Why it is technically incorrect to describe Ferrari SF-25 as fundamentally limited by own design concept
Yesterday at 02:40 PM
The Bahrain pre-season testing session provided mixed signals about the true performance level of the cars, allowing only a rough ranking of the teams based on their on-track performance. There is no doubt that McLaren has confirmed that the MCL39 is currently the most effective car. The race pace shown in long runs, more than in single-lap performance, demonstrates that the Woking team's car did not require any particular setup to extract performance. This situation is almost the opposite of Ferrari's. The MCL39 car is an extreme design but has not changed its fundamental concept. Even though its front suspension stands out due to the extreme inclination of the upper triangle with a low rear attachment point, this does not amount to a radical overhaul of its dynamic characteristics.
The new suspension – Ferrari, on the other hand, is the top team that has made the most radical changes to its car compared to last season. This is particularly evident in the switch from a push-rod to a pull-rod front suspension. It must be clarified that this is anything but a trivial change: it requires a completely different approach to setup compared to the previous car in order to achieve precise integration between aerodynamic and mechanical balance. Therefore, the SF-25 should still be considered a “raw” project when assessing the data from the three days of pre-season testing in Bahrain.
The car is solid – Starting from this premise, the media narrative suggesting that the SF-25 single-seater has inherent limitations compared to the MCL39 needs to be challenged. Based on what was observed in Bahrain, it would be technically incorrect to describe the SF-25 as fundamentally limited by its own design concept. That would imply that, no matter how much the new Ferrari is developed over the season, it would still be forced to chase McLaren for the entire championship. The balance issues were clearly and transparently pointed out by Charles Leclerc, who generally felt less comfortable than Lewis Hamilton. The Monegasque driver particularly struggled to carry enough speed into corners, a key aspect of his driving style, but these balance issues stem from the need to find the right setup over time, not from fundamental design flaws in the car.
Fine-tuning – The SF-25 was able to post strong lap times with ease once time-attack runs were attempted, while tire degradation in race conditions already appears more manageable compared to the SF-24 car from last season. This suggests that the car has performance potential and, like other teams, its true speed may have been concealed. Regarding balance, the data gathered on track and analyzed this week through extensive simulator sessions should help achieve a better setup. Finding the right harmony in a car that has undergone a radical change in its mechanical concept, despite maintaining aerodynamic continuity with its predecessor, is no trivial task—quite the opposite. In fact, one could argue that it would have been almost an “anomaly” if the tests had immediately shown perfect behavior from the SF-25 and an effortless setup process. In short, Melbourne next week, not only because of the characteristics of the Albert Park circuit and its different weather conditions, could logically silence the critics.
The post Why it is technically incorrect to describe Ferrari SF-25 as fundamentally limited by own design concept appeared first on Scuderia Fans.
