48 replies to this topic

[Mrv]

Many of you are probably wondering why Ferrari didn't release a second or third chassis of the F2002 at the end of February. The reason is this. With all the recent testing and data collection, Ferrari have found areas where they can improve the chassis with small modifications in the design. The next version of the F2002 chassis will have slight improvements to it and will be produced shortly. Ferrari have had the luxury of taking their time improving and developing the F2002 due to the success at Melbourne of the F2001.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Mrv
Many of you are probably wondering why Ferrari didn't release a second or third chassis of the F2002 at the end of February. The reason is this. With all the recent testing and data collection, Ferrari have found areas where they can improve the chassis with small modifications in the design. The next version of the F2002 chassis will have slight improvements to it and will be produced shortly. Ferrari have had the luxury of taking their time improving and developing the F2002 due to the success at Melbourne of the F2001.

Shortly? So the F2002A will probably not be raced?

[magic]

i guess ruby will start testing the f2002A as soon as ms is shaking down the f2002B build exactly to his liking.

[Gemini]

I just hope that F-2002B will not turn out to be F-2001 Melbourne specs, which would mean that original F-2002 is nice, but will never make it to the finish...

[Mrv]

In short no. The next chassis that comes out of Maranello will have some slight improvements in them than the original F2002. Ferrari have found a few things which will make the car slightly better. What these improvements are in the chassis, I have no idea.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Mrv
In short no. The next chassis that comes out of Maranello will have some slight improvements in them than the original F2002. Ferrari have found a few things which will make the car slightly better. What these improvements are in the chassis, I have no idea.

Patrick Head said in an interview that creating the moulds for a new chassis could take some months. This could mean that the F2001B will be used beyond Imola.

[Mrv]

Let me clarify one thing, the B designation is only assigned by me to differentiate the first chassis from the next ones produced at Maranello. Once again it is the same car, but with a few minor differences than the 1st one produced.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by karlth


Patrick Head said in an interview that creating the moulds for a new chassis could take some months. This could mean that the F2001B will be used beyond Imola.

Not sure Karlth. By slight changes, I am not sure what they are inferring to. Maybe doesn't need the new mould. I have no idea what the process is for chassis development.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Mrv
Let me clarify one thing, the B designation is only assigned by me to differentiate the first chassis from the next ones produced at Maranello. Once again it is the same car, but with a few minor differences than the 1st one produced.

Just wondering because making a new chassis is a major effort in time.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Maybe the differences are of the same nature like the F2001 and F2001B, where the new chassis didn't require a new mould IIRC.

[Mrv]

The strange thing is, where are the other chassis's.? It has been over 1 month since the release of the F2002 and Ferrari have only one chassis. It doesn't take a month to make a 2nd and 3rd car. For whatever reasons the next cars to roll out of Maranello will be slightly improved.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Hellenic tifosi
Maybe the differences are of the same nature like the F2001 and F2001B, where the new chassis didn't require a new mould IIRC.

I can't comment on whether it needs a new mould or not. But like Karlth said. It takes month's to create a new mould. This is not possible then, unless Ferrari are creating it to use later than Imola, which is a possibility.

[Scudetto]

Isn't it about this time that most teams' designers start to conceptualize their '03 cars? I know we've discussed Ferrari "spreading themselves too thin" before, but to what extent, if any, will the current concentration on developing the F2002 cut into the gestation of the F2003?

[Mrv]

My feeling is that the F2002 is a late 2002 model or a pre 2003 car already. I believe that Ferrari are already 3 to 6 months ahead for the the 2003 season.

[Gemini]

Originally posted by Scudetto
Isn't it about this time that most teams' designers start to conceptualize their '03 cars?

I would think it's a bit early for that. They would like to collect more data from different types of tracks, wheather conditions etc. Late May is more probable, that's what I read somewhere. But with today's Ferrari you never know what they are going to do...

[Mrv]

Your right with Ferrari you never know what they are up to.

[Dudley]

The only clue I can offer comes from Brunner's comment at the 02 Toyota launch that "we started in June with a clean sheet of paper"

[klipywitz]

Originally posted by magic
i guess ruby will start testing the f2002A as soon as ms is shaking down the f2002B build exactly to his liking.

My thoughts exactly!

[Slyder]

You know what? I'm starting to get tired of this "will we use the F2002 or the F2001?" crap. What is this, a beauty contest or something?

Note to Ferrari: Just race the damn car, what the hell is Formula 1 about? Formula 1 isn't only about racing and excitement, it's also a manufacturers' sport (that's why the Manufacturer's Title exist, don't it?) where we see the constructors develop their cars into winning machines. They have to start from either scrap or based on last years model, and as the year moves on the car has to be developed into its full potential, then with another model. And the only way to do that is to do it on the track, race by race, all the way until the final race. That's what F1 is also about.

Ferrari isn't doing this, why? Something tells me that all this stuff that Ferrari's saying that their F2002 car is great and has broken the Fiorano track record is nothing but bullshit. I mean, seriously, if the car is that good and is showing potential, why aren't they racing the damn thing? Why are they still racing the F2001? If they say that the car is great and all that stuff THEN RACE THE FREAKING CAR!!!

What are they waiting for? Testing? Hell you have 16 races plus many testing dates thoughout the year to keep developing your car, so what's the problem? With this recent bombshell that they're going to race AGAIN the F2001 in Malaysia, is erasing my credibility that their F2002 is a great car, 'cause if it were, it should've been on the grid in the very first race in Australia. For the look of it, maybe their new F2002 car is nothing but an unreliable and problematic bullshit car. But whether it is a mule or not, they still MUST race the freaking car, as said, they have plenty of time to develop it. Hell, Shumi and Badoer are great car developers aren't they? So what's the problem?

Maybe they don't want to suffer the same embarrasment they suffered in 1996.

RACE THE F2002, NOW!!!!

[baddog]

slyder, it perfectly simple. all teams would race their last years car if it could win the race, just simply for reliability, and proven setup information reasons.

ferrari have a luxury which will not last. imola will I believe see the 2002 start its season after it becomes clear that the williams and possibly the mac are marginally superior cars to the 2001 by that stage. however its perfectly possible ferrari will go to europe with a fair points lead, and a laungpad for the euro season.

Shaun

[Scoop]

it will probably be Brazil before ferrari realise their "old" car ain't enough...

anyway.. if they keep f2002 to mid this season.. will the f2003 also come in mid next year.. ?

it will be April or june before FIA clears new regulation changes for next year.. and that's when they can work on what the new car will be like..


ofcourse others are going to say ferrari can make f2003 and then expect fia to agree on its plan... but that aside.. it surely is a tough thing to work 3 cars at a time..

[Slyder]

who knows? Maybe by 2003 they'll just release an F2002B and rebadge it F2003.

Lets hope you're right Baddog, eventhough it still bothers me that they didn't use their F2002 at the start of the year

And you mean launchpad, right?

[baddog]

Originally posted by Slyder
who knows? Maybe by 2003 they'll just release an F2002B and rebadge it F2003.

Lets hope you're right Baddog, eventhough it still bothers me that they didn't use their F2002 at the start of the year

And you mean launchpad, right?

I hope Im right too.. and I was pretty pissed off with them (my comment on hearing the 2001 was going to melbourne was roughly that ferrari could bite my arse) about not taking hte new car to the first races. it isnt good practice, but I understand why.

and yes I meant launchpad. 20 years of computing and i still cant type worth ****

Shaun

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Slyder
What are they waiting for? Testing? Hell you have 16 races plus many testing dates thoughout the year to keep developing your car, so what's the problem? With this recent bombshell that they're going to race AGAIN the F2001 in Malaysia, is erasing my credibility that their F2002 is a great car, 'cause if it were, it should've been on the grid in the very first race in Australia. For the look of it, maybe their new F2002 car is nothing but an unreliable and problematic bullshit car. But whether it is a mule or not, they still MUST race the freaking car, as said, they have plenty of time to develop it. Hell, Shumi and Badoer are great car developers aren't they? So what's the problem?

Maybe they don't want to suffer the same embarrasment they suffered in 1996.

RACE THE F2002, NOW!!!!

I hate repeating myself but the F2001 is really a 2002 car.

[skylark68]

Cheepers creepers, Mrv, do you have the phones tapped at Ferrari or what? It's hard enough keeping up with your replies, let alone your threads.

This would be great news. Just great. Man, if true, can you imagine the feelings at McLaren and BAR?

[Slyder]

Originally posted by Mrv



I hate repeating myself but the F2001 is really a 2002 car.

Well, Mrv, as long as the badge reads "F2001" it is the F2001, last years car, no matter how many new components they add into it.

[armchair expert]

Originally posted by Mrv


I hate repeating myself but the F2001 is really a 2002 car.

As long as it is prefixed "F2001x" people will call it last years car. Especially when it visually looks the same to all but the dedicated F1 fans.

If the model designation was generic, such as: F310, no-one would know.

[Scoop]

Originally posted by Slyder


Well, Mrv, as long as the badge reads "F2001" it is the F2001, last years car, no matter how many new components they add into it.

[Lantern]

As far as the manufacturer's championship goes. I would have no problem proclaiming a team as the champions if they were able to BUILD and DEVELOPE a car that could beat the competition's entries for more than a year and quite possibly two. Sounds like pretty good construction to me ;)

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Slyder


Well, Mrv, as long as the badge reads "F2001" it is the F2001, last years car, no matter how many new components they add into it.

Did you look at the 2002 Williams? Not much difference is there to last years car, but they designated it a 2002. This is exactly what Ferrari wants everyone to think that it is last years car. To them the publicity of a old car beating the new Williams and Mclaren sounds more impressive than it they called it a New car. I know its hard for most to believe this, but Ferrari built two new cars this year. You can't tell me that having a 10 kg lighter chassis, new engine and gearbox, new front and rear wing, new front and rear suspension, new electronics, new brake system, new steering wheel, that it is the same car as the F2001 at Suzuka.

[tinman]

Originally posted by Mrv


Did you look at the 2002 Williams? Not much difference is there to last years car, but they designated it a 2002. This is exactly what Ferrari wants everyone to think that it is last years car. To them the publicity of a old car beating the new Williams and Mclaren sounds more impressive than it they called it a New car. I know its hard for most to believe this, but Ferrari built two new cars this year. You can't tell me that having a 10 kg lighter chassis, new engine and gearbox, new front and rear wing, new front and rear suspension, new electronics, new brake system, new steering wheel, that it is the same car as the F2001 at Suzuka.

That I think most comprehensively explains everything. I admire the Ferrari strategy even more now.

[Vrba]

What are the chassis numbers of F2001s Ferrari brought to Australia? Were those cars built after 2001 Japanese GP or they are modified 2001 chassis?

Hrvoje

[Hellenic tifosi]

The chassis numbers were #214(spare), #215(RB), #216(MS). The #214 is the one used in Suzuka by Michael.

[baddog]

they are 2001 cars in the same sense that the car used 15 races into a season is the same one as at the first race.. it is a different thing to a complete new design.

while ross Im sure keeps things quiet when he wants to, he was pretty explicit that the big changes are electornic and in engine management not in aero, chassis etc

Shaun

[Hotwheels]

Mrv,

I like the fact that you now seem to be the absolute authority on Ferrari and we lap up what ever you put
down in front of us.

So is the current Ferrari F2001 c / d or x?? Doesn't a F1 car change throughout the year with a tweak here or there??
If F2001 was the initial car in Aussie 2001 , then it was changed throughout the year hence b / c / d / etc , then
we had a major change with TC in Spain - UNLESS of course Ferrari always had TC - , then the car in Suzuka
was supposed to be much different from the Aussie 2001 etc etc tetc etc

So which car are we on??

All it matters is that it is winning - and MAINLY due to tires - so much for the other changes.

I hope Ferrari start the 2005 car soon - after the dream team they need all the time and the planning possible to
avoid another 21 year slump.

[Hellenic tifosi]

What makes the F2001B different than the original is the fact that the chassis has different specifications from the original. All parts are evelved during the course of the season, but chassis are almost never changed.

[Williams]

Originally posted by Hellenic tifosi
What makes the F2001B different than the original is the fact that the chassis has different specifications from the original. All parts are evelved during the course of the season, but chassis are almost never changed.

It comes down to whether they are using the same mold as last year to produce the chassis. If it is the same mold, you can glue on as many new bits as you want, it is still the 2001 car (evolved). The really radical changes can only happen with a newly-molded chassis to take a new engine, gearbox, etc.

[JDeRosa]

Originally posted by Hotwheels

All it matters is that it is winning - and MAINLY due to tires - so much for the other changes.

Are we watching the same sport????

[Wouter]

Mrv, what you're telling can't be right unless what you earlier said about the chassisnumbers isn't true. If the #214 was raced in Suzuka by MS, then there is no way that the chassis Ferari uses now in what is called the F1-2001 is yet another 10 kg lighter than the one used in Suzuka. The #214 itself was already much lighter than its predecessors. And it is still being used in the races along with #215 and #216.

And you reported on another thread that one of those chassis was destroyed by Rubens, even though no-one has seen him doing that! And then there are the chassis used by Burti and Badoer in europe. They have to be older and thus heavier spec of the F1-2001 because the #214,215 and 216 should still be in Asia. So what's the deal with all your contradicting information? How many chassis does Ferrari have of the different versions of the F-2001?

[Hellenic tifosi]

Originally posted by Williams


It comes down to whether they are using the same mold as last year to produce the chassis. If it is the same mold, you can glue on as many new bits as you want, it is still the 2001 car (evolved). The really radical changes can only happen with a newly-molded chassis to take a new engine, gearbox, etc.

I don't know if they used a new mold, but it is certain that the chassis 214-216 are different from the original ones. By the way, do the teams use one mold for all the chassis they want to build throughout the season, or do they create a separate mold for each new chassis?

Wouter, it is obvious that Barrichello's chassis sustained no remarkable damage apart drom the rear wing, diffuser, etc.

[Wouter]

Yeah, it's obvious that Barrichello's chassis wasn't destroyed in that crash. Yet Mrv posted somewhere that an F1-2002 would be send (according to Todt I believe?) to replace a chassis that "was destroyed by Rubens".

[Hellenic tifosi]

I think that this quote from Jean Todt was just mind games.

[Wouter]

By the way Mrv, I found an interesting quote from you on usenet in the r-a-s-f1 group. You posted on 3/9/2000 in a michelin thread (that has been revived recently) :

< Bridgestone than Mclaren at the moment. Bridgestone would love for Ferrari to
win both Championships as it would benefit them more financially.>>

Seems McLaren had good reasons to switch to Michelin regardless of the quality of their tyres?
What did you mean back then about financial benefits anyway?

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Wouter
Yeah, it's obvious that Barrichello's chassis wasn't destroyed in that crash. Yet Mrv posted somewhere that an F1-2002 would be send (according to Todt I believe?) to replace a chassis that "was destroyed by Rubens".

Jean Todt said in the press that a F2002 chassis would be sent. He was just playing with everyone once again.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Wouter
By the way Mrv, I found an interesting quote from you on usenet in the r-a-s-f1 group. You posted on 3/9/2000 in a michelin thread (that has been revived recently):

<Bridgestone than Mclaren at the moment. Bridgestone would love for Ferrari to
win both Championships as it would benefit them more financially.>>

Seems McLaren had good reasons to switch to Michelin regardless of the quality of their tyres?
What did you mean back then about financial benefits anyway?

Bridgestone received the contract for Fiat and Ferrari road cars worldwide the exposure with the name Ferrari benefited them more financially, than if team Mclaren had won the championship. The exposure that Ferrari brings to a company is phenomenal. To most people worldwide the name Mclaren doesn't mean much to them, but mention Ferrari and it is a different, due to the prestigious name, history etc...

[Wouter]

I see. What about the F1-2001 chassis though Mrv? If they keep getting 10 kg's lighter each race there won't be a chassis left soon; only ballast!

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Wouter
I see. What about the F1-2001 chassis though Mrv? If they keep getting 10 kg's lighter each race there won't be a chassis left soon; only ballast!

[Gemini]

Originally posted by Wouter
I see. What about the F1-2001 chassis though Mrv? If they keep getting 10 kg's lighter each race there won't be a chassis left soon; only ballast!

[Slyder]

Originally posted by Wouter
I see. What about the F1-2001 chassis though Mrv? If they keep getting 10 kg's lighter each race there won't be a chassis left soon; only ballast!

That was classic