F1 Live reports that an F2004 may have been running a ferrari v8 yesterday at mugello with gene at the wheel. Anybody hear anything more on this? He was 2 secs slower, which is very similar to the differences the toyota engine ran during their test.
According to www.pitpass.com they did, as confirmed by the Ferrari PR guy. They tested a V8 in a V10 case...that's one way to get info. A proper V8 is on the dyno. Ciao, Peter
The first question that Todt was asked was have they switch development to 2006 ... You can see that Ferrari while dreaming about sorting this year out are really trying to sort out their lack of performance mystery. I'm not expecting Ferrari to be competitive next year but hopefully starting to look like a racing/car team again. Pete
I for one am not even hopefull that they will be like a race team again for 06 The taking of a V-10 and pulling out 2 rods and pistons may be a way to test the concept when it comes to developing the car around a new engine package this is the wrong direction to take. A V-8 block will have different stresses on it than will a V-10. The thermal properties, air flow and ignition properties will be an entierly new game. I hate to say this but the statement that JT issued goes to show how much Ferrari has rested on its laurels and did not have enough forward thinking to stay ahead of the competition.
Yeah I do actually think we might be in for another huge wait ... Italians are Italians. I just did not want to say it Their laurels have been well and truly rested for the last 3 years, just warmed up the same car over and over again. What I cannot understand is why the other teams were not able to make inroads until this year. Thus I have to conclude that Ferrari were not so much superior in design but they just had it right, while other teams were regrouping ... thus (like most Ferrari WC wins) Ferrari won because the other teams were moving people and structures around NOT because they are/were the best team on the grid. This has happened before and yes to win you must be the best that year and Ferrari were ... but lets face it they had NO opposition. Lets think about it: 1. McLaren - Struggling to get back on form. After Hakenin left they had a major radical redesign and it took years to get that working ... and they are still looking for reliability but have the speed now. 2. Renault - Major regroup from the Benetton team ... it takes years for this to gell. And it is now. Thus they offered NO opposition to Ferrari over the last few years. 3. Williams - Patrick Head has moved sideways and Sam Michael is the the new man. Thus it is taking a while for Sam to get to grips ... thus they are regrouping. On top of that they have a new wind tunnel. 4. BAR - Yep the only real opposition to Ferrari over the last couple of years, but JB has yet to prove if he is a fighter or a RB. 5. Toyota - Still developing their attack ... might fire in the next couple of years. 6. Sauber - Still a small player trying to make it big. 7. Jaguar - As for Sauber but now new management. 8. Who cares ... Thus a lot of Ferrari/Bridgestone's success has to come down to timing ... and that is always true of any winner, and concrats to them for their time in the sun, but my point is they are NOT the clever team on the grid (and this major rule change has highlighted that). Thus next year is CRITICAL to see if Ferrari can fight a direct battle. The only time they really have is in 2000, maybe 2001 (although Hakenin's heart was not in it and the Mercedes reliability was starting to weaken). Many people have won due to timing, even Rossi is winning because nobody can touch him at the moment ... same for Doohan. Pete
And you're not fair to Ferrari either. Over the last few years they made a fast and RELIABLE car! That's a HUGE feat in F1. The others were trying to catch up and sacrified reliability in the process. But that's all in the game and the margins are small. At the moment Renault is in the same position as Ferrari was: fast AND reliable (Alonso at least . McLaren/Mercedes is probably the faster package but the reliability lacks and it hurst them. The idea of a V8 in V10 case is not as bad as it seems. They DO have a proper V8 on the dyno but with the V8-in-V10 they can get data on the track to see how much they loose in performance and speed compared to the V10 car. Sure it would be better to have a proper V8 car on the test track but for now it's doing the job. They should hurry up though. Ciao, Peter
Well... maybe they had no opposition because they were VERY good. Or you could say the same thing for McLaren in the late 80s. Or Williams in the 90s, or, well, maybe that thing could be stated for every world champion of the F1. It´s quite... relative.
Totally agree. They were the best at the right time, as all champions are. What has always concerned me with Ferrari is the lack of innovation. They actually had to buy it in, by dragging in the Benetten design team. Now this team has had it's day ... I guess they need to go after Renault's designers. Ferrari has always been the least innovative team on the track, and infact many times they have won because of it ... but when major rules change, they are left behind. And yes I am being hard on Ferrari ... why?, cause I want them to prove me wrong Pete
Not very fair here, IMO. One thing: many innovative cars were superlative failures. Example: Ferrari F92. Another thing: many times Ferrari was not innovative because they were in the ****. If you can´t do a decent copy of the winning car, how do you want to do an innovative one? And another one: well, Ferrari really had nice ideas. Example: semi-automatic transmision. And another: you say that Ferrari brought innovation from the Benetton team but, were those Benettons really innovative cars? And, did Williams brought innovation from Leyton House when they hired Adrian Newey? And so on... And another: the rule changes had favoured Ferrari many times (example: 1960) so this isn´t related to this supposed lack of innovation. My conclusion: Ferrari is in the **** again, but not because any kind of historical, ideological or philosophical reason.
Now that you mention Newey, this year might be the first season since 1991 that not either a Newey designed or Schumacher driven car will win the championship. This is a rarely mentioned detail, which really does not do Newey's ability justice. The latest rumour is that Williams is trying to hire him again.
by saying that inorder to win you need Adrian Newey to design the car of Michael S to drive it is a bit misleading. The way you put it is have AN Design it and MS drive it and you will win the championship Formula 1 is a team sport. there are so many people behind the scenes doing the trench work. For Example Ferrari has 3 different aerodynamic teams each team has a head aerodynamicist Rory Byrne gives them suggestions of what he wants from the car in terms of shape, Downforce and Drag. It is those teams jobs to design and test and refine the aero package. Another area that the aero dept. has to do is tell the tramsmission, engine, suspension teams that we found improvements in this area if the engine and transmission were 4 inches narrower. Then the Engine + Transmission groups will say we cannot do that because it will force them to raise the center of gravity of the car. So the Aero team has to go back and find another solution Then the suspension group comes in and says that the shape of the new chassis will not work because the roll centers are way off base. The Aero dept is back to work again. Designing a race car is no longer a one person show it takes several teams working together to come up with the best compromise in a car design. and the Key word here is "compromise"
Of course it is not as plain as simple as that, but it if it is a streak of 13 seasons, it can hardly be a coincedence. 1992 -> Williams, Mansell, Newey 1993 -> Williams, Prost, Newey 1994 -> Bennetton, Schumacher, Byrne 1995 -> Bennetton, Schumacher, Byrne 1996 -> Williams, Hill, Newey 1997 -> Williams, Villeneuve, Newey 1998 -> McLaren, Hakkinen, Newey 1999 -> McLaren, Hakkinen, Newey 2000 - 04 -> Ferrari, Schumacher, Byrne 2005 -> Renault, Alonso ? The only odd year is 1997 when Newey had left Williams, but the car was still very much his design.
Interesting you should bring this one up. This is one of the very few innovations Ferrari have bought to the world of motorsport ... but do you know why? The reason this came about was not so much performance, but Barnard (yes it was him) was pissed having to design the chassis and then bolt up the engine/gearbox and then to try and work out the gear linkage ... thus this idea came from wanting to get rid of a mechanical gear linkage connection and thus make designing easier ... ofcourse it turned out to have other advantages once the technology improved. Yes apparently the first team to use what they refer to as female (or male) tubs, ie. there is no outer skin. Earlier F1 cars had carbon tubs (male) that then had a body fitted over it. The Benetton of MS's winning years was ahead of the game and now they all follow. Yes ... another conservative team. As you correctly say it is the designers that are the innovative people ... but it is NOT a coincidence that Ferrari have been the first on so few ideas. It is ALSO not a coincidence that the English dominate the sport. They bought fresh ideas to the sport and really took it over. Yes because the Poms stuffed around arguing about engine size change and Ferrari didn't ... they won, but the car was hardly innovative, just was closer to the complete package than the rest. Brabham did the same later when they changed to 3 litres ... even he would admit to having simplistic cars. Yes I can agree with you ... but it sure is interesting that they continue to have these issues. But I maybe reading too much into it Pete
The English dominate the sport because the following teams are located in England: Williams Renault BAR Honda McLaren Red Bull Jordan So when 60% of the teams recruit from 1 single pool for fresh employees it is highly likely that one pool dominates that market!!! The reason why you do not see many American engineers in teams is because they do not have access to local recruitment for F1! The whole... they bring fresh ideas.... is absolute crap! The English bring fresh ideas because 60% of the teams recruit them to bring fresh ideas!
Sorry Imperial my comments were regarding how the English took over the sport ... probably way before you were interested. That is WHY most teams are located in England. We had BRM, Cooper, Lotus and Coventry Climax who all simply took over the sport, and in Cooper and Lotus' case revolutionised it ... and brought the fresh ideas. Now that the most of the teams are located in England there is a whole industry and university, etc. supporting it ... and as much as we may not like it, England owns F1, and deserve too (if you read the history). Pete
Man, I think this stuff was made by Rory Byrne in the mid 80´s, even before the team was called Benetton. Nothing to do with those championship winning cars of Shumacher. But, well, yes, let´s admit that Benetton had one innovation. One in 20 years. Even Ferrari can equal that. Yep, I think that everybody often read too much into Formula 1. We usually forget that this is just a bunch of kids playing with cars.
Ferrari were the first to use wings (Spa 1968 I believe). The gearbox was in 1989. so yes, one in 20 years is about right (they were the first to win a manufacturers title with a turbo engine in 1982, but that doesn't count, does it?)
Yes BRM, LOTUS, Cooper and Climax were REAL RADICAL REAL REVOLUTIONARY and now they are REAL DEAD AND NON EXISTANT! Radical teams do not survive in F1. The may win a few titles and then they die out! Disciplined and stable teams with consistency stand the true test of time in F1! The fact is when 60% of the engineers are recruited from England, there is bound to be a majority of English in F1!
Well, BRM always failed with their radical cars... Cooper´s only strenght was their radical idea: when the big names copied them, au revoir... But hey, that blaze of glory deserves a place in history. Chapeau. ¿Lotus? That´s another story...
They are just trying to get time on the motor without building the entire car. A V8 has much different packaging than a V10, and to test it on the track fully, you need the new chassis to go along with it. This is still just testing, nothing to worry about. Some manufacturers still build one and two cylinder test engines for simulation work...
