Confirmed...F10 is a guzzler :)

Thursday 18th March 2010 - PlanetF1.com
'Thirsty Ferrari lost ten seconds to Red Bull'

Pre-season rumours that Ferrari's engine is the thirstiest on the grid have been unofficially confirmed with the team reported to have started the Bahrain GP 10kgs heavier than rivals Red Bull.

Although a fault with Red Bull's Renault engine ultimately meant Seb Vettel was unable to win the race, the revelation that Ferrari were significantly heavier at the start of the grand prix prompted renewed belief that Fernando Alonso would have overtaken Vettel even if a loss of power hadn't compromised the German's pace.

According to BBC pit-lane reporter Ted Kravitz, Williams technical chief Sam Michael has confirmed that Renault, who supply Red Bull with their engines, have the most fuel-efficient unit on the grid, 'followed by Mercedes and Cosworth, with Ferrari the thirstiest'.

As a result, it is reckoned that 'the Red Bulls started the race with 10kg less fuel than the Ferraris. That would have been worth nearly 0.4 seconds a lap in the early stages of the race around the extended Bahrain track. Averaging out at 0.2secs per lap, reckoned Michael, Renault's fuel efficiency would have given Red Bull a 9.8-second advantage on Ferrari over the whole race distance.'

Given the difficulties every driver encountered when trying to overtake, it remains debatable whether Alonso would have found a way past Vettel for the lead of the race but for the loss of power the Red Bull suffered on lap 33. However, Kravitz argues that Alonso would have been at his most potent in the final ten laps of the race as only then would he have been chasing Vettel with a similar amount of fuel onboard.

'Had Vettel not had his problem, we would likely have enjoyed a fight for the lead between Alonso, who had been nursing his tyres throughout the race, and Vettel, with his rear tyres starting to fade. At any other stage of the race, it would not have been a fair fight, as Vettel would have been significantly lighter on fuel. We should bear this in mind in the inevitable debates about the first race being boring,' he contends.

 

Welcome to last Friday, lol.

Actually, welcome to something like 2007, when MaXXX announced no one was allowed to change anything on the engine.

 

I don't know, is it last Friday or are we in the twilight zone with these rules!!

 

Well, the Ferrari engine is quite a bit more powerful than the Renault, so surely some of that weight penalty must be evened out.

Either way, the Mercedes/Ilmor engine is still the one to have. Pretty decent fuel economy, best driveability and by far the best reliability.

 

Evidently Merc agree's with you -

Thursday 18th March 2010 - PlanetF1.com
'Thirsty Ferrari lost ten seconds to Red Bull'

Pre-season rumours that Ferrari's engine is the thirstiest on the grid have been unofficially confirmed with the team reported to have started the Bahrain GP 10kgs heavier than rivals Red Bull.

Although a fault with Red Bull's Renault engine ultimately meant Seb Vettel was unable to win the race, the revelation that Ferrari were significantly heavier at the start of the grand prix prompted renewed belief that Fernando Alonso would have overtaken Vettel even if a loss of power hadn't compromised the German's pace.

According to BBC pit-lane reporter Ted Kravitz, Williams technical chief Sam Michael has confirmed that Renault, who supply Red Bull with their engines, have the most fuel-efficient unit on the grid, 'followed by Mercedes and Cosworth, with Ferrari the thirstiest'.

As a result, it is reckoned that 'the Red Bulls started the race with 10kg less fuel than the Ferraris. That would have been worth nearly 0.4 seconds a lap in the early stages of the race around the extended Bahrain track. Averaging out at 0.2secs per lap, reckoned Michael, Renault's fuel efficiency would have given Red Bull a 9.8-second advantage on Ferrari over the whole race distance.'

Given the difficulties every driver encountered when trying to overtake, it remains debatable whether Alonso would have found a way past Vettel for the lead of the race but for the loss of power the Red Bull suffered on lap 33. However, Kravitz argues that Alonso would have been at his most potent in the final ten laps of the race as only then would he have been chasing Vettel with a similar amount of fuel onboard.

'Had Vettel not had his problem, we would likely have enjoyed a fight for the lead between Alonso, who had been nursing his tyres throughout the race, and Vettel, with his rear tyres starting to fade. At any other stage of the race, it would not have been a fair fight, as Vettel would have been significantly lighter on fuel. We should bear this in mind in the inevitable debates about the first race being boring,' he contends.

 

All Alonso has to do is lose 22lbs before Australia and everything will be back in balance.

 

-- but probably very true. I wouldn't be surprised if they started Massa and Alonso on a weight loss/muscle retaining training regiment after they have crunched the numbers. Despite all this, Ferrari look in good shape if they are only lacking in fuel efficiency and slightly better rear aero.

 

It wasn't just gasoline that they were burning:

http://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/17/ferrari-wins-first-formula-one-race-with-cellulosic-ethanol-blen/

 

re bio fuel ??? What is this
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

WTF is Ferrari thinking??? Ethanol will reduce the fuel economy not increase it as Ethanol has a lower BTU content of Gas and the higher Oxygen content of Ethanol will trick the O2 sensor to richen the fuel mixture.

 

RE: "WTF is Ferrari thinking???"

Somehow, I suspect that they know what they're doing...

 

Every team wishes they had Ferrari's "problems".

 

They're required to run xx% biofuel. Somehow I do think they know what doing, they have about 10 people employed to assess the fuel and use the exact right mixture for their strategy (at least they did this in the Schumacher years).

 

Sounds like a piece to make you think there's actually some differences and that F aren't going to necessarily run away with it, so you better stay tuned

 

RE: Weightloss:

Cars are still made mostly of Carbon fibre, correct?

Pagani now uses 'carbotanium', and shed around 20 kgs by doing just that. Its stronger (more rigid) and lighter than normal carbon fibre. Now the Pagani weighs in at just over 1200 kgs, roughly double the weight of an F1 car, so hypothetically, the F1 car could shed 10 kgs by doing this.

Unless they're not allowed, of course.

An easier solution could be to shave Alonso's eyebrows, surely that'll shed a kilo or 5 .

 

Yes. But I am not sure he could drive w/o his eyebrow (singular) as he would have trouble not looking skyward.

 

They're already made of CF.

 

Show me in the technical regulations where it states that the fuel must contain a certain percentage of biomass.

 

From the 2010 FIA F1 Technical Regulations:

19.4.4 A minimum of 5.75% (m/m) of the fuel must comprise bio-components.

19.4.5 Initially the bio-components are restricted to oxygenates. However, hydrocarbons and oxygenates (lying outside the 19.4.3 definition) or mixtures thereof, which have been produced from biomass, will be included into Formula One fuel, provided that a suitable analytical procedure is available to verify their biological origin. Their use in F1 fuel will be dependent on evidence indicating that the supplier is genuinely developing these compounds for use in commercial fuels.

 

Well that would explain the rigidity...

 

Shell has a team led by Lisa Lilley ad Mark Farley working full time with Maranello

 

I suspect Ferrari trust that Shell know what they're doing, afterall, they're the fuel experts, not Ferrari!.

 

Yes, but I was talking about carbotanium.

 

You know I was talking about his brow.


BTW Think he's PO'd now that Lewis is making what used to be his trade-mark dumb comments to the press?

 

To add to ProCoach's post, they have been using bio-fuel since the 2008 season.
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/sporting_regulations/6844/default.html