Whats happening at Ferrari??

Just an interesting topic i think, cast your minds back exactly one year and we were all talking about how Ferrari had just dominated the Hungarian GP like all the GP's in 2002. Now fast forward one year and we have the same team and drivers in a bit of a pickle! Most people think that the Bridgestone tyres are crap compared to the Michelins this season as the main reason why they are not the dominate force they were a year ago but i think theres more to it than that, I believe that ferrari have taken a backward step this year!!

For one i think that it has been publicly stated by Ferrari that the F2003-GA is a lot harder to drive at the limit than the F2002 but is potentialy faster when at that limit. The only times I have seen this ultimate pace all year is in Austria with Michael and at Silverstone with Rubens (twice out of 13 races!). That is not really very impressive and where as Williams started badly they got their act together and have hit the ground running lately Mclaren also have been very consistent and fast (with Kimi) which has also shown Ferrari up. We can't forget the tyre situation which is also a factor in their lack of pace compared to Mclaren, Williams & Renault but just think of this, in the Hungarian GP Schumachers best race lap was only 1 tenth of a second faster than Jenson Buttons Bridgestone shod BAR! food for thought??

Is there more going wrong at Ferrari than meets the eye??

Cheers........Steve

PS. I am not a Ferrari fan
PPS. I am not a Schumacher fan



____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Jenson Button and BAR..........Watch them fly in 2004

there well could be!

but they can now test before monza, and let me asure you. they will be testing like no other team! flat out!

i think other teams should be congratualated for their efforts this year, rather than devalue them by assuming that its ferrari that are struggling

before this season started we heard from ross brawn that this years car was a second a lap faster than last years all dominating 2002 car.

Michelins improvement has certainly helped all the other teams but bridgestones have been the tyres to have over the last few seasons so there can't be too many complaints now that the "boot " is on the other foot, so to speak



Post Edited (08-26-03 09:26)




LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat

I heard rumours that this car isn't as user-friendly as F2002 so they are having a hard time finding the rright setup.

Other rumours that it's too hard on the tyres,forcing bridgestone to come up with harder and harder compounds.

Earlier there were rumours that the front wing isn't optimised for the tyres.



Everything in the past is better than today.It's true,I read it on the internet.

they were ok before the story in monaco about the different compound tyres on the front and back.

surely the car would have seen as being faster than last years car during the winter testing, otherwise why would ross brawn tell the world how fantastic the 2003 car was going to be?






LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat

What puzzles me more was the progress of F2003 in winter/early spring.Great,problems[rumours of suspension design being changed and differnt materials being used after] and than more mediocre testing.

Infact i was surprised at the early F2003 race performance.



Everything in the past is better than today.It's true,I read it on the internet.

I did not think the f2003 has looked great in any GP except austria but then MS was running light due to the fuel problem.

Rubens has had 1 good GP in the car at silverstone.

Maybe they would have been better doing a mclaren and sticking to last years car with mods.

Maybe,but how far can you go?Would that ultimately have been enough to win?Hard to tell,wether or not the F2002 reached the end of the development circle.

Is it down to question of pride,because McLaren had a reason of using the "old" car while Ferrari could build on the same concept like F300-F399,F2000-F2001 and eventually F2002-F2003.



Everything in the past is better than today.It's true,I read it on the internet.

Woops.Going back to the 2002 season it would seem that judging by the success of the modified McLaren the rumours that it had the best chassis were indeed true.

On the tyre front the old regulations did favour Ferrari with their bespoke tyres while Michelin had to make the tyre that suited more cars.And as we had seen,the compromise tyre wasn't far off.Now the new rules came back and bit Ferrari in the ***.



Post Edited (08-26-03 13:27)

Everything in the past is better than today.It's true,I read it on the internet.

Oleg

I think what u said about the hard tyres is right.

I read in the SUN lol that for the 1st time this year bridgestone took soft tyres for BAR and Sauber and look how much closer they were to Ferrari.

But Ferrari must have known about the problem from testing unless they really were running hard fronts and soft rears or vise versa