Ferrari’s next upgrade can’t come too soon for Alonso

2014 F1 season

Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Albert Park, 2014The battle of the three-pointed star was the lead story at Monaco. No banal soundbite, inconvenient speck of grit or tell-tale twitch of the steering wheel was exempt from scrutiny if it involved Lewis Hamilton or Nico Rosberg.

While all that was going on Fernando Alonso’s endeavours in the Ferrari were widely overlooked. But there was significance in his performance in the cockpit and actions outside it.

He began the weekend by suggesting to the press, in not so many words, that it might be nice if his own team spoke as highly of him as Daimler chairman Dieter Zetsche, who had described him as “perhaps the best driver” in Formula One.

Ferrari’s media team snapped into action: “Fernando is the best driver in the world, who always gives 200% in the races,” gushed president Luca di Montezemolo in a statement hurriedly issued to the media.

This PR fire-fighting, conducted with all the composure of a roller-skating elephant, has become typical of Ferrari. Last year Alonso replied half-jokingly to a question about what he wanted for his birthday by saying “a car like the others”. Again the knee jerked and another statement from Montezemolo appeared in which he publicly hauled his star driver over the coals for a inconsequential remark few had noticed until Ferrari decided to broadcast it with a megaphone.

Luckily for Ferrari there are no points for press releases. But points are awarded for winning races, and Ferrari aren’t doing much better at that right now.

Ferrari made no secret of their unhappiness with the previous generation of F1 rules, which they felt rewarded aerodynamic performance at the expense of engine development. With the advent of the new V6 turbo engines that is be longer the case, but where do Ferrari currently rank among F1’s engine builders? Third, trailing both Mercedes and Red Bull-Renault.

It took a near-flawless drive from Alonso, capitalising on a little intra-team tension between the Red Bulls, to claim Ferrari’s only podium of the season so far in China. But it didn’t come soon enough to keep team principal Stefano Domenicali from resigning his position, after the team began another season on the back foot.

On paper, 2014 was supposed to be the year of Mercedes versus Ferrari. As the only two teams to manufacture both their chassis and engine, the new rules should have played into their hands. That’s exactly how it worked out for Mercedes, but Ferrari have been a huge disappointment.

Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Monte-Carlo, 2014In the meantime Alonso has been doing his thing, extracting no less from his car than what it is capable of. Shortly after Montezemolo lauded his driver’s “200%” commitment, Alonso demonstrated exactly what his boss was talking about. On a slippery track during the second practice session in Monaco he danced his Ferrari between the barriers to displace Mercedes at the top of the times sheets.

What a race we’d have seen if that had happened during qualifying. Alonso produced another top-drawer effort in Q3 as well, lapping an impressive seven-tenths quicker than team mate Kimi Raikkonen. He finished the race a lonely fourth after a fault developed on his car’s power unit.

Alonso is contracted to remain at Ferrari for another two seasons after this one. That deal was announced four races into 2011, not long after Alonso had narrowly missed out on winning the championship in his first season with the team, and at the time it must have seemed greater success was just around the corner.

Three years later things look very different. Alonso turns 33 next month, he’s surely closer to the end of his F1 career than its beginning, and he must be increasingly concerned that his championship tally stands at two world titles and three near-misses.

So the rumours of approaches to Red Bull last year and Mercedes this year will have surprised no one. Particularly as Hamilton’s move to Mercedes in advance of the new engine regulations was, with the benefit of hindsight, exquisitely well-timed.

Which engine manufacturer offers Alonso the best chance of finally taking that long-overdue third title in the latest generation of cars? The best options with Mercedes and Renault power appear closed to him for now. A return to McLaren, who will reunite with Honda next year, would be a surprise given the acrimonious circumstances of his departure seven years ago.

But remaining committed to Ferrari is not without unknowns following the arrival of new team principal Marco Mattiacci, who Alonso has admitted needs to be given time.

Now would be a good time for Ferrari to show Alonso they have not been left behind by the latest rules change, nor ventured down a development dead-end as they have done in recent seasons.

The next two races are at circuits where engine power is crucial: the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve and Red Bull Ring. Significantly Ferrari are promising their latest upgrade, which is expected to include engine developments, will make them “a good step faster”.

It needs to be. Because while on one level this is just another step in the constant development of the car, it has deeper significance. Any doubts Alonso might be having must be calmed; he needs faith that he’s pledged his future to the right team.

2014 F1 season


Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image © Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

Advert | Go Ad-free

91 comments on Ferrari’s next upgrade can’t come too soon for Alonso

  1. Osvaldas31 (@osvaldas31) said on 1st June 2014, 11:10

    Yeah, but all aerodynamic upgrades usually don’t work. Massa cheekily mentioned it earlier this season. Ferrari are just throwing lots of money with no results. They need to be more efficient, if they are to succeed.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 1st June 2014, 11:27

      Well, so far this season they have had better results with the parts they brought. But they just don’t have enough of it nor are they improving on the engine front as fast as Renault has done since an abysmal start @osvaldas31!

  2. WilliamB (@william-brierty) said on 1st June 2014, 11:20

    And yet, as the reputation of Ferrari’s technical team grows ever worse, Alonso’s is inversely getting better with each race as he looks set to add Kimi Raikkonen’s name to the list of teammates he has blown into the weeds. In every other point in history a floundering team holding back a great driver would be the formula for a team change, but after the musical chairs of 2013 at the head of the field the music has now stopped and Alonso will find it difficult to find himself in a championship challenging car any time soon. McLaren-Honda-Alonso? I still feel that this is very unlikely, and will certainly not happen for next season. Certainly, if Honda can boast McLaren’s performances substantially then maybe an approach will be made regarding 2016, but McLaren have failed to make the most of the Mercedes powertrain, so why is Honda going to improve things?

    • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 17:28

      @william-brierty

      but McLaren have failed to make the most of the Mercedes powertrain, so why is Honda going to improve things?

      To be fair Mclaren failed to capitalize on the Mercedes power train is not their faults, Toto Wolf said at the beginning of the season that Mclaren will get special treatment to prevent them of transferring relevant data to Honda. Mercedes may be supplying customers teams with basic software versions, i doubt that any customer team will be treated like Mercedes AMG in this matter.
      Mclaren is clearly down on fuel and lubricant which proved to be a key performance element in the new era, Unlike Petronas, Mobil F1 were not aware of the Mercedes PU details from the beginning of the project so that it can produce fuels and lubricant that can extract the maximum out of the PU.
      I give you an example, Shell developed more than 40 types of Fuel for Ferrari PU, the increase of top speed reached in the Chinese GP were down to Shell’s efforts.
      All the Mercedes customers teams were not aware of the clever turbo/compressor separation solution which can help in terms of packaging, they were surprised with it and have to adapt their chassis to suit the PU

      • Breno (@austus) said on 1st June 2014, 21:42

        And despite all that, Mclaren are tied with Williams, behind Force India. They are possibly the slowest Mercedes-powered team in the grid, and that should be down to aerodynamics.

        And even though they have the Mercedes engine, they are much slower than Red Bull (and their Renault PU) and Ferrari.

  3. Nick (@nick-uk) said on 1st June 2014, 11:25

    I used to dislike Alonso a lot. Now it’s just painful seeing someone of his talent in such an under delivering team. It’s such an injustice he hasn’t won more titles yet.

    • Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty) said on 1st June 2014, 12:57

      Would Alonso be the first to win the championship under 3 different engine rules if he won a WDC with the 1.5L V6 turbos?

      Of course, he already has 2005 with the last year of V10s, and 2006 with the first year of V8s.

      • Mashiat (@mashiat) said on 1st June 2014, 13:20

        I think Fangio won with 3 different engines as in those days you could use whatever engine you wanted.

        • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 1st June 2014, 19:30

          @mashiat @udm7 You’re both wrong but for completely different reasons. Udm 7 as mashiat pointed out Alonso would not be the first since Fangio has done it already. Mashiat you’re wrong since the only thing that was strictly regulated in the 50’s were the engine rules. For example, in 1954 Mercedes could even use closed wheel cars. But the only engines they could use were either 2.5l normally aspirated or 0.75l supercharged. Which basically meant a single engine formula as no one would be stupid enough to go for the 0,75

        • matt90 (@matt90) said on 1st June 2014, 22:23

          4 if you count the addition of a supercharger as a ‘different’ engine. Inline 6, 8, 8 with a supercharger, and V8.

      • Fsoud (@udm7) said on 1st June 2014, 15:57

        He would, but its unlikely he will.

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 1st June 2014, 22:27

        No. As above, there was Fangio. But also Piquet and Senna had different numbers of cylinders for all 3 of their championships.

    • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 13:41

      Well, people always say, especially with regards to Alonso, how its not just the outright speed and on-track capabilities that makes a driver great, but the off track political capabilities, on-track consistency, strategic capabilities etc.

      But, if had been able to beat Hamilton consistently on track, and had not fallen out with the team he would have had an almost guaranteed WDC title in 2007, great chance of one in 2008, better chance in 2010 than he had at Ferrari and another great chance in 2012.

      Other teams often praise his abilities, as they do of almost all other drivers if asked, and talk about how they could have him as a driver, but how much of it is just PR. I can not help but think that almost all of it is just empty words, and that in reality he has no other open doors for him in a top team.

      If it wasn’t for his involvement in the 2007 “spy-gate” and the general falling out with the team, he in all likelihood would have had the option to stay at McLaren, and how many other doors closed on him as a result?

      And how many doors were closed on him as a result of the biggest brown skid mark he left on the sports history, his 2008 Singapore win. Would any Renault powered team take him after that (on top of the 07 shenanigans)?

      It seems like his commitment to live out his career at the FIA F1 WDC ex-champions’ retirement home -Scuderia Ferrari, is more of a situation he has put himself in, rather than chosen.

      With these considerations in mind, I think the “best overall driver” having to stay hostage at Ferrari, the team that is ready to do absolutely anything to win, except build a fast car, it seems at the moment, is a case of: You get what you deserve!

      And I still dislike him, mostly for his need of his team to give him unfairly preferential pit strategies, give teammates intentional penalties, or otherwise sabotage their races, so that the “best overall driver” can come out on top.

      • Steph (@stephanief1990) said on 1st June 2014, 14:26

        great chance of one in 2008

        How on earth did he have a chance at the WDC in 08 when he could only win one race in that dreadful car when Renault made Piquet crash?

        Alonso has had offers from other teams – he famously turned down the chance to drive at Brawn – and the team bosses have voted him as the driver of the season in almost every year since 06 iirc.

        • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 14:35

          “How on earth did he have a chance at the WDC in 08 when he could only win one race in that dreadful car when Renault made Piquet crash?”

          If he stayed at McLaren, he would have had a chance. And if not for the hissy fit, that would have been the case.

          “Alonso has had offers from other teams – he famously turned down the chance to drive at Brawn – and the team bosses have voted him as the driver of the season in almost every year since 06 iirc.”

          Yes, it is all these “honors” that separate the good from the great, not the real world results.

      • Fsoud (@udm7) said on 1st June 2014, 16:03

        You forget that had Alonso not decided to switch to McLaren for 2007 and went to Ferrari (He signed for McLaren after 2005 season, Raikonnen left them sometime in ’06 when Ferrari decided to retire Schumacher) he would have had a Massa as a teammate. More importantly, he would have got the best car in 07 and 08 and had a great chance in 2010 (things wouldve settled down by then).

      • WilliamB (@william-brierty) said on 1st June 2014, 16:19

        @mateuss – You forget that Alonso was one of the foremost candidates to replace DC after he retired at Red Bull (he was also approached by Honda), but instead remained at Renault holding out hopes for he dream move to Ferrari in 2010. The decision not to go to Red Bull cost Alonso four world titles, perhaps even five, as I imagine that Alonso in the RB5 would have given Button a better run for his money than Vettel did. That said, even with the presence of Newey at the team, the team’s performances had not been good enough to catch the eye of Alonso in 2008, and were being profoundly beaten by their Ferrari-powered junior team at the time too. So whilst it is Alonso’s fault that he has not won more world titles, in 2008 the choice between Red Bull and Ferrari was a fall gone conclusion.

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 1st June 2014, 22:28

        better chance in 2010 than he had at Ferrari

        I remember analysis showing that Ferrari actually had the 2nd fastest car that year.

  4. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 1st June 2014, 12:29

    I was reading in F1 Racing Magazine today that almost all of Ferrari’s problems this year stem from their power unit. Not their aerodynamics.

    Apparently their car isn’t too far behind the like of Red Bull and Mercedes in terms of cornering speeds.
    It’s just their engine lacks power and efficiency.

    • Iestyn Davies (@fastiesty) said on 1st June 2014, 13:00

      If the car is now solved under Allison, Fry etc., who can Ferrari turn to to improve their power unit? Ex-BMW employees? They are reliable, but not fast enough at the moment it seems. This could pay dividends late in the year with others blowing up, but I can easily imagine reliability not being an issue this year now…

    • djdaveyp85 (@djdaveyp87) said on 1st June 2014, 13:01

      The engine unit itself is apparently hideously overweight. No fix for that until the off season!

    • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 14:46

      @tophercheese21
      James Allison himself admitted that Ferrari isn’t on the same level with RBR and Mercedes in terms of chassis. Aerodynamically speaking the F14T which was designed by Fry and Tombazis has a conceptual defect, the narrow side pods are not working like expected. The thing is Ferrari has an innovative cooling system which theoretically can help the packaging (the inter coolers are situated inside the V of the engine) but the designers or whoever designed the car didn’t capitalize on it, the side pods are not helping to direct the airflow to the diffuser and they also are not reducing the drag, Sauber faced the same problem last year with the super compact C32 that have very tiny side pods, the car only came alive in the second half of the season where all the rear has been revised.
      So what James Allison found when he joined Ferrari a car that have drag, no downforce and a heavy PU (the designers thought that the weight penalty of the cooling system could be out shined by the aerodynamic gain from the extreme packaging) with integration problems between the MGU-H and the MGU-K. So its not only a PU problem for Ferrari

  5. Kim Philby (@philby) said on 1st June 2014, 13:06

    The funny thing is that their roadcars have the best N/A engines bar none, and after reading the reviews of the latest Ferrari California T -the first turbocharged ferrari- in 27 years it seems they have done an outstanding job there as well. Either the other companies don’t put much effort in their road division or Ferrari just can’t work its magic in 6 cylinders.

    • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 14:05

      Ferrari road car engines are big old, loud dinosaurs. Those are qualities that may be good, in a “money is not a question”, “look at me” super car, but efficiency and sophistication have not been their strong points, that has also been reflected in their less-efficient F1 engines.

      In fact, their inefficient engines may be the biggest reason refueling was re-introduced, because they heavily campaigned for it, for the reason it would benefit them, so they can run the races at full power, as they were loosing out to others in this regard.

      I think, as of now, efficiency simply is not a part of that Ferrari magic you speak of.

      • Corrado (@corrado-dub) said on 1st June 2014, 14:44

        “Ferrari road car engines are big old, loud dinosaurs.”

        Dude, do you really know something about cars, in general ?!? Ferrari, just like most things related to Italy in general, have something old-school, yeah, but saying that Ferrari’s engines are big, old and loud dinosaurs… is a naive statement, if not worse. They’re not the most avangardistic car company for sure, but they’re up to the current times for sure too. Watched lots of reviews and haven’t heard anything even slightly close to what you say. Actually, for certain Ferraris, the engine is 1 of the car parts that was better than what the competition offered.

        • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 15:12

          Just because driving a Ferrari is a an overall great experience, does not mean that every single thing about the car is “the best”, newest etc.

          Of course they are not steam-engine old, but they are almost never the on frontier.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automotive_superlatives

          Only meaningful entries on these lists for Ferrari are the highest specific torque for a N/A car. Even a small, one man run, Swedish company builds more advanced engine technology.

          Are Ferrari engines not big? 599- 6L V12, 458 – 4.5L V8, LaFerrari-6.3L V12, F12, 6.3L V12.
          How is this not big?

          Are they not dinosaurs?
          What is their best MPG? LaFerrari does 16.6 mpg. Porsche 918 does over 75 mpg!

          • matt90 (@matt90) said on 1st June 2014, 22:44

            Only meaningful entries on these lists for Ferrari are the highest specific torque for a N/A car.

            That’s wrong. They also have most powerful N/A engine. But anyway, why would Ferrari appearing or not on a very limited list of superlatives matter?

            And the mpg figure for the Porsche isn’t at all representative of normal driving.

        • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 15:40

          @mateuss
          I have a feeling that for patriotic reasons you’re trying to bash Ferrari for anything they made.

          Are Ferrari engines not big?

          This is absolutely silly, i have never saw an Asron Martin or a Mercedes AMG or a BMW M or any other supercar running a 4 cylinder engine, just review please your knowledge about supercars.
          The LaFerrari is the most extreme,advanced and close to F1 road car ever build, it wasn’t meant to be the most efficient, can you find any performance metric in which the 918 is better? no you can’t.

          • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 17:43

            @tifoso1989
            “This is absolutely silly, i have never saw an ASTON Martin or a Mercedes AMG or a BMW M or any other supercar running a 4 cylinder engine, just review please your knowledge about supercars.”

            Aston Martin engines are also big old dinosaurs, AMG also has some, but so what? Are you saying I am wrong, because what I said can also be attributed to other cars? In what world does that make sense? It’s like you are trying to be incredibly defensive about Ferrari, which I would not had expected given your impartial name and avatar…

            I’ll remind that you did not address my question, “are Ferrari engines big?”, but instead danced around it.

            And anyway, AMG also has a 4 cylinder diesel hatchback (which has the most powerful engine in the world for its size and type). And the M4 has a 3L 6 cylinder turbo, and the next ones are going to be 4 cylinder.

            “The LaFerrari is the most extreme,advanced and close to F1 road car ever build, it wasn’t meant to be the most efficient, can you find any performance metric in which the 918 is better? no you can’t.”

            918 isn’t the only other car! But yes I can, I did not even have to go further than the very first thing! 0-100k times: LaFerrari – 3.0s, 918 – 2.5s. This is a huge difference by the way.

            Here is another interesting one: specific output: LaFerrari – 152bhp/litre, McLaren P1 – 237bhp/litre, 918 – 190 bhp per litre. Again big difference! And this stat just reinforces what I said all along, Ferrari engines are big and less efficient and powerful for their specific size!!!

            http://i.imgur.com/7hb8aav.jpg

          • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 17:58

            @mateuss
            I liked the fact that you’re using statistics to prove your point but when you’re using unreliable stats the debate with you becomes absolutely irrelevant
            LaFerrari 0-100<3s and not equal to 3s big difference.
            On paper all the cars you have mentioned can be better than LaFerrari but there is something which you don’t get on paper, which is the special feeling a Ferrari can deliver, just remember Mclaren said that the Mclaren Mp4-12c is better than the Ferrari 458 in every measurable way, but when it was tested against the 458 it wasn’t even on the same level. You can google it if you like
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahsIOVx93zs

          • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 18:14

            @tifoso1989 Ohh please, you are the one who asked “can you find any performance metric in which the 918 is better? no you can’t.”

            Both Porsche and Ferrari are conservative in making 0-100 claims, there is no point in specifying “less than”. And specific power output can not be argued with. So either way you were wrong when you so baldly claimed “can you find any performance metric in which the 918 is better? no you can’t.”
            Hence I linked you to this:http://i.imgur.com/7hb8aav.jpg

            My argument had nothing to do with feelings! (they are extremely subjective and depend on the person).

            And I’ve seen the clip, I do watch Fifth Gear. And I’ve seen all the reviews there is about the LaFerrari, I know what people are saying about it, how it is awesome, fast, powerful, well sorted car. But one thing they are not saying about it is how small the engine is, or how low MPG it has. Nor have I heard of any breakthrough engine technology in it.

          • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 20:25

            @mateuss

            Nor have I heard of any breakthrough engine technology in it

            Chassis
            Architecture
            Vehicule Dynamics
            HY-KERS

          • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 21:39

            @tifoso1989 Don’t give me links to Chassis, this was only ever about the engines.

            Aaaand still I don’t see anything breakthrough.

            It’s just well refined technology pushed to a high degree. First combustion-electric hybrid was built in 1900 by a Belgian, and the current resurgence of hybrid technology was facilitated by other companies such as Toyota, Audi, Honda and others after the Clinton Administration announced a government initiative called the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles in 1993! The Toyota Prius was introduced to the Japanese market in 1997.
            Development of battery technologies has played the biggest role I think.

            If there is some other specific new never before seen technology on that car you wanted to mention, please do. I love that kind of stuff, it’s part of my love for F1, all the technicalities and stuff…

            (Source: http://www.hybridcars.com/history-of-hybrid-vehicles/)

      • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 15:06

        @mateuss

        Ferrari road car engines are big old, loud dinosaurs

        Strangely they have one the performance engine of the year in the last 3 years, how cool is that !!!!

        but efficiency and sophistication have not been their strong points, that has also been reflected in their less-efficient F1 engines.

        I’ll give you one example the Ferrari 458 Italia can deliver 570 BHP @9000 RPM and has a fuel consumption rate of 13.3L/100km and a CO2 emission rate of 307g/km which is unique in sports car industry , all the other Ferrari models follow the same line in terms of performance and efficiency. Your claim is absolutely false, i don’t know from where you get it.
        The thing is Ferrari has not been doing great in F1 since 2009 by its own standards, but the brand is as strong as ever, only 11 brands in the world have an AAA+ rating and Ferrari is in fact the first of these brands, according to Brand Finance Ferrari is the world most powerful brand, i don’t know if you will still believing your claim after this !!

        • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 15:07

          Strangely they have one

          Sorry won not one

        • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 15:34

          I addressed some of the points in my other reply.

          Firstly, you sound like you are just quoting some PR dribble.

          Unique… yeah right:D

          Having a great performance engine is not the same as having advanced an efficient one, I said this to begin with.

          And what has a brand rating have to do with anything. In fact, that is something that would make me suspicious of those awards, the fact that a popular brand name can affect the results. And why is there no Ferrari in the “green engine” or “new engine” or “International Engine of the Year Award” or many of the others, of they are so uniquely efficient :D

          Ferrari being the somthing or other has no relevnce to what I said.

          Their inefficient big V12 engines in F1 is a documented fact.
          Their smallest displacement is what, 4L?

          And by comparison the Porsche 918, does 79 g/km of CO2 and fuel consumption is 3.3 L/100 km. And it has 887 horsepower (661 kW), so I can not but lough when you say:
          ” which is unique in sports car industry ” LOL

          • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 15:48

            And why is there no Ferrari in the “green engine” or “new engine” or “International Engine of the Year Award”

            Because they have simply won the ” the performance engine of the year award”
            Can an actor wins both the oscar of the best actor and the best director when he is only acting ?

          • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 16:39

            Well that was my point!!! They can not win those categories because they are not small, not new and not efficient!

            “Can an actor wins both the oscar of the best actor and the best director when he is only acting ?”
            If only then no, but they can do both, from Wikipedia:

            “Eight people have been nominated for both Best Director and Best Actor for the same film. Warren Beatty did so twice (Heaven Can Wait and Reds), as did Clint Eastwood (Unforgiven and Million Dollar Baby). The other six included: Orson Welles (Citizen Kane), Laurence Olivier (Hamlet), Woody Allen (Annie Hall), Kenneth Branagh (Henry V), Kevin Costner (Dances with Wolves), and Roberto Benigni (Life Is Beautiful). “

          • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 17:02

            @mateuss
            I knew that you will post the list of actors that won the Oscar as an actor and director in the same time that’s why i said

            Can an actor wins both the oscar of the best actor and the best director when he is only acting ?

          • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 17:11

            @tifoso1989 I said that no they can not get an award for something they have not done! Just like Ferrari have not been making small, “new” or efficient engines!

            But that does mean others can not do those things, or even do those things simultaneously, which was my point.

            Have we arrived at the point where you admit to be in agreement with my initial statement?

          • anon said on 2nd June 2014, 7:14

            You do realise that the reason why the Porsche 918 has such impressive figures on paper is because Porsche manipulated the test process?

            Because the emissions tests allow the manufacturers to use a car with a fully charged battery, the figure that was obtained was based on the car doing most of the test on its battery – when Porsche did the test with the car running just on its engine, the fuel consumption shot up to over 11 litres/100km.

            Also, your figures for specific output are completely wrong given that you have added the combined power of the internal combustion engine and the energy recovery systems, not just of the engines.

            The 4.6 litre V8 engine in the Porsche 918 is claimed to produce 608bhp, whilst Ferrari claims 789bhp from their 6.3 litre V12 – the actual specific output for each engine is therefore 132bhp/litre from the Porsche V8 and 125bhp/litre for the Ferrari V12.

          • anon said on 2nd June 2014, 7:14

            You do realise that the reason why the Porsche 918 has such impressive figures on paper is because Porsche manipulated the test process?

            Because the emissions tests allow the manufacturers to use a car with a fully charged battery, the figure that was obtained was based on the car doing most of the test on its battery – when Porsche did the test with the car running just on its engine, the fuel consumption shot up to over 11 litres/100km.

            Also, your figures for specific output are completely wrong given that you have added the combined power of the internal combustion engine and the energy recovery systems, not just of the engines.

            The 4.6 litre V8 engine in the Porsche 918 is claimed to produce 608bhp, whilst Ferrari claims 789bhp from their 6.3 litre V12 – the actual specific output for each engine is therefore 132bhp/litre from the Porsche V8 and 125bhp/litre for the Ferrari V12.

          • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 2nd June 2014, 8:18

            Yes, my fault with the specific power,because I did not calculate myself.

            But still, the figures were such because the Ferrari has the least powerful electric motors of the three cars (La, 918, P1), and the least powerful engine for volume unit anyway – 126, to 132 and 191 hp/L for La, 918 and P1 respectively. So the point stands.

            And with regards to the fuel consumption run, it’s hardly manipulation when the car is a plugin hybrid. Why wouldn’t they do that, its under NEDC rules and representative for real world.
            And the combustion engine only figure of 11 L/100k is still better than Ferrari’s combined of 14L/100k.

            Ferrari is the only one of the three which does not allow e-only drive and can not be plugged in, which isn’t very impressive at all.

      • WilliamB (@william-brierty) said on 1st June 2014, 17:09

        @mateuss – I assume you’ve never owned a Ferrari. I had a 430 Spider some years ago, and the second it drove my love for Ferrari came full circle…even after the head gasket let go. I have since driven a multitude of rented high end cars on track days, and none, not the R8, not the GT-R, not the SLS AMG, not the 991 S or even the MP4-12C has an engine in the same ballpark. I have a friend (who is pathetically rich) that owns an F12, and through having “a wee go” (…at 140mph), I can confirm that the Ferrari V12 is the finest engine in existence. The immediacy of the torque, the sound and surprisingly, the drive-ability, is completely unchallenged by all of the automotive world, as testfied by everyone who has driven one of Ferrari’s latest V12s. The technology is there, the expertise is there, and I’m sure the talent is there, but one can’t help but think some that some innate institutional aversion to a turbo-charged V6 (with Ferrari having no real culture of V6s or turbos) is holding them back. I’m sure that’s a touch romanticized, and that the real answer is deeply practical but it’s certainly worth considering why Ferrari, unquestionably the market leader engine manufacturer in high end road cars, can’t translate that success into a great F1 powertrain.

        • mateuss (@mateuss) said on 1st June 2014, 17:25

          @william-brierty You assume correctly. I would love to have a go in any of the cars you mentioned, I have nothing against big dinosaurs, nor against small 4 cylinders.

          That was my point, that the qualities that make those romantic experiences in a Ferrari possible, that the Ferrari road cars obviously have, are not necessarily what is needed to win a GP.

          “Ferrari, unquestionably the market leader engine manufacturer in high end road cars”
          What is meant by that?

          • WilliamB (@william-brierty) said on 1st June 2014, 18:47

            @mateuss – As I have said, it is not merely romanticism you get with a modern Ferrari (specifically those of the past ten years), it is blistering performance and truly market leading technology. Yes, you make an excellent point in saying that there is little carry over to F1, but if Ferrari can make engines better than other larger, wealthier manufacturers like Mercedes (the AMG V8s sound nice but simply have WHHHAAAY too much torque – even for a competent track day driver like me the SLS is completely undriveable without TC), it shows that there is a great deal of talent within Ferrari, just perhaps not behind the laptops of the F1 engine plant at the moment. What was meant by me saying that Ferrari are the best engine manufacturer for high end road cars? That’s me saying, with quite a lot of reference to my friend’s F12, that Ferrari are in a league of one in terms of road car engines, with Audi’s 4.2 V8 or the fabulous straight-6 in the old E46 M3 the only engines that get anywhere near.

    • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 15:26

      @philby

      The funny thing is that their roadcars have the best N/A engines bar none

      It is absolutely funny because the man behind the road cars engines is a former F1 mechanical engineer which is known for designing killer engines whenever he went, he is the same person that was behind success of the monsters V10 Renault in the 90’s. The Frenchman Jean Jacques His is actually the man behind that success, what i found more funny is that despite his brilliant career in which he was actually heavily involved with the turbo engines, first with Renault when they introduced the turbo in F1 and then in Ferrari in the 80’s in both F1 and road car division, he wasn’t involved at all in the V6 059 project and Marmorini who hasn’t done very well with Toyota in F1 is actually the head of engines and electronics department in Ferrari. I don’t know what Stefano Domenicali was doing in recent years.
      After the flop of V6 059 project Jean Jacques His has joined the engine department to help correct what can be corrected on this year PU and to design next year PU. Amedeo Felisa who is Ferrari CEO (a former pyrotechnical engineer ) has also joined the engine department.

  6. ME4ME (@me4me) said on 1st June 2014, 13:06

    The situation is nothing new. Alonso has been unhappy with Ferraris’ cars for years. Yet he can’t do much about it, because other top teams like Redbull and Mercedes are locked out. Mclaren aren’t a top team anymore. Going there would be a huge gamble. Even more so than Hamiltons decision to join Mercedes back in 2012.

    • William Stuart (@williamstuart) said on 1st June 2014, 16:19

      No, I don’t think so, McLaren are still the second richest in F1, and have a lot of talented people. I think that having suffered two bad years, and with Ron there again, 2015 will be a great season, maybe challenging for second and third in the constructors, rather than fifth or sixth at the moment. But then again, who knows? Maybe Alonso is exactly the kind of driver they need right now, but persuading him will be very difficult. Maybe a move to Williams? Lol, I wish, but give Williams a few years and they’ll keep steadily improving.

      • Breno (@austus) said on 1st June 2014, 21:49

        Second richest? I imagine Ferrari and Red Bull should spend quite a lot more than them, maybe Mercedes too.

      • ME4ME (@me4me) said on 1st June 2014, 22:56

        @williamstuart, you kind of made my point for me. Maybe challenging for 2nd or 3rd. That say’s it all. After all these years at Ferrari, Alonso isn’t interested in 2nd or 3rd. If he is to jump ship, then he’ll surely wan’t to join with the prospect of winning races and championships. On a personal level .. I would love seeing Alonso race for another team tho, just to shake things up a little.

    • montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 1st June 2014, 19:41

      @me4me

      “Mclaren aren’t a top team anymore” That’s a bit of an over-ambitious statement given this is the team which had the fastest car in F1 in the end of 2012(18 months ago, I know time flies fast), and one which has one of the biggest budgets and one of the best facilities

      I agree that it would be a gamble for Alonso, but what you said is a bit over the top

  7. cjpdk (@cjpdk) said on 1st June 2014, 13:51

    I am firmly convinced that, in terms of performance relative to the amount of money spent, Ferrari are the worst team on the grid, even one of the worst ever.

    Minardi were loved for the quality of their cars despite their very low budgets. Imagine what they could have done with Ferrari’s mountains of money.

  8. Albert said on 1st June 2014, 14:59

    The funny (not for him, surely) thing is that, for all the issues Ferrari has, it’s the best team Alonso can hope to be.

    The top teams, Mercedes and Red Bull, have little interest in him. Mclaren and Lotus are a step behind, and Mclaren is about to give up the best engine in the paddock.

    Alonso’s only hope is that Ferrari’s extended team can come up with something really good for 2015.

    As somebody who isn’t too fond of either Alonso or Ferrari, this situation is pretty funny to me.

    • William Stuart (@williamstuart) said on 1st June 2014, 16:22

      I’m not sure, Honda have possibly had more time to prepare, and they can see what the others are doing with their engines. Also, the other manufacturers are going to be bogged down with trying to improve the ’14 engines, and not have as much time to perfect the ’15 engines. That said, Honda are a year behind, and lack a huge amount of data that comes with a season in F1.

  9. Maciek (@maciek) said on 1st June 2014, 15:35

    I hadn’t even realised it’s taken Ferrari six races just to score a podium. How much fun would an Alonso-Hamilton pairing at Mercedes be eh?

  10. Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 1st June 2014, 16:20

    The car that will be present in Canada will not be aerodynamically very different, it will have an update to the PU (an estimated 25/30 BHP) and some minor changes, Ferrari were actually planning a B version of the F14T at Canada which will have aerodynamic and mechanical upgrades but they were not in schedule in the production of some parts which pushed them to reschedule their aerodynamic upgrades to the RBR ring.
    Maybe this was the main reason that pushed Marco Mattiacci to say that Ferrrai need to make faster decisions in order to improve their working process.

  11. Nerrticus (@nerrticus) said on 1st June 2014, 17:05

    While Ferrari have underperformed it’s important to note that Kimi has had some genuine bad luck. No other top driver has had three races wrecked by bad timed punctures caused by other drivers.

    It’s true that Kimi’s average qualifying left him open to the KM incidents but last week’s strangeness with Chilton cost him a possible podium and a likely 4th. Overall I’d say it’s cost him 20-25 pts.

    Ferrari’s struggles are genuine but I imagine if Kimi had those “lost” 20-25 pts, which would put Ferrari 2nd in the WCC, the tone would be much less panicked…

  12. Deej92 (@deej92) said on 1st June 2014, 18:51

    It’s hard to believe that we sit here in 2014, the Ferrari-Alonso partnership in its 5th season, and not one title has been won by them, nor is one going to be this season if we’re honest.

    I thought back in 2010, like many must have, that this was a match made in heaven for both parties, and the titles would flow. How wrong I was. Two near-misses (one in a car that had no right to be that close) and three cars which couldn’t hold a candle to the lead team throughout the season.

    I’ve often thought of his next move. I feel he has until around 2018 in F1 whilst I can’t see him sticking with Ferrari until then if they continue to fail to deliver. I can’t see a move next season, though – Mercedes’ drivers are tied down and McLaren is too much of a risk in their 1st year with Honda. 2016 could see a move, and I’m sure Dennis and Honda would love to have him back. If McLaren show potential next season, then he could be tempted despite the 2007 fiasco, depending on Ferrari’s 2015 season. Then there’s Mercedes. Neither Hamilton nor Rosberg will be dropped, but I think one of them will want to leave after these two seasons of fighting each other at the top, so a seat may open up here. I really can’t see any other alternatives in 2016 than Ferrari, Mercedes, or McLaren.

  13. Clive Allen (@clive-allen) said on 1st June 2014, 18:58

    I was going to write a comment but then realised I have far too much to say. If I had any sense, I wouldn’t hit the Enter button on even this non-comment but I suspect that the temptation will prove too much…

  14. SauberS1 (@saubers1) said on 1st June 2014, 22:22

    This team can’t improve.

  15. Breno (@austus) said on 1st June 2014, 22:49

    The old teams havent had much sucess in the last generation: Ferrari’s last WCC was in 08, last WDC in 07; Mclaren’s last WCC was 98, and WDC in 08; Williams last WDC and WCC were in 97, and have scored a single win since 2004.

    In this new turbo-era, Ferrari are up there, third fastest, capable of second thanks to reliability; and Williams are making a recovery (though we’re yet to see if they can keep this up); Mclaren seem a bit lost, perhaps the slowest Mercedes right now.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.