Ferrari’s year?

This topic contains 17 replies, has 13 voices, and was last updated by  TheJudge 4 years, 7 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • Author
  • #132854


    I know it’s too early…but the last time that Ferrari was so fast in Australia was in 2007.I had to wait 5 years…:)
    Ferrari could have won the race even 1-2 finish, but they focus to beat vettel and compromise the strategy(Alonso only 10 laps in the first medium stint) rather then focus to win the race. Definitely Ferrari in Fp2 had more fuel than Red Bull. Alonso when was in front of Vettel build easy a 10 sec gap.
    Ferrari F138 is not an evolution of F2012 (let apart what Pat fry says) but is not a revolution too…it’s something in the middle. This year Ferrari will use only the Cologne (Germany) wind tunnel, which is the best known wind tunnel till now. The correlation data works perfectly, the new recruitments that Ferrari have made are the best from team rivals: Loïc Bigois (Mercedes), David Sanchez (Mclaren), and the return of Rory Byrne and two engineer from the red bull’s in the cfd department.

    I mabee be wrong but i had the filling from tests( Barcelona first test) that Ferrari was different this year…i waited for the first race for confirmation…and my feeling was right.
    What do you think guys ? and notice that ferrari was never so strong in Australia in 2009,2010,2011,2012….



    It´s waaaaay to early to say it´s going to be Ferrari´s year but, they will definitely be fightinng the whole season!! It really makes me happy that they finally produced a quick car out of the box…



    If it’s gonna be tight, I don’t think so.

    If they get an edge, perhaps.



    I think it’s still way too early to tell in my opinion. If they keep up development I’m sure they’ll be up there consistently, though we can’t count out Red Bull after one race.



    Its too early, but they were definitely quick today and in Fernando Alonso’s hands anything can happen.



    I agree with all other opinions, It’s too early.

    But i think we all agree that the start of the Ferrari this year is very different from 2009,2010,2011,2012.
    Let’s hope the end is also..:)…which is the one that matters

    It will be a long year and a strong development battle between Ferrari, Red Bull, Lotus, Mercedes.

    Sorry but i dont see Mclaren in this group.



    Agree with above^
    For Example, take a look back last year. Jenson won the first race and people were already deeming the Mclaren as the championship car to beat. Although their season was plagued with unreliability, by the end of the year they were miles off (Even coming 3rd behind Ferrari in the constructors). The half way point is usually the about time to start talking about a conclusion to the championship and who may be there or there abouts, also when they get back to Europe is about the time where you know the real race order too.



    This year Ferrari will use only the Cologne (Germany) wind tunnel, which is the best known wind tunnel till now

    I am absolutely certain that the Sauber tunnel is better – but Cologne could indeed be the best wind tunnel available to Ferrari, yes.

    But again – we have to see. Today was unusually cold for a grand prix – something like 17 ambient 22 track? That’s hell cold, which is very unrepresentative. The Albert Park layout is very unrepresentative too. Jenson Button dominated in Albert Park in 2012 – what good did that do him?


    Jon Sandor

    In 2010 Alonso qualified third and went on to win the first race – which that year was in Bahrain, not Australia.

    I could throw a lot of other stats at you, but long story short, it’s too early to tell what’s going to happen this year.

    “i think we all agree that the start of the Ferrari this year is very different from 2009,2010,2011,2012.”

    Difficult to say really. Yes, they look better than they did at the start of last season. The downside is that Red Bull and Lotus also look better than they were at this point last year.


    Tim Edwards

    I’ve found that the Ferraris are usually pretty good on colder tracks. This weekend will be a better representation I think




    The Albert Park layout is very unrepresentative too.

    Why doe people still believe in this myth?

    Fact is that very often, a car that goes well around Albert Park usually goes on to win the championship; or at least fight for the title.

    1996 Williams 1-2 finish, went on to dominate the championship.
    1997 Williams fastest car, Williams champions.
    1998 McLaren 1-2, they go on to win both championships
    1999 Ferrari win. They go on to win the WCC and miss out on the WDC by 2 points.
    2000 Ferrari win, Ferrari champions.
    2001 Ferrari win, Ferrari champions.
    2002 Ferrari win, Ferrari champions.
    2003 McLaren win, Ferrari champions.
    2004 Ferrari win, Ferrari champions.
    2005 Renault win, Renault champions.
    2006 Renault win, Renault champions.
    2007 Ferrari win, Ferrari champions.
    2008 McLaren win, McLaren champions.
    2009 Brawn win, Brawn champions.
    2010 Red Bull fastest, Red Bull champions.
    2012 McLaren win, they had the fastest car that year

    As you can see, a very high rate of the teams who win/or are fastest in Albert Park go on to win the championship. Hell, historic evidence suggests that Melbourne is actually an even better benchmark than Barcelona.

    Therefore, if Ferrari had the fastest car in Melbourne, they have a very, very good chance of winning at least one championship.

    The only time, ever in 17 events, a team which won in Melbourne and did not have a championship-challenging car for the remainder of the season; was 1997.

    That’s a pretty good ratio, isn’t it?



    @kingshark correlation does not imply causation. We cannot differentiate whether that correlation is high because of the track being representative, or because of coincidence. For example, Melbourne is a front-limited circuit, unlike the majority of the calendar which is rear-limited. Also, Melbourne’s corners are all of a similar type to each other. Case in point being, Turn 1-2, 6-7, 9-10 are all carbon copies of one another. Turn 5 and 15 are also the same to each other – though because you have to brake at the entry of 15, not many people realise it. 3 and 16 are also similar. And so on and so forth.

    How many myths do you have that are actually built on scientific fact?



    John Sandor, Ferrari only won in Bahrain in 2010 after Vettel’s experiment with EBD went wrong, but it was Red Bull who had the best race pace too.
    This time however, Ferrari was genuinely the fastest car in the race trim. Lotus was able to play the long game, but their strategy would have yielded 2nd or 3rd at best if Ferraris of Alonso and Massa were able to lap at their optimum speed instead of being held behind Vettel.
    It’s all part of racing of course, but talking about pure speed of the car, Ferrari was probably the best bet for a winner if it weren’t for the traffic.



    I must agree with you, the sensations that Australia give me is that Ferrari had the fastest car in race, instead in Bahrain 2010 i never had these sensations…Vettel was 6 sec comfortable in front of Alonso before he hit trouble. Australia is more representative of the problems that Ferrari had in the last couple of years.

    People also forget that the problem for Ferrari in the last couple of years was putting the tyres in temp in cold condition, and also the problems in last year’s car in medium and low downforce corners, but in Melbourne all this problems seems to be disappear.

    Anyway the key will be development through the year.



    @nomore – Yes ONE of Ferrari’s problems over the last few years has been getting the tyres up to temperature, however once they had got there the race pace and tyre deg was very good. My concern is that they appear to have solved that issue in Melbourne which was unrepresentatively colder than usual…what will happen when we get to hotter tracks, will the Ferrari destroy it’s tyres by overworking them?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.