During the winter there was a lot of talk about Ferrari 2011 car, with Aldo Costa talking about an "extreme design". Domenicali said that Costa "wanted to spur all our engineers to push on the theme of innovation". There was also talk about the impact of Pat Fry on Ferrari - and how he brought new concepts and methods of work to be innervated in the structure of Ferrari. Costa even spoke of a "new era" for Ferrari, as they had updated their wind tunnel. Then there were the rumours surrounding the crash tests. Apparently the Ferrari had a new monocoque construction and more extreme composite materials. Finally, there were the "leaked images" from MARCA which showed a very extreme car. I know the pictures from MARCA show an illegal car, but it did look like an evolution of the F10, and agreed with all the rumors. http://www.marca.com/2010/12/18/mot...9c53f7a18d0fd96da64dac745f03af88&t=1300133780 I guess MARCA look a bit stupid now. When the car was launched, Costa and Tombazis were quick to mention that the launch spec was an "interim" solution, and that they had a huge upgrade for the final test, especially on the aerodynamic side. We were told at the launch: "The rear suspension is really innovative, so is the rear wing system" - I understand Ferrari have an extreme rear push rod solution and the ARW is activated by a pedal. Tombazis even said they were working hard on the 2011 front wing, which was supposed to be very different to their 2010 one. I can only hope that the new front wing at Barcelona was not part of the Melbourne-spec package. I hope that Alonso was referring to this different front wing when he recently said "at Albert Park, I hope we will manage to bring a few updates, especially to the front wing, which can still give us a fraction more in performance terms". After seeing other radical solutions like Renault exhausts, Torro Rosso double floor and Williams gearbox, I expected Ferrari to bring some extreme solutions to the car for the final tests. While there were a few updates, none were really extreme apart from the exhausts - which had already been implemented by Red Bull. Where is Ferrari's extreme designs? While I understand that the quickest car is not always the most extreme, I was a little disappointed to see such a conservative design on the Ferrari 150(degrees) Italia. Well done to Ferrari on the mechanical side but they need to improve on the aerodynamic side. It won't be as important for Australia but any aerodynamic weaknesses will be much clearer at Malaysia and China. If Ferrari don't improve in this aspect, I expect Red Bull to dominate those races.
Really Lorca? That differs from your (sorry Autosports) view a while back saying Ferrari have got it right and that evolution over innovation was the best way to go. Why the sudden change Lorca? And what exactly is not innovative about the solutions that mean the rear of the car is packed tighter, manoeuvring the gearbox around the push-rod suspension and creating an internal aero package that is not visible?
I'd have to agree with some of McWilliams points. Without knowing the details of the internals, I don't think we can really comment. Whilst its not necessarily an external revelation, the Mclaren was and look where that has put them. The Ferrari appears to be quick, so I think we can't really criticise the car design until we get evidence to the contrary.
Perhaps he is focussing on the visuals? In that sense 'Lorca' as you disrespectfully refer to him, is surely correct? I get the distinct impression that your comment was rather personal. And I'm sure you'll agree that is not constructive for good debate.
He wrote an article a while back (right at the point McLaren revealed their radical design) saying that radical is the wrong way to go and that Ferrari had it all right. I want to know why he's changed his mind.
At the risk of starting an argument - I believe thats called Hypocrisy. Ferrari are quick so far, and in racing, really thats all that matters. I can't imagine too many team bosses complaining that they hadn't stuck to their design philosophy after winning the Constructors Championship. If the car is quick and reliable, thats the main thing. The car as it is will be built upon as the season progresses, and that may be where the true innovation is seen. Teams like Mclaren or Toro Rosso with radical design concepts may find they cannot implement new ideas because of this, whilst Ferrari can make small steps and increase the performance as the season progresses.
True, their KERS system has let them down, and mercedes have had issues too. No team have bulletproof reliability, but Ferrari and Red Bull seem top in this respect too. If Red Bull have the reliability to match last seasons pace, I fear the championship may very quickly become a foregone conclusion, although I'd love it to be open all the way through! Anyone know the last time the constructors championship was decided in the last race?
You have to take everything a team says with a pinch of salt, they were under immense pressure from the Italian media after the cock up at Abu Dhabi, coming out and saying "next year we're just looking to get the basics right" wouldn't really have cut them any slack. They had to big themselves up for next season to alleviate the flack they were copping. They've done the right thing by not buckling to public demand because their car looks a class act.
Not in the least. Any personal aspect to my comment is entirely due to seeing a personal comment which I felt did not help the debate. I am here for good quality debate and would prefer to see that comments remain impersonal. I believe that both sides of this have merit. And I think it's good to remain on topic! I also see McWilliams further point. Let's try to keep it all respectful eh? P.S. Nothing personal
Spot on AbsolutelyGlorious! I think thats the key point, its only media! I don't quite no what its like in Italy, where I imagine that Ferrari is far more important, but fans quickly forget those sort of comments if they see a competitive car. Ferrari said something to get themselves out of trouble, and to try and shield themselves a bit so they had more space to work in without the media all over them, and they've gone away and produced something which looks impressive. As I said earlier about team bosses, what fan is going to turn around when their team has just won and say "Yeh, but they didn't stick to their design philosophy did they?".
I see what you're getting at but sometimes having the flexibility to change one's mind is admirable. It appears there was an expectation of something radical and probably visually so. It also appears that this is not the case and the author appears to have had the grace to alter his perspective.
Cosicave with the greatest respect you've been here all of 5 minutes so please cut out the lectures on how I should speak to Lorca and respond to his posts. AG of course you're right and I'd urge the likes of Lorca and Fred to perhaps read technical articles such as those by Scarbs rather than Jake Humphrey's twitter to get form their opinions. The winter break has been so long everything is being scrutinised but actually only the teams know the true story.
Im pretty sure the insides of the car are radical, hence why they focused on that in early testing and have got it reliable and fast. Unlike Mclaren who went radical aerodynamically and have problems with reliability and speed on the inside.
In general, evolution is the better design approach when the rules for the next year are similar (providing you have a good base). I said that before and I stand by that, and the RB7 and 150 (degrees) Italia prove that. In that sense, Ferrari did get it right, and they have done a good job with the internal aspects. But in my original post I was referring specifically to the visual aspects, which, just like the F10, appear to be a conservative design. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Teams like McLaren usually talk about their updates, only to find that they are not very effective. Ferrari are different - they stay quiet unless they have huge updates or extreme designs - like the Valencia update last year. Pat Fry, Costa and Tombazis kept talking about how "most of the visual aspects of the car will change" when they reveal their big package at the final test - and to a certain extent this is true, but it is still disappointing to see simple aerodynamics while another team has a double floor. After all the rumours and comments from Ferrari, I was hoping to see more - and Massa said at Barcelona that the car was in it's Melbourne-spec package. Alonso said that some updates will come, but they won't be signifcant innovations. I wanted Ferrari to bring something that other teams will be looking to copy, like the F-Duct and EBD were last year.
You do realise I dont read anything in pre season testing? I just look at testing results and thats it. I dont have twitter so how can I read JH's?
