Home boost for Ferrari?
Monza 2015
Italian Grand Prix
Ferrari target reliability as drivers promise to fight fair
Scuderia Ferrari
Screen shot 2014-01-25 at 14.20.54
Posted By: Justin Hynes  |  25 Jan 2014   |  3:12 pm GMT  |  346 comments

With comprehensive regulation changes leading to radically different machinery for 2014, Ferrari Technical Director James Allison has targeted reliability as the key target for the team’s F14 T, which was launched this afternoon.

Allison, who joined the team late last season from Lotus, insisted that while new power units and changes to the aerodynamic regulations will create performance differences, it will be a team’s ability to finish races that will have a major influence on this year’s campaign.

“The 2014 season sees us for the first time in many years having free development of an engine from a clean sheet of paper and that’s going to bring a level of variation of power between the various engine manufacturers that makes the engine a much more important competitive factor in 2014 than it has been in previous years,” he said.

“The rules on aerodynamics are also very new,” he added. “The rate of development we have aerodynamically through the season will be very steep and the importance of aerodynamics to the championship is going to be at least as important as the differences in power levels between the various engine manufacturers.

“However, if I had to choose one thing that was likely to be the dominant factor for the whole season I would choose neither the level of power or the aerodynamic development. I would say that this year reliability is going to be absolutely fundamental.”

Echoing the technical director’s views, Fernando Alonso added: “One of things we need to have under control is the reliability of the car and to try to finish the first races of the season. That will be one of the main difficulties this year. As far as we are able to finish all the races without any problem we would be happy, and then the performance will arrive.”

Alonso, of course, will this season be paired with Kimi Raikkönen and while some observers have predicted that the partnership could be fractious, the Spanish driver insisted that he and Raikkönen will race for the team first.

“We will follow whatever the team priority is and we will try to do our best to win both championships and bring back to Ferrari some of the success it has had in the past,” he said. “The best way to achieve that is to race at 100 per cent every race to try to bring back points for the team and for ourselves. To do that we need perfect harmony and to follow the team’s priorities and do what the team asks.”

Raikkönen, too, maintained the party line and when asked what would happen if the duo find themselves racing on the same stretch of track insisted that he and Alonso “know what we have to do”.

“I don’t think there is any way of telling [what would happen]. Every situation is different,” said the Finn who is returning to the team with which he won the 2007 title. “We know what we have to do. We will race other. We respect each other, but you try to come out on top. There’s a lot of talk from outside about problems and that kind of thing but inside the team there is a very good feeling and hopefully we can bring both championships to the team.”

As for the F14 T, the new car, as with others seen so far, features a steeply dropped nose. However, unlike Lotus’ E22, which has a two-pronged arrangement, or McLaren MP4-29, which features uprights on either side of the thin nose, Ferrari’s solution is a sculpted though significant step down from the front bulkhead leading to a relatively wide and flat nose.

Under the skin, too, there are relatively few similarities to the car’s predecessor, though the team has chosen to continue with pull-rod front and rear suspension.

Alonso admitted that the new car and the new regulations, which promote efficiency though tight fuel controls, may influence driving style in F1 this season. However, the double world champion added that is looking forward to the challenge.

“I think in 2014 F1 will change a lot with the regulations,” he said. “Those will have some implications on the driving style so I’m looking forward to discovering this new Formula One.

“I think we have to be optimistic,” he added in a later online press conference. “Let’s say that there are no signs to be pessimistic. We are in a changeable time now with some big regulation changes but I think we are quite well prepared for that. The team has been working for a good time over the winter on the car. We have the technology, the people and the facilities to create and to be able to challenge in this new Formula One.”

Analysis of the car from the images available by JA on F1 Technical adviser Mark Gillan will follow.

Featured Video
Behind the Scenes at the track
Behind the Scenes at the track
Featured News in ferrari
Share This:
Posted by:
  1. Richard says:

    That nose came from a freaking Fiat Multipla…hell I got used to the step-nose in 2012, but this…

    1. PB says:

      Hands down the ugliest car yet without any doubt…

      1. Marybeth says:

        A car is only ugly until its first win. :) I like the black. Fortunatley I am not well enough versed in F1 cars to think that any of them are ugly. I figure they are what they for a practical purpose, a purpose that goes right by me. :)

      2. Jose Sanchez says:

        The Multipla or the ferrari. Because to me the ferrari looks much better than the lotus.

    2. FerrariFan says:

      It looks like a tree fell and flattened the nose of the car

  2. Rich B says:

    and there’s me thinking the Williams was ugly! geez

    1. Monktonnik says:

      I know. I’d never thought I’d see a Ferrari I didn’t want to drive.

      Decent of Ferrari to pay tribute to the Elephant Man with this car though.

  3. Klaas says:

    Ugliest Ferrari F1 car I’ve ever seen!! Why was that horrible nose rule necessary? No innovation, inspiration it seems! Ferrari doesn’t do or try anything new or Exciting don’t they?

    1. Rick says:

      The world’s fastest vacuum cleaner! But really, more ugly you die.

      1. Mark V says:

        Scuderia Hoover: “Sucking up the competition and blowing them away.”

      2. Pete says:

        hahahahaha. that is all.

      3. Peter Freeman says:

        The Terminitor Strikes Back!

  4. johnC says:

    oh my god !! very ugly looking F14 T, it should be names F14 alien,

  5. Brettus Maximus says:

    Man, that thing is UG-LY!

    Reminds me of Cyril sneer from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Raccoons

    1. Paul H says:

      So right! I was thinking exactly same but thought nobody would know who I was on about : ) Cyril Sneer crossed with a hoover.

    2. Pete says:

      Reminds me of the adverts for Dunlop Groundhog tyres (back in the 70′s?).

  6. Craig D says:

    Oh my God! From the anteater to the elephant. Or is it a dust buster to hoover up the Pirreli tyre debris?!

    1. Spyros says:

      Dustbuster! Thank you, that’s exactly what it reminds me!

    2. Richard says:

      You’ve got it in one. It’s not a Ferrari, but a Pirelli vacuum cleaner. – I like it!

    3. PB says:

      Haha rotfl!!

  7. Tom Haythornthwaite says:

    UGLY, but perhaps the least ugly so far.

    1. Mike says:

      UGLY, but perhaps the least ugly so far.

      You need to get to Specsavers!

    2. Steve Zodiac says:

      By far the ugliest so far!!

      1. Martin says:

        It’s subjective I think it is better than the others so far. Yes I’d prefer without the step but that’s the rules. At least from above or looking straight at it it looks better than the little thin appendages others have

      2. Voodoopunk says:

        And how about the profile of it?

        So horrible.

      3. Wade Parmino says:

        I think it looks pretty good. Not the best looking Ferrari but at least it seems to flow at the front rather than a harsh stepped nose, forked prongs or thin drooping. The kiwi bird looking cars are the real ghastly ones.

  8. goferet says:

    Interesting design philosophy from the Ferrari team for it seems like they wanted to get rid of the former gaping hole that was so shocking in the previous cars.

    All this is well and good but now the car is left slightly looking like a snow plow thanks to the huge front wing down below.

    Yes, as things stand, Williams is winning the beauty stakes followed by Force India and wouldn’t it be nice is they are competitive too.

    But looks aside, what has got my attention is the fact that the team has been working on this challenger for the past 2 years >>> Mamma mia.

    For sure with that kind of head start, if you do not cross the finish line first, you might as well lay down your tools and try another profession.

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “Yes, as things stand, Williams is winning the beauty stakes followed by Force India and wouldn’t it be nice is they are competitive too.”

      No, the Lotus is the best looking so far.

      1. Random 79 says:

        It’s all subjective, even if the subjects in question have bad taste :)

      2. AuraF1 says:

        I have to agree – the Williams is an even more ridiculous proboscis than the mclaren which at least looks vaguely okay from some angles. The lotus fork tongue is by far the most pleasing option so far. None are going to win a beautiful car design award though.

      3. Tim says:

        No, the Lotus is the best looking so far…

        You have got to be kidding – you’re on a wind up. Right?

      4. Steve Zodiac says:

        Looks like Williams and Force India, The Macca looks ok too

      5. Voodoopunk says:

        If I was kidding and on a wind up I would tell you how good the Ferrari looked, or that I liked the McLaren… obviously.

      6. Elie says:

        I reckon the Lotus is fantastic looking too. We havent seen the front of the FI but the rest looks spot on too.
        Williams Yuck- Mclaren Yucker! Ferrari somewhere in between!

      7. Tim says:


        you do know that Kimi is no longer driving for Lotus, don’t you? You aren’t required to support them any more :-)

      8. Voodoopunk says:


        This is what it comes down to, not which car you think looks the best but who you support.

  9. Rich B says:

    who sat on the front?

    1. Random 79 says:


      1. Jose Sanchez says:

        Montoya and all his family. He doesnt go anywhere without them.

    2. Rob Newman says:

      Garry Anderson

  10. rach says:

    This reminds me of a quote that Eddie Irvine said to Steve Rider about the release of the 1996 Ferrari. Can’t remember it exactly but it was along the lines of “are you worried it looks nothing like any other car”?

    I hope this is not the case for Ferrari’s sake.

    1. AndyK says:

      Haha he said later on in a quote something like “I remember seeing it for the first time and thinking ‘that looks worryingly different from everybody else’s car.. Turned out we were wrong and everybody else was right’”

      1. rach says:

        That was it!

  11. AlexTrickle says:

    At first I hated the Ferrari nose but now its grown on me and I prefer it to that of the McLaren. From the side the McLaren looks nicer but from the front the Ferrari looks nicer.

    1. gpfan says:

      “At first I hated the Ferrari
      nose but now its grown on me”.

      Better see a doctor! LOL

  12. Anne says:

    Good! That´s exactly what I need to clean my carpet. Well compear to the others it is maybe the lesser evil or the lesser ugly

    1. Andy says:

      It looks like the crevice tool, obviously hoovering up the crumbs for the last 4 years from Red Bull has had an impact on the design team.

  13. ferddy07 says:

    To think the Mclaren actually looks better than this… Now that says it all doesn’t it? I have never laughed so hard at any F1 car unveiling. Thanks FIA.. good job.

  14. Sarvar says:

    What a “pretty” nose(( but as Kimi ‘d have said, doesn’t matter as long as it wins the GPs.

    1. expatpom says:

      I agree with Kimi too Sarvar – if it wins races and there is some aerodynamic magic in the design which we can’t see, then all this bitching about looks will be forgotten. I would love James to have a competition to allow readers to design an F1 car with similar parameters and constraints as 2014 and lets just see how difficult it is to do! I am not a Ferrari fan but I am also not a car designer/aerodynamic engineer. (however – I do want to see the Merc car)

  15. Witan says:

    F14T looks remarkably like FIAT at first glance

    1. Andy says:

      Picked for a reason.

      1. gpfan says:


  16. Nasidas says:

    oookay…. let’s hope it’s fast, the previous few years ferrari have had beautiful and slow cars, hopefully this reverses that trend, ti has to. I’m curious what Vettel will nickname the red bull if it ends up being as ugly as this…

    1. Tealeaf says:

      Susan’s Boyles.

  17. johnnyT says:

    it is one of the most ugliest F1 car i have ever seen… i would not be surprised if she is at least 1 sec slower than most of the field… so maybe next year ferrari…

    1. Macca Man says:

      Yes, because looks and speed go hand and hand. I remember everyone carrying on and on about how good looking the McLaren was last year (and some said the same thing this year – GULP) and that MP4-28 was a dog that never made the podium. The reactions are so silly and stupid. I’ll take these new nose designs over the stepped noses from the last 2 years any day. Kudos to Ferrari, it’s an interesting interpretation and it’s far nicer that the thin proboscis that McLaren have shown and those uneven double prongs on the Lotus. The other thing Ferrari have going for them is the best driver pairing on the grid. Time to see the Red Bull.

      1. Tim says:

        The other thing Ferrari have going for them is the best driver pairing on the grid…

        Unless Ferrari is especially dominant I suspect their very strong driver pairing will be a disadvantage – not for the WCC but the WDC, which, after all, is the only championship the general public cares about.

      2. Voodoopunk says:

        “not for the WCC but the WDC, which, after all, is the only championship the general public cares about.”

        Thank god the general public don’t watch Formula 1 otherwise it would need dumbing down so that the masses…

        Oh, hang on…

      3. Tim says:

        Very droll.

        To be fair, if we judge by the comments , the majority of posters on JA on F1 are far more interested in the WDC
        rather than the WCC. There must have been thousands of comments devoted to ‘proving’ which drivers are the best. I can’t recall very many debates around which team is best – if there are any it’s usually in order to ‘prove’ which driver is better, eg their car is rubbish and they still beat whoever :-)

      4. Voodoopunk says:


        …and yet people still seem to support teams…

    2. JTW says:

      Ugly, or beautiful, means nothing in F1 cars. Winning, or losing, is the criteria to judge the car. I admit it is … unattractive … but who gives a damn. The hope is that it is a) fast and b) reliable.

  18. Andrew M says:

    It doesn’t look as ugly as most of the others.

    1. James Clayton says:

      It really does

  19. Andrew says:

    Looking back to the days of the grooved tyres the cars had dropped narrow noses and narrow front wings too. They didn’t seem slow to me!!
    It’s been said already that the actual speed of the cars won’t be much different with 700 bhp + avalaible ( is that correct ? ) So….what can we expect? More sliding around at the back of the car,opposite lock in corners and lots of close racing maybe ? I’m just guessing of course and am NO expert in any of this. I think it could well be more entertaining and even funny at times as we see people doing spins accidentally in corners if the turbo kicks in at the wrong time….it just might be what this sport has needed in a long while. DRIVERS SKILLS !!
    I’d love to see the comments from the more knowledgeable observers here or even James Allen himself if he’s really here.

    1. Random 79 says:

      You’re basically on the money, but we still have to wait a couple days to see if it pans out that way :)

    2. AuraF1 says:

      You got it right there, sliding, sideways action, silly mistakes (especially depending on the tyres) and also at least two months of cars blowing up spectacularly until they sort the reliability.

      On the one hand the loose rear would seem to suit aggressive drivers but the torque ratio would seem to suit careful adaptable drivers – I think basically we’re just not going to know until it happens so it’s going to be interesting at least.

    3. Mr Ed says:

      In theory the turbo will not ‘kick in’ as you put it. Thanks to the ERS it should always be developing boost.

      As for the looks, not too bad I reckon.

      The cooling inlets look a LOT smaller than on the Mac don’t you think?

      As for the Lotus. Word games. If I was CW I’d kick em to the kerb and tell them to come back with a single nose like they were told.

    4. Martin says:

      The power outputs would be less than the early grooved tyre era I think. The 3 litre V10s got to around 650 kW in 2004 compared to 520 kW for the new cars.

      The engines are likely to be designed to minimise or eliminate turbo lag through using the electric motor generator on the turbo to keep the turbo revs up.

      Whether there will be much tail-out driving will depend on the driver skills and having a progressive throttle map so that the driver can get the right amount of torque out of a corner. The torque of the engines is fuel flow limited, so there’s 1/3 more torque available in a corner taken at 6000 rpm in second gear than one taken at 8000 rpm in second gear. It will be up to the driver to progressively add more right foot. As the tyres get worse the drivers will have to adapt. Some will be better than others. It is likely to be the case that the hurt from spinning up the tyres and the subsequent tyre damage is greater than from being conservative, so I’d expect more tail out errors in qualifying than the race.

    5. James Clayton says:

      Yes Andrew it all sounds great in theory. In fact it sounds awesome.

      But DRS, Pirelli and Double Points are intent on ruining any chance of a good show, I’m afraid.

  20. gpfan says:

    The least hideous, so far.

    1. Voodoopunk says:


  21. slim says:

    well the new Ferrari f14t(fiat) is just awful.

  22. Mike84 says:

    Aerodynamically – it seems worse than all the others. Williams lets more air through to the floor, McLaren even more, and Lotus still more. Another unimaginative following of new regs by Ferrari, like 2009. Despite the fortunes spent on new wind tunnel and CFD, they’re still inferior at aero. There are other factors that might let them win, reliability, efficiency, execution… but for many years they’ve been eroding the Ferrari brand’s traditional primary identities: Speed and Style. Now it’s coming to mean Endurance and Consistency. Notably, reflective of the current team principal’s conservative nature.

    1. Hansb says:

      Lets wait such judgement after final test session is over. It it almost impossible to have a reliable picture of the performance of a F1 car without having more info than pictures.

    2. Paul H says:

      That’s my main confusion with this nose – all the other teams are getting so much more air through. Ferrari have gone from one extreme to the other, I can’t help thinking this car will be very different for the first race.

    3. Klaas Backers says:

      Totally agree! Ferrari hasn’t done anything to improve their aerodynamic innovation. This car looks like any other car they’ve produced over the last 5 years (except the nose) No inspiration, innovation or good ideas. Look at how beautifully sculpted the Mclaren is behind the driver. Ferrari urgently needs a brilliant mind to help them with aero, because their current staff don’t think outside the box for new ideas!!!

      1. hero_was_senna says:

        You do realise their current heads of design used to work for Ferrari between 2000 and 2004?
        Rory Byrne was the main man and he’s been working on this for about a year.
        James Allison joined the team a few months ago, yet was responsible for last years Lotus.

        Can you name me a designer, other than Newey, who would be better?

      2. Klaas Backers says:

        Rory Byrne wasn’t the designer on this car, but only a consultant. I’m just saying that Ferrari lacks a truly great aerodynamic team. Newey has a whole team around him.
        Allison is undoubtedly an asset, but it’s too early to see his influence on this year’s car.
        They (Ferrari) seem to lack creativity and new ideas, when was the last time Ferrari came up with something truly innovative? I can only remember 2008 when they had a hole in the nose, but other that that? They didn’t came up with the double diffuser or the F-duct or exceptional engine mapping to replicate traction control or ride height control or flex wings and the list goes on. They were excellent in making their car worse over the season though, kudos for that…

    4. Jipaide says:

      Your comments remind me of those of Gary Anderson last year who after the launches and before the on track tests found the McLaren the most innovative and promising and the Red Bull too conservative…

      1. FerrariFan says:

        Thanks for bringing that up. I guess the only thing we can talk about right now is aesthetics and these things are not winning any contests. Force India did the best reveal by showing only the profile.

      2. Tim says:

        I was just thinking much the same thing – Gary used to rock up at the car launches, have a quick look at the car and then make all sorts of prophecies regarding the cars likely competitiveness. I used to find it quite irritating and insulting to the teams – they have spent thousands of hours honing their masterpiece and this (relatively unsuccessful) ex-designer would take one look and then proceed to rubbish their work. Still, the BBC has let him go, so that won’t be a problem this year :-)

      3. KRB says:

        They let Gary Anderson go? When did this happen?

      4. Tim says:

        I read about it a couple of weeks ago – I think it was the Judge13 site , they said GA wanted an expanded role and the BBC said no, so he left. I thought GA was really good with a pen and paper in hand when he explained some technical issue. But, when he turned up at the launches and spouted off it really used to irritate me. Others probably loved it – horses and courses I guess :-)

    5. hero_was_senna says:

      Funny really, when Ferrari began winning championships with Schumacher back in 2000 through to 2004, they had speed, style and reliability/ endurance.
      As to the team principal, he over-sees the road cars too, they don’t lack much in speed or style.

      If you want to look back in history, I’ll give you two examples but there are many more which would back up my argument.

      2005, Mclaren had speed and style yet was beaten by the reliable , consistent Renault.

      1995, Williams had speed and style yet was beaten by a reliable and consistent Benetton.

      Still, why let the truth get in the way of assumptions.

      1. Vlad says:

        Yeah and James Allison said that reliability is more important, so a conservative approach is what they have gone for. Anyways 2014 will be a battle of engine efficiency, I think Merc will be the front runners there, unless some more silly equalisation rules are drafted by the FIA.

      2. hero_was_senna says:

        I’m not so sure. By all accounts Mercedes were burning midnight oil few weeks back, they couldn’t believe Ferrari and Renault had their engines on track already. They have also reportedly had reliability issues on the dyno.

        As to Ferrari, one thing all professional observers have been saying is how small the side pods are on the car, compared to the others. Maybe the cooling requirements got the Ferrari engine suggest their efficiency is good, the Sauber is also sporting small sidepods

    6. Elie says:

      I completely disagree. I have been waiting for a team to come up with a wider flat nose, for two reasons maintaining consistent channel of airflow along the bottom of the chassis to the floor whilst generating consistent progressive down force over the front of the car. Ferrari have the pullrod fron end sonoerhaps this concept works better in tandem for them.The Mclaren& Williams have taller but narrower channels both have obstructed the airflow over the nose and through the middle. To this end the Ferrari is far better ( perhaps too the Lotus but we havent seen the front on of the E22.
      In terms of Looks that E22 in black & gold is by far the best looker and its proportion front to back is fantastic, same too the FI – they just look brilliantly balanced. For mine- the Mclarens ape snout and bulbous engine cover & rear make it easily the worst looking car.
      But like I said before we will all say how beautiful they are when they win!

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        Bloody hell!

        For once, I agree with you, but looks are subjective.

    7. Ali Nasser says:

      I am no expert so this is just a theory. The engineers in various articles spoke about cooling being a massive factor contributing to reliability. So perhaps with the nose design, they’re trying to use the airflow and force it into that hole above the drivers head to increase cooling and thus reliability, rather than going for outright aerodynamic performance.

    8. stoic says:

      Here’s a technical analysis on why ferrari chose the nose design:

    9. Anil Parmar says:

      How do you know how the car performs aerodynamically when the parts currently on it are just placeholders?

      Teams don’t give anything away at reveals. Also worth noting how incredibly small the sidepods are; those rumours of ferrari using water cooling could well be true.

      1. RodgerT says:

        Water cooling of what? It’s not like they’re running air cooled Porsche flat sixes.

        The inlets on the sidepods are for putting air past radiators to cool all of the system fluids. Even the KERS has had cooling fluid since they’ve been introduced.

      2. Anil Parmar says:

        I know what the air inlets are for..I’m just observing what others have; the air inlets around the car are much smaller on the Ferrari than on other cars, which is odd given how important cooling is this year, with only 5 engines per driver across the season.

        This would support the reports in the Italian media over the last few weeks that Ferrari are going to be water cooling their engine, something which hasn’t been seen for a long time.

    10. Clarks4WheelDrift says:

      It is hard to imagine what is happening with the aero on this Ferrari.

      You could say it looks to have a big flat area where the nose rises, above the shell logo, that could produce an area of greater than normal drag. Or does this shift the air up and over the drivers head and down on to the rear wing, helping reduce drag? Or will the drivers be racing in an airless pocket vaccum and need an air supply to their helmets!?!

      It’s prettier than the rest from directly above, but the McLaren looks nicer head on. So with some careful TV coverage editing, F1 could look beautiful this year ;)

      The overriding thing for me is still does the Ferrari engine have enough grunt?

      I’m a tiny bit suspicious when drivers start saying they need to finish races, then the performance will arrive… (perhaps by then Neweys car will be long gone in the title race)

      One thing though, the Ferrari looks perfect for giving a driver a lift back to the pits as with Webber Alonso last year. Only now they sit on the seat at the front and hold on to the two black handles like some kind of super powerful Sinclair C5 (of you remember those) ;)

  23. Peter says:

    That is ugly. Even the livery is a mess. If the design of the car has to be so ugly at least the livery should be something that does not make it worse. They should follow the less is more approach with all of these strips and try to place the sponsor logos in some harmonious way. Disappointed. McLaren is a beauty compared to Ferrari.

  24. goferet says:

    The new car, to be driven by Fernando
    Alonso and Kimi Raikkönen

    As a reminder, due to it’s driver line-up, I think Ferrari won’t necessarily be fighting against Newey in 2014 but rather against the history books because of the following;

    1) Since their very first year of racing (1950), the team has never gone more than 2 years without winning a driver’s title except for those times when they go through a dry spell

    2) The shortest dry spell to date lasted 10 years (1964-1974) and the longest 20 years (1980-1999)

    3) The drivers responsible for having broken Ferrari’s dry spells are the German speakers in Lauda & Schumi

    4) With the exception of Fangio in the 50s, no driver has been lucky enough to win titles with two manufacture teams.

    5) Lastly, Brab(ham) and Gra(ham) have the official record of the longest time between titles ~ 5 years (Lauda has the unofficial record of 6 years because he came out of retirement after 4 years)

    As for the constructors trophy:

    a) In their history, Ferrari have never gone longer than 3 years without the trophy except for the dry spells.

    b) The first dry spell lasted 10 years and the other 15 years (1983-1998)

    c) Interestingly after the end of the first dry spell, Ferrari won 3 consecutive constructors titles and after the second dry spell won 6 back to back titles.

    d) Only 3 times have Ferrari not won back to back constructors titles i.e. 1961, 1964 and 1979

    1. Robert F. says:

      #4 is simply incorrect. Schumacher won at Benneton & Ferrari, Lauda at Ferrari and Mclaren, Prost at McLarwn and Williams, etc.

      1. Daniel m says:

        By ‘manufacturer’ he meant a major road car manufacturer. Benetton never built a road care, and neither have Williams, whilst McLaren only started building road cars after Lauda and Prost had retired. So quite correct actually, from the examples you give anyway.

      2. goferet says:

        @ Robert F.

        No, in F1 there are two types of teams.

        There’s the private teams such as Williams, Lotus, Red Bull etc

        Then we also have the manufacturer teams such as Mercedes, Ferrari, Toyota, BMW, Maserati etc

        In other words the manufacture teams are global car companies.

      3. AuraF1 says:

        I can only assume goferet meant car manufacturer constructors? Either that or his fun but dodgy statistics run downs are still written more like horoscopes ;)

      4. hero_was_senna says:

        goferet has been very careful in his wording, surprised you missed it.

        “two manufacturer teams” Fangio won with Alfa Romeo, Mercedes, Ferrari and Maserati – so actually he’s wrong stating two, as they were all manufacturers in the 50′s

        The Benetton was not a manufacturer team, they got engines from Ford and Renault.

        As to Lauda and Prost, in their eras, they used Tag engines, Honda engines and Renault engines which were supplied to the respective teams

      5. RobF says:

        I stand corrected.

      6. Elie says:

        He creates all these crazy notions and stats to fit in with a preconceived outcome. Most of which are often wrong

      7. hero_was_senna says:

        I know Elie, we’ve both experienced his rambling a for years ;) lol

      8. Matthew says:

        Number four is not incorrect as written. benneton are not a manufacture team, neither are McLaren and neither are Williams…. fangio won it with 4 different manufacturer teams (Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz and Maserati) so the point stands, but it’s tenuous at best

    2. npw123 says:

      And Scumacher went 5 yrs between titles also

      1. goferet says:

        @ npw123

        No Schumi went through a 4 year dry spell.

        We don’t count the last year a driver won a title nor the one breaking the spell and so for Schumi it’s 1996-1999.

      2. gpfan says:

        Also, the turn of the century
        was 01 Jan. 2001!

        So, there!


        (And, you are correct).

      3. James Clayton says:

        So they’ve never not won back to back titles unless they’ve gone for 4 or more years without a title and not counting the three years you specified?

        Ever considered a career in politics?!

    3. 1.6V6T says:

      Lol, won regular except for ‘dry spells’ that is one of the most convoluted bunch of stats I ever read, so in 60 odd years they had near 25 with no titles and only won every 2 years for the other 35. Come on! That really ain’t that great. To top it off they only had 6 driver titles in the last 30 seasons.
      Really, Ferrari suck just a little. They rest back on being Ferrari just too much for me to take the really seriously. Although I do hope the RedBull/vettle dominance needs ending and I for one don’t care who does it, just as long as someone does…….

    4. James Clayton says:

      “Since their very first year of racing (1950), the team has never gone more than 2 years without winning a driver’s title except for those times when they go through a dry spell”

      How many years constitutes a dry spell?

      1. goferet says:

        @ James Clayton

        The Ferrari case is really peculiar. So I would guess a dry spell is anything in between 10-20 years.

      2. goferet says:

        @ James Clayton

        And no mate you’re confusing the constructors title and individual drivers title.

        In the constructors race, they have never gone more that 3 years whereas Schumi took 4 years before he won a drivers title for the team.

      3. RodgerT says:

        More than two obviously. ;)

  25. . says:

    so ugly.
    what do you think james? it doesn’t look too aggressive.. either :( . and that elephant nose’.. are they hidding something?

    1. James Allen says:

      I’m not sure about the look of the cars, but we do get used to it very quickly. I remember when the cars went to narrower track in late 1990s and they looked like they’d been in a car crusher, but now when you see an early 1990s car it looks all squat and ugly!!

      1. rasbob says:

        “but now when you see an early 1990s car it looks all squat and ugly!!”

        Not to me they don’t!

      2. greg says:

        I’m with you. The McLaren MP4/8 1993 car has to be the best balanced looking car ever. Its just perfect from every angle.

      3. Reuben says:

        I’ll second that! The 1990/91 Ferrari’s look stunning!!

      4. Vlad says:

        Yeah loved the 641/2, just not the pick-up in 2nd gear. 1980s cars look the best though… massive and with grunt.

      5. RobF says:

        Ferrari 643. A dog on the track, but so breathtakingly beautiful.

      6. David says:

        Yes, totally agree with you James. When Tyrell came out with the first raised nose I thought that was ugly, but now I find it normal. Personally from what I’ve seen so far, for me this year’s cars are 100% more attractive than last year’s. Then again art is subjective. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Bring back the 1958 Maserati 250F! lol.

      7. AndyK says:

        I know what you mean.. Most people seem to think I’m mental but I still say the F2008 is my favourite looking F1 car.. It was a stunner! Most people seem to hate all the little winglets etc that were added around that time but I liked it.

      8. James Clayton says:

        “when you see an early 1990s car it looks all squat and ugly”

        Excuse me?!!

      9. Lee says:

        I think the point of James’ comment is that you get used to the cars and after a while they look normal. My own example is when the wider front wings and narrower rear wings came in a few years ago. At first they looked really strange but by Monaco they looked normal.

      10. Heinzman says:

        Agree James, the only time the early 90′s cars look good is in the eyes of the nostalgic; the romantics of Senna/Prost days.

        And before anyone gets upset, I admit to the same crime. I think the MP4-20 or the R26 are the best looking cars but that is only because they were my favourite times.

  26. Ace says:

    A novel solution, lets hope it’s not as slow as the name implies (F14T = FIAT). Now we wait for the Mercedes and the Red Bull to see what they come up with.

    1. hero_was_senna says:

      It makes me smile when I see the same tired old insults about Fiat.
      It may serve you well to read up on wikipedia about what the company actually does regards the automotive industry.

      1. goggomobil says:

        Well said, and it’s rather sad that ignorance takes the plsce,FIAT contributed same great man and their innovations.
        Man like Vittorio Jano, a briliant engineer/ designer of his time, who Enzo Ferrari recruited ex Fiat and the rest is History,an other, such man as Vincenzo Lancia, what can be said about Mr Lancia, simply years ahead of anyone in Motor Industry.
        Yep,it takes all type does it not.

      2. Ace says:

        yes of course it will….but it’s hardly an insult when a fiat will be slower than THIS ferrari. Yes it’s a stereotype that whenever fiat is mentioned, the memory of a tiny car falling apart is conjured, but I am by no means insulting a car company. It’s just ironic that the ferrari hopeful to challenge the might of red bull is called a fiat.

        I am fully aware of Fiat’s contribution to the motor industry. Nobody just happens to become part of the top 10 automotive manufacturer in the world (choose your own metric as to how they are in the top 10). So before you actually level criticism at people who “insult” (crack jokes with the similarity of the name) Fiat, please do a bit of research yourself…the fact that you’re not the smartest person commenting here.

      3. hero_was_senna says:

        Calm down ace, I suggested research because your initial comment was a tired cliche I’ve heard far too often.
        Smartest person, I didn’t realise I had made that claim but just so you understand, I am Italian, have owned many Italian cars and have even sold many of these, my understanding of their histories would surprise you. I digress, I recommended wiki to you and others because it’s easier than typing it all out!

      4. goggomobil says:

        I do not claim to be a smart arse in any field however I do admire most, the people through their vision and effort and at times their life, present or past,thus is the very cornerstone of the lifestyle we injoy today.
        I subscribe to J.A site as I find it above ordinary and to learn something I did not know it before.

  27. Steve McGill says:

    Is it coincidence that F14T looks like FIAT? These cars aren’t ahlf as bad as I was expecting, this is almost nice, prefer lower noses than up high

  28. Bob says:

    Looks wise I think it looks a bit better than the McLaren and a lot better than the Lotus from the front though still ugly. From the side though the McLaren looks much more pleasing to the eye as strangely enough does the Lotus.

  29. Bob says:

    I think it looks a little bit better than the McLaren and a lot better than the Lotus from the top/front.
    From the side however it looks like the person hitting this years cars with the ugly stick took particular exception to the Ferrari. Both the Mclaren/Williams and Lotus approach look much better at angles other than straight on.

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “I think it looks a little bit better than the McLaren and a lot better than the Lotus from the top/front.”

      The majority of Ferrari fans seem to have vision issues.

      1. gpfan says:

        Not a Ferrari fan.
        I am not just British,
        but Scottish (hint, hint).

        But, so far, all of the
        cars seen are just so ugly,
        that the Ferrari is the
        best of the lot.

        A scathing indictment of
        the FIA. FYI? I currently
        have a window open on the
        McLaren site. Yup, that car
        is still manky.

      2. Tim says:

        The majority of Ferrari fans seem to have vision issues..

        I think you will find it’s their taste, rather than vision, which is contrary to yours :-)

      3. Voodoopunk says:

        There’s no accounting for it…

      4. Tim says:

        Your taste (in F1 car noses)? I agree there is no accounting for it ;-)

  30. Nick says:

    The thing I like about these new regs….everyone is coming up with different interpretations and ways to get around them. It’s reminicent of the Golden Age when there were so many different designs and each car was so different.

    They’re not the most beautiful looking cars….but they could be a lot worse. Be interesting to see the running next week

  31. Adam says:

    While the new noses aren’t the prettiest things in the world it’s nice not to have uniform cars and a range of unique solutions to an engineering problem. It reminds me of the mid 70s when you could tell the cars apart by the shape as much as the colour scheme.

  32. Rayz says:

    I reckon Ferrari need a good season or they risk losing both Kimi and Alonso for 2015. Ferrari need to show they are still championship material. 2007 is a long time ago. There will be no excuses for hem now as they have two of the top 4 drivers in F1 today.

    1. Macca Man says:

      You are totally incorrect. In some shape or form all teams will struggle with these new cars and new engines. There will also be massive improvements made by all the teams as well. If Ferrari struggle more so than their competitors, they won’t have to worry about Alonso or Kimi. Why? Because Ferrari pay their drivers (and for Kimi they pay in a timely manner) the most money and Red Bull will not come calling for either Alonso or Kimi. Red Bull have Vettel locked up and Ricciardo is their #2. Where else are they going to go? McLaren? That’s a joke, Alonso and Dennis can’t stand each other. Kimi has been down that road as well. Mercedes are locked up with Hamilton and Rosberg. That’s pretty much it for the possible destinations. Alonso and Raikkonen will remain at Ferrari for 2015 & 2016.

  33. FerrariFan says:

    which animal can we relate this to? Platypus ? Duck ?

    Anyway I feel that the rear of this Ferrari is more interesting. The side pods are much narrower than all other cars unveiled. Is it because of better thermal management of the new engine or Ferrari underestimating cooling needs. We will find out.

    1. FerrariFan says:

      I mean the side pod air intakes. I would love to read a technical analysis of the designs so far.

      1. Timmay says:

        Read up on Scarbsf1 blog in the coming weeks

      1. Voodoopunk says:


    2. Random 79 says:

      Kind of reminds me of a scrab from Abe’s Oddysee

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        Fantatstic game along with exoddus.

  34. Nick says:

    First came the anteater, then the flared nostrils; now we have the vacuum cleaner. I can’t wait for tomorrow! :)

  35. Random 79 says:

    …and suddenly the odd looking Williams looks good.

    1. Sebee says:

      I was wrong about F166 turns out. F14T it is…I don’t like it myself, naming after year.

      But I may quite possibly be right about car 7 beating car 14 in ’14 in that F14T.

      On another note, Schumi…keep thinking about him. I just came from being off grid for a week and finding out he’s still under is very discouraging.

      1. Random 79 says:

        James put up a reply on the Mercedes launch article (24/1). From what he says it’s not looking good :(

      2. Sebee says:

        Yup. Saw it.

        You don’t have to be a neurosurgeon to figure out that if they are holding him under for a month it’s not at all good. This is playing out exactly like that chap that went over the bike handle bars I told you about.

    2. Sebee says:

      Hey…FIAT….F14T…oh man…I should have seen it!

      1. Random 79 says:

        Yeah, but the really sad part is that people actually voted for it.

      2. Sebee says:

        14 Alonso fans with numerology as second hobby?

      3. Voodoopunk says:


        14 Alonso fans?

      4. Sebee says:

        Sorry Voodoo, #14 Alonso is what I meant.

      5. Random 79 says:

        Look at it from Sebee’s point of view: When you’re the only Vettel fan, 14 seems like a lot ;)

      6. Sebee says:

        Don’t worry Random, when he wins the 5th in 2014, you’ll finally see the light and be converted the Vettelism.

      7. Random 79 says:


      8. Random 79 says:

        More like 14 Fiat fans with no hobby ;)

  36. Elie says:

    I was impressed with the wide flat nose tip and they seem to be the only team to have retained a substantial opening to the floor intake- the downside is the substantial drop from the bulkhead to the nose. The front on / side profile look very streamlined but the front quarter view is less flattering. I still think it looks much better than the Mclaren.

  37. Piston Bob says:

    Mama Mia.
    Looks flacid lolling about on that cushion. Hope it rises to the occasion.

    1. RodgerT says:


  38. DK says:

    Speechless on the look … Now I just hope it is fast and reliable.

  39. Dingle Dell says:

    Ugliest so far, by a mile. Can’t wait to see who comes out on top this year.

  40. rasbob says:

    Best thing I can find to say about this one is that it makes the others look quite attractive in comparison….

  41. Dany says:

    Well it’s another ugly duckling
    (typical of 2014 sor far), hope for them it performs better than it looks.

  42. Shane Pereira says:

    The nose on the new Ferrari looks pig ugly to me. The only car that looks ‘ok’ on the front-end thus far is the new Lotus.

  43. Robert F. says:

    I really wish that the FIA would stop screwing around with the parameters for the cars with ought taking into consideration the aesthetic impact. Look at that thing. It’s hideous. Perhaps the ugliest F1 car ever built. I am truly disappointed by this and all of the other cars debuted so far.

    1. wellerfan says:

      The FIA don’t make the cars ugly. They set rules that the designer interprets and then pushes to the limit in the name of downforce and efficiency. The cars could be stunningly beautiful with these rules but the performance would be affected. I am sure kimi wants the fastest car not the prettiest after all

      1. Robert F. says:

        I disagree. The FIA consults designers when adopting new regulations on the cars, who help validate whether or not a particular rule will achieve the desired end. The lack of foresight amongst them has resulted in monstrosities such as the 2012 step-nosed cars (which led to the vanity cover optionof 2013), and this year’s batch of ugly ducklings. Had the FIA mandated a minimum nose width that extended all the way to the very tip of the nose, then we wouldn’t be talking about anteater noses. Had they said that the noses could only slope down once along its longitudinal profile, then we wouldn’t be talking about the Ferrari’s “boxer’s nose.” Guaranteed, they will adopt rules like this in 2015 to remedy what has resulted this year.

      2. wellerfan says:

        Good point. I feel the ferrari nose is more pronounced than others we have seen as they have got the chassis very high to aid airflow towards the rear that the nose really swoops dramatically to reach the new max height of the front wing. I’m sure we will get used to the looks after a few weeks.

      3. RobF says:

        @wellerfan Yes, the chassis height was also something the FIA could have made a better decision on. I think they lowered it a few cm for safety reasons, but they certainly could have reduced it a few more to make the sloped noses have a prettier profile like the cars of the 90s. Some would argue that none of this matters as long as a design is fast, but I don’t agree. Part of the allure of F1 is the beauty of the cars themselves, and things like merchandising are deeply affected by a car’s looks. Which Hot Wheels Ferrari would you want on your desk, the F2004 or the F14T? No brainer there.

        I have already started to soften to the looks of the Ferrari a bit, but will certainly never love it. As ugly a solutions as it presents, it is still somehow not as bad as the F2012 step-nose. At least to my eye.

  44. Olli says:

    Looks like an aging vacuum cleaner.

  45. Peter O says:

    Hmmm, I think that given the regs, it looks quite good and not as pug-ugly as we have seen from them in the last couple of years.
    It will good to see how well it runs.

  46. goggomobil says:

    Sculptured all around best so far from its rivals, the nose though looks like a comercial vacum cleaner,a very noticeable steep nose with its endplate close to the wheels,where by the unveils so far have the endplate with its nose much further from the tyers, wait and see if Ferrari got it right,however over all one feels F14-T looks the best so far, may be Mercedes and Red Bull will spring the surprise.

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “however over all one feels F14-T looks the best so far”

      One might need a trip to the opticians then.

  47. Bart says:

    Interesting, 5 cars so far and it seems they all have different noses

  48. super seven says:

    My missus says it looks pigeon toed.

    1. hero_was_senna says:

      Rather than the Lotus “camel-toe”?

      1. Tim says:

        Lol, best analogy for the Lotus nose I’ve read.

  49. JaseSabai says:

    Very excited for this new challenger to the 2014 title, it looks like a car that Kimi and Alonso can have a lot of fun with in a technical way and be aggressive with too, I like their solution to the new regs on the front end, very Ferrari feel to it, if that makes sense. The clean rear, bodywork design is also very clean, neat and visually pleasing!!

  50. furstyferret says:

    I know all the cars are going to be, shell we be generous, a required taste, but this is downright disgusting

  51. Mark says:

    Best looking conk so far…

  52. Michael says:

    Well, at least it’s not as ugly as the E22 which isn’t saying much. The front of these cars so far are god ugly!

  53. Grant H says:

    So now we have the platypus nose to add to the bunch anteater / tusks

  54. David McIntosh says:

    Another different front nose solution. It’ll be interesting to see if by the European Season all the teams move towards the same look/style or if they continue to be different? Wonder what Red Bull are done..

  55. darren w says:

    I don’t know if it comes down to livery, but the red car certainly looks good. Very slim and trim looking front to back.

    With all the different treatments you have to wonder how nervous the various engineering teams are feeling as they wait to see who got this right.

    I haven’t enjoyed car launches this much…probably ever:-)

  56. Jose Sanchez says:

    The car is not going to be remembered as one of ferrarris finest for style, but it looks to me that could be a winner. Could win the reliability race.

    1. aezy_doc says:

      How can you tell by looking if it will win the reliability race? That all congress from what is underneath.

      1. Random 79 says:

        The only comparison would be the ugly but reliable 2012 Lego Ferrari :)

      2. Jose Sanchez says:

        By looking at how good it is finished, an also looking at ferraris reliability récord.
        It could be his year. At least un the constructors championship.

  57. Andrew says:

    It looks like a Hoover at the front! Side pods look nice and tight with the smallest air intakes seen so far

  58. Simon ford says:

    That’s one ugly front end

  59. Ian N says:

    Best looking car so far. There was no way Montezemolo would entertain the anteater nose. Time will tell if this approach can translate into race wins.

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “There was no way Montezemolo would entertain the anteater nose.”

      Nope, he went for the beluga.

  60. JimmiC says:

    Having at first recoiled from these horrible noses, now I’m enjoying this. Because, rather than having all the cars basically look the same but with different stickers, we’ve now seen four teams go four different ways with their blunt ends. It’s going to be fascinating to see what works.

  61. Yngwie Malmsteen says:

    So far the best looking !!!

  62. Richard says:

    Does this Ferrari get the ugly prize? Not sure whether this is the platypus or the groundhog nose but it sure is different to the anteater type we have seen previously. While we all like cars to look nice it really doesn’t matter a jot because performance is everything in F1. One thing is for sure the cars are going to be lacking downforce big time, however I now await cars from Mercedes and Red Bull for some direction.

  63. Paul D says:

    That’s a face only a mother could love! Looks like a vacuum cleaner!

    On a serious point I have no idea how the Ferrari drivers will have any idea where the front of their car is! Needs park assist as an option!

    1. Random 79 says:

      “I have no idea how the Ferrari drivers will have any idea where the front of their car is”

      Generally speaking the drivers will find the front of the car on the front of their car. Maldonado is the exception where the front of his car can be found on the back of another driver’s car.

  64. Yona says:

    Ferrari look quite decent but the question is! Will it have some speed? Redbull will probly tell everything … The William nose look like a d***k and it trolled all over the internet. McLaren meh >_<… the w05 looks promising as Well. Lotus is just one weird fork … Well let wait

  65. Glennb says:

    I don’t normally get into looks with an F1 car but this one seems nice enough to me. Maybe the livery appeals to me but I don’t find it ugly at all. Can’t wait for the RBR unveil so we can all see what a winning design will look like ;)

  66. Dmitry says:

    I am commenting when 58 comments are already seen.

    Well, it is so funny to read both “for” and “against” comments =) Personally I don’t like it (Mclaren still is number 1 for me), but I can’t say it is ugly. Yes, it reminds of some home devices, but it is not that bad!

    1. Sri says:

      When you said “home devices”, the front portion reminded me of USB port. As others said, vaccuum cleaner also.

  67. Matt W says:

    I’m going against the grain here but I love the look of these new cars. The stepped noses looked draft but these at least look like F1 cars. The look of the cats should always be evolving and we could do with a radical change this season.

  68. Phill P says:

    I think what everyone is forgetting is that none of the noses we have seen so far will stay the same for long. So if you don’t like it don’t sweat it, it’s only going to be on the car for 5 minutes anyway.

    Expect them to go through many changes until one team cracks it and everyone copies them.

  69. sej82 says:

    I can’t wait for the season to begin. The cars are ugly but at least they are all different, and with the technical changes this promises unpredictable races. Brilliant. Please don’t spoil it for me Mr Newey.

  70. panagiotis says:

    What you see ain’t what you get. Aerodynamics are having fun with our eyes.

  71. Dutch Johnny says:

    Its just like your mother in-law, Its uglie and you dont like it but you have to get on with it, like it or not.

  72. Sri says:

    I hope this car has what it takes to fight in the front. One thing is sure, wherever the car is in the pecking order, the intra-team rivalry will be mouth-watering and that itself is enough. You don’t get the same feeling watching at any other team. Although you could say Hulk/Perez or Gro/Maldo are also interesting, this pair is few notches above them in talent itself and hence more focus would be on them.

    It looks like Mr. Benson in BBC has got a shock to discover that Kimi will also fight for WDC instead of supporting Alonso as had been the practice in Ferrari for the last 4 years. The headline says so:

    We heard, so often from pundits and others, that Kimi will push Alonso implying Alonso will be ahead and Kimi will support him. Not many actually even gave a thought to what if Alonso ends up behind Kimi?
    I hope another shock is delivered to many when Kimi actually ends up ahead of Alonso at the end of the season (even the bookies don’t think it is more likely than the other way around). Imagine what would be the reaction if Kimi wins WDC!

    1. Vlad says:

      Forget it , the Vacuum Cleaner will be hoovering up Hammy’s smoke all season.

    2. Elie says:

      Wont surprise me one bit.. But its probably one of the most titanic battles F1 will ever see. Lets hope the cars are reliable so we have an even fight

    3. Shaboopi says:

      The only way Alonso would lose is if there is internal strife in the team and he decides he wants to leave. If there is peace in the team Alonso will wipe the floor with Kimi.

    4. AlexD says:

      I think people like Kimi more than Alonso. I do, certainly. Still, I am 100% sure Alonso will be on top….he will not smash Kimi, but he will be faster and better overall.

    5. R says:

      You’re right, Kimi will not bend over backwards for Fernando. But it’s silly to assume that just bec. the Finn won’t be relegated to a secondary role, he will immediate

  73. Ashboy says:

    That’s three different solutions on the four cars we have seen, I will keep my judgment until I have seen what Newey thought is the best.

  74. Valentino from montreal says:

    Alonso is gonna get smashed by Raikkonen starting from the word GO .. For the first time in 7 years , I actually want Ferrari do to good this year and wish to see Raikkonen get his much deserved 2nd F1 title …

    PFYM .. WLY

    1. deancassady says:

      Well said.
      Hey Val, cold this year? You got the best goalie in world working in your city. We’re blue over here, of course, as usual.
      I love the new Ferrari. I don’t know what the problem is.
      Smart people who don’t see it yet, will agree with me when the no. 7 starts winning the races.
      Any one who thinks the McLaren isn’t the ugliest F1 car in recent (30 years) memory, should consult their optometrist. Whoa!
      The Lotus looks quite good.
      Ferrari si Ferrari; I actually meant to write, “Ferrari is Ferrari”, but after I looked at the former, I thought it was just as applicable.
      I’m a Ferrari fan, now.

    2. hero_was_senna says:

      But Val, will your respect for Alonso increase if he genuinely beats Kimi?

      1. Valentino from montreal says:

        Ciao Hero !! How are u ??

        Alonso could’nt even beat Trulli back in the day , Raikkonen is gonna walk all over him with his

        1) speed
        2) ice cold head strong mentality

        Raikkonen ain’t a Fisichella !

        Alonso said he wants emulate Schumacher by winning a title in his 5th year at Ferrari… Message to Fernando :

        Keep dreaming and leave Michael out of the discussion please …

      2. quattro says:

        LoL, I can imagine your feelings when you got to know that Ferrari decided to kick RAI out to make place for..ALO, a few years ago.

        Prepare yourself for the same kind of feelings, at quite a few races the coming season(s). ALO takes no prisoners – Ask MAS (who was beating RAI on regular basis when the latter got kicked out), he will tell you all about it.

      3. Elie says:

        Why am I surprised !- this is about Michael and his Ferrari records & nothing to do with FA or Kimi

    3. Elie says:

      I think “smashed” is overly ambitious. But Ive being hoping for karma since 2009 & truly believe Raikkonen is the most deserving driver on the grid because of the circumstances surrounding that. & 03/05. Hes come back with mission and its not often you see someone racing at the very front after two year out is it..sign of a legend not just a champion

      Dare I ask what the letters mean Val ??

      1. Tim says:

        Praying For You Michael, We Love You

        that’s my guess – do I win anything?

      2. Valentino from montreal says:

        Hey your good ! Well done Tim …

      3. Elie says:

        Yes you get a MS doll signed by Val.! I Should have known it.

  75. unF1nnished business says:

    I’m sure the Top Gun references will be flying with the Iceman piloting the F14T/F14 Tomcat. I wonder who will be who’s wingman?

  76. Rich C says:

    Yep, a high-speed Hoover. Suck it up!

  77. Bear says:

    Interesting but it seems to me that they attached on the FIAT (F14T) a Dyson vacuum nose… it will keep the track clean…

  78. DB4Tim says:

    Lets go racing ….ugly can still be fast.

  79. Peter says:

    Looks like Juan Pablo Montoya has sat on the front of it. Rest of the car looks appalling – worst looking f1 car I have ever seen!

  80. Matt says:

    The Ferrari looks like a bunch of different pieces they had sitting around and then tried to graft them all together. Hideous. Looks like an awkward Beluga Whale!

  81. Max Smoot says:

    An open-wheeled car will always challenge standard notions of beauty regardless of the aero regs — if aesthetics are the only consideration then a full-bodied sports car is the only candidate for a beauty prize.

    1. Timmay says:

      Not true, lots of great looking F1 cars. They started gettin ugly around 2005-2008. And regulations have offiially made them ugly since 2012.

  82. Franco says:

    When the rules were announced that the front nose was dropping I had images on the 1995 Ferrari not these FUGLY cars.

    James, can’t see how we will get used to these car…. Thankfully F1 is not shown on 3D

  83. Garry Llewellyn says:

    We’ve had Ferrari perfume, trainers, watches, tops even Ferrari world, now the most expensive merchandise ever — the Ferrari vacuum! Next they will be reveling Dyson as sponsor and Kimi will be making quips about hoovering up the competition! Nice one Ferrari.

  84. Mike84 says:

    “F1 has to reduce costs”

    How about increasing revenue… putting laughably ugly and ridiculous econo cars on track is not going to get you more viewers.

    Learn from Apple… And the Ferrari of old. It’s not just about power, it’s also about appeal.

    p.S. I’ll bet a lasagna dinner they will copy the Lotus nose asap.

    1. David in Sydney says:

      One thing is for sure, teams will get a shock when Lotus fires up the taser nose during the race… that ERS power can be used for multiple things.

      1. Random 79 says:


        Maybe you have a talk to the promoters of Formula E :)

    2. hero_was_senna says:

      Can I choose the restaurant?

  85. JP says:

    It looks a bit like a Dunlop Grounhog. Did Murray W design it I wonder?

  86. Monza 71 says:

    “The best way to achieve that is to race at 100 per cent every race to try to bring back points for the team and for ourselves.

    To do that we need perfect harmony and to follow the team’s priorities and do what the team asks.”

    A typical Alonso comment. He’s clearly assuming he will be in the lead for the championship and, just like Massa, Kimi will just fall in line.

    Dream On !

    I predict tears and tantrums, and not from Kimi !

    1. H.Guderian says:

      The IceCreamMan did not managed to beat MASSA (0.7s slower than Alo). And he had a hard time against Gros. So…. keep dreaming….

      1. Timmay says:

        Massa pre accident and Massa post accident can’t be compared

      2. H.Guderiam says:

        I knew someone would say that.

        Massa has been beaten by Alonso way before the accident.

  87. Kaki says:

    I find the new Ferrari the most beautiful car so far and hope this year Ferrari have something to give to the fans! We have also the hotest and better duo on the grid! Forza Ferrari

    1. AfterLife says:

      Well Said :)

  88. DJ ILLusive says:

    As I tweeted earlier, THANK GOODNESS there will be at least 2 cars on this year’s grid that won’t have that hideous limp d*** nose! Thank you Scuderia Ferrari!
    It might not be the most dynamic design but I’m pulling for Fernando and Kimi to do well this year.

    1. Trebor157 says:

      At last Mr. Park has designed a car for Grommet!

  89. Olli says:

    Enzo Ferrari:The car is beautiful when its winning.

  90. Truth or Lies says:

    They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder and judging from some of the comments here, that must be true!

    “It’s the best looking car so far of 2014″ really ? I think not.

    It had better be fast and last, because right now with its droopy nose and awful lively, things aren’t looking great.

    1. Azac21 says:

      Sometimes is in the eye of the beer-holder though …. ;)

    2. Kirk says:

      We’ll said, as some people say that love is blind and there are many people here who has strong feelings about Ferrari, we could say that many here are so biased to see an ugly Ferrari and some say is the best looking so far, I used to be a Ferrari fan until Alonso get there, now I have mixed feelings because Kimi is my favorite driver, but that doesn’t mean that I could find beautiness in this ugly car, is really bad, some people here say that is even better than the 2012/2013 cars, I don’t think so, conclusion, opinions about this topics are far from been objective.

  91. James,

    Do you think Ron Dennis returning to McLaren has killed off the chances of Alonso returning there ?

    I think Alonso now realises he needs Ferrari and will toe the party line again. Hopefully Ferrari give him and Kimi a car that can challenge. No matter how ugly !!

    1. James Allen says:

      I do think that, yes

    2. hero_was_senna says:

      I thought that too. I am also left wondering that if – as rumored – Boullier joins Mclaren, where will Ross Brawn finish up at?

  92. Sami says:

    Can any engineer around shed any light on why a pull-rod front suspension has been retained?

    1. Random 79 says:

      I’m not an engineer, but apparently the geometry works better with a lower nose.

  93. Kevin Shiel says:

    Looks like lotus is going to be the blackhorse if they could sort out the reliability issues and finance to finish some races. The uneven prongs might b the aero thing that decides who goes faster in the turns.

  94. Andy says:

    An interesting design on the FIAT.
    The designs so far have been quite different, no doubt the designers are now burning the midnight oil trying to understand each others.
    There will be some interesting design changes in the first 6 races. Will they copy the broken tuning fork, nostrils, hoover and god knows what else is coming.

  95. Gaz Boy says:

    James, I am right in saying that every time there is a dramatic rule change in recent years Ferrari has a dogs breakfast of a season? I am thinking back to 2005 when the one set of tyres rule changed came in and 2009 when the aero balance regulations were dramatically changed. In both 2005 and 2009 Ferrari had dismal seasons, with in 2005 both Ferrari and Brigestone failing to combine a cohesive narrative, while in 2009 the Ferrari italian stallion looked more like a cleethorpes donkey that was heavy, slow and aerodynamically outclassed. Point is, Ferrari don’t tend to be good at dramatic rule changes, they tend to favour continuity in the regulations. Like McLaren, Ferrari seems like to vision, direction and clarity of thought in it’s design department in recent years and also their operating efficiency is questionable at times: witness Monza 2013 when Ferrari kept Fernando on old worn tyres when Sebastian had pitted fresh rubber and was going a second lap quicker. Like Mclaren, Ferrari are not always the most “street-wise” of Formula 1 teams while the more nimble, agile teams of Sauber, Lotus and Red Bull always make excellent strategic choices. I think Ferrari is hurting also because of the shift away (because of the testing ban) to simulation tools instead of the old empirical approach of wheeling the car out on the test track and evaluating changes to the car bit by bit; you cannot do that now with the testing ban so teams with the best simulation techniques are the now teams leading the way. Having said that, like Mercedes, the fact that Ferrari produce both chassis and engine may be hugely advantageous this year. But that’s the great thing about Ferrari; they are the ultimate Formula 1 enigma!

    1. James Allen says:

      Newey tends to do well with major rule changes

      As for Ferrari, they went through a lot of changes at that time

      2005 was a tyre rule change which didn’t work for Bridgestone

      1. Anne says:

        James, is it fair to say that this is a Rory Byrne car with Fry and Allison adding a thing or two here and there?

        P.S.It would be great if you could get an interview with Allison at some point.


      2. James Allen says:

        Byrne was in background but I’m not sure you could say its a Byrne car

        I’ll have to dig around for that

      3. Gaz Boy says:

        Fair point on 2005 James about the tyre war situation and how Bridgestone was marginalized. Mind you, in 2009 everyone had the same control tyres and still Ferrari produce a lemon. And this time they couldn’t blame Bridgestone!

    2. hero_was_senna says:

      Max Mosley has admitted that the tyre rule change for 2005 was designed to stop Ferrari.

      That year, Bridgestone had Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi testing their tyres which had to survive a race distance.
      Michelin had Renault, Mclaren, Williams, Toyota and all the others running their products. That amount of information was always going to favour the Michelin runners.

      As soon as the regulations changed back, ie for 2006, Ferrari were competitive again.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        “That amount of information was always going to favour the Michelin runners.”

        At least something favoured the Michelin tyre runners, tell me which of the Michelin runners had the bespoke tyres?

  96. marcus says:

    This is the first constructers car shown, with rather narrow looking sidepods, either the ferrari moteur has less need for heat management or the other constructors cars will be similar, the Mercedes will answer these questions… I think we should stop talking about the front end and focus a bit more on the rear..

    1. Random 79 says:

      “I think we should stop talking about the front end and focus a bit more on the rear”

      Easier said than done ;)

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        Well said.

  97. David in Sydney says:

    If Ferrari have a race winning car this year they’ll have their hands full with two leading drivers taking points off each other being unhappy.

    What was Ferrari thinking?

    Regards ugly car comments – either celebrate F1 bespoke chassis rules or support spec chassis rules.

    1. kenneth chapman says:

      david, it is not so clear cut and should not have to be an ‘either/or’ argument.

      aesthetics is a thorny issue and as a practicing artist we are always confronted with the issue of ‘form and function’.

      in this case the argument will always fall in the ‘form follows function’ as that is the nature of motor racing. what i don’t like is that the rule writers have managed to create, inadvertently, the worst possible aesthetic outcome when it could well have been otherwise. one last point… i can guarantee that ferrari would never allow such a visual mess to be implemented on their roadcars even if they were to be able to improve their relative performances.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        “i can guarantee that ferrari would never allow such a visual mess to be implemented on their roadcars even if they were to be able to improve their relative performances.”

        That’s slightly different, no one is expected to buy a Formula 1 car.

  98. ànt says:

    Im sorry,I feel like I have woken up in F1 kids designs 2014, what the BL&%dy hells is going on? Surely Bernie is playing a prank on us f1 fans….I haven’t stopped crying since that Williams monstrosity was dumped on us..then came to Lotus toothpick nose….now this…Ferrari, what have you done …explain yourself now!!!

  99. Erik says:

    Taking the focus off the ugliest nose yet for a sec, can’t believe that Ferrari is trumpeting on about reliability. Is this loser speak for we couldn’t make the car fast enough?.. Though that the last few years, where they have had one of the most reliable cars, would have shown them that speed is what they should be focusing on – reliability they can get sorted, but it’s no good if the car isn’t fast enough to win.

    Seriusly, found that statement really dissapointing. My to fav drivers in one team, hope they don’t ‘reliably’ finish second all season.

  100. Gaz Boy says:

    Just to add to my comments: reliability is important, but you must, must, MUST have good aero balance and downforce. As Gary Anderson always points out, if a car is a second a lap quicker than it’s opposition, eight tenths of that is due to raw downforce and aero balance/efficiency. It’s worth pointing out that a car which is aerodynamically slippery and balanced (i.e produces good downforce while slicing through the air cleanly) can make up for a horsepower deficit in a straight-line, but a car with good power but poor aero balance and little downforce can never make up the difference. Reliability is important, but I think that the quality of engineering is so good I’m guessing it won’t be a huge issue. May be proved wrong though! However, even if reliability is a bit iffy in the first few races, once the teams get back to Europe it will who can develop an aerodynamic supercar that will ultimately matter.

    1. kenneth chapman says:

      the issue of reliability will be paramount right from the very start. the first three flyaway races cannot be disregarded for one minute. getting big points on the board from race one can have a tremendous advantage insofar as the championship is concerned.

      it also allows the winners more time to reflecton and develop their pathway knowing that they have got it right, partly or not, to their advantage. yes, development will speed up once the teams return to europe but to have a healthy number in the bag from race one will be the desired result for all teams.

      1. Gaz Boy says:

        Dear Ken, I’m not saying reliability isn’t important, of course not, that would be foolish, and yes, you are right, getting big points early in the season can ultimately tip the balance in a drivers favour – witness Fernando in 2005 when he three of the first four races, and Jenson in 2009 when he won six of the first seven races. Even though their cars and teams were ultimately outpaced in the second half of the year, the early season momentum of Fernando and Jenson was enough to seal their world championship. However, both the Renault R25 and Brawn were fundamentally aerodynamic super cars with excellent aero balance and good downforce, and the Brawn in particular had superb suspension compliance that was a major advantage on the street tracks of Melbourne, Monaco and Valancia. I personally feel that in the last 10 years Formula 1 engineering and mechanical knowledge is so good that reliability isn’t an issue any more. I mean look at Caterham; had they been competing, say, in the mid 90s, they may have been able to scrape a point here and there when reliability was still a major issue (and bear in mind during the mid 90s you had to finish at least sixth to scrape a point). However, the fact that they have never (so far!) finished in the top 10 in FOUR seasons shows you just how good reliability is these days. I think having a rev limit on the engines has made a huge difference; you can build any component (i.e the gearbox for example) to a set parameter and stress/torque level. I not saying reliability is a given; of course not, but it’s not enough these days to have a car that is aerodynamically flawed but reliable just to pootle about in mid field mediocrity in you want to win championships. Look at McLaren last year – pretty good finishing rate, but lack of downforce and poor aero-balance meant it was never going to challenge for a podium, let alone a win.
        But that’s the great thing about pre season F1. We just don’t know how things are going to pan out!

    2. Martin says:

      I’d qualify your comments slightly – historically the most powerful cars have taken pole position, but have not always been good in the race. For one lap new tyres and specific set up details can make a poor car fast for one lap. If you have more engine power you can run bigger wings, so that allows poor performance from the floor to be compensated for.

      Cooling is a key part of reliability and tends to directly counter aerodynamic performance. To me the key part is likely to be cooling the batteries as there is up to 10 times the amount of energy flowing to and from the battery.

      1. Gaz Boy says:

        Dear Martin, yes, totally agree about the cooling aspects of the new turbo engine. Couldn’t agree more, I’ll come back to that in a minute.
        Not sure about the most powerful cars taking pole position in the last few years. Might have been true in the 80s, 90s, and early 00s, but not so sure now. The Red Bull-Renault has never in the last five years had massive grunt and ultimate straight-line speed and yet Sebastian would waltz to pole, race after race. Sebastian’s uncanny technique of applying more throttle to counter pre-apex oversteer, effectively using the rear axle to steer the car straight using the cold blowing exhaust gas gave Seb a qualifying advantage that the others consistently struggled to match. That’s my point; in modern day F1 an aerodynamic super car with more aero efficiency and good downforce is much better for lap times than just raw straight line grunt.
        I totally agree with you Martin on the cooling issue of the new turbo engine and I’m glad you brought it to my attention. The thermal discharge of the engine and electrical system has a massive influence on the aero balance of a car, because of course if you design an engine/ERS package with less thermal discharge then that means you a team can use smaller radiators which means less frontal area and less aerodynamic “clutter”. Smaller radiators/cooling areas translates into better straightline speed and more downforce as you can exploit the underbody section between the engine and rear axle to produce a cleaner, more consistent flow. You’re are very correct Martin in pointing out a team that can minimize the thermal discharge from the engine/electrical system will benefit massively from improved aerodynamics and therefore performance. Well spotted Martin!

      2. Martin says:

        Hi Gaz,
        In recent years there have been a few changes to the influence of the engines. With the freeze the top the manufacturer engines are regarded as being with 0.3 of a second in terms of pure power, and there’s been a tend to improving other characteristics. Without the engine freeze there’s a pretty high likelihood that exhaust blowing would not be the thing it is. The simple reason is that more power allows bigger to be run as the power overcome the drag penalty with the resultant gains under braking and cornering.

        The Renault V8 required less cooling than the Ferrari in particular, so this was another benefit that Red Bull could exploit.

        You mention aero balance quite a few times. My understanding is that this isn’t much of an issue for the teams. They will usually put more front wing on for qualifying to aid hitting apexes and wind it off using the adjustment on the wing to protect the rear tyres. A trickier problem is using wing stalling on the front wing and suspension squat to shed drag at high speeds.

        If you compare the McLaren front wing from 2013 to 2014 the front wing has twice as many elements. The performance under braking of the 2013 car was noted by Gary Anderson on several occasions, where he’d point out that the large elements were stalling and regaining downforce causing the car to porpoise under braking. Tuning the ride control was a problem for them. Although possibly not the real cause the pull rod suspension is now gone.

        Personally I wouldn’t be surprised if the McLaren is faster than the Mercedes this year.

  101. ànt says:

    I am busy watching the muppets and cannot help notice the similarities between this years cars and the muppets…especially Gonzo who is a dead ringer for the Williams…

  102. Gaz Boy says:

    James, thanks for your replies, but I still have a niggling feeling that the British teams and the Mercedes engine might – might! – have an advantage over Ferrari, at the start of the season at least. As you rightly point out, Adrian loves rule changes, he always thinks laterally yet clearly when it comes to new designs. Having said that, James Allison is a very talented man with superb vision when it comes to aerodynamics – he had an input on the superb 2005/2006 Renaults that took Fernando and Renault to WDC and constructors titles. Can one man make a difference? No, but what one man can give is clarity of thought and a direction on how the car should be designed and developed. Perhaps James Allison can provide Ferrari with that. I acutally believe that Ferrari and Mercedes have got the biggest potential in 2014 because they have the advantage of building both chassis and engine. My question mark over Ferrari is whether they can realise that potential, and also up their game when it comes to strategic nous. Of course, the other issue isnt just about aerodynamics and internal combustion, but about the combustion between Fernando and Kimi. Just how will they get on? Will they drive Ferrari to new heights of glory? Remember the old cliche about Formula 1: at any grand prix, there can only ever be one winner…………..Kimi and Fernando together is a real mouth-watering prospect and whatever Ferrari’s competitive state of play is this year is bound to be fascinating viewing!

  103. Thompson says:

    I’m sorry but you lot are blind these cars look superb, the low nose scream downforce – head on the Ferrari looks aggressive, it looks ready to race, you can almost hear it growling.

    The pictures we will see of these cars when in action will have you guys singing a different tune by the end of the opening laps, you watch.

    The back ends look so smooth and compact on them the low nose just adds that purposeful…. arrrrgh!, if you know what I mean?

    James any chance you could post pics of the last few generations of racers just to make them see how great these cars look by comparison…….

    I’m sold on this season already!

    1. James Allen says:

      We’ll do a variety of visual posts in the coming days

  104. Iceman4ever says:

    If it crosses the line first… Its a beautiful car! Kimi 4 the title! :)

  105. aveli says:

    I k I k k k khe he he haaaa! what’s that? a car?

  106. john says:

    Damn…..Looks like it’s been snorting cocaine.

  107. Luke Smith says:

    Ferrari and McLaren fighting it out for ugliest car of the year it seems. Lets see if there’ll be any other contenders? I hope not, these two are dead-set shockers!

  108. Olivier says:

    Haha! The F1 cars look like characters from Futurama!!

    I am loving the diversity. I truly do! They all look very different from each other.

    However, I have to say. It is the first time your site makes me GUFFAW … especially when reading the comments :D

  109. greg says:

    Front on, it reminds me of Wallace from Wallace and gromit. Its that worrying grin when things are about to go wrong.

  110. ABNormal says:

    Looks like Orson Welles sat on the nose. Hope it is quick.

  111. Don says:

    Boys n girls , it doesn’t matter what the F14-T looks like…. lets all hope its faster than the rest!

  112. Chris George says:

    I am in the minority it would seem but I am thoroughly enjoying these car unveilings. Engineers engineering and designers designing.
    Lots of different solutions to the same problem.
    It’s what F1 is about and if you took the liveries off these cars you wouldn’t need to be Craig Scarbrough to tell them apart. It’s been a few years since that was the case.
    Can’t wait to hear/see them in the flesh (or should that be ‘in the carbon fibre’?)

  113. LP says:

    Everyone has to remember that formula 1 isn’t a fashion contest, it is a battle of technology, man and machine. If that machine is ugly but does the job it is beautiful in that way.

  114. NickH says:

    The others are worse, lotus and Mclaren have nasty pronged noses

  115. Joe Sixpack says:

    Am I the only one who actually finds the Lotus’ nose to be the most attractive? The asymmetry is fine, it even reminds me of the spaceship from the first Alien movie.

    The Blue Proboscis Monkey is next. Bad, but I think I’ll learn to ignore it soon enough.

    Ferrari. Dust Buster? Italian Heffalump? It’s bad from some angles, fine from others.

    Last by several laps is the Godawful Flying Nostril. Every time I look at it, I get flashbacks from the from Total Recall (the fist one!!) scene where Arnie is pulling the red tracker ball out his nose!

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “Am I the only one who actually finds the Lotus’ nose to be the most attractive? The asymmetry is fine,”

      Nope, it’s not just you.

  116. Bikram says:

    Its Interesting noting that people here are just discussing about the nose of the cars & not other distinguishing features.

    I am amazed to see Ferrari will 30% smaller side pods compared to that of McLaren & Williams car designs. Also The engine packing looks very tight in Ferrari. I can’t compare Lotus as their picture leaks are more concentrated on nose and i can’t clearly see their side pods which would have given us indication of the Renault V6 unit.

    McLaren & Williams are using Mercedes engine which maybe requires more cooling and thats what James Allison is trying to say about reliability.

    Will be interesting to see and compare the Renault power teams with their engine packing & exhausts.

    1. James Allen says:

      The lower amount of cooling on the Ferrari compared to the others is very interesting, seeing as this is a real priority with the turbo cars

    2. TheFlyingFlyer says:

      This is what is seems to contradict the message coming out of the release, surely if you wanted to increase reliability the first thing you would do was to make sure cooling was foremost. The sauber car looks very tight too, which I would more expect from Red Bull, and we know that cost them in 2009.

      1. Martin says:

        There’s a suggestion that the Ferrari power unit might use more water cooling for an aero benefit but a weight penalty. Some other design choices by Ferrari suggest a focus on weight minimisation, according to Craig Scarborough.

  117. Gord says:

    I fear this may actual end up being one of the prettier cars …

  118. Tifoso says:

    At least the F14 T doesn’t have a nose that looks like….something obvious….we all know what those finger noses look like.
    Furthermore, I’m no expert aerodynamicist, but I’ve done plenty of reading pre-launch. Some who ARE experts say there is a clear advantage to a wide, rounded nose, as seen on the F14 T. Read up before you pass judgement….

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “Furthermore, I’m no expert aerodynamicist, but I’ve done plenty of reading pre-launch. Some who ARE experts say there is a clear advantage to a wide, rounded nose, as seen on the F14 T. Read up before you pass judgement….”

      Good job on the reading, but none of that stops it from being ugly, even if it is fast.

  119. Rudy says:

    Yes yes! Bla, bla, bla… All those above who have said the nose is ugly or whatever, need to remember this:
    Form follows function.
    The rules are to blame, not the teams. Everyone is on the same path. They try to extract the max aero efficiency from what the rules allow. If Newey’s baby has also the same pronged nose don’t blame the design teams. Blame the FIA and their over protective rules. Come on! Racing is dangerous. What’s next? Rubber made cars? Soft perimetric barriers? Padded trees? For Christ sake! This is F1. It is a dangerous sport. And let me close stating F1 cars have been until this aero era, the best engineered and developed cars, beautiful machinery, not these… you know what…

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “The rules are to blame, not the teams. Everyone is on the same path.”

      And yet the Lotus looks way nicer, and the Sauber.

  120. Martin Place says:

    I’ll never understand the proclivity of websites and blogs to fail to link to source material. It’s poor form.

    For more photos and videos of the F14 T see:


    1. Random 79 says:

      Please – we’ve been scarred enough already ;)

  121. Rafael says:

    I don’t think it’s an ugly car, not when compared to Lotus’ anyways! It’s a toss up between this and McLaren’s MP4-29. The dropped nose kind of reminds me of that of the McLaren MP4-18′s + the Ferrari F2001′s – albeit in a very exaggerated manner.

    Hopefully this car proves quick, and Fernando can finally clinch his much deserved – and painfully elusive – 3rd word title!

    1. Voodoopunk says:



  122. Witan says:

    The FI4T even had a FIAT decal on its nose.

  123. Bru72 says:

    Dolphins nose, I love it.

  124. zombie says:

    James, how deeply was Rory Byrne involved in the development of the car ?

    1. James Allen says:

      That is a good question and one I aim to find out more about. Certainly involved for some time as a consultant, but how hands on was, he? That’s the question.

  125. Lee says:

    I like the fact that the cars are looking so different, like f1 in the 70s and 80s. These last few years the only thing distinguishing each car was the paint job to a large extent. I loved the mad and crazy f1 designs in the 70s. Long may it continue.

  126. The front end looks like this because of their choice of the push pull rod arrangement…most other teams have not chose this strategy…will it work…who knows…for now

  127. seifenkistler says:

    It looks like the mouth of a nurse shark. It’s a shark, but the least dangerous one.
    Hope it didn’t get killed by Flipper the dolphin.

    But there is hope, wiki says nurse sharks can suck there oppenents into their mouth. So i hope for Ferrari that means they will come into the slipstream easily.

  128. JohnBt says:

    Kinda weird but if it’s fast winning that’s the game.

  129. Bayan says:

    If it is fast, It will be beautiful!

  130. Gaz Boy says:

    James, I know it’s not strictly related to reliability of the car, although it is related to Ferrari: has anyone noticed that in recent years Ferrari’s weakest tracks have been Melbourne, Monaco and Hungary. All tight twiddly tracks with bumps aplenty and lots of high kerbs to jump over (I think that’s why Lewis is a Hungaroring specialist since he loves to attack the kerbs ferociously). In fact, Ferrari haven’t won at Melbourne since 2007, their race winning pedigree at Monaco is even worse with no winners champagne since 2001 and they have been woefully slow in Hungary over the last three years. As Monaco and Hungary are tight, slow and bumpy, this would suggest that Ferrari’s suspension compliance is pretty poor, as it seems the prancing horses are not able to soak up the bumps and attack kerbs with impunity. Also, Monaco and Hungary are ultra high downforce tracks suggesting that Ferrari’s ability to generate raw downforce is severely lacking. Also, agility and nimbleness are very important around Monte Carlo and the Hungaroring, so is it possible that the Ferrari is just too cumbersome on tight corners? I’m not beating up on Ferrari, but Ferrari’s lack of form at Australia, Monaco and Hungary does hint of an ongoing lack of suppleness and ultimate downforce potential.
    Any thoughts?

    1. James Allen says:

      Alonso was second in Melbourne last year..

      Monaco has been a weakness for quite a while. They are long overdue a win there.

      I think it’s clear that Ferrari hasn’t had the most downforce for ages, since the Schumacher times in fact.

    2. Martin says:

      Hi Gaz,
      The Ferrari suspension is fine. You may recall comment on Mercedes’ FRIC hydraulic suspension. Aldo Costa brought that knowledge from Ferrari. If you want a car without suspension compliance, look at the McLaren. The Ferrari basically lacks downforce from the floor and exhaust blowing. The speed at Spa and Monza suggests that the efficiency is there, just not the total load.

      Mark Hughes’ analysis of Hamilton is that it is his ability to quickly rotate the car with turn in oversteer and get on the throttle a fashion earlier that is a key part of his technique at the Hungaroring. The other thing to consider is that he’s rarely had a weak car there. The McLaren had the qualifying edge over Ferrari in 2007 and 2008. Once McLaren changed the front wing in Germany the 2009 was a match for anything in slow corners. Fuel loads meant he wasn’t on Pole. 2010 was the only time he had an off the pace car. 2011 was the Red Bull mid season lull. The McLaren suspension is great for wet tyre temperature. 2012 McLaren had the most downforce so Hamilton just had to control the race from pole and survive the greater tyre life on the Lotuses. 2013 a qualifying error from Vettel left the door open for a high quality lap. Track position and some efficient passing did the rest.

      1. Gaz Boy says:

        Dear Martin,
        Thank you for replying to my comments and your immense wisdom and insightful knowledge! I agree with your comments, it’s just I find it too much of a co-incidence that Ferrari have been so poor at Monaco and Hungary in recent years. I think you hit the nail on the head: Ferrari have good efficiency, but not the total loading ability.
        Actually Martin, that ties in with my comments on Ferrari’s aero balance being inferior to Red Bull over the years. When I talk about aero balance, I mean the ability to generate an equal load and distribution of downforce between the front and rear axles, and to have the aerodynamic centre of pressure right in the middle of the car. You may have noticed the Red Bull of the last few years runs more rake than any other car, certainly compared to Ferrari. You’re spot on Martin in pointing out that Ferrari cannot generate as much rear downforce as Red Bull, and I do wonder if Ferrari’s aero department can find the solution run this years new regs. We shall see…………..
        Again, you are spot on Martin about McLaren lacking suspension compliance and composure. The last few years all Maccas have had a poor ride quality as well. I always thought the 2009 Brawn that sent Jenson on his way to the WDC had superb suspension compliance and excellent ride quality: witness Brawn wins at Melbourne, Monaco, Valencia and even Monza where kerb hopping composure is required.
        Lovely to talk to somebody who is such well informed, knowledgeable and insightful into the black art of Formula 1 design!
        PS Martin, we haven’t mentioned tyres, and the effect they will have on the new cars. Presumably this years Pirelli’s will have a much stiffer sidewall to cope with the flexing from the extra torque?

      2. Martin says:

        Hi Gaz,

        A thing to consider with the tracks at Melbourne Monaco and Budapest is that all of them are quite low grip surfaces, being quite smooth at the micro level from all the road traffic, and the Hungaroring is quite dusty. This could play a role in tyre warm up for qualifying as the loads through the tyres are reduced. Just an idea.

        Re the tyres, it will come down to what tricks Pirelli has to manage heat build up. Greater longitudinal forces distort the sidewalls more, and distortion leads to the creation of heat. Material choices will influence this.

        One thing I’d need longer to think about is the magnitude of the acceleration force compared to the braking forces. Due to the aerodynamic loads and the low CoG the rear tyres do almost 50% of the braking. Aerodynamic drag makes up a bit of the peak braking force, so how significant the change is in terms of peak forces, I’m not sure, but there will be more time spent with higher forces involved.

        The peak acceleration of the 2014 cars will be less than the 2013, as there are points where the 2013 cars will produce more power and in general they will be lower geared. The average acceleration of the 2014 cars will be greater I believe as the V8s have a very limited range where the torque is high ~14000 rpm plus.

        I’m familiar with the level of rake in the Red Bull from 2011 onwards, which allowed a greater working range of the floor while using softer springs to aid traction and shed some drag at high speeds by having the car squat.

        Designers will look for a centre of pressure that is behind the centre of gravity in high speed turns as it helps a lot with stability and preventing drivers spinning. I found an academic paper on this from one of the Enstone engineers on this (I think Renault rather than Benetton era) but the principle hasn’t changed. In low speed corners it is less relevant as the driver has the ability to use the brakes and engine to influence car behaviour and there is much more human capacity to react. Now where the drag is and how the downforce is distributed are different things but they are related. Having a downforce distribution that matches the weight distribution might seem nice, but due to the desire to shed drag at high speeds and the varying weight distribution in corners due to the braking effect, it isn’t a primary goal. The front to read wing levels get adjusted to provide the best compromise for the corners on the track to keep the driver happy while shedding the right amount of drag at high speeds to get the race engineers happy with the lap times. Fundamentally, I don’t think Red Bull had an aerodynamic balance advantage over any of the teams, just an advantage in total load. Early in the season the Mercedes probably had an advantage in some corner types in terms of load, plus it worked its tyres very hard.

        Just on suspension, I agree that softer generally seems to be a better way to go.


  131. Nic Maennling says:

    Has anyone considered the ramifications of a serious rear end collision ? Would the follower not bury himself underneath the leader car more easily ?

    They are what they are chaps so let’s enjoy the season – until the last race………

  132. Random 79 says:

    Well if all else fails it will make a good slippery-dip for the kids :)

  133. Gaz Boy says:

    I think its fair to say that along with McLaren Ferrari have been serial underachievers in the last five years; no WDC or constructors titles; lack of clarity of thought and direction in design department; inability to out develop rivals throughout the European leg of the season and a lack of operational efficiency and questionable strategic decisions (remember that bizarre decision to bring in Fernando early at Abu Dhabi 2010, trapping him behind Petrov and handing a grateful Sebastian and Red Bull WDC which he has yet to relinquish?). Hopefully, both Macca and the Italian stallion will get their act together this year; that’s easy for me to say, but lets not forget Ferrari and McLaren have excellent facilities and big budgets and should be doing better then they been. But there again, Adrian is plotting another year of humiliation for the scarlet and silver cars…………..

  134. Hansb says:


    There is already a rumor going around, the three engine suppliers are in a fight about the safety of the turbo. It seems Merc and Renault have a safety cover around the turbo while Ferrari not, thus saving some kilos in an area where you dont want any weight (high above CoG).
    Is this true or is there more news to it ?

    1. Joe Sixpack says:

      Interesting thought. When most people think ‘turbocharger,’ they think of the bomb-proof 10 pound lump of metal in their car or truck. It stands to reason that the units used in F1 will be a lot lighter, possibly to the point that they won’t be able to contain a turbine failure?

  135. Chuck 32 says:

    Remember the new cars are a response to a host of new rules. The cars have been under development for more than 18 months to date. They all use the same FIA mandated deformable side impact structure, each team is free to profile the intakes, guide vanes and lower surface at the tray.
    In the case of the Ferrari I think the wide nose is interesting because of the way it rolls off the upper edge. Ferrari may be considering the fact F-1 cars moving laterally tend to shroud the outboard sidepod intake, the rolled upper edge of the nose could reduce the turbulence and its effect on volume into the sidepods thus giving a marginal, but important increase in thermal efficiency. This year is going to be about energy management; be it fuel , kinetic, electrical or thermal. The F-14 T (think “Top Gun” and the Grumman F-14 “Tomcat not FIAT) is the first integrated car/power unit developed under one roof we have seen so far. McLaren, Williams, Lotus and Ferrari have each come up with different solutions to a very complex problem, can’t wait to see the new Red Bull and Mercedes.
    This year the technically inclined f-1 fans are going to be challenged as never before to understand the subtleties of this amazing conflict we call Formula 1.

  136. Gaz Boy says:

    There seems to be a misconception on this forum (and in general) that all Ferrari F1 cars are pretty and the epitome of style and beauty. Unfortunately, Ferrari sometimes creates an F1 creature so ugly it makes your eyes bleed! Just look at the 1979 T4 and 1980 T5, my god those two cars from the Scuderia were ugly; they were basically a red wart with 2 axles. And to cap it all, the ugly 1980 T5 was slow, unreliable and outclassed by the gold old Cossie DFV teams. The 1986 Ferrari f1/86c was a podgy old thing (and didn’t win a race that year as well), and who remembers Michael and Eddie 1996/97 machines which looked a puffa fish that had binged on burgers? And recently, there was the 2009 Ferrari, a bloated pig of a car if ever there was one – especially compared to beautiful, slim, elegant Brawn of that year. Ferrari had made some glorious looking machines for F1, no doubt about it: the 1989/1990 640′s driven by Gerhard, Our Nige and Professor Prost were automotive works of art, and with Ross’s guidance the F1 machines of 2000 to 2005 were truly lovely to look at – and pretty effective as well. I noticed that Top Gear was made this point too: we all think Ferrari’s are pretty because of their names; but they have some stinkers in their time, so don’t be surprised that this years car looks terrible.

  137. anthony says:

    Funny comments here, really looking forward to this season.
    so i understand very basic aero but wont that nose at 150mph deflect air over and past the air box ? hmmm ferrari slowest top speeds this year.

  138. Gaz Boy says:

    To Martin, thanks your reply to my earlier comments. As always, incredibly well informed and insightful!
    Martin (or anyone else in the know-how) do you know if Ferrari has gone with a long or short wheelbase car this year? And if so, why?
    Secondly, has James Allison has any input into this years design? If so, how much and what ideology has he brought to Ferrari?
    Thirdly, do you think the Ferrari’s water jacket design has sacrificed ultimate light weight in favour of aero efficiency?
    Fourth, did – or are – Ferrari still using Toyota’s wind tunnel for this years aero development? It doesn’t seem to have brought them much benefit into their total downforce making ability in the last few years.
    Fifth, does anyone agree with me that Ferrari have struggled relatively to the Bulls, Maccas and Branws/Mercs the last few years because those teams have invested in advanced simulation techniques, while Ferrari culturally relied on the old empirical way of development – ie testing on their private track – and the Italian stallion is struggling to adjust to simulation software to develop its F1 cars? I know that sounds a bit simplistic, but, isn’t it fascinating that since the testing ban came in since 2009 Ferrari have never out developed their rivals during the European season at any time.
    PS Martin, totally agree with you on the Red Bull producing more overall load than the Prancing Horse. I noticed last year Fernando and Felipe were struggling with turn in/mid corner oversteer, suggesting that the rear axle of the Ferrari lacks downforce relative to front axle. This problem was particularly acute at Suzuka, Korea and Abu Dhabi. Also noticed Ferrari had poor traction at some tracks as well.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Top Tags
SEARCH Scuderia Ferrari
JA ON F1 In association with...
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer