F14-T- Development & News

[Gerhard Berger]

I would not mind Ferrari producing fundamentally the fastest car at the expense of reliability which can be ironed out later. 2010 Redbull was not reliable either but still won & later when all the reliability was ironed out, Red Bull dominated 3 years in a row.

You need reliablity from the start. There are only 5 engines next year, rather than 8. A couple of blown engines early in the season will put you in a very difficult situation. If you end up taking a 6th engine, you will get a 10 place grid penalty in the first race you use it, and a 5 place grid penalty in every other race that you use it. Same for a 7th, 8th etc. engine. We need to be fast AND reliable, just like we were 10 years ago.

[Rishu]

You need reliablity from the start. There are only 5 engines next year, rather than 8. A couple of blown engines early in the season will put you in a very difficult situation. If you end up taking a 6th engine, you will get a 10 place grid penalty in the first race you use it, and a 5 place grid penalty in every other race that you use it. Same for a 7th, 8th etc. engine. We need to be fast AND reliable, just like we were 10 years ago.

I was referring about the reliability caused by tight packaging & not engine but nonetheless your point is valid & engine reliability is even more important than ever.

[impactX]

So in reality, it makes perfect sense to make an engine that will only last 1 race but with 200hp more. Should be relatively easy to make up the 10-place grid penalty.

[stefa]

So in reality, it makes perfect sense to make an engine that will only last 1 race but with 200hp more. Should be relatively easy to make up the 10-place grid penalty.

On paper everything is possible, in real life....

[F1NAC]

So in reality, it makes perfect sense to make an engine that will only last 1 race but with 200hp more. Should be relatively easy to make up the 10-place grid penalty.

good idea but impossible. Engines will be frozen from 28th February onwards

[medeni73]

I was referring about the reliability caused by tight packaging & not engine but nonetheless your point is valid & engine reliability is even more important than ever.

I dont know how our bodywork will be tight but I was speaking of our engine that is according to rumours sleeker, tighter and maybe lighter than other 2 engines...Regardless of the bodywork it is unknown if that tight engine will be reliable (everything is vague cos we dont have many facts but people were discussing for example exhaust pipe that goes straight out of the engine on ferrari and by renalult and mercedes there are extra pipes leading to exhaust pipe that come out from the side of the engine making it bulkier but allegedly preventing some overheating problems...)

this is renault engine where u can see how bulky it is...


And this is our engine, very sleek and not many pipes on the side :)

[Ste]

Here's another small glimpse at the new teamwear:

[stefa]

Here's another small glimpse at the new teamwear:

Why does it say race driver no 3?! Didn't FA picked No 14?

[Ste]

Why does it say race driver no 3?! Didn't FA picked No 14?

This was uploaded on the 20th December 2013 and chosen numbers don't apply yet, since they aren't finalised.

[stefa]

This was uploaded on the 20th December 2013 and chosen numbers don't apply yet, since they aren't finalised.

Thank you for the explanation. Didn't know that

[mkable1370]

So in reality, it makes perfect sense to make an engine that will only last 1 race but with 200hp more. Should be relatively easy to make up the 10-place grid penalty.

Although I think common consensus is that this would be seen as a phenomenal risk, this is actually a very interesting and out-of-the box idea... If an engine manufacturer could design an engine with excellent in-race reliability to last the full race distance, but with the plan to replace the engine after each race, then this would be down to how much trust a team places in driver ability, race strategy, assumption of overall risks, etc. as to whether they would ever contemplate such a thing. Maybe it would never happen, but interesting none-the-less.

[Ferris]

The problem with this approach is that the regulations are always subject to change which would wrong foot Ferrari immensely as the years go on with this engine formula.

What I mean by this is the penalties for having to change your engine could be significantly increased each year as they have done in the past. So basing reliability, performance and penalty calculations on current regs is very dangerous when you have no control over the penalty regulations.

There has been much talk about Ferrari potentially using exotic materials in their engine. Given the regulations limit the flexibility in this area with respect to exotic light weight materials for engine construction; if there is any truth to these rumours of exotic materials and given the layout of the exhausts I would assume that they have some sort of technical edge in the heat sinking properties of the exhaust outlets.

Just compare the Renault design to the Ferrari sketch. Renault is clearly trying to both lower the centre of gravity and deal with the heat from the exhausts, while Ferrari has taken a more aero approach in keeping the lower areas around the engine block free for greater aero benefit. But there is a risk around the excessive heat over the engine. This had to be considered by the engineers and for this reason I believe they may have an edge around heat dissipation. The knock on effects in getting this right is tremendous.

Better heat management, leads to tighter packaging, leading to greater flexibility around aero form factor which should provide greater levels of rear down-force which will be key with such "torquey" turbos.

Looking forward to see how all of this develops.

[f1tomi8]

According to La Gazzetta dello Sport Jan-23. or 25. release the new Ferrari.

[stefa]

According to La Gazzetta dello Sport Jan-23. or 25. release the new Ferrari.

As late as possible, before first test

[Fer12]

Ferrari Push Rod setup for 2014.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...g-7967006.html

[gjoko-mkd]

Why, because now the front of the chassis is 10 cm lower then previous ,and pullrod at this situation will be more effectely

[Hornet]

Why, because now the front of the chassis is 10 cm lower then previous ,and pullrod at this situation will be more effectely

Well, only the nose tip needs to be lower though. The chassis can still remain high if the designer chose to do so. It may look weird, but if it provides better advantage, most team might do it.

[F1NAC]

Ferrari Push Rod setup for 2014.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...g-7967006.html

they marked pull rod wrong

[radosav]

Well, only the nose tip needs to be lower though. The chassis can still remain high if the designer chose to do so. It may look weird, but if it provides better advantage, most team might do it.

No no, the tube has to be lower to!

[Nero Horse]

Ferrari Push Rod setup for 2014.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...g-7967006.html

Push rod is better than pull rod setup, right?

[medeni73]

As late as possible, before first test

Then they should reveal it in Jerez one day before testing begins like Mercedes did it last time...

[gjoko-mkd]

No no, the tube has to be lower to!

Yes,this pictures shows that

[Hornet]

No no, the tube has to be lower to!

They can still make the step nose with vanity panel above it, like in 2013 right?

[Kyss4k]

They can still make the step nose with vanity panel above it, like in 2013 right?

There is no point in doing that. And even if they could, you can't have anything inside the vanity panel (suspension parts etc...).

[Hornet]

Edit: Nevermind. My bad I just realize that the max bulkhead height was 625mm in the past, while the new height will be 525mm. So the bulkhead should now be similar to McLaren's 2012 car, but the nose tip needs to be lower than McLaren's 2012 nose still, hence the elephant nose. That explains why the bulkhead is lower, but teams are still looking at ways to keeping it higher than what the FIA intended with sharply curving nose cone.

[gjoko-mkd]

I think that every f1 car in the 2014 will be more or less similar with Mclaren Mp4-18

[Hornet]

I think that every f1 car in the 2014 will be more or less similar with Mclaren Mp4-18

That's a very good example, especially the front nose

Here's what Caterham nose may look like based on their crash test video, very similar to that McLaren
40ZNx.jpg

[stefa]

Then they should reveal it in Jerez one day before testing begins like Mercedes did it last time...

Off course! There is no need to rush with presentations as that was the case in 90's and early 2000, when there was unlimited testing.

[stefa]

I think that every f1 car in the 2014 will be more or less similar with Mclaren Mp4-18

I don't mind this look at all!

[Kristof_F40]

Quick question: how are the rules about "an extra engine"? Is it when you use your 6th engine, or can you simply say during the season this is our 6th engine, while you haven't used your 4th and 5th?
It may sound stupid, but, if you can "choose the number of the engine", you can use the extra engine when you already have a penalty or bad qualy and when you're weekend is already spoiled...