Ferrari gives up on F60

#1

Luca di Montezemolo believes this year's campaign was tainted not by Ferrari
engineers building a bad car, but largely because of the rules.

He said he is happy that, in 2010, there will be 'stable, clear and
transparent' regulations.

"Soon we will concentrate fully on next year's car," Montezemolo explained,
confirming that the F60's successor will not feature a Kinetic Energy
Recovery System.

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090629120001.shtml

#2

Chad wrote:

Quote:

Luca di Montezemolo believes this year's campaign was tainted not by Ferrari
engineers building a bad car, but largely because of the rules.

He said he is happy that, in 2010, there will be 'stable, clear and
transparent' regulations.

So, which is it?

Perhaps he and Booth should confer.

#3

News wrote:

Quote:

Chad wrote:
Luca di Montezemolo believes this year's campaign was tainted not
by Ferrari engineers building a bad car, but largely because of
the rules.

He said he is happy that, in 2010, there will be 'stable, clear and
transparent' regulations.

So, which is it?

Perhaps he and Booth should confer.

It's a tense situation.

--
Bigbird
#

#4

On 29 jun, 12:11, "Chad" <cbs... (AT) safemail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

Luca di Montezemolo believes this year's campaign was tainted not by Ferrari
engineers building a bad car, but largely because of the rules.

He said he is happy that, in 2010, there will be 'stable, clear and
transparent' regulations.

"Soon we will concentrate fully on next year's car," Montezemolo explained,
confirming that the F60's successor will not feature a Kinetic Energy
Recovery System.

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090629120001.shtml

What a little baby crying about not clear rules. Red Bull Racing
didn't knew also double decker diffusers are legal but they are still
kicking butt.

I believe FIA should relax the restriction of KERS to work. The 6
seconds at 80 hp per lap isn't enough.

#5

On Jun 29, 3:33*pm, Timmy <Wc... (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

I believe FIA should relax the restriction of KERS to work. The 6
seconds at 80 hp per lap isn't enough.

But even that was up to the engineers to sort out. They're the ones
with the data which could / should have seen them weigh up the
benefits vs the cost (in performance, not money) and decided it wasn't
worth doing. Remember your mum saying "If he told you to stick your
head in a hot oven, would you have done it" - just because the rules
allowed it didn't mean any team *had* to use it.

Matt

#6

AC <xxx (AT) xxx (DOT) xxx> wrote:

Quote:

AR, you there? My prediction for the 2010 F1 Championship:
WCC will be won by Ferrari, and Alonso will be the WDC driving a Ferrari.
Massa second. Every one else making up the numbers. Hold me to it. I wonder
what the odds are?

Let's see.

Quote:

Oh look.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motor-sport/formula-one/constructors-champ-next-year

Ferrari are favourite for 2010. Shocker. Actually, that's really, really
funny.

And who was favourite this year? And last year?

Quote:

Well done FOTA fans, you just fucked up F1. Well done.

And what, precisely, *are* odds in terms of proof of anything?

#7

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:23:00 +0000 (UTC), Mark
<spam (AT) not (DOT) welcome.here.ac.uk> wrote:

Quote:

AC <xxx (AT) xxx (DOT) xxx> wrote:

AR, you there? My prediction for the 2010 F1 Championship:
WCC will be won by Ferrari, and Alonso will be the WDC driving a Ferrari.
Massa second. Every one else making up the numbers. Hold me to it. I wonder
what the odds are?

Let's see.

Oh look.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motor-sport/formula-one/constructors-champ-next-year

Ferrari are favourite for 2010. Shocker. Actually, that's really, really
funny.

And who was favourite this year? And last year?

Well done FOTA fans, you just fucked up F1. Well done.

And what, precisely, *are* odds in terms of proof of anything?

Odds ? 1 to 1, AC lost his bottle.

LOFL. The FOTA fans "fucked up F1" ? The 9 other teams and the ones
queueing up, don't see what AC does ? Rruuuilley ?

--

Regards, Frank

#8

Timmy <Wcub4 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in
news:5dd6a136-dcc3-4816-9eda-f7df6441733a (AT) f19g2000yqo (DOT) googlegroups.com:

Quote:

On 29 jun, 12:11, "Chad" <cbs... (AT) safemail (DOT) com> wrote:
Luca di Montezemolo believes this year's campaign was tainted not by
Ferrari engineers building a bad car, but largely because of the
rules.

He said he is happy that, in 2010, there will be 'stable, clear and
transparent' regulations.

"Soon we will concentrate fully on next year's car," Montezemolo
explained, confirming that the F60's successor will not feature a
Kinetic Energy Recovery System.

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090629120001.shtml

What a little baby crying about not clear rules. Red Bull Racing
didn't knew also double decker diffusers are legal but they are still
kicking butt.

Oh I think he's saying what most teams think.

My opinion is that designing your car around the DDD or not isn't the
result of genius or incompetence: I don't believe you should judge based
on their chosen direction - not whether they picked the right side. There
seems to have been the legitimate long held belief that this was
something that was unacceptable amongst many of the teams that didn't
employ it initially. These things are invariably political and the best
indication of that was the FIA's reticence to make a decision even when
it became obvious that it was an area of confusion.

So Ferrari, McLaren, BMW, Renault and RBR are in that set. And yes - RBR
have done an exceptional job and imo are the team of the season. But of
the big players here Ferrari have done best. If not well..

And I'd suggest it's no coincidence that Toyota and Williams are stronger
at circuits where aero is important. Even *still*. It remains a
fundamental misdirection imo. Just look at how BMW, Renault and McLaren
struggle.

KERS is different, again the big teams got it wrong, though Toyota were
early to abandon it. The cost here is the problem - you have to spend the
money and understand what it can do or risk conceding an advantage if
it's more than you know. So if we allowed diesels next season the big
teams would have to piss money against a wall whether or not they ended
up with a diesel engine.

Quote:

I believe FIA should relax the restriction of KERS to work. The 6
seconds at 80 hp per lap isn't enough.

It's just a red herring, a money pit and completely unnecessary. The
effect could easily be replaced by allowing engines to rev higher for
short durations.

And it is one of two things that gives the lie to the cost cutting
imperatives of the FIA. The second btw is the huge amount of money not
passed onto the teams, and presumably not needed if the budgets are
reduced.

Has anyone considered what happens when the teams' incomes exceeds the
amount the teams can spend? I'm sure the FIA and FOM will give it to a
charity of their choosing.

--
CatharticF1

"What you thought was freedom is just greed."

#9

"Paul-B" <paul (AT) rasf1 (DOT) net> wrote in news:7atnmtF21eb74U1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net:

Quote:

CatharticF1 wrote:

Oh I think he's saying what most teams think.

My opinion is that designing your car around the DDD or not isn't the
result of genius or incompetence: I don't believe you should judge
based on their chosen direction - not whether they picked the right
side. There seems to have been the legitimate long held belief that
this was something that was unacceptable amongst many of the teams
that didn't employ it initially. These things are invariably
political and the best indication of that was the FIA's reticence to
make a decision even when it became obvious that it was an area of
confusion.

Hmm, illegal barge-boards and sprung floors... remind me, which team
was that?

Very different though Paul, the floor wasn't as integral to the cars design
as the DDD (and it wasn't subsequently even used!). The barge boards were
not as significant as the DDD.

--
CatharticF1

"What you thought was freedom is just greed."

#10

CatharticF1 wrote:

Quote:

Oh I think he's saying what most teams think.

My opinion is that designing your car around the DDD or not isn't the
result of genius or incompetence: I don't believe you should judge
based on their chosen direction - not whether they picked the right
side. There seems to have been the legitimate long held belief that
this was something that was unacceptable amongst many of the teams
that didn't employ it initially. These things are invariably
political and the best indication of that was the FIA's reticence to
make a decision even when it became obvious that it was an area of
confusion.

Hmm, illegal barge-boards and sprung floors... remind me, which team
was that?

--
Paul-B