F14-T- Development & News

[Ferris]

Do you think there are any serious issues. I know it's gut feelings but I do not think there are any serious unexpected issues. I think the recent test just may have shown who guessed closest to optimum engine maps and gearing for example. In Australia things can turn on there head as now they will be all crunching the numbers gathered on all areas of the cars and the optimum solutions will be in place for Australia. It will then be down to which cars are best and who can develop most. All we have seen thus far is who is closest to the start line and they will all be pretty level in development stages come the 1st race. Renault excluded as they appear to have deeper issues.

To be honest I think we are behind in a number of areas. My only real concern is with respect to fuel consumption as this is something that is harder to address and Ferrari seems to be talking about this more than other teams. There are a number of other areas where we are also behind but can be quickly clawed back and we wont be restrained from doing this also.

I am not worried on the aero side as clearly there is more to come there and we have good correlation (or so the team states). What I don't know is how good our software guys are in terms of integrating ICE with ERS delivery. This is very important for a number of reasons. Our "torque fill" algorithms do not seem to be at their optimum yet.

[Ferrari Rules]

Once again. There is no such thing as sandbaging with very limited testing!!!!

and what did Redbull do last year?

I know all is different but if the correlation is correct the simulator will also be correct, and with a working simulator you don't need to test for speed on track. what they needed to do they did, which was reliability testing!

Everything looks on track to me.. faith is the word.

[mark p]

To be honest I think we are behind in a number of areas. My only real concern is with respect to fuel consumption as this is something that is harder to address and Ferrari seems to be talking about this more than other teams. There are a number of other areas where we are also behind but can be quickly clawed back and we wont be restrained from doing this also.

I am not worried on the aero side as clearly there is more to come there and we have good correlation (or so the team states). What I don't know is how good our software guys are in terms of integrating ICE with ERS delivery. This is very important for a number of reasons. Our "torque fill" algorithms do not seem to be at their optimum yet.

With limited fuel flow i cannot see how the consumption is an issue. With unlimited flow it would be. Ferrari may well be talking about it as gameplan is fast race pace by not burning fuel with drag from df and where this equilibrium lies. RB went against the grain with extra short gearing with last set of rules?

[tifosi1993]

http://translate.google.com/translat...tempi-bahrain/

[vcs316]

http://translate.google.com/translat...tempi-bahrain/

That does sound encouraging. Hope its true

[Hornet]

and what did Redbull do last year?

I know all is different but if the correlation is correct the simulator will also be correct, and with a working simulator you don't need to test for speed on track. what they needed to do they did, which was reliability testing!

Everything looks on track to me.. faith is the word.

This year, the teams barely got enough testing. Ferrari said we were not able to do all the testing we wanted. So sand bagging would be a dumb thing to do.

Actually nothing is as accurate as testing on track. Correlation doesn't translate to substitute, there are many things that cannot be simulated in CFD or wind tunnel. Both CFD and wind tunnel focus on aero characteristic only, but the car's working involves many other mechanical characteristic as well which cannot be simulated.

Put it this way. Ferrari isn't the only team with smart people. If we claim sandbagging is advantageous, why won't our competitors. If it's not useful to put everything together and see what performance can be achieve, why are our competitors doing it.

[Nero Horse]

http://translate.google.com/translat...tempi-bahrain/

Wow, that does sound very interesting indeed and if it's really true then that would be simply wonderful!

[Ferris]

With limited fuel flow i cannot see how the consumption is an issue. With unlimited flow it would be. Ferrari may well be talking about it as gameplan is fast race pace by not burning fuel with drag from df and where this equilibrium lies. RB went against the grain with extra short gearing with last set of rules?

Limited fuel flow is only on the max flow limit. It sounds like Merc may be able to deliver the same amount of power using less fuel and therefore staying well under the fuel flow levels of the Ferrari unit. When you listen to the comments of Alonso and SD it is quite worrying. They are looking for ways save fuel under deceleration, warm up laps, pit stops, etc.

They are fuel savaging wherever they can while Bottas has stated that he had no real issues on fuel efficiency on his two race sims... That is a worrying sign if you ask me.

[brawnydog]

To be honest I think we are behind in a number of areas. My only real concern is with respect to fuel consumption as this is something that is harder to address and Ferrari seems to be talking about this more than other teams. There are a number of other areas where we are also behind but can be quickly clawed back and we wont be restrained from doing this also.

I am not worried on the aero side as clearly there is more to come there and we have good correlation (or so the team states). What I don't know is how good our software guys are in terms of integrating ICE with ERS delivery. This is very important for a number of reasons. Our "torque fill" algorithms do not seem to be at their optimum yet.

I'm a bit confused. I thought Ferrari was strong on the fuel consumption front. See http://grandprix247.com/2014/02/07/f...rise-mercedes/
It's also been stated that the engine is very light and compact which can only benefit fuel consumption. It's also been rumoured that Mercedes may not have the most fuel-efficient engine. They may set the pace in qualifying but may have to switch down the engine during the race.

I also don't think Ferrari is yet where they want to be with aero. The new wind tunnel is exactly that - new. Yes, it's correlating correctly now, but they've only had it working for a short time which means less time than other teams to perfect their aero. Just my opinion. We'll see in Australia. Can't wait.

[brawnydog]

This year, the teams barely got enough testing. Ferrari said we were not able to do all the testing we wanted. So sand bagging would be a dumb thing to do.

Actually nothing is as accurate as testing on track. Correlation doesn't translate to substitute, there are many things that cannot be simulated in CFD or wind tunnel. Both CFD and wind tunnel focus on aero characteristic only, but the car's working involves many other mechanical characteristic as well which cannot be simulated.

Put it this way. Ferrari isn't the only team with smart people. If we claim sandbagging is advantageous, why won't our competitors. If it's not useful to put everything together and see what performance can be achieve, why are our competitors doing it.

A team could sandbag if they have something to hide, such as Ferrari's controversial engine cover, which is in danger of being protested.
http://grandprix247.com/2014/02/21/m...-in-melbourne/

[Stormsearcher]

Everything looks on track to me.. faith is the word.

I tend to agree with this. I too feel we have been decent if not good in testing, which we havent really been last few years. I do get a feeling that its smoke and mirrors which the team is putting out to the media and we do have some pace we are hiding at the moment.
i think we will be pleasantly surprised come australia.

[Ferris]

I'm a bit confused. I thought Ferrari was strong on the fuel consumption front. See http://grandprix247.com/2014/02/07/f...rise-mercedes/
It's also been stated that the engine is very light and compact which can only benefit fuel consumption. It's also been rumoured that Mercedes may not have the most fuel-efficient engine. They may set the pace in qualifying but may have to switch down the engine during the race.

I also don't think Ferrari is yet where they want to be with aero. The new wind tunnel is exactly that - new. Yes, it's correlating correctly now, but they've only had it working for a short time which means less time than other teams to perfect their aero. Just my opinion. We'll see in Australia. Can't wait.

A lot of this is old news (a few weeks old which is old in F1 time) which given the information from the track during testing seems to suggest Ferrari is not in the most favourable position as originally outlined.

All i am saying is let's be realistic and not expect dominance nor expect disaster. There are likely area's that require more work, Ferrari has stated as much. The key is which area's require effort which cannot be addressed after the engine lock down. That is why i am largely concerned about fuel consumption as this will be harder to fix now that the engines have been locked down by the FIA.

All other area's, aero, software, etc. can be further enhanced as the season progresses.

We will be at the pointy end and have been pretty good on the reliability front; i would say even better than merc so we are no better than them on this front and certainly no worse.

[ALO]

" i think we will be pleasantly surprised come australia."... Yes I agree finally sucess soon to come

[Giallo 550]

Everything will be revealed in Australia.

[mark p]

Limited fuel flow is only on the max flow limit. It sounds like Merc may be able to deliver the same amount of power using less fuel and therefore staying well under the fuel flow levels of the Ferrari unit. When you listen to the comments of Alonso and SD it is quite worrying. They are looking for ways save fuel under deceleration, warm up laps, pit stops, etc.

They are fuel savaging wherever they can while Bottas has stated that he had no real issues on fuel efficiency on his two race sims... That is a worrying sign if you ask me.

To produce more power with less fuel means more power at same revs so more torque. With how tight the rules are I cannot see a night and day difference could occur. Even if one has a slight advantage the effect on fuel economy is likely very small. The biggest area i can imagine for power differences is thw engines integration with the ERS. If a differenc exists here it is possibly a mapping issue and with all the test data and analysis this week certainly possible to overcome by Australia if indeed an issue exists at all.

[FER]

Not everything actually. Red Bull's potential will be revealed as soon as they eliminate their engine problem, which could last some GPs. Lotus had some financial issues as well and they are a bit behind in develooping, so we could expect fast forwarding in the first third of the season.

[medeni73]

not so good thoughts about Ferrari from Leo Turrini...

" I'm worried ... ... .... Very worried. Honestly I was expecting something more, but I am afraid that in Maranello the watchword was: "first and foremost reliability because with that you win". Unfortunately it would seem that the latter is not at the level we had hoped (some too much failure) as well as problems remain with the perfect management of the PU, especially in torque (I saw footage of spectacular Tan idi Alonso and Raikkonen, but maybe pay rally, not in F1). Furthermore, as I have already written under the hood the day of presentation, from an aerodynamic standpoint, I haven't seen anything that has me excited ... ... ne in general forms, in particular that on other cars I have seen more attention. The two drivers have a warranty, but F1 is first and foremost speed ... ... ... ... If you can't find that, once you have placed all the troubles of engine could be yet another rude awakening"

[jgdswaran]

ROLLE, Switzerland, March 5, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Honeywell (NYSE: HON) Turbo Technologies will boost the engines of the Scuderia Ferrari Formula 1 car in 2014. Formula 1 is adopting a new rules package that requires cars to be turbocharged marking a new technical era for the pinnacle of global motorsport racing.

Honeywell will support the Scuderia Ferrari team with the unique technical challenge of moving to an all-new turbocharged 1.6L V6 engine from a 2.4L naturally-aspirated V8 configuration used from 2006 through 2013. This downsized 1.6L engine will produce the equivalent power of a production Honeywell turbocharged 16L commercial vehicle engine. The new downsized turbo engines are also designed with the latest in energy recovery technology to support other systems in the race car.

"To win in Formula 1, our powertrain system must have no weak links," said Luca Marmorini, Scuderia Ferrari Engine and Electronics Director. "To ensure that, we choose partners with impeccable reputations and experience in delivering innovative, high quality products and services. Honeywell's turbochargers helped us find the downsizing solutions we needed to meet the new rules without compromising the performance."

As Formula 1 adopts global passenger car trends for downsizing and turbocharging to improve fuel economy and emissions without sacrificing driving performance, its 2014 engine formula represents an exciting look at specific technologies -- including in the area of heat energy recovery -- which could shape more advanced passenger vehicles in the years to come.

"We are very excited to be collaborating with the most successful team in the history of Formula 1 on what is an extremely challenging new rules package which brings turbocharging to the forefront of this motor racing series once again," said Honeywell Vice President of Advanced Technologies and Motorsport Gavin Donkin. "Honeywell has a 60-year legacy of developing turbocharger technology leveraging our jet engines business within Honeywell. It continues to be a tangible point of differentiation for Honeywell Turbo to the point where we've joked with Scuderia Ferrari that given the sophistication of the turbos we are providing, that many of us consider them to be our lowest altitude aerospace customer."

Honeywell continues to be a leader in global turbo technology averaging 100 new turbo launches a year for global passenger and commercial vehicle applications in partnership with nearly every major global auto maker. In addition, Honeywell is supporting the industry with hundreds of applications already in its development pipeline.

About Honeywell Turbo Technologies

Honeywell Turbo Technologies (http://turbo.honeywell.com/) is the leading automotive turbocharger supplying technology solutions to nearly every major automaker and truck manufacturer in the world. The Turbo Technologies business is part of Honeywell Transportation Systems. Honeywell Transportation Systems enhances vehicle performance, efficiency and appearance through state-of-the-art technologies, world-class brands, and global solutions tailored for its automotive customers around the world.

Honeywell (www.honeywell.com) is a Fortune 100 diversified technology and manufacturing leader, serving customers worldwide with aerospace products and services; control technologies for buildings, homes and industry; turbochargers; and performance materials. Based in Morris Township, N.J., Honeywell's shares are traded on the New York, London, and Chicago Stock Exchanges. For more news and information on Honeywell, please visit www.honeywellnow.com.

Photo - http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20140305/LA76919

SOURCE Honeywell Turbo Technologies

/CONTACT: Michael Stoller, +1 734 392 5525, michael.stoller@honeywell.com; Liz Svilane, +32 (0) 2 894 90 14, esvilane@webershandwick.com

/Web site: http://turbo.honeywell.com

[f300v10]

Conformation the F14T was fastest in a straight line in winter testing:

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...n-8165979.html

[Ferris]

To produce more power with less fuel means more power at same revs so more torque. With how tight the rules are I cannot see a night and day difference could occur. Even if one has a slight advantage the effect on fuel economy is likely very small. The biggest area i can imagine for power differences is thw engines integration with the ERS. If a differenc exists here it is possibly a mapping issue and with all the test data and analysis this week certainly possible to overcome by Australia if indeed an issue exists at all.

The comments from Alonso and SD addressed two areas:
1. How Merc has managed to get more power given the fuel flow restrictions - This says to me that Merc do have more peak power than Ferrari which would be useful for qualy
2. Fuel efficiency and the need to find alternate ways and opportunities to save fuel as I outlined earlier.

I agree that the integration of the ERS is a fundamental development path but for me it is not a big issue as this is not something that is closed off with the freezing of the engines on the 28th of Feb. This is mainly software which can continually be upgraded.

So although ERS will go some ways to helping power delivery and fuel efficiency I don't think that by itself it is the silver bullet.
Peak power certainly is not something we can have much of an influence over now with the engines locked down so on power circuits (Monza, Spa, Canada, etc.) I don't expect Ferrari to fair well in qualy.

More will be known in a few weeks. Plenty of work to do and no doubt the team are doing it!

[Bubbles]

Niki Lauda said the Merc fuel engine produces 580 horsepower, meaning the extra overall power comes from the electric motor alone. I remember during the winter watching an interview somewhere with Luca Marmorini where he said their fuel engine produces between 600 and 650 horsepower. Now, that clearly means the Ferrari V6 is more powerful than the Merc V6. It also means that any power deficit Ferrari has is due to the ERS parts.

Even at 600 hp, Ferrari's got 20 hp advantage over the Merc engine. Now, if they could get that ERS to work properly...

EDIT: That's 55 hp deficit on ERS, and it could swing in Ferrari's favor fast, especially since the Merc doesn't seem to have any problems and they've been probably running close to full power during testing. If that's the case, then Merc should be affraid.

I still think the F14 Ts aero is garbage and Red Bull will steamroll the field once they solve their problems.

[Ferris]

Niki Lauda said the Merc fuel engine produces 580 horsepower, meaning the extra overall power comes from the electric motor alone. I remember during the winter watching an interview somewhere with Luca Marmorini where he said their fuel engine produces between 600 and 650 horsepower. Now, that clearly means the Ferrari V6 is more powerful than the Merc V6. It also means that any power deficit Ferrari has is due to the ERS parts.

Even at 600 hp, Ferrari's got 20 hp advantage over the Merc engine. Now, if they could get that ERS to work properly...

EDIT: That's 55 hp deficit on ERS, and it could swing in Ferrari's favor fast, especially since the Merc doesn't seem to have any problems and they've been probably running close to full power during testing. If that's the case, then Merc should be affraid.

I still think the F14 Ts aero is garbage and Red Bull will steamroll the field once they solve their problems.

Interesting, i would have thought they could get more from the ICE, hell my stock twin turbo V6 has similar HP to them. Now all i need to do is get the total weight down...

If the Ferrari ICE is indeed more powerful than the Merc, perhaps this is what is causing the problem for Ferrari as the power delivery is too "peaky". So whereas Merc uses ERS to deliver peak power, Ferrari needs to use ERS to smooth the power delivery.

Both approaches have their pros and cons but I think Merc's approach is more responsible in terms of getting a running start on the campaign as it means their software guys have less to do to make up for any torque bumps in the ICE. Ferrari's may prove valuable as the season progresses.

[Nero Horse]

I still think the F14 Ts aero is garbage and Red Bull will steamroll the field once they solve their problems.

Oh well then it must be true when it's coming from a "real aerodynamic expert" like you LOL...

Like I've already said previously, stop pretending like you know what you're talking about!

[Ferris]

Oh well then it must be true when it's coming from a "real aerodynamic expert" like you LOL...

Like I've already said previously, stop pretending like you know what you're talking about!

I agree. It is far too early to comment on aero. If you look at RB, their aero is very "plain" also but that probably means their base platform works very well that they don't need a plethora of aero appendages to further direct the air.

Only 11 more days people. Chill.

[Bubbles]

Interesting, i would have thought they could get more from the ICE, hell my stock twin turbo V6 has similar HP to them. Now all i need to do is get the total weight down...

If the Ferrari ICE is indeed more powerful than the Merc, perhaps this is what is causing the problem for Ferrari as the power delivery is too "peaky". So whereas Merc uses ERS to deliver peak power, Ferrari needs to use ERS to smooth the power delivery.

Both approaches have their pros and cons but I think Merc's approach is more responsible in terms of getting a running start on the campaign as it means their software guys have less to do to make up for any torque bumps in the ICE. Ferrari's may prove valuable as the season progresses.

I agree.

[Bubbles]

Oh well then it must be true when it's coming from a "real aerodynamic expert" like you LOL...

Like I've already said previously, stop pretending like you know what you're talking about!

I don't feel aerodynamic. ... but I guess you were trying to say "aerodynamics expert".

[Nero Horse]

I don't feel aerodynamic. ... but I guess you were trying to say "aerodynamics expert".

Whatever, just stop spreading your doom and gloom nonsense and stop pretending like you know everything! You don't know who has the best aerodynamic solutions, unless you work in F1 as an aerodynamics engineer, so you really need to stop presenting your arguments as fact. All you do is come here bash the team and talk about how bad and wrong everything is at Ferrari and how good and right everything is at Red Bull or other teams. Go to Red Bull forum and praise your beloved Red Bull there as much as you want, but stop talking ignorant made up crap about Ferrari.

[Kiwi Nick]

When a Romanian is correcting your use of English, things are getting serious.

[mark p]

The comments from Alonso and SD addressed two areas:
1. How Merc has managed to get more power given the fuel flow restrictions - This says to me that Merc do have more peak power than Ferrari which would be useful for qualy
2. Fuel efficiency and the need to find alternate ways and opportunities to save fuel as I outlined earlier.

I agree that the integration of the ERS is a fundamental development path but for me it is not a big issue as this is not something that is closed off with the freezing of the engines on the 28th of Feb. This is mainly software which can continually be upgraded.

So although ERS will go some ways to helping power delivery and fuel efficiency I don't think that by itself it is the silver bullet.
Peak power certainly is not something we can have much of an influence over now with the engines locked down so on power circuits (Monza, Spa, Canada, etc.) I don't expect Ferrari to fair well in qualy.

More will be known in a few weeks. Plenty of work to do and no doubt the team are doing it!

I think are thoughts are on the same wavelength i am playing devils advocat. Ferrari did have highest speed figures however. I know wing angles are crucial to this but i see know pictures of Ferrari with low wing angle v Merc with large wing angles and with current press reporting of Ferrari I would have thought a comparison like this would enable the press to shoot down Ferrari's top speed figures but no comparison wing angle pics....

[Kiwi Nick]

I think are thoughts are on the same wavelength i am playing devils advocat. Ferrari did have highest speed figures however. I know wing angles are crucial to this but i see know pictures of Ferrari with low wing angle v Merc with large wing angles and with current press reporting of Ferrari I would have thought a comparison like this would enable the press to shoot down Ferrari's top speed figures but no comparison wing angle pics....

The differences in wing angle settings are virtually imperceptible. Perhaps a centimeter or two of range. That is why nobody picks it up from photos. The affect is far greater than the image. Observers know whether a car is set for high or low down force by its times.

Of course this assumes that the team hasn't changed wings. It would be obvious if a team had cone to a Monza style rear wing vs. a standard wing. But adjusting the angle of attack on a front wing is very, very hard to see.