Wow, that's strange. Really strange.
Wow, that's strange. Really strange.
Disappointing; 2009 to 2016...
What the hell is going on
So if we ran the upgrades knowing full well that it would result in DNF would that be the right decision?
Some people.....![]()
Forza Ferrari
Some moderators in this forum must be some Ferrari mechanic.
Disappointing; 2009 to 2016...
KR should improve ASAP.
"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."
If that is the case it would have been wiser to use 1 of our cars with all the new parts. We could then use that data for evaluation purposes. We panicked and overlooked that option possibly. This isn't the first time we have done this. Frustration is completely understandable. I think we're playing it way too safe.
Where does pettel comes from each time![]()
Dyno tests are working![]()
Exciting year, yayyy!![]()
From engineering point of view it seems a bit strange to put a lot of effort in designing several upgrades for a car and then notice that one basic element ie. temperature has not been modelled sufficiently or precisely enough in computer simulations or such. But better be safe than sorry.
"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."
It's not like we're going to get lots of points without these parts. Points would have been minimal. You've got to look at the risk/reward ratio. We've played it way too safe but ironically when it comes to race strategies at times we opt to take an extremely risky race strategy that have cost us dearly. Doesn't make sense. We could have run our engine on a lower setting to minimise the chances of a DNF but which driver is going to be willing to do that? We don't have Massa anymore.
Bookmarks