Reason: Ferrari lack of pace

[5vz-fe]

For that reason, Todt was unwilling to go deeper into the problem, and it’s not just a matter of more testing. “First we need to analyse because testing for testing’s sake doesn’t make us quicker. We need to analyse why on Friday we are competitive, why on Saturday we may lose performance and why on Sunday we definitely lose a lot of performance. We need to analyse why. To identify the problem is quite easy, to solve the problem is more difficult but that’s what we have to do.”

Source: http://f1.racing-live.com/en/headlines/news/detail/050712013630.shtml

I wonder if there are any chance that michellin compound that got laid down on the track is not too competitable with the Bridgestones. On Friday, teams are doing tire evaluation, thus they will not be run each set of tires alot. Saturaday however, after the teams have picked their tires, they will do durability test using what's left over on Fridays.

A racing line is formed when cars continously run on the same line over and over due to the rubber deposit. Since there are more Michellin cars out there then Bridgestone, it should make sense that Michellin contribute more to the racing line then the Bridgestone. If Brdigestone tires are not as gripy over Michellin tire deposit then Michellin themselves, it might explain why their pace keep dropping over the weekend.

I don't know...it might be crazy talk, but that's my thought.

[ZfrkS62]

if that was the case though, why has Ferrari/Bridgestone kicked everyone's ass the past couple years?

It really doesn't make a whole lot of sense that this problem would start now and not when michelin first came on board. Especially when the tires themselves are all made up of the same material anyway. the only real variances are cord construction, and manufacturing process :bah:

[5vz-fe]

I totally see what u are saying ZfrkS62, rubber is rubber....and shouldn't react so differently. But if Jean Todt say something like that, it is hard not to think that Ferrari might be running the same fuel load on Friday and Sunday but got a huge difference in laptime.

I just hope they find the reason..........and quick.

[irrational_i]

Well it would basically point to a sustained racing issue. Fridays and Saturdays they do not run such long stints.

Also the weather played a role here. It was much warmer on Sunday.
I think the Ferrari aerodynamics are not that great. Its not helping the tyres. The Mclarens are very good because the aero package works well with the tyres.
The Mclarens are easy on the tyres and thus are much more stable all the time.

Of course I am not saying Bridgestone is blameless, but as they all say - it's not really a single thing that's wrong. Its the whole package.

[szumszer]

well they can't possibly blame schumacher ... so let's blame the tyres ... or better yet, michelin

[ZfrkS62]

Well it would basically point to a sustained racing issue. Fridays and Saturdays they do not run such long stints.

Also the weather played a role here. It was much warmer on Sunday.
I think the Ferrari aerodynamics are not that great. Its not helping the tyres. The Mclarens are very good because the aero package works well with the tyres.
The Mclarens are easy on the tyres and thus are much more stable all the time.

Of course I am not saying Bridgestone is blameless, but as they all say - it's not really a single thing that's wrong. Its the whole package.

So you think if Ferrari grafted a pair of wings to the intake tower and made it look like a docked Imperial Shuttle Ferrari would again dominate :D I could just see that discussion at the wind tunnel :lol:

Brawn- "Seriously, if we brought in George Lucas to redesign our intake tower, we might just comeback!"

Todt -"Ross, have you been holding Star Wars marathons again?"

Brawn- "No"

Todt-"Shut up and eat your banana"

:lol:

well they can't possibly blame schumacher ... so let's blame the tyres ... or better yet, michelin

I think blaming the tires will only go so far. But i think the aero does have something to do with it.

They obviously stuck themselves behind the 8 ball this year on the aero front, but the tires i believe was 75% Bridgestone's fault and 25% Ferrari for not running enough tests to nail down a decent compound.

[5vz-fe]

its more then tires, sorry you cant say that this is the main reason far from it. its the damn aero on the car, its crap. they need to redesign the car for next year, and not just ad this and ad that, they need a whole new design.

We want revolution not evolution!!!!! Stop giving us the chicken Ferrari, we want BEEF!!!! :P

[ZfrkS62]

its more then tires, sorry you cant say that this is the main reason far from it. its the damn aero on the car, its crap. they need to redesign the car for next year, and not just ad this and ad that, they need a whole new design.

In the start of the season, fine, i would have given them the tire excuse, but yes, i do think the aero is their biggest issue. their engines are fine, the gearboxes have had a few little fits here and there, but my god has their aero package screwed them. They might be faster if they lost the wings and opted for parachutes :?

[ae86_16v]

^ But numerous articles had said that Ferrari's car is fine. . . it is actually one of the better cars on the circuit.

This is the first year that they are doing the one tire rule. So it could simply be that Bridgestone could not step up. . .

[ZfrkS62]

^ But numerous articles had said that Ferrari's car is fine. . . it is actually one of the better cars on the circuit.

This is the first year that they are doing the one tire rule. So it could simply be that Bridgestone could not step up. . .

umm i dont know, i havent read anything about wethere the aero is bad or good to be honest. but i dont think Ferrari would be talking about it either.

thier pace has dropped WAY TO MUCH, for it to be blamed on the tires alone.

i dont believe them on sec, and knowing Ferrari they tell anyone why they are lacking pace.

What else could it be then? I can't think of anything that would be more detrimental to a F1 car's performance than their aero. Unless there is something wrong with the fuel loading from friday to sunday..but that would only account for maybe one or two tenths. Certainly not a full minute or more.

what's the word on their power output compared to Mercedes and Renault? that may have a little to do with it as well, though tests have shown engine power to make negligble differences in lap times compared to downforce.

[SFDMALEX]

/\/\/\Im sure Ferrari has no problem with power. They have always had top engines.

I say its Aero and Tyres.

[ae86_16v]

Here you go. . .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4670399.stm

Schumacher said the car did not feel bad to drive but that it was not fast enough.

"The handling was not the problem, there was just no grip."

Many F1 observers believe Ferrari's problems are caused by their Bridgestone tyres, which are considered to be less competitive than the Michelins used by the other top teams.

The car, most believe, is among the best.

But even if it is as simple as aero. . . why would that slow down from Friday through Sunday?

[5vz-fe]

The aero prolly contribute a time offset, and the Friday thru Sunday is prolly due to the durability of the tires, there seems to be blister problems if u look at the post race pictures. Lose of grip means understeer and oversteer, leading to more blistering .... even more understeer oversteer...eventually Ferraribeinglappedsteer. :cry:

[ZfrkS62]

Here you go. . .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4670399.stm

Schumacher said the car did not feel bad to drive but that it was not fast enough.

"The handling was not the problem, there was just no grip."

Many F1 observers believe Ferrari's problems are caused by their Bridgestone tyres, which are considered to be less competitive than the Michelins used by the other top teams.

The car, most believe, is among the best.

But even if it is as simple as aero. . . why would that slow down from Friday through Sunday?

because aero can only compensate for so much mechanical grip

[|Nuno|]

After Silverstone and France, I'm pretty sure the tyres are the major concern. Not the only problem, but by far the most important.

I say this because first we had a shitty Qualifying pace, bad first stage of the race and then excellent performance towards the end of the race. (Imola, Spain, Monaco).

Then, with the introduction of the new Bridgestone tyres at the 'Ring, the Qualifying pace and the first stint of the race improved, but the pace towards the end of the race decreased a little bit. (Germany, Canada).

And now, again with the introduction of new tyres in France, Qualifying is okay and so is the first part of the race; the middle part of the race is now the peak, while the last part went from great to poor. (France, U.K.).


Notice a trend?



While trying to improve Qualifying pace (which happened), Bridgestone compromised race pace. I'm not blaming Bridgestone for everything, but I doubt the F2005 is a bad car. Maybe not as good as the McLaren, but ceratainly not as slow as it is showing.

The updates on the car also aren't being as effective as tought, and the reliability in the early races didn't help either, but right now, the tyres are the main reason why Ferrari hasn't been on top.

[SFDMALEX]

Reading Nunos post I came to a conclusion that it is the tires.

I say that because there pace varies too much, if it was their car alone, they would be slow the entire race, the entire weekend...etc

They are all over the map, pointing straight to the tires.

[ae86_16v]

Nice analysis Nuno. . . yeah let's hope Bridgestone could make one last effort into getting this car in Racing form.

[ae86_16v]

A quote from John Watson. . .

"What has become abundantly clear is people are always underestimating how good Michael is.

Probably a fairer judgement of where Ferrari are is where Rubens is - Michael is lifting the car and delivering performances above and beyond where the car is."

[jenkF1]

Watson is spot on

[ae86_16v]

So I guess after last weekend. . . all hope is finally gone.

[ZfrkS62]

Well, Kimi could always blow another couple of gear boxes and Alonso can still fuck up. I'm holding on to a little sliver light that is still at the end of the tunnel...i think

[Max Power]

^^^
when pigs fly

[zondaland]

The question mark that I would raise over the aero is as follows. Before the end of 2004 Ferrari had started testing their weird chin style front spoiler. When all of the other teams cars came out they had (to varying degrees) dips in the centre of the wings. All the teams were exploiting the same hole in the regulations. However only Ferrari chose to do so with the chin style front wing. Surely the other teams would have tried the Ferrari style of chins. So we can only assume that their data showed that they could get better results from a dip in the main profile of the wing. Over the last few years Ferrari have totally brained the opposition in the application of transient aerodynamics, perhaps on this occasion they stuffed up?

I just find it strange that they are the only team using that style of front wing.

[mindgam3]

I think tyres are a problem, but they're being blamed way too much for Ferrari's poor performance.

You have to bare in mind that there are new parts and tyres deisgned specifically for each race meeting and Bridgestone and Ferrari are developing constantly.

My view is there is just a fundamental problem with the balance of the car, just like williams who should also be battling at the front

[ZfrkS62]

at this point, i don't think BS or Michelin will be in favorable eyes when it comes time to decide wether to go to a single tire supplier for next year, or whenever they are talking about switching.

On Speed they were talking about how it now seems Toyota is at fault for causing the tire panic at the USGP for running too low pressures to gain grip. This came to light after William's problem in Turkey.


Bridgestone has let their runners down plain and simple. I think most of you have seen the F430 test on TG where it was about .5s slower than the 360CS simply because of the Bridgestones on the F430 compared to the Pirellis on the CS.

[ae86_16v]

after this last race Bridgestone has actually come out and said that its not really thier problem since the 2005 car was given to them 2 months late and that it didnt allow them enough time to test with the car, which can play a big role in things.

heck i think it was in the latest F1 mag, amongst all the articles they have little bit of info and there was one interesting bit of info. in about 9 months time michelin has run up some 350k miles in all testing and racing combined, while Bridgestone has only done 97Kmiles, (it might have beem km, none the less its all the same), now this is mainly Ferrari's fault as they have wanted a more exclusive partnership with thier tire manufacture and it finally has caught up with them.

hopefully, things will change in the future and it wont make a difference.

350k - for 9 teams

97k - for 1 team

I don't think it is mainly the testing. It could be that Bridgestone just did not have enough time, especially since the car was received late.

Bottomline, Michelin adapted better in the one lap qualifying plus one set tire rule than Bridgestone.

[360modenalover]

Didnt Ferrari also have a dramatic decrease in there operating budget for the 2005 Season?

[ae86_16v]

after this last race Bridgestone has actually come out and said that its not really thier problem since the 2005 car was given to them 2 months late and that it didnt allow them enough time to test with the car, which can play a big role in things.

heck i think it was in the latest F1 mag, amongst all the articles they have little bit of info and there was one interesting bit of info. in about 9 months time michelin has run up some 350k miles in all testing and racing combined, while Bridgestone has only done 97Kmiles, (it might have beem km, none the less its all the same), now this is mainly Ferrari's fault as they have wanted a more exclusive partnership with thier tire manufacture and it finally has caught up with them.

hopefully, things will change in the future and it wont make a difference.

350k - for 9 teams

97k - for 1 team

I don't think it is mainly the testing. It could be that Bridgestone just did not have enough time, especially since the car was received late.

Bottomline, Michelin adapted better in the one lap qualifying plus one set tire rule than Bridgestone.

its bridgestone 3 teams, and michelin 7 teams and i mentioned how bridgestone got the car late.

and the 350k and 97k, includes testing and races all in one.

That's right, I forgot about the 2 other teams. No, that's what I was pointing out, that you said they had the car 2 months late. I think that is probably a bigger deficit than anything else.

[RAMMIUS]

EVERYBODY KNOWS THE REASON :

http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=97508