Ferrari F2012 launch

[Mike Rotch]

Well you're negativity is to be expected (particularly if it's Ferrari or Kimi Raikkonen ), as you wouldn't give props or have hope for Ferrari's 2012 challenger regardless of what it looked like...

And since when did aesthetics have any valid correlation to on track performance? Basically you're trying to imply that because the car has a rather awkward looking front nose cone shape (which is mainly a result of the new regs in that area), that the car is ugly and won't perform - which is all rather short sighted.

I don't see anything really inovative with Force India's nose. The nose dimensions are what you would expect to see given the new regulations. And Mclaren have always been pushing the boundries looking for outside the box solutions in the last decade or so... but how many WCC has it gotten them?

First of all, aggresive doesn't necessarily mean the car has to be revolutionary in outward apperence or have to have the latest silver bullet. Secondly, to judge only on what you've seen and know so far regarding the trickery of the car, is jumping the gun a bit (and basically judging a book by it's cover...in that we certainly don't know all of the secrets of the car or just how incredibly efficient the car might be aerodynamically).

Just from a simple outside perspective, the car is aggressive in that it will likely be one of the few, if only cars to use a pullrod front suspension, will likely be using exhaust energy to blow the rear brake ducts, has a massive venturi/funnel like area under the nose cone with massive uprights to guide a lot a large quanity of high energized air to the t-tray, an interesting diffuser/floor concept which the legendary Rory Byrne is said to have come up, and side pods and a rear end which is unique in shape (with the radiator cooling soultion as well) and extremely tidy.

Beyond that, I think this years Ferrari will be more aggressive/or pushing the boundries further in terms of maximizing the design/performance of each compenent, at the expense of pushing the reliability/strength envelope.

And being that Ferrari's main disadvantage was the exhaust blown diffuser last year and that underneath it all they actually had a very solid package (minus the tire issues...which will likely be resolved this year), they didn't neccesarily have to reinvent the wheel entirely to have a good shot at being succesful in 2012.

Good post.

I think it is amusing how people are equating looks with performance. One that basis, people espousing that view are expecting Caterham to outperform Ferrari I guess . I'd rather Ferrari save their aesthetic creativity for road cars, unlike certain silver liveried manufacturers who look like more akin to kit cars...

And as for claims of "copy and pasting" other's work, I'm not sure exactly who they copies blown brake ducts from, but again, a pretty baseless claim - when have F1 teams not followed the leader in using new advances? That goes all the way back to Benetton and the lifted nose.

The proof will be in the pudding at the first GP in 6 weeks time.

 

[Cowboys965]

What are Legos? I know what Lego is but Legos don't exist.

 

[nitrorocks]

The dip at the front is interesting.

 

[Bobert power]

To be honest. The F2012 looks like a ugly duck. But i would like to see them rack up some wins. (KILL RED BULL!)

 

[Peter.]

Oh, this again.

The plural of LEGO is not LEGOS, it is LEGO Bricks. LEGO themselves, don't like that people always say LEGOS, either.

 

[Alex.]

Thank god someone said it.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

And since when did aesthetics have any valid correlation to on track performance?

When didn't they? When was the last ugly car that actually won anything? And why is it that aesthetics suddenly mean nothing as soon as Ferrari produce an ugly car?

Basically you're trying to imply that because the car has a rather awkward looking front nose cone shape (which is mainly a result of the new regs in that area), that the car is ugly and won't perform - which is all rather short sighted.

I don't think the nose is awkward. I think the whole car is awkward.

 

[Peter.]

When didn't they? When was the last ugly car that actually won anything? And why is it that aesthetics suddenly mean nothing as soon as Ferrari produce an ugly car?


I don't think the nose is awkward. I think the whole car is awkward.

The last time an ugly car was succesful does not matter now. Why? Because the new technical regulations will make every car that has a stepped nose look ugly in our eyes. That all aside, looks do not matter at all in car success. Formula 1 Aerodynamics is meant to create the most downforce at the cost of as little drag as possible, not about which one looks best on our bedroom walls.

 

[Cowboys965]

Oh, this again.

The plural of LEGO is not LEGOS, it is LEGO Bricks. LEGO themselves, don't like that people always say LEGOS, either.

Thank god someone said it.

Oh, Alex's post confused me until I realized my error in Political correctness.

Hopefully this is a good car, I'd love to see Ferrari up on P1.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

But we'll know the championship results in 2 years!

I think the stepped nose will be king, Red Bull have been doing it for a few years now and its worked for them.

at the first part.

Also yeah, I have to say that it will help to a degree, there are plenty of other tricks teams are barely getting to that RBR have used for the past two years at least. Tricks that won them 4 world championships (2 WDC & 2 WCC)

very interesting, they are running with pull rod front suspension

Yeah they said they would at the end of last year, since it has been such a big hit with RBR and other teams. Not to mention there is one thing Ferrari were behind the times with and it was this key part, but the front suspension being pull rod is interesting. The rear should have been a given.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

delete

 

[Grand Prix]

When didn't they? When was the last ugly car that actually won anything? And why is it that aesthetics suddenly mean nothing as soon as Ferrari produce an ugly car?

Who cares what it looks like as long as it is quick? Sure, some of the most successful racing cars ever built had some kind of aesthetic quality to them, however, aesthetics are entirely subjective. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

Not to mention the two are a bit unrelated in nature as well... The boxfish, for example. Ugly to some but has a very low drag coefficient.

I've always thought F1 cars were a bit ugly since around 1990. Even then there were some very ugly cars in the late 70s (Lotus 79 excepted), and early 80s, but of course, this is all in my opinion. I don't watch the sport solely based on how the cars look. If I did, I'd probably have never started watching it.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

New Ferrari Explained

 

[niky]

Nice post from the Outlaw.

Yeah, aesthetics aren't going to tell us who's winning this year, since those noses are rules mandated.

For those who don't get it, rules mandate that your nose can only be yay high in front, and the bodywork can only be yay low at the wheel hub. This means that, in order to package the suspension, while still using the high nose configuration most teams prefer, the nose will have to be stepped... Or you'll have to alter the suspension geometry to work within a much narrower nose.

Still waiting for Scarbs... Perhaps we should invite him here with free Premium?

 

[Ardius]

See, I felt last year that Ferrari were too conservative and they weren't going to find the pace needed to win.
This year it looks better, more aggressive, but equally doesn't necessarily mean it will be faster. This could be a catastrophe like the F60 (very unlikely..but then no one predicted 2009).

Personally I prefer Ferrari being wildly aggressive than boringly conservative. It seems more in their nature to me, Ferrari is about being somewhat flamboyant even if it doesn't always mean success.

Its all pre-mature speculation at this point about how fast any of the cars will be. Its impossible to just look at a car and know how fast it will be. Certainly with the resources at hand, Ferrari should be a stable 3rd fastest at the very least - beyond that who knows?

Still think it has by far the worst looking front end so far. Probably doesn't help being all-red, as Force India's livery seems to compliment it a bit better.

 

[Sach]

If it's fast then it's fast, but at this point I dunno... Very strange looking.

 

[magpie1997]

I know f1 is not about the looks and I know the reason why the nose the way it is but why does a Ferrari look so ugly. If McLaren is fast then it will prove the ugly nose is not necessary. Hopefully RBR does not have the ugly nose

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The last time an ugly car was succesful does not matter now. Why? Because the new technical regulations will make every car that has a stepped nose look ugly in our eyes.

McLaren took the time to design a car that looks quite good. Ferrari's design reeks of "we'r only doing this because we have to, not because we want to".

 

[Mike Rotch]

McLaren took the time to design a car that looks quite good. Ferrari's design reeks of "we'r only doing this because we have to, not because we want to".

That entirely your opinion, unless you have some proof in the form of fluid dynamics that show the design is flawed or some notebook from one of the designers revealing this?

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Yeah they said they would at the end of last year, since it has been such a big hit with RBR and other teams. Not to mention there is one thing Ferrari were behind the times with and it was this key part, but the front suspension being pull rod is interesting. The rear should have been a given.

The other teams have been running pull-rod suspension on the rear of their cars, not the front which is why this is rather interesting.

 

[corporatesteve]

expect vortex generators in front of the step area, will be cool looking to see what gets added.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

 

[RX-7_FD3S]

I know f1 is not about the looks and I know the reason why the nose the way it is but why does a Ferrari look so ugly. If McLaren is fast then it will prove the ugly nose is not necessary. Hopefully RBR does not have the ugly nose

There's rumour around the net that the McLaren nose is illegal actually. Apparently the FIA inspector are gonna go to the test days in february and check a lots of stuff on the new cars (all manufacturer). So until then I wouldnt say this car is good or that one is not.

 

[gorsad]

This looks better then the F2012

 

[Hun200kmh]

Maranello, 3 February –This afternoon, the F2012 set off on its journey to make its track debut, scheduled for 7 February at Jerez de la Frontiera, in Andalusia. The only car available so far was launched this morning to all the fans of the Prancing Horse through the medium of the Maranello company’s website and was then returned to the Car Assembly area where the final touches were put to it. Then, at dusk, on a very cold day that actually did not see any more snow fall in the end, it was loaded onto a high-speed transporter which then left for Jerez.

It’s a long way to go, given the distance separating Maranello from the Spanish city is around 2,200 kilometres and it is due to arrive tomorrow night. Some members of the team will already be there awaiting its arrival, while the majority will fly out of Bologna on Sunday morning.

High Speed Transporter? These guys are poets!


EDIT - " ... was then returned to the Car Assembly area where the final touches were put to it ..."

I guess they mean all the illegal parts plus the missing illegal diffuser.

On a more serious note: These Jerez tests will be more about who is legal/who is not than about speed. Poor Charlie, lots of work to do next week .

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

High Speed Transporter? These guys are poets!


EDIT - " ... was then returned to the Car Assembly area where the final touches were put to it ..."

I guess they mean all the illegal parts plus the missing illegal diffuser.

On a more serious note: These Jerez tests will be more about who is legal/who is not than about speed. Poor Charlie, lots of work to do next week .

Poor Charlie indeed, what he deems legal may be deemed illegal by the FIA and vice versa. I always hated jobs where the top boss' words conflicted with the ruling of the local boss.

I still love how the diffuser wasn't shown but I could clearly see the FI diffuser

 

[Ardius]

I don't understand why the teams repeatedly make the mistake of taking Charlie Whiting's word as the word of the law. He can only give an opinion of what he thinks might be legal or illegal but he clearly does not know every little technical regulation off-by-heart. It seems most teams ask him if a particular part meets a certain regulation..but seem to forget there are other regulations and that Charlie is not going to have every answer.

Its a little annoying for people to keep moaning about how the FIA is inconsistent on this. To me its pretty consistent:
Teams ask Charlie if a part is ok.
Charlie says yes as far as he knows.
Another team/FIA notice said part is illegal.
Part is banned.

Perhaps we should instead moan about the teams not being able to read the technical regulations properly or trying to pass parts that they know already are illegal.

So yeah, poor Charlie haha.

 

[Griffith500]

Ignoring the stepped nose, I think the F2012 is OK looking, now that I'm getting used to it (ha; isn't everything like that?). However, I don't like the piggy-backed intake on the "airbox", nor the mohawk fin that trails it, but that's probably irrelevant. I really like the sidepods, they have a nice sculpting to their "undersides", almost boat-hull-like from the front, and the upper surfaces seem unique, too. I'm quite interested to see how their extreme focus on the front aero (as it affects the rear aero) pans out.

I'm also looking forward to the "bickering" and confusion over the regulations, especially regarding the stuff we haven't seen yet. I just hope it doesn't get too "political".

There's rumour around the net that the McLaren nose is illegal actually. Apparently the FIA inspector are gonna go to the test days in february and check a lots of stuff on the new cars (all manufacturer). So until then I wouldnt say this car is good or that one is not.

The regulations stipulate a maximum height (55 cm) for the nose forward of the front "axle", which is lower than that allowed from the cockpit up to the front axle (62.5 cm).
McLaren appear to have complied with this: presumably their nose structure is set at a height of 55 cm already at the front axle, which is why the step is missing. This means the nose is lower overall, and might mean they have compromised the quantity of air they can channel under the nose, around the sidepods and onto the diffuser, relative to a high-nose design like the Ferrari; this supposedly all depends on how well McLaren's under-nose "snowplough" works.

 

[ExigeEvan]

That entirely your opinion, unless you have some proof in the form of fluid dynamics that show the design is flawed or some notebook from one of the designers revealing this?

Airflows like pretty cars. That step isn't pretty.

However, one thing I will add is that perhaps some teams are using it to "throw" the air up and over the driver and into the air box.

 

[sumbrownkid]

But a huge "ramp" thing on the Ferrari just spells unnecessary drag for whatever downforce they are attaining.

The Mclaren looks like a conventional tried and true design of slippery aero, while the Ferrari reminds me of an oddity from past: Remember the Walrus nose on the BMW? I think it was the 2004 season?