thats my understanding of his description.

Equally, the move from pull rear on previous RB to push on this era, was to package the suspension into a now very much reduced gearbox space (remember that moving both driver and engine rearmost) while also keeping clear of where the gearbox drops down into diffuser area.

Effectively both front and rear are slaved to pure aero performance, and completely confirmed by his own description.

Interestingly, the McL (under James key, I believe) came to the same start point, and now with aero competency added seems quite productive.

Guessing that Ferrari are now looking and comparing those front end flow structures to give their design comparable scope as these two.

[FDD]

He specifically said that he always wants the keel shape (like a boat) at that point for flow volume approaching floor and so that shape in this iteration would bring too much geometric compromise to push rod arrangement.

I do not know/understand why so many discussions are made on this question/subject.
At the first place nobody here has any single data about the aero flow of both designs.
Many fluid dynamics engineers involved in F1 said that this boat alike keel shape do not offer any aero flow advantage in respect to flat one.
That is only Adrian's approach.
That is to say GeS can change to pull rod and stay with flat underneath nose shape.
MP4/15 had that like a boat keel shape but Ferrari took the title that year and year after that...
So, that is not the silver bullet and do not offer any advantage over the other approach as aero experts involved in F1 said.
Eventual advantage maybe can be find with the different air flow around the outer suspension elements and that can be verified only with aero tools on both specific designs.
Yes, they (all of them) checked for sure eventual advantages of both concepts and yes they will not write about it in Gazzetta dello Sport, Allgemeine Deutsche Zeitung or The Daily Telegraph.

[Farnborough]

I made no projection as to the technical value of one design over another in this case, merely a response to previous posting about Ferrari going to the front pull rod design for their next chassis. I put into this conversation HIS reasoning, thats all. They, the Ferrari team, must see value in it from their evaluation tools, else they'd have more confidence to continue with their own design.

Some may have not seen or listened to AN interview, its just his view though, as you say.

But those view and recorded success clearly have a weighting to them in this sport if we look at pure performance recorded.

[bananapeel23]

Related to this aspect, pull rod front suspension, AN interview in which he talks specifically about this design.

Equally, the move from pull rear on previous RB to push on this era, was to package the suspension into a now very much reduced gearbox space.

Guessing that Ferrari are now looking and comparing those front end flow structures to give their design comparable scope as these two.

It seems weird to expect Ferrari to emulate the Red Bull/McLaren approach simply because they’re discussing a move from pushrod to pullrod front suspension.

1) There have been no rumours of them switching to a pushrod rear, meaning they probably aren’t focusing on gearbox packaging to the same extent. It would also be very strange for them to completely redesign their gearbox in the last year of a regulation set.

2) Ferrari packaging efforts in this regulation set seem to have mostly been focused on reducing the size of the engine cover and cleaning up the flow over the sidepods and beam wing. I doubt we will see them give up on this philosophy.

3) Ferrari is actually seeing results from their car development at this point. Completely switching the entire packaging concept and starting fresh would be pretty odd and risky. Especially since they seem broadly happy with the SF-24 apart from the tyre warmup issues.

Personally I don’t think the switch to a pullrod front is really a sign of them emulating other teams, but rather a case of them needing to redesign the front suspension to resolve the bouncing issues, with the switch to pull rod simply being something they do while they’re at it, since it has aerodynamic benefits. They seem to be converging on pull rod, but not because Ferrari is converging on overall car concept.

[Farnborough]

Related to this aspect, pull rod front suspension, AN interview in which he talks specifically about this design.

Equally, the move from pull rear on previous RB to push on this era, was to package the suspension into a now very much reduced gearbox space.

Guessing that Ferrari are now looking and comparing those front end flow structures to give their design comparable scope as these two.

It seems weird to expect Ferrari to emulate the Red Bull/McLaren approach simply because they’re discussing a move from pushrod to pullrod front suspension.

1) There have been no rumours of them switching to a pushrod rear, meaning they probably aren’t focusing on gearbox packaging to the same extent. It would also be very strange for them to completely redesign their gearbox in the last year of a regulation set.

2) Ferrari packaging efforts in this regulation set seem to have mostly been focused on reducing the size of the engine cover and cleaning up the flow over the sidepods and beam wing. I doubt we will see them give up on this philosophy.

3) Ferrari is actually seeing results from their car development at this point. Completely switching the entire packaging concept and starting fresh would be pretty odd and risky. Especially since they seem broadly happy with the SF-24 apart from the tyre warmup issues.

Personally I don’t think the switch to a pullrod front is really a sign of them emulating other teams, but rather a case of them needing to redesign the front suspension to resolve the bouncing issues, with the switch to pull rod simply being something they do while they’re at it, since it has aerodynamic benefits. They seem to be converging on pull rod, but not because Ferrari is converging on overall car concept.

Perhaps my phrase has been misunderstood, I've not suggested that they are following defacto "pull" philosophy just to be the same.

The nuance in that which I'm suggesting is that they are putting that concept through their own evaluation processes, tools, CFD etc, etc to base their decisions on their own in house knowledge base.
That process in itself, on their own terms, will show them if there's say value in this route and focus their own view of the plus and minus aspect.

Working with a push or pull system in its mechanical effect has no real secrets, it's pretty low risk to use one or the other in resolving the mechanical loads imparted by each design.

The gain, if there's any available, appears to be ultimately in flow structures within this aero regulation set.

Again there's no suggestion from me that they are taking just a " if its good enough for newey, then its good enough for us" type position. Just that they are opening a logical evaluation of potential, thats really how anyone may progress their own facility.

[yooogurt]

formu1a uno:
A word of clarification about Loïc Serra. He'll be a track technical director, meaning he'll be out on the track almost every weekend.
His specialization in vehicle dynamics will be of great benefit to the on-track team. Something different from previous years.

[AR3-GP]

I think that Charles Leclerc will win at least 1 more GP this year.

[scuderiabrandon]

I think that Charles Leclerc will win at least 1 more GP this year.

Seeing McLaren's performance, I'd gladly take an odd win. I'd be happy if we could carry that momentum into next season. I wholeheartedly believe in a constructors win before Baku & Singapore. Seeing how much went to waste there I find it hard to believe we can mount a challenge now.

[Vanja #66]

I think that Charles Leclerc will win at least 1 more GP this year.

Like I said for Baku and Singapore, McLaren is obviously the clear favourite. If Ferrari was expected to be a close rival in those 2 races, these last 6 events and 3 Sprints are all McLaren's to lose. And not just the win, they have everything needed to get a 1-2 in every one of those 9 point scoring events. So anyone else winning anything will come as a consequence of a bad weekend execution of McLaren. Whether Ferrari will be up there to pick up the pieces depends on Red Bull and their Austin update, as well as Max' feel with the car and motivation to keep fighting

[Sevach]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferr ... /10657976/

Interesting article.

[bananapeel23]

I think that Charles Leclerc will win at least 1 more GP this year.

Like I said for Baku and Singapore, McLaren is obviously the clear favourite. If Ferrari was expected to be a close rival in those 2 races, these last 6 events and 3 Sprints are all McLaren's to lose. And not just the win, they have everything needed to get a 1-2 in every one of those 9 point scoring events. So anyone else winning anything will come as a consequence of a bad weekend execution of McLaren. Whether Ferrari will be up there to pick up the pieces depends on Red Bull and their Austin update, as well as Max' feel with the car and motivation to keep fighting

I mean you're right that McLaren are the favourites for all remaining races, but it's not like their margin over Ferrari seems HUGE. Ferrari have been there or thereabouts in the last 3 races in terms of race pace, albeit a bit lacking in quali pace. I think you're a bit too pessimistic.

Ferrari won't be favourites for any of the remaining races, but I'd say they are close enough on pace to be more likely than not to win at least one of them if their relative pace in the recent races is anything to go by. McLaren have proven to be mistake prone and Ferrari seems to have generally good race strategy this season.

I would also be hesitant to say McLaren has everything for a 1-2 in every race. The car might be capable of it, but I'm not sure the drivers and strategy team are. Ferrari has the better drivers (Leclerc > Norris, Sainz arguably slightly better than Piastri) and seemingly also great race pace and Red Bull has Verstappen. I like Piastri and believe he will turn out to be better than Norris eventually, but currently he isn't great in terms of race pace unless he's running in clean air.

Basically if I was a betting man I'd bet on Ferrari winning at least one more race.

[Vanja #66]

I mean you're right that McLaren are the favourites for all remaining races, but it's not like their margin over Ferrari seems HUGE. Ferrari have been there or thereabouts in the last 3 races in terms of race pace, albeit a bit lacking in quali pace. I think you're a bit too pessimistic.

Ferrari won't be favourites for any of the remaining races, but I'd say they are close enough on pace to be more likely than not to win at least one of them if their relative pace in the recent races is anything to go by. McLaren have proven to be mistake prone and Ferrari seems to have generally good race strategy this season.

I would also be hesitant to say McLaren has everything for a 1-2 in every race. The car might be capable of it, but I'm not sure the drivers and strategy team are. Ferrari has the better drivers (Leclerc > Norris, Sainz arguably slightly better than Piastri) and seemingly also great race pace and Red Bull has Verstappen. I like Piastri and believe he will turn out to be better than Norris eventually, but currently he isn't great in terms of race pace unless he's running in clean air.

Basically if I was a betting man I'd bet on Ferrari winning at least one more race.

I didn't say they have a huge margin, but they are in the leading position. They have the car and the drivers have the performance and speed to be 1-2, as well . If they don't do it, someone somewhere dropped the ball realistically. Either strategy, setup mistake, driving error in Q or R...

As for car performance, McLaren and Red Bull are bringing updates, Mercedes as well. I have a hard time believing Ferrari has the capacity in funds and aero resources to bring a matching update in terms of performance improvement compared to McLaren. On paper, McLaren has the biggest chance to bring a massive update and blast off in these 6 races and I expect they will be very hard to beat in any case. If they've hit a development ceiling or, even worse, bring a downgrade, then we will have a new situation to evaluate, in my view

[Delasoup]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferr ... /10657976/

Interesting article.

I had to read this part a couple of times: "I think ever since we brought these ground effect cars back, it's presented challenges that have... in simple terms, when the car's a long way from the floor and the floor is not generating huge amounts of downforce based on its proximity to the floor, then the tunnel can be pretty accurate." Probably a case of wind tunnel floor vs car floor.

Thanks for sharing, very interesting indeed.

[ScuderiaLeo]

I don't think the expectation should ever be "McLaren will mess up and Ferrari will snatch the win." After the summer break, McLaren came back stronger, both on the team and drivers side. They didn't spend that time slacking and I doubt they'll be lazy during this break either. And McLaren are the only team to not bring "failed upgrades"; I think we can assume they have more resources remaining because of it.

If Leclerc can get one more win this year I'd be surprised. Pleasantly so, but still surprised, because it'd take either a mistake from McLaren or a leap in strength from Ferrari. Not only that, but this is assuming Red Bull and Mercedes are still nowhere, which is a lot to ask for...

At least Serra arrives in 5 days. After what feels like a very long wait!

[Sevach]

I don't think the expectation should ever be "McLaren will mess up and Ferrari will snatch the win." After the summer break, McLaren came back stronger, both on the team and drivers side. They didn't spend that time slacking and I doubt they'll be lazy during this break either. And McLaren are the only team to not bring "failed upgrades"; I think we can assume they have more resources remaining because of it.

If Leclerc can get one more win this year I'd be surprised. Pleasantly so, but still surprised, because it'd take either a mistake from McLaren or a leap in strength from Ferrari. Not only that, but this is assuming Red Bull and Mercedes are still nowhere, which is a lot to ask for...

At least Serra arrives in 5 days. After what feels like a very long wait!

Vegas is a return to the low downforce package where Mclaren was vulnerable to Ferrari.
And their low downforce wing should work less efficiently now.

Other than that, what kind of upgrades can Ferrari bring? A RW that has less side spill and makes the car more efficient? There's maybe .1, being generous .15 there.

Other than Vegas, COTA sometimes throws curve balls due to how bumpy it is, cars will be running outside their optimum ride heights and floors(like in the article i just quoted) will be going haywire with so much hitting the ground.

Mexico and it's rarefied air also brings some unexpected results and Brazil, also rarefied air, sometimes bumpy and unpredictable weather.

Losail and Abu Dhabi would be incredible if Ferrari is able to compete, it hasn't been the teams strong suit at all.