Monte Carlo has often exposed right and wrong choices, without appeal. At the same time, the Monaco GP knows how to offer less spectacular but emotionally engaging races. This is what, for better or for worse, happened to Ferrari and not only.
Before the start of the race Charles Leclerc, the local favorite and the driver who should have started from pole position, was forced to retire due to a broken left axle hub. It broke after accelerating out of the tight Loews hairpin.
All of this is obviously related to the crash on Saturday but, very importantly, not to the choice of the decision not to replace the transmission.
As understood by Formu1a.uno, the gearbox mounted on the SF21 was intact and completely usable. Had there been the slightest doubt that it had problems, the gearbox would have been replaced, despite losing 5 positions on the grid, as caution was the team’s intention to avoid any issues during the race. It will be replaced in Baku simply because the DNF allows a team to replace it without penalties.
The hub of the left axle shaft had been inspected visually but not in detail, without showing any signs of possible failure, being on the opposite side of the impact against the barriers. In addition to this, it should be considered that an undamaged or compromised component is not easily replaceable for a team. It needs to be ‘justifiable beyond any doubt’, given the parc fermé rules to which all components are subjected.
Of course, with more thorough scrutiny, the ‘clique’ would most likely have been discovered by the team; for this Ferrari stated that it will improve its processes to ensure that a similar problem can be detected more effectively.
Of course, in hindsight it was a half disaster for the constructors’ classification. It would have been possible to score many more points than Mclaren given Ricciardo’s difficulties. However, it is true that, apart from the winner Max Verstappen, Ferrari was the other great protagonist of the weekend.
The red team had high hopes, as explained by Mattia Binotto, knowing the qualities of the car and having all the simulation data available. But the Italian side was deliberately cautious about the potential for last weekend.
Unfortunately Charles Leclerc suffered his second major disappointment after Bahrain two years ago. For the moment they are marginal disappointments, far from the definitive ones of Fernando Alonso or Sebastian Vettel. Something similar to the first was Michael Schumacher, at a time of construction. Difficult to accept on the spot but (speaking of failures) nothing irreparable.
It was Carlos Sainz’s turn to shine in Montecarlo, where pure power (at the ‘highs’) has little relevance, a concrete improvement in the car’s optimization skills, in particular a certain ability to always use the entire range of compounds in the traction phase.
We know that in general the limitations have made this a little more critical. We think that compared to the performance values of the last edition 24 months ago, Red Bull has not improved, Mercedes has lost from 3 tenths of Bottas to 1.0 full for Lewis, while Ferrari has improved by 6 tenths.
Speaking of compounds, on the circuit where Charles Leclerc gave the turning point to his season in Alfa Romeo, it will be interesting to see the Pirelli C5s still available in Baku.
Despite the disappointment, there are many positive aspects. In Maranello they say they have ideas on how to improve the SF21 towards the summer and that everything they will do will be in view of 2022. On the new car that is running in the tunnel, there is the awareness that aerodynamic research above the floor will count for the benefit of other aspects such as traction. Something that the SF21, through the tokens spent, is clearly expressing better than other cars.
In addition, they are extremely happy with how the understanding of the SF21 is developing with both drivers, who are giving important indications especially for next year.
Obviously they will have less and less power as compared to their rivals in this 2021 Formula 1 season, but at the same time they think it could be improved further in other aspects such as energy recovery or electronic management to push the power unit even further.
The end of revolving doors and the culprit at all costs has left room for greater cohesion between the technical office and the engineers and this seems to be showing the positive results.
The championship is undoubtedly very interesting. Verstappen and Red Bull did what they had to do, which is to make the most of the difficulties and the unveiled nervousness of Hamilton, derived from a Mercedes management far from their usual level.
Even the problem at Bottas’ pit stop, with the nut completely stripped from the gun, was defined by the Finn himself as “nobody’s fault but our pits don’t seem like a strong point this year” . Yet Mercedes hasn’t changed anything compared to last year , unlike Ferrari (for the better) .
The W12, like other times in Monte-Carlo, highlighted problems in correctly activating the tires and, as it happened, the technicians defined it as a “Diva”.
That means it has a very high potential but which is not so easy to extract in all conditions. For this reason they seem disappointed but not surprised. Interesting because it highlights how, despite many changes and years of development, many things change and others remain quite similar.
We have said it several times: the W12 is a car that is far too gentle on the tires. A useful feature at Montmelo, not Monte-Carlo. Especially on the front, which continues to miss the DAS. Even in Baku you will feel it (on the single lap).
Baku might be less positive for Ferrari, but the Monaco performance can translate into a new starting point for the Maranello team.
Leave a Reply