The Maranello team seems to have found the right path to solve the historic issues of the SF-23, but are these real steps forward or results influenced by a generally positive context? Charles Leclerc himself has “suggested” that Aston Martin’s difficulties in the last two GPs, the ones dominated by Mercedes in Austria, as well as the unique characteristics of the Gilles Villeneuve circuit and the Red Bull Ring, might have altered the hierarchy beyond the effectiveness of Ferrari’s updates to their single-seater.
After the Spanish Grand Prix, we analyzed how Ferrari’s new sidepods aimed to provide the car with a more consistent and substantial level of downforce at high speeds, a crucial weak point until then. Two races later, the Italian side introduced a new front wing and a new floor to further enhance this aspect of the car, seemingly finding a way to make the behavior of the SF-23 less unpredictable when it comes to tire compounds and fuel loads. They worked on improving the stability of the rear at high speeds, finding additional downforce from the floor and reducing aerodynamic drag, areas where Red Bull had a significant advantage.
The Maranello team’s senior engineer, Jock Clear, commented on the latest update in Austria, saying: “From the numbers, we are heading in the right direction, and it’s another incremental step, probably similar to the previous one, but once again, it’s been designed not just to increase downforce and reduce aerodynamic drag, the most obvious numbers; it’s been designed to make the car a bit softer and more predictable.” – he explained.
And here lies the biggest obstacle. When it’s not just the numbers that need to be evaluated, the efficiency of the simulator and computerized models drastically decreases, making the feedback from the drivers crucial. In this regard, Charles Leclerc’s near pole position in Friday’s qualifying session in Austria was an important confirmation.
“In reality, this is hard to get from the wind tunnel. We’ve put it on believing that the wind tunnel numbers can be trusted, and the Friday performance certainly suggests that it’s delivered performance. We’re back in a situation where we’re frustrated not to be on pole,” Jock Clear added, recalling Charles Leclerc’s words.
The updates had a primary objective: to reduce the separation of airflow with a less critical path between the front wing and the edges of the floor and along the underfloor. It was a significant effort that the team managed to achieve two races ahead of schedule.
Show your support for Scuderia Ferrari with official merchandise collection! Click here to enter the F1 online Store and shop securely! And also get your F1 tickets for every race with VIP hospitality and unparalleled insider access. Click here for the best offers to support Charles and Carlos from the track!
After the Canadian Grand Prix, hosted in Motor Valley, we talked about the updates brought by Ferrari in the previous race in Spain, and honestly, we were not at all sure about their effectiveness. Stability and consistent performance were to be sought in mechanical balance and the suspension department rather than in managing the airflow through the floor, side pods, and engine cover. Yet, the proper distribution of airflow, further improved with the package brought to Austria, seems to have hit the target.
The new wing has played an important role, although the changes in the shape of the elements are not very evident. Ferrari describes them as follows in the official document delivered to the FIA: “A redesign of all the elements of the front wing: mainplane, flap, and endplate. Reason: Performance, flow conditioning. Part of the standard development cycle, the objective of this front wing update is to reduce further losses in the aerodynamic structure and their downstream impact, along with increased flexibility in aerodynamic balance adjustment.”
The modifications make the load more stable at different dive and pitch angles, thanks to a progressive management of airflow, which is now less sensitive to different car configurations.
Regarding the changes to the floor, Ferrari describes them as follows: “Revision of the front floor inlet channels, floor edge, central floor, and diffuser side. The side underfloor has been redesigned accordingly. Together with the front wing update, the floor topology has been revised, focusing primarily on loss management and load distribution, resulting in an increase in the car’s efficiency.”
As reported in a detailed analysis by Mark Hughes and Giorgio Piola on formula1.com’s Tech Tuesday, Ferrari practically discovered that the aerodynamic surfaces of the previous design could become “overloaded,” and at that point, the airflow could deviate from the intended path, causing sudden losses of downforce and contributing to inconsistency. This often happened when the car tilted or dived during braking, which are critical moments for the drivers.
The aerodynamicists in Maranello understood that the optimal wind tunnel numbers were not remaining constant, and to achieve better real-world characteristics, stability in different operating conditions and speed ranges, they “changed direction,” as Fred Vasseur stated after the Spanish GP.
The answer to the question posed in the title is therefore: reasonably yes, the Ferrari updates have worked! They achieved mechanical balance through aerodynamic solutions and took some of the magic that has characterized Adrian Newey’s brilliant design since last year. It’s not about peak performance improvements but having a more predictable and drivable car. Perhaps that’s why Carlos Sainz, who excels in consistency and progression, has benefited the most from it in his driving style. Charles Leclerc has also demonstrated its benefits, at least in dry conditions, pushing the limits a bit further as he usually does.
There are still question marks regarding the external conditions that potentially contributed to the positive results in the last GPs. In this sense, and perhaps definitively, the upcoming races at Silverstone and especially Spa will be litmus tests for a project that could either be the foundation for building competitiveness in 2024 or not.
Leave a Reply