Ferrari's lack of Pace

[neilap]

There was speculation that Ferrari had a flexing floor on the car. The rules were tightened and they seem to have suffered the most. It seems to me Mac had a case especially after the last few races. Is it a matter of the Mac making such a huge step forward or did the new testing standards hurt Ferrari?

[Gt_R]

It is worth noting that the flexing floor issue came up early in the season, and Ferrari had won in Spain after the revised floor tests were implemented, with a good lead. And the flexing floor would have little difference in Monaco, with or without, and hence isn't the pure reason for Ferrari's lack of pace.

One of the key reason behind Ferrari's slight drop, as compared to Mclaren's rise, is that this year, Mclaren took a slightly less aero-led design philosophy for their 2007 car as compared to previous years, while Ferrari take a more aero-led design philosophy (relative to a mechancal grip approach preferred by engineers like Brawn).

With same tyres, Ferrari have a car that is now aerodynamically quite sound and cut through the air brilliantly. Mclaren too has a very aerodynamically sound car. But what Ferrari now lack is the generating of grip at slow speed, and the mechanical grip part, relative to their rival. This is most obvious when you observe a Ferrari behind a slower car, that Kimi and Massa have great difficulty in following close and near. And also, when Ferrari isn't as quick in Monaco and the tight sections of Indy infield. The Ferrari car is simply too reliant on its aerodyamics, and it is difficult to achieve consistent use and predict effects on it's tyres. A problem which Mclaren overcome better, and make Ferrari being a car that can be very fast, but not easily and consistently achieved.

This problem is compounded that in the Paul Ricard test, Ferrari simply din't do as good a job in new parts, and with no tests between Monaco and Indy, it hurts them consecutively for 3 races.

[Dutton]

That Ferrari are not quite on their game is not entirely surprising. Transition was always going to affect things to a point (it was always a question of how much - I think they have minimised the damage pretty well). If this is the worst it gets, then I can live with that.

Catching Mclaren is not going to be easy...they can afford to not win all the time, whereas we are looking at needing to do exactly that. This won't be easy...can't rely on unreliability this year either. It sucks when Mclaren nails both factors. They can get depressingly strong at the best of times, let alone with two excellent drivers.

I remember reading/hearing something a while back (I think it was written, but couldn't say how good a source) a POV saying that the switch to a sole supplier hit Ferrari harder than Michelin runners. The theory behind this was the rather late switch to a different construction, which hurt Ferrari more because they had already focused the design around the previously stated 2007-construction. Thus, there had to be significant modifations made.

I am not arguing for the above position, but neither against it. I just thought it was an interesting thing to read.

[Sodemo]

We have had many years of Ferrari domination, surely a few years without them at the front is both welcome and expected at some point?

Its always nice to see another team take the spotlight.

[Dutton]

Well, my preference would be to see Ferrari keep winning, but it is certainly more fun when there is a challenge.

Ferrari had to drop from the top at some point. I am just happy it has not been a very far drop. It could be a lot worse.

I have no doubt many are glad to see Ferrrari not winning. I completely understand that, but I am never going to feel that way (for obvious reasons).

[Knowlesy]

I for one am delighted Dutton.

I must admit, I felt this season Ferrari would start off stronger than they finished. With no Michael to push the team and in his place a lazy man, it can only do harm.

But then again, we have been on some quirky tracks lately. Let's see how the Ferrari copes with those fast sweeps in Magny Cours.

[Dutton]

I've been thinking about Magny. Ferrari have tended to have a good run there. Michael was cleary ridiculously effective at the place, which is why he won as much as he did there...but, beyond that, his team-mates often faired alright.

The problem is, to my mind, if Mclaren go for the high-downforce approach of Indy. This has often been the Ferrari strategy at Magny, which means the gains would be lost this time around.

I would agree RE expecting them to start stronger, relatively speaking, than they would continue. That seemed likely pre-season, and became very apparent after the first couple of races (i.e. it was clear Mclaren had a rather good package once they sorted things out).

Hopefully Lewis can keep beating Alonso. This would, to my mind, keep increasing internal tensions. Which can only be a good thing from my POV (nothing against Mclaren as a team - it would just help translate into, hopefuly, dropped performance on track).

Clutching at straws, I know, but any little helps.

[JeremySmith]

Interesting maybe?

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19298.html

[Dutton]

Hmmmm. An out of commision windtunnel would be a tad problematic.

[Knowlesy]

If "the word" is indeed accurate...

[Dutton]

Well, clearly, it could very easily be nonsense. That holds true for a great many media stories...

[Sodemo]

Its certainly possible.

[f1manoz]

If I was understanding correctly, the reason for Ferrari's perceived downfall is this hybrid spec car that isn't as quick as the old one, while it's clear McLaren have come on leaps and bounds since the beginning of the season.

[Sodemo]

Its nice to see the drivers wrestling with the car for once, usually F1 drivers nowadays can ride with one hand on the wheel.